Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20151005 - Planning Board - Meeting Minutes 1 HOPKINTON PLANNING BOARD Monday, October 5, 2015 7:30 P.M. Town Hall, 18 Main St., Hopkinton, MA MINUTES MEMBERS PRESENT: Kenneth Weismantel, Chairman, John Ferrari, Matthew Wade, Fran DeYoung, Claire Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: Patrick Mahon, Brian Karp, Frank Sivo, Frank D'Urso Present: Elaine Lazarus, Director of Land Use, Planning & Permitting; Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant 1. Continued Public Hearing - 34-40 Hayden Rowe – Site Plan Review – RPI Hopkinton LLC Jerry Effren, attorney, Ron Müller, traffic engineer, and Joe Marquedant, J.D. Marquedant & Assoc., Inc., surveyor, appeared before the Board. Mr. Effren stated it appears there is a logistical problem tonight due to the lack of Board members, and requested to continue the public hearing to October 19, 2015, concurrently with the hearing on the Flexible Community Development special permit application for this project. Mr. Wade moved to continue the public hearing to October 19, 2015 at 8:00 P.M. Mr. Ferrari seconded the motion and Mr. Weismantel, Mr. Ferrari, Mr. Wade and Mr. DeYoung voted in favor. Ms. Wright joined the Board at this time. 2. Minutes Ms. Wright moved to approve the Minutes of September 15, 2015, Mr. Ferrari seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. 3. Master Plan Update Referring to the draft Economic Development section, Mr. Weismantel stated he is pleased to hear that Mr. DeYoung met with the Chamber of Commerce to get feedback on commercial business issues, and asked that the other members review their respective Master Plan update sections. Reference was made to the Community Services and Facilities section. Mr. Ferrari stated he would like this section to reflect the change in demographics, which indicates an increase in the age 55+ population, creating different demands for the future. Ms. Wright noted they should also include the need to address parking issues, either by reconfiguration of existing facilities, shared parking or a new facility. She noted this should be addressed because it comes up with almost all new proposals and affects quality of life. She noted she is concerned about maintenance of existing buildings, and for instance they cannot just mothball the Center School when it is no longer needed. Mr. Weismantel suggested including some ideas for possible re-use of the building, noting the Board sent a letter to the Board of Selectmen regarding this matter. He noted they had talked about the possibility of moving the school administration offices into the historic portion of the building, and Parks & Recreation taking over the 1980’s addition for a youth center. He noted another possible option may be public senior housing under the Housing Authority as 2 opposed to a private developer. He noted some people may be tempted to sell the property because of the amount of upcoming capital projects, but the Town won’t get a lot of money for the building in its current condition and he feels they should keep it facing the Common as a public facility. Mr. Wade stated he feels most people would agree with that. Ms. Wright noted it will be hard to measure the true impact of 1,400 additional housing units in the pipeline, but they no doubt will affect the Town’s facilities and services and it would be a waste to get rid of a perfectly good building in a perfect location. She noted the facility could potentially offer parking within a reasonable walking distance to downtown, including the new Library, and the shared parking agreement under discussion with St. John’s Church may not always be there. Mr. Ferrari noted with the amount of anticipated growth the Town will need additional space for administrative offices and overflow from other departments. It was noted perhaps a portion of the building could be used for archival storage. Mr. Weismantel noted he thinks the Board’s consensus is to dedicate a portion of this master plan section to this issue to at least get people excited and start the discussion. Ms. Wright referred to maintenance of buildings and facilities. She stated it seems like some current practices are just reactionary and inadequate based on recent discussions at town meeting. Mr. Ferrari stated that when he was on the Permanent Building Committee, they developed a master plan for facilities but he doesn’t know if it is being updated or being adhered to. Mr. DeYoung asked who is in charge of this, and Mr. Ferrari noted that with the exception of the Schools the responsibility is with the Facilities Department. Mr. Wade stated perhaps this task is too much for one person. Ms. Wright noted she feels it cannot hurt to call out this issue in the Master Plan at this time. Ms. Lazarus noted she will check on the current status of the facilities plan. Ms. Wright asked if they should start talking about the need for a fire substation on the east side of town now that Legacy Farms South is almost done and development of the north parcel is coming up soon. Mr. Weismantel stated he has not heard much in terms of a need for a substation on that side of Town, and there has been reference to something needed on the west side of the highway. Ms. Lazarus noted all buildings at Legacy Farms with the exception of the 15 single family homes are suppressed, and Ms. Wright noted there will be an increase in emergency calls considering the growth of senior housing and smaller units occupied by older people in general. Mr. Weismantel stated he believes the Board of Selectmen was considering contracting for EMT services as opposed to building a new full-service fire station. Mr. Ferrari noted at one time there was a discussion of the potential need for another station in the Legacy Farms area when built out, and also the feeling that the Woodville fire station is a prime example of an abandoned building basically only used for storage. Ms. Wright noted the impact of growth is uncertain but she remembers the Fire Chief at town meeting pleading for more resources. It was noted that changes are being made to the Fire/Police call centers. Ms. Wright stated the increased demand on emergency services will have to be monitored, and, if necessary, will have to be addressed – either by a new building or specific EMT services. Ms. Lazarus noted a significant number of emergency calls are on the highways, and that could increase as volume increases and traffic congestion worsens. It was noted that fewer older people may be moving to warmer climates, and may have decided to stay in the area if there are housing options. Ms. Wright stated it is important to have a mix of housing and they always talked about the need for smaller homes where people could "age in place". 3 She provided several comments and proposed language changes, including elimination/change of the reference to the urgent need for a new DPW as that is close to being addressed, the section on a fire substation as just discussed, the planned construction of a new Library starting next year, and the senior center vs. projected growth in age 55+ population. She noted the section on the needs for more playing fields seems a little outdated as they seem to have leveled off, with a Legacy Farms athletic field seemingly without a purpose and a housing trend generating fewer children. Mr. DeYoung asked if Ms. Wright discussed this with Parks and Recreation, because it appears they are always looking for other opportunities. Mr. Weismantel stated that he believes Parks & Recreation wants to do several things but are holding off on plans for the Legacy Farms field to see what will happen with the Marathon Museum plan for the property next door, using CPC funds to improve the Fruit St. property in the meantime. He noted there is also talk about building a turf field behind the High School, so he does not think the pressure is off. Ms. Wright noted she would like to see mention of the restoration of the Claflin Memorial Fountain on the Common and the fact that the Hopkinton Center for the Arts project is nearing completion. She asked for clarification on the statement that the inability to obtain water from the Town or a private well has not made many lots unbuildable. Mr. Weismantel noted that developers have always found a way, usually by going deeper. It was noted the wording can be changed to make it more clear what is meant. Ms. Wright referred to the discussion of trails, and suggested adding something regarding the priority of finishing the Upper Charles Trail. Mr. Weismantel suggested asking the Upper Charles Trail Committee for comments, and Ms. Lazarus noted it should be mentioned here, but there is a bigger section on that project in another section of the Master Plan. Mr. Ferrari stated it can also be tied in with the section on protection of natural resources. Ms. Wright stated she would like to see a reference to the recent purchase of the Pratt land. She stated as a general comment on the goals, she is getting annoyed with the multiple references to further study and wants the wording to direct action, implementation and results. Ms. Wright referred to the reference to sewer service. She noted there is a difference between service and capacity, and Mr. Weismantel noted it can be worded differently to make that clear. Ms. Wright noted they should encourage private on-site facilities like the one at Legacy Farms because it is better for groundwater recharge. Ms. Wright asked if technology is at the point where they can actually encourage the use of state-of-the-art or alternative systems. Mr. Weismantel noted there are urgent needs, such as Woodville and the Lumber St. commercial area, and he agrees that they should study and implement alternative solutions. Ms. Wright referred to the goal regarding the Town’s recreation facilities. She noted there does not appear to be much in terms of stewardship or maintenance programs, and the Town should not continue to build more without proper maintenance of what's already there. She noted that without oversight and maintenance, conditions can quickly deteriorate, referring to the graffiti problem at College Rock Park as an example. Mr. Ferrari stated this has been a topic of discussion on the Open Space Preservation Commission, and he agrees that a better plan is needed. Mr. Wade stated perhaps the Scouts can put College Rock on their list for projects to be completed. Mr. Weismantel stated there has been some criticism that the Conservation Commission does not walk the properties under their jurisdiction, and Ms. Lazarus stated that Jennifer Burke, Principal Planner, will work with them on stewardship issues. It was noted that the change in demographics and trend toward more multifamily housing also has an impact on the type of and demand for recreation facilities. 4 Ms. Wright referred to the draft housing goals. She asked for clarification regarding the status of the Housing Committee. Mr. Weismantel stated it has not been in existence for 4 years, but he would like to able to reconvene it when the Town falls back down closer to the 10% Chapter 40B requirement. It was clarified this committee is different from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board which exists and meets as needed. Ms. Wright referred to the draft goal regarding a proposal to maintain a list of properties subject to demolition delay based on historic or architectural value. She stated that the way the bylaw is written now, properties 75 years old or older are subject to a possible demolition delay. She noted that 27% of the housing stock is over 50 years old and 433 dwellings were built before 1900. Mr. Weismantel stated that perhaps the Historical Commission could go through the list of pre-1900 homes and determine which ones they really want to keep. He stated he agrees with the criteria but feels it would be helpful to prospective home sellers and buyers to know whether a property is subject to the demolition delay bylaw. Ms. Wright noted there is a reason for age based demolition delay, and sometimes it is a matter of neighborhood context, as described by the Massachusetts Historical Commission. She noted they could undo the current system and protect fewer properties, but for instance the value of a particular property could be based on its location within a 1900’s contiguous mill house streetscape, not just the individual home’s unique aspects. She noted the Historical Commission discussed this issue, feels the 75 year date-based demolition delay works fine and does not agree with putting this goal in the Master Plan. She noted she is opposed as it is contrary to what the Historical Commission feels is in the best interest of the Town. 4. Continued Public Hearings – 13 Main St. and 9 Church St. - 1) Site Plan Review Application; 2) Shared/Off-Site Parking Special Permit Application – Library Addition/Renovation Project - Town of Hopkinton Dan McIntyre, Chairman, Permanent Building Committee, joined the Board. Mr. Weismantel stated it is his understanding that they do not yet have a parking agreement that they can share with the public. He noted he feels they cannot approve a document they cannot see, and in order to grant the special permit, the Board has to find that the application meets the criteria. He noted he believes the applicant is making progress on this issue, and hopefully an agreement will be available soon. Mr. McIntyre noted he has no idea when the agreement will be done and he is not sure why it is an issue. He noted they are just asking for 4 to 5 spaces in front of the Library, and the plan will meet the requirements for the Library and meeting room separately, but not as a combined proposal. Mr. Weismantel stated it sounds as if the applicant is asking for a condition of approval stipulating that two uses of the proposed building cannot take place at the same time. He noted the Board is short a few members tonight which will affect the process in terms of voting eligibility, and it may be better to continue the hearing. Ms. Wright noted that if a shared parking agreement goes away the two conflicting uses could not happen until some other agreement is found, and Mr. McIntyre stated that is correct. Ms. Wright asked if the plan can be approved with the understanding that the operation of the meeting space generating the additional parking requirements cannot go forward until the agreement is in place. Mr. McIntyre noted the Library can still use the space for library activities, and it is not 5 uncommon for libraries to have a meeting room. Mr. Weismantel described a typical town night meeting scenario and stated it is like asking for a parking lot for a “500-year storm”. He stated they could spend time writing a condition, but he does not want to do this on the side and would prefer seeing a parking agreement in place. Scott Richardson, Library representative, noted occupancy would not be until July 2017, so there is time to work this out. Mr. Weismantel noted the Board needs to make a finding with respect to the zoning requirement for parking. Mr. Richardson stated he proposes approval with limited scope of operation. Mr. Weismantel noted he would like to see the agreement open to the public for comment. Mr. Ferrari moved to continue the public hearing to October 19, 2015 at 9:15 P.M. Mr. DeYoung second the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Ms. Lazarus stated that an Approval Not Required (ANR) plan was submitted today, and the applicants have requested the Board’s endorsement this evening. She noted the plan would combine the two parcels for the expanded Library as shown on the submitted site plan. Mr. Weismantel asked if the plan meets the criteria for endorsement, and Ms. Lazarus replied yes. Mr. DeYoung moved to endorse the plan as not requiring approval under the Subdivision Control Law, Mr. Wade seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. 5. Other Business Mr. Weismantel stated that the number of Hopkinton school students living in the apartment development at Legacy Farms is higher than anticipated, currently 52 vs. 39 in April. The Board discussed the issue. Ms. Lazarus will check the vacancy rate. 6. Master Plan Update The Board continued its discussion of the Housing & Residential Development section. Ms. Wright stated she listened to the recording of the last meeting which included a discussion of the impact of the Flexible Community Development bylaw, particularly in view of the trend for developers to deposit money into the Trust Fund instead of providing an actual dwelling unit. She noted as time goes by the Town will get less and less for the money available as construction costs will go up. She noted this system however will at least give the Town something, although each development added to the housing stock will negatively affect the Town’s affordable housing numbers, and if a development comes in just under 20 units it only has to provide 1 affordable unit. She asked about the possibility of getting a proportional payment instead, perhaps based on a percentage. Ms. Lazarus stated the Board could look at changing the ratio of units required. Mr. Weismantel noted alternatives were discussed with the Zoning Advisory Committee last year but tabled. Ms. Wright stated they should not eliminate the bylaw and take away the Town’s one method of defense, and the Town at some point will have some money, maybe for a project in the old Center School, the Fruit St. property, or elsewhere. Mr. Weismantel noted he would be in favor of Town rental units, because it is the best approach from a Chapter 40B perspective. Ms. Lazarus stated they should keep their options open because the current market trend toward apartments may change. Ms. Wright stated she has a general question about the Town's zoning bylaw as a means for the community to decide what it wants to look like with the requirement of a 2/3 majority town meeting vote to make changes. She noted her comment is related to a proposal before the Board, in which she could not participate because she is an abutter. She stated she would like to think 6 that when someone applies for relief from the zoning bylaw, the Board of Appeals in its decision will reflect the will of the Town. She asked if there is any mechanism to prevent an elected Board from totally ignoring the desires of neighborhood residents, approving a type of housing in a density far above what the Town wants as allowed in the zoning bylaw, in this case a 34-bedroom development in a single family neighborhood. Ms. Lazarus noted there are special permit criteria to be considered, and they are very broad. Ms. Wright stated she understands the criteria, but asked whether the Board of Appeals can be required to make decisions in keeping with the general aspect of the existing bylaw of the Town. Ms. Lazarus stated that Board members believe that is what they are doing. Mr. Weismantel noted the Board of Appeals' decision was limited to the preexisting nonconforming aspect of the case. Ms. Lazarus noted the Board reviews and makes a determination on each proposal based on its merits. Ms. Wright asked about the extent of Design Review Board (DRB) review of multifamily developments. Ms. Lazarus noted the Planning Board refers applicants to the Design Review Board for Garden Apartment applications because it values their input, but it is not a requirement in the bylaw. Mr. Weismantel stated in case of site plan review, the Planning Board has no control over aesthetics but it asks the DRB for their opinion and help in persuading an applicant to make changes in the best interest of the Town. Ms. Wright stated the Planning Board's stated emphasis on the value of design review would add some teeth to what the DRB can do. Mr. Weismantel noted the interaction between the Planning Board and DRB has had positive results. Ms. Wright referred to a recent failure of a sign review from the DRB's perspective, making them feel like they are wasting their time. Mr. Weismantel stated things may get worse because of a recent Supreme Court decision regarding signs, which among other things caused the Planning Board to hold off on a proposed bylaw change at the last town meeting. Adjourned: 9:10 P.M. Submitted by: Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant Approved: November 2, 2015 Documents used at the Meeting:  Agenda for October 5, 2015 Hopkinton Planning Board meeting  Memorandum from Elaine Lazarus, Director of Land Use, Planning and Permitting, to Planning Board, dated October 1, 2015 re: Items on October 5, 2015 Planning Board Agenda  Master Plan Update Draft sections: 1) Housing and Residential Development 9/22/15 Ken Weismantel; 2) Community Facilities & Services 9/28/15 – John Ferrari, Claire Wright  Plan entitled “Plan of Land owned by Inhabitants of the Town of Hopkinton”, 13 Main Street & 9 Church Street, Hopkinton, Massachusetts, dated September 24, 2015, prepared by WSP Group  Missed Meeting Certificates: Claire Wright, September 28, 2015 meeting re Library Addition/Renovation Project; Francis DeYoung, August 24, 2015 meeting re Library Addition/Renovation Project