Hi and welcome to the um April 12 21st meeting of the Swam Zoning Board of Appeals. Um the first item on our agenda is um well the first item is um past minutes but we don't have them. We're going to um go straight to number two,
which is the continued petition number 2518 um which is by Scott Miller who is here. And um this is a a special permit to remove an existing hip roof,
construct a new gabled roof, um resulting in an addition of 754 square feet, um and also a dimensional special permit to construct a covered porch over an existing covered porch. So, we've we've looked at this before. >> Yes. >> So, do you do you want to go over just
the changes since last you were here? >> Yeah. Basically, uh I I think the the main concern there was on the on the uh deck and it was uh although it was done under a permit, it still was it didn't
uh survey out at 6 ft, which is the the closest we could come to the uh boundary line. So, uh, and, uh, looking at it and figuring that, uh, I should I I I need to see what's underneath there anyway.
So, I was just going to move it 3 in and that'll be on in compliance with the uh, with with the zoning. >> Okay. So, you'll need um to go. So, the so 7 and 1/2 ft is allowed, six feet is
allowed with a special permit. So, you'll need a special permit for that. Um, and then I know you're also um, look, you're also doing the addition and you've been to planning a couple times. It look, and I reread the notes from the last planning meeting. Looks like you're got continued and you're going to go
back, right? >> Um, and I don't know. I'll see what other people on the board think. I believe that the um is is there any zoning relief needed other than that for assuming that you're you're you're not asking for any relief
on height. >> You're not asking for any relief um on the square footage. I understand that you're still working on confirming the square footage with the planning board to make sure that it it's documented for what is actually happening, right? And so that the height um the height over
the the um >> yeah everything's in compliance >> is under the 50%. Yeah. But that you're not asking for any relief on that. >> No no no. >> So normally I would say I'd like to have that all figured out before we vote. But if we're going to offer
relief strictly on the dimensional special permit um to build that basically it's the upper deck that makes the lower deck out of compliance because now the lower deck is a covered deck >> and so yeah >> that's where you need to so basically we can give you the relief for the six
feet. Um but I think any decision we make would really not talk about the addition at all as as in the addition is um based is basically the building inspector and planning that have been >> exactly right.
>> Does anybody disagree with me on that or >> I agree with you. I think that we should if we're being asked just for that limited >> relief. Yeah. >> Just address that. just address that and don't give any relief on anything else and let that go through planning the proper and the building um commissioner.
>> Um so that would be my thoughts on this is any >> I'm I'm fine with that assuming whatever goes through planning wouldn't have end up coming back to us again anyway like will we see this again? We shouldn't see this again assuming that you don't need
any any more relief that everything is is as of right. Um it just means that the decision should be very limited and should really be say that we are only giving relief for for this. We're not giving any height relief. We're not giving any square footage relief. Um we're not going to giving this you're not adding a unit. This is
>> Yeah. It's all got it's 50% of the third floor will be of the second floor. >> Yeah. And it's going to be part of that unit. They're going to be >> right. It's part of that unit. It's not a separate unit. >> Um, so there's no other relief you need from us. So I think that's
>> that's what I would recommend. >> Now, how about for the special permit? What do I do for a special permit? >> So what we would do is we would vote now on the special permit to get the six the six feet versus the seven and 1/2 ft. Y >> um and um then we we would so that would
al happen here tonight if if agrees and um the board is just the five of us because um >> four out, right? >> She's out. So then >> I'm out. >> Oh, four. Sorry. The four of us. But we can we can vote with four. >> Okay.
>> Um >> that little thing on top. >> That is a Koopa Koopa. And that is um that is a a functioning open air ventilation which has special um
uh accommodations in our bylaw that you can have a height. You can go higher if it is a functioning >> ventilation. So >> all right. Does anybody want to make a motion or does anybody have any more? Is there any there's nobody online or any that needs to hear about it?
>> Yeah, you should open the public hearing and close it. Um I believe those are the Kleinfelder consultants online, but regardless. >> So there's nobody Is there anybody So there's nobody um watching at home who has any questions about this petition.
Okay. >> All right. Do we want to close the public hearing? A motion to close the public hearing. Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> All right. Does anybody want to make a motion
for this limited relief of just the um the sideyard to set back? >> I don't mind writing it. Someone wasn't >> I'll make the motion. >> I'll write it. I'm happy to write it. Yep. I'll make a motion to approve the request for a dimensional special permit
for the sideyard setback for the uh soon to be covered deck um to permit it to be 6 feet from the side property line where 7.5 ft is required.
Um and as shown on the plans for the deck and the relief is limited only to that specific request and relief granted and you make no findings
on um any of the items that are within the jurisdiction of the planning board. >> Do you have a second? >> A second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> All right. Right. So, you have your your relief for the um for your deck portion,
but you'll still be going through the rest of >> Yeah, I still have to go through it. Okay. All right. >> Terrific. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. >> All right. Next, we have a presentation um about some proposed amendments to the zoning
bylaw that will be voted on by um town meeting. And >> yeah, good evening. Uh my name is Mark Nan. I'm the assistant engineer field coordinator for the DPW. And here tonight we have uh two of our
consultants attending uh virtually. We have Peter Varga and we have El Thompson. Um, the town has an MS4 permit and that permit allows us to discharge our storm water to the Nihant Bay.
There's all sorts of requirements over the life of that permit that we have to meet in order to be in compliance. And one of those is taking a look at our own bylaws and ordinances as it relates to storm water management and green
infrastructure. Um, so Peter and Elise have worked with um some of the employees at town hall to come up with ideas and they're going to present um their proposed changes to the to the documents uh here tonight. So I'll turn it over to Peter and Elise.
>> You >> thanks Mark. >> Thanks Mark. >> I'll go ahead and share my screen. Nice to meet you all. My name is Peter. Um again I'm a project manager at Kleinfelder. Um, and uh, I have some slides to show to the group tonight. Um,
we can be brief and um, hopefully this won't be too um, wordy, but there's definitely a lot of words on the slides. Um, this the permit that Mark referred to was the MS4 permit. It's um, really the the stormwater discharge permit for the
town and all towns in Massachusetts are subject to discharge permit for their storm water. Um this permit has iterative requirements and for Swamcot there was a requirement in 2022 to um
actually make an assessment of the street design and parking lot guidelines. Um basically it's a a way to target like impervious surface. Impervious surface prevents rain from soaking into the ground and it creates runoff and flooding issues and and water quality issues. Um so you know any
anywhere that impervious surface can be reduced or minimized is um going to be a benefit for the MS4 system which is a municipal storm sewer system and um and storm water quality discharging to the bay. So really this this requirement I'm
sorry for bouncing back but this requirement was um a 2022 requirement for the permit and to fulfill that requirement and be compliant with the permit the town um actually had us conduct a um street design and parking lot analysis that is a specific
deliverable and requirement um and that year the permit this is a basis for the follow-up work that we um have done um to to look at a few ordinances and to make some concrete recommendations and red lines um that are amendable to the
town but also comply with with the permit. So these are the documents that we looked at um and we only found two of them, you know, um opportunities to make to make changes and to to improve a
little bit the language. Um we took those recommendations and we met we had several meetings um over the course of a couple years actually um since that initial analysis to get feedback and to sort of rep prioritize some of the recommendations um and
restructure some of those recommendations to meet sort of the the needs of the of the town and to um make sure that we're considering how these documents relate to each other um so there's no conflicting recommendations. Um, since
Kleinfelder is not a law firm, we had we recommended that a law company or that the town's legal council review our work as well, which they did and they had some comments that mostly spoke to clarification points and um pretty minor
in nature. We did we addressed all those comments. We incorporated those comments into um red lines that we presented um two uh you know select um town departments as you can see on the slide
um to get to where we are now. Um and so really as I said earlier, you know, these revisions are designed to remove obstacles in the ordinances that um you know, for removing impervious areas and and to minimize imperous
surface. It's really um it was not the goal to make a very prescriptive and um demanding uh sort of set of of language in here. really just to create opportunities for further impervious u reduction and green infrastructure. Um
and you know again as I said we made sure that we were sort of in um tandem with other town reports and requirements um uh to get to where we are now. And so there's um not a whole lot of revisions
that were actually offered as a result of this work. a lot of the language that were existing in the ordinances was was very good um and was retained. Um but there were some locations where we found room for um some improvement and um I'll hand it over to Elise to talk about
those specifically in the next few slides. >> Thanks Peter. Hi. Um I'm Elise Thompson, a project engineer at Kleinfelder. Um, and I'm going to go through specifically uh the recommended revisions for the
zoning bylaw um and focus on those for this presentation. Uh so the first revision that we are recommending is in the general regulations and the off- streetet parking and loading the general parking requirements. Um, and this is
adding a bullet to allow a decrease in parking requirements if there's proximity to general parking lots or structures, nearby on street parking or access to multimodal transportation um, which include bus routes, bike lanes or community paths. Um, and then this
can be reduced with the issuance of a special permit by the board of appeals. Um, the second Oh, yep. The second revision um is regarding low impact development in parking lots. So this is in the
general general regulations under general landscapecaping and screening requirements under the landscaping section. Um so this is allowing the landscaped islands and parking lots with six or more spaces to be um specific
types of green infrastructure. So these are dry soils, rain gardens, bio retention areas. Um and these would allow infiltration of storm water runoff from the parking lots. Um in the proposed revisions we have um that the
landscape islands need to be located in an area with soils of hydraologic group um A or B so that they're suitable for infiltration um and that it will not result in ponding or flooding of the landscaped
islands as well. And then the uh third bylaw revision is regarding the smart growth zoning overlay district and the Glover mult
multifamily overlay district. Um and this is regarding parking lots and compact cars. Um so the first item is uh in these sections decreasing the stall
size length to 18 feet. Um and this is to match the general stall dimensions of 9 foot width by 18 foot length that's within the zoning bylaw. And then um the main point is allowing up to 30% of the
required parking to be designated for compact cars. Um, and then that has a requirement that the compact car parking space shall be at least eight feet wide by 16 ft long. So, a slight reduction in
size. Um, and then this also adds a um definition to the bylaw for what is defined as a compact car. Um, and it's as defined by the US EPA.
Um and then one other item for um these two overlay districts is allowing permeable pavers given that they do not present significant maintenance or accessibility concerns within the parking lot.
Um and these are in sorry section 4.6.0 and 410. So those are the three changes or red lines that we are proposing for the uh zoning bylaws. Um the next steps for
these red lines uh which would include the zoning bylaw and the subdivision rules and regulations are to submit and present to the planning board at their May 11th meeting. uh we met with select members of the planning board but will
be presenting it to the planning board at whole during their next meeting and then after that the plan is to submit and present to the select board for adoption and eventual approval by the December 2026 town meeting.
>> Thank you Elise. That concludes our our presentation that we wanted to go over with the group. Unless there are further questions, of course, we have um additional slides that have the language specifically um and the specific red lines that we included. So I can pop
those back up again if there are questions and desire to see those. Thank you so much for presenting. It's nice to see the changes that are going to be proposed at town meeting. I feel like they don't usually come through us, so it's nice to have a heads up as to what's going to happen on at town
meeting. Um, does anybody have any questions or concerns about these or how they might, you know, affect petitioners coming forward? You seem >> Nothing's jumping out at me. >> Yeah. No, nothing's jumping out of me either. I mean, to be honest, the
parking is is great and and there's a lot of reasons to besides storm water runoff to sort of lessen parking >> Yeah. >> requirements. >> Yeah. I mean, some of these some of these proposed changes improve the human environment as well within the town and
call for slightly greener infrastructure to be installed where where where possible. It is not forcing uh anything. >> Yeah. Actually, one question. Are these changes consistent with uh other towns
zoning bylaws? Are we sort of getting in line with what others communities in the state are doing? AB: >> Absolutely. Part of our analysis um was incorporating experience from other municipalities. Um in addition to documents and advisory, you know,
guidelines from EPA and um regional planning boards as well like regional planning commissions. Thank you. >> Welcome. >> Great. Thank you so much for presenting these. Anybody? >> Thank you.
>> No questions. >> All right. I don't know if there's anybody watching us who has any questions. Doesn't look like it. >> No, we're just This is justformational. Yeah, it's it this will go before town meeting. Then town meeting will vote on whether or not to adopt them. Um, will you be at town meeting presenting?
>> Uh, that will be the December. That's the December meeting if I'm not mistaken. >> Oh, it's not until December. Okay. So, it's not this one that's in the the um because we have one in May as well, >> right? I believe it's the one we're going to be meeting with the planning board in May. Um, so we have a May we're
on the May 11th agenda for the planning board. Um, but I think I think we needed to go through that step before bringing it to town meeting. So I believe that's the reason why we're at the December meeting at this point. >> Okay. No, that's good. >> Right. And all all zoning bylaw changes
this year going in December. There are no changes going in May. >> Going in May. Okay. So, what we would do um this year in the annual reporting to the EPA for compliance with the MS4 permit is
basically record these meetings in there just to make sure that we're they're that these meetings are documented and we'll we'll write um a little summary of the steps that we've that the town has taken to advance these ordinances. So, the real compliance point was in 2022 when that analysis was conducted. that
was a required prescribed deliverable from the permit. Beyond that point, the town basically set its own timeline for adapting. It hasn't quite followed that timeline, but that's okay. As long as we can report on good faith effort to bring
these forward and to um advance these we know very concrete steps for the December meeting, we're golden. >> Excellent. Great. >> All right. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Nice to meet you all.
>> Thank you. >> All right, that's it. Anybody >> want to make a motion? >> Wait, I have one um item before you guys go. >> Oh, the Yes, we're trying to make sure we have the >> the rescheduling of the May 19th
meeting. Um because of town meeting potentially going more than one night um it was recommended that we rescheduled the May 19th meeting. I didn't get a conclusive response from the board. So I was hoping while I have you here um
that we could get whether potentially Tuesday May 12th or Tuesday May 26th works better to have a quorum at that meeting. >> I can definitely not go the 12th. So, I could do the 26. >> I can do the 26.
>> 26. Good with me. >> That's four. >> Okay. To me. >> All right. That's five. >> Okay. >> You have a forum. >> Great. Um, I will revise the meeting date to be on the 26th. Um, I'll make sure to reserve a room. If for whatever reason this room
isn't available, we'll see about the senior center. Um, but I will let you know ASAP. >> Very good. Sounds good. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. >> All right. Now we can move to adjourn. >> Motion to adjourn. >> Second. All in favor? >> I. >> Excellent. Thank you.