SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF JUNE 9, 2010
A regular meeting of the Town of Sharon Zoning Board was held on Wednesday, June 9, 2010 at 8:00 P.M. in the Lower Level of the Town Office Building. The following members were present: John Lee, Chairman (8:10 p.m.); Kevin McCarville, Secretary; Lee Wernick, Larry Okstein, Seth Ruskin, Walter Newman.
Mr. Lee opened the meeting at 8:13 p.m.
8:13 P.M. Igor Tsinman, 6 Arboro Drive, Case No. 1657 Continued Hearing: Mr. Lee stated the board was awaiting receipt of a letter from the Health Agent, Jim Andrews which was received. He also stated that the setbacks are shown on the submitted plot plan.
There were no public comments.
Mr. Wernick moved to approve the application as submitted subject to the board’s standard conditions and two special conditions. Motion seconded by Mr. McCarville and voted 3-0-0 (Lee, McCarville, Wernick).
8:20 P.M. AT&T, 68 Mohawk Street, Case No. 1656, Continued Hearing: Mr. Lee continued this hearing to July 28, 2010 at 8:00 p.m. as per request of the applicant. The applicant has agreed to pay for a peer review study.
8:25 P.M. Sharon Commons, Old Post Development Realty Trust and Sharon CF II, LLP, Case No. 1659 (Letter of Credit): Mr. Lee read the public hearing notice. He stated that Richard Gelerman and Cindy Amara, Gelerman & Bushman were both present. Mr. Lee stated that this finalizes what took place at the May 12th hearing. He did receive the Letter of Credit and sent it to Atty. Gelerman for review. Mr. Lee questioned what was advertised and stated that all we are dealing with on this is the letter of credit. Ms. Amara stated yes and also the site work that was not done yet. Mr. Gelerman stated the applicant can’t do any more work without coming back to the Zoning Board including the reduction of the letter of credit.
Mr. Stantansky, 12 Colonel Gridley Road: asked if town counsel agrees with this decision. Atty. Gelerman stated his position is that it is legally okay. The amount that the board has accepted was the board’s decision. Mr. DiScipio, an abutter, asked what that acceptable amount was based on. Mr. Lee stated the Letter of Credit was $800,000 and was reduced to $170,000. This reduction was discussed at the board’s last meeting.
Joyce Rabino, 12 Col. Gridley Road: she is against this reduction. She stated they have clear cut many acres. She feels this bond is not about just the top soil and the board should keep it at the full amount. The applicant should be planting more trees to cut down on the noise. Because of the tree removal, they can’t sit on their deck because of the noise from Route 95. Mr. Lee stated that in the beginning, the $800,000 would cover revegetation if the site was leveled.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF JUNE 9, 2010 (2)
The money was not to replace all the trees as that would not be practical. Mr. DiScipio asked who came up with $170,000 figure and Mr. Lee deferred to Mr. Houston.
Tom Houston stated they did a cost estimate which came out to $152,000. They addressed replacing topsoil and hydroseeding on approximately five acres on site. In addition, the planting of 3’ high trees being replanted on the entire site was included in that figure. However, the number the board settled on was slightly higher. Mr. DiScipio asked if that estimate was in hand and Mr. Lee stated yes. Mr. Wernick stated we don’t have an estimate from a contractor. Mr. DiScipio asked how accurate can the board’s estimate be. Mr. Houston stated they used prices that are standard in the industry for doing that work. He also stated that our estimate does include a 25% cost contingency. The Board of Appeals also increased the estimate. Mr. DiScipio asked how accurate the estimates have been in the past. Mr. Houston stated they are pretty reasonable and he is confident the site could be restored for this value.
Bob Stankansy, 12 Col. Gridley Road: asked why the town is motivated to reduce the amount. It seems like it is in the interest of the developer, not the town. Mr. Lee stated the $170,000 is what we expect it would cost to restore this site. Mr. Stankansy stated the board is choosing not to put back bigger trees. Mr. Newman stated it is not to restore the site to its original quality, but is to prevent the land from becoming a public nuisance. A person can cut down their own trees if they want. Mr. Stankansy stated that habitation will reduce the noise. Mr. Newman stated that a person can do what they want on their own property as far as removing trees. We will not restore this site to its original quality as it is not the responsibility of the board to do so. Mr. Stankansy feels they can’t create a public nuisance. Mr. Newman stated the noise comes from another source. The applicant is not creating the noise. Mr. Lee stated the noise is only being generated through the site and we have no control over that. Mr. Stankansy asked what is motivating the board to reduce the letter of credit. Mr. Lee stated the letter of credit was coming to an end. The $800,000 letter of credit was for restoring the site if it was cleared and leveled and they had to do some engineering on the site. The applicant came and cleared the site and now it looks bad, but the soil is intact and things will be able to grow. The $170,000 will allow revegetation of the site. Mr. DeScipio feels the board is using the term restoration loosely. Mr. Lee stated we should probably use the word stabilization instead. Mr. Stankansy asked if the board could take a more aggressive position than it is in the obligation of restoring this site. He asked if the decision is subjective. Mr. Wernick stated that is why we have Tom Houston. He gives us his professional opinion on what needs to be done. Mr. Stankansy asked if it is within their discretion to raise the bar. Mr. Wernick stated the board feels what we have done is appropriate. Mr. Gelerman stated he understands the question, but he doesn’t know the answer and feels this is the right thing to do. Mr. Stankansy feels it sounds like town counsel is saying this was not fully evaluated. Mr. Wernick stated we spent a lot of time discussing this. Mr. Lee stated he disagreed with Mr. Houston and asked for a higher amount. Mr. Okstein stated the board felt the higher amount was more reasonable.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF JUNE 9, 2010 (3)
Mr. Stankansy stated you are hearing from some of the abutters that they don’t think it is reasonable. Mr. Lee stated they weren’t all here at the last meeting. Mr. Houston stated that all the bylaw simply requires is stabilization. There is no requirement to replant trees. Currently this exceeds anything required by a bylaw.
Brian Flore, 147 Old Post Road: what species of trees have grown back on the site. Mr. Lee stated the extent of revegetation was not as extensive as stated at the public meeting. Some small trees were coming up. Trees are not popping up all over the place as stated at the public hearing. Mr. Newman suggested to the abutters that are having noise issues that they approach Mass Highway and talk about sound barriers along section of Rout 95 where the noise is coming from. Mr. Flore asked if there was a second study down before or after the trees were taken down. Mr. Lee stated there was none done. They did discuss noise from the store roofs.
Mr. Lee questioned the original decision. He stated that Mr. Wernick and Mr. Lee signed on the signature block, but Mr. McCarville didn’t. The actual vote is being taken tonight and it could be a different one. Mr. Gelerman said it could be shown that Mr. McCarville had voted previously in the negative.
There were no further comments or questions.
Mr. Wernick moved to accept the Letter of Credit in the amount of $170,000 for site stabilization in accordance with the decision for Case No. 1659 dated June 9, 2010. No work will be done until the applicant comes back and the Letter of Credit is reassessed. Motion seconded by Mr. McCarville and voted 2-1-0 (Lee, Wernick in the affirmative; McCarville in the negative).
Mr. Lee asked if Case No. 1659 is for the Letter of Credit only. Mr. Houston stated yes. Mr. Lee stated we are not changing anything but the Letter of Credit. The board feels that $170,000 is correct and sufficient.
Mr. Gelerman reminded the board that the Letter of Credit automatically renews in one year. Mr. Houston took the signature page and will file the decision.
9:05 P.M. Sharon Commons, Case No. 1653, Continued Hearing: The applicant was represented by Atty. Bob Shelmerdine. Mr. Shelmerdine stated that the town clerk assigns a case number to each application. This application is a modification request to an existing decision. This is the original Phase I site plan approval that was rendered by the Zoning Board of Appeal. Mr. Lee stated that normally the Zoning Board of Appeal issues a decision for a project. Then, if the applicant finds they need to come in for a modification, the applicant asks the Zoning Board to determine if what they are trying to change is a minor or major modification. In this case, the applicant assumed this was a major modification. He is not sure if that is okay. Atty. Richard Gelerman stated it is.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF JUNE 9, 2010 (4)
Richard Rudman, Counsel for CFII stated in addition to the site plan, they have filed for an additional special permit for BJ’s store. Mr. Lee stated that zoning allows for 80,000 s.f. and they are asking for an additional 5,000 s.f. Mr. Rudman agreed and stated they are determining that change to be a major modification. Atty. Shelmerdine stated that Case No. 1588 is the original decision and this application seeks to amend that. Mr. Gelerman agrees with Mr. Shelmerdine. It could have been numbered Case No. 1588-A.
Mr. Lee asked where we stand with invoices for Tom Houston’s work. Mr. Houston stated that Sharon Commons CFII only have a current invoice outstanding. Sharon Residences has one outstanding invoice in the amount of approximately $13,000, which has been outstanding for some time. Mr. Lee stated that although they are separate projects, we want reassurance they are getting paid. He has an invoice in front of him dated May 14th. Mr. Houston stated that has not been paid yet, but thinks it will be soon.
Mr. Shelmerdine introduced the team they are currently working with: Dean Stratuli, Richard Rudman, Liam Patterson, Tom Houston, Richard Cursol, and Ken Caputo. They filed the application with the town clerk on April 29, 2010.
Mr. Lee stated we will move this along tonight. The Zoning Board has spent a lot of time on the last plan. However, we would like an explanation as to why things have changed. What happened to the rotaries, slopes, walkways. These things are now gone. Mr. Rudman agrees and feels an explanation would be reasonable. He would like as much feedback from the board and people here.
Dean Stratulis, President, Congress Group: appreciates the amount of time the board has put into this project. At the last meeting, they presented a revised site plan. They talked about changes in the economy and the retail world and how it affects them. Their vacancy rate is running 12-14% and has changed the way they respond to their client base. The original concept has gone by the board. It is now point, park, shop. They want to park near the store they are shopping at. The days of warehouse buildings being used as shopping points has also changed, like BJ’s, Home Depot, Lowes. They need to make their stores more attractive. They are no longer servicing the smaller stores. Target will open in March 2010. This is one of their twelve locations to move forward. These changes are in response to the changing market. They are also about to sign a lease with BJ’s. After he was here last time, Westwood filed to change their life style center. They are making the project smaller and less environmentally impacting.
Patrick Harpley, Head of BJ’s Development Team: has seen a lot of the changes discussed by Mr. Stratulis tonight. Their patrons have come to expect a higher quality. They are excited about coming to Sharon and are at the point where the executed documents are being prepared. They are also aware of what the Zoning Board wants and they will work closely to meet everyone’s expectations. They are very involved in the community after they open.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF JUNE 9, 2010 (5)
Mr. Lee stated that the Sharon Zoning Bylaw has a specific architectural style. The Design Review Committee worked with the people from Target. The people at town meeting voted for a Life Style Center.
Ken Caputo, Coler & Colantonio: reviewed what is changed from the Sharon Commons. Mr. Lee asked him to compare the old and the new plans. Mr. Caputo stated that more open space has been created by the reduction in s.f. Impervious cover has also been reduced. There was no open space along Old Post Road and now there is which makes Old Post Road more of a focal point. He discussed what was originally proposed and what is now being proposed. There is more visual awareness of where the stores will actually be and there is still a lot of walkability. It is less confusing to the customer. “Life Style” is now a “New England Village” concept. There are more than 400 spaces provided for parking. Mr. Caputo feels it is closer to 600 spaces. Mr. Lee stated that at Derby Village, there is customer parking with shops all around. He asked if this will be like that. Mr. Caputo stated the shape of this parcel makes it different from Derby Village. Mr. Stratulis stated he stops at Derby and he anticipates internal circulation at this proposed village to much the same as Derby. Mr. Caputo stated the arch and streetscape makes this a unique shopping area. Mr. McCarville asked if there will still be restaurants there and Mr. Caputo stated yes. Mr. Stratuli stated they have cut the trees so a perspective tenant could see the site. Mr. Intoccia stated that people have asked who will be going there before they commit. This change will affect the 40R also. Mr. Lee asked how they stand with the fencing. Mr. Intoccia stated they have put a deposit down now. Mr. Lee reminded him that right now they are not in compliance.
Mr. McCarville asked if they are still planning on having doctors’ offices, etc. Mr. Stratuli stated yes that 10% have to be offices. Mr. Ruskin asked what is the difference between what was previously approved and what they are now asking for. Mr. Harpley stated this is a more realistic format. Mr. Lee asked if they plan to have palletized retail and Mr. Harpley stated yes, everything is on pallets as that creates a cost savings. Mr. Lee stated that is also addressed in the zoning bylaw. Mr. Rudman stated that the special permit addresses it, not the zoning bylaw. He would hope that would not be a condition of approval for this application. Mr. Lee stated he will check the zoning bylaw.
Anthony DiScipio, 147 Old Post Road: before you break ground he would like to know how much is leased out. Mr. Stratuli stated about 70% is leased now, but there are many letters of intent pending. The opening for Target and BJ’s is March 12, 2012. They have a lot of site work to do.
Joyce Rabino, 12 Col. Gridley Road: asked if the board is voting on whether or not to accept this new plan. Mr. Lee stated they are not voting tonight as he wants to give everyone an opportunity to digest what has been presented. There are a lot of positives here. Mr. Ruskin stated they had mentioned patios with tables and chairs. Mr. Stratuli agreed and pointed out where they will be. They are looking for openness and connectivity, but are running out of revenue generated space.
SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF JUNE 9, 2010 (6)
They also need a liquor license. Mr. McCarville stated that extra green throughout the site will lend something to this project. Mr. Wernick stated that as this relates to BJ’s, there is typically a brick façade and entrance. Will the food court be partially inside and partially outside? Mr. Harpley stated they are working with Mr. Stratuli to see what is presently available and will wait to see what he comes up with. Mr. Stratuli stated that this BJ’s will be similar to the store located in Hyannis. Mr. Harpley stated this will be dramatically different from what is typically built for a BJ’s.
Brian Flores, 147 Old Post Road: asked the date of the plan discussed. Mr. Caputo stated April 28, 2010. He asked if this has been presented to Peter O’Cain as he has one dated May 30, 2007. Mr. Lee stated the revised date on this plan is March 25, 2010. Mr. Caputo stated they only revised certain pages. Mr. Flores asked where the waste treatment center is and Mr. Caputo stated in the back. Mr. Lee stated that nothing else will be brought on site for sewage disposal.
Joyce Rabino, 12 Col. Gridley Road: feels this is an extremely drastic changed plan. She feels this needs to be turned into the Life Style Center that the town voted on. She wished she had gone to previous meetings. She doesn’t see a lot of green and doesn’t think this is what we voted on. Mr. Lee agrees with everything she said. Things changed and now we have to decide what suite the best interest of the town.
Bob Stepansky, 12 Col. Gridley Road: asked how this cannot go before the town given the substantial changes made. He asked if the Zoning Board is empowered to approve this or does it go back to the people. Mr. Lee stated we are empowered to do this and we are acting in compliance with what we are charged with. He asked Mr. Gelerman if this needs to go back to town meeting and he stated no, this doesn’t require a town meeting vote. Mr. Stepansky asked if any of these changes need traffic comments and Mr. Rudman stated no. They will fulfill those commitments previously made. Mr. Lee stated we were not asked to re-do the mitigation package.
Mr. Okstein asked what happened to the walkway. Mr. Stratuli stated the Conservation Commission didn’t like it and they were concerned about safety and security. Mr. Lee stated the townspeople were excited about walkability. Mr. Stratuli stated that South Main Street will remain the same. He eliminated the path because of the impact on the wetlands and it can’t be patrolled. Mr. Lee stated that the New England Life Style concept is what we are interested in protecting for the town. We need to protect their interest. Mr. Stratuli stated they need to make sure this project look good and works well. He needs people shopping there for his tenants to be successful.
There were no further comments or questions. Mr. Lee continued this hearing to July 28, 2010 at 8:00 P.M. It was moved, seconded and voted to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Approved: 9/22/10