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