SHARON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 2012
A regular meeting of the Sharon Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Wednesday, April 11, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Second Floor, Town Office Building. The following members were present: John Lee, Chairman; Kevin McCarville, Vice Chairman; Lee Wernick, Clerk, Seth Ruskin, Larry Okstein, Barry Barth.
7:05 p.m. Brian Greenfield, 562 S. Main Street, Case No. 1696 Continued Hearing: The applicant was represented by Atty. Joel Fishman, Stoughton, MA. Mr. Fishman stated that when we last met a figure of 20 vehicles was discussed. Mr. Lee asked if 16 would be a manageable number and Mr. Greenfield stated he currently has nine and feels that 16 would limit him. Mr. Wernick stated that Peter O’Cain had stated that much more than 16 would be a problem when turning. Mr. Lee stated he would like to leave this up to the applicant to do as he sees fit as the professional. If a problem arises it will become an enforcement issue. He thinks twenty is reasonable. Mr. Okstein asked if the pad that is there is sufficient for 20? Mr. Wernick stated that Peter O’Cain has a problem with pad as sized. Mr. Okstein stated he doesn’t want to limit this either. Mr. Lee asked the dimensions of the sign and Mr. Fishman stated the latest was 5’x3’. It is the same sign as submitted, just downsized.
Mr. Wernick stated he won’t argue with 16 vs. 20 vehicles. Mr. Lee asked who owns this property now and Mr. Fishman stated Moose Hill Realty Trust. He asked if the applicant is leasing or purchasing and Mr. Greenfield stated purchasing. Mr. Lee stated this will be a real addition to the town and it fits in the character of the neighborhood. He is in favor of approval for one sign on the front parcel. He questioned fencing. Mr. Fishman stated 6’ cedar in the front and 6’ black chain link all along the other sides except there will be an 8’ high green chain link fence with green slats on Mr. Ward’s side. Mr. Lee stated that what has been currently farmed by someone else will be fenced off. The trees will be Eastern red cedar 5’ on center, 4’ high as depicted on the plan. Mr. Barth asked if the stone wall will remain across the back and Mr. Greenfield stated it is just ruble and it will be removed. Mr. Okstein stated he thinks this is a nice project. Mr. Ruskin agreed and stated they have gone above and beyond to protect the area.
Mr. Wernick moved to approve Case No. 1696 with plantings and fencing per the site plan and with the board’s standard conditions and six special conditions as per a site plan dated February 2, 2012 by Site Design Engineering and April 5, 2012 by United Consultants, Inc. Motion seconded by Mr. Okstein and voted 3-0-0 (McCarville, Wernick, Okstein).
7:23 p.m. Sharon Credit Union, 42 Pond Street, Case No. 1698 New Hearing: Mr. McCarville read the public hearing notice and Mr. Lee read correspondence from Greg Meister, Conservation Agent and Jim Andrews, Health Agent. The applicant was represented by Atty. Joel Fishman, Stoughton, MA and Mark Emerson, Chief Operational Officer for Sharon Credit Union.
Atty. Fishman referenced a special permit that was granted in 1983. Mr. Emerson stated they have been operating in Sharon since 1983 and have had a walk up in the lobby since the 1990’s and are requesting to have a drive up ATM. They are doing this in reaction to many requests from their customers. It will be on the same corridor as the drive up window and they will still maintain a walk up ATM. There is some membership that walks to this branch. They feel the impact would be minimal. Mr. McCarville asked about surveillance and Mr. Emerson stated there will be a camera within the ATM unit itself. It records and they will add an additional exterior camera that will record transactions. Mr. McCarville asked if any special lighting is required and Mr. Emerson stated no. Mr. Emerson stated the plan is dated December 13, 2011 and the current site has been there since 2000. There will be a 30” x 2-1/2’ x10’ bump out which will incorporate the night depository. It has to be bumped out because of the curbing that runs the length of the building. Mr. Fishman stated they also have a tube system that is positioned on the curbing. He presented the elevation plan for the actual installation and presented some general pictures of the building and environment. They would like to install a surround plat on the entire bumped out wall to give a clean look and that would be subject to the board’s approval. They ar also requesting an additional sign. The existing signage says “enter” and they would like add the drive up ATM signage. There will be 5 soffit lighting fixtures 10’ apart and the one by the bump out would be eliminated. They are currently on now for security purposes, but there is no lighting on the ground. If approved by the board, they would like a face plate to include an overhead sign. It would be lit and the underside would be an opaque white panel. Mr. Emerson stated the Planning Board mentioned the difficulty in matching the brick, especially 30 years later, but they are confident they can do an acceptable match job. It is on the north side of the building and has never been exposed to direct sunlight.
Mr. Wernick asked how bright the lighting will be and Mr. Emerson stated he can’t answer that, but he will control it. Mr. Fishman stated it will be downward.
There were no abutters present. Mr. Emerson stated they like to think they are good neighbors and try to maintain the buildings. Mr. Lee stated the Credit Union sign will be lit from above and asked if they feel that is necessary for this project. Mr. Emerson stated it is preferred as it gives identification to the bank and the ATM. Mr. McCarville stated they can control the wattage. Mr. Lee stated it is a town business and he is sure they will do the right thing. Mr. Okstein wants it lit up. Mr. Barth asked if this is the only illuminate sign and Mr. Emerson stated there is the new one and a post sign at the front of the building.
No further questions. Mr. Fishman asked to close the hearing. Mr. Wernick moved to close thehearing. Motion seconded by Mr. McCarville and voted 3-0-0 (McCarville, Wernick, Okstein). Mr. Wernick moved to approve as per the submitted plans with the board’s standard conditions and no special conditions. Motion seconded by Mr. Okstein and voted 3-0-0 (McCarville, Okstein, Wernick). Mr. Fishman asked that this be a modification to an existing special permit as advertised. The purpose of the special permit approved in 1983 was for the drive through, but the town doesn’t permit drive throughs for banking. The board agreed that Mr. Fishman would draft the decision and review before it is filed.
It was moved, seconded and voted to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Accepted 5/9/12