Dear Hopkinton Community –
Unfortunately, I will be out of the country on a business trip for the 2024 Annual Town Meeting, but as the Chair of the Planning Board, I’d like to share details of why I am supportive of Article 39, the MBTA Communities Zoning Bylaw.
Our goals with the MBTA Communities Housing were three-fold.
- Comply with requirements of the law – doing so ensures that Hopkinton will not be sued by the state for non-compliance.
- Align with the spirit of the law – Rather than react to developer’s proposals, we can proactively place future housing efforts in the parts of town that make the most sense.
- Minimize the negative impact or disruption to Hopkinton – Critical that we minimize development that would put further strain on our schools and town services.
I am proud of the work that ZAC, the Planning Board, and our Town Planner have done to identify parcels that meet all these objectives. Here are some additional details on each.
Cedar Street Zone – This zone consists of “The Preserve” condominiums across from the Hopkinton State Park and several parcels across the street including Carboni’s. All properties are within easy walking distance from Southborough train station, making them well suited to comply with the law. However, development of these properties is very unlikely. There is not any sewer or municipal water service at these locations making a large-scale development virtually impossible. Furthermore, re-development of “The Preserve” would require 75% of homeowners to agree to sell or re-develop.
Downtown Zone – This zone comprises several properties from the 85/135 intersection up to the Free Mason building. The current zoning downtown already allows for dense housing (sometimes denser than what would be allowed with MBTA Communities Zoning) but doing so requires mixed-use development which includes desirable commercial square footage. As an example, the current Hopkinton Drug property can support mixed-use housing density of approximately 25 units per acre, while the new MBTA communities housing would allow for approximately 15 units per acre. While this zone is not near the train station, downtown is considered a reasonable place to build denser housing as it supports local businesses and restaurants.
We also looked at numerous other parts of town, but none of them met our objectives the way our selected parcels do. For example, utilization of South Street parcels would have further shifted our tax base away from commercial and may have accelerated growth of housing units. Most undeveloped land would likely also accelerate growth of housing units and effect our school enrollment. We even looked at re-zoning existing high-density developments such as Legacy Farms or on Lumber Street, but doing so was not in the spirit of the law and risked compliance to the law.
Your vote on this article should NOT be based on whether or not you support dense housing. It SHOULD be based on the implications for Hopkinton.
With a Pass vote, Hopkinton expands zoning on several parcels, but with very low likelihood that anything substantial is developed in the foreseeable future.
With a Fail vote, Hopkinton will lose access to current and future grants and likely be sued by the state costing tax-payer dollars. Depending on the outcome of the lawsuit, Hopkinton may be required to implement new zoning anyways, and in the worst case may have less control over where the new zoning goes.
As of May 1st, there are 44 municipalities that have already approved MBTA housing. Please support Hopkinton in passing this practical, balanced, and thoughtful article.
Vote YES on Article 39.
Gary Trendel, Chair @ Hopkinton Planning Board, 31 Chamberlain Street
Nope!
Craig – I am curious… what are your concerns? Which of the properties do you think is going to get built out?
Gary- I just don’t like the big government bullying the cities and towns within the Commonwealth. We shouldn’t have to be Forced into building housing. The school system is already overwhelmed, traffic is at a standstill every morning and afternoon. The citizens of our community only have a say where these housing units will be built, not if they get built. That’s just wrong! I would urge the Town of Hopkinton to fight this as several other towns are, including Milton, which boarders the City of Boston.
Just to clarify…. Nothing is being built, and based on the sites selected, developers won’t be building much either. I understand your perspective about the state over-reaching, but I think we found a solution that won’t be built out for at least the next 20 years if not longer. Case in point, dense housing is already allowed by right downtown but it hasn’t happened. There is a lot of mis-information out there…. Hopefully people understand that neither Hopkinton or the state will be building anything.
Gary just a simple question. If this passes will it restrict the Carbone family from being free to develop land they have owned and been taxed on for generations?
Huh? I’m not sure why you asked that. Why would Carbones be restricted now or it it passes?
The act simply requires re-zoning.
Craig, just to clarify, Milton is only appealing their designation, not the law itself. They have been clear that they support the law in general, but their concern is that they don’t think having the Mattapan Trolley Line stop in their town should cause them to be named a “Rapid Transit Community” and be held to the requirements of such a community. Here’s an article for reference: https://commonwealthbeacon.org/opinion/mattapan-trolley-is-a-unicorn-says-milton-official-in-letter/
Sorry, I’m not spending town money to fight this. The town line is right at the T station and is an excellent candidate for housing near a station. Besides, like Gary said, this isn’t forced building.
No. It will be addititive to currently allowed uses.
Steve, the Carbone family has the absolute right to sell or not sell to anybody they choose. The MBTA Communities Act does not require that any land owner sell to anybody at all, and there is zero discussion of anything being taken by eminent domain.
The owners at the Preserve do not want to be re-zoned. We live here. To offer properties that won’t be developed is a gamble. The state will see what communities are doing by offering parcels that can’t or won’t be developed. The properties here near the park “probably” won’t be developed for many years but is this all a good idea? We at The Preserve do not want to be re-zoned and we are asking our fellow citizens to vote no to this article. The planning board can look at other sites or the town can fight the state on this law.
We, the residents of The Preserve want to know that we are protected and our right to reside is not threatened. Please vote No to this article.
Eric – your rights are still fully protected. Only the home owners association, with 75% approval, can decide to sell. Your right to reside is NOT threatened.