Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20091102 - Planning Board - Meeting Minutes HOPKINTON PLANNING BOARD Monday, November 2, 2009 7:00 P.M. Hopkinton Town Hall MINUTES MEMBERS PRESENT: Mark Abate, Chairman, John Coolidge, Vice Chairman, Joe Markey, Sandy K. Altamura, Carol DeVeuve, David Auslander, Ken Weismantel, John Mosher, Claire Wright …. Elaine Lazarus, Planning Director …. Cobi Wallace, Administrative Assistant 1. Minor Project Site Plan Review - 71 West Main St. – Paul Lee It was noted the Board received a request from Paul Lee, applicant, to withdraw the application for minor project site plan review. Mr. Auslander moved to grant the request for withdrawal, the motion was seconded by Mr. Coolidge, and the Board voted unanimously to grant the request to withdraw the application. 2. Administrative Business  Bills – The Board voted unanimously to authorize payment of an outstanding bill.  Minutes – The Board voted unanimously to approve the Minutes of October 19, 2009 as amended. 3. Auciello Oaks Ms. Lazarus stated Michael Auciello, developer, informed her that he has made the repairs to Auciello Dr., as requested by the DPW. She stated a long term solution to roadway maintenance issues is necessary, however, because the road is getting older and will need further repairs in the future. She stated Mr. Auciello would like the Town to accept the road as a public way, but one of the subdivision approval conditions required it to remain private. Ms. Wright asked about a homeowners association, and Ms. Lazarus stated the development was intended to be a family subdivision and no association was formed. Mr. Abate asked about a quid pro quo in this situation, and Ms. Lazarus stated Mr. Auciello does not own any lots other than his own and she did not discuss the subject of money with him. Mr. Abate stated he does not like reversing a previous Board’s decision. Ms. Wright stated there is no homeowners association to take care of repairs and this is what could happen with all the family subdivisions in Town. Ms. Altamura arrived at this time. Ms. DeVeuve stated the DPW Board discussed Auciello Dr. at a recent meeting and the subdivision approval/agreement with the Town does not say anything about snowplowing. Ms. Lazarus stated the Town usually plows private ways, and Ms. DeVeuve stated the DPW Board is debating whether they should continue doing this. Mr. Auslander asked what this means to the residents of the street. Mr. Coolidge stated the residents could submit a petition to Town Meeting for road acceptance. He stated the Board should find out if the road needs a lot of repair Hopkinton Planning Board – Minutes – November 2, 2009 2 and the long term solution could be road acceptance, but the Town should make sure this does not happen anywhere else. He stated the Town could use the performance guarantee funds to get the road up to standards and take it from there. Mr. Auslander expressed concerns about setting a precedent. Mr. Coolidge stated this is a drawback with family subdivisions. Ms. Altamura stated if there was a homeowners association the residents would be monitoring the condition of the road. Ms. Wright asked if the Board can put some teeth in its decisions for private subdivision roads by requiring a homeowners association, and Ms. Lazarus stated this is done now, but wasn’t in 1992. It was noted that the developer lives in the subdivision at the present time. Ms. Wright asked about recourse for the Town, and Ms. Lazarus stated there is no enforcement left under the Subdivision Rules & Regulations once all lots are released. Ms. Altamura asked if the Town could step in if there was a homeowners association that does not do what it is supposed to and then bill them. Ms. Lazarus stated a homeowners association could be formed now. Tommy Paparazzo, 6 Auciello Dr., stated he and 2 other homeowners are in favor of road acceptance. He noted the repairs requested by the DPW were done a week ago but the residents’ primary concerns are stormwater drainage and icing problems at the intersection with Hayward St. during winter. In response to a question from the Board, Mr. Paparazzo stated he moved to Auciello Dr. a couple of years ago, but all the other residents are original owners. Ms. DeVeuve asked about snowplowing, and Ms. Lazarus stated it is not addressed in the decision. Ms. DeVeuve noted the DPW wrote to the residents to let them know the road could not be plowed unless repairs were made. Mr. Abate stated the Board should ask J.T. Gaucher, DPW Director, to look into the condition of the road. Ms. Wright stated she would first like to see whether the necessary repairs were done. Mr. Coolidge stated he is not proposing the Town take over the subdivision but to have Mr. Gaucher evaluate the condition of the road. Ms. Wright stated she would like to see a homeowners association there. The Board decided Ms. Lazarus will contact Mr. Gaucher for his input. 4. Other Business  Low Impact Development (LID). The Board discussed the use of Low Impact Development techniques. Mr. Mosher stated he has been trying to get information about LID applications in the Pine Hills development in Plymouth. Mary Pratt, 102 Fruit St., stated she attended a recent 495/ Metrowest meeting and has asked the engineer working on a 40B development at the former Nike factory site in Wayland to contact Ms. Lazarus to provide additional information on LID methods. Ms. Lazarus referred to a study distributed to the Board which was done over two winters in New Hampshire. She stated it showed that LID methods worked better than conventional systems. It was noted there are maintenance requirements for both LID and conventional methods. Ms. Wright asked how a homeowners association would handle LID maintenance and whether the Town’s DPW has the required equipment. Ms. Lazarus stated the Town has to plan for the future maintenance.  Meeting Dates. The Board set January 25, 2010 as a meeting date. Hopkinton Planning Board – Minutes – November 2, 2009 3  Downtown Planning. Mr. Markey stated that Laura Barry, Trustee, Hopkinton Public Library/Co-Chair, Library Building Committee, would like to come back to update the Board on the new library project. Ms. Lazarus stated Ms. Barry should call to set up a date.  Housing Committee. Mr. Coolidge stated there is a vacancy on the Housing Committee. It was stated that Mr. Abate had been designated by the Board as its representative. Ms. Lazarus stated there has been some confusion regarding Planning Board representation or membership on the Housing Committee. Mr. Weismantel arrived at this time. 5. Continued Public Hearing – Bridle Path – OSLPD Concept Plan Special Permit Application – P M Realty Trust It was noted the applicants are still working to resolve a disagreement with the owners of 3 and 5 Appaloosa Circle and are requesting a continuance of the public hearing. Ms. DeVeuve moved to continue the public hearing to January 25, 2009 at 7:30 P.M., Mr. Auslander seconded the motion, and the Board voted 8 in favor with 1 abstention (Mosher). 6. 81-83 Main St. – Site Plan Review – Request for Extension – Strazzulla/Straly Corp. Joe Strazzulla, applicant, appeared before the Board. He stated he would like a 3-year extension of the site plan approval granted for construction of an office building at 81-83 Main St., due to poor economic conditions. He stated market conditions are soft for potential tenants, and his original prospect relocated to another property in Hopkinton. He noted this uncertainty, combined with poor economic conditions, make it hard to get financing. He stated there already are vacancies at his 81 and 85 Main St. properties, as well as on South St., and these will probably absorb the demand for office space in the near future. It was noted that the Board can only extend the approval for a maximum of 2 years. Ms. Wright moved to grant a 2-year extension of the site plan approval for 81-83 Main St., Mr. Coolidge seconded the motion and the Board voted 8 in favor, 1 opposed (DeVeuve) on the motion. 85 Main St. – Mr. Coolidge referred to Mr. Strazzulla’s minor site plan approval for restoration/renovation of 85 Main St. including window replacement discussed at the previous meeting. He noted he did some research and it appears that restoration/replication of historic windows is a viable, more durable option and might even be cheaper than purchasing new mass produced windows for the building. He noted there seem to be a lot of people who do this type of work. Mr. Strazzulla stated his dilemma is creating a double barrier with a “dead zone” of air in between layers of glass, not just restoring the windows. He noted he received information from Ms. Wright on the subject also. Mr. Mosher stated he has additional information, and Mr. Strazzulla requested it be emailed to him. The meeting was suspended until the specified time for the next agenda item. 7. Drowne Family Subdivision (Saddle Hill Road) Dan and Nancy Mercer, 68 Saddle Hill Rd., developers, appeared before the Board to discuss the draft Declaration of Trust document for the Drowne Family subdivision. Mr. Abate stated Ms. Lazarus has recommended changes to the document including clarification of ownership of the Hopkinton Planning Board – Minutes – November 2, 2009 4 common area/roadway and changing the term “open space” to “common area” because there is no open space. Ms. DeVeuve pointed out a couple of inconsistencies in the document with respect to the number of subdivision lots. She asked why a resignation from the Trust has to go to the Registry of Deeds when only a simple letter is needed to join. Mr. Mercer stated he does not know what the reason is, but will ask his attorney about it. Mr. Weismantel stated the document appears adequate, and Ms. Lazarus asked that a revised document be submitted with the corrections requested by the Board. The meeting was suspended until the specified time for the next agenda item. 8. Continued Public Hearing – Legacy Farms Master Plan Special Permit Application – East Main St., Clinton St., Frankland Rd., Wilson St. – Boulder Capital LL/Legacy Farms, LLC Roy MacDowell and Steven Zieff, Legacy Farms LLC, applicants, appeared before the Board. Fred Merrill and Elizabeth Sargent (Sasaki Associates (SA)), David Glenn and Fred Moseley (Fay, Spofford & Thorndike (FST)), and Rich Hollworth (Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB)) were also in attendance. Mr. Abate stated the Board members have not had a chance to finish reading the latest “red-lined” Design Guidelines (DGL) document and will probably not be able to provide 100% feedback at this point. Ms. Wright stated she has read the base document received in the meeting packet and it appears SA’s recommendations are more like wordsmithing and repositioning than actual content changes. Mr. Abate stated the recommended changes appear to be substantial, and Ms. Lazarus stated her comments are more like questions and items the Board should discuss. Mr. Weismantel asked if everyone has received the latest DGL draft. Mr. MacDowell stated they just received the proposed changes today and therefore they are not prepared to give comprehensive feedback at this point, but it would be helpful to hear from FST and SA why they made the changes. The Board reviewed the DGL by section: A. Introduction & Applicability - In response to a question from Mr. Zieff, Ms. Lazarus stated future individual site plans should comply with the new DGL if the Board has amended them in the intervening years. B. Design Principles - Mr. Markey stated when the OSMUD zoning bylaw was adopted, it was anticipated the DGL would go into more detail. He referred to Item B. Design Principles and stated that the effect of the language of #5 would be weak without additional metrics, leaving just a framework in place and nothing more. He stated the language should include a reference to how many of the buildings have to be energy efficient and to what extent. Mr. Zieff stated these are just guidelines pertaining to a long-term project, and the alphabet soup of energy efficiency techniques is constantly changing with even LEED certification being a moving target. Mr. Markey asked if the principles are spelled out somewhere else in the document. Mr. Hollworth stated they are not. Mr. Markey stated at public hearings and forums leading up to the Legacy Farms rezoning the applicants stated they want this to be a showcase development from an energy efficiency standpoint. He stated he realizes there will Hopkinton Planning Board – Minutes – November 2, 2009 5 be a lot of LID components with respect to stormwater management and runoff, but he does not see anything solid in here pertaining to the buildings. Mr. Abate stated the general design principles in the DGL are not meant to be exact. He agreed the language on energy efficiency should be more specific but maybe not in this section. Ms. Lazarus stated a section on energy could be added. Mr. Markey asked how the Town can be competitive in the future if the Board does not give guidance to the developer in this regard now when it has the opportunity. Ms. DeVeuve stated the language needs to progress as time goes on and things change. Mr. Weismantel stated he agrees the Board is looking for a paragraph on energy and the consultants should work on this further. Mr. Merrill stated he feels this is more like a long term planned community and the Board should be careful not to get boxed in too quickly. He stated the application is not that well formulated and the Board has to be comfortable with a little uncertainty. He added the developer has a lot at stake including the possibility of an award-winning development on the State or even national stage. C. Site Treatment & Landscaping - Mr. Zieff referred to language prohibiting removal of plant material without prior approval. He stated Mezitt Agricultural Corp. is still removing plant material from the site, which they are required to do under the agreement by a certain time. Mr. MacDowell stated while going through the development phase there will be a need for significantly more tree removal. Mr. Lazarus stated the intent was that it would only apply to post-development tree removal and landscaping. The Board discussed the requirement for compliance with professional standards of the National Arborist Association and American National Standards Institute. Mr. Zieff stated that compliance with “recognized professional standards” should be sufficient, and Mr. Markey stated he does want to see the language watered down. It was agreed to leave the requirement for compliance in the DGL but add an option of using the services of a registered professional landscape architect. Ms. Wright raised the issue of monoculture tree plantings that could be vulnerable to disease and infestations, and Mr. Merrill stated there can be a mix of species as long as there is consistency. Mr. Markey asked why the use of fences is discouraged, and Mr. Merrill stated they want to see more unrestricted open space with animal habitat in mind. Mr. Mosher asked about grey water recovery and its use for irrigation, and Mr. Zieff stated that at this point it is not going to happen unless there is a change in the state-of-the-art technology and plumbing codes. Mr. Hollworth stated right now grey water recovery is allowed in operations such as snowmaking in ski resorts and golf course irrigation. Mr. Zieff offered the definition of “grey water” and stated its use is not yet considered safe for residential use. Ms. Wright asked if there is a maintenance plan for the restricted open land. She stated it is important to protect the natural environment and avoid excessive disturbance but, if not maintained, the land will quickly get overgrown, first with weeds, invasive plants and then trees. Mr. Zieff stated this would be similar to other restored farms where the fields are maintained by regular haying, farming, or like in an Andover, MA example by introducing goats. He stated the intention is to have a series of maintenance requirements so that there will no unwanted reforestation. Hopkinton Planning Board – Minutes – November 2, 2009 6 Mr. Weismantel asked about active recreation areas and whether the DGL would affect or prohibit town ballfields. Mr. Zieff stated it basically means the field should be designed sensibly. Ms. Wright stated it appears the sentence that would address this issue had been taken out of the Restoration of Restricted Land/Active Recreation Areas section and it could left in. Mr. Coolidge stated wetlands next to active recreation would be a problem, and Mr. Merrill stated the transition between the restricted open land and an active recreational use should be gradual. D. Buildings and Structures - Mr. Zieff stated he feels it would be helpful to include definitions for the various dwelling and building types planned for Legacy Farms. Ms. Lazarus stated she is not in favor of having definitions for terms that are not used in the DGL, as they are not necessary. She added the terms are used in the OSMUD zoning bylaw, and that would be the place to define them, although they could be defined in the MPSP as well. Mr. Zieff stated he is open to taking the definitions out, but with 940 dwelling units of all different types planned for the entire site it is important to have them somewhere. Ms. Lazarus stated the terms are not used in the DGL, and if they are listed there, then they will just pertain to the DGL and would not be where they are needed. Mr. Abate stated the definition language should be taken out of the DGL and be included in the MPSP. Ms. Altamura stated it should be spelled out somewhere for future use. Mr. MacDowell stated Legacy Farms will consist of multiple neighborhoods which will have a different feel but be in harmony with each other. Mr. Auslander stated he does not want every section of the development looking exactly the same. Mr. Merrill stated there will be a lot of changes in methods and technology over the next 5 years with respect to green development and LID. He stated future Boards will be implementing the guidelines and the appropriate place for structure definitions should be up to Ms. Lazarus. Ms. Lazarus stated if the definitions are not in the Zoning Bylaw, they should be in the MPSP because it is the document that future Boards will refer to every time they review an application. It was agreed they should be in the MPSP. Architectural Standards - Mr. Zieff asked if height is specified in the Zoning Bylaw, and Ms. Lazarus responded yes. Mr. Zieff stated Legacy Park will have large buildings and Boulder Capital agreed to see the facades broken up. He noted the concept in the DGL is right but the maximum dimensions are not. Mr. Weismantel suggested putting in different absolute numbers for the various categories (Legacy Park, apartments, etc.). Mr. Abate asked about guidelines regarding energy use and efficiency, and Mr. Markey asked if this section of the DGL would be an appropriate place to get specific either with the number of buildings or percentage of energy efficiency. Ms. Lazarus stated it can be inserted here. Mr. Merrill stated maybe LEED would be helpful, and Mr. Hollworth stated they have studied this issue in connection with the MEPA filing and should be able to lift language from there. Mr. Markey stated he would be interested in seeing that language and they have to make sure the wording is consistent with that of other regulatory documents. Mr. Abate stated there is an element of time and maybe they should add some standards around energy efficiency as defined at the time of development. Mr. Mosher referred to the use of a rating scheme to help maintain contemporary standards. Hopkinton Planning Board – Minutes – November 2, 2009 7 Ms. Pratt referred to the paragraph on mechanical roof equipment and recommended taking out “wherever possible” at the end. Ms. Altamura asked if it could create a loophole. Mr. Abate stated the Board needs to decide whether it needs to strike similar language throughout the document and asked Ms. Lazarus to review. He noted leaving this type of language here could be an “out” clause and the Board has to be reasonable but firm. Mr. Merrill stated the Board should leave itself some flexibility to avoid unintended consequences. Mr. Abate stated a future Board could exercise its own judgment. Mr. MacDowell stated he does not mind making changes and is willing to work with Ms. Lazarus to address the Town’s and their own concerns. Mr. Markey stated the screening of mechanical roof equipment should be addressed as long as the language does not result in a conflict with respect to the use of solar panels. Ms. Wright referred to Ms. Lazarus’ question regarding the impact of garage entrances relative to aesthetics. She stated from a design review standpoint garages are a huge element and part of aesthetic goals, and future designers should not get the impression that the Town just wants to get pedestrians in quickly regardless of aesthetics. It was agreed to modify the language accordingly. E. Streets and Infrastructure - Mr. MacDowell stated it would be helpful to sit down with FST and SA to talk about LID methods. He stated FST wants wider streets and they are looking for a village type development along the lines of Pine Hills. Mr. Moseley and Mr. Glenn joined the discussion. Mr. Moseley stated FST’s comments on general road design are mainly for discussion purposes. Mr. Glenn stated the Legacy Farms plans are very conceptual, laying out 9 different individual developments, and FST would like to see specific plans for every one of these developments before they can go along with some of the proposed design guidelines. Mr. Zieff stated he understands what FST is saying but right now they are just trying to design what is around the individual development pods and not necessarily what is in the pods. Mr. Hollworth stated he understands FST’s request for more information and offered to color code the streets to make the plans easier to follow. He noted the overall objective is to integrate LID methods and make the development look more like Pine Hills with respect to roads and view corridors. It was noted that only Legacy Farm Rd. will be subject to the Hopkinton Subdivision Rules and Regulations. Mr. Abate stated the applicants and consultants should get together and find common ground with respect to the next DGL sections, and Mr. Weismantel stated the Planning Board should provide guidance. He stated he agrees with FST with respect to Legacy Farms Rd. north of the North Club Village, which should be designed for speeds more than 30 mph. He noted there are only 10 curb cuts there and the road will connect major roads like Rt. 135 and Rt. 85 with speed limits of 40 and 45 mph respectively, and the intent is to get people through faster and more efficiently. He stated the DGL initially listed road grades of 10 to 12 % which is on the high side, but there are sections of the road where that could be allowed. Mr. Weismantel stated the applicant should explain which sections of the road they intended for 12% or more because there might be trade-offs. Mr. Hollworth stated they have that information and are trying to cope with topography. Mr. Merrill stated another approach could be the use of performance standards rather than geometric standards like they did in Hopkinton Planning Board – Minutes – November 2, 2009 8 Pine Hills. Mr. Zieff asked if the Board will allow them to have a workshop session with VHB, FST and SA at Town Hall to go through the issues and narrow the focus. Ms. Pratt stated the applicants have to address what the Town’s DPW wants because of maintenance issues. Mr. MacDowell stated Legacy Farms Rd. will be the only public road in the development. Ms. Wright stated she is not comfortable with the Board giving a directive to have the road designed for 50 mph. Ms. Altamura stated the roads should be narrower, but the Board should not hamstring itself either, as it is a huge site with a lot of grade changes. She stated allowing a 12% grade would eliminate the need for huge cuts and fills, but this should be evaluated on a section-by-section basis. Mr. Markey stated the new road will connect with higher speed limit roads but some parts can be slowed down. Ms. Lazarus stated she will set up a date and time for the workshop and it will be posted as a Planning Board meeting if there will be a quorum of members attending. The Board voted 8 in favor with 1 abstention (Mosher) to continue the public hearing to December 7, 2009 at 7:30 P.M. The Board discussed possible dates for a second meeting in December and it was decided to add December 15, 2009 (Tuesday) for the purpose of continuing the Legacy Farms MPSP public hearing. 9. Special Town Meeting 12/14/2009 It was noted that the Board already voted to submit four articles into the Warrant for the December 14, 2009 special town meeting. 10. Other Business Mr. Zieff stated there will be a site walk of the Legacy Farms property at the request of the Hopkinton Trails Club on Sunday, November 8, 2009 at 1:00 P.M. starting at the end of Curtis Rd. Adjourned: 9:55 P.M. Cobi Wallace, Administrative Assistant APPROVED: November 16, 2009