What zoning ordinances or local regulations can be waived in an Unfriendly 40B?

Neighborhood Zoning Variance Requests

The Newburyport Zoning Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing on an application for a Comprehensive Permit filed by Port Plaza Realty Trust. This permit is for the construction for 212 residential apartment units at the site of the former K-Mart store at Port Plaza. This is a "friendly" 40B development meaning the applicant is agreeing to make additional units affordable. Specifically, the developer has agreed to include 25% of the total units as affordable (80% of Annual Median Income) in perpetuity. To learn more about the project, you can find the permit application and supporting documents on the City's OpenGov portal at https://newburyportma.portal.opengov.com/records/69450/.  In particular, we draw your attention to the waivers the applicant is requesting. A copy of this section of the application can be found below.

Traffic Considerations

Much of the discussion since the start of the public hearing in July has been concerning the traffic impacts of the project and possible mitigation measures to address those impacts. The applicant's traffic engineer and the city's peer reviewer believe that there will be no more than 73-75 cars added during peak traffic times as a result of this development. That translates to less than a minute of additional time for a vehicle travelling in that area at that time. Many of those in attendance appeared dubious of this claim.

In addition to the volume of traffic and the level of inconvenience that might bring, the more important discussions have centered around pedestrian and cyclist safety. As a supposed transit-oriented development, it is appropriate to focus not just on vehicular traffic (the primary transit orientation of this project is its ready access to Route 95 and by extension, Route 495), but also safety and accessibility for public transit users, cyclists, and pedestrians, particularly at an intersection that has had two pedestrian fatalities in the last 5 years.

Much of the discussion has focused on the intersection of Low Street at the center entrance to the plaza. This is the area where the pedestrian fatalities happened, near where someone would cross after exiting the MEVA bus. Is this a condition that presently exists, yes. But I think we can all agree that the issue is significantly exacerbated by the addition of some 400 to 450 pedestrians, many of whom are to be encouraged (by the property manager's "transportation coordinator") to use public and alternative modes of transportation. In my opinion, the proposed traffic mitigation measures are not up to the task.

While I dislike the idea of adding another traffic light on Low Street, I have not seen any other way that seems adequate to protect our residents and visitors from the higher volume of vehicles that will travel through this area, particularly with this street having a permissible speed of 35 mph. The intersection at Low Street and the center entrance needs to be fully signaled.  Because the project is directly responsible for the addition of 400+ pedestrians and 200+ cars in that area, it seems reasonable to expect this cost to be paid by the applicant as a traffic mitigation measure.

There has also been discussion about pedestrian and cycling safety for moving within the Port Plaza development. Currently, the parking lot lacks very little structural definition and at times feels like a free for all. Using curbing and landscaped planting strips to add definition to the parking area, reduce impervious surface further, and allow for a defined path through which pedestrians and cyclists could safely travel. At the very least, a structurally protected walkway that takes a pedestrian from the building south to Low Street or north to Storey Avenue (all the way to Storey Avenue). This would exclusively benefit the users and tenants of Port Plaza and should, therefore, be borne entirely by the applicant.

Finally, there needs to be recognition of the MEVA bus stop. One of those bus stops is adjacent to the rear of the proposed project. As a transit-oriented development, the applicant needs to recognize and make accommodations for the additional riders that the units will generate. A bump-in from Low Street behind the building with sidewalks to a building entry point, would be an appropriate accommodation.