*"and loss of property values that is sure to come out of having massive apartment complexes without enough parking be your neighbor."*
This is the biggest red herring in any and all discussions about development... and should never be mentioned as it's rarely true. Please provide evidence of this occurring... Sudbury, Concord, or Weston which have all had recent "mid to large" developments. On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 10:20 AM ٍSarah Postlethwait <sa...@bayhas.com> wrote: > The issue isn’t that we don’t want progress. The issue is that Only 20% of > the 42 acres needs to be near Lincoln Station to comply with the HCA. > However *100%+ of the 42 acres minimum is in south Lincoln in all 3 of > the proposed options* (64 acres in south Lincoln in options A and B and > 70.2 acres in option C) > > Perhaps some of the 20,000 sq/ft lots in other parts of town could bear > some of the burden of this rezoning and traffic- and loss of property > values that is sure to come out of having massive apartment complexes > without enough parking be your neighbor. > > If the HCAWG proposed options that didn’t far exceed the minimums that the > HCA has asked for (which already were overburdensome for our town) and > concentrated it all within half a mile at Lincoln Station- then there > likely wouldn’t be this much push back. > > But the HCAWG has its own agenda of development near the mall and has > avoided putting any substantial rezoning anywhere else in Lincoln, and has > tacked on a 125 unit mixed use development at the mall just for fun. > > Not to mention that 90% of these excessive units being proposed will be > rented and sold at Market rate. *Any developer wanting to build in > Lincoln should be required to have a minimum of 25% affordable units, just > as we required for Oriole landing*. Creating overpriced inventory that > most people won’t be able to afford does not solve the housing crisis. > > If the town really wants to comply with the HCA, there needs to be another > option that has the minimal required rezoning in South Lincoln, 70-80% > rezoning spread throughout the rest of Lincoln, and any additional rezoning > beyond what is required needs to go through the traditional town meeting > process, and needs to have a high affordable housing requirement for any > developer that wants to build. > > Sarah Postlethwait > Lewis Street > > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 9:55 AM John Mendelson <johntmendel...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Save it from what? Progress? Working to help solve the regional >> challenges of housing, traffic, environment? Providing housing >> alternatives? >> >> Or should we just continue to approve 20,000 sq/ft single family houses >> on big lots and put our heads in the sand? >> >> Lincoln is not an island despite what many seem to wish it could be. >> >> John >> >> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 9:47 AM Robert Ahlert <robahl...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 1000% agree with Susanna. Well said. I have young children and want >>> them to enjoy Lincoln as it is now, not as another Concord or Bedford or >>> Lexington. >>> >>> Lincoln is precious, save it! >>> >>> Rob >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 9:41 AM Susanna Szeto <szeto...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> A developer’s only objective is to make money! It is not a charitable >>>> organization who cares about providing more affordable housing for people! >>>> Please find one example that proves the contrary! Regarding 😊 ng the >>>> train to work because they live walking distance to the train station! >>>> When we moved to Lincoln in 1977, my husband was working at Mass General >>>> Hospital, an ideal situation for him to take the train to work. He did it >>>> at the beginning and gave up the idea because for one thing, it ends up >>>> more costly and the train does not run often enough to give the flexibility >>>> he needs! >>>> Yes, we have enjoyed decades of living in Lincoln, and we want the >>>> future generation of Lincolnites to enjoy what we have loved about Lincoln, >>>> the open space, the ‘low key’ nature of our town center even though >>>> occasionally we complained we are far from everything! We care greatly >>>> about what will happen to Lincoln even though we both at the later stage of >>>> our lives! So, for the relatively newcomers to town, there are older >>>> residents in town who do care what is going to happen to Lincoln even >>>> though it may take decades for the developers to get their hands on >>>> Lincoln! We have resisted them so far by using our tax dollars to buy up >>>> lands for conservation! There is no other town like Lincoln that is so >>>> close to Boston! Please do not let the developers come in to spoil it for >>>> us! >>>> >>>> On Oct 9, 2023, at 11:29 PM, ٍSarah Postlethwait <sa...@bayhas.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> All very well voiced points! >>>> >>>> But make no mistake- do not be fooled by the voices saying "potential >>>> development will take decades". >>>> If option C of this rezoning gets passed, development will begin >>>> immediately. >>>> >>>> *The HCAWG and the RLF are directly working with Civico, the developer >>>> of Oriole Landing*. Civico isn’t working with the town because it >>>> likes us and is a trusted town partner… it wants to make money. >>>> Civico has threatened the town by saying it will not go through the >>>> town meeting process again after it did so with Oriole Landing. The >>>> pro-building HCAWG (which includes the Executive Director of the RLF as a >>>> member) wants Civico to develop. >>>> So in turn, the HCAWG and Planning board added mixed Use Zoning at >>>> Lincoln Center to this proposal so it wouldn’t be necessary for them to go >>>> through the traditional town meeting process. >>>> >>>> This gives Civico the chance to push a high cost, high density housing >>>> complex (125 units), with only 10% affordable housing (we required 15% with >>>> Oriole landing). And it’s more likely to be passed because *only a >>>> simple majority is needed under the HCA instead of the usual 2/3 majority >>>> at town meeting*; not to mention, the HCAWG is making it seem like a >>>> looming lawsuit and loss of grants are eminent to encourage residents to >>>> pass the rezoning. >>>> >>>> Let me emphasize again- if Civico develops this Subdistrict, it will be >>>> 112 units at market rate and 13 units of affordable housing. *Market >>>> rate for Oriole Landing is currently $4,000 to $8,500 without utilities,* >>>> according to their listing on Apartments.com. >>>> That is not affordable housing for anyone who wants to downsize or work >>>> in Lincoln, as many seem to be under the impression this development would >>>> help. >>>> >>>> A slide from the presentation: >>>> >>>> <69012668-7F39-478C-B8C4-134AB43AB1A5.jpeg> >>>> >>>> <75467D4B-940C-4471-880D-5A25ED122A3D.jpeg> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 9:15 PM William Broughton < >>>> wbroughto...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thank you Bob and Rob, among many others, for the helpful insights. >>>>> >>>>> I have a number of concerns with the currently proposed HCA options. >>>>> The impacts to affordable housing in town (both absolute number and >>>>> percentage of total), traffic, and finances (taxes) are just a few. >>>>> >>>>> As another resident mentioned in a separate thread, the potential for >>>>> areas like Lincoln Woods, with a higher % of affordable housing units, to >>>>> one day be redeveloped and, despite an increase in total number of housing >>>>> units, result in a net decrease in the town's number of affordable units, >>>>> is concerning. If we can only mandate that 10% of new housing units (in >>>>> the >>>>> HCA zone) must be affordable, and the 40b threshold for the town is also >>>>> 10%, doesn't that imply that the town's overall ratio would get closer and >>>>> closer to being under the threshold with each new development that is >>>>> built? What will that result in - yet more development? >>>>> >>>>> Further, the argument that the entire district needs to be near >>>>> the commuter rail station does not make sense to me. The commuter rail is, >>>>> at its best, inconvenient and expensive, and at its worst it is both of >>>>> those things, plus unreliable. The traffic study that was shared, in my >>>>> opinion, grossly understates the potential impact of the additional >>>>> vehicles resulting from the additional development. The reality is that >>>>> most people, unless they live in perhaps Boston/Cambridge/Somerville, use >>>>> cars for much of their daily lives. >>>>> >>>>> It also pains me to hear, from multiple individuals, that the >>>>> "potential development will take decades". I'm a relatively new and >>>>> young homeowner in Lincoln. I intend to be here in the future "decades" >>>>> referenced, and I hope to get to enjoy Lincoln with my children in much >>>>> the >>>>> same way so many current residents have over the past several decades. >>>>> These choices we make today will have big impacts, and we can also be sure >>>>> that this will not be the last effort by the Commonwealth to force >>>>> additional development in the decades to come. >>>>> >>>>> I look forward to the continued lively debate among residents and the >>>>> various working groups, but it feels like there is much more that needs to >>>>> be explored before we can have a "final" proposal. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Will Broughton >>>>> Round Hill Rd >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 2:32 PM Robert Ahlert <robahl...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thank goodness you are paying attention Bob! >>>>>> >>>>>> The HCA feels like a juggernaut and options were clearly favored >>>>>> towards “all near Lincoln station”. I have a long series of unanswered >>>>>> questions. I hope to get answers and publish them all on a blog/website >>>>>> that everyone can read. >>>>>> >>>>>> I’ll need help to put it together and get answers. >>>>>> >>>>>> If anyone is even slightly concerned about what is happening with the >>>>>> HCA in Lincoln, please email me privately or text me on 781.738.1069. >>>>>> >>>>>> Rob A >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 1:30 PM Robert Domnitz <bobdom...@hotmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 Conant Road as shown in options A,B, >>>>>>> and C >>>>>>> from the HCAWG would likely result in rapid redevelopment, as >>>>>>> owners on Conant 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> 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. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> 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. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Robert Ahlert* | *781.738.1069* | robahl...@gmail.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. >> >> -- > 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.
