1000% agree with Allen and just add that any other Options we consider D, E, F, etc need to have enough distinction in them and pros/cons need to be fairly developed. Traffic impact for each option D, E, F should be paid for if necessary to get an objective understanding of those impacts.
Rob On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 10:47 AM Allen Vander Meulen <pastorall...@gmail.com> wrote: > The Planning Board is correct in that a detailed traffic study is not > possible without a known quantity for use as a model - i.e., a development > proposal. But, we don’t need a detailed study. Many of these challenges > have troubled us for years and are already well known (and/or easy to > foresee). > > Ruth Ann Hendrickson is correct enumerating what the potential issues are > (and developing possible solutions) is a worthwhile endeavor. A > well-structured and wholistic study will provide a clearer understanding of > the challenges we’re likely to face, and the costs and benefits of > addressing them (and how best to do so). As Ruth Ann said, this will allow > us to have plans already in place when that first developer knocks on the > door, which will be a huge advantage. > > In closing, I have closely followed the town’s response to the Housing > Choice Act since it was signed into law in January, 2021. Developing and > vetting the zoning-change proposals, and gaining the approvals needed to > comply with the HCA, is a very complex and daunting task. The HCAWG, > Planning and Select Boards, Town Administration, and many other > contributors, have done a superb and thorough job. If approved at Town > Meeting next year, their recommendations will be of immense benefit to all > of us in the years to come. > > - Allen Vander Meulen > > > On Oct 11, 2023, at 20:56, RAandBOB <raand...@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > > I am largely in favor of the recommendations from the HCA study > committee. But I did not like Planning Board‘s response to traffic issues. > Usually, she said, they deal with traffic issues case by case basis, as the > developments before the planning board. In this case, however, the Town is > opening up the possibility for a large of development in a small area. > > > > I think the Planning Board should look at the overall picture and > develop mitigation plans. For example, perhaps Lewis Street should be > closed in the middle so that developments in the rear have to exit onto Rte > 117. Can we negotiate with the State to improve the rail station and to > ensure that the gates are not down when the train is in the station? > Long-term planning such as this needs to be thought through before the > first developer knocks on the door. > > > > Ruth Ann Hendrickson > > (She, her, hers) > > 2253 Concord Rd. > > -- > > 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.
