SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 22, 2010
A regular meeting of the Sharon Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Wednesday, September 22, 2010 at 8:00 p.m. in the Lower Level Town Office Building. The following members were present: John Lee, Chairman; Lee Wernick, Larry Okstein, Walter Newman and Seth Ruskin.
Mr. Lee opened the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
Minutes: Mr. Wernick moved to accept the minutes of March 10, 2010, March 24, 2020, April 14, 2010, April 28, 2010, May 12, 2010 and June 9, 2010 as presented. Motion seconded by Mr. Newman and voted 5-0-0.
8:05 p.m. AT&T, Mohawk Street, Case No. 1656 Continued Hearing: Mr. Lee continued this hearing to October 27, 2010 at 8:00 p.m. at the request of the applicant.
8:07 p.m. Sharon Commons, Case No. 1653 Continued Hearing: Mr. Wernick asked if the peer review was ready for the board to review and Mr. Lee stated yes. He stated that the Peer Review Committee was also present tonight.
Bob Shelmerdine, attorney for the applicant, stated this is a continued hearing. The first meeting was back in April. They submitted two requests for relief: 1) a special permit for a building larger than 80,000 s.f. which will be BJ’s; and 2) a modification to the original approved site plan. The last meeting held on this was June 28, 2010 and they have been working on a modification since that time. He stated that the purpose of the Design Review Committee is to advise the Zoning Board with regard to design issues. They met with the DRC on September 3, 2010 and wanted to meet again before tonight’s meeting on September 16, but they couldn’t attend that night. The team had other matters to discuss. Tom Houston has reviewed their submittal in terms of the modification to the site plan.
Atty. Richard Rudman stated that regarding the September 16th proposed meeting, there were scheduled conflicts prior to that meeting date and informed the DRC several days prior to the meeting that they couldn’t attend. They offered several times for rescheduling, but those dates were not possible. He didn’t want it portrayed as they just didn’t show up. They did choose to go ahead and meet without them. Mr. Lee stated it was not portrayed any other way.
Mr. Shelmerdine stated that since July 28, 2010, they have taken some of the comments made at the Zoning Board meeting, tweaked the plan and reviewed other comments received from the DRC and Peer consultants.
Dean Stratuli, President of the Congress Group, showed the plan they started with back in April. He stated that the comments they were given ranged from big items to smaller items. They then went to a second plan showing more green space and more common area. They tried to establish more pedestrian connections. This plan was better received.
Sharon Board of Appeals Minutes of September 22, 2010 (2)
It addressed some of the issues, but not all of them. They then did a more detailed plan which is where they are today. There have been significant changes. They tried to address parking issues, pedestrian issues and have more open green space. The new plan is broken up into five segments. There will also be a BJ’s, an outside café, and they have created another anchor plaza. They feel they have addressed the board’s concerns and they think the new plan works well. The movement of pedestrians will be complimentary to the retailers also. They are still trying to come up with a use for the 5,000 s.f. building, but feel it would be a good restaurant. They are trying to continue the pedestrian and village feel. He got feedback that the feel of the mall isn’t New England-y enough and wants some help with this. Mr. Lee asked if that feedback was from the ZBA and Mr. Stratuli stated he wasn’t sure. Mr. Houston stated it was one of his comments. This is supposed to be very similar to Derby Street.
Mr. Newman stated he is not sure if they are translating to their anchors the ideas of what should be presented. Mr. Stratuli stated that Target went through the Design Review process and was given a thumbs up by them. He knows the board has been very strong about not being just inward, but also outward. They are trying to make the large anchors more outward. He is a civil engineer, not an architect so his vocabulary is limited in trying to explain this. They met last week with Target and looked at the building again. This is probably one of the best looking stores he has seen. The store has a lot of glass, a cupola, and a pitched roof. They have worked with them to create more receptivity to the building. The design that went before the DRC is spectacular. Regarding BJ’s, they will defer to the board and the DRC. They think this works. He wants to know where do they go with BJ’s, 80,000 versus 85,000 s.f. and do they move forward with this plan relative to the Phase I site plan.
Mr. Wernick stated he is concerned with truck access and how it will be people friendly and would like them to work more with the DRC. Mr. Ruskin questioned the backs of the stores and asked what they envision. Mr. Stratuli stated that the back is as important as the front. They have tucked in dumpsters behind fences. Deliveries will not be allowed after 10:00 a.m., plus or minus and no activities after 10:00 p.m. They will keep this clean and attractive. Mr. Wenick stated again he would like them to work out these details with the DRC. Mr. Lee asked if they are closer to the wetlands and Mr. Stratuli stated no. They are taking advantage of the natural topo in the back.
Mr. Ruskin asked how many stores and Mr. Stratuli stated twenty-one, but the square footage is down from what they previously planned. Mr. Lee questioned the retaining walls and Mr. Caputo showed him the locations on the new plan. Mr. Lee asked about the large retaining wall and Mr. Caputo stated it is not 6-8’ and will taper into the landscape. Mr. Newman questioned the sidewalks and Mr. Caputo stated there are some on Old Post Road and they also added some crosswalks, which will be raised to control speed. That should keep people to about 15 m.p.h. There are also raised islands with walkways, which didn’t exist on the previous plan, but was a recommendation of Tom Houston.
Sharon Board of Appeals Minutes of September 22, 2010 (3)
Atty. Rudman stated there was an “oops”. The square footage that they were working on with Target and BJ’s is the square footage of the retail space. There will be small mezzanines used exclusively for the offices of the staff and will not be open to the public. There will be no rents paid from the mezzanine, therefore it got by them. There is probably 2700 s.f. more in BJ’s because of this error. He doesn’t know about Target yet, but they will get that information. They will verbally amend that the BJ’s special permit to cover errors that happened in the process.
Ed Hershfield, 33 Gavin Pond Road was present. He will be speaking tonight as chairman of the DRC. He stated that the DRC members are Christine Turnball, Ann Bingham, along with Beth Greene and Paul. They delivered a report which was circulated by John Lee to the Zoning Board. He also sent a copy to the Board of Selectmen and Richard Rudman. They were asked to weigh in on the revised plan at the end of July or the beginning of August. They met with them on September 3. From the standpoint of the DRC, they didn’t know of any of the changes. At the conclusion of the meeting, they suggested they put together a list of questions to send to the applicant. The next meeting was to be held on September 16. Before that meeting, the applicant said they couldn’t attend. They offered three other dates, but couldn’t work it out. They told Bob Shelmerdine they were still going forward on September 16th. They did not have a revised site plan at that meeting, but did have the plan August 5, 2010 plan. It was voted 4-0-0 to tell the ZBA that the DRC couldn’t do anything at this time. They would welcome the opportunity to perform their task.
Mr. Lee asked the applicant if they looked at the 21 questions submitted. Atty. Rudman stated yes and they can respond to many of them tonight and many were responded to in Mr. Houston’s memo. They also feel that some of them can be dealt with in subsequent phases. Mr. Lee stated this is the first night we have seen the plan and report. He does like this plan and thinks it is an improvement over the last one. However, he wants all the questions raised by the DRC answered and wants Tom Houston to review this plan. Mr. Wernick wants the detailed input from the DRC and Tom Houston before we move forward on this new plan. Mr. Stratuli stated he understands and appreciates what the board is saying, but they need some indication that they are heading in the right direction, although he is not looking for a binding vote. Mr. Lee stated he liked the previous plan, but likes this one even more. We want this to work for the town and also for the applicant, but you will not walk away with a vote tonight. Mr. Wernick agrees with Mr. Lee.
Mr. Stratuli stated he understands what they board is looking for. He just saw this plan at 6:00 tonight. They have run out of any more tweaking. They are looking for guidance that they are in the realm of acceptance. He appreciates everyone’s efforts and knows they are a volunteer board. It does him no good to build something that no one leases. They know the board has goals and they need to be respectful of those goals.
Sharon Board of Appeals Minutes of September 22, 2010 (4)
Mr. Okstein stated he likes this plan better than the last one and he does want them to meet again with the DRC. When they feel comfortable and all issues have been addressed, then we can move forward. We can say we like it and if they come back with issues, then we will have problems again. Mr. Newman stated he has no comments at this time. Mr. Wernick stated he will still depend on Mr. Houston and the DRC for their input. Mr. Ruskin agrees it is within the realm of acceptability, but some things need to be worked out.
Denise Fine, 5 Mitchell Street: once you have made a decision, will this come back to town meeting for approval. What was voted at town meeting is very different from what she is seeing tonight. Mr. Lee stated no. Ms. Fine stated she thinks that is very unfair.
There should be no box stores. Mr. Lee stated what we voted on was the zoning change, not the stores. Ms. Fine stated it is smoking mirrors.
Aamir Rashid, 26 Laurel Road: asked the legal definition of a life style mall. Mr. Ruskin stated there is no legal definition. Mr. Rashid stated he went to several meetings and they were explicitly sold on the vision of a grand life-style mall, like Derby Street. They asked if there will be box stores, like Home Depot, Lowes, or BJ’s and they were told no. What they are saying tonight is not what he voted on at town meeting. Why should they settle for less? This is like false advertising. How can you sell me on something, get my vote and then change it. Mr. Wernick stated he is not defending Dean Stratuli, but the market is down. Mr. Ruskin stated he doesn’t think that Mr. Stratuli ever mentioned stores by name. Mr. Rashid disagreed. He was told these stores would not be a part of this. He in fact asked this question himself.
Mr. Lee stated we deal with the zoning bylaws. The stores are not listed in the zoning bylaw. They go by the bylaw that this town created. We have to go by the definition of retail stores. Ms. Fine asked why not go back to town meeting. She lives at ground zero. She doesn’t understand all this, but feels it should be put to a town meeting vote with the revised plan instead of many residents feeling they have been bamboozled. They were given a presentation and told what this should be.
Mr. Ruskin stated it is not up to the Zoning Board to decide what stores will go in there. Ms. Fine said let the town decide. She appreciates the work you guys have put in, but the town should be able to say what they want and what they don’t want.
Susy Walsh, 680 S. Main Street: would like the time line in terms of the roadway going into the site. Mr. Stratuli stated they are obligated by contract to open BJ’s, Target, a movie theater by March 2012. The issue has been raised, what if they just build BJ’s and Target and then go home, but they can’t. Ms. Walsh asked if the road will be built first. Mr. Stratuli stated there is a construction access road already there. Over the next twelve months, they have to put in water, sewer, electrical. Mr. Shelmerdine stated that Ms. Walsh lives almost across from our site and she wants to know when all will happen. Mr. Stratuli stated if this gets approved now, work will start in the spring.
Sharon Board of Appeals Minutes of September 22, 2010 (5)
Ed Pearson, 16 Laurel Road: will this project still take care of the aesthetics on Laurel Road and if so, what are they. They can’t get out of Laurel Road now, so will that be addressed. Mr. Caputo stated the end of Laurel Road will remain as stated previously with regard to landscaping, etc. There will be a pedestrian access over to the walkway along Old Post Road. At S. Main Street, they have received approval from Mass Highway for the signalization of Old Post Road as well as the off ramps. Also, Gavin Pond Road is integrated with the Old Post Road system. You will have gaps on S. Main Street that you don’t have now. The experience of getting out of driveways and side streets will be greatly enhanced.
Aamir Rashid, 26 Laurel Road stated there are dust storms on Laurel Road when it gets dry. He has sent emails to Mr. Houston regarding this problem because his son is asthmatic and Mr. Houston has said that nothing can be done until after this project starts. He would like this area paved now. Mr. Wernick stated he understands. Mr. Lee stated there is a dust control program already. Mr. Houston stated there is a dual level of protection.
Ed McSweeney, 68 S. Walpole Street: asked why something wasn’t done when they cut down the trees because the dust covered everything. He also had a list of eighteen questions that he submitted to the board which he would like answered. He also stated that Mr. Lee has given a copy of those questions to Tom Houston and Bob Shelmerdine at the July 28th meeting. Mr. Lee stated he would like each question addressed at the next meeting.
Ray Samuels, 70 S. Walpole Street: stated he likes the idea that he will have places to work, but because of the failures of Patriot Place in Walpole is why he is not comfortable. They said these places have failed, so why are they convinced that someone is going to get off the highway, go through the bushes and brush and come to this mall. Mr. Ruskin stated that BJ’s and Target hasn’t closed a single store, which makes them good tenants. Mr. Lee stated we have had this conversation before. Mr. Stratuli stated he wants this to work and Mr. Samuels stated he does too. Mr. Stratuli stated this industry has gone from producing 22 million feet of retail to 2 million feet because of the economy. The stores that they have attracted are stores that have survived this Darwinian exercise we have experienced in the past two to three years. This location is successful because Sharon is a good town demographically and there is sight line off Exit 8 both Northbound and Southbound. Target is buying land here and they want to own their own pad and will condominimize the land; BJ’s has a terrific structure that has worked well for them for the past 25 years. They are delivering a great sustainable and serviceable product. He stated that Mr. Ruskin left out Legacy Place, which is a huge success. Mr. Lee stated that no one wants to see empty buildings in the future. Mr. Samuels stated the applicant mentioned co-tenancy requirements. Mr. Shelmerdine stated they have enough commitments now to put a shovel in the ground. Mr. Lee stated this is their project. If they want to move forward that is their choice. Mr. Samuels stated it is his neighborhood. Mr. Lee stated we want this to work.
Sharon Board of Appeals Minutes of September 22, 2010 (6)
Suzy Walsh, 680 S. Main Street stated that one of the tenants is a movie theater and another is BJ’s. She asked what will happen to the existing market and theater on S. Main Street. Will BJ’s affect Shaw’s? She asked if there is a plan for this board or any other board to bring in the leaseholders to talk about this situation. Mr. Lee stated we will not bring them in. He asked if the traffic signalization includesthis area and Mr. Caputo stated yes. Mr. Shelmerdine stated they think and we think this will be a help to businesses in the area.
Mr. Rashid asked the status of where Old Post Road meets Laurel Road, an area that was given to the town and will become a cul-de-sac. Mr. Caputo stated the status is unchanged. Mr. Stratuli stated that whatever they commented to and agreed to in the permitting process will be done. Mr. Houston stated the house needs to be demolished as it wasn’t donated to the town. Mr. Shelmerdine stated there is land coming out of that lot that will be added to the town layout. Mr. Rashid stated the house in question is vacant and no one is taking care of it. He has been making call to the police. Mr. Lee asked who owns the house now and Mr. Shelmerdine stated Sharon Commons. Mr. Rashid stated that building needs to be secured and someone should take responsibility. Mr. Shelmerdine stated they didn’t know there was an issue, but they can take the house down before winter.
Ed Hirshfield, 33 Gavin Pond Road stated the Zoning Board needs to control what is happening here. They need to know that every time they give discretionary relief, it becomes harder to say no. He stated they have permission to put in two 80,000 s.f. stores, but one has to be a movie theater. Also, a retail food supermarket of at least 75,000 s.f.. BJ’s is neither of these two things. He urges the board to take a look at whether or not this is a life-style development. He doesn’t think so. People in town rely on the Zoning Board. You can require that they not open anything else until they open some in-line stores. The ZBA has the power to control this and urges the board to do so. Exercise the authority you have. Don’t allow them to come in time after time to make changes. They don’t have the right to change things. Mr. Lee stated those were good points.
Ed Marshall, 31 Laurel Road: Asked what is the specific thing that needs the special permit? He also questioned if there is a specific requirement. Mr. Lee stated with regard to elevations of the building, yes. Mr. Marshall stated he knows what this area looks like because the land has been stripped. Mr. Rashid asked will the new buildings be visible or hidden is what they are asking. Mr. Lee stated regarding your first question on the special permit, they are allowed 80,000 s.f. and are asking for 85,000 s.f. for BJ’s.
Mr. Hirshfield stated they are coming in for a building over 60,000 s.f., which is simply a 5,000-7,000 s.f request to do something over 60,000 s.f. Mr. Houston agreed. He stated there are no limitations for the board. They can grant or deny the special permit or grant it with reasonable conditions. Regarding elevations, none of the buildings on the current site plan approach the limited as stated in the zoning bylaw.
Sharon Board of Appeals Minutes of September 22, 2010 (7)
Mr. Lee stated the whole site will be balanced and the entire site will be one flat playing field. Mr. Houston stated this site will look exceptionally flat. Mr. Rashid stated he thought the previous plans said it was going to be 3-step architect. Mr. Lee stated no. Mr. Shelmerdine stated the resulting elevation is established by making sure the cuts and fills are neutral.
Susy Walsh, 680 S. Main Street questioned the water treatment systems. Mr. Lee stated they will be in the back. Aamir Rashid stated four years ago there were a lot of meetings for them to attend; now what they are getting is different from what was given to them previously. It seems things have changed drastically. If this is not the committee to answer their questions, what do they go? Mr. Lee stated the Board of Selectmen. He suggested they talk to them, get something on the town meeting warrant and go back to town meeting. Zoning changes take a 2/3 vote. Denise Fine, 4 Laurel Road, feels this was done very quietly. The average person doesn’t understand the process. Mr. Rashid asked why they aren’t noticed of these meetings. Ms. Fine agrees with him. She thought this project was dead. This area is now in shambles. She feels the town should see what is happening.
Beth Greene, 11 Huckleberry Lane stated to fight this takes diligence. You have to be organized and it is not easy. The meetings have been televised. The DRC feels the same way. We are glad you are here. The change is quite shocking.
Ed McSweeney, Old Post Road stated he had eighteen questions and is upset there is no time for them. Mr. Ruskin stated that is not fair. We spent an hour at the last meeting going over the concerns of abutters. To suggest you haven’t been given enough time is not fair. Mr. Lee stated the applicant has a copy of his questions, but they need time to answer them. This is the way we run our meetings. Mr. McSweeney stated they are protecting the mall, but not the neighbors. Where is all the gravel going? Why aren’t you protecting the other side of Old Post Road? Mr. Samuels asked why are you forgetting the right side of the street. Mr. Wernick stated that is a different project. Mr. Lee stated it is 168 apartments. Mr. McSweeney stated it is changed and is now up to 400 apartments. Mr. Shelmerdine stated what is currently permitted is 29 townhouses at 669 Main Street across from Shaws. What still needs to be permitted as passed by town meeting is 39 condo units and 100 apartments for a total of 468 units. Mr. Lee stated they are limited by the septic system.
Mr. Rashid asked the legal status of Old Post Road – is it a public way? If so, how can it be closed for so long. Mr. Houston stated it is a county layout, but there were conditions imposed in terms of traffic mitigation as per a perception by the town that the neighbors don’t want a through roadway. Mr. Lee stated it is a public road. The Board of Selectmen are the road commissioners and you need to bring those questions before them.
Sharon Board of Appeals Minutes of September 22, 2010 (8)
Ms. Fine, 4 Laurel Road, asked once you have made your decision, we need to go before the Board of Selectmen and ask them to go to town meeting? Mr. Lee stated this is not going to town meeting. You need to talk to the Selectmen about a zoning change. Does the town want to vote to put this back to residential? We have to work within the zoning bylaw. Ms. Fine stated she doesn’t understand the process. She thinks a lot of decisions are being made that she doesn’t understand. Mr. Ruskin stated the Board of Selectmen is where you want to be.
Mr. Lee stated he wants the applicant and Mr. Shelmerdine to address Mr. McSweeney’s questions. He continued this hearing to October 27, 2010 at 8:00 p.m. He stated there will be not further notice.
It was moved, seconded and voted to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Approved 5/11/11