The Planning Board at a special hearing Monday received public feedback on the three zoning overlay district proposals that would allow Hopkinton to be in compliance with the MBTA Communities Act. The most vehement complaints were from residents of the condominium developments who felt that considering their homes was “pitting neighbors against neighbors.”

Under the MBTA Communities statute, also referred to as 3A, 177 cities and towns that are in the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority’s service area must approve new zoning that would encourage multifamily housing near public transportation options. The denser housing, in theory, would encourage more people to take the T and depend less on cars. It also would help meet the state’s demand for more housing.

Hopkinton was designated as an MBTA-adjacent community because of its proximity to the Southborough commuter rail station. As such, it would be required to zone for 750 housing units at a density of 15 units per acre for 50 developable acres.

Principal Planner John Gelcich stressed that the law is not requiring that the units be built, only that the zoning be in place.

The three proposed zoning overlay districts were reviewed at this meeting with the intention of narrowing down the options the Planning Board submits for the Nov. 18 Special Town Meeting warrant to one or two choices. They were identified previously by the Zoning Advisory Committee in September and presented to the Planning Board in early October as the most viable options for compliance.

The first option, which was narrowly defeated at May’s Annual Town Meeting by a 118-126 vote, includes a portion of the downtown area, The Preserve condominium complex, the Carbone’s Restaurant property on Cedar Street and two parcels adjacent to it. The other two options under consideration also include the downtown area, with some tweaking of the boundaries. One proposal contains the Indian Brook condominium complex, while the other option incorporates the Walcott Valley townhouse condominium community.

Near the end of the discussion, Planning Board chair Rob Benson proposed a fourth option. It would contain a smaller downtown area, The Preserve and Walcott Valley. This option will be reviewed in greater detail at the Planning Board’s next meeting on Nov. 4.

He added that choosing among the three proposals was like “pitting neighbors against neighbors.”

Condo residents stress fears about potential displacement

Member Karen Wills said she was concerned that putting an overlay district in place would create a “slippery slope” where the state could eventually seek that the units be built. She also asked that Planning Board members consider how they would feel if their properties were included.

Some residents and abutters of The Preserve, Indian Brook and Walcott Valley agreed, asking why these communities were included if they were already developed. Two concerns raised were the threat of eminent domain or being pressured to sell their condos to developers with nowhere else to go.

Benson reiterated throughout the meeting that the zoning was being “forced upon” Hopkinton and the other MBTA communities. The board’s task was to come up with zoning that would cause the least detriment to the town and not spur development in the near future. He also acknowledged that all proposals would impact the town. Not approving one would preclude Hopkinton from receiving state grants and potentially cause the town to be sued by the state for noncompliance.

Said Benson: “We’re trying to come up with solutions when, as a community, we didn’t set out for this as our individual objective.”

Zoning Advisory Committee chair Ted Barker-Hook explained that the three options were identified because they are “in the spirit” of the act’s objective of increasing public transit use and are not likely to be developed “in the foreseeable future.” They also are in locations where there already is dense housing, although he noted that open space and businesses also were considered by ZAC.

Residents of The Preserve called out the Planning Board and the Zoning Advisory Committee for presenting the first option again despite its being voted down in May. Cheryl Gladstone said it was “a [disrespect] to the residents of Hopkinton” to have the community under consideration again.

Ken Weismantel, a former Planning Board and ZAC chair, agreed, calling it “an insult to Town Meeting” to have it reconsidered.

Residents of the three condo complexes said that none of them should be considered. Alison Rettman, a Walcott Valley resident, said she felt the condo communities were “being used as a sacrifice for the town.”

Eric Wieland, a board member of The Preserve’s homeowners association, said he believed no options should be presented “that have people living on the properties.” He added that, via attorneys, The Preserve asked the Planning Board and the Select Board not to consider this community, but the residents have yet to receive a response.

Stressed Wieland: “You can call it a condo, but it’s home to us.”

“This isn’t a conspiracy,” said member Parker Happ, noting that a zoning overlay creates more potential property uses. “Nobody’s taking away your property rights.”

Added member Michael King: “We’re not doing this with any secret plan in the background or any coordination with the state.”

Shane Diaz, the president of the Indian Brook homeowners association board for the past 24 years, noted that much of the land surrounding the development is wetlands or conservation land. Other Indian Brook residents raised environmental concerns as well as the potential of being displaced from their homes by eminent domain or pressure from a developer to sell.

Benson explained that eminent domain would not be a factor. He said a developer would have to buy all the condos in a development, raze them and build new housing. The homeowners association would have to have a steep majority of condo owners support this plan, with percentages varying by individual homeowners association.

Donald Jackson raised concerns about the lack of infrastructure in the Upper Cedar Street district. Benson noted that this would discourage development and an influx of school-aged children into an already overburdened school system. The developer would be responsible for utility upgrades, Gelcich added.

Benson encouraged everyone to attend the Special Town Meeting and make their opinions known. He also suggested reaching out to state Rep. James Arena-DeRosa and Senate president Karen Spilka to express concerns.