Draper Proposal

Hopedale has a $50M dream

By Christopher Gavin / Daily News Staff

Posted Jul 5, 201

8 at 6:56 PM Updated Jul 6, 2018 at 6:27 AM

Hopedale’s Draper factory renewal plan will cost nearly $50 million and will include more than 500

residential units and commercial and industrial space. Funding for the project would rely heavily on state,

federal and private sources.

First of two parts

HOPEDALE – The extensive plan set forth by selectmen and other town officials to redevelop the long-

dormant Draper Corp. factory site would cost nearly $50 million to bring in more than 500 residential units

and commercial and industrial space.

“The Draper Falls Urban Renewal Plan,” filed this week in the Town Clerk’s Office, would rely heavily on

state, federal and private funding to see through its estimated price tag of $49.9 million, the plan indicates.

“There’s a lot of different financing mechanisms,” Selectman Thomas Wesley said Thursday in an

interview. “Clearly, the goal here is to have joint investment here.”

The 42-page document filed Monday spells out several financial means Hopedale can consider regarding

how to carry out the 13 phases, over two decades, needed for the project.

Here are a few key points:

Private, state and federal funding could make up almost $30 million. Town officials estimate a total of

$29,970,450 in various grants and programs could potentially cover the majority of the project’s expenses,

according to the plan..

Other money contributed by the town could come through the use of a “district improvement financing plan”

– a mechanism under state law that allows municipalities to channel tax dollars to a particular

redevelopment area involved in a public-private partnership.

The urban renewal plan shows Hopedale could match the initial investment of $10 million put forth by

developers through the financing plan.

Major expenses include planning, demolition and amenities. Among the most costly parts of the urban

renewal plan are the planning, site engineering, permitting and design portions, which total an estimated

$4,995,300, according to the project’s budget.

Last month, Wesley said the town would seek to keep as much of the 1 million-square-foot factory for reuse

as possible, although portions of the site – unoccupied for nearly four decades - would likely need to be

demolished.

Demolition expenses are budgeted for approximately $5,875,000, with the demolition of the remaining

portions of the Hope Street bridge budgeted at an additional $190,000, the plan says.

Wesley said Thursday the plan calls for considering moving Town Hall into the planned 170,000 square

feet of commercial space at the site with the potential to make the existing Town Hall into condominiums.

The new 12,000-square-foot residences could cost $2,460,000, according to the plan.

Other aspects of the plan call for $1,050,000 for new synthetic athletic fields; $950,000 for a new

Department of Public Works building; and $2,850,000 for site remediation.

Acquisition of properties

There are 26 sites that make up the proposed project, including properties that are owned by the Town of

Hopedale and by private owners.

Twenty of those parcels would need to be acquired, with 16 owned by either Hopedale Industrial Center,

LLC, or Hopedale Properties, LLC.

Phillip Shwachman is principal of both groups.

“Based on current highest and best use, these private properties combined would have a negative net

valuation and therefore it is anticipated the owner will most likely attempt to donate them to the town,” the

plan says regarding properties owned by Shwachman.

When reached Thursday, Shwachman said he had no comment on the plan because it had not yet been

shared with him.

However, Wesley said several options for land acquisition can be considered, including through purchase,

donation or agreements.

Upcoming public hearings, meetings

The Planning Board is set to meet at 7 p.m. Wednesday in Town Hall, 78 Hopedale St., to discuss a

concept plan for the site with Selectman Brian Keyes, according to a meeting agenda.

Selectmen will discuss the plan at 6 p.m. Thursday in Town Hall with state Secretary of Housing and

Economic Development Jay Ash, according to a copy of the agenda.

A public hearing on the urban renewal plan, organized by selectmen, is also scheduled for 6 p.m. on July 16

in the Hopedale Junior-Senior High School auditorium, 25 Adin St.

A report on other aspects of the urban renewal plan will appear in Saturday’s edition of the Daily News.

Hopedale mill, downtown revitalization could cost $50 million

The former Draper mill site takes up 100 acres of Hopedale's downtown.

by Zachary Comeau

Worcester Business Journal

The total cost to redevelop the vacant Draper Corp. mill and revitalize 139 acres of land the center of

Hopedale would cost an estimated $50 million.

In a new Urban Renewal Plan filed with the Town Clerk's office, the town calls for nearly $30 million in state

and federal funding for the project, dubbed Draper Falls.

The town -- via a district improvement financing tax method -- and developer Draper Falls LLC, owned by

Milford builder Kevin Lobisser will invest a total $20 million.

The conceptual plan includes demolishing much of what remains of the 1-million-square-foot Draper Mill

and building new a new housing community overlooking Hopedale Pond.

The remaining 73,000-square-feet of space would be transformed into condos or apartments. Also

included are commercial and business opportunities and transforming the remaining portion of the mill

into a mixed-use building.

There are even conceptual plans to include office space for a new Town Hall, Department of Public Works

facility and potentially a new athletic field.

The town will need to assemble 20 different parcels, 16 of which are owned by First American Realty and

its CEO Philip Shwachman. The plan does not call for any acquisition costs related to those parcels due to

the negative net valuation of the crumbling properties.

"It is likely the current owner will most likely attempt to donate these properties to the town and take

advantage of any tax write-off he may be entitled to," the plan says.

The largest costs, according to a breakdown, are site preparation at nearly $9 million, and planning, legal,

financing and managing the massive project, which would run the parties about $16 million.

Now, the project needs approval from several town boards, including the Board of Selectmen and Planning

Board.

A public hearing on the proposal is scheduled for July 16.

The town was once close to executing a similar plan more than a decade ago. However, the committee

charged with the plan stopped meeting after the 2008 economic crisis.

A new Downtown Revitalization Committee began meeting late last year and used many of those same

materials to conceive of a new plan that could dramatically transform a town in need of an economic boost.

The mill, which once fueled the local economy, has been vacant for about 40 years. The Draper Corp. was

once the largest maker of textile looms in the country and employed thousands of local workers until it

ceased operation in the 1970s.

ousing will fuel Draper factory reuse in Hopedale, plan says

By Christopher Gavin / Daily News Staff

Posted Jul 6, 2018 at 6:53 PM Updated Jul 6, 2018 at 6:53 PM

Second of two parts

HOPEDALE - The urban renewal plan that envisions over 500 residential units and 170,000 square feet of

commercial space on the site of the former Draper Corp. factory indicates Hopedale’s desirability as a

place to live will play a key role in bringing the plan to fruition.

The residential aspect of the “Draper Falls Urban Renewal Plan” is the factor needed to make the $50

million transformation a reality, says the 42-page plan, released this week.

Housing makes the project feasible for developers to finance it, according to the plan.

As the document says, Hopedale residents pay a premium to live where they do.

“If the design, construction, and pricing is ‘on point,’ people will come to live in Hopedale and support the

redevelopment as well as providing housing options for young people that grew up in Hopedale but are

unable to afford the current housing stock and are forced to move outside the town they grew up in,” the plan

says.

“Housing is the engine that can drive the overall feasibility because the market for housing has been

historically strong and deep.”

The plan calls for a mix of duplex, townhouse and condominium units - 565 units in total - that will offer new

views for the public of the Hopedale Pond and parklands while revitalizing the town’s center.

In the plan, town officials write that the Grafton and Upton Railroad - whose tracks run across the 77 acres -

has capability of financing portions of the project.

They anticipate signing a development agreement with the railroad company to make it the project’s

developer through its subsidiary, Draper Falls LLC, the plan says.

Milford-based developer Kevin Lobisser is listed as the principal of Draper Falls LLC - formed in May - in

records filed in the Massachusetts Secretary of State’s office.

But large portions of the proposed site are privately owned, with 16 of the 20 properties that the town would

need to acquire owned by either Hopedale Properties LLC or Hopedale Industrial Center LLC.

Philip Shwachman is principal of both companies.

The plan says the properties combined could have a negative net value because of their current condition

and the owner may attempt to donate them to the town.

Shwachman had no comment about it Thursday because the plan had not yet been shared with him, he

said.

Selectman Thomas Wesley said the town could consider several options in the acquisition, including by

purchase, agreements or donation.

“I still remain very excited about the future of Hopedale in this development and it’s our fervent desire that all

parties can amicably agree as to how to proceed,” Wesley said in an interview Thursday.

Here are other key points in the plan:

Job creation, economy growth

Local officials see the revitalization of the Draper factory property as necessary for new economic growth,

according to the plan.

Commercial space at the site could house all sorts of new businesses, from offices to a grocery store,

banks, restaurants and an assisted living facility, the plan indicates.

Construction would generate approximately 200 temporary jobs, with about 100 permanent jobs once the

project is completed, the plan shows.

An environmental approach

The urban renewal plan, by revitalizing town center areas, will help protect those spaces from unnecessary

future development, the document says.

The plan also states that cleaning up of the brownfield, or contaminated, property would better serve local

ecosystems.

Officials would also explore the possibility of installing a hydro-power generator at the falls under the

Freedom Street dam and solar energy panels on roof-tops and carports to provide electricity to the site, the

plan says. Rainwater could be collected for irrigating the property.

Upcoming meetings

The Planning Board will meet Wednesday at 7 p.m. in Town Hall, 78 Hopedale St., to review a concept plan

for the site, a meeting agenda says.

Selectmen are set to meet at 6 p.m. Thursday in Town Hall with state Secretary of Housing and Economic

Development Jay Ash, according to an agenda.

A public hearing on the urban renewal plan is also scheduled for 6 p.m. on July 16 in the Hopedale Junior-

Senior High School auditorium, 25 Adin St.

Hopedale board postpones Draper vote

By Cesareo Contreras / Daily News Correspondent

Posted Jul 12, 2018 at 6:20 PM Updated Jul 12, 2018 at 7:48 PM

HOPEDALE - The Planning Board has postponed until next month a vote on a plan to economically revitalize

the site of the former Draper Corp. property, after its principal property owner complained he was not

adequately informed of the undertaking.

Making his case before the board after an overview of the nearly $50 million “Draper Falls Urban Renewal

Plan” presented by Grafton and Upton Railroad President Michael Milanoski on Wednesday, Philip

Shwachman, owner of the former Draper Corp., called the plan “a land grab by the railroad company,” and

that he only learned about the plan just a few days prior.

“The statutory conditions of taking my property as part of the urban renewal plan simply have not been

satisfied,” he said. “This plan is not well thought out. This plan is a land grab by the railroad company.”

Wednesday’s meeting was meant to serve as an opportunity for the Planning Board to get a general

overview of the concept and take a vote on whether it believed the plan is consistent and in line with the town’

s overall comprehensive plan - an essential decision needed for the urban renewal plan to move forward,

Milanoski said.

The plan calls for a number of changes to the property, including the construction of more than 500

residential units, as well as the reallocation of up to 175,000 square feet of the property for commercial,

recreational and industrial uses.

The plan, created by selectmen and other town officials, aims to address the 35-year question of what to do

with the vacant facility and “strengthen the heart of Hopedale, the town center, and sustain the quality of life,”

according to a 37-page document filed with the town clerk outlining the concept.

Milanoski said the town had reached out to the railroad company about a year ago to help expand on a study

the town had put out in 2007 to determine how the town could redevelop the Draper property.

In a public-private partnership with the town, Grafton and Upton Railroad has stated it will invest in the

development of the project, according to the urban renewal plan.

“The urban renewal plan is really the vehicle to help implement that 2007 study,” Milanoski said.

The document states the plan will help create 200-plus temporary jobs during construction of the

redevelopment, and 100-plus jobs once it is completed.

Seconds before the board was set to vote on the concept plan, Shwachman took the floor to speak.

“No one ever contacted me from the town,” he said.

Shwachman said he had inquired about being part of the planning process earlier and was told to call

Grafton and Upton Railroad. He said he first met with selectmen regarding the issue only the previous day. It’

s not clear whether he has contacted the railroad company.

In addition to not being made aware of the plan earlier, Shwachman said he also took issue with a number

of assertions brought up in the document, including a claim that he would most likely donate the land to the

town due to his property having “net negative valuation.”

“I’ve got millions of dollars invested in this property,” he said. “Nothing could be further from the truth. There

is no way I’m going to donate it to the town.”

Of the 140 acres the town is seeking to develop, 77 acres is property that Shwachman owns.

Shwachman also said many comments about building contamination were without merit, as he has spent

millions of dollars cleaning up the property.

Taking into account Shwachman’s claims, the Planning Board held off on voting on the proposal until its

next meeting on Aug. 1 to allow Shwachman an opportunity to review the plan.

The Board of Selectmen had planned to meet Thursday with Secretary of Housing and Economic

Development Jay Ash to discuss the renewal plan, but that item was removed from the agenda. A public

hearing on the urban renewal plan remains scheduled for 6 p.m. Monday at Hopedale Junior-Senior High

School.

Hopedale residents cite schools, public safety during hearing for proposed Draper Corp. development

By Cesareo Contreras Daily News Correspondent

Posted Jul 16, 2018 at 10:58 PM

HOPEDALE - Residents Monday night pointed to a lack of infrastructure, the possibility of overcrowded

schools and overwhelming public safety officials at a public hearing hosted by selectmen that discussed a

proposed development at the former Draper Corp. site.

Selectmen attempted to gauge community reaction to the nearly $50 million “Draper Falls Urban Renewal

Plan,” and more than 100 residents attended and nearly a dozen spoke. Selectmen gave an overview of the

plan.

Outlined in the plan is the construction of more than 500 residential units, as well as the development of up

to 175,000 square feet of the property for commercial, recreational and industrial uses.

Major topics of discussion included how Hopedale’s school, fire and police systems will accommodate the

increase in single-family residential units, traffic flow, and the next steps forward after the hearing had ended.

Philip Shwachman, property owner of nearly 80 acres of the 140 acres planned for development, also

appeared at the meeting with his attorney, Douglas T. of Radigan of Bowditch & Dewey, LLP. Shwachman

repeated statements he made during last week’s Planning Board meeting that the concept plan is full of

inaccuracies and that he was not consulted prior to the concept plan being filed to the clerk’s office.

Selectmen also held off on voting on the urban renewal plan, because the Planning Board has yet to vote on

if the plan is consistent with the town’s overall comprehensive plan.

Citing concerns that the current police force and fire department aren’t properly equipped to handle the

increased load of individuals, resident Tara Cahalane called on selectmen to take a closer look into securing

enough police officers are hired to accommodate more people.

“I don’t think we have the infrastructure right now to support that,” she said.

Michael Carpenter called on selectmen to establish a way for the board to explain the process of the urban

renewal plan to make it more digestible to the town.

Video of Monday’s hearing will appear online sometime on Tuesday.

Hopedale Selectman Tom Wesley.

Click here

to go to Tom's

statement about the proposal to develop the Draper property.

opedale selectmen to address Draper-related Open Meeting Law violation

By Alison Bosma

[email protected]

Posted at 8:21 PM Updated Jul 27, 2018 at 10:35 PM

HOPEDALE – Selectmen will handle an Open Meeting Law complaint Monday night, filed on behalf of a man

who owns the majority of the town’s signature landmark.

The town has compiled a plan to develop the largely vacant former Draper Mill complex, through a

combination of commercial and residential use. The plan has been presented at least one public hearing,

and officials intend to submit it for state approval after it clears local boards.

In mid-July, attorney David Lurie filed an Open Meeting Law complaint against Hopedale’s three selectmen

after a meeting in which selectmen discussed the property. Lurie represents Philip Shwachman, principal the

companies that own nearly 80 acres of the 140 acres officials hope to develop.

The complaint claims selectmen improperly discussed the Draper complex plan in executive session July 12.

Shwachman attended the meeting that evening, but left after selectmen told him the public agenda item

containing the Draper complex plan would be removed.

Selectmen later went into executive session to talk about the plan, according to the agenda.

“Such action was in violation of the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law,” Lurie wrote.

Town Administrator Steven Sette said the issue is a clerical error.

Selectmen cited the incorrect language, out of the handful of state-sanctioned reasons, for going into

executive session that evening, he said. The board used reason three, which allows discussion out of the

public eye for collective bargaining or litigation. It should have used reason six, which is for real estate

discussions.

″.We are being transparent with the process and are answering the complaint as is required by the statute,”

Sette wrote in an email.

The board will also release minutes from the executive session Monday night, he said.

Lurie’s letter also references the town’s July 16 public hearing on the plan, the original agenda of which

included a vote by selectmen. Lurie claimed selectmen could not vote on the plan without prior approval by

the Planning Board.

“If you do proceed to hold a public hearing on the Plan and/or Agreement,” Lurie wrote, “you should not hold

any vote but rather continue the hearing .... to allow Mr. Shwachman - who was excluded from the process of

preparing the Plan even though his properties comprise the bulk of the Plan - to have input into these very

important decisions that will have substantial financial and other consequences for the Town.”

Shwachman attended that public hearing and said the plan was full of inaccuracies, and that he had not been

consulted in its creation.

The voting portion of the July 16 meeting did not take place, and selectmen will meet jointly Wednesday with

the Planning Board to discuss the Draper complex plan.

A call to Shwachman was not returned.

Draper owner: Property ‘won’t be ‘stolen from me’

By Cesareo Contreras / Daily News Correspondent

Posted Jul 29, 2018 at 12:01 AM Updated at 11:23 PM

HOPEDALE — Selectman Tom Wesley says Hopedale officials didn’t discuss the drafting of the recently

unveiled “Draper Falls Urban Renewal Plan” with a key property owner because they were under the

impression that he was not interested in developing the site.

But that property owner, Philip Shwachman of Worcester-based First American Realty Inc., says that’s not true.

The nearly $50 million urban renewal plan aims to economically transform the site of the vast - and long

vacant - Draper Corp. site and the area surrounding it.

In a video about the plan posted July 20 on Facebook, Wesley cites two recent discussions he and another

town official had with Shwachman as evidence to back up their claim.

First, in a conversation with Shwachman on May 10, Wesley said Shwachman informed him that he was

marketing the site, stating that “my development days are over.”

Second, after the development plan was made public earlier this month, Wesley said Shwachman had a

conversation with Town Administrator Steven Sette during which Shwachman said he’d be willing to sell the

land to the town and, should the right developer be retained, “might be willing to put up my own money for a

piece of the action.”

Of the 26 parcels envisioned for redevelopment, 16 are owned by Shwachman. He first acquired a portion of

the properties in 1990, and has acquired others over the next 25 years

But in a recent interview with the Daily News, Shwachman said some of his comments were “taken out of

context” and that the Facebook video was an “inaccurate conclusion on my discussions with the town of

Hopedale.”

Furthermore, Shwachman said those conversations are an inadequate excuse as to why the plan was

developed “secretly” from him.

“I’ve had numerous discussions with the town in the past year on other operational matters, and they never

once brought this up,” he said.

Reclaiming its destiny

The plan calls for the redevelopment of 140 acres of land for more than 500 residential units and up to

175,000 square feet for commercial, recreational and industrial use.

The main goal of the project, as explained in the renewal plan, is to develop a mix-used development on

property that town officials have deemed a blighted safety hazard and which has plagued the town - which has

a limited commercial tax base - for more than 30 years.

Wesley said the plan acts as a vehicle for Hopedale to reclaim its “destiny.” Without the plan, Wesley said the

town of about 6,000 residents is at the mercy of a “speculator” who “has never offered to develop that property.”

“Mr. Shwachman has had his development interest at heart with this property, and I understand that,” Wesley

said. “What we’re trying to do is put the needs of this community, front and center - to defend this town.”

Along with housing units and space for industrial, commercial and recreational endeavors, the plan calls for a

number of other changes, including a potential relocation of Town Hall, the reconnecting of Fitzgerald Drive

and the creation of a new athletic field.

One difference from a previous study in 2007, on which the new plan is based, is the town’s partnership with

the Grafton and Upton Railroad. Town officials reached out to the rail company to serve as their “preferred

developer” early in the process, because it now owns some of the land envisioned for redevelopment.

In turn, the plan notes, the Grafton and Upton Railroad established a joint partnership with Milford developer

Kevin Lobisser, “a well-known and also respected developer in the Greater Hopedale region.”

Working together, the two entities will be known as Draper Falls LLC, the plan explains. Lobisser serves as

principal.

Town officials estimate that $30 million of the plan will come from private, state and federal funding, primarily

through grants and special programs.

An additional $20 million could come from the town through so-called “District Improvement Financing,” in

which communities channel tax dollars into targeted redevelopment districts, and from Draper Falls LLC,

according to the plan.

Also noted in the plan, under a future land disposition agreement with the rail company, selectmen would

“transfer the acquisition parcels for redevelopment and implementation of the project to the Grafton and Upton

Railroad.”

Grafton and Upton Railroad President Michael Milanoski said in an interview that the purpose of the

agreement is “to have an experienced and financially capable development team with decades of experience

in housing, commercial and industrial development use their combined experience to properly remediate the

properties following to DEP and EPA regulations.”

Aspects of that remediation would include services such as fixing sewer issues, demolishing buildings,

installing new water and sewer lines, building new roads and removing any leftover asbestos and lead paint,

he said.

Additionally, the plan notes that selectmen and other town officials will review each phase of development and

that certain performance and timetable standards will have to be met.

“Once the infrastructure is completed, they will be turned back over to the town as public roads and utilities,”

Milanoski said. “This is about a public-private partnership with the town of Hopedale to jointly redevelop the

project in the town’s best interest.”

Shwachman’s involvement

Now that Shwachman has reviewed the plan, selectmen hope to come to an agreement with him and have

him work in partnership with the town and Grafton and Upton Railroad.

But Shwachman said he believes aspects of the plan are ill-conceived and misleading. He also takes issue

with the possibility of the land being taken from him through eminent domain, as the town has deemed it as

decadent.

He sees that is as “a land grab by the Grafton and Upton Railroad.”

Given his 50-year career in real estate, Shwachman said he is “a recognized expert in valuation” and

estimates that his 77 acres are worth more than $10 million.

And in response to claims made by Wesley that he is “speculator” and not a developer, Shwachman said

millions of dollars have gone into demolishing and cleaning up the property, and in removing asbestos and

other contaminants.

Wesley said he is unsure how Shwachman came to a valuation north of $10 million, but added the town is

willing to come to some type of an agreement with him. He is unsure what such a partnership would look like.

“It’s up to Mr. Shwachman to decide whether he wants to participate - whether he wants ‘a piece of the action’

or not,” Wesley said. “This project will go on, with or without him.”

Shwachman said he’s had a productive relationship with the town in the past, and was an active participant of

the Draper Rescue Complex Committee that created the 2007 study on which the urban renewal plan is

based. He said he can’t stand by the new plan, however, especially because it was developed without his

involvement.

A better plan, according to Shwachman, would involve the town sending out a request for proposal to find the

“best and brightest and most successful” developers to submit proposals for the revitalization of the area.

“That was my intention - to sell or joint-venture my property with others - and I suggest it’s the most

appropriate process for the town to follow as well,” he said. “I would be pleased to follow independently on my

own or with them.”

In Shwachman’s estimation, partnering with the Grafton and Upton Railroad may not be in the town’s best

interest.

“Why would the town want an entity controlling their downtown that might use the pre-emption of the federal

railroad commission?” he said.

He is also reluctant to trust Milanoski, whom he said “seems to have a controversial past,” primarily based off

Milanoski’s previous work experience as executive director of the Attleboro Redevelopment Authority and

financial issues surrounding an industrial business park project in that community a decade ago. (

https://bit.

ly/2LX3UX6

)

But Milanoski said Shwachman is “using an apples-and-oranges comparison to another project that has

been implemented per its original intent,” and that the comparison is “out of context.”

Shwachman has hired Ted Carman, president of Concord Square Planning Development Inc., the developer

who helped craft the Draper Complex Reuse Study in 2007, to review and comment on the Draper Falls Urban

Renewal Plan.

Shwachman has also hired legal counsel and plans to do everything necessary to protect his land, he said.

“I’ve spent many years and millions of dollars acquiring and improving the properties, he said. “There is no

way I’m going to allow it to be stolen from me.”

What’s next

Selectmen hosted a public hearing on July 16 to gauge residents’ thoughts on the undertaking, and plan to

hold more in the future.

The Planning Board will review the plan on Wednesday on whether it believes the plan is consistent with the

town’s overall comprehensive plan. The board was originally scheduled to vote on the plan earlier this month,

but held off after Shwachman said he hadn’t yet familiarized himself with it.

The results of Wednesday’s meeting could determine whether selectmen can go forth and take a vote on the

plan and move it along for state approval.

McLay Proposal for Draper Property, 1987 Draper Plan from 2006

.Demolition at the Draper Plant - 2020 - Hopedale Street

Demolition of the Draper Plant - 2020-2021 - Freedom Street

Draper Menu G&U Railroad Menu HOME

Hopedale selectmen, Planning Board canceled meeting about Draper buildings

By Alison Bosma

[email protected]

Posted at 1:33 PM Updated at 2:41 PM

HOPEDALE - A joint meeting scheduled for Wednesday, to discuss a comprehensive plan for the town’s

signature Draper Mill complex, has been canceled.

Selectmen and the Planning Board were expected to review the Hopedale Draper Falls Urban Renewal Plan

Aug. 1, after a public forum July 16.

The plan proposes both commercial and residential uses for the empty acres of downtown buildings, and

has been opposed by Philip Shwachman, principal of the companies that own the majority of the Draper Mill

complex. Shwachman’s chief complaint has been that he has not been included in the process of

developing the plan.

Small town’s big eyesore

Hopedale officials again seek to develop vacant factory and transform the

community

By Emily Williams, Boston Globe Correspondent August 09, 2018

HOPEDALE — For more than a century, the Draper Corp. factory stood at the center of this small town,

serving as its economic base and prime benefactor. But in 1980, the company, once the country’s leading

producer of textile machinery, closed for good.

Nearly 40 years later, the vast brick factory still looms over the Mill River, a ghost of a bygone era. Despite

multiple plans for redevelopment, the complex remains a vacant eyesore, casting a long shadow over the

town’s efforts to reinvent itself.

“When Draper left, it left a hole in Hopedale’s psyche,” said Tom Wesley, a selectman in this town of 6,000,

about 30 miles southwest of Boston.

Now, after years of false starts and dashed hopes for the property, the Board of Selectmen has introduced a

new plan — a $50 million mixed-use development that would preserve some of the property’s historic

character.

Calling the property a “scar across the center of Hopedale,” the plan envisions more than 500 residential

units and as much as 175,000 square feet of retail, industrial, or recreational use, an ambitious project that

would transform the quiet town center.

Draper Mill in Hopedale, which the town has targeted for redevelopment after many previous failed attempts.

“This is Hopedale’s first real chance to define itself,” Wesley said. “This plan is the result of more than 30

years of frustration.”

In keeping with the longstanding struggles to redevelop the property, there’s a catch. The plan calls for Phil

Shwachman, who owns the factory and a number of surrounding parcels, to donate his land to the town,

estimating that cleaning up the property will cost more than it’s worth. If he doesn’t, officials say they would

consider seizing the land by eminent domain.

Shwachman has “put a stranglehold on the development of the town” by allowing the factory to sit vacant

since he bought the property nearly 30 years ago, Wesley said.

But Shwachman, who owns a real estate company in Worcester, said his properties are worth far more than

that, and bristled at the prospect of the town taking his land without market-rate compensation.

“I’m getting railroaded here,” Shwachman said. “I won’t stand for that.”

He said he has spent millions on the complex over the years, demolishing 14 structures, clearing debris

and furnishings from the buildings, and disposing of a “tremendous volume of asbestos.”

In 2007, Shwachman participated in a town study of the property and was interested in pursuing

development then, he said. As a result, he was surprised to hear that town officials had been meeting for

the past year to discuss redevelopment plans without notifying him.

Wesley and Town Administrator Steve Sette said town officials didn’t tell Shwachman because they didn’t

think he would be interested.

Sette said the town is willing to purchase the land from Shwachman but hasn’t been presented with a price.

While the plan’s budget includes $120,000 in legal costs related to eminent domain, Sette said that option

is “always the last resort.”

‘This plan is the result of more than 30 years of frustration.’

Despite the clash, Shwachman said he agrees with town officials that it’s well past time to redevelop the

site into “a productive part of the Hopedale community again.”

That goal has been vexingly elusive. The momentum from the town study in 2007 was quickly stalled by the

economic downturn, and by the time officials revisited the issue, the Grafton & Upton Railroad had bought

the railroad that runs through the property, adding a new complication.

The railroad’s owner, Jon Delli Priscoli, has agreed to work with the town as a developer and invest $10

million in the project. The town will also contribute $10 million, Sette said, and officials hope to fund the rest

through grants.

Delli Priscoli, the developer behind the revival of the Edaville Family Theme Park in Carver, says he sees

tremendous potential in the Draper site.

“I don’t know why Hopedale has waited so long,” he said.

Hopedale was founded as a utopian commune in 1842 by prominent minister and abolitionist Adin Ballou.

When the commune failed several years later, its assets were taken over by wealthy community members

Ebenezer and George Draper, who eventually established the Draper Corporation.

The town’s street names harken back to the community’s aspirational origins — Hope, Peace, Social, and

Union — and the Draper legacy runs deep.

The Town Hall, a 2½-story mass of Milford granite and reddish-brown sandstone, was dedicated in 1887 as

a memorial to George Draper, who had planned, built, and paid for the building. Across the street from

Town Hall is the Unitarian Church, also planned and built by the Drapers.

Hopedale is exceptional for its origin story and close ties to the Drapers, said local historian and longtime

resident Dan Malloy.

“It’s almost impossible in New England to find anything quite like it,” Malloy said.

But decades after Draper’s last employees locked the factory doors behind them on Aug. 29, 1980,

residents are ready to move on.

“We are past the nostalgia,” Wesley said. “We’ve run out of patience.”

At a public hearing about the plan in mid-July, some community members expressed concern about the

impact of more than 500 residential units on such a small town. But officials say the change would be

gradual, allowing the school system and police department to adjust over time.

“I don’t think there’s anyone in this town that doesn’t think we need to take the most blatant eyesore in town

and do something with it,” said Carole Mullen, who directs the town’s Council on Aging. “The question is

what’s right for Hopedale.”

Comments to the Globe article:

There are three now and this property is an eyesore!! Shwachman needs a dope slap before they take this

property by eminent domain. Imagine doing this to a whole town. Jerk.

cbolon08/09/18 01:48 PM

The former Draper Company factory is a handsome example of nineteenth century industrial architecture--

anything but an "eyesore." If it were located in the Seaport district of Boston, it would honored by

preservationists, Globe reporters, always driven by company politics rather than by news, would seek out

favorable opinions rather than angry ones

jjshello08/08/18 11:23 PM

Hopedale is a jewel of a small town. Not sure of the tax rate and if the tax base can support needed

services, but it appears to be absolutely lovely. It is right next door to the much bigger town of Milford that

offers lots of needed (non tax services) such as supermarkets, retail shopping, access to I-495, a decent

hospital and more.

Looks like a great place with an excellent quality of life. Not familiar with the property in question but I hope

they can work something out.

smack52208/09/18 08:31 AM

How is it possible to have such an opinion of this town but be "unfamiliar with this property in question"? It

is an enormous structure set in the center of this jewel of a small town and impossible to be unfamiliar

with.

jjshello08/09/18 09:29 AM

Smack,

I had reason to be in the center of town of several occasions. Wasn't doing any deep research such as

what one might do if they are considering moving into the community.

It just seems like a nice sma

ll town and wholesome charm.

Olivette08/09/18 12:21 AM

I can't stand greedy, selfish owners like the one in the article. He obviously doesn't need the money or he

would not let the building just sit there for so long.

This is reminding me if the Druker company and how they let that beautiful Shreve, Crump & Low building

sit there and rot for so many years. They also own many of the vacant stores on that block.

I used to work at the Colonnade Hotel, owned by Druker, and he would make restaurant employees work

on Thanksgiving just so he and his wife could have Thanksgiving dinner there, along with various higher-

ups who felt obligated to attend. Nice.

twik-d08/09/18 05:40 AM

Way to pass judgement on someone you don’t know and read one article abut in the Globe Olivette! The

town was talking behind his back for 2 years. Give me a break, property owners do want to develop but not

at the risk of losing their shirts. Its called private property for a reason.

richstan08/09/18 05:54 AM

He's owned it for 30 years and has done nothing with it. I don't blame the town for doing what they're doing.

Show more replies (5)

user_349688008/09/18 05:56 AM

POOR OLIVE HAD TO WORK ON THANKSGIVING! STOP FEELING SORRY FOR YOURSELF!GROW UP

mikestatic08/09/18 06:25 AM

Go away, ignorant child - no one needs to hear the contents of your empty mind.

Jeanne35708/09/18 07:22 AM

With all caps user is probably some addled old phart who is just learning to use a computor.

mikestatic08/09/18 06:28 AM

If Shwachman is that lame of an investor that he can’t make something work after 30 years, instead of

feigning anger he should thank Hopedale for paying him anything for it. He has done nothing but fail in his

attempts to profit from it, it is time to let more talented people take a crack at it.

Jeanne35708/09/18 07:25 AM

He did remove all that asbestos which is a shame since EPA is now letting contractors use it sgain. Lung

cancer, asbestosis for everyone!

FransBevy08/09/18 09:12 AM

Did he have to remove the asbestos for liability purposes? He doesn’t sound too philanthropic.

DennisByron08/09/18 07:15 AM

30-40 years ago, the investor was betting on the Wangs, Primes, Digitals and Data Generals expanding

forever, moving south along 495 and needing more and more floor space.

Turned out to be a bad bet maybe because -- my recollection -- then Hopedale town fathers were a tough

group to do business with and did not really want expansion. So DG and Prime built in next-door Milford.

Digital built in next-door Franklin. A big mega car dealer built in next door Mendon.

But it's still the owner's

play

jvc12308/09/18 07:36 AM

The town should condemn the buildings and issue a demolition order, Thirty years is long enough...

jvc12308/09/18 07:42 AM

This whole thing is a sheist. The only possibility for development is through urban renewal or some other

government purchase. The owner simply holds out and demands big money for dangerous, abandoned

buildings. The buildings look dangerous to me, and should be torn down.

AL500008/09/18 08:56 AM

Sounds like an uninformed opinion to me. What "looks dangerous" about the building, and why is tearing it

down the solution?

Justthedata208/09/18 08:10 AM

The factory building is beautiful - I hope they can preserve it. The grounds are a mess which is probably

what everyone is complaining about.

johnson908/09/18 08:31 AM

These old buildings cannot be replaced.It doesnt make sense to knock it down when it can be repurposed.

JackBstn08/09/18 08:37 AM

The article doesn't mention Hopedale's newly formed historical commission attempting to make this

property part of a historical district. I cant think of a better way to stifle development and over-complicate a

situation .

dubsar08/09/18 09:51 AM

"I removed asbestos!" cries owner.

Congrats, dude, you just complied with minimum applicable legal standards for selling the property. Your

sainthood papers are being drawn up right now.

dubsar08/09/18 09:53 AM

Hopefully Hopedale's town planners are consulting with the folks who successfully converted mills into

multiuse buildings in Lowell and Easthampton. Both took a while to fill up, but now are bustling and

contributing to the towns again.

AL500008/09/18 10:37 AM

Why Lowell and Easthampton? How about old mills in Newton, Waltham, Needham, Medway, Walpole

(where one was just torn down to make room for new condos), others?

The state has a publication on converting old mill buildings:

https://www.mass.gov/service-details/smart-growth-smart-energy-toolkit-modules-mill-revitalization-

districts-mrd

marymelon152208/09/18 10:08 AM

i've lived a stone's throw from the plant for 35 years and can't believe that it hasn't gone up in a huge

conflagration like so many other old mill buildings. i was on the property once taking pictures and saw

electrical cabinets perched on the edge of the mill river, which at that point is contained in a channel of

rocks, and there were signs on the cabinets that read Caution PCB. nice. there used to be many more

buildings but schwacmann had them razed. now only the brick building is left. one summer some scenes

from the bruce willis movie Surrogates were filmed there. as far as the town acquiring it and doing

something with it, my father always used to say when i had a bright idea, I'll clap when i see the parade. i

can't see it being anything other than an enormous expensive headache. the road right beside it was

closed for a while yesterday because apparently water from the pond right next to it was leaking under the

building.

everyone should come out and see it. bring dynamite.

Great building to convert to office or condos. Issue is that the demand for condos in Hopedale is not strong

and major corporations don’t want to locate there due to distance from 495. Add to this construction costs

are high right now.

No hope for Hopedale.

Hopedale is exceptional for its origin story and close ties to the Drapers, said local historian and longtime

resident Dan Malloy.

“It’s almost impossible in New England to find anything quite like it,” Malloy said.

__________________________

Actually, this is a fairly common story in New England. Many towns had a main employer with a factory or

mill. The owner(s) often built worker housing, churches and other amenities. This local historian needs a

bigger lens.

Reply

from me - Dan M

. Yes, true, there are many New England towns similar in some ways. My point (that

didn't get into the article) had nothing to do with the fact that Drapers built worker housing, a church, and

other amenities, as was

also

done in many other towns. It was about the fact that it appears to be in a

unique

situation now. At least the Board of Assessors hasn't been able to find anything quite like it. The

difference

is size and location. It seems impossible to find another old factory of its size that's not in or very

near to a

city, or very near to an Interstate or a commuter rail station.

Draper factory owner files suit

Says Hopedale officials, others seek to take property by eminent domain

By Alison Bosma,

Daily News Staff,

November 21, 2018

HOPEDALE – The man who owns the massive Draper factory complex downtown has filed a lawsuit

against the town, a local developer and the Grafton & Upton Railroad.

“He intends to develop or sell the property if the town will work with him,” attorney David Lurie said of his

client, Philip Shwachman. “But he is not going to stand by quietly while the selectmen concoct a secret

illicit scheme to take it by eminent domain and pay him nothing for it.”

The suit accuses the town and others of conspiring to take Shwachman’s property – the former Draper

Corp. factory – without compensating Shwachman and without including him in the process.

“However, for over a year, Defendants … have secretly plotted and concealed from Shwachman and the

public a scheme to create a no-bid public- private partnership to take Shwachman’s property by eminent

domain and give it to an entity of (

Grafton & Upton Railroad

) for no cost,” the suit reads.

Filed Tuesday afternoon in Worcester County Superior Court, the suit names 18 defendants, from

individual selectmen, to the Housing Authority, to Milford- based developer Lobisser Building Corp., to

leadership within the Grafton & Upton

See LAWSUIT, A6

Hopedale Board To Meet on Draper Falls Urban Renewal Plan.

By MyFM’s Rick Michaels

- WMRC -

November 29, 2018

The Hopedale Board of Selectmen will meet this afternoon, with one order of business to vote on before

moving into executive session to discuss a recent lawsuit that has been filed as well as other matters,

all involving the Hopedale Draper Falls Urban Renewal Plan. Hopedale Selectmen will first be asked to

sign an estimated useful life document for School Busses to be purchased as part of Municipal Bond,

approved at the Special Annual Town Meeting in July. In executive session the board will discuss

strategy with respect to litigation filed in Worcester Superior Court the owner of the Draper property,

Philip Shwachman versus the Town of Hopedale. Selectmen may also consider discussion involving

the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property again dealing with the Hopedale Draper Falls

Urban Renewal Plan.

Officials: Hopedale urban renewal plan might strain town’s infrastructure

By Alison Bosma

[email protected]

Posted Dec 4, 2018 at 7:40 PM Updated Dec 4, 2018 at 7:40 PM

“We all have an obligation as public officials to step up, to speak up, to be open and honest about what

we’re doing.” - Water and Sewer Commissioner Christine Burke

HOPEDALE – The town might not have the water and sewer capacity to pull off a massive and much-

anticipated downtown housing and retail development plan, according to local experts.

Following up on a Sept. 12 letter, the town’s water and sewer department head and commissioners

told selectmen this week that they had serious concerns about the idea.

“We are at capacity and cannot support an additional 500 (housing) units,” commissioners said, as

recorded in the minutes of a September meeting during which they discussed the letter.

Dubbed the Draper Falls Urban Renewal Plan, the project proposes 565 residential units – including

duplexes, townhouses and condominiums – and 170,000 square feet of commercial space. Most of

that is planned for the downtown property currently occupied by the former Draper factory. Once a

booming cornerstone of the local economy, the looming buildings have been largely unused for

decades.

On Monday, commissioners told selectmen the town is at capacity for both water and sewer, and a

sudden influx of 500 homes would require expensive fixes, as well as time-consuming government

permitting changes.

Additionally, some of the pipes for both types of infrastructure run through the old buildings.

“That was one of our points for writing this letter,” Water and Sewer Department Manager Timothy

Watson said Monday. “You could spend $500,000 just on engineering, to figure out what to do with

those issues.”

That’s before the actual costs of any resulting projects to move or upgrade the infrastructure, upgrade

the water treatment plant or add another one, or create and permit new water sources.

“Any type of upgrade at the wastewater plant ... it’s just big, big dollars,” Watson said.

The town is working on a long-term plan to expand, but the urban renewal plan proposes a lot of

increased demand at once, Watson said. According to the Sept. 12 letter, the cost to clean the water

system alone to prevent plugging – currently about a $60,000 to $70,000 annual expenditure – would

likely double. The last time the town put new water wells online - something commissioners said

would be needed under the plan - it took more than a decade to obtain the proper permits.

“This is wonderful information to have,” Selectman Thomas Wesley said, adding that the 565 units won’

t be built “overnight.” “If that’s the number that works, that’s great. If that’s not a number that works, we’ll

revisit that. .... Your concerns are duly noted, believe me.”

Beyond capacity and cost issues, commissioners voiced an additional worry.

The factory is in a protected zone, where contaminants could affect the water supply, commissioners

said. Though the town currently has the right to protect the area, commissioners pointed to a part of the

renewal plan that would give control of the land to the Grafton & Upton Railroad, and to legal

precedence that allows railroads to override local regulations.

Selectmen were quick to point out the plan is still “just a draft.”

“I’d ask everyone just to calm down, just a bit,” Wesley said. “We’re nowhere near submitting this thing

yet, either. ... We floated an idea, and here we are, so that’s all.”

Selectman Brian Keyes called some of the warnings, particularly any possible railroad ownership,

“presumptuous.”

“I take offense to the word presumptuous,” Water and Sewer Commissioner Christine Burke said. “We

all have an obligation as public officials to step up, to speak up, to be open and honest about what we’

re doing.”

The commission wanted to bring the issues to the town’s attention specifically while the plan is in its

early stages, she said, so officials have the information needed as they move forward.

“For the record,” Selectman Louis Arcudi III said, “I’m glad they have this on file for us, to make sure

that as we go forward, it’s under consideration.”

The group Monday night also brought up the contentious possibility that the town might take much of

the land – the Draper factory is currently owned by local developer Philip Shwachman – by eminent

domain. Shwachman has said he does not intend to give the town his property, and is suing several

boards and people connected to the urban renewal plan.

The town has not commented on the lawsuit.

Selectmen Monday said eminent domain is mentioned in the plan, but it’s not a focus.

“The words ‘eminent domain’ are in the plan. That is a last resort,” Wesley said. “We’re miles away

from that right now. Miles away.”

For decades, this old Mass. factory has sat empty. Now there’s a battle over its future.

Christopher Gavin --- Boston.com staff

December 6, 2018 4:52 pm

In the heart of Hopedale, the sights and sounds that brought the Draper Corp. factory to life went still and silent decades ago.

In their absence, shattered windowpanes and chipped paint, boarded windows and dark hallways are mainstays at the expansive,

1,000,000-square-foot former industrial powerhouse that once churned out textile machinery used around the globe.

Since its doors shuttered in 1980, plans to revitalize the massive, 77-acre property in the small town’s center — also a central piece

of local history at the core of the town’s identity — have followed the same fate as the building’s storied past: They have come and

they have gone.

But the latest pitch from town officials, a nearly $50 million Urban Renewal Plan dubbed “Draper Falls” that calls for potentially 565

housing units and 175,000 square feet of commercial space on the property and others under private-public partnership, has now

pit them against the property owner, Worcester developer Philip Shwachman, in a battle that could take years to play out.

In a lawsuit filed in Worcester Superior Court last month, Shwachman — who has acquired properties that make up the site over the

last three decades — alleges the town, notably selectmen, conspired in closed-door meetings to take it all from him through

eminent domain — without giving him any compensation.

The lengthy and biting civil complaint demands that officials drop their plan on the basis that they violated Shwachman’s rights with

disregard. Other allegations say officials repeatedly violated Open Meeting Law and deceitfully rammed the renewal plan through the

local approval process, aided by the Grafton & Upton Railroad, which operates on adjacent property.

“The town has acted behind closed doors in a rush to push through a poorly-conceived plan that proposes taking all of Mr.

Shwachman’s property, and nobody else’s property, by eminent domain, and paying him nothing for it,” David Lurie, Shwachman’s

attorney, told Boston.com in a statement.

The Urban Renewal Plan, unveiled this summer, states however that the redevelopment of the property wouldn’t be possible without

government support, since after 30 years of Shwachman’s private ownership, little has changed.

The town worked with Shwachman in 2007 to form a reuse plan — one that outlined how the site could become a mixed-use

development filled with offices, shops, and homes — but it was never put in motion.

The current Board of Selectmen told residents last year about a renewed effort they were spearheading to build upon that plan with

new additions that would consider the use of the adjacent Grafton & Upton Railroad rail yard. The railroad, which was dormant

before returning to local service in 2013, would be a key component of Hopedale’s future, Selectman Thomas Wesley said at the

time.

He told The Boston Globe in August that Shwachman has “put a stranglehold on the development of the town” as his property, a

stone’s throw away from downtown Hopedale, sits empty and undisturbed. Officials have said redevelopment would additionally

provide a major boost to tax revenue, potentially joining an effort the town, currently with limited commercial tax revenue, has

undertaken in recent years to grow its tax base.

Selectmen delved into crafting the Urban Renewal Plan over the past year and unveiled it earlier this year. Calling the property a

“scar across the center of Hopedale,” the plan identifies 16 Shwachman-owned parcels the town would need to acquire to see its

vision through. The project, altogether, would span 26 properties.

Altogether, the properties appear to have a “negative net valuation” because of the cost to knock down buildings and conduct

environmental cleanup where needed, according to the plan, which adds that Shwachman would most likely donate the land to the

town for a potential tax write-off because of that value. (Eminent domain legal expenses are listed in the plan’s budget at $120,000

while “Land Acquisition (given negative value of parcels)” is listed at an anticipated $0 expense.) The lawsuit says talk of a likely

donation “was false and outrageous.”

The Grafton & Upton Railroad, working with local developer Kevin Lobisser, is named as the town’s preferred developer in the plan.

Shwachman was never offered a seat at the table during the process, even after asking selectmen to be included, according to the

lawsuit, which cites emails between selectmen. The railroad, owned by Jon Delli Priscoli, meanwhile gave planning and consulting

services to the town for free without a chance for public bidding, the court filing says.

“The people of the Town of Hopedale were merely collateral damage to the Selectmen and their quest to destroy Shwachman,” the

document reads.

The complaint alleges railroad leadership had a guiding hand in how selectmen and other officials should carry out the plan, and

how they should push it along.

Delli Priscoli, who bought some parcels from Shwachman, had talked to Shwachman in 2012 about buying other parts of the site,

but didn’t have the capital to close the deal, according to the lawsuit. The two parties later swapped some parcels in a “more modest

transaction” in 2014, the complaint reads.

“

The Town should have used (a Request for Proposals) process to select both a professional planner and a Master Developer,” Lurie

said. “Instead, it used the Railroad for both and, not surprisingly, the resulting plan calls for expansion of the railroad for industrial

uses. It’s not clear why that is in the best interest of the Town

.”

Requests for comment from Delli Priscoli and Lobisser, both named as defendants among 19 in total in the lawsuit, were not

returned. Selectman Brian Keyes declined to comment when reached by phone, and inquires to Town Hall were directed to town

counsel, which did not return multiple requests for comment from Boston.com.

Draper Falls LLC — formed by Lobisser earlier this year — is also listed as a defendant, although records with the Secretary of State’

s office show a certificate of cancellation was filed and signed by Lobisser in October, stating that the company was “no longer

active.”

Wesley, speaking at a selectmen meeting Monday while addressing concerns from Water & Sewer Commission members about

the water infrastructure required for such a development, said the plan is just a draft.

He said officials, right now, are “miles away” from eminent domain, which he called a last resort option, and added that they are still

pursuing the urban renewal planning process, although there are “revisions envisioned” for the plan.

“We’re nowhere near submitting this thing (to the state) yet either,” he said.

In July, Wesley told The Milford Daily News it’s up to Shwachman to decide whether or not he wants to participate and that officials

would be willing to make some sort of an agreement with him, adding though that “this project will go on, with or without him.”

Asked why Shwachman has yet to develop the property himself, Lurie blamed the inaction of town leaders and said Shwachman

was onboard with the 2007 study but it was local officials who let the plan gather dust before their latest effort was made in secret

this year.

Shwachman, through the lawsuit, says he has spent over $10 million cleaning environmental hazards on the property, demolishing

unsafe structures, and providing staff to monitor the site.

The lawsuit states Shwachman was “frustrated by the lack of cooperation from the town” by 2016 and indicated to officials he

intended to put the property up for sale. The site was ultimately put on the market in October this year, months after the Urban

Renewal Plan was revealed.

In the court filing, Shwachman’s attorneys request that the court order selectmen to drop the plan and rule the town’s actions invalid,

among other rulings. The lawsuit also demands that the defendants be held “legally and financially accountable.”

The town had 20 days to file a response to the complaint in court as of its Nov. 20 filing. Other documents on file in court indicate that

should the case move forward, the two sides may not hear a judgment until November 2021.

“The reality is, if this goes forward, Hopedale residents will end up paying a lot more money for Mr. Shwachman’s property, for water

and sewer infrastructure that the Town has not taken into account, and for defending litigation that is likely to go on for years,” Lurie

said. “The Town should use a professional planner and work cooperatively with Mr. Shwachman to develop the property in a way that

makes sense for everybody.”

Draper Mill lawyer claims Hopedale refused records request.

By Alison Bosma [email protected]

December 28, 2018

HOPEDALE – The lawyer for a man who owns nearly 80 acres of vacant mill buildings downtown claims the

town denied his client’s public records request, and has filed an appeal with the state.

“In our view, the Town is improperly invoking and intentionally misreading the regulations as a ploy to prevent

and/or delay the release (of) information that the public has a right to access,” wrote Lurie Friedman, LLC,

attorney David Lurie, who represents Philip Shwachman, principal of the companies that own the Draper

factory complex.

The complex is the target of the town’s Urban Renewal Plan, which proposes acquiring the buildings and

turning them into commercial and residential space. Shwachman has said he does not plan to give the town

his property, and, through Lurie, has sued several boards, officials and related companies.

According to documents sent to the Daily News by Lurie, the town’s law firm KP Law, P.C., did not outright

refuse the records request, which asked for a long list of wide-ranging documents, communications,

schedules and town procedures.

A letter from KP Law’s Matthew Feher to Lurie says the town “is not obligated” to respond to the request, but

claims officials already gave Lurie the requested documents anyway. The letter says Lurie requested

“voluminous records,” which the town provided over the past year.

But Lurie said the previously provided records do not fully cover what he is now asking for.

“A citizen does not lose the right to make a public records request just because he or she is involved in a

lawsuit, nor can a town hide these records from the public based on who requests them,” Lurie wrote, in an

emailed statement to the Daily News. “The Town’s refusal to provide the records we requested is legally

unsupportable and we expect the Supervisor of Public Records to order the records to be produced. It makes

you wonder what the Town is trying to hide.”

Hopedale Town Administrator Steven Sette declined to comment and KP Law did not return a call from the

Daily News on Thursday.

“We’re in active litigation, so we’re not commenting on anything with respect to the mill until the litigation

plays out,” Sette said.

Feher’s reasoning, as cited in the letter, for not responding to the records request is the civil lawsuit. Lurie

said that is a misreading of the public records law, and is an “unreasonable and hard-line position.”

Information provided through court proceedings, he said, does not cancel out a records request.

″...the rights of a requester making a public records request are the same, regardless of whether or not it is a

party to litigation with the public body,” Lurie writes to the state supervisor of records. “In other words, if the

information requested is a public record, it is a public record for all requesters.”

Lurie has also filed paperwork claiming environmental issues with the Urban Renewal Plan, including

concerns over conservation land and assertions that the nearby railroad may carry hazardous wastes

through the site under town management.

The issue is expected to come before the town Conservation Commission at 6:30 p.m. on Jan. 15 at Town

Hall.

Alison Bosma can be reached at 508-634-7582 or [email protected]. Find her on Twitter at

@AlisonBosma.

raper Corp. owner questions silos in Hopedale

By Alison Bosma

[email protected]

Posted Jan 7, 2019 at 2:45 AM Updated at 6:07 PM

HOPEDALE – A pair of new structures off Rte. 16 has drawn the attention of the man who owns the iconic

downtown Draper Corp. factory complex.

Law firm Lurie Friedman, LLP, filed a letter Friday with Building Commissioner Robert Speroni on behalf of

Philip Shwachman, who is the principal of the companies that own acres of vacant buildings downtown,

requesting an inspection of the new structures.

The letter suggests they pose a health risk and are in violation of the town’s bylaws.

“We respectfully request that the Board of Selectmen, through you as Building Commissioner, inspect the

(property) and enforce the apparent zoning bylaw violations,” attorney Harley Racer wrote.

The building commissioner did not respond Friday to a Daily News request for comment.

The structures in question - relatively slim, metal silos - appeared last month in a lot off Rte. 16 and

Fitzgerald Drive used by the Grafton & Upton Railroad. They stretch above tree line, and are visible from Rte.

16 and downtown.

While they are meant for storing fly ash, a byproduct of coal described as carcinogenic by the Center for

Disease Control, Grafton & Upton Railroad President Michael Milanoski said his company went through the

proper process with Hopedale in October before installing them. A lawyer with Lurie Friedman said the

company checked with the building inspector at the end of November and obtained a file for the property, but

saw no indication of a permitting process for the silos.

“It was properly sited and secured,” Milanoski said.

The structures did not require special permitting, he said. In fact, they represent an action by the company

that’s good for the environment – recycling. Fly ash is mixed into cement, and can be used in road projects.

“It’s just a way of recycling ... that’s appropriate to reduce the amount of material that goes into our landfills,”

Milanoski said.

Shwachman is in the middle of a lawsuit with the railroad and the town that names 18 defendants, and

accuses them of trying to take his property for Hopedale’s proposed Urban Renewal Plan. That plan would

turn the vacant Draper factory buildings into recreational, commercial, industrial and residential space, and

suggests taking Shwachman’s property by eminent domain if he doesn’t cooperate.

The railroad runs through that property, and is part of the urban renewal plan.

Racer’s letter says the property with the fly ash silos is within a groundwater protection district.

“Clearly, fly ash poses a significant risk of contamination to surface water, groundwater, public drinking water

supplies, and substantial risks to public health and safety,” Racer wrote in his letter to the building

commissioner.

Milanoski said the company will take safety precautions when moving the material. The fly ash, to be trucked

in by rail car, will be vacuumed directly from the truck to the silo, “so it doesn’t even hit air.”

The silos likely won’t be used until spring, he said.

Meanwhile, David Lurie, founding partner of Lurie Friedman, said he’s waiting to see how the town responds.

“We hope that the Selectmen will enforce the zoning bylaw and rule that this railroad fly ash operation is

illegal,” he wrote in an email. “More concerning is that under the proposed urban renewal plan, there would

be a significant expansion of railroad industrial use but there is no mention of any fly ash operation, or any

description of the expanded railroad industrial uses.”

Hopedale responds to Draper lawsuit

By Alison Bosma

[email protected]

Posted Jan 14, 2019 at 7:43 PM Updated at 9:21 AM

“As most residents are ... unfortunately aware, under Mr. Shwachman’s stewardship, the Draper Falls property has laid

dormant over the past three decades, as Mr. Shwachman has permitted the parcel to fall into disrepair and decay, to the

point where it is a large scar in the center of the Town,” the letter reads. “It has become clear to the Town that Mr.

Shwachman has no real intention of developing the property, which is such a critical part of the Town’s economic future,

but instead appears to be content to let it sit idle while opportunities to make productive use of the property pass by.”

HOPEDALE – The town broke its silence on a pending lawsuit Monday, issuing through lawyers a page-long response to