HomeMy Public PortalAbout20210104 - Planning Board - Meeting MinutesHopkinton Planning Board
Monday, January 4, 2021 7:00 P.M.
REMOTE MEETING
Minutes
Members Present: Gary Trendel (Chair), Robert Benson (Vice chair), Fran DeYoung, David
Paul, Jane Moran, Deborah Fein-Brug, Muriel Kramer, Mary Larson-Marlowe, Sundar
Sivaraman
Members Absent:
Present: John Gelcich, Principal Planner; Stephanie Pemberton, administrative assistant; Phil
Paradis, BETA Group
_____________________________________________________________________
Mr. Trendel called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM
Mr. Trendel called the name of each Planning Board member, and each member that was present
responded affirmatively that they were present and could hear him. Mr. Trendel then called the
names of staff members, Mr. Gelcich and Ms. Pemberton, who responded affirmatively that they
were present and could hear.
Mr. Trendel stated that the meeting is being conducted remotely consistent with Governor
Baker’s Executive Order of March 12, 2020, due to the current State of Emergency in the
Commonwealth due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 virus. He noted that in order to mitigate
the transmission of the virus, the Board is complying with the Executive Order that suspends the
requirement of the Open Meeting Law to have all meetings in a publicly accessible physical
location. He stated that the Executive Order allows public bodies to meet entirely remotely as
long as the public body makes provisions through adequate, alternative means to ensure that
interested members of the public are provided reasonable access to the deliberations of the
meeting. He noted that for this meeting the Board is convening by video conference via Zoom
App as posted on the Town’s web meeting calendar and the Board’s agenda identifying how the
public may join. He stated that the meeting may also be broadcast by HCAM. He noted that the
meeting is being recorded and attendees are participating by video conference. Mr. Trendel
stated that all supporting materials that have been provided to the Board are available on the
Town website via the web meeting calendar, unless otherwise noted.
Ann Karnofsky, 132 East Main St., has asked the Board to enter into an executive session. The
Board discussed entering into an executive session in regards to potential litigation against the
Board and the Town. Ms. Kramer welcomes this to be fully apprised and to be able to stay
informed. Ms. Moran doesn’t see anything of the level requiring an executive session and
suggested getting advice from Town Counsel, Ms. Kramer believed there is enough reason. Mr.
Trendel noted he has met with the Select Board in executive session in regards to this, but there
has been no update. He also noted there have been discussions with the Community Preservation
Committee in regards to the purchase of the land, but it was noted the Applicant was not
1
interested in selling per Mr. Khumalo, Town Manager. Mr. Paul suggested waiting for additional
information. Ms. Larson-Marlowe noted it should be customary for the Board to be fully
informed. Mr. Trendel asked Mr. Gelcich if he could reach out to Town Counsel.
Ms. Larson-Marlowe moved to enter into an executive session at the next meeting in regards to
potential litigation, Mr. DeYoung seconded. Mr. Paul noted if entering into an executive session
he believed they should have Town Counsel present. Mr. Trendel noted he would reach out to
Town Counsel for updates and if there is a need for them to be present. Mr. Gelcich noted if
Board members wanted he could get them in touch with Town Counsel. On the motion to enter
into executive session at the next meeting the Board voted in favor 8-1-0 (Ms. Moran was
opposed).
1.0 Administrative Items
a.Performance Guarantee Estimate and Form K Lot Release Request -
Whisper Way
It was noted that BETA is scheduled to inspect and would be able to have the
estimate for 01/25/21.
Ms. Kramer moved to open the public hearings, Mr. Benson seconded and the Board voted
unanimously in favor through roll call vote 9-0-0.
2.0 Continued Public Hearing - 0 South St. - Major Site Plan Review - REC Hopkinton
LLC
Phil Paradis, BETA Group, noted that BETA had sent a representative and noted no immediate
impact, but did want to confer with the Conservation Commission. Mr. Paradis noted that all
issues pertaining to the Planning Board had been addressed.
Mr. Trendel went through the decision criteria for conformance with site plan standards:
●It was noted by John Kucich, Bohler Engineering, that all utilities will be underground
and the loading bays will be screened per the most recent plans. It was asked by Ms.
Kramer how to ensure there won’t be noise or odor if there are no tenants proposed. Mr.
Gelcich noted the tenants would have to comply with the site plan standards and would
be enforced by the Zoning Enforcement Officer.
●In regards to safety measures for pedestrians from parking to the building. It was noted
by Mr. Kucich there are sidewalks proposed from the parking to the building, but no
sidewalks to the street from the building. Mr. Trendel noted the Board encourages
sidewalks along the drive to the street for accessibility. Mr. DeYoung noted doesn’t
believe it needs to be built. Ms. Moran agreed, but asked to leave a five foot strip should
sidewalks become available in the area and asked if the Applicant would be willing to
2
re-purpose the stones. Mr. Paul suggested one for street frontage. Mr. Trendel also would
like to see a sidewalk along the driveway. Mr. Kucich noted the Conservation
Commission has requested minimizing impact to the wetlands and they would have to fill
in five feet of wetlands for this. He noted other industrial buildings along the street also
don’t have sidewalks. Mr. Paul noted discussing with the Conservation Commission as it
is a safety concern. Mr. Trendel asked Mr. Gelcich if the Board conditions the approval,
but the Conservation Commission denies it, what would happen. Mr. Gelcich noted they
would have to come back before the Planning Board or not be able to build the project.
Mr. DeYoung noted not crazy about conditioning it as others in the area do not and that
there are 24 feet of clear driveway.
●Mr. Kucich noted the height of the proposed lighting conforms to town standards. Ms.
Kramer asked if there would be any purpose to not having the lights operational at night
if it’s not being used. It was asked if there are bylaws that require lighting be shut off at a
certain time. Mr. Sivaraman noted the concern for those working late for safety if lighting
shut off. Ms. Moran noted if it were in residential it would be more important, however in
an industrial setting it should be up to the property owner. Ms. Kramer noted for safety
reasons motion lighting could be utilized so it would not be lit all night. Mr. Kucich said
he was unsure of the tenants intentions. Mr. Trendel noted comfortable having it conform
to bylaws. Ms. Kramer noted important considerations. Mr. Paul suggested to Ms.
Larson-Marlowe that the ZAC look into differences between residential and commercial
lighting standards.
●Ms. Fein-Brug asked the applicant, clarification of the heights of bushes and trees in the
back. John Kucich noted that at request of the Design Review Board, a row of trees had
been added to the plan. He noted they will be standard size at planting, about 6 feet, that
will mature. Ms. Fein-Brug asked for the arborvitae to be removed, Mr. Kucich noted
there are additional species proposed.
●In regards to dumpsters, Mr. Kucich noted there are no mechanical plans at this point;
however, there is a specific location planned for the dumpster. Paul Mastroianni,
Applicant, noted there is screening proposed for around the dumpsters.
●Mr. Paul suggested to the applicant the possibility of adding solar panels.
●Ms. Kramer asked about conditioning in regards to noise and odor. Mr. Trendel noted
adding a condition if the noise and odor were beyond permissible by Hopkinton Bylaws.
Mr. Gelcich noted any change would be a violation of the issued permit. He noted
concern of setting a metric of noise and odor and a way to mitigate without a tenant. Mr.
DeYoung noted it is difficult to set a standard, but maybe incorporate measuring against
noise and odor. Mr. Trendel noted adding that the site shall not generate inappropriate
levels of noise or odors. Ms. Moran noted utilizing bylaws as you cannot predict what
could happen. Ms. Kramer noted with unknown potential uses, feeling more comfortable
at the list connecting the decision with current bylaws with some affirmative statement
that attached town bylaws to this site plan. Mr. Gelcich noted that there is no bylaw that
3
addresses odor aside from wastewater and kennels. He also stated that the noise bylaw
does not address noise in industrial areas. Ms. Fein-Brug wants correction to the site plan
on the detailed section regarding shielding of landscaping and lighting. Mr. Kucich noted
all light fixtures are the same, some are shielded to ensure lights don’t bleed over
property lines.
●In regards to sidewalks, Mr. Gelcich noted per Mr. Paradis said that only three properties
have sidewalks and are on the West Side of town. He suggests not adding sidewalk, but
signalization. Ms. Moran suggested a solid white line four feet from the curb. Mr. Kucich
noted it will not be a high pedestrian or traffic area and it could be problematic with the
Conservation Commission as they wanted them to shift the driveway. He noted he felt
comfortable with the width of the driveway in regards to safety. Mr. Trendel noted
adding sidewalks where possible or some sort of pedestrian access. Mr. Paul felt strongly
about adding a sidewalk. Mr. Trendel suggested a condition for safe pedestrian access
along the driveway as opposed to conditioning a raised sidewalk.
The Applicant has requested the following waiver for Section 210-136.1.M.: Sidewalks. The
Applicant has requested a waiver for provision of sidewalks along the frontage of the lot.
Mr. Benson moved to grant the waiver, Mr. Sivaraman seconded and the Board voted
unanimously in favor through roll call vote 9-0-0.
Mr. Trendel read aloud the proposed conditions and the Board discussed the following.
●Mr. Trendel asked if there was a suggestion for the performance guarantee amount, if
requested. Mr. Gelcich noted the usual is $10,000. Mr. Trendel noted he was comfortable
following practice. Mr. Trendel proposed the guarantee be $10,000 in alignment with
other similar projects.
●The applicant shall make reasonable effort to provide an easement to the town of
Hopkinton for access and maintenance of existing stormwater retention basin along South
Street. The applicant shall make reasonable effort to provide an easement for parking to
the abutter. Mr. Paradis suggested a condition stating for the applicant to provide an
easement plan to present to the town for acceptance. Mr. Kucich noted they are amenable
to work with the other parties to make the easements happen.
●The applicant shall provide means for safe pedestrian access between South Street and
the parking area. It was the will of the Board to condition a full sidewalk.
●The Applicant shall provide a sidewalk along the driveway to allow safe pedestrian
access to the building per subdivision standards.
●The Applicant shall relocate materials from stone walls to other portions of the site as
appropriate.
●The Applicant will ensure that measures are taken to mitigate for or abate noise and/or
odors caused by future uses on the site that impact surrounding properties.
4
●Additional condition requested from the Design Review Board (DRB): the Applicant
shall appear before the DRB once tenants and colors are chosen.
Mr. Benson moved that the Board finds that the proposed development conforms to the Site Plan
Standards and provisions of Article XX; and that all applicable criteria and standards set forth in
the Zoning Bylaws (Chapter 210) have been satisfied, with the exception of waiver of sidewalks,
Mr. DeYoung seconded and the Board voted unanimously in favor through roll call vote 9-0-0.
Mr. Sivaraman moved that the Board grant approval of the Site Plan under Article XX of the
Zoning Bylaws, granting the following waiver: Section 210-136.1.M.: Sidewalks, and subject to
the conditions that were previously read aloud by the Chair and discussed by the Board, Mr.
Benson seconded and the Board voted unanimously in favor through roll call vote 9-0-0.
Mr. Benson moved to close the public hearing, Ms. Fein-Brug seconded and the Board voted
unanimously in favor through roll call vote 9-0-0.
3.0 Administrative Items, Continued
a.Minutes of November 30, 2020
Mr. Sivaraman moved to approve the draft minutes of November 30, 2020, Mr.
Benson seconded and the Board voted unanimously in favor through roll call vote
9-0-0.
b.Discussion/Vote on Changes to Permit Application Process re:
Pre-Submission Meeting
The Board discussed the suggested changes to the administrative rules of the
Planning Board. It was noted that plans shall be provided in electronic pdf and
may also be provided in ACAD format. Also to change that instead of suggesting
a pre-submission meeting between the applicant and Town Staff, to now require
this. This would provide a more streamlined and efficient process. Mr. Gelcich
spoke with Town Counsel and noted that as long as it is listed in administrative
rules it is acceptable. It was also noted that satisfaction of this is to be determined
by the Principal Planner.
Mr. DeYoung moved to accept the changes to the administrative rules of the
Planning Board as outlined by Mr. Gelcich, Ms. Kramer seconded and the Board
voted unanimously in favor through roll call vote 9-0-0.
c.Discussion of 2021 Objectives for Planning Board
5
Mr. Trendel discussed breaking into sub groups and working with other town
committees then come back with recommendations with the previously discussed
2021 goals: update overdue Open Space recreation plan, town wide connectivity
plan, and to update affordable housing strategy
Rob asked logistically how it would work. Mr. Trendel discussed the need for
minutes and to post to the town calendar 48 hours before the meeting in
accordance with the Open Meeting Law.
Mr. Gelcich noted the Board chose good topics to focus on this year. He then
went over the scope of each project. He noted a good mix of amount of work
required for each task with different timeline requirements. Mr. Trendel also
added that there is a good opportunity to talk about other things the Planning
Board does besides proposals. Ms. Moran noted the Board provides guidance and
leadership to let the community know where they plan on evolving.
The Board discussed which subcommittee each member best fit.
●Update the overdue Open Space recreation plan: Mr. DeYoung, Ms. Fein-Brug,
Mr. Benson
●Town Wide connectivity plan: Mr. Paul, Ms. Moran, Mr. Trendel
●Update affordable housing strategy: Ms. Kramer, Ms. Larson-Marlowe, Mr.
Sivaraman
Mr. Trendel asked each subcommittee to meet to come up with deliverables by
the end of the calendar year and key milestones for along the way. Ms. Fein-Brug
asked for any emphasis for priority or time frame for connectivity plan. Mr.
Gelcich noted there is no set path currently, if the funding is granted then would
need to find out the scope of the work.
Mr. Benson moved to adjourn, Mr. Sivaraman seconded and the Board voted unanimously in
favor through roll call vote 9-0-0.
Adjourned: 9:57 PM
Submitted by: Stephanie Pemberton
Approved: February 8, 2021
Documents used at the meeting:
●Administrative Rules of the Planning Board As of 08-12-19 - Proposed Amendments, 12/31/20
●Agenda and Meeting Materials for Planning Board meeting, January 4, 2021
●Planning Board Draft minutes of 11/30/20
●Site Plan Review Submission Requirements and Procedures - Proposed Amendments, 12/31/20
●0 South St, DRB Recommendation, 11/19/20
6
●0 South St, Email from BETA re Stormwater, 01/04/20
●0 South St, Missed Meeting Certificate M. Kramer, 1/04/21
●0 South St, Revised Site Plan, 12/10/20
●0 South St, Revised Stormwater Documents, 12/10/20
The files may be found online in the public shared folder on Google Drive
7