Dear Barbara and friends, Five years ago such proposals of dense construction at the Lincoln station did come up in some Housing Commission meetings. I saw the unsuitability of the proposal. Many residents complained in the open meeting. Some of our colleagues called me names forcing me to leave the Commission. it is possible that the same proposal or the same builders have resurrected it in a new cover. Let the housing be distributed, let us create public transportation in town as a service. While I am writing this, I have no interest in participating because of the ugly experience last time. Best regards, Bijoy Misra
On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:27 AM Barbara Peskin <bpeski...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Lincoln, > *What will our choice for Lincoln's future be at Town meeting?* It may > depend on our collective voices October 10th. My thoughts for HCAWG and a > more thorough explanation from a fellow citizen are below: > > > Dear Housing Choice Act Working Group, > > 1) I agree with the viewpoint Bob Domnitz voiced on LIncoln Talk and below. > > In addition: > 2) Lincoln has long supported a variety of housing options and we have a > lot of housing already - it is important that everyone on the working group > visits all the sections of town mentioned to see all the existing housing > we have. > > 3) The MBTA is not currently a popular choice of transportation nor the > only choice of transportation for those units - it is highly likely that > 400-500 additional units of housing at Lincoln Station will bring two cars > per unit - that is another 800-1000 cars of daily traffic for the town. > > 4) Lincoln is Lincoln - putting a proposal forward for dense housing in > one location is not in keeping with and would be a stresser on Lincoln's > important history of being a town where people can live in and with nature. > > If this is a choice - why would we put the strain on the people currently > living near Lincoln Station, people visiting and driving through Lincoln > Station, and the schools and other services. If you go forward with a plan > to propose 1000 additional cars at Lincoln Station and 500 additional > housing units in one location, is it not the end of the Lincoln we know? > > Sincerely, > Barbara Peskin > 299 South Great Rd > > > *From:* Robert Domnitz <bobdom...@hotmail.com> > *Sent:* Friday, October 6, 2023 1:30 PM > *To:* lincoln@lincolntalk.org > *Subject:* [LincolnTalk] Thoughts on the Housing Choice Act and the > October 10th Multi-Board Meeting > > As a recently-retired member of the Planning Board and Housing Choice Act > Working Group, I am concerned that the three options presented last > Saturday at the SOTT - and the plan to choose just one of those options at > a multi-board meeting on October 10th - will restrict Town Meeting to > merely rubber-stamping the HCAWG's decision. And the HCAWG's decision will > reflect its embedded priorities that may differ from what town meeting > would choose if we are given more options. I therefore think it is crucial > for the HCAWG to submit several options to the state for advisory opinions > prior to Town Meeting. All options should be presented to Town Meeting for > debate and vote. > > > I'd like to expand on some of the points made - and some of the points > omitted - by the presenters at last Saturday's SOTT meeting. > > > 1. *About 35% of the town's residences are currently multi-family* (not > including Hanscom Field, see list below). Most folks are surprised when > they hear this. Lincoln has done an outstanding job allowing multi-family > living while maintaining our rural character. With full build-out under the > HCA, multi-family housing will approach 50% of the town's inventory. > > > 2. *State guidelines for the HCA provide a mechanism for towns to get > credit for existing multifamily housing.* Towns are free to locate > HCA-compliant subdistricts in areas that currently have high residential > density. These subdistricts will help us meet our "quota," even though it > is very unlikely these areas will be redeveloped. > > > 3. *An evaluation of the various options requires consideration of the > likelihood that redevelopment will actually occur.* Existing condo > developments would require consent of the owners to redevelop, with the > particular procedures laid out in the condominiums' organizational > documents. If condo owners don't want redevelopment to happen, it won't > happen. Existing apartment buildings (e.g., Oriole Landing) owned by a > single entity would only require a decision by that entity and would depend > on their analysis of whether an increase in density would justify the cost > of redevelopment. On the other hand, rezoning single family homes on Codman > Road as shown in options A,B, and C from the HCAWG would likely result in > rapid redevelopment, as owners on Codman Road take advantage of the jump in > value that would result from the increase in development potential. > > > 4. *State guidelines require that only 20% of the HCA-compliant district > be located in the vicinity of the commuter rail station*. The other 80% > can be anywhere in town. However, the HCAWG eliminated consideration of the > Farrar Pond and Lincoln Ridge condos as "too far from any amenities and > public transit." See link below to p. 17 of SOTT slide deck. This area > could be used as part of our plan for compliance; the HCAWG's decision to > eliminate consideration of this area reflects their prioritization of > access to public transit and goes beyond what the state requires. > Similarly, the Commons/Oriole Landing area was removed from consideration > by the HCAWG because it is "not walkable to any public transit or public > amenities." See p. 20 of SOTT slide deck. Instead, the HCAWG has proposed > placing 100% of the district in Lincoln Station (option C) or adding to > option C additional subdistricts in North Lincoln so that the total > development potential greatly exceeds what is necessary for compliance. > > > 5. *The HCAWG should consider other ways of splitting the HCA district. *The > current option C fully complies with the HCA by allowing development only > within the Lincoln Station area. If compliance with state law is our > objective, options A and B are less appealing because they needlessly add > to option C more development potential elsewhere in town. Among the three > options, C is the obvious choice for most residents because it minimally > complies with the HCA. But the Town deserves a chance to vote on other > options that do not exceed the HCA's requirements. Three options that would > make sense are: > > > - Place the entire district at Lincoln Station (current option C) > - Place most of the district at Lincoln Station and some of the district > elsewhere. > - Place some of the district at Lincoln Station and most of the district > elsewhere. > > > For all options, the details should be worked out for minimal compliance > with the HCA, giving Lincoln residents maximum control over future land use > decisions. It's worth noting that the HCA does allow, on a discretionary > basis, subdistrict boundaries that do not match parcel boundaries. This may > provide the Town with additional flexibility it needs to comply with, but > not exceed, the HCA's requirements. > > > Residents deserve a meaningful, democratic chance to choose the level of > development they want in the Lincoln Station area. Due to the limited set > of options that were presented, I don't think the survey taken at the SOTT > is a good indicator of the will of the town. Surprisingly, the HCAWG did > not propose an option where some development allowed elsewhere in Town is > used to reduce the development allowed at Lincoln Station. All three of > their options allow more than 400 units of additional development in the > Lincoln Station area. That is an extreme increase compared to what > currently exists in the area. See p. 40 of SOTT slide deck. > > > My goal in writing this post is to encourage the HCAWG to give our Town > Meeting the respect and deference to which it is entitled. This is a hugely > important matter for the Town and we can move forward together only if Town > Meeting has a meaningful role as the decisionmaker. Please attend the > October 10th multi-board meeting to share your thoughts. > > > Best regards to all, > Bob Domnitz > > > SOTT slide deck: Follow link found in > https://www.lincolntown.org/1327/Housing-Choice-Act-Working-Group > <https://southlincolnstrong.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=106f5994bae83997705e61df9&id=13a5ffab02&e=cd294a1801> > Existing multifamily housing in Lincoln (not including Hanscom housing): > > The Commons > Oriole Landing > Battle Road Farms > Minuteman Commons > Lincoln Woods > Greenridge Condos > "Flying Nun" apartments > Ridge Road apartments > Ridge Road Condos > Todd Pond Condos > Farrar Pond Condos > Lincoln Ridge Condos > Ryan Estate > Accessory Apartments in Single Family Homes > Miscellaneous (Scattered sites under Housing Comm.) > > -- > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Barbara Peskin > > *My Moments in Nature Photo Gallery: barbarapeskin.com > <http://barbarapeskin.com>* > -- > The LincolnTalk mailing list. > To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. > Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/ > . > Change your subscription settings at > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. > >
-- The LincolnTalk mailing list. To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
