HomeMy Public PortalAbout20130923 - Planning Board - Meeting Minutes
1
HOPKINTON PLANNING BOARD
Monday, September 23, 2013 7:30 P.M.
Town Hall, 18 Main St., Hopkinton, MA
MINUTES
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ken Weismantel, Chairman, John Coutinho, Vice Chairman, John
Ferrari, Todd Holbrook, Brian Karp, Dick MacDonald, Deb Thomas, Claire Wright
MEMBERS ABSENT: Matthew Wade
Present: Elaine Lazarus, Director of Land Use, Planning & Permitting; Cobi Wallace, Permitting
Assistant
Mr. Weismantel opened the meeting and summarized the agenda. He thanked HCAM for taping
the meeting.
1. Master Plan Update
Community Vision - Norman Khumalo, Town Manager, appeared before the Board. Mr.
Khumalo noted he and Ms. Lazarus prepared a draft Scope of Services to start the hiring process
for a consultant to help with the preparation of a community vision. He noted his background is
in planning and a couple of years ago started working on the possibility of incorporating
community visioning into the master plan update, eventually receiving funding from town
meeting for a consultant. He stated the Board of Selectmen recently established working on this
with the Planning Board and other stakeholders as one of its goals. Mr. Weismantel stated they
would like to do something similar to the “Voices for Vision” process in the 1990’s organized by
a cross-section of community volunteers with a focused agenda that generated a number of ideas
and conclusions. Ms. Wright noted the draft Scope of Services mentions the use of social media
and on-line surveys and asked if the effort will include working groups with face-to-face
discussions. Mr. Khumalo noted they will definitely take advantage of new technology, but the
bulk of information gathering will be through a series of charrettes, and, as requested by the
Board of Selectmen, the creation of a community based working group to guide the consultant.
Ms. Thomas asked what will be done with the final report. Mr. Khumalo noted the goal is to
establish a common vision and identify goals and guiding principles for all Town departments
which will then be tied back into the master plan process.
Mr. Weismantel stated the Board has reviewed draft updates master plan chapters and he hopes
to get validation for the necessary action steps through the visioning process. Mr. Khumalo
noted the information will be used for the implementation of the master plan, and, from his
experience in working with several groups and committees, they need a “rallying cry” for the
organization. He noted when asked about their mission, the typical answer is public service and
projects but there needs to be more to that statement. He stated these have been tough economic
times, and going forward it will be easier to budget if the Town can articulate its goals. Ms.
Wright noted as a Planning Board member she has certain ideas how she would like to see the
Town developed and the Board needs to take advantage of any window of opportunity to use its
influence, but decisions have to be based on private development rights and what the law allows.
Mr. Khumalo noted the Board as part of the review process could ask whether the application is
2
consistent with the master plan. Mr. Coutinho referred to the Zoning Advisory Committee
(ZAC) as a breeding ground for ideas to tighten or loosening up regulations. He noted right now
the Board is doing the day-to-day work, but people expect planning for the future. Mr. Holbrook
noted it is not always a matter of whether an application meets the letter of the law. Mr.
Weismantel noted Voices of Vision showed quality education as a common concern, and also
somewhat surprisingly, downtown revitalization was high on the list. He noted there has been a
lot of progress on schools, but not so with respect to the downtown. He noted it will be
interesting to find out if opinions have shifted since then.
Ms. Thomas noted that as a resident she would be discouraged if it turns out priorities as a whole
are still the same after all these years, and Mr. Weismantel stated it would get people to really
focus on what needs to be done. Mr. MacDonald noted he agrees there should be a vision but it
is very difficult to get anything done with the current form of Town government, referring to the
most recent efforts and frustrations of the Downtown Revitalization Committee and the
downtown project consultant. Mr. Khumalo stated the master plan could include a review of
town government and governance. Ms. Lazarus stated the 2007 Master Plan includes a small
section on governance and it could be more robust. Ms. Wright noted there needs to be an
opportunity for a broad spectrum of voices, and unfortunately sometimes a community planning
process runs into a conflict because one faction drives the discussion and others feel left out.
Ms. Thomas stated she questions whether Town Meeting provides the inclusivity needed, and
Ms. Wright agreed it depends on who shows up, but in the case of the downtown proposals
people felt their input fell on deaf ears. Ms. Lazarus stated the implementation of the master
plan has to consider the form of government in place. Mr. Weismantel stated he feels the Board
supports the draft Scope of Services and suggested turning it back over to Mr. Khumalo and Ms.
Lazarus for further action. Mr. Weismantel asked if it is the intent to form a subcommittee with
members of the Planning Board and Board of Selectmen as a sounding board for the consultant,
and Mr. Khumalo stated yes, and also members of the community at large. Mr. Weismantel
suggested Board members think about joining the subcommittee. The Board thanked Mr.
Khumalo for his input.
Sidewalk Survey and Sidewalk Plan – Ms. Lazarus reviewed the results of the online Sidewalk
Survey, stating that there were 99 responses which included some general comments on
maintenance and repair issues. She stated Ash St. and East Main St. were mentioned most often.
She noted she prepared a map to illustrate the streets mentioned in the survey. The Board
reviewed the map. Ms. Lazarus referred to the draft Sidewalk Plan for inclusion in the master
plan update. She noted that the recommendations are results of previous Planning Board
discussions on this issue. Mr. Weismantel noted he is satisfied with the information which is
consistent with previous Planning Board discussions. He noted he believes the Town’s budget
for sidewalks/maintenance is $2,500, and Mr. Coutinho noted that amount should be increased.
The Board decided to include the Sidewalk Plan in the Transportation section of the updated
master plan.
The Board thanked Mr. Khumalo for coming to the meeting, and Mr. Khumalo thanked the
Board for its work on the master plan update.
Documents: Draft Community Vision Scope of Services; Draft Sidewalk Plan dated 9/23/13; Map of
Hopkinton with highlighted streets, undated, untitled
3
2. Design Review Board
Jeff Doherty, Chairman, and Jeanette Thomson, Sue Ellen Stoddard, Gail Fallon, and Ria
McNamara, members of the Design Review Board (DRB), joined the Board. Mr. Weismantel
noted Ms. Wright is also a member of the DRB, and he thanked all members for attending. He
noted the DRB works hard to participate in the site plan review process. He noted the DRB has
long term members which is good for continuity. Mr. Weismantel noted the outcome of projects
such as Pulte Homes at Legacy Farms is an excellent example of DRB input, and Mr. Coutinho
stated the same is true for recent changes to the Maspenock Woods development.
Mr. Doherty noted DRB review of projects such as the post office, Mobil station, EMC
buildings, and a dry cleaner business resulted in improvements over original submittals, which is
a credit to everyone on the Board. He noted the majority of the Board however feels they are not
getting the recognition they deserve and their recommendations fall on deaf ears. He noted in
the case of the 78 West Main St. (Dunkin’ Donuts) proposal, the Board made 11
recommendations, but there was no evidence of the Planning Board following through or
negotiating with the applicant’s architect and attorney on these. He noted the DRB members
were extremely disappointed and even suggested he ask the Board of Selectmen about the need
to continue having a DRB, and requested a meeting with the Planning Board to discuss the issue.
Mr. Coutinho noted he feels the DRB review had a big influence on the Dunkin’ Donuts project,
resulting in a number of significant and beneficial changes. He noted the Planning Board has to
approve a site plan if it meets the approval criteria under the bylaw, but DRB input resulted in a
much better project. Mr. Weismantel noted unlike special permit applications, site plan review is
an administrative process and unless there are intractable reasons for denial, the Board has to
approve the plan because zoning allows it by right. Ms. Thomas noted the Board extended the
public hearing process to allow for a follow-up meeting with the DRB while typically that
process is wrapped up prior to final Planning Board approval. Mr. Doherty noted the DRB met
several times with the applicant and at the final meeting it appeared he agreed to their
recommendations, but the information submitted by the attorney to the Planning Board was quite
different and caught the DRB off guard. Mr. Weismantel noted aesthetics is not one of the
approval criteria and not under Planning Board control. He noted the Board essentially
subcontracts this aspect to the DRB and if a certain concern can be tied to a specific standard,
that is beneficial. He stated the site plan review submittal guidelines tries to set up an
atmosphere of cooperation and an applicant might be more willing to work cooperatively with
the Board on design issues, as long as it is early in the process.
Ms. Wright noted cooperation is a two-way street where the Board sets the tone and the applicant
typically looks for a smooth, quick process. She noted if the Board makes it clear early in the
process that it holds the opinion of an advisory board in high esteem, the applicant will know
what to expect. Mr. Ferrari stated it appears the DRB felt it had made progress but saw it undone
at the Planning Board level, and the question is how to close the gap.
Roy MacDowell, Legacy Farms LLC, noted applicants should take a close look at the feel and
desires of a community as a whole to see what works. Jon Koeller, 72 Frankland Rd., referred to
the site plan process for Liberty Mutual where at times there appeared to be two different stories,
pitting boards against each other with perhaps a lack of communication contributing to the
problem. Ms. Wright stated push back can be part of the negotiation process, and sometimes a
4
problem might not be as intractable as originally thought. Mr. Doherty stated when discussing
lighting at 78 West Main St., the applicant’s engineer indicated his proposal is allowed under the
bylaw and there was no further negotiation at the Planning Board level. He noted the DRB did a
fairly good job, but the finished product does not blend in a Rural Business zone and abutters
will be disappointed. Mr. Weismantel noted the area is zoned for this use, and the abutter who
appealed the decision also appealed a previous bank proposal which in retrospect could have
been a better fit. Mr. Doherty stated the appellant claims she did not get notified of the hearing.
Mr. Weismantel noted the abutters were properly notified and many residents attended the
hearings.
Mr. Coutinho noted it is important for the Town to look cooperative and welcome new
businesses so that they do not quickly abandon their proposal and go to places where they will be
received with open arms. Ms. Thomas stated she feels the Planning Board places a lot of value
on the DRB and makes this consistently clear in its statements to applicants, although the
outcome is not always exactly as desired. Mr. Weismantel noted in this case there is a
neighborhood element that did not entirely understand site plan review and the limitations of the
authority of the Planning Board. Ms. McNamara noted the DRB did not realize the applicant did
not agree to all 11 recommendations until the night of the final Planning Board meeting. She
noted there is a need for better communication because without it this will happen again. Mr.
Weismantel noted they can certainly work on improving communication between boards. He
stated he feels that the DRB concerns could not be tied into any of the criteria. He noted lighting
is still a difficult issue even after the site plan review bylaw was rewritten a couple of years ago
and now includes a lighting standard where there was nothing before. Ms. McNamara noted the
DRB told Dunkin’ Donuts the proposed signage is not appropriate, but the sign bylaw is too
loose as currently written. She noted the site plan review and sign bylaw should be reviewed,
and Mr. Weismantel noted the next ZAC session will start soon and perhaps this can be added to
the work program. Ms. McNamara noted lighting was of particular concern because this is
essentially a transition area to a residential neighborhood. Mr. Coutinho suggested Ms.
McNamara join the ZAC to work on these types of issues. He noted the sign bylaw was a
challenge and put together by a group of 14 people with a good cross-section of opinions which
gave them an idea how much they could get through town meeting. Mr. Doherty suggested the
Planning Board keep them informed after the applicant is finished with the DRB. Ms. Thomas
noted perhaps the Board should not automatically rely on being filled in by Ms. Wright, who is a
DRB member, and perhaps another Planning Board member could attend if Ms. Wright is
unable. Mr. Weismantel noted Planning Board agendas are posted on line with links to related
documents. Ms. Lazarus noted she can add the DRB members to the agenda distribution list.
The Board thanked to the DRB members for attending.
3. Legacy Farms - Update
East Main St. Road Modifications – Mr. MacDowell noted they are currently working with the
engineering department at Verizon to address the fiber optic cable vault which needs to be
lowered in certain areas to accommodate the planned modifications to East Main St. He stated
any disconnection of service is subject to extreme fines, and therefore Legacy Farms does not
intend to do this work on its own. He noted he is hoping to hear from Verizon in the near future
but the process is slow. Mr. MacDowell noted he has spoken to Eric Carty of the Water Dept.
regarding issues relative to the relocation of the water line, and hopes to be able to do the work in
5
the next couple of weeks. He stated another issue is NSTAR’s work on the gas line to correct a
connection with the right pipe size, and to replace the line from Wilson St. to downtown. He
noted NSTAR feels there is not enough natural gas in Hopkinton in general and would like to run
a line from Wilson St. through the Legacy Farms propert y parallel to Legacy Farms North,
Phipps Rd., back to East Main St. all the way to Ashland. Ms. Lazarus asked if this will affect
the North Parcel Restricted Land, and Mr. MacDowell stated it will not. Mr. MacDowell stated
the fiber optic cable and water line issues need to be addressed before they can proceed with
lowering the road. Mr. Weismantel noted he knows about the Verizon issue and asked if there is
any possibility to improve sight distance by raising a section of road to the west. Mr.
MacDowell stated the engineers looked at that possibility, but it would only help sight line to the
east, not the west. Mr. Weismantel asked about shifting the alignment, and Mr. MacDowell
noted he can look in to it. Mr. Koeller stated he is not convinced the proposed road modification
will solve the sight line problem without shifting the 4-way intersection closer to Legacy Farms
North, and Mr. MacDowell stated he feels the proposed changes will make a lot of difference.
East Main St. Sidewalk – Mr. MacDowell showed an updated plan with engineering details on
various locations along the proposed sidewalk along East Main St. He noted they will have to
terrace the existing stone wall at 43 East Main St. which will be fine with the homeowner
although it is actually on Town property. He noted they have come up with a solution for the
previously washed out area near Wilson St., and would like input on the extent of required tree
removal at the Ray St. section from the DPW or Planning Board members. Mr. Weismantel
noted the Tree Warden has jurisdiction, but the Board can make recommendations. Mr.
MacDowell stated perhaps the path can meander. He noted he is submitting this plan into the
record, pending additional engineered plans to be submitted to the Planning Board and DPW.
In response to a question, Mr. MacDowell stated they are planning to start construction of the
sidewalk next summer. He noted they would also like to get going on the Legacy Farms north
side as sales and construction on the south side are going well. Ms. Lazarus noted as of last
month a total of 278 building permits and 71 certificates of occupancy had been issued in Legacy
Farms. Ms. Wright asked whether Pulte will also be developing on the north side, and Mr.
MacDowell stated the decision has not been made yet although it has been discussed. He noted
Legacy Farms is monitoring the construction and finished product on the south side, and
appreciates the help from the Town inspectors. He stated the housing market has changed since
2004-2006, and developers have learned to pay attention to quality, reputation and
competitiveness. Mr. Weismantel stated he has heard from the School Dept. they are
anticipating enrollment will increase as a result of Legacy Farms, and Mr. MacDowell stated he
thinks it is too early to tell if it will exceed what was projected. Ms. Lazarus noted many 3
bedroom simplexes are being built first, which might be giving the impression of more school
children than anticipated. Mr. Weismantel suggested communicating with the School Dept. to
monitor trends vs. projections.
Mr. MacDowell noted Pulte is considering their Del Webb age-restricted brand for the north
side, which would have no school children and pure tax revenue. Mr. MacDowell noted
Hawthorn Retirement Group is going ahead with a proposal to build a senior living facility on
part of the East Main St. commercial parcel, with 127 units. He noted they had a meeting with
6
abutters on October 3. He noted the proposed facility will be similar to the one in Westborough
which is almost ready for occupancy.
Mr. Koeller asked about the need for additional sidewalk sections along East Main St. to fill in
the gaps. Mr. Weismantel noted it would require working with an abutting land owner, but the
Board is currently working on a sidewalk plan and East Main St. is listed as one of the busy town
roads in need of sidewalks. Mr. Weismantel noted eventually money will have to be spent on
sidewalks, either by the Town or someone else, but right now the DPW sidewalk budget is very
limited.
Document: Plan entitled “Proposed East Main Street Pedestrian Connection” dated 08-19-2013
Legacy Farms South – Performance Guarantee - Mr. Weismantel referred to the estimated
performance guarantee for the remainder of Legacy Farms South, from just beyond the rotary to
Clinton St. It was noted the estimate will have to be reviewed by the Town’s consultant
engineer. Mr. Weismantel asked about the additional parcels recently sold to Pulte, and Mr.
MacDowell indicated the parcels in question on a map.
4. Approval-Not-Required Plan - 294 Hayden Rowe St. – LePelley
Varoujan Hagopian, Connorstone Engineering, appeared before the Board. Mr. Weismantel
noted the Board has seen a previous ANR plan for this land. Mr. Hagopian noted the plan
reconfigures parcel A and B, due to the lack of clear title on a strip of land once owned by the
railroad. He noted the strip was initially transferred from the railroad to the Flannery’s and then
to LePelley, but the Commonwealth of Massachusetts was not given the right of first refusal as
required by law. He noted after removing the strip of land, they had to reconfigure the lot to
comply with area requirements. He noted this plan is necessary to facilitate the planned closing,
but the future property owner will work towards resolving the issue. Mr. Weismantel stated the
plan appears entitled to endorsement but asked whether the owner intends to build 2 or 3 homes,
and Mr. Hagopian stated there will be two mainly because of wetlands limitations. In response
to a question of Ms. Lazarus, Mr. Hagopian stated the title issue will be resolved and if the
outcome is in favor of LePelley they will come in with a new plan. Mr. Weismantel asked why
the plan shows three lots if there will only be two houses, and Mr. Hagopian stated it is up to the
future property owner to decide what to do with it. The issue of title to former railroad land was
discussed. Ken Parker, Upper Charles Trails Committee, stated he is interested in acquiring the
railroad strip for the bike path, and noted the owner appears willing to grant an easement to the
Town on this property. Mr. Coutinho moved to endorse the plan as not requiring approval under
the Subdivision Control Law. Ms. Thomas seconded the motion and the Board voted
unanimously in favor.
Document: Plan entitled Plan of Land 294 Hayden Rowe Street in Hopkinton, Mass., dated Sept. 13, 2013,
prepared by Connorstone Engineering
Mr. Karp stepped off the Board at this time.
5. Approval-Not-Required Plan - 20 Chamberlain St. – Chamberlain Street Realty, LLC
Larry Sabean, Hannigan Engineering, appeared before the Board. He noted the Board endorsed
an ANR plan last year which created a separate parcel for future conveyance. He noted the
7
parcel has now been transferred, and the current plan will combine the parcels into one
contiguous building lot with an easement for the Sanctuary Lane driveway. It was noted that
Sanctuary Lane is not a road but a condominium driveway and was approved by a
comprehensive permit issued by the Board of Appeals. Mr. Sabean noted it concerns an access
utility easement and can be built on. Mr. Holbrook moved to endorse the plan as not requiring
approval under the Subdivision Control Law. The motion was seconded and the Board voted 6
in favor with 1 abstention (Ferrari).
Document: Plan of Land in Hopkinton, Massachusetts (for 20 Chamberlain St.), prepared by Hannigan
Engineering, Inc., dated Sept. 16, 2013
Mr. Karp returned to the Board at this time.
6. Legacy Farms – East Main Street Recreational Parcel
Mr. Weismantel noted the Board discussed the East Main St. recreational parcel at the last
meeting, with respect to the potential construction of a hockey rink. He noted the Town
Manager has been working to resolve outstanding issues regarding a possible agreement between
the Town, Legacy Farms and Demons Youth Hockey Association. Mr. Weismantel noted he
thinks the agreement may almost be done. Mr. MacDowell stated people are asking him about
this and he would like to make it clear he is in favor of whatever the Town wants. He noted from
Legacy Farms’ perspective there are concerns about building size, aesthetics – a New England
barn look as opposed to an urban style rink, runoff, and other site plan related issues. He noted
sight line distance on East Main St. is important in view of the anticipated traffic, including
buses. He stated the initial Legacy Farms project traffic mitigation did not anticipate this type of
use, so if the need for additional mitigation is triggered, they don’t want to be responsible for
someone else’s project. He stated that site geotechnical and drainage studies should be
performed considering this used to be a cranberry bog. Mr. MacDowell stated he is not sure if
the facility plans to tie into the Legacy Farms sewer system and if so whether additional capacity
with more pump stations will be required. Mr. Weismantel noted the Planning Board’s concerns
raised at the last meeting appear to have been addressed by recent changes. Mr. MacDowell
noted the Demons understand they will only own a portion of the land, not the whole parcel.
Mr. Weismantel noted another issue is the timing of compliance with Master Plan Special Permit
condition #44 which requires rough grading of the land, and in the latest draft this requirement
will be transferred to the Demons. He noted obviously the Planning Board will hold a public
hearing on changes to this condition. Mr. MacDowell stated they don’t have a comprehensive
plan for the entire recreational parcel, and the current preliminary plan shows many uses
basically trying to please everyone. Mr. Weismantel noted the preliminary plan was not
necessarily realistic and they will be lucky to get athletic fields, the hockey rink, and maybe a
commitment to a trail hub. Mr. Coutinho noted they have to be careful not to want too much,
and Mr. MacDowell stated it has to remain financially feasible for the Demons. Mr. Weismantel
noted he thinks the current draft satisfies previous Planning Board concerns, provided there were
no additional changes. Mr. Weismantel noted he attended the last Parks and Recreation
Commission meeting, and they want to get it done quickly and are still interested in athletic
fields if the agreement falls through. Mr. Weismantel noted the parcel would still be subject to
the Legacy Farms/OSMUD rules and if the Town takes ownership and leases a portion to the
8
Demons, the project would have to be put out to bid subject to prevailing wage rules. Mr.
Weismantel noted it is complicated but the agreement appears to be on the right track.
Ms. Wright asked about access through the property to adjacent parcels. Mr. Weismantel stated
he received a letter from Jane Moran of East Main St. who wants to make sure people don’t
forget about the horse trails. He noted he responded to her indicating this would be a good spot
for a trail hub especially for visitors who don’t live in the area, unless there is the will to invest in
a parking lot on the north side. Mavis O’Leary, 11 Curtis Rd., stated she would like to speak for
the Trails Club members who feel that the proposed hockey rink agreement might jeopardize the
potential for connectivity. Mr. MacDowell noted he feels it can still be achieved but a plan is
needed. Mr. Weismantel noted the Planning Board was not pleased with the original wording of
the agreement, and would probably not have signed off on condition #44 as a result. He noted
the Planning Board at this time does not need to take any action. Ms. Wright asked if the
proposed curb cut is in the right location for sight distance, and Mr. MacDowell noted it is
probably in the best possible place.
7. Administrative Business:
Minutes: The Board reviewed the draft Minutes of the July 22, 2013 meeting. Ms. Thomas
moved to approve the Minutes of July 22, 2013 as written. Mr. Coutinho seconded the motion
and the Board voted unanimously in favor. The Board reviewed the draft Minutes of the August
12, 2013 meeting and made corrections. Mr. Coutinho moved to approve the Minutes of August
12, 2013 as amended. The motion was seconded and the Board voted unanimously in favor.
Invoices: The Board reviewed invoices submitted for payment. Ms. Thomas moved to authorize
payment to BETA Group, Inc. in the amount of $4,091.02 for consultant services for the
Hunter’s Ridge subdivision, the Forest Ridge application and 78 West Main St. site plan review.
Mr. Coutinho seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Mr. Coutinho
moved to authorize payment to BETA Group, Inc. in the amount of $4,277.94 for consultant
services regarding the 78 West Main St. and 98 Hayden Rowe St. site plan applications. Ms.
Thomas seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Mr. Coutinho moved
to authorize payment in the amount of $832.80 to BETA Group, Inc. for consultant services
regarding the 98 Hayden Rowe St. site plan application. Ms. Thomas seconded the motion and
the Board voted unanimously in favor.
Documents: Draft Minutes of July 22, 2013 and August 12, 2013; Payment authorization requests and invoices
6. Other Business
Zoning Advisory Committee - Mr. Coutinho noted more people have expressed interest in
joining the ZAC and he will ask them to contact Ms. Lazarus or Mr. Weismantel. The Board
discussed possible topics for ZAC discussion, such as lighting, signs, medical marijuana and
industrial district frontage requirements. Ms. Thomas asked about the possibility of eliminating
billboards in Town. Ms. Wright noted existing billboards would be grandfathered. Ms. Lazarus
stated she could research the issue. Mr. Weismantel stated he would also like the ZAC to look at
the Streets and Sidewalks bylaw which is outdated and should be rewritten. He noted the ZAC
will start off with a brainstorming session to solicit possible topics for further discussion. He
noted he encourages everyone to submit ideas.
9
78 West Main St. – Appeal of Planning Board Decision – Mr. Weismantel noted the Board of
Appeals will have a continued public hearing on September 25, 2013 at 7:15 P.M. on the appeal
filed by Coco Bella LLC of the Planning Board’s decision for 78 West Main St. He noted
attorney Jon Witten will be there to represent the Planning Board.
Hopkinton Trails Club Announcement - Mr. Parker noted the Trails Club will conduct a walk
this Sunday beginning at Center School and going along the old railroad bed to Legacy Farms.
He noted this will be an opportunity to look at the land the Town may use for potential expansion
of Center School also. Mr. Weismantel asked about the status of the trails around the Alta
Legacy Farms apartments, and Ms. Lazarus noted the trails shown on the plan will be developed
when all the buildings are closer to completion and the fences are removed.
Adjourned 10:05 P.M.
Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant
Approved: November 4, 2013
Other Documents:
Agenda for September 23, 2013 Planning Board meeting
Memo to Planning Board from Elaine Lazarus, Director of Land Use, Planning and Permitting, dated September
19, 2013, Re: Items on Planning Board agenda – September 23, 2013