Neighbors push back as Markley seeks to double on‑site diesel capacity; council sets public hearing

Lowell City Council members agreed to schedule a public hearing on Oct. 21 after the environmental and flood issues subcommittee referred a petition from Markley Law Offices to add diesel storage and generator capacity at its Dutton Street facility.

The subcommittee report said Markley asked to add 96,700 gallons of diesel fuel to existing on‑site storage, bringing total permitted diesel from 71,000 gallons to 167,700 gallons. Subcommittee members and residents said they oppose the increase and asked for more mitigation and clearer data on energy use and stormwater handling.

Why it matters: Neighbors said the facility sits in a dense area and raised health, noise and stormwater concerns. City staff and subcommittee members described outstanding technical and permitting issues — including a rejected tie‑in proposal from Markley to the city wastewater/stormwater system — that the council should weigh before action on the fuel permit.

The Markley presentation to the subcommittee said the generators are intended for backup when utility power is unavailable and that generators are generally used for short weekly tests and one annual two‑hour test. Attorney William Martin, representing Markley, told council the company is implementing noise attenuation and other mitigation work and asked for additional time to complete those tasks before the public hearing.

Residents and neighborhood speakers sharply disputed that progress has been sufficient. Jake Fortes and other neighbors described repeated ponding and new drainage patterns since Markley rebuilt walls and modified site grading. They said work promised in 2020 to disperse and infiltrate stormwater has not been delivered and that new ties and underground utilities have limited options for previously planned drainage solutions.

City wastewater staff said they asked Markley in July about a private drainage tie‑in and exchanged engineering information; the request was rejected on Sept. 22. The city described alternative infiltration designs it could pursue but said those options entail significant cost and engineering review. Water and wastewater Director Erin Fox said the city will not recommend tying Bourne Street runoff into combined sewer pipes where it would risk backups into homes.

Council discussion focused on three themes: whether to hold a prompt public hearing or delay while Markley completes mitigation; whether outstanding stormwater and noise mitigation work should be conditions of any approval; and whether a negotiated community benefits agreement could restore neighborhood trust.

Councilor Robinson and other members argued for a public hearing without delay and for listing conditions — analogous to planning and zoning approvals — that Markley would have to meet. Councilor Jeunesse, neighbors and some subcommittee members said they wanted more time to see the promised mitigation completed before hearings progress.

The council also voted to ask the city manager to initiate talks with Markley about a possible community benefits agreement, after Councilor Genessa made that motion and Councilor Scott seconded; the motion passed.

What happens next: The council will hold the public hearing on Oct. 21 to take testimony and consider conditions. City staff will continue to review Markley’s outstanding technical submittals, and the council asked the administration to report on stormwater and wastewater tie‑in options, permitting status, and the status of promised noise‑mitigation work before or at the hearing.

Quotes and attributions are from the meeting transcript and city staff presentations.

Ending: The October hearing will be the council’s first formal opportunity to weigh the fuel‑storage amendment against the outstanding site and neighborhood concerns raised repeatedly during the subcommittee process.