Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20180709 - Planning Board - Meeting Minutes HOPKINTON PLANNING BOARD Monday, July 9, 2018 7:30 P.M. HCAM-TV Studio, 77 Main St./Lower Level, Hopkinton, MA MINUTES MEMBERS PRESENT: Muriel Kramer, Chairwoman, Fran DeYoung, Vice-Chairman, David Paul, Amy Ritterbusch, Mary Larson-Marlowe, Deborah Fein-Brug, Gary Trendel MEMBERS ABSENT: Frank D’Urso Present: Georgia Wilson, Principal Planner, Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant Ms. Kramer opened the meeting. 1. Zoning Advisory Committee (ZAC) - Discussion The Board discussed the structure of the ZAC in preparation of a more formal discussion scheduled for July 23. Mr. Trendel noted he missed the previous meeting when the Board discussed this issue but he served on the ZAC last year for the first time and agrees with a lot of the comments made. He noted to him the ZAC is the "planning arm" of the Planning Board and he believes that are some things that might be improved. He noted he appreciates the desire for a diverse set of perspectives but feels membership should be limited to 9 people to make it more efficient and maximize output. He noted he likes the idea of having some non-voting members as a way for people to get some experience, and feels members should be Hopkinton residents. He noted he too feels meetings should be year-round, perhaps less frequent in the off-season, so that people can be proactive and won't feel rushed. Mark Hyman, Chairman, Board of Appeals, joined the discussion. He noted he agrees last year's group with 20 members was too large. He stated he likes the idea of including non-voting members and keeping the number of voting members low to avoid quorum problems. He stated he believes between 7 and 11 members would be reasonable, and perhaps they should consider the ability of members to resign if they don't want to continue, or the possibility of dropping them from the quorum. Ms. Ritterbusch stated membership was 9 in 2016, 13 in 2105 and 10 in 2014. Ms. Kramer noted it typically was in the 7 to 9 or 9 to 11 range, but last year they had more applicants than ever before, and the Board did not have time to come up with applicant criteria or some type of selection process. Mr. Hyman stated a little more professional input from potential members would be appropriate especially if the ZAC becomes a year-round committee and takes on a larger role for instance in doing a more comprehensive review of the zoning bylaws. Ms. Ritterbusch asked if the Board as the entity that creates the ZAC can set a rule to automatically remove a member from the committee after missing 3 meetings. Ms. Kramer stated they can definitely talk about it, but as far as she is concerned they should reach out first and find out what is going on. Mr. DeYoung noted often joining the ZAC is someone's first volunteering experience, and defining tasks and expectations up front may help identify applicants with the experience or willingness to serve either as full or associate members. He noted in his opinion a year-round committee may have a better opportunity to be involved with a total review of the Zoning Bylaw and look at issues that have lingered from year to year, such as lighting and signage. Ms. Kramer noted she believes a comprehensive review of the Zoning Bylaw is one of the action items in the most recent Master Plan update, and she would like to check on that. She invited Mr. Hyman to attend the ZAC discussion scheduled for July 23, and it was decided to also invite representatives of the Board of Selectmen, Conservation Commission, Chamber of Commerce, John Ferrari as the former ZAC chairman, and well as last year's members. Ms. Kramer summarized potential topics for the July 23 discussion, including group size, terms, appointment criteria, increased Planning Board involvement, and potential ZAC work items. Ms. Larson-Marlowe suggested adding training for new ZAC members. Ms. Fein- Brug stated they really need a job definition, or at least a rough outline of what the ZAC is trying to achieve, and she really likes the idea of alternate, perhaps non-voting members, offering some flexibility for people to decide whether they want to participate in a particular issue scheduled for that night. Mr. Trendel stated he is not in favor of that type of limited commitment, and if people want to pick and choose it would be better for them to participate as a member of the public. Ms. Ritterbusch stated the application could include the option to join as a full or associate member or either. Ms. Kramer cautioned the members not to expect a big change in functionality right away this year, but hopefully efficiency will improve in the long run. Ms. Kramer stated she would envision topics that carry forward to next year, and Ms. Fein-Brug stated discussions could include the definition of commercial/residential dark sky community, fascinating concepts that could take a couple of years to figure out. 2. Continued Public Hearing - 17, 0, 0 Wilson St., 0 Cedar St. - Commercial Photovoltaic Solar Facility - Special Permit and Stormwater Management Permit Applications - TJA Solar Mr. DeYoung moved to open the public hearing and continue when the applicant arrives, Ms. Fein-Brug seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. 3. Administrative Business The Board discussed the possibility of an alternative meeting location starting with the 2nd meeting in August, potentially returning to the Town Hall. The Board discussed the schedule for July 23, relative to the site plan application for 84 to 92 West Main St. which has to be continued because they do not have enough voting members tonight, and the continued public hearing on the stormwater management permit application for Bucklin St. which may or may not be sufficiently complete to warrant a full time slot. Ms. Kramer noted it has been suggested to follow the example of other boards and committees scheduling all hearings at the same time, she feels the Board should utilize that approach with some discretion as it may be convenient for the Board but costly for applicants when their paid consultants have to wait an entire night. 4. Continued Public Hearing - 17, 0, 0 Wilson St., 0 Cedar St. - Commercial Photovoltaic Solar Facility - Special Permit and Stormwater Management Permit Applications - TJA Solar Chris King, Atlantic Design Engineers (ADE), engineer, appeared before the Board on behalf of TJA Solar, applicant. Mr. King noted he has handouts, including plans, a response letter, and information on the Upper Charles Trail (UCT) master plan. Ms. Kramer noted the plans were revised just today, and she reminded the applicant of the Board's submission deadline for additional documentation, and stated that they will listen but will not be able to make a decision tonight. Mr. King noted he understands, but the intent is to provide an update of the changes made. He noted BETA, the Board's consultant, has not seen the revised plans but he has talked to Mr. Paradis, and Atlantic Design's letter describes the changes. Mr. King referred to the issue of sight line distance on Wilson St. He stated as noted in ADL's response letter, Wilson St. is a scenic road and they are trying to utilize an existing cart path for access which does not require tree or stone wall removal. He noted Wilson St. does not have a posted speed limit, typically used to determine the required sight line distance, but, although there is some level of interpretation, the ultimate goal is to create safe conditions. He stated when exiting the Wilson St. driveway, the sight line to the north is impeded by existing trees and vegetation which they do not want to disturb. He stated they feel they have addressed safety with a note on the plan indicating a police detail during construction to ensure vehicle and pedestrian safety, and they are amenable to having this as a condition of approval as well. He noted after construction, vehicular traffic will be very infrequent, just for maintenance and inspection purposes and much less frequent than a single family residential use, and it is assumed that experienced drivers will use caution when exiting. Mr. King noted another outstanding issue is screening, and basically BETA indicates it is up to the Board to determine whether the proposal is satisfactory in that respect. He noted they met with the abutters on site viewing the proposed arrays from their properties, and he believes they have come up with a sound program providing mature plantings for immediate screening 3 to 4 months after construction is finished. He noted the applicant has agreed to come back during the non-foliage seasons to determine if additional plantings are required to adequately screen the project from the neighbors, particularly the abutters at 15 and 21 Wilson St., and the proposed plantings are on the plan. He noted they will also try to do a forest restoration for lower to mid level canopies or try to block the view from Wilson St. itself to preserve the integrity of the scenic road. Mr. DeYoung asked if the abutters are amenable to this approach. Tom Shambo, 15 Wilson St., noted they spent 1 to 1-1/2 hour with the proponents on site. He stated there was some good conversation with a number of ideas, but he cannot say whether the screening is satisfactory because until he saw the plan tonight he did not know the details. Ed Cutter, 21 Wilson St., noted he is not satisfied because there was no specificity. Mr. Cutter stated he had not seen any new plans until tonight and it appears the plans always seem to come in within the last hour. Matt Zettek, 16 Wilson St., stated he did not attend the meeting with the developer, and although it sounds as if there was some good initial conversation, he does not think it is appropriate to comment now because of outstanding issues, such as the infrastructure on the Wilson St. side, and the exact location of the panels. He noted he is looking forward to comment on the proposal when the screening details are worked out. Mr. Trendel asked for more details regarding additional screening. Mr. King noted they have some specific character planting details on the plans, but currently the majority of the plantings is located within the jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission and therefore his wetlands professional is preparing a more detailed plan that caters to these specific needs. He noted it is difficult to provide additional details until they start clearing and identify the potential gaps. Ms. Fein-Brug noted her big concern is the difference of elevations, with the homes on Wilson St. up high and the solar project down below, and screening will be a challenge. Mr. King stated they looked at the site from Susan Hanewich's property at 14 Wilson St., and it appears that any necessary screening would have to be done on her property and the applicant is amenable. He stated it was thought at the time that leaving 75 ft. along Wilson St. with forest in front of her home would provide plenty of screening, and Ms. Fein-Brug noted that may not be the case in the winter. Mr. Trendel referred to the construction of the new Marathon School, and noted in that case the Town set aside money for additional screening and worked with the abutters. He noted he thinks that worked reasonably well, and he asked if the applicant would be willing to do something similar to make sure that fall/winter screening is achieved with input from and to the satisfaction of the abutters. Mr. King stated he cannot speak for his client and will bring this to his attention but based on prior conversations he is pretty sure he would be agreeable to creating some type of flex fund. Mr. King referred to BETA's comments regarding the stormwater management design. He noted they have slightly revised the detention basins and in working with BETA were able to eliminate 2 of the ponds pulling the limit of work away from the wetlands. He noted they have also changed the outlet structures within each basin to prevent the pipes from clogging, and based on comments received from the Conservation Commission, they will install a series of French drains to pick up groundwater discharge and redirect it into their stormwater system, to protect the integrity of the access driveway and the adjacent Shambo property. Mr. DeYoung asked who will be responsible for monitoring the detention basin outlet pipe, and Mr. King stated during construction it will be the site contractor as outlined in the SWPPP, and once the facility becomes operational it will be the owner's responsibility. He noted there will be a long term Operation & Maintenance (O&M) plan with best management practices for maintenance and inspections included as details on the plans. Mr. DeYoung asked about the Town's recourse in case of long term implications downstream as a result of a malfunction, and Mr. King noted some towns require weekly inspections and reports as a condition of approval. At the request of Ms. Fein-Brug, Mr. King referred to the plans and provided additional details regarding the proposed French drains along the side of the road. Ms. Fein-Brug noted she finds it hard to understand how the detail sections relate to the overall plans, and Mr. King noted they will try to make it easier to navigate. Mr. King referred to the BETA comments, and noted some of their comments may be addressed through conditions of approval, and the applicant has no objection. Ms. Kramer asked about the status of the Conservation Commission process, and Mr. King noted the next meeting is on July 17. Mr. King stated the delineation has now been finalized and the Commission had some minor comments with respect to the wildlife evaluation study. Mr. Paul asked Mr. Paradis to comment on the requirement for underground utilities, and Mr. Paradis noted some of them are above ground, which is typical, but the majority are below, similar to the solar project recently approved on Lumber St. The Board noted in this case there are additional above-ground utility connections between the Cedar St. and Wilson St. array sections, and Mr. King stated this is due to topography, the amount of ledge in the area, and the proximity to the Tennessee Gas pipe line. Mr. Paradis noted he appreciates the Board's emphasis on getting additional information ahead of time. Mr. King apologized for the last minute submittal, but one of BETA's comments was related to making sure that both Cedar St. and Wilson St. have adequate turning radii. Mr. King noted they worked with the Fire Dept. on this issue, and the turnarounds on the site have now been adjusted for an SU30 vehicle. Steven Slaman, Fire Chief, noted he has not seen the plans but has given the applicant guidance on what he feels is a first good step. He noted he has been evaluating each solar project on a case-by-case basis, and stills needs more information. At the request of Mr. Paul, Mr. King provided additional details on the utility interconnections. Mr. Trendel asked about the benefit of connecting on Wilson St. vs. Cedar St. Mr. King stated typically these decisions are made by the utility company based on an impact development study. He noted he was not directly involved during that phase of the project and he is not sure why Wilson St. was identified as the point for interconnection, but factors usually include existing infrastructure and the proximity to wetlands, and it has a lot to do with other projects in the pipeline. Ms. Kramer stated it appears the utility company is driving the preferred connection, but based on existing conditions and abutter feedback she would like to find out from the utility company through the applicant what it would take to change. Mr. King stated he understands TJA Solar has reached out to Eversource in recent days, and he is willing to follow up on this issue. Ms. Kramer noted she has seen the email thread on this issue, and understands the current connection is preferred by Eversource but not necessarily by anyone else for a variety of reasons. Mr. King noted that in the event the project is stuck with a Wilson St. interconnection, there are things they can do to reduce the impact from an aesthetical standpoint, such as installing some of the equipment underground and providing supplemental screening. Mr. Paul noted it appears from the email exchange that changing the location now would result in significant delays, and Ms. Kramer stated yes, but she would still like to find out if a change is possible. Mr. King stated in the meantime he will check if it is at least possible to install the last portion of the run underground across the street with minor disruption. Reference was made to a possible UCT connection through the site. It was noted Jane Moran, Chair, Upper Charles Trail Committee (UCTC), sent out documentation showing the UTC Master Plan alternatives for connecting the northeast to the southwest portion of Town. Mr. King stated he has not had a chance to follow up with Ms. Moran formally, but the topography, amount of ledge, and wetlands completely bisecting the property, would make it impossible to have a bike path in that area. He noted TJA Solar is only going to be leasing a small area limited by a fence line within the 34-acre parcel, and from a logistics standpoint he does not think this parcel is the right way to connect Wilson St. and Cedar St. Jane Moran, 70 East Main St., Chair, UCTC, noted the Board of Selectmen has asked the UCTC to provide several options for increased continuity of trails throughout the Town, and this alternative would create a connection from the Center Trail around St. John's cemetery via the recently purchased Fecteau property to Wilson St. She stated she realizes TJA Solar is only leasing a portion of the site, but she would like to know if the property owner would consider giving the Town a 25 ft. easement, around the perimeter so as not to impede further development. She noted the Town would then follow up with funding and permitting for boardwalks etc. through the wetlands. Mr. Trendel noted that based on topography there may be some way to get a trail through the property but certainly not within 25 ft. of the property edge. Mr. King stated this site has too many challenges, and from his experience building boardwalks through the wetlands will be just about impossible due to the proximity to the gas pipe line. The Board suspended the discussion pending the opening and continuation of the public hearing regarding the minor site plan review application for 84 to 92 West Main St. 5. Continued Public Hearing - Minor Site Plan Review Application - 84, 86, 88, 92 West Main St. - Global Companies It was noted that the Board does not have enough eligible members tonight to vote on this application. After further discussion, Mr. Paul moved to continue the public hearing to July 23, 2018 at 7:35 P.M., Mr. DeYoung seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Mr. Paul moved to extend the deadline for filing the decision with the Town Clerk to July 30, 2018, Mr. DeYoung seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. 6. Continued Public Hearing - 17, 0, 0 Wilson St., 0 Cedar St. - Commercial Photovoltaic Solar Facility - Special Permit and Stormwater Management Permit Applications - TJA Solar Chad Klazna, 10 Wilson St., stated he just moved here in January of this year, did not receive notification regarding this project, and is now seeing the plans for the first time. He noted the point was raised earlier that the houses on the other side of Wilson St. are up a little higher, and it appears that the eastern most panels will be quite visible from his second floor, especially during the fall and winter. Mr. Shambo stated he is in favor of solar energy and has installed panels on his roof, but he wants to make sure this is the right thing for him and the Town. He noted he agrees there is a problem with new/revised plans being submitted last minute, and it is frustrating to come to a meeting prepared one way and then find that things have changed. He appreciates the discussion about the option to have the electrical connection on Cedar St. vs. Wilson St., on industrially vs. residentially zoned property. He noted he understands that all connections within the solar arrays need to be underground but now sees utility poles and overhead connections between the southern and northern arrays, and perhaps this could be allowed in return for changing the utility interconnection to Cedar St. He noted 95% of his property is located in the Agricultural zoning district, with a small portion in Residence A which apparently only requires a 25 ft. buffer zone between his property and a commercial use. He referred to the Town's zoning bylaw section 210-117.1 which states that lots in split zones are considered to be located in the most restrictive zone with respect to certain dimensional requirements and asked that this rule be applied in his case. He stated that when he decided to install solar panels on his roof, the solar company came out with apparatus and did all kinds of research, and asked whether this has been done here. Mr. Shambo stated he appreciates the conversation they had with the proponents and it appears they are willing to address fall/winter screening but he would like see a landscape plan first to determine whether it will be adequate. He noted he is a little concerned about snow removal. Mr. Cutter stated he has lived on Wilson St. since 2000. He stated using Wilson St. for the electrical interconnection will be extremely disruptive and detrimental to the neighborhood. He noted Cedar St. makes a lot of more sense in that respect, and although Tim Vautour, TJA Solar, indicated that the utility company had made the decision, Mr. Vautour informed the neighbors later that he was asking Eversource to reconsider making it sound as if it was not impossible after all to change the location. He noted he does not know what the Town or the Planning Board can do about this, and it might cost the applicant a few more dollars, but this concerns the impact on the abutters and that should weigh heavily, and as far as causing additional delays is concerned, there have been delays already for other reasons, including significant discrepancies with respect to the wetlands delineation. He noted Cedar St. would be an ideal place, especially considering this is property rezoned Industrial without objections from the abutters. Chief Slaman stated it appears the access roads will have permeable surface, and he asked the applicant, BETA or the engineer to demonstrate whether it can support the Department's emergency vehicles. Mr. Paul asked for clarification regarding Mr. Shambo's comment regarding buffer requirements for non-residential uses from properties in more than one zoning district. Ms. Wilson noted she will check her notes, but according to the Zoning Bylaw they have to use the buffer required for a specific district, in other words 75 ft. against property in the Agricultural district and 25 ft. in the Residence A district. Mr. King noted he does not know the answer, but they will provide a 75 ft. buffer if possible or address deficiencies through additional screening. He noted there is mention of a number of panels within the 75 to 100 ft. buffer zone, but that is strictly a Conservation Commission issue. He noted in response to one of Mr. Shambo's questions, they can do actual shading studies, but typically they build these types of facilities on already cleared property, and at this point they can only do their best guess. He noted with respect to the differences in wetlands delineation, it was pretty much straightforward for the majority of the site but there were some transition areas with shallow sloped wetlands and plant communities subject to interpretation. He noted snow removal should not be a problem, but there is not a lot of room for snow storage without impacting the panels, and if necessary it will then become a snow disposal operation. He noted with respect to the ultimate location of the electrical interconnection, Cedar St. in an Industrial district would be a better choice, but if not possible, an additional pole along Wilson St. with some underground cabinets and additional screening should not be too objectionable. He noted the access road on Wilson St. will have a farm gate with the actual chain-link fence around the facility far away from Wilson St. Ms. Kramer asked if a scenic road hearing will be required, and Ms. Wilson noted the applicant knows he has to submit an application, but she will confirm whether a scenic road permit is required prior to the issuance of the solar special permit. Mr. Paul asked for a determination regarding possible waivers with respect to the required buffers for nonresidential uses prior to the next meeting. Mr. DeYoung moved to extend the time to file the decision on the stormwater management permit to September 6, 2018, Mr. Paul seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Mr. Paul moved to continue the public hearings to August 27, 2018 at 8:45 P.M. contingent on having the required additional documentation in place during the week of August 21, 2018, to warrant a full time slot, Mr. DeYoung seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. 7. Public Hearing - Major Project Site Plan - 90 Hayden Rowe - Town of Hopkinton School Department Ms. Larson-Marlowe moved to open the public hearing, Ms. Fein-Brug seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Susan Rothermich, Director of Finance & Operations, and Tim Persson, Director of Buildings and Grounds, Hopkinton Public Schools, and Bill Mertz, WorldTech Engineering engineer, appeared before the Board. Mr. Mertz stated the School Dept. proposes to convert Field 9 to a bus parking lot. He provided background on the proposal, and stated they are working with the School Dept. to improve internal circulation within the school campus. He noted as Board members know, the current bus and parent/student drop-off area is currently in front of the High School, which causes conflicts and safety issues because of queues extending onto Hayden Rowe. He noted they are about to start the improvements to Hayden Rowe working with the DPW, and the driveway to the school campus will be widened to 2 lanes approaching the main road. He noted they propose to use the existing loop road for parent/student drop-off, and feel that using Field 9 for the bus parking lot seems to make the most sense. He stated they need 30 bus spaces and will provide 33, as well as 35 spots for the drivers. Mr. Mertz explained the exact location, described existing conditions, and noted they plan to raise the area 1 ft. or so, and install gravel base for the roadway. He noted the design will be very simple with a rectangle lot and some channelization through landscaped traffic islands, and a new walkway. He described the traffic navigation and circulation pattern on a daily basis. He noted another benefit of a bus parking lot on the school property would be $50,000 in excise taxes, and a reduction in the School Dept.'s contract with the bus company by having buses closer to the school representing an annual savings of $100,000. He noted they also had to file with the Conservation Commission and that process is ongoing. He noted there are some stormwater issues, basically related to sheet flow through a stone-lined swale going into an existing detention basin, and they are modeling the design to make sure there are no adverse impact downstream. Mr. DeYoung asked for clarification, and Mr. Mertz noted parking for the drivers will be around the perimeter of the lot, and those spaces are specifically intended for them. He noted 2 handicapped spaces were added to the layout since it was originally submitted. Ms. Ritterbusch asked about the potential for expansion in case more bus routes are added, and Ms. Rothermich noted they currently have 28 buses and the lot will accommodate 33 in total. Mr. Mertz described the lighting plan, consisting of 4 poles, each on one corner, 1 more compared to the original proposal, for security reasons particularly at night. He noted he knows the Board would prefer 15 ft. poles, but they are proposing 25 ft. consistent with the rest of the campus. He stated it will be a dark sky concept with cutoff fixtures, pretty much screened by the building and woods. Mr. Paul noted the Design Review Board had concerns about all night lighting, and asked if the applicant has had a chance to check on the possibility of using motion- activated features. Mr. Mertz stated he does not think there is motion-activated lighting on the rest of the campus, and Ms. Kramer stated that does not matter because this would be a big beam of light and there are residences nearby. Ms. Rothermich stated the Police Chief prefers the lights to be on all night, and Ms. Kramer stated she would like to hear from the Police Chief on this issue. Ms. Kramer asked about refueling procedures. Ms. Rothermich stated this is done in a variety of ways, and they also have a refueling truck that comes around. Mr. Mertz stated having a local bus parking lot will result in fewer trips through the neighborhood, and less emissions. Ms. Kramer asked if refueling on site would be a concern in this case, and Ms. Rothermich noted there are MassDOT regulations and Hazmat certification requirements for this type of activity with a number of precautionary measures to follow. Ms. Wilson noted she believes this will be covered under the stormwater design aspect of the proposal especially in view of the site's proximity to wetlands. It was noted that Mr. Trendel is an abutter to the site. Mr. Trendel stepped off the Board at this time. Ms. Fein-Brug stated she has a feeling this is a very tight spot for the proposed number of buses and asked whether all turning radii have been vetted. Chief Slaman noted the Fire Dept. did not evaluate the access road, but they can take a look at it. Ms. Fein-Brug noted this will put a lot of traffic on a small piece of land with a lot of backing up to get the buses in there. Mr. Mertz stated the layout seems to work based on the templates they used but they will look at it again to make sure. Board members expressed concerns with respect to safety, and Mr. Mertz stated he feels it will work fine. Ms. Wilson clarified the Board will have 90 days from the close of the hearing to make a decision and there is no need to extend the deadline. She noted she has no other comments. She stated reference was already made to the Design Review Board's concerns regarding all-night lighting, and Mr. Paradis will address the stormwater issues which are a main concern. In response to a question of the Board, Mr. Persson noted the School Dept. would like to start work before the start of school and it will take 1 month to 6 weeks to complete. Mr. Paradis noted several of BETA's comments have been addressed. He stated he expects turning radii will be addressed satisfactorily. He noted the applicant has added 2 handicapped spaces as recommended but has been asked to make sure these are ADA compliant with respect to the grade. He noted there are some stormwater issues, and he has some concerns with respect to refueling on site which would require additional bmp's to capture potential fuel spills. He noted BETA wants to make sure that the existing swale can handle the runoff, but they need more information on the swale itself and the detention basin to make sure they will work together hydrologically. He noted there were no utilities other than lighting and BETA recommended a 4th pole to make it more uniform but obviously the pole height is subject to the Board's interpretation. Mr. Paradis noted there is a landscaping component that was not addressed, and although the site is not immediately next to residences BETA is asking whether the Board wants the applicant to comply in this respect. He noted wetlands issues are being reviewed by the Conservation Commission. Ms. Larson-Marlowe asked whether this proposal will impact the new trails that have been added in this area, and Mr. Mertz stated no. Gary Trendel, 31 Chamberlain St., speaking strictly as a resident, asked if town meeting voted just to fund the feasibility study or the entire project. Ms. Rothermich noted the feasibility study was paid for through this year's operation budget, so the vote at town meeting was for actual construction. Mr. Trendel asked about the impact of the loss of this field on the athletic programs, and Ms. Rothermich noted this field was not used often so there is no impact. Mr. Trendel stated there will always be vehicles in this lot, and he asked if they will still be able to use this area for tents during the Marathon, in an effort to preserve other fields used for that purpose. Ms. Rothermich noted there was a lot of damage last because of the severe weather, and at the post-Marathon meeting they talked about possible solutions. It was noted at the time that this particular field would become a parking lot, and the Committee knows that continuing to use this are for staging will be challenging. Mr. Trendel asked if there is any consideration of security cameras as an option opposed to lighting, and Ms. Rothermich noted they will evaluate what the camera funding approved at town meeting can accomplish throughout the campus. Martin Bayes, 106 Hayden Rowe, commented on the proposal. He noted the site is very tight, and he is concerned about snow plowing. He noted he hopes the Board is open to allowing this parking lot to be different from the rest of the campus and will ask the applicant to reduce the height of the light poles. Ms. Rothermich stated the Town plows the parking lots, and snow is not stored on campus. Mr. DeYoung asked if the bus lot and surrounding area will be salted during snowing conditions, and Ms. Rothermich stated yes. Mr. DeYoung noted this will mean salt, oil and other fluids ending up in the detention basin and beyond and asked whether this is something to be considered in the broader analysis. Mr. Mertz noted there is a stone-lined swale but currently an oil/water separator is not proposed, and he expects this issue to be brought up by the Conservation Commission. Chief Slaman noted he has no further comments at this time. Mr. Paul stated he feels the proposed design does not pass the eye test in terms of functionality, and he asked whether there is a backup plan. Ms. Kramer noted the math has been done and it works. Ms. Fein-Brug stated now that she understands the proposed design, it is really tight in there, and she is also concerned about the environmental impact on the area. Ms. Kramer stated she trusts the Conservation Commission on this. Mr. Mertz stated BETA raised concerns about turning radii and he ran autoturn tests to make sure it will work. He distributes copies of the autoturn plan to explain the internal navigation based on the design. Further discussion followed, and Mr. Mertz noted they will have to work with the bus company. Mr. DeYoung asked if Mr. Paradis is ok with that, and Mr. Paradis stated yes. Mr. Bayes stated he is interested in what will happen in the winter with respect to snow removal, and what will be done to clear the spaces while the buses are out on their routes. Ms. Kramer noted she believes the DPW prioritizes the schools. Mr. Bayes stated he is concerned about timing and piles of snow left behind. Ms. Kramer stated she believes this is a normal challenge and she will leave this in the capable hands of the DPW and the School Dept. Mr. Trendel stated he realizes this is a common problem but he does not know how many schools have buses and drivers parking in the same lot. Mr. Persson noted they will work with the DPW, but if there is a significant amount of snow there will be no school anyway and they would not have to deal with the drivers spaces. It was noted the project would need waivers for the pole height requirement as well as landscaping. Ms. Wilson referred to the letter from WorldTech requesting a waiver from the landscape requirement, and Mr. Mertz stated in this case they are starting with a wide open, cleared site, and there are money constraints. Ms. Ritterbusch noted they talked about this at the Design Review Board, and the site will be visible from the cafeteria. She asked if they could add some plantings between the building and the lot, perhaps funded through donations. Ms. Rothermich noted there are some trees in that area, and Ms. Ritterbusch stated she will take another look. Mr. DeYoung stated he is familiar with this area and he feels it would benefit from some additional landscaping so that people would not be looking at the backs of the buses. Ms. Kramer stated she understands the financial issue but it is worth thinking about, and the Board understands the School Dept. is requesting a waiver. Ms. Larson-Marlowe asked if there is any other reason to keep the poles at 25 ft. other than consistency throughout the campus. Mr. Mertz stated that lowering the fixtures would make it necessary to increase the number of poles to avoid dark spots which in turn may preclude the number of spaces they need. The Board asked whether he is sure about that and how many more poles would be needed, and Mr. Mertz stated he will check. Ms. Fein-Brug stated there are different types of lighting and maybe they could use bollards to light the area nicely and calmly. It was noted the Board will start early on July 23 to accommodate the meeting schedule. Mr. Paul moved to continue the public hearing to July 23, 2018 at 7:00 P.M., Ms. Ritterbusch seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Mr. Trendel returned to the Board. It was noted the Board will talk about Design Review Board appointments at a future meeting. Ms. Kramer noted the joint interviews with the Board of Selectmen to fill the vacancy on the Planning Board have been scheduled for tomorrow, July 10. Mr. Trendel noted he will not be able to attend. Administrative Business Minutes. The Board reviewed the draft Minutes of June 11, 2018. Ms. Fein- Brug asked to amend the Minutes by including additional conversation with respect to lighting issues regarding the 84-92 West Main St. minor site plan application. Ms. Larson-Marlowe moved to approve the Minutes to be amended as discussed tonight prior to filing with the Town Clerk, Mr. DeYoung seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Mr. Paul moved to adjourn the meeting, Mr. Trendel seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Adjourned: 10:35 P.M. Submitted by: Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant Approved: August 27, 2018 Documents used at the meeting:  Agenda for the July 9, 2018 Hopkinton Planning Board meeting  Memorandum from Georgia Wilson, Principal Planner, to the Planning Board, dated July 5, 2018 re Items on July 11 (9), 2018 Planning Board Agenda  Site Plan Review Public Hearing Outline, 90 Hayden Rowe, Public Hearing Date: July 9, 2018; Site Plan entitled “Town of Hopkinton, Hopkinton Public Schools, Bus Parking Lot at Hopkinton High School”, dated July 2018, prepared by WorldTech Engineering, for use at July 9, 2018 meeting; Letter from Philip Paradis and Jill Bokoff, BETA Group, Inc., to Georgia Wilson, Principal Planner, dated July 5, 2018, re: Hopkinton High School Bus Parking Lot Peer Review; Response dated July 9, 2018 (from WorldTech Engineering) to Comments Letter from BETA Group, Inc. to Georgia Wilson, Principal Planner of the Hopkinton Land Use, Planning and Permitting Department Dated July 5, 2018  Public Hearing Outline Solar Special Permit/Stormwater Management Permit, 17 Wilson Street – TJA Solar, Public Hearing Date: July 9, 2018; Site Plan Development for Wilson Street Solar Project, dated March 7, 2018 revised through July 9, 2018, prepared by Atlantic Design Engineers, Inc.; Letter to Jill Bokoff, BETA Group, Inc., from Richard J. Tabaczynski, Atlantic Design Engineers, Inc., dated July 9, 2018, re: Response to BETA Group, Inc. Comments; June 15, 2018, Wilson Street Solar Project, Hopkinton, MA, ADE Project #2928.01; Letter to Georgia Wilson, Principal Planner, from Jillian Bokoff and Philip F. Paradis, BETA Group, Inc., dated July 5, 2018, re: Wilson Street Solar Project – Site Plan Peer Review; Email Exchange Melanie Khederian, Eversource/Timothy Vautour, TJA Solar/Tom Shambo/Georgia Wilson, from June 28, 2018 through July 6, 2018 – Fwd: Eng Hold – Path Fwd by 7/13/18 WO2230376, Hopkinton – 17 Wilson St.; Letter from Jane Moran, Chair, Hopkinton Upper Charles Trail Commission, dated June 8, 2018  Draft Planning Board Minutes for June 11, 2018