Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Snow Removal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hopkinton council narrows sidewalk snow‑removal rule to 48 hours, keeps enforcement flexibility for major storms
Summary
After deliberation and public input following a 50‑year blizzard, the Hopkinton Town Council agreed to amend a proposed sidewalk snow‑removal ordinance to require clearing within 48 hours after a storm and to move enforcement to Building & Zoning; the council continued the public hearing to March 16 for attorney drafting and final vote.
The Hopkinton Town Council on March 2 continued its multi‑session public hearing on a proposed amendment to Chapter 17 to require property owners to remove snow and ice from sidewalks and to add penalties for noncompliance.
Councilors and the public debated the time window for compliance after a storm, possible exemptions for elderly or disabled residents, enforcement responsibility and appropriate fine levels. Councilor Burns, who has repeatedly pushed the issue, said the town must move forward: "at this point it is your responsibility to shovel sidewalks," urging clearer expectations for property owners.
Speakers and staff discussed a range of timing options — 24, 36, 48 or 72 hours — with several councillors and the DPW director noting that multi‑day storms make short windows impractical. The DPW director suggested tying the clock to the end of the storm so extreme events do not trigger enforcement: "I think if you define it after the storm, you may not have to reach out to that 72‑hour — maybe the 48 will suffice." The council reached consensus to change the draft to a 48‑hour window while retaining discretion during exceptional storms.
Members also agreed to strike the police department as the local enforcement office and assign enforcement to Building & Zoning. Councilors asked the town attorney to draft clear language prohibiting deposition of cleared snow into public rights‑of‑way and to include waiver or exemption processes for residents who cannot reasonably comply (for example, an application to Building & Zoning or the town's public‑welfare office).
The council considered fine levels and enforcement approaches used by neighboring towns and discussed community‑service alternatives or voucher programs to assist residents who cannot afford contractor help. Several public commenters suggested creating a pre‑vetted list of volunteers or nonprofits to assist vulnerable residents.
The public hearing was continued to March 16 so the town attorney can prepare revised ordinance language for council review and a possible vote. The council directed staff to ensure the draft includes explicit enforcement discretion for catastrophic storms, an exemption/waiver process, a prohibition on putting cleared snow into rights‑of‑way, and the change assigning enforcement to Building & Zoning.
The hearing will return March 16 for discussion and a potential vote on the amended ordinance.
