Create an Account - Increase your productivity, customize your experience, and engage in information you care about.
View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
NOTICE OF DECISION
Special Permit A3 (Parking Determination)
Applicant: W/S/M HINGHAM PROPERTIES LLC
Derby Street Shoppes, 90 DERBY STREET
Premises: Derby Street Shoppes Certified Mail #7014 2120 0003 3809 8624
90 Derby Street
Hingham, MA 02043
Date: April 28, 2016
Re: Removal of Parking Spaces by Burton’s Grill
Summary of Proceedings
At a duly noticed public hearing at the meeting of April 11, 2016 Planning Board members Sarah H. Corey, Gary Tondorf-Dick, William Ramsey, Jennifer Gay Smith and Judith Sneath heard the application of W/S/M HINGHAM PROPERTIES, LLC for a modification under § V-A of the Zoning By-Law to the existing Special Permit A3 parking determination dated July 21, 2009, as amended, and such other relief as necessary to remove 3 parking spaces and widen the sidewalk adjacent to Burton's Grill at 90 DERBY STREET in the Industrial Park and South Hingham Development Overlay District. The Applicant team included Robert Devin, Attorney, Andrew Manning, W/S/M, and Bill Hamilton, General Manager of Derby Street Shoppes. The Applicant is also seeking a modification to the existing Special Permit A2 from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
This project is the proposed removal of 3 parking spaces adjacent to Burton’s Grill in order to expand the sidewalk in that area. The Applicant explained that the Apple Store is expanding and relocating the main entry door to a location where the sidewalk is narrower now. This portion of the sidewalk is heavily travelled and that a wider sidewalk is best for safer pedestrian access & flow. The relocation of the main entry door to the expanded Apple store could result in congestion on the narrower sidewalk by the new doorway.
The Chair asked if the intent was to increase the sidewalk to add seats to Burton’s, and the applicant said that was not the intent. The goal is to provide a wider sidewalk for pedestrians and avoid creating a new choke point for pedestrian traffic with the relocation of the entrance door to the expanded Apple store. The Board then reviewed the location of the new entrance and discussed if removal of two spaces would accomplish the intended goal of increasing pedestrian safety and circulation adjacent to the entrance. The Board noted that while they understood the intent, those spaces identified for removal were the closest spaces to the stores and thus highly desirable for some customers. Chief Olsson spoke to the need for more parking at the shopping center and read his comment letter into the record. He noted that it would be helpful to find ways to create more parking, not eliminate spaces. He also noted that remote parking spaces might be used in the overall parking tabulation but realistically they aren’t the spaces in demand or use by the general public. After discussion, it was found that removal of two spaces instead of three would still accomplish the intent of the request, and yet minimize the loss of parking spaces. The Boards discussed concerns about pedestrians walking out into the parking field and not using the designated crosswalks. The installation of a mounded landscape treatment along the corners was discussed as a way to guide pedestrians to more appropriate crossing locations. The Board discussed the shifting of amenities, and the Mr. Hamilton confirmed that the existing streetscape treatment would be continued. The Board asked if the radius of the extended curb could be softened, and the applicant said yes. After additional discussion a 5’ radius on the corner was determined to be acceptable to all parties. The Boards asked if there would be pedestrian impediments in the area of the expanded sidewalk, and the applicant indicated that only a continuation of the existing treatment was intended to possibly include benches or light poles, etc. The Boards asked if a revised plan would be submitted, and the applicant indicated it would. The Board noted that the expanded sidewalk seemed to provide a safer pedestrian environment and was not objectionable providing it is kept open for pedestrian activity with no impediments.
Findings and Decision
• The Board found that removal of two spaces instead of three would still accomplish the intent of the request, and yet minimize the loss of parking spaces.
• The Board noted that it seemed to provide a safer pedestrian environment and was not objectionable providing it is kept open for pedestrian activity with no impediments.
• The Board found that the parking table indicated that there was sufficient surplus parking spaces to eliminate two spaces.
• The Board found that a rounder radius on the new corner softened the treatment and made the turning movement easier.
The Board then Moved, Seconded and So Voted to Approve the Special Permit A3 Parking Determination for W/S/M HINGHAM PROPERTIES LLC, Derby Street Shoppes, 90 Derby Street, to allow the removal of two parking spaces as presented and discussed at the hearings.
Town of Hingham Planning Board,
Sarah H. Corey, Chairman
Cc: Town Clerk, Building Department, ZBA, R. Devin
EXECUTED this _____ day of May, 2016
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Plymouth, ss May ____, 2016
Then personally appeared Sarah H. Corey, Chairman of the Hingham Planning Board, and acknowledged the foregoing to be the free act and deed of said Board.
____________________________ My Commission Expires March 4, 2022
Dolores A. DeLisle, Notary Public