Enough Time for All The Questions!

Holliston Reporter

The April 15th meeting of the Holliston Planning Board began as scheduled at 7:00pm.  Chair David Thorn called for the re-opening of the Public Hearing on the proposed development at 555 Hopping Brook Road.  A peak of 168 participants logged into the Zoom meeting to ask questions that the Board would forward on to CRG Integrated Real Estate Solutions, the developer of the project.

The Board set a curfew for the meeting of 9:00pm.  It turned out that everyone who had a question, had the opportunity to ask the question before the meeting adjourned.

Mr. Thorn prefaced the Hearing by stating that to date 52 speakers have commented at previous sessions of the Public Hearing.  Also, 132 letters or electronic communications have been received and reviewed by the Board.

Town Counsel, Jay Talerman (above), stated that CRG had recently sent some updated materials that have not yet been thoroughly reviewed.

The ground rules for this session discouraged presentations and focused on questions that citizens had for CRG to answer – at the May 6th Planning Board meeting.

During the course of the meeting, 22 different people asked questions.  6 of the questioners were from Medway.  Several of the questioners referenced materials that they had previously sent to the Planning Board as the basis for their questions.

Below is a list of questions asked of CRG through the Planning Board:

  • The W.H.O. lists diesel exhaust as a carcinogen.  Is this appropriate in a residential area – especially for children?
  • Has a sound study been done at an actual facility similar to the proposed site?
  • What is the length of the proposed left-turn lane on Washington St into Hopping Brook?
  • Will traffic waiting to turn left block the Weston soccer field parking area?
  • What is the quality of life / safety impact of increased truck traffic crossing the Upper Charles Rail Trail on Hopping Brook Road?
  • Who is actually authorized to apply for the special permit?
  • Is the Board considering not approving the application?
  • Has an air quality study been done?
  • Were the abutters notified of the hearing?  Planning Board responded, yes.
  • Will a list of abutters be posted?  Planning Board responded, yes.
  • Did the sound study presented by CRG include the scenario that ALL loading docks will be operating at the same time?
  • Can / should a new traffic / environmental study be required of the developer?
  • Has the Town Public Safety officials approved the life / fire safety plan?
  • What is the frequency of the noise disruptions (intermittent loud sounds)?
  • Is there a similar size / hours of operation facility that residents can visit / study?
  • What is the proper Land Use Code to use when modeling truck traffic generated by the facility?
  • What will happen when the planned second building of 700,000 sq. ft. is built?
  • The air handlers on the building are above the proposed berm.  Can the air handlers be relocated to reduce the noise pollution for neighbors?
  • How will stormwater runoff from this huge, covered area be properly handled?
  • Is there a standby water supply for firefighting?
  • Would CRG be willing to limit overnight truck traffic?
  • Will CRG require tenant to use electric-powered ‘yard dog’ tractors?
  • Will the developer do a more thorough study of vernal ponds in the area?
  • How will incoming trucks be quickly dispatched to avoid backups and excessive idling?
  • Has CRG budgeted for studying the impact on Medway – especially the social and emotional well-being of children?
  • Are we coming to an end of this hearing / conversation? Planning Board responded, no it will “likely continue for some time.”
  • How will all aspects of any approved permit be enforced?
  • How will we “put the Genie back in the bottle” if the tenant is not a good neighbor?
  • Why does CRG want to build here given the vocal public opposition?
  • Where will diesel trucks refuel?
  • Where will trucks “hang out?”
  • How will this site be managed 10 years in the future?
  • How many company-owned trucks are anticipated?
  • How will downtown Holliston traffic be affected?

Attorney Talerman closed by stating that the session was very productive session and that he took a lot of notes.

Mr. Thorn thanked the participants for their time and participation.  The Hearing was continued to May 6, 2021 at 7:00pm.

The meeting adjourned at 8:54pm.

Comments and input can be sent to the Planning Board through the Town Planner, Karen Sherman, 703 Washington Street, Holliston, MA 01746 OR shermank@holliston.k12.ma.us.

3 thoughts on “Enough Time for All The Questions!

  1. Thank you for posting this list of questions. There were over a hundred questions asked, showing that the citizens of town are watching this process carefully and are following the data and the issues in a fact-based way. This is a legacy project; it will affect life in Holliston for generations. “Local Reporting by Local People” makes a difference, so that all points of view can be heard.

  2. The CRG developer for Hopping Brook said they do not know who the buyer will be for 555 Hopping Brook but the Metrowest Regional Planning Board has said it will be Amazon. Why not tell the truth to the people of Holliston?

    1. Hi Margaret. It looks like the report you are referencing is from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council and can be found here, with the relevant info appearing on page 21 and 22: https://www.mapc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Feb2021-Ecommerce-Report.pdf

      However, the source provided for this claim (Chapter 3, reference 11 in the report) is a Holliston Town News article from August 2020 (https://www.hollistontownnews.com/2020/08/27/325856/holliston-and-medway-residents-concerned-over-hopping-brook-proposal). In this article, there is no evidence that Amazon will be involved with 555 Hopping Brook. In fact, this article explicitly points out that the Amazon connection is merely resident speculation. It seems like sloppy research and fact checking by the MAPC is the cause of what appears to be this erroneous connection between 555 Hopping Brook and Amazon.

Comments are closed.