As previously stated, Metro Credit Union is attempting to reconfigure their lot at the corner of Main and Sylvan to feature a drive-through. Our members oppose this plan, due to the negative effects the drive-through would have on local pedestrian/cyclist safety. This evening, the applicant presented a modified plan to the Zoning Board, which reduced the amount of paved area on-site but which maintained a drive-through lane with a curb cut off Main Street. Please find our letter of opposition below.
The Zoning Board of Appeals shared our concerns about the safety of creating a new curb cut off Main Street and expressed universal discomfort with this approach. The applicants expressed a desire to try to create a new plan which had a drive-through that both entered and exited off Sylvan Street alone. The Board unanimously agreed to allow a continuance in this case until February. We’ll keep tabs on this potential redesign in the new year.
December 7th, 2020
Dear members of the Zoning Board of Appeals,
In light of the new materials provided by the applicant under Case 20 021 – 138 Main Street, the officers and members of the Melrose Ped/Bike Committee (PBC) are sending this letter to reiterate our opposition to the creation of a drive-through and curb cut at this site.
While we appreciate that the applicant has reduced the amount of impervious surface and achieved sufficient open space to meet the Bylaw, the proposal retains the two most problematic elements: a new curb cut off Main Street and a new drive-through facility. The applicant claims that these elements meet the standard of being “essential or desirable to the public convenience or welfare.” At the last hearing, the members of the public most immediately impacted — the direct abutters — gave the Board the opposite message: the increased intensity of auto usage, particularly with respect to increased noise, light, and air pollution from vehicles idling at the drive-through, will very much degrade the public welfare. The drive-through reconfiguration, while likely shielding abutters from some noise, does not expose them to less air pollution, likely exposes 144 Main to greater light pollution, and comes at the cost of locating the parking substantially closer to all four abutting properties.
The applicant further claims that these elements will not unduly impair pedestrian safety, instead claiming that pedestrian safety will be “enhanced” and “ensured.” We disagree with these claims. Pedestrians in this area will be directly and quite negatively impacted by increased idling of vehicles in the front yard, particularly children and the elderly, both of whom face special risks from increased exposure to air pollution from vehicles. Pedestrians will also inevitably face greater vehicular conflicts based on the new curb cut exit coming off the site. Two particular cases will be of great concern to us:
- Drivers exiting the lot intending to make a right turn will tend only to look to the left for oncoming vehicles. Such drivers may often fail to notice oncoming pedestrians using the sidewalk from the right, heading northbound. This is particularly problematic at dusk or in the evening, when people are most likely to be walking home from Oak Grove. The natural walking routes from both Oak Grove station and Oak Grove Village means that more pedestrians are likely to be on this side of the road, increasing the chances of such conflicts.
- Southbound traffic stopped at a red light on Main Street will, with great regularity, queue well beyond the project site. Vehicles exiting Metro Credit Union under these circumstances can be expected to “inch out” into the roadway, in order to request a spot in the traffic queue. Such vehicles will often fully obstruct the sidewalk, forcing pedestrians into the street.
The applicants themselves acknowledge that the drive-through lane creates unsafe conditions for pedestrians by touting, as a safety feature, that “patrons who arrive by car will not be required to walk through the drive-through lane in order to access the building.” Unfortunately, all public pedestrian traffic on this side of Main Street will be required to walk through the drive-through lane, if an exit is permitted to cross the public sidewalk.
Finally, we continue to disagree with the applicant’s claims that the existing parking service is “at or near capacity.” To check our assumptions, our members took 50 separate weekday parking counts between October 28th and December 4th during the traditional “rush hour” windows. Our complete list of dates and figures is attached in an appendix, alongside sample photos of a range of conditions. We observed during this time that the median number of cars parked in the MCU lot was 4, with an average of 4.22. While we did observe two weekday occasions where the lot was fully utilized, one of these times occurred while extensive utility work was being performed at the intersection, taking away the typical street parking availability on Sylvan. Further, we observed numerous instances of arriving customers parking on Sylvan even in circumstances where there was space within the lot. Ample street parking is always available for customers at this location, something few Melrose businesses can claim.
We again wish to congratulate Metro Credit Union on their continued growth in customers and deposits. However, local business growth must not come at the expense of the safety and well-being of residents and the general public. The proposal alteration of this lot swaps street parking, a common everyday occurrence for virtually every business in Melrose, with a highly irregular front-yard drive-through. The requested use is more intensely auto-centric; will create more light, noise, and air pollution at the site; and will dramatically increase the potential for conflicts with pedestrian and bicycle traffic along Main Street. We respectfully urge the board to deny this usage.
Sincerely,
Officers:
Jonah Chiarenza, Chair;
Dan Krechmer, Vice Chair;
Ryan Williams, Secretary;
Finn McSweeney, Communications Officer;
Signing Committee Members:
Elizabeth Foulser, Ellen Katz, Ben Bradley, Cindy Chabot, Jeremy Garczynski, Brian Gregory, Lihlani Nelson, Garrett Nelson
APPENDIX: Parking Observation Data
| Date | Time | Autos in Lot | Date | Time | Autos in Lot | Date | Time | Autos in Lot |
| 10/28/20 | 9:00 AM | 2 | 11/12/20 | 8:15 AM | 1 | 12/1/20 | 4:45 PM | 5 |
| 10/28/20 | 4:45 PM | 3 | 11/12/20 | 9:30 AM | 3 | 12/2/20 | 9:45 AM | 9 |
| 10/29/20 | 9:00 AM | 5 | 11/12/20 | 4:25 PM | 5 | 12/2/20 | 4:30 PM | 4 |
| 10/29/20 | 4:45 PM | 4 | 11/12/20 | 4:45 PM | 5 | 12/3/20 | 8:20 AM | 4 |
| 10/30/20 | 8:45 AM | 3 | 11/13/20 | 9:05 AM | 7 | 12/3/20 | 9:30 AM | 3 |
| 10/30/20 | 4:30 PM | 3 | 11/13/20 | 9:30 AM | 9 | 12/3/20 | 4:30 PM | 8 |
| 11/2/20 | 9:00 AM | 5 | 11/13/20 | 4:30 PM | 2 | 12/4/20 | 9:00 AM | 7 |
| 11/2/20 | 4:30 PM | 4 | 11/16/20 | 9:20 AM | 7 | 12/4/20 | 4:45 PM | 5 |
| 11/3/20 | 9:15 AM | 4 | 11/16/20 | 4:45 PM | 1 | |||
| 11/3/20 | 4:45 PM | 4 | 11/16/20 | 8:20 AM | 2 | |||
| 11/4/20 | 9:00 AM | 6 | 11/17/20 | 9:00 AM | 4 | |||
| 11/4/20 | 4:30 PM | 2 | 11/17/20 | 8:30 AM | 4 | |||
| 11/5/20 | 9:15 AM | 4 | 11/18/20 | 9:30 PM | 3 | |||
| 11/5/20 | 4:30 PM | 4 | 11/18/20 | 4:30 PM | 5 | |||
| 11/6/20 | 9:15 AM | 4 | 11/19/20 | 9:30 AM | 3 | |||
| 11/6/20 | 4:30 PM | 7 | 11/19/20 | 4:30 PM | 3 | |||
| 11/9/20 | 9:15 AM | 1 | 11/30/20 | 10:00 AM | 6 | |||
| 11/10/20 | 8:45 AM | 2 | 11/30/20 | 4:30 PM | 3 | |||
| 11/10/20 | 9:15 AM | 3 | 11/30/20 | 8:20 AM | 4 | |||
| 11/10/20 | 8:30 AM | 2 | 12/1/20 | 8:05 AM | 4 | |||
| 11/10/20 | 4:45 PM | 5 | 12/1/20 | 9:30 AM | 8 |
Examples of existing conditions:
