Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20120227 - Planning Board - Meeting Minutes 1 HOPKINTON PLANNING BOARD Monday, February 27, 2012 7:00 P.M. Town Hall, 18 Main St., Hopkinton, MA MINUTES MEMBERS PRESENT: Ken Weismantel, Chairman, John Coutinho, Vice Chairman, Brian Karp, Deb Thomas, Carol DeVeuve, Claire Wright, Christian Ollenborger, Dick MacDonald MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Abate Present: Elaine Lazarus, Director of Land Use, Planning & Permitting Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant Mr. Weismantel opened the meeting and summarized the agenda. He stated the applicant for the Reservoir View OSLPD special permit application has requested a continuance of the public hearing to March. 1. Hopkinton Square – 22 South St. & 167 West Main St. – Proposed Amendments to Approved Site Plan Peter Markarian and Chuck Joseph, CJPM Development, and Dan McIntyre, engineer, appeared before the Board. Mr. Weismantel stated he believes the proposed changes to the site plan are minor and can be addressed administratively without a public hearing. It was noted the members have seen the proposed changes distributed to the Board in the meeting packet. Ms. Thomas moved that the Board consider the changes as minor, Mr. Karp seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. Mr. Markarian thanked the Board for putting the issue on the agenda on such short notice. He stated he is asking for approval of 4 minor revisions to the approved plan. He noted they would like to expand the patio for a restaurant tenant, make changes to the landscape plan, and add a bank drive-through window that was recently approved via a special permit issued by the Board of Appeals. He stated this will be the only drive-through on the site, although some Board members may remember they initially planned for two. He noted they are looking for a change to the lighting plan at the request of Price Chopper for security reasons and enhanced display of an American flag. Mr. Markarian stated the owner of Zio’s Bistro has decided to open a restaurant at Hopkinton Square but asked to expand the existing patio around the building to provide customer seating that is shaded in the late afternoon. Ms. Wright asked whether the proposed inkberry bushes next to the patio produce fruit that will attract birds. Mr. Markarian stated he did not know. Ms. DeVeuve asked if access to the patio will be exclusively through the restaurant, and it was stated it would not be the only access, but there will be no access from the roadway. Mr. Markarian described a change in the sidewalk layout from South Street to discourage people from walking 2 through the patio to get to the front of the building. Ms. Wright followed up on her question regarding inkberries and recommended the applicant check because the birds can make a mess and be a nuisance to diners. Ms. DeVeuve asked whether the proposed patio expansion will result in increased restaurant seating, and it was noted the number of seats is about 75 and will not change. Mr. Weismantel asked Ms. Lazarus to comment on the proposed changes to the lighting plan. Ms. Lazarus stated the lighting appears consistent with what the Board approved before, with no spill of light off the site. Ms. DeVeuve stated some of the poles are higher now, and Mr. Markarian stated a couple of double-headed light poles went from 20 to 24 ft. Ms. DeVeuve stated the property is already up high and she is concerned about glow, as discussed during the initial approval process. Mr. Markarian stated Price Chopper asked to increase lighting for security reasons and install flood lights on the building to illuminate an American flag display. He noted they switched to LED lighting, and Mr. Coutinho noted that should alleviate spillover concerns. Mr. Markarian stated Price Chopper wants lighting around their building 24 hours a day, but the lighting for the other building will be turned off at 10:00 P.M. Ms. Lazarus asked if the flood lights are shown on the photometric plan, and Mr. Markarian stated yes. Mr. Markarian stated Price Chopper is planning to be open 24/7 and it is a market driven decision. Ms. DeVeuve stated there are residences across the street. She noted she assumes there will be only a limited number of customers after a certain hour, and suggested reducing lighting levels accordingly. Mr. Markarian stated he will discuss the issue with Price Chopper. Mr. Coutinho stated the light level at the property line will be 0, and Ms. DeVeuve stated some of the parking lot levels are as high as 6.6 foot-candles and there should be some way to tone it down. A discussion followed to determine which areas in the parking lot could be safely lit with less light depending on the time of day. Mr. Karp brought up employee parking, and Ms. Lazarus suggested lighting employee parking areas for the 24 hours. It was agreed that Mr. Markarian would review with Price Chopper the idea to reduce to 50% the lighting in the two parking lot islands not immediately adjacent to the building. Ms. Wright referred to the Liberty Mutual site on Frankland Rd. as a good example of adequate lighting using low foot-candle levels. Mr. Weismantel stated he does not agree with Ms. Wright, has been out to Liberty Mutual in the winter after dark and is not comfortable with the lighting there. Ms. DeVeuve stated the applicant indicated he would look into it and they should leave it at that. Mr. Markarian referred to the proposed landscape changes. He noted Price Chopper wants to go to all native, drought-resistant plantings which will be established with water trucked in and no further need for irrigation, but otherwise everything will be the same. He stated that this will contribute to the building’s LEED certification. Ms. Wright stated she would like to comment on three of the species described in material distributed to the Board, specifically honey locust, white spruce and gingko. She noted honey locust will be ok in the parking lot but not on the patio, referred to the propensity of white spruce to bolt, and absolutely advised against the use of gingko because it is easy to end up with female trees which have an obnoxious odor. Mr. Markarian stated he will discuss this with the landscaping company. Ms. Thomas moved that with the minor modifications proposed to the site plan for Hopkinton Square, the site plan as modified will continue to conform to the Decision Criteria in §210-136 3 of the Zoning Bylaw. Ms. DeVeuve seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Ms. Thomas moved that the Board approve the proposed modifications to the site plan as submitted, with the following condition:  That all of the site plan sheets affected by the changes be amended to incorporate said modifications. The applicant shall submit one full size copy of each amended sheet to the Board, and shall also provide a copy in electronic format. Mr. MacDonald seconded the motion. Ms. DeVeuve stated she would like to add a condition requiring the applicant to revise the lighting plan as discussed earlier. Mr. Markarian stated he is planning to make additional changes and have some control by dropping two rows of parking down to 50%, and Ms. DeVeuve stated she thought the applicant was willing to go down to 0 in sections further away from the grocery store. Mr. Markarian stated they talked about it but the discussion then evolved into a 100%/50%/50% preferred setup. Mr. Coutinho stated the use of LED will make a big difference and the photometric plan does not consider trees that will also screen the lighting. The Board discussed adequate levels of lighting depending on location within the site and type of tenant. Mr. Markarian stated one the tenants is a bank with an ATM and a drop-off box, and Ms. DeVeuve stated other banks in Town with the same type of facilities do not have this level of lighting. Ms. DeVeuve asked if the applicant has discussed the proposed changes with the neighbors, and Mr. Markarian stated no. Mr. Weismantel stated the plan shows a lot of trees to screen the development, and people will let the Board know if it’s too bright. Ms. Wright stated this is the time to ask for lower levels because once approved and installed they will be stuck with it. Ms. DeVeuve stated the lighting as proposed will be too bright. Ms. Wright suggested a compromise that includes more lighting near the bank area. Ms. Thomas stated there is no need for further discussion at this point as the applicant has indicated he will go back and talk to Price Chopper. Ms. DeVeuve amended the motion to include a condition requiring the applicant to talk the grocery store tenant about the possibility of reducing late night lighting levels in certain areas of the parking lot to at least 50%, Mr. Ollenborger seconded the amended motion, and the Board voted to approve the changes to the approved site plan for Hopkinton Square, 7 in favor and 1 opposed (MacDonald). Documents:  (Undated) photometric plan for Hopkinton Square  Site Plan, Hopkinton Square, page C.2, dated 5/10/07, revised through 2/8/12, prepared by Gorman Richardson Architects/McIntyre Engineering  Landscape Plan, Hopkinton Square, page L1.1, dated 4/30/2010, revised through 10/4/11, prepared by CJPM Development LLC/Gorman Richardson Lewis Architects/Cosmos Associates  Literature, J. Frank Schmidt & Son Co. with details on Honey locust, White Spruce, Ginkgo and Pin Oak 2. Public Hearing – Zoning Bylaw and Zoning Map Amendments Mr. Ollenborger moved to continue the public hearing to later in the evening upon completion of the next agenda item, Mr. Karp seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. 4 3. 81-83 Main Street – Request for Extension of Site Plan Approval Joseph Strazzulla and Chris Strazzulla, Wayland Realty Trust, applicants, appeared before the Board. Mr. Strazzulla stated he received site plan approval in 2008 for a new office building in the rear of the property at 81-83 Main St. and in 2009 was granted an extension to April 2012 in view of the lack of demand for commercial office space in the downtown area. He stated conditions have not improved and he is asking for an additional 2 year extension. Mr. Weismantel stated he feels the request is justified given the overall poor economy. Ms. Wright moved to extend the site plan approval for 81-83 Main St. for 2 more years for good cause, Mr. Coutinho seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. 4. Continued Public Hearing – Zoning Bylaw and Zoning Map Amendments Mr. Weismantel suggested reviewing the proposed amendments as listed in Ms. Lazarus’ memo to the Board and voting on each item as to whether to put the article on the warrant and to recommend the change to town meeting. a. Site Plan Review Mr. Weismantel referred to a letter from Miyares and Harrington LLP, Town Counsel, dated February 23, 2012 providing comments on the draft article. Mr. Coutinho stated the Zoning Advisory Committee (ZAC) worked to revise the bylaw to make the process as smooth and easy as possible, including the appeals process. Mr. Weismantel referred to Mr. Miyares’ comments on energy efficiency and building design with the recommendation to add two new design standards to the bylaw. He stated he has trouble with new standard S. and asked if that means that every building has to be LEED certified. He noted he feels that the ZAC and the Planning Board tried to come up with criteria that can be enforced and he does not think that items S. and T. fall into that category. Ms. Lazarus stated as noted in the letter, the reasoning for adding the two criteria is because the draft bylaw includes an encouragement for applicants to make these design considerations, and Town Counsel feels that if the Town wants it to have teeth, it should add corresponding standards. Mr. Weismantel noted the ZAC intended to encourage energy efficiency, and he feels the Board should not go beyond that. Ms. Wright stated site plans require design review and she is not too concerned about item T. which is still broad-based in asking applicants to consider certain architectural elements, but in item S. it sounds like the Town is dictating energy efficiency and renewable resources. Mr. Coutinho stated he does not think the Board should be able to deny an application based on subjective opinions on architectural style, and Ms. DeVeuve stated she does not think the proposed language implies a reason for denial. Mr. Weismantel suggested deleting items S. and T. from the draft bylaw. Ms. DeVeuve asked Scott Richardson, architect and ZAC member, for his professional opinion. Mr. Richardson stated item S. is worded too strongly and would be difficult to enforce, as is item T., but both would be ok in just the preamble as ZAC recommended. Ms. Lazarus stated the Board of Appeals reviewed the article at its last meeting and had no recommended changes. A motion was made to submit the article into the Warrant and to recommend that town meeting adopt the change, as drafted but incorporating Town Counsel’s comments with the exception of 5 items S. and T. in the Site Plan Standards section. Mr. Karp seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. b. Medical Center/Health Services Facility Mr. Coutinho stated the main reason for the proposed amendment is to change the term “medical center” to “health services facility”. He noted the existing term was appropriate in the 1960’s or 70’s but does not now adequately describe the use. He noted the ZAC developed a modified definition of the term, which includes outpatient surgery but excludes emergency medical care requiring an ambulance unless absolutely necessary. Mr. Coutinho stated in addition the amendment proposes changing the use in Rural Business and Industrial A and B from by special permit to by right, and in Office Park from not permitted at all to by right. Ms. Lazarus stated Mr. Miyares recommended some housekeeping changes to the proposed wording of the article, and Mr. Weismantel stated the ZAC did a good job incorporating the Planning Board’s previous comments. Mr. Coutinho moved to submit the article into the Warrant and to recommend that town meeting adopt the change as drafted with the changes recommended by Town Counsel. Mr. Ollenborger seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. c. Medical Office Use It was noted that Town Counsel recommended some housekeeping changes to the article and offered a possible definition of the “medical office” term. Mr. Weismantel stated the wording is reasonable. Mr. Karp moved to submit the article into the Warrant and to recommend that town meeting adopt the change, as drafted with the recommendations made by Town Counsel. Mr. Coutinho seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. A High School student in attendance referred to the Site Plan Review article discussed earlier. He asked if the Town has any energy efficiency criteria at all. Mr. Weismantel stated the Board has discussed this in the past and energy efficiency is being encouraged in the Legacy Farms development. Mr. Richardson stated the Town of Hopkinton has “Green Community” status and therefore some new buildings now have to comply with the Stretch Energy Code adopted by the Town. d. Continuing Care Retirement Community in Industrial A and B Districts Ms. Lazarus stated Town Counsel reviewed the draft language and recommended changes to the article wording and made housekeeping edits. There were no comments from the public. Mr. Coutinho moved to submit the article into the Warrant and to recommend that town meeting adopt the change, as drafted with the changes made by Town Counsel. Mr. Karp seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. e. Life Science/Biotechnology in Industrial A and B Districts Mr. Coutinho described the proposed amendment. He noted the ZAC proposes to amend the bylaw to allow life science/biotech uses if conducted at Biosafety Level 1 or 2 by right in the Industrial A and B districts. He noted Biosafety Level 1 compares to high school chemistry lab and Level 2 is the type of activity that occurs in medical office buildings and hospitals. He stated Level 3 deals more with infectious diseases, and Level 4 is not even on line in Massachusetts although one is proposed at Boston University but has not been given the go- ahead. Ms. DeVeuve noted biotech companies can use a lot of water and with limited water/sewer resources a change to by right could be problematic for the Town. Mr. Weismantel 6 stated he is not concerned about water and sewer capacity, and biotech is an area favored by the Chamber of Commerce and the Hopkinton 2020 Group as a key industry for investment and part of the future. He noted the Town already has “bronze” status and will have an opportunity to move up to “silver” if it is able to easily allow such uses. He noted there are ways for the Town to control water use, mainly through the fee schedule which is tiered and can be amended by a vote of the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Coutinho stated there are two large biotech companies in Town, but only one of them uses a lot of water. Ms. DeVeuve suggested a condition that the use is allowed by right only if its water demand is low. Mr. Coutinho stated the use should be allowed by right because otherwise nobody will be interested in locating in Hopkinton. Ms. Wright stated it is not a question of whether it is allowed or not, it is about by right vs. by special permit. She stated at the end of the day the purpose of the Planning Board is to determine whether the proposed change is in the best interest of the Town, and this covers a broad range of things, such as economic growth, quality of life, resource protection and safety issues. She stated nobody denies the benefits of a strong economic base and tax revenue but the Planning Board is here to serve the people of Hopkinton and the Town should have control if something is proposed which would be detrimental. She stated her concerns include preservation of water resources and potential contamination through discharge through sewer into the aquifer. In response to a question of Ms. Thomas, Mr. Weismantel stated the Town has a 2-tier water rate schedule to encourage conservation because until a few years ago there were capacity concerns, and the schedule is reevaluated on a yearly basis. In response to a question of Mr. Ollenborger, Ms. DeVeuve noted the Town has had a water problem for a long time, and the 25-year agreement with Ashland will have to be renegotiated when it expires. In response to a comment from Mr. Coutinho, Ms. DeVeuve stated the Planning Board should not allow the use by right contingent upon the decisions of other boards or committees. Ms. Lazarus stated the Board should be prepared for these types of questions when it presents the article at town meeting. Ms. Wright stated so far they only talked about Biosafety Levels 1 and 2 but Town Counsel refers to Levels 3 and 4 as well, and Ms. Lazarus stated right now the Bylaw does not mention any levels at all, so all are allowed by special permit. Ms. Lazarus stated that the voter’s reaction at town meeting to seeing a reference to Level 4 could be an issue, and she suggested taking it out because it is extremely unlikely that one would be proposed or that the Town would want that level of activity. Mr. Karp moved to submit the proposed amendment as drafted into the warrant with the changes made by Town Counsel without the reference to Biosafety Level 4 and to recommend the article to town meeting. Mr. Coutinho seconded the motion and the Board voted 6 in favor and 2 opposed (DeVeuve, Wright). f. Restaurants, Industrial B District Mr. Coutinho stated the original draft was revised as a result of input received from the Planning Board during a previous discussion and now includes limits on seating capacity and business hours for the use by right, and anything else would require a special permit. Mr. Coutinho moved to submit the article into the warrant with the changes made by Town Counsel and to recommend that town meeting adopt the change. Mr. Karp seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. 7 g. Retail Stores in Industrial A, Industrial B and Office Park Districts Mr. Coutinho described the proposed amendment and stated he hopes it will provide retail services to companies and their employees in these districts. Mr. Weismantel asked if the Chamber of Commerce is in favor, and Mr. Coutinho stated yes, it was their suggestion. Mr. Coutinho moved to submit the article into the Warrant with the changes made by Town Counsel and to recommend the amendment to town meeting. Ms. Thomas seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. h. Zoning Change – 91 Grove Street Mr. Coutinho stated the property has been in commercial use for over 60 years. He noted the ZAC unanimously voted in favor for rezoning of the property from Residence A to Business. Mr. Weismantel referred to the letter from Town Counsel indicating that this is not spot zoning. Ms. Lazarus stated Town Counsel notes that one component of that is if Board has a legitimate planning concern with respect to the use and location, such as if this is a suitable location for business. Mr. Coutinho stated it probably will never go back to a residential use, and Mr. Karp stated the lot is not big enough. There were no comments from the public on the proposal. Mr. Coutinho moved to submit the article as drafted with Town Counsel’s corrections into the Warrant and to recommend the change to town meeting. Mr. Karp seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. i. Off-Street Parking Ms. Lazarus submitted a letter from Town Counsel received after the meeting packet was distributed. Mr. Weismantel stated the change was proposed by a student as a “green” initiative. Mr. Coutinho moved to submit the article into the Warrant as drafted with corrections made by Town Counsel and to recommend the change to town meeting. Ms. Thomas seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Mr. Ollenborger moved to close the public hearing, Ms. Thomas seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Documents:  Draft Zoning Bylaw and Map Amendments – Summary  Letter to Hopkinton Planning Board from Miyares and Harrington LLP, dated 2/27/2012 re: Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments – Off-Street Parking - 2012 Annual Town Meeting  Letter to Hopkinton Planning Board from Miyares and Harrington LLP, dated 2/23/2012 re: Proposed Zoning Map Amendment – 91 Grove Street - 2012 Annual Town Meeting  Letter to Hopkinton Planning Board from Miyares and Harrington LLP, dated 2/23/2012 re: Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments – Small Retail Stores - 2012 Annual Town Meeting  Letter to Hopkinton Planning Board from Miyares and Harrington LLP, dated 2/23/2012 re: Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments – Restaurants in Industrial B Districts - 2012 Annual Town Meeting  Letter to Hopkinton Planning Board from Miyares and Harrington LLP, dated 2/23/2012 re: Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments – Life Science – Industrial A District - 2012 Annual Town Meeting  Letter to Hopkinton Planning Board from Miyares and Harrington LLP, dated 2/23/2012 re: Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments – Life Science – Industrial B District – 2012 Annual Town Meeting  Letter to Hopkinton Planning Board from Miyares and Harrington LLP, dated 2/23/2012 re: Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments – Continuing Care Retirement Community - 2012 Annual Town Meeting  Letter to Hopkinton Planning Board from Miyares and Harrington LLP, dated 2/23/2012 re: Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments – Medical Offices - 2012 Annual Town Meeting 8  Letter to Hopkinton Planning Board from Miyares and Harrington LLP, dated 2/23/2012 re: Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments – Health Services Facility - 2012 Annual Town Meeting  Letter to Hopkinton Planning Board from Miyares and Harrington LLP, dated 2/23/2012 re: Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments – Site Plan Review - 2012 Annual Town Meeting 5. Continued Public Hearing – Reservoir View – Open Space and Landscape Preservation Development Special Permit – Christopher P. Olson It was noted the applicant has requested another continuance of the public hearing. Mr. Coutinho moved to continue the public hearing to March 26, 2012 at 7:35 P.M., at the request of the applicant. Mr. Ollenborger seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. 6. Other Business a) Minutes - Ms. Thomas moved to approve the Minutes of the meeting on January 23, 2012. Mr. Coutinho seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously in favor. Document: Draft Minutes January 23, 2012 b) Legacy Farms update – It was noted that the Board has received an application from Pulte Homes of New England, LLC/Legacy Farms, LLC, for site plan review of the remaining residential development for the south side of Legacy Farms, consisting of a variety of duplexes, single family homes and simplexes. Mr. Weismantel stated he would like to get the application electronically. Ms. Lazarus stated she would distribute the materials, and it was noted that the submission is complete except for elevation drawings which will be submitted next week. Mr. Weismantel noted he is concerned about starting a new application just before elections with the possibility of Board membership changes, and would like to get a feeling from Fay, Spofford & Thorndike, the Board’s consultant, as to their review schedule for a public hearing on 3/26. He noted the Board should probably schedule a site walk. Ms. Lazarus stated Pulte Homes and Legacy Farms also submitted an application to amend the Legacy Farms Master Plan Special Permit to modify the buildable areas on the approved Master Plan. She stated the Board has to determine if the proposed change in Buildable Area is minor or significant, which would require a public hearing. She presented a colored map of the site indicating the proposed changes. The Board asked for Ms. Lazarus’ input on the matter, and Ms. Lazarus stated it appears as though the Curtis Rd. neighbors will be affected by the change at least, and a public hearing would be a good idea. It was decided that the proposed change is significant requiring a public hearing to be held concurrently. Document: Legacy Farms “Buildable Area Exhibit”, dated 2/10/12 prepared by Bohler Engineering c) Legacy Farms Wastewater Treatment Facility - Mr. Weismantel stated the applicant is working on answers to the list of questions he submitted. Ms. Lazarus noted the public hearing has been scheduled on 3/12/2012 and the meeting will be held at the Hopkinton Middle School Lecture Hall. d) Liaison Reports  Downtown Initiative Steering Committee – Ms. Thomas asked about updates, and Mr. Weismantel stated there were a couple of information sessions with another one scheduled this week. Mr. Weismantel asked Ms. Lazarus to notify the Board regarding the next 9 meeting, and Ms. Lazarus stated she will send an email. Ms. Lazarus stated the committee is still in information gathering mode.  Community Preservation Committee – Mr. Weismantel provided an update on the decisions made by the CPC on articles for town meeting. He stated the Committee voted in favor of purchasing land on Hayden Rowe St. near Chestnut St. but decisions are still pending on other sites under consideration.  Student Government Breakfast – Mr. Weismantel reminded Board members of the 3/23/2012 Student Government Breakfast. Mr. Weismantel and Mr. Coutinho stated they are planning to attend, and asked Ms. Wallace to RSPV to the Town Manager’s office on their behalf. Other Documents Used at the Meeting:  Agenda for 2/27/12 Planning Board meeting  Memorandum from Elaine Lazarus to Planning Board, dated 2/23/12 Adjourned: 9:00 P.M. Submitted by Cobi Wallace, Permitting Assistant APPROVED: March 12, 2012