The meeting at the Hopkinton Planning Board was dominated by a discussion regarding the site plan amendment for 85 through 89 West Main Street, which involved potential EV charging station installations. The applicant, Andrew Steiner, sought a waiver from the EV parking regulations, arguing that compliance would increase project costs from under $10,000 to over $50,000. Steiner highlighted the site’s physical constraints, contractual obligations, and operational challenges as reasons for the waiver request. Notably, approximately 50% of the parking spaces were within a 100-foot wetlands buffer, complicating any construction efforts. Furthermore, existing contracts reserved a portion of the parking spaces for Uni Bank and handicap use, which were deemed unsuitable for EV charging stations.

The board conducted a straw poll to gauge support for the waiver, resulting in six members opposing it, one in favor, and one abstention. This decision was influenced by concerns that installing EV chargers could exacerbate existing parking issues, especially given that nearby charging stations were reportedly underutilized. Additionally, the board recognized the potential impact on Starbucks, which had lease provisions prohibiting reductions in parking capacity.

In parallel, the board engaged in a detailed examination of a bond reduction request for the Diana Farm subdivision. The applicant sought to revise the bond amount to reflect work done exclusively within the town’s right-of-way, which reduced the bond from the original $124,000 to $12,900. Concerns from the consulting firm Tai and Bond were noted, particularly regarding labor and equipment costs. However, the board decided to approve the bond reduction, acknowledging the urgency of allowing the applicant to commence the project.

Additionally, the board addressed the Form K lot release for the Chestnut subdivision, which aimed to create four new homes and redevelop an existing one. The developer requested the release of lots one and four, following the previous release of lots two, three, and five. With no issues preventing the approval, the board unanimously endorsed the release of these lots.

Regarding the parking site plan at 85 through 89 West Main Street, discussions also touched on the historical context of parking arrangements, referencing a 2017 site plan that had allowed for additional spaces. Participants expressed skepticism about the consistency in the planning process, questioning the documentation of previous approvals and the absence of a peer review process. The conversation highlighted the challenges of balancing parking needs with environmental and operational constraints.