Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Paving Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA defers decision on Bayswater paving after questions over permeability and over-coverage
Summary
A Bayswater Road property owner’s representative asked the board to forgive existing paving that exceeds coverage limits; the board continued the application to Oct. 7 to let the applicant document pavement permeability and confirm how much coverage exceeds the 30% limit.
Kimberly Rodriguez appeared before the Quincy Zoning Board of Appeals on Sept. 9 representing the Bulch Andrew Trust for relief from section 5.1 of Quincy’s bylaws to allow expanded front paving at 18 Bayswater Road.
Rodriguez told the board the property’s irregular lot shape and preexisting nonconforming setbacks make compliance with the 30% lot coverage standard impractical and that the owner installed additional paving to provide a third parking space required for a four-bedroom house. She said the owner is willing to remove 3 feet along a property line to help meet the regulation.
Board members said the work had already been done without prior approval and asked whether the asphalt installed was a permeable product as claimed in an invoice. One member said on inspection the surface “looks like regular asphalt” and expressed concern about runoff because the site is close to the ocean. Rodriguez said the contractor invoiced permeable asphalt and an engineer submitted plans; she offered to provide further documentation.
Councilor Dave McCarthy told the board he is not in favor of the application. Several board members requested a site inspection and a precise calculation of how far the paving exceeds the 30% limit before taking action. One member suggested inspectional services confirm the overage and that the applicant work with the contractor to reduce runoff and cut the paved area to the minimum necessary for three spaces.
The applicant requested a short continuance to gather permeability proofs and a coverage calculation. The board continued the matter to Oct. 7 for follow-up.
