HomeMy Public PortalAbout20151116 - Planning Board - Meeting Minutes
1
HOPKINTON PLANNING BOARD
Monday, November 16, 2015 7:30 P.M.
Town Hall, 18 Main St., Hopkinton, MA
MINUTES
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kenneth Weismantel, Chairman, Brian Karp, Vice Chairman, Matthew
Wade, John Ferrari, Claire Wright, Frank D’Urso
MEMBERS ABSENT: Frank Sivo, Patrick Mahon, Fran DeYoung
Present: Elaine Lazarus, Director of Land Use, Planning & Permitting; Cobi Wallace, Permitting
Assistant
Mr. Weismantel opened the meeting and summarized the agenda, noting that the hearing regarding
34-40 Hayden Rowe will be continued at the request of the applicant.
1. Continued Public Hearings – 13 Main Street and 9 Church Street – Library
Renovation/Expansion Project - Site Plan Review Application and Shared/Off-Site
Parking Special Permit Application – Town of Hopkinton
Dan McIntyre, Chairman, Permanent Building Committee, and Scott Richardson, Library
Representative, appeared before the Board.
The Board discussed the Shared/Off-Site Parking Special Permit application. Mr. Weismantel
noted the Board received a copy of the License Agreement between the Roman Catholic
Archbishop of Boston and the Town of Hopkinton to allow parking at 20 Church St. for Library
use. Mr. D’Urso stated he just read the document and is not ready to vote until he has had a
chance to digest the information. He cited concerns as to the cost of the agreement. Mr.
Weismantel stated the Church is offering 40 spaces and the Planning Board is not concerned about
the financial aspect. Ben Palleiko, Chairman, Board of Selectmen, noted this is a negotiated
agreement which is going to be put into place. Mr. D’Urso stated it appears the agreement is
within the Planning Board’s jurisdiction, and while it is great to have access to additional parking
he has concerns regarding the impact on the Town’s budget. Mr. Karp noted he understands Mr.
D’Urso’s concern, but the Planning Board’s involvement is only to make sure there is enough
parking for the expanded Library. Mr. Weismantel stated the payment appears reasonable given
needs for snow plowing and maintenance of the parking area. Ms. Wright noted the Board’s
concern is compliance with site plan standards, such as lighting, pedestrian flow, parking and
stormwater management, and the main question is whether the site plan can now be approved.
She stated she too has concerns as a taxpayer and has not read the agreement, but the Board of
Selectmen has the authority to enter into this type of agreement independently from the Planning
Board. She noted it would be nice to get parking for free, but the Church is offering an amenity
and should be compensated. Ms. Lazarus noted a vote to grant the special permit must be based
on 2 findings: 1) that all parking spaces associated with the use are within practical walking
distance, and 2) that the granting of the special permit is in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of the zoning bylaw.
2
Mr. D’Urso stated he understands the special permit criteria under the bylaw, but this is a Town
project and as such the Board also has some responsibilities in terms of financial oversight. He
noted he would like feedback from the Board of Selectmen, more than just a statement that it is a
done deal. Mr. Palleiko stated he does not feel he has to respond to this question but will do so
only under duress and to facilitate the process. He stated the Board of Selectmen approved the
shared parking agreement because it will benefit the community and the price was negotiated to
compensate the Church for snow plowing and extra wear and tear. He noted the associated cost is
rather minor compared to other agreements, and the Town plows the parking lot behind Town Hall
under the shared agreement with Bill’s Pizza and others. Mr. Weismantel stated he agrees with
Mr. Palleiko’s assessment, but Board members received a copy of the agreement just before the
meeting. He noted the project meets the parking requirement with the agreement in place.
Mr. D’Urso stated he does not like making decisions based on something he has just received, and
he still is not sure whether he can endorse the agreement as a good value for the Town as part of
the bigger picture. Mr. Weismantel stated the Library is adding a room that requires 31 parking
spaces, and the agreement will provide 40 in a location that’s convenient and better from a
traffic/pedestrian flow standpoint compared to the lot behind Bill’s Pizza.
Mr. Weismantel noted delaying a vote will cause delays in construction and result in additional
costs to the Town. Mr. Karp stated the agreement is now in place and provides the required
number of spaces, and voting no would not be in the best interest of the Town. Mr. Ferrari stated
he agrees somewhat with Mr. D’Urso’s concerns, but the Town has assigned the responsibility for
different parts of a project to certain entities, in this case the Permanent Building Committee and
the Board of Selectmen, and opening up their decisions to other entities that clearly have no
jurisdiction will set a precedent. In response to a question of Mr. D’Urso, Mr. Palleiko noted the
Board of Selectmen authorized the Town Manager to sign the agreement and the Board is aware of
the costs. Mr. D’Urso noted there may be an alternative solution, and Mr. Palleiko requested a
brief recess to speak with Mr. D’Urso. The meeting was recessed for approximately 10 minutes.
Mr. Weismantel asked whether Mr. D’Urso has enough information to be able to vote. Mr.
D’Urso thanked the Board of Selectmen for its efforts on behalf of the Town, and stated it seems
the agreement is more flexible than he originally thought. He stated the arrangement is not
permanent, with an even better solution not totally out of the question, and he feels more
comfortable voting in favor. James Walker, 8 Hayden Rowe, asked for clarification on what
would happen if the agreement is terminated, and Mr. Weismantel noted they would have to look
for another agreement or they cannot use the assembly space. Sue Hadley, 4 Hayden Rowe, stated
it sounds as if the use would then be suspended, and Mr. Weismantel stated that decision would be
up to the Building Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer at that time.
Mr. Ferrari moved to find that the provision of shared/off-site parking spaces at 20 Church St. for
Library use will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Bylaw and that
all parking spaces will be within practical walking distance of the Library. Mr. Wade seconded
the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Mr. D’Urso moved to grant the special
permit with the following conditions:
3
1. If the off-site parking agreement expires or is revoked and the use at 13 Main Street/9
Church Street no longer conforms to the parking requirements in the Zoning Bylaw,
the Applicant shall, within 30 days of receipt of notice of such expiration or revocation,
seek other shared parking arrangements so that conformance with parking requirements
is maintained.
2. Events, activities and the like planned for the assembly space in the Public Library
shall include a notification indicating the location of off-site parking for attendees.
3. A sign shall be posted within the Public Library parking lot that directs people to the
location of the additional off-site parking.
4. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued which allows uses of the Public Library
building that require more than 24 parking spaces pursuant to Zoning Bylaw § 210-124
until: a) a shared/off-site parking agreement has been fully executed which provides for
additional parking at 20 Church Street; and b) said agreement provides a number of
spaces which enables the entire building to comply with the parking requirements.
Mr. Wade seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor.
The Board discussed the Site Plan Review application. Mr. Weismantel referred to the public
hearing outline, and noted further discussion is needed to follow up on the questions remaining
about the landscape plan and setback requirements. Ms. Lazarus noted the approval-not-required
plan combining 13 Main St. and 9 Church St. has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds. She
stated the Library property is now considered a single, corner lot, and the Building
Inspector/Zoning Enforcement Officer has determined the proposal complies with the setback
requirements in the Downtown Business district.
Ms. Lazarus noted the Tree Warden has stated that honeylocust trees are an appropriate choice in
the area in question, on the south side of the property. She noted questions were also related to the
use of arborvitae near the parking lot, which could be damaged by snow removal activities and
salt, and whether they will get enough sun. She stated the Tree Warden feels they will get enough
sun in the proposed location. Mr. McIntyre noted the landscape architect agreed that wrapping the
arborvitae in burlap to protect it during the winter is a good idea. Ms. Wright suggested putting
them in a wooden frame for protection or cut back on the use of salt, and Mr. Weismantel noted
they don’t want people to slip on ice.
Ms. Wright stated the Tree Warden says there is nothing wrong with honeylocusts, but she feels
these are typically messy trees often seen in vacant lots, and suggested that the Board confer with
Mr. Walker for a better option. Mr. Walker noted he had requested other solutions for the Board’s
consideration, perhaps using his property for something more permanent and more appropriate,
but feels he did not really get a full response. Mr. McIntyre noted they reviewed other options and
responded, but the Town would need a license or easement to use private property. Mr.
Weismantel stated there is a provision in the bylaw to do that if they are interested. Ms. Wright
stated it is understood that the site will be properly landscaped and screened from abutting
property, and it does not matter whether it is accomplished by planting on or off site. Mr.
Weismantel asked what kind of trees Mr. Walker has in mind, and Mr. Walker suggested
hemlocks or anything that will provide permanent screening on their side of the fence. Mr.
Richardson asked about the ensuing maintenance, and Mr. Weismantel noted the Town would
4
install them and the rest is up to the property owner. Mr. Weismantel noted the decision could
include a condition for 3 hemlocks on Mr. Walker’s property, provided he allows the Town one-
time access to plant them. Ms. Wright noted the perennial beds shown on the plan would only
look nice during part of the year, and she would like to see some junipers to augment them.
Mr. Weismantel asked for additional comments from Board members or the public and there were
none. The Board discussed draft conditions of approval. Mr. Ferrari moved to find that the site
plan conforms to the Site Plan Standards in the Zoning Bylaw, and to approve the Site Plan with
the following conditions:
1. No construction shall commence until the Hopkinton Historic District Commission has
reviewed and approved any modifications to the exterior which require such approval.
2. The Applicant shall plant three (3) hemlocks along the property line, on the property at 8
Hayden Rowe, subject to the owner providing written permission in a form acceptable to
the Town of Hopkinton which permits the planting on private property.
3. Dumpsters on the property shall not be emptied before 8:00 AM or after 5:00 PM.
4. The Applicant shall be responsible for mitigating all construction related impacts,
including erosion, siltation and dust control in a timely manner.
5. The Applicant shall regularly remove construction trash and debris from the site in
accordance with good construction practice. No tree stumps, demolition material, trash or
debris shall be burned or buried on the site.
6. As long as Church Street is a two-way street, there shall be no parking on the east side of
the street between Main St. and Church Place, and left turns out of Church St. onto Main
St. shall be prohibited. Such restrictions shall be indicated by appropriate signage, which
shall be installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. If Church Street
becomes a one-way street in the future (in the southerly direction), these restrictions shall
not apply.
7. There shall be no construction activity conducted within the Main Street right of way
associated with the project within two weeks prior to the start of the Boston Marathon.
8. In the event that the amount of snow on the Site exceeds the amount that can be
accommodated safely in the snow storage areas indicated on the Site Plan, the excess snow
shall be removed from the Site.
9. Site lighting shall be off one hour following the closing of the building to the public; in no
case shall site lighting be on after 11:00 PM. This condition shall not apply to lighting
necessary for public safety and security and/or required by the State Building Code.
10. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on the roof, grounds or buildings shall be
screened from view from the ground.
11. The Director of Municipal Inspections inspects Site Plans under construction for
compliance with the approved Decision of Site Plan Review. If the Director of Municipal
Inspections determines at any time before or during construction that a registered
professional engineer or other such outside professional is required to assist with the
inspections of the stormwater management system or any other component of the Site
Plan, the Applicant shall be responsible for the cost of those inspections.
Ms. Wright seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Mr. D’Urso moved
to close the public hearings, Mr. Wade seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in
5
favor. Mr. Palleiko thanked everyone for their efforts relative to this project on behalf of the
Board of Selectmen.
Mr. Karp left the meeting at this time.
2. Continued Public Hearing – Site Plan Review Application - 34-40 Hayden Rowe – RPI
Hopkinton
It was noted that the applicant has requested to continue the public hearing. Mr. Wade moved to
continue the public hearing to December 21, 2015 at 9:00 P.M. Mr. D’Urso seconded the motion
and the Board voted 4 in favor with one abstention (Wright).
3. Rafferty Road Sidewalk
Roy MacDowell, Legacy Farms LLC, joined the Board at this time. Mr. Weismantel referred to
an email from the Town Manager asking the Board to follow up on the conditions associated with
the Board of Selectmen’s approval of tree removal in connection with the construction of a
sidewalk along Rafferty Rd. He noted one of the conditions is a site walk to be conducted by
representatives of the Planning Board, DPW, Tree Warden and Legacy Farms LLC, and Peter
LaGoy has been designated to participate on behalf of the Selectmen. Mr. Weismantel stated the
site walk took place on November 13 and represented the Planning Board, joining John
Westerling, DPW Director, Paul Gleason, Tree Warden, Roy MacDowell, Legacy Farms LLC,
and members of the public. He noted they reviewed the trees designated for removal and found 8
that with minor modifications to the plan can be saved. He asked if that would be OK from the
Board’s perspective, and there was consensus to that effect. Mr. Weismantel noted the Board of
Selectmen has asked the Planning Board to affirm its vote of November 2, 2015 requiring the
sidewalk. Mr. D’Urso moved to affirm the Board’s vote of November 2, 2105, and Mr. Ferrari
seconded the motion.
Ms. Wright stated Mr. LaGoy is well respected and very active in open space and trail issues, and
she is glad to see that the Selectmen asked him to represent them. She noted Mr. LaGoy’s report
on the site walk is included in the Town Manager’s email to the Board, and she was glad to see
that the group agreed that 8 trees could be saved, including 2 large ones which will preserve some
of the tree canopy for the future. Chris Small, 5 Reservoir Rd., asked for clarification as to the
number of trees to be saved. Mr. MacDowell noted after they met with the Board of Selectmen
they tagged 9 trees for reconsideration, but after they walked the site walk the Tree Warden took
one off the list due to its very poor condition. Mr. Small disagreed. Mr. Weismantel noted the
conditions of the Board of Selectmen’s approval have been met. The Board voted unanimously in
favor of the motion.
4. Continued Public Hearing - 0 Lumber St. – Site Plan Review - Hopkinton Tennis Club –
Crandall-Hicks Company, Inc.
Donald Satterfield, applicant, Mark Donahue, attorney, Jesse Johnson, engineer, and Luis Lobao,
architect, appeared before the Board. Andrew Ogilvie, BETA Group, Inc., the Board’s consultant,
was also in attendance. Mr. Weismantel referred to Ms. Lazarus’ memo to the Board, and noted it
appears the applicant will need to submit an application for a special permit to address exterior
illumination levels, and perhaps a special permit from the Board of Appeals under the Water
Protection Resources Overlay District (WPROD). He noted the applicant is meeting with the
6
Design Review Board (DRB) tomorrow, and the Board expects to have their input at the next
meeting.
Mr. Johnson stated they revised the lighting plan, taking into account the comments and
recommendations made at the last meeting. He referred to his letter dated November 11, 2015,
and distributed copies of the revised plan. He noted the configuration shows a total of 6 poles at
22 ft. and 15 poles at 15 ft., with a 10 foot-candle maximum/0.6 foot-candle minimum lighting
level, achieving a less than 3 foot-candle average, meeting the IESNA standards. He stated he
believes they have come up with a sensitive design compared to the recently approved Starbucks
and Dunkin’ Donuts sites. Ms. Wright stated she appreciates the effort to bring down the height of
some of the poles, but the Planning Board recently approved plans with much lower light levels.
She noted she does not want the project to be unsafe, but the brighter the light the darker the
shadows. She referred to the recently approved 1 Lumber St. project where she’s seeing more
residential looking fixtures and significantly lower levels for a development with more pedestrian
traffic as that what is expected at a tennis club. She referred to an article in Preservation magazine
about a neighborhood where people could see the stars again after a blackout. She noted there is a
problem with collective glow, and feels the applicant can use 15 ft. poles throughout the site and
still achieve the necessary lighting levels for safety. Mr. Johnson stated he feels they found the
necessary balance and the 15 ft. pole requirement is more about looks than safety. He noted the
problem can be overcome, especially since the property is across from industrially zoned property
and screened by woods. Ms. Wright stated she feels the plan has more light than necessary and
would like the applicant to see if they can replicate the light levels achieved for the project at 1
Lumber St. Mr. Weismantel asked about lighting hot spots, and Mr. Johnson noted lower poles
would create more of them. Ms. Wright stated that bright lights don’t equal safety. Mr.
Weismantel stated it is more than just about crime, and it is also important that people can see
where they are going. Mr. D’Urso stated he agrees with Ms. Wright, and he does not quite
understand the parking lot situation. He stated the lighting on this portion of the NMU district
should fit in with the others. Mr. Johnson noted septic design typically drives site layout, and in
this case they were fortunate to find a place for a septic system of this size.
The Board discussed the requirements for a sidewalk with respect to Master Plan Special Permit
(MPSP) Condition #30. Mr. Johnson distributed copies of the NMU Master Plan showing a
proposed sidewalk connection from the Tennis Club property to the entrance of the Hopkinton
Mews development. He stated he met with the Planning Board and Conservation Commission
Chairs on site informally last week to walk the potential route. He explained site conditions along
the road, and stated the route is adjacent to wetlands with a 4 to 5 ft. drop-off in some areas. He
noted construction of a retaining wall would require some wetlands disturbance and they talked
about possibly crossing over to the other side of the street for a short distance, then crossing back
again. He noted it seemed to make sense and sight line distance is good in both crossing locations.
Mr. Weismantel stated crossing back and forth could be a little dangerous but is probably OK,
although construction of a sidewalk along the applicant’s side of the street would not be
impossible from a conservation perspective. He noted that the proposed alternative is open for
discussion and they have to make sure it meets the connectivity requirement. Mr. D’Urso stated
he looked at this area on Friday. He stated he remembers the Conservation Commission and
Planning Board discussions and believes there is space for a sidewalk in the pre-disturbed area
along Parcel 5. Ms. Wright asked about the length of sidewalk across the street, and Mr. Johnson
7
stated it is probably just under 400 ft. Mr. Weismantel asked about development plans and timing
for Parcel 4. Paul Mastroianni, REC Hopkinton, LLC, stated nothing is planned for the parcel
right now. Ms. Wright noted 400 ft. would appear to be long enough so that people would use it.
She asked what would happen if Parcel 4 is not developed, and expressed concerns about having a
sidewalk to nowhere. Ms. Wright stated Condition #30 talks about a meandering path as an
option, and she feels that won’t be useful because it won’t be plowed in the winter when a
sidewalk is needed most. Mr. Donahue stated that discussion would be more appropriately timed
under the specific site plan review application, and the question is when not if Parcel 4 will be
developed. Ms. Lazarus asked whether the Board has come to a conclusion about the sidewalk
going south from the Tennis Club. Mr. Weismantel noted he is OK with not having a sidewalk
along Parcel 7 in its entirety.
Reference was made to pedestrian and vehicular traffic flow and parking lot design, and a
determination regarding whether the parking requirement has been met. Mr. Weismantel asked
who verifies the requirement, and Ms. Lazarus noted the Building Inspector is reviewing the
occupancy limits for the use under the Building Code, to which the Zoning Bylaw refers.
Mr. Johnson noted they provided BETA with an exhibit to show the proposed traffic circulation.
He explained the location of the pedestrian walkways within the site and stated the plan provides
full vehicular access, which does not need to accommodate large tractor trailers. He noted BETA
did not identify any issues with the design. Mr. D'Urso asked about access for tractor trailers
bringing in the health club equipment during construction and Mr. Johnson stated they will have to
pull in, drop off the materials, and back out. Mr. Weismantel stated the Board may need a
condition limiting timing of commercial activities, although there are no residential abutters.
Mr. Weismantel stated he believes there was a clean report from BETA with respect to stormwater
management. Ms. Lazarus noted there were no additional comments and Mr. Ogilvie stated
everything has been addressed. Mr. Weismantel asked about site utilities. Mr. Johnson stated
municipal water will be brought down Lumber Street and there is adequate pressure. He noted the
site has natural gas, and everything else is basically there. He noted separate plans will be
submitted to the Board of Health for the septic system. Mr. Weismantel asked if there are any
issues regarding compliance with the MPSP and Design Guidelines, and Ms. Lazarus replied no.
Mr. Lobao described the building interior. He stated the building configuration is guided by
overall site design and the facility will be for members only. He noted the building will contain
several recreation/fitness related components, including a gym, fitness rooms, pro shop, restaurant,
and a viewing deck looking over 6 tennis courts open to the air during the warm season and 4
others that will be enclosed year-round. He noted there will also be covered swimming pools and
outdoor recreation areas. He noted it is an Adirondack style building which he feels should fit in
nicely with the area. Mr. D'Urso asked about the possibility of hosting a large tennis event, and
Mr. Lobao stated they would need a waiver from the Zoning Enforcement Officer for maximum
occupancy. Mr. Weismantel noted he does not believe the facility could handle such an event with
the number of people and cars. Ms. Wright asked about input from the Fire Chief, and Mr. Lobao
noted the Fire Dept. requested an access lane so that they can bring their hose in, but the building
will be fully sprinkled. Mr. Weismantel asked if the dome is suppressed and Mr. Lobao replied
no. Mr. Weismantel asked if BETA has any additional comments, and Mr. Ogilvie stated the
8
stormwater design is adequate, and they have no comments on lighting and landscaping. Mr.
Weismantel asked about screening of mechanical equipment, and Mr. Lobao noted the roofline
will shield the equipment, which will be in a trough behind the parapet.
Mr. Ogilvie stated the plan initially showed some shrubs in the snow storage area and that issue
has now been resolved. Mr. Weismantel noted the decision should include a condition to bring
snow somewhere else if it gets excessive.
Mr. Weismantel referred to an item on the public hearing outline with respect to the capacity of
Lumber St. He noted it appears the majority of issues has been addressed, and he feels a DRB
approval with reasonable recommendations will speed up the process and make it possible to
finish up at the next hearing. Mr. Donohue stated he will email Ms. Lazarus regarding the
WRPOD special permit requirement, because he thinks it does not really apply. Mr. Weismantel
noted that the applicant needs a special permit for the lighting plan, and if the application is
submitted in time it can be scheduled for the same night as the continued hearing. Mr. Wade
moved to continue the public hearing to December 21, 2015 at 8:00 P.M. Mr. D'Urso seconded
the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor.
5. Administrative Business
The Board reviewed the draft Minutes of October 19, 2015. Mr. D'Urso moved to approve the
Minutes of October 19, 2015 as written, Mr. Wade seconded the motion, and the Board voted
unanimously in favor.
Mr. Weismantel stated at the recent site walk of Ash St. with Chris Gonzales of Eversource, he
was glad to see that Eversource is somewhat flexible with respect to saving particular trees,
especially some of the larger ones. He noted he would like to do a similar site walk of Front St.
and Wilson St. on Saturday, November 21, preferably in the morning. He asked Ms. Lazarus to
post the site walk for November 21, 2015 at 9:00 A.M. starting at the corner of Front St. and
Valentine Rd., and going on to Wilson St. after finishing the Front St. walk.
Ms. Lazarus noted the Town adopted two new special permit provisions at the 2015 annual town
meeting, and she has amended the Board’s application form to accommodate them. She noted a
$300 administrative fee and a $1,000 consultant fee is recommended for those applications. Ms.
Wright moved to approve the proposed changes to the special permit application form and the
fees. Mr. Ferrari seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor.
6. Approval Not Required Plan - Front & South Mill St. - Braim
Ms. Lazarus explained the plan for property on the corner of Front St. and South Mill St., which
would create 5 building lots. She noted the lots conform to the frontage and area requirements.
Mr. Ferrari 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.
7. Master Plan Update
Mr. Weismantel encouraged members to complete review of the sections assigned to them. Mr.
Wade noted he is working on the Transportation section, and is thinking about including language
about recent activity, such as improvements to the sidewalk network.
9
9. Administrative Business
Mr. Weismantel noted the Planning Board has received the site plan application for the Legacy
Farms North villages, and has scheduled the public hearing in January. He noted he would like to
forward the plans as submitted to the members now, as there may be some generic questions that
the Board can ask the applicant to address at the public hearing stage, such as whether the mix of
unit types can be adjusted to use less land. He noted under the MPSP there will be a lot of
townhouses, which certainly changes the look of the Town, for better or for worse. Ms. Wright
stated she is in favor of seeing something less repetitive and having a broader palette.
Ms. Wright referred to the Deerfield Estates senior housing development on Lumber St. She
noted the historic McFarland-Sanger home right near the street is almost the oldest historic home
in Hopkinton and initially was supposed to be included in the development but did not have the
right characteristics. She noted they eventually created a small separate lot for the purpose of
saving the house. She noted the basic structure of the house is being stabilized with CPA money,
but the developer, Capital Group Properties, is very slow and still has not finished the landscaping
they promised, actually creating more problems, making the property more unsafe and the house
more unlivable in the process. She showed photographs and a plan of the area. She noted going
out the back door of the house there is a stoop, a stone wall with large boulders, and steep drop-
offs on three sides. She noted students from the North Bennet St. School in Boston and from
Keefe Tech will be coming to work on the house, and this would be an unsafe situation. She
asked what can be done here and how they can put pressure on Capital Group. Mr. Weismantel
stated they should ask the Building Inspector to at least look in to the installation of a fence. Ms.
Lazarus stated she spoke with the developer recently, and they provided a utility as-built plan. She
suggested a walk through with the developer, Planning Board and Historical Commission
representatives. Mr. Weismantel noted the Town still has a performance bond. He noted it
appears the input of the building inspector is needed with respect to the code. Ms. Lazarus noted
ideally there needs to be a better grade there, and the property was intended to be used as a
museum and not a residence.
Ms. Wright stated she understands the performance guarantee money is reserved for certain things
such as landscaping, and asked if construction of a retaining wall and additional grading to create
a safe side yard could possibly qualify. She stated under current conditions it will not even be
possible to plant anything there and she would like to see a grading plan. Mr. Weismantel stated it
may be possible to use the performance guarantee if they can show that the final product is not in
compliance with the proposed plan, and it would be a matter of due diligence on the part of the
Planning Board.
Mr. Weismantel noted the Community Preservation Committee is currently reviewing funding
proposals for the next fiscal year. He noted the Parks and Recreation Commission is requesting
money to scrap the existing EMC Playground on Hayden Rowe and build a new facility for
$125,000. He noted they are talking about an 18 year old facility, and he is not sure if it is a
matter of maintenance which cannot be done with CPA funds.
Adjourned: 10:15 P.M.
10
Submitted by: Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant, Dept. of Land Use, Planning & Permitting
Approved: December 21, 2015
Documents Used at the Meeting:
Agenda for November 16, 2015 Planning Board meeting
Memorandum to Planning Board from Elaine Lazarus, Director of Land Use, Planning & Permitting, dated
November 12, 2015, re: Items on November 16, 2015 Planning Board Agenda
Draft Planning Board Minutes of October 19, 2015
Missed Meeting Certificate – John Ferrari (November 2, 2015/Legacy Farms Amended Special Permit
Application, Scenic Road Public Hearing – Eversource; 0 Lumber St. Hopkinton Tennis Club)
Email to Elaine Lazarus from Norman Khumalo dated Nov 16, 2015, re: Fwd: Rafferty Road trees
Public Hearing Outline – Site Plan Review and Special Permit for Shared/Off-Site Parking, 13 Main St. & 9
Church St. – Public Library
Plans entitled “Submission for Site Plan Approval and Special Permit: Hopkinton Public Library”, dated July 30,
2015, rev. through October 15, 2015, prepared by DeVellis Zrein, Inc.
License Agreement between Town of Hopkinton & Roman Catholic Archbishop of Boston
Plan entitled “Plan of Land for Front St. and South Mill St., Owners: James Braim & Jack Braim”, dated Oct. 19,
2015, prepared by Connorstone
Planning Board Special Permit Application form
Public Hearing Outline – Site Plan Review Application – 0 Lumber St. – Hopkinton Tennis Club
Plans entitled “Hopkinton Tennis Club”, dated 11-2-2015, prepared by aF+S
Plan entitled “Site Development Plan, Sheet 11, Lighting”, dated 9-17-15 revised 11-12-2015, prepared by Bohler
Engineering
Master Plan “Overall Development Plan” for REC Hopkinton in Hopkinton, Massachusetts, dated August 20,
2014, revised through 11/17/14, prepared by Allen Engineering, LLC