SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2007
A regular meeting of the Town of Sharon Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Wednesday, November 14, 2007 at 7:30 P.M. in the Lower Level of the Town Office Building. The following members were present: John Lee, Chairman; Kevin McCarville, Lee Wernick, Regular Members and Walter Newman, Larry Okstein and Seth Ruskin, Alternate Members.
Mr. Lee called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M.
Appointments:
7:35 P.M. Continued Hearing : Case No. 1598, Christopher Seiberling, 13 Massapoag Lane:
Mr. Lee stated the board was waiting for a certified plot plan showing the dimensions. Mr. Lee stated that the existing total was 1360 s.f.; the new total is 2149 s.f. The applicant’s architect, Shpresa Theodhosi, stated they will be leaving this house as a cottage. It will still be a one-story with a cathedral ceiling with sky lights.
Mr. McCarville asked if they are trying to match this to the existing carport and Ms. Theodhosi stated yes. Nancy Rae, applicant, stated the end result will be two bedrooms and a small sitting room. Mr. Lee asked if they removed the fence and Ms. Theodhosi stated yes. Mr. Lee asked if there will be an elevation issue as it will be 4’ up to the front door. Ms. Theodhosi stated there will be no change as there will be 4’ in the front and 3’ in that which is what is there now. Mr. Wernick asked if they are starting and ending with three bedrooms and Ms. Theodhosi stated yes. Mr. Lee stated it will be a condition of approval that the house is presently a 3-bedroom and will remain as such and it cannot be converted into more bedrooms in the future.
There were no neighbors present.
Mr. Newman stated the addition will be one foot closer to the property line and Ms. Theodhosi agreed with him. Mr. Newman asked that this be part of the decision.
Ms. Theodhosi asked that the public hearing be closed. Mr. Wernick moved to grant a special permit as per the plan dated September 10, 2007 for 13 Massapoag Lane and also as per a revised plot plan dated October 12, 2007 with standard conditions and the following special conditions: 1) three bedroom now and will remain a 3-bedroom; 2) sideline is 6/10ths of a foot closer on the easterly side of the property; 3) family room cannot be converted to a bedroom in the future. Motion seconded by Mr. Okstein and voted 3-0-0 (Okstein, McCarville, Ruskin).
7:50 P.M. New Hearing: Case No. 1600, Drake Realty Trust, 13 Drake Circle: Mr. McCarville recused himself. Mr. Lee read the public hearing notice and comments that were received from Greg Meister and Jim Andrews. The applicant was represented by Atty. Steve Marullo. Mr. Lee stated that this property has a very long history. Mr. Marullo stated there was a decision previously made in 1992. Mr. Wernick asked if there is anything presently on this lot and Mr. Marullo stated no. He also stated that the applicant did not go to the ConCom back in 1992, but did file this time with them for an Order of Conditions, which restricts this to a 3-befroom house. The Board of Health variance restricts them also. He further stated that the lot in question is the second largest lot in a large subdivision and conforms to all the other lots in the neighborhood, which have all been built out as single-family houses.
Mr. Lee stated that this board does not approve undersized lots. Mr. Wernick stated that he respects Mr. Meister’s judgment and is not inclined to override him.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2007 (2)
There were no public comments.
Mr. Lee stated he doesn’t think that much has changed with this lot since 1992. Atty. Marullo stated that the difference is that the past decision referenced environmental impacts, which was the issue back in 1992. Atty. Marullo asked that the public hearing be closed.
Mr. Lee made a motion to grant a variance from the Sharon Zoning By-Law, Section 2421, Minimum Lot Area, relative to a proposed new structure at 13 Drake Circle and located in the Rural 1 Zoning District. Motion seconded by Mr. Newman and voted 0-3-0. Motion denied.
8:05 P.M. New Hearing: Case No. 1602, TKG Fitness, 700 S. Main Street: Mr. Lee read the public hearing notice. He stated that this request is located at Shaw’s Plaza. Mr. Lee read letters received from Jim Andrews and Linda Rosen, Board of Health. The applicant was represented by Antonio Parham. The owner of Shaw’s Plaza was also present.
Mr. Parham stated they are seeking to operate a gym in an empty building. It will be a 24-hour health facility, named SNAP. They are seeking a special permit for the allowed use and also approval for a 24-hour operation. Mr. Lee asked if they had any input from the police chief regarding the 24-hour facility and Mr. Parham stated no. They did, however, have letters from other communities that presently have the 24-hour facilities. He handed out notebooks to the board for their review and comment.
Mr. Newman asked if the facility is value priced and Mr. Parham stated yes. Mr. MCarville asked if they are asking for shower facilities and Mr. Parham stated no. Mr. Lee asked if there are water contamination issues at the property. Jeff Worth, mall owner, stated yes and that PES Associates is monitoring that situation. Mr. Lee stated that having no showers is a good thing.
Irv Frankel, property manager, stated that whenever they have a chance to replace a toilet, they use low-flow toilets as they are very conscious of water conservation. Mr. Lee stated that if we grant a special permit, that would be a condition of approval. We could even require “ultra” low. Mr. Wernick stated this might be a good place to start that if we really want them to have a water conservation program. Mr. Parham stated they will select the toilets with the general contractor.
Mr. Wernick asked if they went to the Board of Health and Mr. Parham stated yes. Mr. Wernick also questioned the pass card entry and the fact that no one would actually be there. Mr. Parham stated there will only be staff on the premises about 20 hours/week and the members will let themselves in using pass cards. Further they have 504 different sites now and there are no issues. There is a 24-hour video surveillance system and a monitoring system. Mr. Okstein asked why they are open 24/7 when such a small amount of people will be there between 11p.m. and 5 a.m. Mr. Parham stated that 94% of the people feel it is a good service even though only 1% will use it at those times. It is also important to people with third shift jobs. The monitoring company will contact the Sharon Police if there is a problem. Mr. Wernick asked how often they look at the monitor and Mr. Parham stated only when there is a problem. Mr. McCarville asked if they would be willing to give the Sharon Police the ability to monitor it and Mr. Parham stated yes. Mr. Lee stated that we need input from the Chief of Police as this will be the only operation in town open 24/7. Mr. Ruskin asked if the front window would be completely open and Mr. Parham stated yes. Further, there have been 13,000 members nationally with no problems. Mr. Lee asked if the sign will be 37 s.f. and Mr. Parham stated yes.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2007 (3)
Mr. Lee asked if there are any other sites in the Boston area and Mr. Parham stated they are currently looking at Hyde Park, Belmont and Waltham. To date, they have looked at over one hundred sites. Mr. Wernick asked where the trainer, Joe Summer, lives and Mr. Parham stated Boston. Mr. Lee stated he will give this information to the Police Chief. Mr. Okstein asked the rates and Mr. Parham stated $39.95/month or $69.95/month for couples. A family membership would be $199.95/family.
Mr. McCarville asked how they control that someone isn’t using the gym without authorization and Mr. Parham stated they video everything. Mr. Lee asked if they have a copy of Special Permit #965 and Mr. Worth stated yes.
Mr. McCarville stated he would like some information on the surveillance camera and would like to check on its clarity. Mr. Okstein asked if it will be staffed by trainers or just clerical staff. Mr. Parham stated both. Mr. Newman stated that some of the equipment seems to be complicated and asked if everything is self-explanatory. Mr. Parham stated that upon joining the gym, members are given a complimentary orientation on how to use the equipment. SNAP uses the most simple equipment they can use.
Mr. Lee asked that Mr. Parham submit a copy of Permit 965, information on the video system and input from the Police Chief. Mr. Parham stated that the biggest fitness month is January and they have about two months worth of work to do. He asked how quickly this approval could happen. Mr. Lee stated he is not comfortable without having the police chief’s input as the issue is public safety. Mr. Okstein asked if they don’t get permission for the 24/7, would they still go forward. Mr. Parham stated yes, but they would be greatly disappointed as it would have some business impact. Mr. McCarville asked if they would be willing to work with the Police Chief if he had concerns and Mr. Parham stated yes.
Mr. Lee asked if they are working with an attorney who could draft a decision and Mr. Parham stated yes.
There were no public comments.
Mr. Lee continued this hearing to November 28, 2007. He would like a draft ready for Mr. McCarville to sign at that time.
8:55 P.M. Sharon Commons Continued Hearing: Mr. Caputo stated there is a 2-page stamped zoning plan in the file that shows the actual engineering of the lay-out. Also, they are working on site grades at this time. Mr. Lee asked if they are planning on expanding the parking area and Mr. Caputo stated no. Mr. Okstein asked how many parking spaces they took out because of revisions and Mr. Shelmerdine stated they lost about twelve, but they were moved to other places. Further, they are asking for approval of this site plan. Mr. Lee stated that is unusual as normally site plan approval is filed with everything. T he Board looks at all of it – engineering, building lay out, etc., then close the hearing and issue a decision. What they are asking for tonight is different. He asked Mr. Shelmerdine to explain.
Mr. Shelmerdine stated that what Mr. Lee said was true. This is a different project with a very large and comprehensive plan that requires initial site lay out. They have asked for three phases: the first is they are asking the board to approve the two-dimensional approach; the second phase would consist of utilities, drainage and grading. At this point the grading is 2’ lower, so if approved, they have to engineer this new plan. They would like decision of approval on this site plan with a list of conditions that they need to meet.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2007 (4)
The second phase would have to be advertised. Further, they cannot get building permits until they close Phase 2. The third phase would be the actual face on the buildings and they will need to come back to the board for approval. The process is not unusual for this life center approach.
Mr. Caputo stated that the first step had a full set of site engineering plans and that opened the process. Mr. Ruskin asked why they are asking to do it this way. Atty. Rudman stated it is important to tell tenants they have an approved site plan and that they have achieved a certain level of approval. Mr. Caputo stated that the tweaks are minor, but changes will be done over and over.
Mr. Lee stated if in Phase 2 it turns out that a building doesn’t work in a certain location, they will modify it. It will be in the decision that they can go back and change things. He has been in touch with Gelerman & Buschmann and they have said that can be done. Site Plan Approval is very flexible. Mr. Shelmerdine stated that the conditions attached to the decision will be very specific. If during the second phase they need to change something already approved, the board can go back and make changes. This would make it better for working with tenants.
Emily Mobran, Arrow Street Architects: did an architectural presentation. Stated she is trying to show the board what it could be and showed the board the materials they will be using on site and also the height of the buildings. She stated this presentation will give the board an idea of what the site will look like. Also, the roof will be a flat surface. Mr. Newman stated that is not “New England”. Michael Wang, Arrow Street, stated it would be a visual approach. Mr. Newman stated they should hide the flat roofs behind the New England style roofs. Mr. McCarville agreed. He stated that the town was sold on the New England style. He would like windows with shutters. Mr. Shelmerdine stated if you drive through Cohasset, you would see hip roofs. Ms. Mobran stated there will be some flat roofs among the gables or hips. All the materials being used will be of high quality.
Mr. Lee asked if their intent was to hold onto this property and manage it into the future or do they intend on selling it. Mr. Intoccia stated he is not doing this to sell; they are here to stay. At this time, he is getting tenant and financial pressure. They have closed with ConCom already.
Ms. Mobran presented the open space plan located near Anchor #2 and stated they will be using colored stamped concrete for the raised cross walks. They may possibly use pavers also and scored concrete. Mr. Intoccia stated that regular brick will heave in the winter. Mr. Newman asked what size trees they will bring in and Ms. Mobran stated that 3-4” is typical. Mr. Caputo asked if there is something in the by-law. Mr. Houston stated he thinks at least 4”.
Mr. Lee stated that one of the advantages of having three phases is that the board can talk about what is being proposed. Mr. Shelmerdine stated that regarding typical sign design and locations, they have done three different drafts. He presented the final sign package to the board. Also, there is a retail pylon pole sign to be located across from Shaw’s. They are doing what the Design Review Committee wants. Mr. Intoccia stated that the votes from the various boards were unanimous.
Mr. Shelmerdine asked that the board consider the following tonight: 1) special permit for the 135,000 s.f. anchor; 2) special permit for improvements within the 100’ buffer; 3) special permit for additional impervious area in the aquifer protection area. Mr. Caputo stated they are down to 13% on the vegetated wetland buffer. Mr. Shelmerdine stated they have given the board a plan for the record, an order of conditions for the roadway coming into the area and also for the site. The order of conditions references the November 12, 2007 plan.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2007 (5)
Mr. Lee asked if the silt fence is already in place and Mr. Caputo stated it is for the habitat out there. The fence is to stop the migration of turtles.
Mr. Lee questioned the traffic. He stated this needs to be addressed at a public hearing. Also, Mr. Samuels and Ms. Gobi, the Old Post Road neighbors, have questions. Ms. Gobi , 147 Old Post Road, is represented by George Comeau. He stated she is extremely distressed with the roundabout being in her front yard. Mr. Newman asked how that is in her front yard. Mr. Comeau stated her impact is one of the greatest. In addition, she will be impacted by the lights, traffic, etc. He thinks it would be premature to close before they can meet with the developers to work something out. The Old Post Road that she drives over today will be abandoned. Mr. Lee stated it will still be a town-owned road as it will be shifted into the county lay out. Mr. Comeau stated it will be abandoned and torn up. Mr. Intoccia stated he walked the site with Ms. Gobi and his engineer. She has been noticed every time there was a meeting. At the last second, his team went out there and met with her. She cut down her trees in her front yard. The road is paved now and will stay paved. He stated they did move it a little, but it will still be paved. She will live on a dead end with a gate that only three people will live on. They offered to move her driveway and replant bushes and trees and also put up a fence. They will do whatever landscaping she wants. He has been working with her and everyone else for over a year. He is trying to make everyone happy.
Mr. Comeau stated that with respect to Ms. Gobi’s property, the turnabout has not always been in this location. The board disagreed with him. Mr. Comeau stated she can cut down trees on her own property. A section of the roadway will be changed in front of her house. Mr. Intoccia stated he is paving it. Mr. Intoccia stated he will do whatever Mr. Comeau and his client wants him to do. Further, they have been trying to do this for a year. Mr. Lee stated we a plan before us showing plantings, fencing and a new driveway. He asked if it is acceptable to Ms. Gobi. Ms. Gobi stated she cut her trees down two years ago, not six months. And, she did so because of termites. She stated they cannot move the driveway because she drives a truck and wouldn’t be able to make the turn. Mr. Intoccia stated he will build her a turnaround. Mr. Caputo stated he met with Ms. Gobi and went over concepts of the fence line and relocating the driveway. Mr. Comeau stated this was decided for her, as she had no input. Mr. Intoccia stated he will put the trees, bushes, fence wherever they want it to go. Mr. Comeau stated there are also other issues. Mr. Intoccia asked what they are. Mr. Comeau stated he is not sure the signs are in the best location as his client will see them every day. Mr. Wernick stated he feels they are in the correct place to help the people find where they are going. Mr. Comeau disagreed and stated they won’t help anyone. Mr. Newman suggested Mr. Comeau make a list of the problems and give it to Mr. Shelmerdine and also a copy to this board. He feels the two parties should set up an appropriate meeting to discuss this. Mr. Intoccia stated he will agree to do the trees, fencing, or whatever it is they want. Mr. Comeau stated the board needs to protect Ms. Gobi’s rights.
Ray Samuels, 70 S. Walpole Street and Ed McSweeney, 68 S. Walpole Street: both are abutters to this project. Mr. Samuels stated there is a right of way that appears on the property of all involved including Mr. Intoccia. They currently access their property from S. Walpole Street and also have a S. Walpole Street address although they don’t actually live on that street. They actually live on Bramel Street. Also, Nstar has telephone poles that run from Old Post Road to S. Walpole Street and they access their poles from this area. Mr. Samuels stated he is in favor of this, but there is something missing, which is his access to Old Post Road has been eliminated. He needs access to Old Post Road and also emergency vehicles will need access. He questioned how the plan before the board addresses this.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2007 (6)
Mr. Shelmerdine stated the road is presently a country lane and there are telephone poles bringing the electricity from Old Post Road to Mr. McSweeney and Mr. Samuels. These plans have no impact on the use of this Nstar easement. Mr. Lee stated that if you look, the easement goes right now to Old Post Road. He asked when they do a new layout, it will not go to Old Post Road. Mr. Shelmerdine stated they may be changing the right of way layout to Old Post Road. Mr. Intoccia stated there is an emergency gate at Mr. Samuel’s end. Mr. McSweeney asked that they discuss his well water situation. Mr. Caputo stated that the legal right of way easement is not being altered in any way, shape or form . Mr. Wernick asked if they will have the same access in the future that he has now and Mr. Caputo stated yes and they will not impede any current rights. Mr. Shelmerdine stated that presently both Mr. Samuels and Mr. McSweeney have well water. They will bring the water line to both houses. Mr. Samuels stated he is not concerned about water, just access. Mr. Lee stated that Mr. Samuels’ right of way ends at the county layout now and when this project is done, it will be the same. Mr. Intoccia stated he will not block anything. Mr. Lee stated that presently they have a right of way to the Old Post Road layout and when this project is done they will still have that. Mr. Shelmerdine stated they will also provide a curb cut.
Mr. McSweeney stated the well is close to his house. Mr. Samuels asked if they will be bringing water right to his house also and Mr. Intoccia stated they will if he wants it. He stated the water service will go to the side of his house. Mr. Samuels asked it not be left in the street. Mr. Lee stated they will not do the plumbing in the houses.
Christine Turnbull: at the beginning, you were talking about the three phases of the site plan approval, and she is not clear about phases two and three. She asked why they can’t be hooked together. She doesn’t think anything should be done until all approvals are received. Mr. Intoccia stated they need to meet with tenants, which means they need to do this in phases. Ms. Turnbull asked why she hasn’t seen a phasing plan. Mr. Intoccia stated they have to do that. Ms. Turnbull asked why Phases 2 and 3 can’t be lumped together. Mr. Caputo asked that she not confuse the phasing of the site with the phasing of the construction. Ms. Turnbull stated she would like some assurances. Mr. Lee stated they are going to ask for a restoration bond which will give assurances for everyone. Further, Dick Gelerman had said that no building permits will be issued until all three phases are approved and all phases will require new public hearing notice. Ms. Turnbull questioned who is in charge of the conditions – the Zoning Board, Dick Gelerman or the DRC? Mr. Lee stated that the DRC is to be used during Phase 3. Ms. Turnbull asked if the DRC, ZBA and Dick Gelerman will work together on the conditions. Mr. Lee stated that Phase 1 will be the ZBA and Dick Gelerman and they will work on road lay-out, building sizes and locations and parking. There will be no bonding required on Phase 1. Mr. Intoccia stated he doesn’t want to bond anything until he pulls a building permit. Mr. Lee stated that a bond will be required when they start the actual site work. Mr. Shelmerdine stated they need to start preliminary grading of the road and site. The best time to do that is in January, February and March. They will put a grading plan in place, which will be Phase 2. They will have an approved erosion control plan, an approved grading plan, and a restoration surety estimated to restore the property. All of those three things are part of Phase 2.
Mr. Lee stated we still need to hear about the traffic. Tom Houston stated that is a key concern. They have had an initial submittal and there were additional recommendations from that. However, some issues have not been fully resolved at this point, but the framework is in place. The timing of one signal affects the signal down the street.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2007 (7)
The Board of Selectmen and Engineering Department will need to approve whatever is submitted as well as Mass Highway. The framework is in place now and most of the problems have been resolved already. Mr. Houston thinks everything is in good shape at this point. They are trying to make the waiting time as short as possible at the traffic lights. Mr. Shelmerdine stated that Mr. Houston’s comments will be part of the conditions of approval.
Mr. Caputo stated the study has been adequately completed. They are now entering an area of design refinement.
Mr. Lee stated the applicant could close the hearing. If they do that, this will be the end of Phase I site plan approval. He stated we could then get a draft decision. We will not be voting on this tonight as town counsel would also need to review the decision. Mr. Houston stated they have completed the decision on part 1. This approval process is new to this town, but there is substantial precedence in other towns.
Atty. George Comeau, representing Ms. Gobi, stated that in his opinion the plan that is before the board tonight is not the final plan regarding his client’s house. Mr. Lee stated we want this to move along. Mr. Intoccia asked if the board is voting on this tonight and Mr. Lee stated no. Mr. Intoccia asked about voting “subject to” and Mr. Lee stated we cannot vote on something we don’t have before us or something we have not reviewe. Mr. Shelmerdine asked if the board could close the hearing tonight and then vote conceptually on the three special permits and site plan review subject to further conditions.
Mr. Wernick asked if they want a conceptual approval and Mr. Shelmerdine stated yes, a conceptual vote. Mr. Lee stated it would be completely binding. Ms. Turnbull asked if there are conditions ready for tonight and Mr. Lee stated no. Further, we will not vote tonight on something we don’t have. He stated the board would be willing to have a special meeting although we would need 48 hours for posting. He stated we cannot vote on something that is not in front of us. Mr. Samuels asked if he could have a copy of something before it is voted and Mr. Lee stated we can only incorporate his concerns into our decision. Mr. Samuels stated he would like to review the decision first. Mr. Okstein stated that the board makes the decision. He could see the decision when it is voted at the meeting.
Atty. Comeau asked the time frame to challenge this decision. Mr. Lee stated it is a site plan approval. Mr. Shelmerdine stated the appeal period starts when the decision is filed with the town clerk.
The board agreed to meet on Monday, November 26, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. Mr. Lee stated that when he gets the draft of the decision, it will be forwarded via email to the board members.
Mr. Wernick moved to close the hearing as requested by the applicant. Motion seconded by Mr. McCarville and voted 5-0-0.
It was moved, seconded and voted to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 11:05 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,