date:20231201

There is a marked difference between plans not being "final'' and an
assertion made by folks affiliated with the RLF/LLCT that "there is no
development plan for the mall", when the evidence points to the contrary.
Please see below for links.



On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:39 PM John Mendelson 
wrote:

> Yes, discussions have happened, meetings have taken place, but plans are
> **not** final.  How many times does this need to be repeated?
>
> Listen to some Jethro Tull.  Vote C.
>
> Good night.
>
> John
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 9:32 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>
>> This is absolutely **not** true.
>>
>> The HCAWG site says the following: "RLF has been working with CIVICO to
>> develop a vision for the Mall." (
>> https://www.lincolntown.org/1327/Housing-Choice-Act-Working-Group)
>>
>> Ms. Olson confirmed in writing: "The RLF has met with the town to
>> explain what they would like to see in the mall zoning. They brought along
>> Civico."
>>
>> The SOTT presentation says: "The RLF is pursuing a redevelopment project
>> for the benefit of the Town and the Lincoln Station area as we feel it is
>> our best chance at improving the sustainability of commercial space at the
>> Mall." (page 33 from this presentation:
>> https://www.lincolntown.org/DocumentCenter/View/85116/2023-SOTT-HCA-Slide-Deck-wtih-Notes?bidId=
>> )
>>
>> Ms. Barnes said in the November 8th forums that "current plans would
>> bring a reduction in commercial space at the mall".
>>
>> To say that the "there is no redevelopment plan for the mall right now"
>> is incredibly misleading, given all of the above and multiple public
>> meetings.
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> Karla Gravis
>> Weston Rd
>> A resident not affiliated with any board in town, but very happy to see
>> board and town employees disclosing their affiliation
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:06 PM Sara Lupkas  wrote:
>>
>>> There are no basic site plans for the mall because there is no
>>> redevelopment plan for the mall right now. The HCA options that we will be
>>> voting on tomorrow are to decide where to put the multi-family zoning
>>> districts, that's it. There is no development plan for the mall at this
>>> time, and no developer bidding on any project. Putting forward any site
>>> plans under these conditions would be extremely premature.
>>>
>>> Sara Lupkas
>>> Staff member of the Lincoln Land Conservation Trust, but these are my
>>> personal views and not an official statement
>>> Sandy Pond 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

Ok, not technical site plans. How about some 2D “design concepts” which
include the full site?

The real answer as to why they don’t have them is because they don’t need
to have them. And they don’t need to have them because the plan is to get
HCA zoning and then sell the property for top dollar. Then let the new
owner/developer come up with actual site plans which only the PB sees
because it’s HCA zoning. And the PB can’t control costs of what is built so
the owner/developer will look to pass their higher costs to consumers by
building luxury condos that only the top 1% can afford.

It just doesn’t seem very progressive to me at all but maybe we’ll get a
super nice developer.

Rob

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:06 PM Sara Lupkas  wrote:

> There are no basic site plans for the mall because there is no
> redevelopment plan for the mall right now. The HCA options that we will be
> voting on tomorrow are to decide where to put the multi-family zoning
> districts, that's it. There is no development plan for the mall at this
> time, and no developer bidding on any project. Putting forward any site
> plans under these conditions would be extremely premature.
>
> Sara Lupkas
> Staff member of the Lincoln Land Conservation Trust, but these are my
> personal views and not an official statement
> Sandy Pond Rd
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:03 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>
>> I can imagine a person that votes for C now in December, but then feels
>> hoodwinked because he or she later learns about other details in the
>> bylaws, that he or she which switch their vote to No in March.
>>
>> It would’ve been much cleaner if the planning board had published their
>> draft bylaws by now. It would also be much cleaner if we had some basic
>> site plans for the Mall. It would also have been much cleaner if we had a
>> better traffic study which included 5 corners.  Etc.
>>
>> Let’s take another year to figure this out with some fresh sets of eyes.
>>
>> Sorry, I’m on repeat now.
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:31 PM Karla Gravis 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws that
>>> will be up for vote in March.
>>>
>>> Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important part
>>> of the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' (4
>>> stories) in the Village Center.
>>>
>>> In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that
>>> include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of those
>>> will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between the
>>> lesser of two evils.
>>>
>>> Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says the
>>> PB can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, the vote
>>> in March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any
>>> restrictions or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't
>>> agree with either? We are forcing residents into false choices.
>>>
>>> Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of these
>>> considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the option to
>>> choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are letting
>>> the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting.
>>>
>>> This is very much internally consistent.
>>>
>>>
>>>


 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP  wrote:

> What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the
> Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town
> meeting?
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis 
> wrote:
>
>> I am confused with this answer.
>>
>> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In
>> March, the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws 
>> (currently
>> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).
>>
>> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option
>> to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, 
>> there
>> should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability 
>> to
>> pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
>> whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.
>>
>> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
>> information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
>> make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on 
>> those
>> critical variables.
>>
>> We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented
>> in March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March,
>> residents will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or
>> non-compliance.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Once again,

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

2023-12-01 Thread John Mendelson

Yes, discussions have happened, meetings have taken place, but plans are
**not** final.  How many times does this need to be repeated?

Listen to some Jethro Tull.  Vote C.

Good night.

John

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 9:32 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:

> This is absolutely **not** true.
>
> The HCAWG site says the following: "RLF has been working with CIVICO to
> develop a vision for the Mall." (
> https://www.lincolntown.org/1327/Housing-Choice-Act-Working-Group)
>
> Ms. Olson confirmed in writing: "The RLF has met with the town to explain
> what they would like to see in the mall zoning. They brought along
> Civico."
>
> The SOTT presentation says: "The RLF is pursuing a redevelopment project
> for the benefit of the Town and the Lincoln Station area as we feel it is
> our best chance at improving the sustainability of commercial space at the
> Mall." (page 33 from this presentation:
> https://www.lincolntown.org/DocumentCenter/View/85116/2023-SOTT-HCA-Slide-Deck-wtih-Notes?bidId=
> )
>
> Ms. Barnes said in the November 8th forums that "current plans would bring
> a reduction in commercial space at the mall".
>
> To say that the "there is no redevelopment plan for the mall right now" is
> incredibly misleading, given all of the above and multiple public meetings.
>
> Respectfully,
> Karla Gravis
> Weston Rd
> A resident not affiliated with any board in town, but very happy to see
> board and town employees disclosing their affiliation
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:06 PM Sara Lupkas  wrote:
>
>> There are no basic site plans for the mall because there is no
>> redevelopment plan for the mall right now. The HCA options that we will be
>> voting on tomorrow are to decide where to put the multi-family zoning
>> districts, that's it. There is no development plan for the mall at this
>> time, and no developer bidding on any project. Putting forward any site
>> plans under these conditions would be extremely premature.
>>
>> Sara Lupkas
>> Staff member of the Lincoln Land Conservation Trust, but these are my
>> personal views and not an official statement
>> Sandy Pond Rd
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:03 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>>
>>> I can imagine a person that votes for C now in December, but then feels
>>> hoodwinked because he or she later learns about other details in the
>>> bylaws, that he or she which switch their vote to No in March.
>>>
>>> It would’ve been much cleaner if the planning board had published their
>>> draft bylaws by now. It would also be much cleaner if we had some basic
>>> site plans for the Mall. It would also have been much cleaner if we had a
>>> better traffic study which included 5 corners.  Etc.
>>>
>>> Let’s take another year to figure this out with some fresh sets of eyes.
>>>
>>> Sorry, I’m on repeat now.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:31 PM Karla Gravis 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws that
 will be up for vote in March.

 Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important
 part of the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' (4
 stories) in the Village Center.

 In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that
 include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of those
 will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between the
 lesser of two evils.

 Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says the
 PB can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, the vote
 in March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any
 restrictions or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't
 agree with either? We are forcing residents into false choices.

 Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of these
 considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the option to
 choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are letting
 the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting.

 This is very much internally consistent.



>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP  wrote:
>
>> What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the
>> Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town
>> meeting?
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am confused with this answer.
>>>
>>> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In
>>> March, the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws 
>>> (currently
>>> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).
>>>
>>> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the
>>> option to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very
>>> least, there should be 100% clarity on issues like height,

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

“There are no basic site plans for the mall because there is no
redevelopment plan for the mall right now. ”


How generous of Andrew Consigli, the owner of Civico Development, to offer
his free time to help Lincoln with our rezoning and bylaws out of the
goodness of his heart.


Also, Michelle Barnes stated at a recent meeting that the RLF would have
site designs for their development available in “Early December”… but it
seems she intended for that to happen right after town meeting instead of
before it?
Seems like strange timing since people have seen the site plans in person
for the development at the mall, so the site plans do exist already.

Sarah Postlethwait
Lewis St


On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:06 PM Sara Lupkas  wrote:

> There are no basic site plans for the mall because there is no
> redevelopment plan for the mall right now. The HCA options that we will be
> voting on tomorrow are to decide where to put the multi-family zoning
> districts, that's it. There is no development plan for the mall at this
> time, and no developer bidding on any project. Putting forward any site
> plans under these conditions would be extremely premature.
>
> Sara Lupkas
> Staff member of the Lincoln Land Conservation Trust, but these are my
> personal views and not an official statement
> Sandy Pond Rd
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:03 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>
>> I can imagine a person that votes for C now in December, but then feels
>> hoodwinked because he or she later learns about other details in the
>> bylaws, that he or she which switch their vote to No in March.
>>
>> It would’ve been much cleaner if the planning board had published their
>> draft bylaws by now. It would also be much cleaner if we had some basic
>> site plans for the Mall. It would also have been much cleaner if we had a
>> better traffic study which included 5 corners.  Etc.
>>
>> Let’s take another year to figure this out with some fresh sets of eyes.
>>
>> Sorry, I’m on repeat now.
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:31 PM Karla Gravis 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws that
>>> will be up for vote in March.
>>>
>>> Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important part
>>> of the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' (4
>>> stories) in the Village Center.
>>>
>>> In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that
>>> include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of those
>>> will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between the
>>> lesser of two evils.
>>>
>>> Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says the
>>> PB can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, the vote
>>> in March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any
>>> restrictions or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't
>>> agree with either? We are forcing residents into false choices.
>>>
>>> Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of these
>>> considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the option to
>>> choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are letting
>>> the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting.
>>>
>>> This is very much internally consistent.
>>>
>>>
>>>


 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP  wrote:

> What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the
> Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town
> meeting?
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis 
> wrote:
>
>> I am confused with this answer.
>>
>> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In
>> March, the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws 
>> (currently
>> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).
>>
>> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option
>> to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, 
>> there
>> should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability 
>> to
>> pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
>> whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.
>>
>> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
>> information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
>> make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on 
>> those
>> critical variables.
>>
>> We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented
>> in March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March,
>> residents will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or
>> non-compliance.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Once again, zoning

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

This is absolutely **not** true.

The HCAWG site says the following: "RLF has been working with CIVICO to
develop a vision for the Mall." (
https://www.lincolntown.org/1327/Housing-Choice-Act-Working-Group)

Ms. Olson confirmed in writing: "The RLF has met with the town to explain
what they would like to see in the mall zoning. They brought along Civico."

The SOTT presentation says: "The RLF is pursuing a redevelopment project
for the benefit of the Town and the Lincoln Station area as we feel it is
our best chance at improving the sustainability of commercial space at the
Mall." (page 33 from this presentation:
https://www.lincolntown.org/DocumentCenter/View/85116/2023-SOTT-HCA-Slide-Deck-wtih-Notes?bidId=
)

Ms. Barnes said in the November 8th forums that "current plans would bring
a reduction in commercial space at the mall".

To say that the "there is no redevelopment plan for the mall right now" is
incredibly misleading, given all of the above and multiple public meetings.

Respectfully,
Karla Gravis
Weston Rd
A resident not affiliated with any board in town, but very happy to see
board and town employees disclosing their affiliation





On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:06 PM Sara Lupkas  wrote:

> There are no basic site plans for the mall because there is no
> redevelopment plan for the mall right now. The HCA options that we will be
> voting on tomorrow are to decide where to put the multi-family zoning
> districts, that's it. There is no development plan for the mall at this
> time, and no developer bidding on any project. Putting forward any site
> plans under these conditions would be extremely premature.
>
> Sara Lupkas
> Staff member of the Lincoln Land Conservation Trust, but these are my
> personal views and not an official statement
> Sandy Pond Rd
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:03 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>
>> I can imagine a person that votes for C now in December, but then feels
>> hoodwinked because he or she later learns about other details in the
>> bylaws, that he or she which switch their vote to No in March.
>>
>> It would’ve been much cleaner if the planning board had published their
>> draft bylaws by now. It would also be much cleaner if we had some basic
>> site plans for the Mall. It would also have been much cleaner if we had a
>> better traffic study which included 5 corners.  Etc.
>>
>> Let’s take another year to figure this out with some fresh sets of eyes.
>>
>> Sorry, I’m on repeat now.
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:31 PM Karla Gravis 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws that
>>> will be up for vote in March.
>>>
>>> Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important part
>>> of the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' (4
>>> stories) in the Village Center.
>>>
>>> In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that
>>> include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of those
>>> will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between the
>>> lesser of two evils.
>>>
>>> Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says the
>>> PB can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, the vote
>>> in March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any
>>> restrictions or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't
>>> agree with either? We are forcing residents into false choices.
>>>
>>> Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of these
>>> considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the option to
>>> choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are letting
>>> the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting.
>>>
>>> This is very much internally consistent.
>>>
>>>
>>>


 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP  wrote:

> What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the
> Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town
> meeting?
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis 
> wrote:
>
>> I am confused with this answer.
>>
>> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In
>> March, the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws 
>> (currently
>> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).
>>
>> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option
>> to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, 
>> there
>> should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability 
>> to
>> pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
>> whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.
>>
>> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
>> information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
>> make those

Re: [LincolnTalk] Primer on units in Options C and E

2023-12-01 Thread Lis Herbert

57! For once, a number that matters. Thank you, Louis.Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 1, 2023, at 8:54 PM, Louis Zipes  wrote:Hi Greg,I'm glad you highlighted the subjective nature of your figures. Therefore, as a Supporter of Proposal C in that spirit I'm going to try and summarize your scenario under E using another calculation:
Option E: ~160 net new units built at Lincoln Station, increasing Lincoln's overall housing stock by ~8%100 units built at the Village Center in 3 story buildings through Town Meeting (see below*)0 units built along Codman road  --> True!39 net new units built along Lincoln Rd / Lewis St  --> Who knows, after all some of the property owners are fervent Option E supporters but I will still add it in. 18 net new units built at Lincoln Woods --> Maybe, maybe not because we have no idea what a private Developer will do but still I will add it in. *Village Center: So since we have moved from Proposal C, which was overwhelmingly supported at SOTT and then we moved to D1-D3 and now also somehow Proposal E was included in the mix I'm not counting on anything for the Village Center if Proposal E somehow wins tomorrow.So I'm going to count the Village Center as zero. If you can't imagine a more limited amount of housing under C then I'm not going to give the same courtesy for E and some kind of redevelopment for .So we are at 57 total net new units in the best case scenario with Proposal E. Which even if the commonwealth somehow calls us compliant would mean that we over 7 years, if you factor from the completion of Oriole Landing (2022) to your 5 year into the future horizon (considering that zoning probably won't be fully completed to 2024 or maybe even later because of course people are saying 'why are we rushing!') we will have produced a grand total of of 5.7 affordable units (using the 10% floor) meaning less than one affordable unit per year by 2029.  Plus over that 7 year time frame (2022 - 2029) we would actually produce total housing yearly output (8.14 units per year) lower than our already paltry 14.28 units per year of housing we have built per year over the last 57 years. I'm basing this on the 800 units built between 1966 to 2022 that we were told to be proud of. Let's not even get into how many of those units are specialized let alone the fact that a bunch of us are sitting on low interest rate loans so we are probably not going anywhere from our current houses in the next 20 plus years so a bunch of housing is essentially off the market for the next few decades.I think that is it for me for the night. I'm going to play a little Spelling Bee, rest up and get ready for tomorrow. I might come up with a Bingo Card ala my first effort back in 2019 to fill out when I hear people, on both sides, bring up certain topics and arguments.Best, LouisOn Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 6:36 PM Greg H.  wrote:Hi all,A handful of friends who have been following the HCA debate less closely have asked for my expectations of what development will realistically look like under different scenarios (i.e. how to read the tables). I thought it might be helpful to share here in case others have similar questions. While there is subjectivity introduced in any projection, I've tried to keep to the facts where possible and use conservative assumptions. I welcome any questions or challenges to assumptions.Here are my assumptions (based on a 5-year horizon):Assume the Village Center is developed to zoning limits*Where zoning overlays on existing condos, assume no new development Where zoning overlays on existing apartments (Lincoln Woods), assume units built = 50% of the difference between existing units and capacityWhere zoning overlays on existing single family or commercial, assume 50% of property owners sell and condos are built to zoning limits*If "E" wins tomorrow, assume the Mall will be developed to 100 units separately at town meeting (highly likely since all C/D supporters and many E supporters would be supportive)*Note that zoning limits are different from modeled units and are a more realistic measure of what can be builtSummary of net new units built in medium termOption C: ~400 net new units built at Lincoln Station, increasing Lincoln's overall housing stock by ~20% 178 units built at the Village Center in 3 or 4 story buildings114 net new units built along Codman road87 net new units built along Lincoln Rd / Lewis St18 net new units built at Lincoln WoodsOption E: ~160 net new units built at Lincoln Station, increasing Lincoln's overall housing stock by ~8%100 units built at the Village Center in 3 story buildings through Town Meeting0 units built along Codman road39 net new units built along Lincoln Rd / Lewis St18 net new units built at Lincoln WoodsDisclosureI will be voting for Option E tomorrow, but have tried to be impartial in the above assessment (e.g., I personally think the 50% I used is a too-conservative assumption for what percent of Lewis St/Lincoln Rd/Codman Rd

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

2023-12-01 Thread Sara Lupkas

There are no basic site plans for the mall because there is no
redevelopment plan for the mall right now. The HCA options that we will be
voting on tomorrow are to decide where to put the multi-family zoning
districts, that's it. There is no development plan for the mall at this
time, and no developer bidding on any project. Putting forward any site
plans under these conditions would be extremely premature.

Sara Lupkas
Staff member of the Lincoln Land Conservation Trust, but these are my
personal views and not an official statement
Sandy Pond Rd

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:03 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:

> I can imagine a person that votes for C now in December, but then feels
> hoodwinked because he or she later learns about other details in the
> bylaws, that he or she which switch their vote to No in March.
>
> It would’ve been much cleaner if the planning board had published their
> draft bylaws by now. It would also be much cleaner if we had some basic
> site plans for the Mall. It would also have been much cleaner if we had a
> better traffic study which included 5 corners.  Etc.
>
> Let’s take another year to figure this out with some fresh sets of eyes.
>
> Sorry, I’m on repeat now.
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:31 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>
>> With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws that
>> will be up for vote in March.
>>
>> Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important part
>> of the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' (4
>> stories) in the Village Center.
>>
>> In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that
>> include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of those
>> will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between the
>> lesser of two evils.
>>
>> Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says the
>> PB can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, the vote
>> in March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any
>> restrictions or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't
>> agree with either? We are forcing residents into false choices.
>>
>> Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of these
>> considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the option to
>> choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are letting
>> the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting.
>>
>> This is very much internally consistent.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP  wrote:
>>>
 What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the
 Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town
 meeting?

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis 
 wrote:

> I am confused with this answer.
>
> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In March,
> the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws (currently
> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).
>
> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option
> to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, 
> there
> should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability 
> to
> pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
> whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.
>
> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
> information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
> make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on 
> those
> critical variables.
>
> We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented in
> March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March, residents
> will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or 
> non-compliance.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting.
>>
>> The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as
>> required by law. The town then votes at town meeting.
>>
>> Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by
>>> the EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly
>>> zoning by laws".
>>>
>>> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is
>>> incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions
>>> tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning board 
>>> can
>>> just override everything and make it whatever height and density that 
>>> they

[LincolnTalk] Fwd: Voting on incomplete options

2023-12-01 Thread Garrick Niemiec

Vote for EE and be free!

-- Forwarded message -
From: Garrick Niemiec 
Date: Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options
To: Robert Ahlert , Karla Gravis ,
Jennifer Glass , Lincoln Talk ,
Sara Mattes 


The system is flawed...our leadership knows it but continues to perpetuate
it except for Sara Mattes...she works for democracy

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 8:03 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:

> I can imagine a person that votes for C now in December, but then feels
> hoodwinked because he or she later learns about other details in the
> bylaws, that he or she which switch their vote to No in March.
>
> It would’ve been much cleaner if the planning board had published their
> draft bylaws by now. It would also be much cleaner if we had some basic
> site plans for the Mall. It would also have been much cleaner if we had a
> better traffic study which included 5 corners.  Etc.
>
> Let’s take another year to figure this out with some fresh sets of eyes.
>
> Sorry, I’m on repeat now.
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:31 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>
>> With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws that
>> will be up for vote in March.
>>
>> Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important part
>> of the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' (4
>> stories) in the Village Center.
>>
>> In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that
>> include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of those
>> will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between the
>> lesser of two evils.
>>
>> Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says the
>> PB can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, the vote
>> in March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any
>> restrictions or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't
>> agree with either? We are forcing residents into false choices.
>>
>> Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of these
>> considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the option to
>> choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are letting
>> the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting.
>>
>> This is very much internally consistent.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP  wrote:
>>>
 What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the
 Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town
 meeting?

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis 
 wrote:

> I am confused with this answer.
>
> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In March,
> the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws (currently
> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).
>
> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option
> to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, 
> there
> should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability 
> to
> pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
> whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.
>
> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
> information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
> make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on 
> those
> critical variables.
>
> We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented in
> March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March, residents
> will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or 
> non-compliance.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting.
>>
>> The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as
>> required by law. The town then votes at town meeting.
>>
>> Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by
>>> the EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly
>>> zoning by laws".
>>>
>>> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is
>>> incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions
>>> tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning board 
>>> can
>>> just override everything and make it whatever height and density that 
>>> they
>>> (or the developer) feels like adding.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue that
>>> Utile thought may need

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

2023-12-01 Thread Garrick Niemiec

The system is flawed...our leadership knows it but continues to perpetuate
it except for Sara Mattes...she works for democracy

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 8:03 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:

> I can imagine a person that votes for C now in December, but then feels
> hoodwinked because he or she later learns about other details in the
> bylaws, that he or she which switch their vote to No in March.
>
> It would’ve been much cleaner if the planning board had published their
> draft bylaws by now. It would also be much cleaner if we had some basic
> site plans for the Mall. It would also have been much cleaner if we had a
> better traffic study which included 5 corners.  Etc.
>
> Let’s take another year to figure this out with some fresh sets of eyes.
>
> Sorry, I’m on repeat now.
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:31 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>
>> With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws that
>> will be up for vote in March.
>>
>> Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important part
>> of the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' (4
>> stories) in the Village Center.
>>
>> In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that
>> include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of those
>> will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between the
>> lesser of two evils.
>>
>> Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says the
>> PB can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, the vote
>> in March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any
>> restrictions or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't
>> agree with either? We are forcing residents into false choices.
>>
>> Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of these
>> considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the option to
>> choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are letting
>> the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting.
>>
>> This is very much internally consistent.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP  wrote:
>>>
 What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the
 Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town
 meeting?

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis 
 wrote:

> I am confused with this answer.
>
> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In March,
> the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws (currently
> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).
>
> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option
> to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, 
> there
> should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability 
> to
> pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
> whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.
>
> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
> information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
> make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on 
> those
> critical variables.
>
> We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented in
> March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March, residents
> will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or 
> non-compliance.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting.
>>
>> The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as
>> required by law. The town then votes at town meeting.
>>
>> Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by
>>> the EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly
>>> zoning by laws".
>>>
>>> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is
>>> incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions
>>> tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning board 
>>> can
>>> just override everything and make it whatever height and density that 
>>> they
>>> (or the developer) feels like adding.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue that
>>> Utile thought may need addressed before submitting it to the state. It
>>> meets all the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC.
>>>
>>> Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never deemed
>>> compliant. Nor were options D1, D2 or D3.
>>>
>>> Furthermore,

[LincolnTalk] A few musings on tomorrow's votes

2023-12-01 Thread Greg H.

Hi all,

In an effort to do my small part to help the meeting go faster tomorrow,
sharing my thoughts on tomorrow's topics over Lincoln Talk vs. in person.

*On the Community Center*

   - I agree Parks & Rec should be at the school and that the pods are in
   need of renovation or replacement
   - I think there are valid arguments for locating the COA at *either*
   Lincoln Station (where it would soon be walkable by hundreds more people
   thanks to the HCA) or in an existing (but renovated) historic structure, of
   which we have several including Bemis Hall, the Pierce House, etc.
   - I would advocate for the latter, since by removing the COA from Bemis
   and building anew we will have yet another underutilized historic building
   to maintain or (regrettably) watch fall into disrepair
   - I remain unconvinced of the benefits of co-locating the COA and Parks
   & Rec, especially since the optimal location for each is different

*On the RLF and HCA*

   - I have historically been a huge fan of the RLF/LLCT and its mission to
   preserve Lincoln's rural character
   - I am honestly very confused, however, about how RLF's support for
   Option C aligns with its mission. The definition of "rural" is quite
   literally "places with lower population density". Option C (which will
   likely increase Lincoln's population by over 20%) is the option under
   consideration that most significantly increases Lincoln's population and
   therefore most significantly decreases Lincoln's rural-ness
   - I understand that the RLF wants to maximize profit on their sale of
   the Mall by cutting red tape, but why not at least endorse D3 which keeps
   some semblance of "rural character" by Codman Farm?

*On the HCA in general*

   - I think we as a town have a wide range of valid HCA options we could
   consider, from outright non-compliance ("wait and see") to "build as much
   as possible"
   - We all have different priorities and views, which I respect
   - Given this, I think there's a strong argument for choosing a
   compromise option tomorrow
   - I believe Option E + voting "yes" on the Mall redevelopment next
   Spring is the closest we have to a compromise between those favoring
   maximum change (C) vs. those planning to vote against compliance next Spring
   - (To a lesser extent, I think D3 could also be considered a compromise,
   since at least it doesn't develop Codman Rd)

*On the Community Center / HCA interplay*

   - For those who do want to locate a Community Center at the Mall, I
   encourage you to support Option E - I think it unlikely any developer
   (including the RLF) would choose to forgo profit by choosing the CC as a
   tenant over luxury condos without the Town making it a condition

*Closing HCA thoughts*

   - There are hundreds of towns in Eastern Massachusetts with dense town
   centers and vibrant shopping plazas, but very few with 80 miles of trails,
   community farms, and safe roads for pedestrians. I fear that when all this
   is said and done, we are going to have made a small impact on housing, but
   a large and irreversible change on Lincoln


If you got this far, thanks for reading and see you tomorrow!

Greg Haines
41 Lincoln 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

2023-12-01 Thread Terri via Lincoln

 Not for long.  With every option C vote, Civico inches closer to owning  the 
mall property. Then we can say... I told you so.  

Terri K

On Friday, December 1, 2023 at 12:39:11 PM EST, Margaret Olson 
 wrote:  
 
 The owner of the mall property is the RLF, not Civico.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:36 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait  wrote:

There are already 4 story buildings being proposed at the mall to be able to 
fit the 100 units Civico is insisting on… the only way the mall could add a 
community center is if another floor was added, making it 5 stories. 

At what point do we say that’s enough? 
Sarah PostlethwaitLewis Street
On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:53 AM Margaret Olson  wrote:

There is nothing that would prevent the RLF from providing or preserving the 
option of community center space.  And, since it would likely be a long-term 
lease arrangement, it would spread the cost over the life of the lease with the 
upfront construction costs borne by the developer.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:44 AM Lynne Smith  wrote:

Option E is the only HCA option that would allow us to think about including 
the Community Center at the Mall.
Lynne Smith5 Tabor Hill RoadLincoln, MA 01773cell:  781-258-1175ly...@smith.net



On Dec 1, 2023, at 8:53 AM, Jane Appell  wrote:
Ken, 
You make a great point. The community center and housing zoning came up at 
different times as separate issues. But,  For good planning and to provide the 
most benefit to the town as we would like to see it, it makes sense to look at 
them both together while we have the chance. 
Jane

Jane Appell, Ph.D.Sent from my iPad

On Dec 1, 2023, at 7:54 AM, Ken Hurd  wrote:



Hello LincolnTalkers,With apologies for expressing yet again my strongly held 
opinion as an architect concerned with what we build in Lincoln, I want to 
remind everyone why I and many others believe we should not build a community 
center on the school campus.  I still believe it should be located in Lincoln 
Station, particularly now that our small commercial area is in play because of 
the Housing Choice Act.
As I wrote last year, "I fully support building a new facility, but it has long 
been my opinion that such a major investment by the town should be deployed 
where it is most needed - namely in the Lincoln Station area.  For more than 
ten years since Town Meeting approved the Comprehensive Long Range Plan, in 
which the revitalization of Lincoln Station was overwhelmingly one of the 
highest priorities, the area has lain dormant and in serious need of a catalyst 
to jumpstart its transformation into the compact, vital, walkable village 
center that was a stated goal at the time.  A community center in such a 
location would be the equivalent of an anchor store in a retail setting, and by 
virtue of attracting more people on a regular basis, it would create more 
opportunities for a clustered cross-current of activities spawning greater 
social interaction."  
As many will recall at last year’s Town Meeting, there was serious concern 
about the cost to build it, and I am of the opinion that there are better ways 
to accomplish this than spending anywhere from $18 to $24 million of taxpayer 
money to do so.  As was recently suggested to me by an experienced urban 
planner, why not include the Community Center as a required accessory use in 
the development of a future residential project at Lincoln Station?   
As he said, “With clear program requirements and project parameters to guide 
the design of a new project, developers can be very efficient in realizing a 
good project on time and within budget.” Moreover, “It would be a plus to any 
potential developer's proforma to have a confirmed tenant (assuming COA 
long-term lease) for … an active community use in purposely designed ground 
level space. This strategy would minimize the cost to Lincoln upfront financing 
for design and construction, replace public project inefficiencies with 
professional development expertise, and as such the new Community Center 
facility may be more affordable to the town's stressed taxpayers."
As I also wrote last year, I believe  it would constitute the classic suburban 
planning error to create a new facility that stands alone at the school and, 
like the suburban mall, accessible only by car.  In addition, because of school 
protocols, there would be very limited inter-generational co-mingling until 
after school hours, if at all.  And, even if there weren’t a greater  awareness 
about the effects of climate change, wouldn’t it make far more sense to locate 
a community center where there are already other crucial services such as the 
post office, grocery store, cleaners, a cafe and restaurant, not to mention the 
potential for more housing?  
Earlier this week I wrote the Selects about including an option to vote for 
“None of the Above” at tomorrow’s Town Meeting.  Absent any response, I plan to 
vote for Option 3 ($12.5 million project cost) that has already been 
characterized as

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

2023-12-01 Thread Lis Herbert

Yes — total nonsense.Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 1, 2023, at 7:18 PM, DJCP  wrote:What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town meeting? On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:I am confused with this answer.No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In March, the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws (currently undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, there should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability to pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on those critical variables. We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented in March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March, residents will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or non-compliance.   On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson  wrote:Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting. The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as required by law. The town then votes at town meeting. Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting.On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait  wrote:The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by the EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning by laws".This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning board can just override everything and make it whatever height and density that they (or the developer) feels like adding. Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue that Utile thought may need addressed before submitting it to the state. It meets all the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC.Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never deemed compliant. Nor were options D1, D2 or D3. Furthermore, option C was significantly changed on Wednesday and will need resubmitted to the state to account for these changes. It’s unfortunate that you think we are trying to be disruptive, considering the state actually modified the HCA model used to calculate modeled units this week, due to the LRHA’s work highlighting the significant flaw that results in an overzoning of units. This change removed over 400 additional units from option C that could have been built, by right, on top of the 800 actual units that are allowed in the current option C being voted on tomorrow.While we are grateful that Utile finally listened to our concerns and consulted with the state to address the issue with the model, It’s unfortunate that the HCAWG members refused to sit down with us weeks ago when the issue was detected. So if you call that disruptive, so be it. Sarah Postlethwait Lewis StreetAnyone interested in learning more about Option E and the significant changes made to options C, D1, D2 and D3 this week can learn more here:https://sites.google.com/view/lincoln-hca-info/compare-the-optionsOn Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:10 PM John Mendelson  wrote:We are NOT being asked to vote on bylaws.  The HCA is a set of guidelines and we are being asked to vote for one of 5 zoning options that conform (or perhaps don't confirm in one case) to said guidelines.  We've been told repeatedly that bylaws are to follow and we will vote for one fully developed plan (or not) in MarchI find this continued obfuscation and distraction really frustrating and hard to hear as anything but an attempt to disrupt the process.JohnOn Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for approval at the March town meeting. Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for a set of bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred option would then be presented for approval in March. Options C and D as being voted on tomorrow are incomplete because we do not have answers to these questions: Building heights/storiesPB having override prower through special permitsCommercial space requirementsAllowance of fees in lieu of affordable unitsIf HCA zoning is "exactly zoning by laws" why are we voting under incomplete assumptions?On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Margaret Olson  wrote:Town

Re: [LincolnTalk] Primer on units in Options C and E

2023-12-01 Thread Louis Zipes

Hi Greg,
I'm glad you highlighted the subjective nature of your figures. Therefore,
as a Supporter of Proposal C in that spirit I'm going to try and summarize
your scenario under E using another calculation:

*Option E: ~160 net new units built at Lincoln Station,* *increasing
Lincoln's overall housing stock by ~8%*

   - 100 units built at the *Village Center *in 3 story buildings through
   Town Meeting (see below*)
   - 0 units built along Codman road * --> True!*
   - 39 net new units built along Lincoln Rd / Lewis St  -->* Who knows,
   after all some of the property owners are fervent Option E supporters but I
   will still add it in. *
   - 18 net new units built at Lincoln Woods
*--> Maybe, maybe not because we have no idea what a private Developer will
   do but still I will add it in. *

**Village Center:* So since we have moved from Proposal C, which was
overwhelmingly supported at SOTT and then we moved to D1-D3 and now also
somehow Proposal E was included in the mix I'm not counting on anything for
the Village Center if Proposal E somehow wins tomorrow.

So I'm going to count the Village Cente*r as zero.* If you can't imagine a
more limited amount of housing under C then I'm not going to give the same
courtesy for E and some kind of redevelopment for .

So we are at *57 total *net new units in the best case scenario with
Proposal E. Which even if the commonwealth somehow calls us compliant would
mean that we over 7 years, if you factor from the completion of Oriole
Landing (2022) to your 5 year into the future horizon (considering that
zoning probably won't be fully completed to 2024 or maybe even later
because of course people are saying 'why are we rushing!') we will have
produced a grand total of of *5.7* affordable units (using the 10% floor)
meaning *less than one affordable unit per year *by 2029*.  *

Plus over that 7 year time frame (2022 - 2029) we would actually produce
total housing yearly output (*8.14 units per year*) lower than our already
paltry 14.28 units per year of housing we have built per year over the last
57 years. I'm basing this on the 800 units built between 1966 to 2022 that
we were told to be proud of. Let's not even get into how many of those
units are specialized let alone the fact that a bunch of us are sitting on
low interest rate loans so we are probably not going anywhere from our
current houses in the next 20 plus years so a bunch of housing is
essentially off the market for the next few decades.

I think that is it for me for the night. I'm going to play a little
Spelling Bee, rest up and get ready for tomorrow. I might come up with a
Bingo Card ala my first effort back in 2019 to fill out when I hear people,
on both sides, bring up certain topics and arguments.

Best, Louis

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 6:36 PM Greg H.  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> A handful of friends who have been following the HCA debate less closely
> have asked for my expectations of what development will realistically look
> like under different scenarios (i.e. how to read the tables). I thought it
> might be helpful to share here in case others have similar questions. While
> there is subjectivity introduced in any projection, I've tried to keep to
> the facts where possible and use conservative assumptions. I welcome any
> questions or challenges to assumptions.
>
> *Here are my assumptions (based on a 5-year horizon):*
>
>- Assume the Village Center is developed to zoning limits*
>- Where zoning overlays on existing condos, assume no new development
>- Where zoning overlays on existing apartments (Lincoln Woods), assume
>units built = 50% of the difference between existing units and capacity
>- Where zoning overlays on existing single family or commercial,
>assume 50% of property owners sell and condos are built to zoning limits*
>- If "E" wins tomorrow, assume the Mall will be developed to 100 units
>separately at town meeting (highly likely since all C/D supporters and many
>E supporters would be supportive)
>- *Note that zoning limits are different from modeled units and are a
>more realistic measure of what can be built
>
> *Summary of net new units built in medium term*
>
> *Option C: ~400 net new units built at Lincoln Station, increasing
> Lincoln's overall housing stock by ~20% *
>
>- 178 units built at the Village Center in 3 or 4 story buildings
>- 114 net new units built along Codman road
>- 87 net new units built along Lincoln Rd / Lewis St
>- 18 net new units built at Lincoln Woods
>
> *Option E: ~160 net new units built at Lincoln Station,* *increasing
> Lincoln's overall housing stock by ~8%*
>
>- 100 units built at the Village Center in 3 story buildings through
>Town Meeting
>- 0 units built along Codman road
>- 39 net new units built along Lincoln Rd / Lewis St
>- 18 net new units built at Lincoln Woods
>
> *Disclosure*
> I will be voting for Option E tomorrow, but have tried to be impartial in
>

Re: [LincolnTalk] THE COMMONS EXPANSION

Thank you! This is quite informative and helpful. Definitely a lot to think
about.
I appreciate you sharing this.
Best,
Margo Martin

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:27 PM Christine M Campo 
wrote:

> Hello LincolnTalk!
>
>
>
> An email has been circling around in favor of the Commons expansion. I
> have some close friends whose parents are also at The Commons but have a
> very different take on the proposed expansion.  I have included below the
> bulleted comments from the original email (in blue) and the coordinating
> response (in black) on behalf of my friends.
>
>
>
> I’m only the messenger here…
>
>
>
> Town Meeting, December 2, 2023
>
>
>
> One issue that is not on many people’s radar but a critical one for many
> is the vote we will take regarding “THE COMMONS EXPANSION.”
>
>
>
> It will come after the community center and before the HCA. There is
> concern that many will leave for a break in between allowing a small
> majority to make this critical decision.
>
>
>
> Highlighted Concerns (in bullets) from the original email and responses
> (in bold):
>
>
>
> The Commons is a non-profit organization where all profits are funneled
> back into the organization.
> This is very misleading.  The owners keep perpetuating the idea that being
> a non-profit is equal to doing nothing wrong. "Non-profit" is simply a tax
> status. It is true that a non-profit cannot be owned or sold *- but
> its assets can be*. There is little limit on what kinds of* expenses *a
> non-profit can pay, including high salaries, and bonuses, and no control
> over with whom they sign contracts and how lucrative they are. Because
> Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRCs) are not regulated, there is
> plenty of risk that these kinds of abuses can happen.
>
> There are currently property systems failing with huge costs associated to
> fix them - including septic, roof infrastructure and siding on almost all
> buildings.
> This is dramatic and not truthful- the entire septic system was just
> replaced- and I have not heard about roofing issues (my mother has lived
> there for almost 12 years). The only siding issues that have been
> identified are on the skilled nursing building, and these are related to
> contractor failures, which are being remediated. There ARE kitchen
> deficiencies (too small for the current population, let alone an increased
> population), carpet and painting to be done in common areas and the parking
> is too limited. These have not been addressed because the property does not
> have sufficient capital reserves to pay for all of the upgrades; the former
> owners paid themselves big distributions rather than investing in the
> property. And, when they sold, they took a lot of money out of the
> transaction, instead of leaving it with the property. This is really one of
> our biggest concerns; we do not want this to happen again. There are
> currently no guarantees if the property is sold or profits generated from
> the expansion, that the net revenues will stay with the property.
>
> The expansion would generate an additional 1.2 million free cash flow that
> would go directly into repairing and maintaining the property.
> This is a huge point of concern as there has been a lack of financial
> projections provided for the as-is buildout and the proposed expansion.
> What has been provided to date *provides no detail* to how it is that
> this buildout will actually generate $1.1MM in cash flow. If that
> projection IS correct, then is 3+ years of construction all over the campus
> (remember many of the people are on walkers, wheelchairs, etc.), worth
> $1.1MM of cash, which will take 5 years to get there? Some of these units
> sell for over $1MM alone. Something does not add up.
>
>
>
> Running elderly housing in general is an increasingly costly endeavor and
> not permitting the Expansion would increase an already substantial resident
> monthly assessment to increase.
> Not clear that: a) monthly fees won't go up anyway as they have every year
> and b) that the way to improve that is by adding more units, which require
> taking on new debt= more expenses.  AND more residents will require more
> dining room space and staffing for services; they are already struggling to
> provide sufficient staffing for the current population.  The
> owner/developer has estimated this project will require a minimum of
> $12-$14 million more debt and it is already carrying approximately $105MM
> of debt now. This will add to an increasing cash flow burden on the
> property.
>
>
>
> The Commons is part of a Pilot tax program and pays the town taxes making
> it one of the only non-resident tax bases in Lincoln.
> The Commons does make a “Payment in Lieu of Taxes”, which is good for
> Lincoln (tax revenue), but that will be the case whether or not the
> expansion takes place.
>
>
>
> Residents are well aware of the years of construction and inconvenience
> but are still willing to support this because of the financial needs of the
>

Re: [LincolnTalk] Garage door repair???

2023-12-01 Thread Sonja Johansson

Door Systems Metro Boston

 (Framingham)

508-875-3508

Sonja Johansson

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 6:44 PM Rich Rosenbaum  wrote:

> You might check the recommendations on the Lincoln Squirrel:
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eRaE4o9SyHeRkFXuKqc9kPITLU8-whELX-YV5sdBU5Q/mobilebasic
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 6:33 PM Stacey Parks 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear LT,
>> Someone recommended a garage door person recently, but I cannot retrieve
>> the information.
>> Sorry to ask again.
>>
>> Thank you for any help.
>>
>> Best,
>> Stacey
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> --
>> 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

I can imagine a person that votes for C now in December, but then feels
hoodwinked because he or she later learns about other details in the
bylaws, that he or she which switch their vote to No in March.

It would’ve been much cleaner if the planning board had published their
draft bylaws by now. It would also be much cleaner if we had some basic
site plans for the Mall. It would also have been much cleaner if we had a
better traffic study which included 5 corners.  Etc.

Let’s take another year to figure this out with some fresh sets of eyes.

Sorry, I’m on repeat now.

Rob

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:31 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:

> With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws that
> will be up for vote in March.
>
> Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important part
> of the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' (4
> stories) in the Village Center.
>
> In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that
> include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of those
> will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between the
> lesser of two evils.
>
> Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says the PB
> can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, the vote in
> March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any restrictions
> or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't agree with
> either? We are forcing residents into false choices.
>
> Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of these
> considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the option to
> choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are letting
> the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting.
>
> This is very much internally consistent.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP  wrote:
>>
>>> What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the
>>> Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town
>>> meeting?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>>>
 I am confused with this answer.

 No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In March,
 the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws (currently
 undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).

 Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option
 to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, there
 should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability to
 pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
 whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.

 I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
 information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
 make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on those
 critical variables.

 We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented in
 March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March, residents
 will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or non-compliance.

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson 
 wrote:

> Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting.
>
> The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as
> required by law. The town then votes at town meeting.
>
> Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait 
> wrote:
>
>> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by
>> the EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly
>> zoning by laws".
>>
>> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is
>> incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions
>> tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning board 
>> can
>> just override everything and make it whatever height and density that 
>> they
>> (or the developer) feels like adding.
>>
>> Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue that
>> Utile thought may need addressed before submitting it to the state. It
>> meets all the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC.
>>
>> Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never deemed
>> compliant. Nor were options D1, D2 or D3.
>>
>> Furthermore, option C was significantly changed on Wednesday and
>> will need resubmitted to the state to account for these changes.
>>
>> It’s unfortunate that you think we are trying to be disruptive,
>> considering the state actually modified the HCA model used to
>> calculate modeled units this week, due to the LRHA’s work

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws that will
be up for vote in March.

Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important part of
the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' (4 stories)
in the Village Center.

In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that
include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of those
will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between the
lesser of two evils.

Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says the PB
can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, the vote in
March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any restrictions
or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't agree with
either? We are forcing residents into false choices.

Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of these
considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the option to
choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are letting
the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting.

This is very much internally consistent.



>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP  wrote:
>
>> What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the
>> Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town
>> meeting?
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>>
>>> I am confused with this answer.
>>>
>>> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In March,
>>> the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws (currently
>>> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).
>>>
>>> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option to
>>> choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, there
>>> should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability to
>>> pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
>>> whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.
>>>
>>> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
>>> information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
>>> make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on those
>>> critical variables.
>>>
>>> We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented in
>>> March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March, residents
>>> will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or non-compliance.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting.

 The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as
 required by law. The town then votes at town meeting.

 Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting.

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait 
 wrote:

> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by the
> EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning
> by laws".
>
> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is
> incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions
> tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning board 
> can
> just override everything and make it whatever height and density that they
> (or the developer) feels like adding.
>
> Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue that
> Utile thought may need addressed before submitting it to the state. It
> meets all the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC.
>
> Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never deemed
> compliant. Nor were options D1, D2 or D3.
>
> Furthermore, option C was significantly changed on Wednesday and will
> need resubmitted to the state to account for these changes.
>
> It’s unfortunate that you think we are trying to be disruptive,
> considering the state actually modified the HCA model used to
> calculate modeled units this week, due to the LRHA’s work highlighting the
> significant flaw that results in an overzoning of units.
>
> This change removed over 400 additional units from option C that
> could have been built, by right, on top of the 800 actual units that are
> allowed in the current option C being voted on tomorrow.
>
> While we are grateful that Utile finally listened to our concerns and
> consulted with the state to address the issue with the model, It’s
> unfortunate that the HCAWG members refused to sit down with us weeks ago
> when the issue was detected.
>
> So if you call that disruptive, so be it.
>
> Sarah Postlethwait
>
> Lewis Street
>
> 
>
> Anyone interested in

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

2023-12-01 Thread DJCP

What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the Planning
board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town meeting?

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:

> I am confused with this answer.
>
> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In March, the
> options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws (currently
> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).
>
> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option to
> choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, there
> should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability to
> pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
> whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.
>
> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
> information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
> make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on those
> critical variables.
>
> We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented in
> March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March, residents
> will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or non-compliance.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting.
>>
>> The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as
>> required by law. The town then votes at town meeting.
>>
>> Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by the
>>> EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning
>>> by laws".
>>>
>>> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is
>>> incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions
>>> tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning board can
>>> just override everything and make it whatever height and density that they
>>> (or the developer) feels like adding.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue that
>>> Utile thought may need addressed before submitting it to the state. It
>>> meets all the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC.
>>>
>>> Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never deemed
>>> compliant. Nor were options D1, D2 or D3.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, option C was significantly changed on Wednesday and will
>>> need resubmitted to the state to account for these changes.
>>>
>>> It’s unfortunate that you think we are trying to be disruptive,
>>> considering the state actually modified the HCA model used to calculate
>>> modeled units this week, due to the LRHA’s work highlighting the
>>> significant flaw that results in an overzoning of units.
>>>
>>> This change removed over 400 additional units from option C that could
>>> have been built, by right, on top of the 800 actual units that are allowed
>>> in the current option C being voted on tomorrow.
>>>
>>> While we are grateful that Utile finally listened to our concerns and
>>> consulted with the state to address the issue with the model, It’s
>>> unfortunate that the HCAWG members refused to sit down with us weeks ago
>>> when the issue was detected.
>>>
>>> So if you call that disruptive, so be it.
>>>
>>> Sarah Postlethwait
>>>
>>> Lewis Street
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> Anyone interested in learning more about Option E and the significant
>>> changes made to options C, D1, D2 and D3 this week can learn more here:
>>>
>>> https://sites.google.com/view/lincoln-hca-info/compare-the-options
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:10 PM John Mendelson 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 We are NOT being asked to vote on bylaws.  The HCA is a set of
 guidelines and we are being asked to vote for one of 5 zoning options that
 conform (or perhaps don't confirm in one case) to said guidelines.  We've
 been told repeatedly that bylaws are to follow and we will vote for one
 fully developed plan (or not) in March

 I find this continued obfuscation and distraction really frustrating
 and hard to hear as anything but an attempt to disrupt the process.

 John

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis 
 wrote:

> I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for approval at the
> March town meeting.
>
> Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for a set of
> bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred option would then be
> presented for approval in March. Options C and D as being voted on 
> tomorrow
> are incomplete because we do not have answers to these questions:
>
>- Building heights/stories
>- PB having override prower

Re: [LincolnTalk] Garage door repair???

2023-12-01 Thread Rich Rosenbaum

You might check the recommendations on the Lincoln Squirrel:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eRaE4o9SyHeRkFXuKqc9kPITLU8-whELX-YV5sdBU5Q/mobilebasic



On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 6:33 PM Stacey Parks  wrote:

> Dear LT,
> Someone recommended a garage door person recently, but I cannot retrieve
> the information.
> Sorry to ask again.
>
> Thank you for any help.
>
> Best,
> Stacey
> Sent from my iPhone
> --
> 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.

[LincolnTalk] Fw: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting Re: Voting on Saturday

2023-12-01 Thread Sara Kooima

Not every law written is constitutional. If the Town of Lincoln is
unwilling to address its ongoing discrimination and overt civil rights
violations, then we as residents must force the issues. The AG and the
Disability Law Center in Boston can help:


Office of the Attorney General of Massachusetts:
https://www.mass.gov/how-to/file-a-consumer-complaint

Disability Law Center:
https://www.dlc-ma.org/ask-for-help/

US Department of Justice
https://civilrights.justice.gov/report/

Sara Kooima
North Commons




On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:27 PM Adam M Hogue  wrote:

> I also personally feel my rights are being violated under the equal rights
> law in MA. We have a bunch of lawyers in town maybe we can sue Lincoln and
> bring change and name the town administrators and town board.
>
> *Adam M Hogue*
> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 4:18 PM, Sarah Liepert 
> wrote:
>
> 
> Dear LT,
>
> Please scroll down to see the reply of Town Administrator Tim Higgins,
> which I am sharing per his request. He includes the opinion of Town Counsel
> regarding the matter.
>
> Above it, you will see my response to Jane Marie, advising her of Mr.
> Higgins's response.
>
> Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General's Office) is not in
> agreement with the opinion of the Town of Lincoln's Town Counsel.
>
> You may contact Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts
> Attorney General's Office, at 781-429-9286. You may also document your
> concerns with her. She is copied on this email as well.
>
> All best,
>
> Sarah Liepert
> Trapelo Rd.
>
> --
> *From:* Sarah Liepert 
> *Sent:* Friday, December 1, 2023 10:57 AM
> *To:* Jane Marie ; bethany.h.br...@mass.gov <
> bethany.h.br...@mass.gov>
> *Cc:* Pereira, Dan ; Hutchinson, Jim <
> jhutchinsonsel...@lincolntown.org>; Cannon Holden, Sarah <
> sarahcannonhol...@gmail.com>; Higgins, Timothy S. <
> higgi...@lincolntown.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town
> Meeting Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday
>
> Dear Jane Marie,
>
> Please get in touch with Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the
> Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office as soon as possible. Her cell is
> 781-429-9286. She is copied on this email.
>
> Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General’s Office) is not in
> agreement with the Lincoln Town Counsel’s advisory opinion.
>
> You may document your concerns regarding ADA Reasonable Accommodations
> with Bethany Brown.
>
> All the best,
>
> Sarah Liepert
> Trapelo Rd., Lincoln
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 10:37 AM, Higgins, Timothy S. 
> wrote:
>
> 
>
> Hello Sarah and Jane Marie
>
>
>
> The Town’s preparations for Town Meeting include a whole host of
> accommodation measures.  Remote voting is not one of them as Town Counsel
> has advised us that remote voting is precluded by State Law.  Below please
> find her formal opinion.   We are, however, live streaming the meeting so
> that folks at home will be able to observe and listen.  The instructions
> for tuning in are included on the Town’s website.
>
>
>
> Thank you for your question.
>
>
>
> Tim Higgins
>
>
>
>
>
> *Timothy S. Higgins*
>
> Town Administrator
>
> Town of Lincoln
>
> 16 Lincoln Road
>
> Lincoln, MA 01773
>
>
>
> higgi...@lincolntown.org
>
> 781 259 -2601
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Tim, this is to follow up on my initial response to you concerning
> reasonable accommodations at town meetings.  We understand that the
> Massachusetts Office on Disability has taken the position that remote
> participation in a town meeting is a reasonable accommodation for a person
> who cannot attend.  In our opinion, allowing remote participation in an
> open town meeting is specifically prohibited by law and would fundamentally
> change both the nature and the conduct of a town meeting.
>
>
>
> As you are likely already aware, the Americans with Disabilities Act
> (“ADA”) requires public entities to make “reasonable modifications” to
> their procedures to accommodate persons with disabilities.  What is
> “reasonable” is fact-specific and depends upon the nature of the program
> and the accommodation being sought.  However, any change that would result
> in a “fundamental alteration” to the program or service is not required.  A
> fundamental alteration is one that results in a change in the essential
> nature of the service or program.  Likewise, a requested accommodation is
> not required if it would result in undue financial and administrative
> burdens.
>
>
>
> The very purpose of a town meeting is for members of the community to
> gather together to debate and vote of legislative issues of the Town.
> Allowing some individuals to participate from a remote location
> fundamentally changes the public, legislative process. Moreover, such
> action is specifically not allowed by law.  During the COVID-era revisions
> to various municipal laws, representative town meetings were specifically
> authorized to meet

[LincolnTalk] Council on Aging at the Mall

2023-12-01 Thread Tony Liepert

 Hi All,
I've been reading with great interest the discussion about locating the
Community Center at the Mall (Town Center).

My take on this opportunity is different but aligns with comments that
Peter Buchtal has made several times on LT.

I've never understood, nor bought the argument, that LEAP, Parks and Rec
(PR), and Council on Aging (COA) should all be co-located, and would
benefit from being co-located. I also agree with Ken Hurd about suburban
architecture mistakes that require a car for access.

With the recent revelation that mixed-use development could count towards
HCA requirements, a re-examination of that basic assumption is warranted.

LEAP, and Parks and Rec, should stay on the school campus. They operate
independently of COA and would continue to do so.

COA should be located at the Mall and would become an anchor tenant there.
Seniors attending COA activities at the Mall could also do their shopping,
banking, eating, etc, thereby supporting the commercial tenants at the
Mall. If the Mall buildout is done correctly, seniors would be drawn to
down-sizing to the Mall area, freeing up their larger houses (and yards!)
to new families in town.

Seniors also have fewer cars, and don't drive them during rush hours.

Comments welcome,
Tony


-- 
Tony Liepert
tliep...@gmail.com
617 633 3521 (cell)
-- 
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

2023-12-01 Thread Garrick Niemiec

You are SPOT ON guys...keep up the good work for fairness

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:

> I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for approval at the
> March town meeting.
>
> Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for a set of
> bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred option would then be
> presented for approval in March. Options C and D as being voted on tomorrow
> are incomplete because we do not have answers to these questions:
>
>- Building heights/stories
>- PB having override prower through special permits
>- Commercial space requirements
>- Allowance of fees in lieu of affordable units
>
> If HCA zoning is "exactly zoning by laws" why are we voting under
> incomplete assumptions?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> Town Counsel has advised us that we should not bring multiple potential
>> zoning by-laws to town meeting. The state regulates how zoning changes are
>> handled.
>>
>> A zoning article at town meeting is a straight yes/no vote on a very
>> specific set of changes. We can not have any sort of multiple choice vote
>> as we can for a "sense of the town" vote. So if we were to bring the zoning
>> by-law changes for all five options to town meeting we would have five
>> warrant articles. In what order should they appear? If the first one passes
>> do we go on and vote on the others? As a voter who supports the HCA but
>> doesn't like the variant that comes first in the warrant what should you
>> do? Vote no, holding out for your preferred option, or do you vote yes to
>> ensure we do comply? If all five are on the warrant what happens
>> if multiple options pass?
>>
>> Margaret
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:59 PM Karla Gravis 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Given that, according the Chair of the Planning Board:
>>>
>>>1.  "*Compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning by laws*"
>>>2. "Z*oning by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance*"
>>>3. These by-laws are not ready
>>>
>>> Then, why are we voting tomorrow?
>>>
>>> To emphasize how rushed this process has been, significant changes to
>>> the densities across options C and Ds were communicated on Wednesday
>>> evening (without any public meetings).
>>>
>>> The areas where the Planning Board hasn't agreed on the bylaws are:
>>> building heights/stories, giving the PB special permit powers to change
>>> densities and heights/stories, parking and allowing fees in lieu of
>>> affordable units. These are all critical questions as we evaluate the
>>> different options. How are we expected to discuss the merits of these
>>> options without a full understanding of those issues?
>>>
>>> LRHA has a stance on these open questions. Option E has a set of
>>> setbacks, height/story limits and floor area ratios for every district. We
>>> are distinctly opposed to providing variances to all of those items, as
>>> well as units per acre, through a Planning Board special permit.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Margaret Olson <
>>> marga...@margaretolson.com> wrote:
>>>
 Compliance with the HCA is *exactly* zoning by laws. The zoning
 by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance. There is no way to comply
 with the HCA without voting to amend the zoning by-laws.

 If the town votes down the proposed zoning by-laws in March, and the
 sense of the town is that we want to comply but the planning board
 presented an unacceptable set of regulations, then the planning board will
 go back to work and try again at a special town meeting at a later date.




>
> --
> 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.

[LincolnTalk] Primer on units in Options C and E

2023-12-01 Thread Greg H.

Hi all,

A handful of friends who have been following the HCA debate less closely
have asked for my expectations of what development will realistically look
like under different scenarios (i.e. how to read the tables). I thought it
might be helpful to share here in case others have similar questions. While
there is subjectivity introduced in any projection, I've tried to keep to
the facts where possible and use conservative assumptions. I welcome any
questions or challenges to assumptions.

*Here are my assumptions (based on a 5-year horizon):*

   - Assume the Village Center is developed to zoning limits*
   - Where zoning overlays on existing condos, assume no new development
   - Where zoning overlays on existing apartments (Lincoln Woods), assume
   units built = 50% of the difference between existing units and capacity
   - Where zoning overlays on existing single family or commercial, assume
   50% of property owners sell and condos are built to zoning limits*
   - If "E" wins tomorrow, assume the Mall will be developed to 100 units
   separately at town meeting (highly likely since all C/D supporters and many
   E supporters would be supportive)
   - *Note that zoning limits are different from modeled units and are a
   more realistic measure of what can be built

*Summary of net new units built in medium term*

*Option C: ~400 net new units built at Lincoln Station, increasing
Lincoln's overall housing stock by ~20% *

   - 178 units built at the Village Center in 3 or 4 story buildings
   - 114 net new units built along Codman road
   - 87 net new units built along Lincoln Rd / Lewis St
   - 18 net new units built at Lincoln Woods

*Option E: ~160 net new units built at Lincoln Station,* *increasing
Lincoln's overall housing stock by ~8%*

   - 100 units built at the Village Center in 3 story buildings through
   Town Meeting
   - 0 units built along Codman road
   - 39 net new units built along Lincoln Rd / Lewis St
   - 18 net new units built at Lincoln Woods

*Disclosure*
I will be voting for Option E tomorrow, but have tried to be impartial in
the above assessment (e.g., I personally think the 50% I used is a
too-conservative assumption for what percent of Lewis St/Lincoln Rd/Codman
Rd owners will sell within 5 years, but others might disagree so have left
as is).

Thank you,

Greg Haines
41 Lincoln 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.

[LincolnTalk] Garage door repair???

2023-12-01 Thread Stacey Parks

Dear LT,
Someone recommended a garage door person recently, but I cannot retrieve the 
information. 
Sorry to ask again. 

Thank you for any help.

Best, 
Stacey
Sent from my iPhone
-- 
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Fw: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting Re: Voting on Saturday

2023-12-01 Thread Terri via Lincoln

 Hello LT,
I placed a call to the AGA office this afternoon and had a pleasant 
conversation with Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts Attorney 
General's Office. 
Sarah Liepert is 100% correct, Ms Brown voiced disagreement with the Towns 
Legal Counsel and was quite empathetic with my concerns.  Therefore, she urged 
residents with disabilities  ( including the elderly)  to please contact the 
ADA or reach out via their web site. 
You also will find more information on their web site.  Helpful links:
 https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/disability/ada 
https://www.mass.gov/news/memo-reasonable-accommodations-at-town-meetings

I hope this helps. My wish going forward is for everyone to have the 
opportunity to vote.  Everyone's voice matters.
Sincerely,
Theresa KGiles Road








On Friday, December 1, 2023 at 04:18:17 PM EST, Sarah Liepert 
 wrote:  
 
  Dear LT,
Please scroll down to see the reply of Town Administrator Tim Higgins, which I 
am sharing per his request. He includes the opinion of Town Counsel regarding 
the matter.
Above it, you will see my response to Jane Marie, advising her of Mr. Higgins's 
response.
Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General's Office) is not in 
agreement with the opinion of the Town of Lincoln's Town Counsel.
You may contact Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts Attorney 
General's Office, at 781-429-9286. You may also document your concerns with 
her. She is copied on this email as well.
All best,
Sarah LiepertTrapelo Rd.
From: Sarah Liepert 
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 10:57 AM
To: Jane Marie ; bethany.h.br...@mass.gov 

Cc: Pereira, Dan ; Hutchinson, Jim 
; Cannon Holden, Sarah 
; Higgins, Timothy S. 
Subject: Re: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting 
Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday Dear Jane Marie,
Please get in touch with Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts 
Attorney General’s Office as soon as possible. Her cell is 781-429-9286. She is 
copied on this email.
Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General’s Office) is not in 
agreement with the Lincoln Town Counsel’s advisory opinion. 
You may document your concerns regarding ADA Reasonable Accommodations with 
Bethany Brown.
All the best,
Sarah LiepertTrapelo Rd., Lincoln

On Dec 1, 2023, at 10:37 AM, Higgins, Timothy S.  
wrote:



 
Hello Sarah and Jane Marie 

 

The Town’s preparations for Town Meeting include a whole host of accommodation 
measures.  Remote voting is not one of them as Town Counsel has advised us that 
remote voting is precluded by State Law.  Below please find her formal opinion. 
  We are, however, live streaming the meeting so that folks at home will be 
able to observe and listen.  The instructions for tuning in are included on the 
Town’s website.

 

Thank you for your question.

 

Tim Higgins

 

 

Timothy S. Higgins

Town Administrator

Town of Lincoln

16 Lincoln Road

Lincoln, MA 01773

 

higgi...@lincolntown.org

781 259 -2601

 

 

 

 

Tim, this is to follow up on my initial response to you concerning reasonable 
accommodations at town meetings.  We understand that the Massachusetts Office 
on Disability has taken the position that remote participation in a town 
meeting is a reasonable accommodation for a person who cannot attend.  In our 
opinion, allowing remote participation in an open town meeting is specifically 
prohibited by law and would fundamentally change both the nature and the 
conduct of a town meeting.  

 

As you are likely already aware, the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) 
requires public entities to make “reasonable modifications” to their procedures 
to accommodate persons with disabilities.  What is “reasonable” is 
fact-specific and depends upon the nature of the program and the accommodation 
being sought.  However, any change that would result in a “fundamental 
alteration” to the program or service is not required.  A fundamental 
alteration is one that results in a change in the essential nature of the 
service or program.  Likewise, a requested accommodation is not required if it 
would result in undue financial and administrative burdens.

 

The very purpose of a town meeting is for members of the community to gather 
together to debate and vote of legislative issues of the Town.  Allowing some 
individuals to participate from a remote location fundamentally changes the 
public, legislative process. Moreover, such action is specifically not allowed 
by law.  During the COVID-era revisions to various municipal laws, 
representative town meetings were specifically authorized to meet remotely.  
That authority was extended several times.  During that same period, the 
General Court considered whether remote participation should be allowed at open 
town meetings; such a concept never received significant support, however, and 
was not enacted.  Moreover, allowing one or a small group of people to 
participate remotely would result in

The fundamental representational issue here is whether the questions being considered should be decided at town meeting or via some kind of written ballot that everyone can participate in. Despite many people’s belief in the town meeting system (including mine), this particular set of options concern all of us, and not all of us can attend town meeting (including me). I would recommend that someone propose at the town meeting itself that the decision should be made not by the meeting itself, but via town wide ballot. My hope is that such a measure would pass, and put all of our minds at ease. - Sent from iPhone. Typed by thumb. Excuse misspellings! On Dec 1, 2023, at 3:45 PM, Iwona Pawlikowska via Lincoln wrote:I totally agree. Not everyone can be for the Saturday meeting from 9:00am-3:00pm. On Dec 1, 2023, at 1:47 PM, Kathleen Lomatoski wrote:A resident reached out to town leaders several weeks ago about Town Meeting and ADA compliance. I am not sure the final outcome. I believe the town leaders were consulting with the legal team. Kathleen Lomatoski klomato...@gmail.comOn Dec 1, 2023, at 1:27 PM, Margo Fisher-Martin wrote:Exactly!On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:16 PM Sasha Golden wrote:There's an ADA issue...On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:44 PM Adam M Hogue wrote:Unfortunately they can’t vote. Our voting laws in this town do not allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln wrote:Hello Friends,Does anyone know how residents such as the elderly or disabled are able to vote tomorrow? I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important. I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer. I do not see it on Town Web site (?) Thank you,Terri K-- 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.--
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

Karla -

 think would just have to vote “Restart” (e.g No) in March and start this
process all over which I think could be a good thing.

Set a special town meeting for December 2024, layout a broader set of
compliant options with the bylaws presented in parallel, with site
guidelines updated and published and with community center considered as
well. With a new traffic study. With a designer for the Lincoln Station
area as well. Might be expensive but will be worth it.

I volunteer for the new Working Group. I am a resident within 0.5 miles of
Commuter Rail and at least one of us should be on the working group.

Rob Ahlert
185 Lincoln Road

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 6:03 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:

> I am confused with this answer.
>
> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In March, the
> options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws (currently
> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).
>
> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option to
> choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, there
> should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability to
> pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
> whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.
>
> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
> information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
> make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on those
> critical variables.
>
> We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented in
> March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March, residents
> will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or non-compliance.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting.
>>
>> The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as
>> required by law. The town then votes at town meeting.
>>
>> Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by the
>>> EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning
>>> by laws".
>>>
>>> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is
>>> incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions
>>> tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning board can
>>> just override everything and make it whatever height and density that they
>>> (or the developer) feels like adding.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue that
>>> Utile thought may need addressed before submitting it to the state. It
>>> meets all the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC.
>>>
>>> Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never deemed
>>> compliant. Nor were options D1, D2 or D3.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, option C was significantly changed on Wednesday and will
>>> need resubmitted to the state to account for these changes.
>>>
>>> It’s unfortunate that you think we are trying to be disruptive,
>>> considering the state actually modified the HCA model used to calculate
>>> modeled units this week, due to the LRHA’s work highlighting the
>>> significant flaw that results in an overzoning of units.
>>>
>>> This change removed over 400 additional units from option C that could
>>> have been built, by right, on top of the 800 actual units that are allowed
>>> in the current option C being voted on tomorrow.
>>>
>>> While we are grateful that Utile finally listened to our concerns and
>>> consulted with the state to address the issue with the model, It’s
>>> unfortunate that the HCAWG members refused to sit down with us weeks ago
>>> when the issue was detected.
>>>
>>> So if you call that disruptive, so be it.
>>>
>>> Sarah Postlethwait
>>>
>>> Lewis Street
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> Anyone interested in learning more about Option E and the significant
>>> changes made to options C, D1, D2 and D3 this week can learn more here:
>>>
>>> https://sites.google.com/view/lincoln-hca-info/compare-the-options
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:10 PM John Mendelson 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 We are NOT being asked to vote on bylaws.  The HCA is a set of
 guidelines and we are being asked to vote for one of 5 zoning options that
 conform (or perhaps don't confirm in one case) to said guidelines.  We've
 been told repeatedly that bylaws are to follow and we will vote for one
 fully developed plan (or not) in March

 I find this continued obfuscation and distraction really frustrating
 and hard to hear as anything but an attempt to disrupt the process.

 John

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis 
 wrote:

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

I am confused with this answer.

No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In March, the
options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws (currently
undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance).

Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the option to
choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very least, there
should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of stories, ability to
pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial space requirements and
whether the planning board can provide variances on those or not.

I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that
information is because some members of the planning board would prefer to
make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on those
critical variables.

We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented in
March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March, residents
will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or non-compliance.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson  wrote:

> Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting.
>
> The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as required
> by law. The town then votes at town meeting.
>
> Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait 
> wrote:
>
>> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by the
>> EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning
>> by laws".
>>
>> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is
>> incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions
>> tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning board can
>> just override everything and make it whatever height and density that they
>> (or the developer) feels like adding.
>>
>> Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue that Utile
>> thought may need addressed before submitting it to the state. It meets
>> all the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC.
>>
>> Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never deemed
>> compliant. Nor were options D1, D2 or D3.
>>
>> Furthermore, option C was significantly changed on Wednesday and will
>> need resubmitted to the state to account for these changes.
>>
>> It’s unfortunate that you think we are trying to be disruptive,
>> considering the state actually modified the HCA model used to calculate
>> modeled units this week, due to the LRHA’s work highlighting the
>> significant flaw that results in an overzoning of units.
>>
>> This change removed over 400 additional units from option C that could
>> have been built, by right, on top of the 800 actual units that are allowed
>> in the current option C being voted on tomorrow.
>>
>> While we are grateful that Utile finally listened to our concerns and
>> consulted with the state to address the issue with the model, It’s
>> unfortunate that the HCAWG members refused to sit down with us weeks ago
>> when the issue was detected.
>>
>> So if you call that disruptive, so be it.
>>
>> Sarah Postlethwait
>>
>> Lewis Street
>>
>> 
>>
>> Anyone interested in learning more about Option E and the significant
>> changes made to options C, D1, D2 and D3 this week can learn more here:
>>
>> https://sites.google.com/view/lincoln-hca-info/compare-the-options
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:10 PM John Mendelson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We are NOT being asked to vote on bylaws.  The HCA is a set of
>>> guidelines and we are being asked to vote for one of 5 zoning options that
>>> conform (or perhaps don't confirm in one case) to said guidelines.  We've
>>> been told repeatedly that bylaws are to follow and we will vote for one
>>> fully developed plan (or not) in March
>>>
>>> I find this continued obfuscation and distraction really frustrating and
>>> hard to hear as anything but an attempt to disrupt the process.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>>>
 I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for approval at the
 March town meeting.

 Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for a set of
 bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred option would then be
 presented for approval in March. Options C and D as being voted on tomorrow
 are incomplete because we do not have answers to these questions:

- Building heights/stories
- PB having override prower through special permits
- Commercial space requirements
- Allowance of fees in lieu of affordable units

 If HCA zoning is "exactly zoning by laws" why are we voting under
 incomplete assumptions?

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Margaret Olson <
 marga...@margaretolson.com> wrote:

> Town

[LincolnTalk] Fwd: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting Re: Voting on Saturday

2023-12-01 Thread Sarah Cannon Holden

Please see the note below from Tim Higgins. Our Town Counsel had advised that remote voting is precluded under State Law. Thank you. See you tomorrow. Sarah Cannon HoldenBegin forwarded message:From: "Higgins, Timothy S." Date: December 1, 2023 at 11:41:53 AM ESTTo: Sarah Liepert , Jane Marie , bethany.h.br...@mass.govCc: "Pereira, Dan" , "Hutchinson, Jim" , "Cannon Holden, Sarah" , "Pereira, Dan" Subject: RE: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday







Hello everyone –
 
We have been in discussion with the Attorney General’s Office and have shared Town Counsel’s opinion.  We expect to have ongoing dialogue with them, and with the Mass Office of Disability next week.  In the meantime, we have been reaching
 out to anyone who has expressed a particular challenge to explore possible accommodations, over and above those we currently offer, short of providing remote voting which Town Counsel has advised is precluded under state law.
 
Tim Higgins
 
 
Timothy S. Higgins
Town Administrator
Town of Lincoln
16 Lincoln Road
Lincoln, MA 01773
 
higgi...@lincolntown.org
781 259 -2601
 
 
 


From: Sarah Liepert  
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 10:58 AM
To: Jane Marie ; bethany.h.br...@mass.gov
Cc: Pereira, Dan ; Hutchinson, Jim ; Cannon Holden, Sarah ; Higgins, Timothy S. 
Subject: Re: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday


 
Dear Jane Marie, 

 


Please get in touch with Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office as soon as possible. Her cell is 781-429-9286. She is copied on this email.


 


Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General’s Office) is not in agreement with the Lincoln Town Counsel’s advisory opinion. 


 


You may document your concerns regarding ADA Reasonable Accommodations with Bethany Brown.


 


All the best,


 


Sarah Liepert


Trapelo Rd., Lincoln







On Dec 1, 2023, at 10:37 AM, Higgins, Timothy S.  wrote:




 
Hello Sarah and Jane Marie 
 
The Town’s preparations for Town Meeting include a whole host of accommodation measures.  Remote voting is not one of them as Town Counsel has advised us that remote voting is precluded by State Law.  Below please find her formal opinion. 
  We are, however, live streaming the meeting so that folks at home will be able to observe and listen.  The instructions for tuning in are included on the Town’s website.
 
Thank you for your question.
 
Tim Higgins
 
 
Timothy S. Higgins
Town Administrator
Town of Lincoln
16 Lincoln Road
Lincoln, MA 01773
 
higgi...@lincolntown.org
781 259 -2601
 
 
 
 
Tim, this is to follow up on my initial response to you concerning reasonable accommodations at town meetings.  We understand that the Massachusetts Office on Disability has taken
 the position that remote participation in a town meeting is a reasonable accommodation for a person who cannot attend.  In our opinion, allowing remote participation in an open town meeting is specifically prohibited by law and would fundamentally change both
 the nature and the conduct of a town meeting.  
 
As you are likely already aware, the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) requires public entities to make “reasonable modifications” to their procedures to accommodate persons
 with disabilities.  What is “reasonable” is fact-specific and depends upon the nature of the program and the accommodation being sought.  However, any change that would result in a “fundamental alteration” to the program or service is not required.  A fundamental
 alteration is one that results in a change in the essential nature of the service or program.  Likewise, a requested accommodation is not required if it would result in undue financial and administrative burdens.
 
The very purpose of a town meeting is for members of the community to gather together to debate and vote of legislative issues of the Town.  Allowing some individuals to participate
 from a remote location fundamentally changes the public, legislative process. Moreover, such action is specifically not allowed by law.  During the COVID-era revisions to various municipal laws, representative town meetings were specifically authorized to
 meet remotely.  That authority was extended several times.  During that same period, the General Court considered whether remote participation should be allowed at open town meetings; such a concept never received significant support, however, and was not
 enacted.  Moreover, allowing one or a small group of people to participate remotely would result in undue financial and administrative burdens to the Town.  Not only would such a system be difficult and costly to implement, it would be highly disruptive during
 the course of the meeting and would require significant adjustments in the procedures that are usually followed.  Again, this position is not merely speculative.  The COVID-era relief

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting.

The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as required
by law. The town then votes at town meeting.

Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait  wrote:

> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by the
> EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning
> by laws".
>
> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is incredibly
> important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions tomorrow, as
> all of these options have specified, if the planning board can just
> override everything and make it whatever height and density that they (or
> the developer) feels like adding.
>
> Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue that Utile
> thought may need addressed before submitting it to the state. It meets
> all the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC.
>
> Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never deemed
> compliant. Nor were options D1, D2 or D3.
>
> Furthermore, option C was significantly changed on Wednesday and will
> need resubmitted to the state to account for these changes.
>
> It’s unfortunate that you think we are trying to be disruptive,
> considering the state actually modified the HCA model used to calculate
> modeled units this week, due to the LRHA’s work highlighting the
> significant flaw that results in an overzoning of units.
>
> This change removed over 400 additional units from option C that could
> have been built, by right, on top of the 800 actual units that are allowed
> in the current option C being voted on tomorrow.
>
> While we are grateful that Utile finally listened to our concerns and
> consulted with the state to address the issue with the model, It’s
> unfortunate that the HCAWG members refused to sit down with us weeks ago
> when the issue was detected.
>
> So if you call that disruptive, so be it.
>
> Sarah Postlethwait
>
> Lewis Street
>
> 
>
> Anyone interested in learning more about Option E and the significant
> changes made to options C, D1, D2 and D3 this week can learn more here:
>
> https://sites.google.com/view/lincoln-hca-info/compare-the-options
>
> 
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:10 PM John Mendelson 
> wrote:
>
>> We are NOT being asked to vote on bylaws.  The HCA is a set of guidelines
>> and we are being asked to vote for one of 5 zoning options that conform (or
>> perhaps don't confirm in one case) to said guidelines.  We've been told
>> repeatedly that bylaws are to follow and we will vote for one fully
>> developed plan (or not) in March
>>
>> I find this continued obfuscation and distraction really frustrating and
>> hard to hear as anything but an attempt to disrupt the process.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>>
>>> I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for approval at the
>>> March town meeting.
>>>
>>> Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for a set of
>>> bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred option would then be
>>> presented for approval in March. Options C and D as being voted on tomorrow
>>> are incomplete because we do not have answers to these questions:
>>>
>>>- Building heights/stories
>>>- PB having override prower through special permits
>>>- Commercial space requirements
>>>- Allowance of fees in lieu of affordable units
>>>
>>> If HCA zoning is "exactly zoning by laws" why are we voting under
>>> incomplete assumptions?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Margaret Olson <
>>> marga...@margaretolson.com> wrote:
>>>
 Town Counsel has advised us that we should not bring multiple potential
 zoning by-laws to town meeting. The state regulates how zoning changes are
 handled.

 A zoning article at town meeting is a straight yes/no vote on a very
 specific set of changes. We can not have any sort of multiple choice vote
 as we can for a "sense of the town" vote. So if we were to bring the zoning
 by-law changes for all five options to town meeting we would have five
 warrant articles. In what order should they appear? If the first one passes
 do we go on and vote on the others? As a voter who supports the HCA but
 doesn't like the variant that comes first in the warrant what should you
 do? Vote no, holding out for your preferred option, or do you vote yes to
 ensure we do comply? If all five are on the warrant what happens
 if multiple options pass?

 Margaret



 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:59 PM Karla Gravis 
 wrote:

> Given that, according the Chair of the Planning Board:
>
>1.  "*Compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning by laws*"
>2. "Z*oning by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance*"
>

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by the
EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning
by laws".

This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is incredibly
important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions tomorrow, as
all of these options have specified, if the planning board can just
override everything and make it whatever height and density that they (or
the developer) feels like adding.

Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue that Utile
thought may need addressed before submitting it to the state. It meets all
the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC.

Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never deemed compliant.
Nor were options D1, D2 or D3.

Furthermore, option C was significantly changed on Wednesday and will need
resubmitted to the state to account for these changes.

It’s unfortunate that you think we are trying to be disruptive, considering the
state actually modified the HCA model used to calculate modeled units this
week, due to the LRHA’s work highlighting the significant flaw that results
in an overzoning of units.

This change removed over 400 additional units from option C that could have
been built, by right, on top of the 800 actual units that are allowed in
the current option C being voted on tomorrow.

While we are grateful that Utile finally listened to our concerns and
consulted with the state to address the issue with the model, It’s
unfortunate that the HCAWG members refused to sit down with us weeks ago
when the issue was detected.

So if you call that disruptive, so be it.

Sarah Postlethwait

Lewis Street

Anyone interested in learning more about Option E and the significant
changes made to options C, D1, D2 and D3 this week can learn more here:

https://sites.google.com/view/lincoln-hca-info/compare-the-options

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:10 PM John Mendelson 
wrote:

> We are NOT being asked to vote on bylaws.  The HCA is a set of guidelines
> and we are being asked to vote for one of 5 zoning options that conform (or
> perhaps don't confirm in one case) to said guidelines.  We've been told
> repeatedly that bylaws are to follow and we will vote for one fully
> developed plan (or not) in March
>
> I find this continued obfuscation and distraction really frustrating and
> hard to hear as anything but an attempt to disrupt the process.
>
> John
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>
>> I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for approval at the
>> March town meeting.
>>
>> Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for a set of
>> bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred option would then be
>> presented for approval in March. Options C and D as being voted on tomorrow
>> are incomplete because we do not have answers to these questions:
>>
>>- Building heights/stories
>>- PB having override prower through special permits
>>- Commercial space requirements
>>- Allowance of fees in lieu of affordable units
>>
>> If HCA zoning is "exactly zoning by laws" why are we voting under
>> incomplete assumptions?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Margaret Olson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Town Counsel has advised us that we should not bring multiple potential
>>> zoning by-laws to town meeting. The state regulates how zoning changes are
>>> handled.
>>>
>>> A zoning article at town meeting is a straight yes/no vote on a very
>>> specific set of changes. We can not have any sort of multiple choice vote
>>> as we can for a "sense of the town" vote. So if we were to bring the zoning
>>> by-law changes for all five options to town meeting we would have five
>>> warrant articles. In what order should they appear? If the first one passes
>>> do we go on and vote on the others? As a voter who supports the HCA but
>>> doesn't like the variant that comes first in the warrant what should you
>>> do? Vote no, holding out for your preferred option, or do you vote yes to
>>> ensure we do comply? If all five are on the warrant what happens
>>> if multiple options pass?
>>>
>>> Margaret
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:59 PM Karla Gravis 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Given that, according the Chair of the Planning Board:

1.  "*Compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning by laws*"
2. "Z*oning by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance*"
3. These by-laws are not ready

 Then, why are we voting tomorrow?

 To emphasize how rushed this process has been, significant changes to
 the densities across options C and Ds were communicated on Wednesday
 evening (without any public meetings).

 The areas where the Planning Board hasn't agreed on the bylaws are:
 building heights/stories, giving the PB special permit powers to change
 densities and heights/stories, parking and

Re: [LincolnTalk] Fw: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting Re: Voting on Saturday

Hi,

Those of you who think that all Lincoln residents with disabilities can
vote (as long as they are registered and can get a ride), should know that
some elderly and disabled people cannot stay at town meeting all day
because they cannot tolerate sitting or standing for hours waiting for the
opportunity to vote. There are MANY reasons why some disabled people are
unable to attend or stay at Town Meeting. Yes - we can offer rides
(although some may need chair vans which need to be pre-arranged and can be
costly) and we can offer assistance guiding people to a safe location,
however, there are still people who are unable to vote. If any of you have
ever suffered severe back or neck pain, you may understand this problem
better. Or perhaps one has a hearing loss and cannot understand what is
happening in the meeting. The ADA is a law that was enacted to provide
access to all with disabilities.
As a special educator/teacher of the deaf and hard-of-hearing, I am
well-acquainted with this law and surprised that the town legal counsel
would not offer alternative voting arrangements. There are situations in
which we need to do better than simply offering rides.
Thank you for looking into this Sarah.

Respectfully,
Margo Martin

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:44 PM Jeffrey  wrote:

> Any Lincoln resident whose voter registration is up to date can vote in
> any town meeting, and, of course, in any election; local, State, or
> Federal. I just want to make this clear; I think the whole town knows this
> but some comments on LT appear to confuse the issue.
>
> The reason the elderly and other motion-restricted residents (whose voter
> registration is current) do not get to vote is due to a lack of
> transportation to town meeting/polling location.
>
> Decades ago, I and others drove Ford Econoline Vans and Family Vans around
> town to pick up such residents. I do not know what has happened to that
> effort.
>
> Thank you. Jeffrey L.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:44 PM Adam M Hogue  wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not allow
>> for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting.
>>
>> *Adam M Hogue*
>> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln 
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Hello Friends,
>>
>> Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able
>> to vote tomorrow?
>> I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.
>>
>> I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
>> I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Terri K
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>


On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:18 PM Sarah Liepert 
wrote:

> Dear LT,
>
> Please scroll down to see the reply of Town Administrator Tim Higgins,
> which I am sharing per his request. He includes the opinion of Town Counsel
> regarding the matter.
>
> Above it, you will see my response to Jane Marie, advising her of Mr.
> Higgins's response.
>
> Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General's Office) is not in
> agreement with the opinion of the Town of Lincoln's Town Counsel.
>
> You may contact Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts
> Attorney General's Office, at 781-429-9286. You may also document your
> concerns with her. She is copied on this email as well.
>
> All best,
>
> Sarah Liepert
> Trapelo Rd.
>
> --
> *From:* Sarah Liepert 
> *Sent:* Friday, December 1, 2023 10:57 AM
> *To:* Jane Marie ; bethany.h.br...@mass.gov <
> bethany.h.br...@mass.gov>
> *Cc:* Pereira, Dan ; Hutchinson, Jim <
> jhutchinsonsel...@lincolntown.org>; Cannon Holden, Sarah <
> sarahcannonhol...@gmail.com>; Higgins, Timothy S. <
> higgi...@lincolntown.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town
> Meeting Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday
>
> Dear Jane Marie,
>
> Please get in touch with Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the
> Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office as soon as possible. Her cell is
> 781-429-9286. She is copied on this email.
>
> Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General’s Office) is not in
> agreement with the Lincoln Town

[LincolnTalk] Fwd: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting Re: Voting on Saturday

Hi LT. Please see additional info from
Tim Higgins, which he provided below.

Please contact Mr. Higgins as soon as possible if you have a request regarding 
Reasonable Accommodations for tomorrow. In his email, he shared:

In the meantime, we have been reaching out to anyone who has expressed a 
particular challenge to explore possible accommodations, over and above those 
we currently offer, short of providing remote voting which Town Counsel has 
advised is precluded under state law.

His email below shows his complete contact information.

Best,
Sarah Liepert


Begin forwarded message:

From: "Higgins, Timothy S." 
Date: December 1, 2023 at 11:41:59 AM EST
To: Sarah Liepert , Jane Marie 
, bethany.h.br...@mass.gov
Cc: "Pereira, Dan" , "Hutchinson, Jim" 
, "Cannon Holden, Sarah" 
, "Pereira, Dan" 
Subject: RE: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting 
Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday


Hello everyone –

We have been in discussion with the Attorney General’s Office and have shared 
Town Counsel’s opinion.  We expect to have ongoing dialogue with them, and with 
the Mass Office of Disability next week.  In the meantime, we have been 
reaching out to anyone who has expressed a particular challenge to explore 
possible accommodations, over and above those we currently offer, short of 
providing remote voting which Town Counsel has advised is precluded under state 
law.

Tim Higgins


Timothy S. Higgins
Town Administrator
Town of Lincoln
16 Lincoln Road
Lincoln, MA 01773

higgi...@lincolntown.org
781 259 -2601



From: Sarah Liepert 
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 10:58 AM
To: Jane Marie ; bethany.h.br...@mass.gov
Cc: Pereira, Dan ; Hutchinson, Jim 
; Cannon Holden, Sarah 
; Higgins, Timothy S. 
Subject: Re: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting 
Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday

Dear Jane Marie,

Please get in touch with Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts 
Attorney General’s Office as soon as possible. Her cell is 781-429-9286. She is 
copied on this email.

Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General’s Office) is not in 
agreement with the Lincoln Town Counsel’s advisory opinion.

You may document your concerns regarding ADA Reasonable Accommodations with 
Bethany Brown.

All the best,

Sarah Liepert
Trapelo Rd., Lincoln


On Dec 1, 2023, at 10:37 AM, Higgins, Timothy S. 
mailto:higgi...@lincolntown.org>> wrote:

Hello Sarah and Jane Marie

The Town’s preparations for Town Meeting include a whole host of accommodation 
measures.  Remote voting is not one of them as Town Counsel has advised us that 
remote voting is precluded by State Law.  Below please find her formal opinion. 
  We are, however, live streaming the meeting so that folks at home will be 
able to observe and listen.  The instructions for tuning in are included on the 
Town’s website.

Thank you for your question.

Tim Higgins


Timothy S. Higgins
Town Administrator
Town of Lincoln
16 Lincoln Road
Lincoln, MA 01773

higgi...@lincolntown.org
781 259 -2601




Tim, this is to follow up on my initial response to you concerning reasonable 
accommodations at town meetings.  We understand that the Massachusetts Office 
on Disability has taken the position that remote participation in a town 
meeting is a reasonable accommodation for a person who cannot attend.  In our 
opinion, allowing remote participation in an open town meeting is specifically 
prohibited by law and would fundamentally change both the nature and the 
conduct of a town meeting.

As you are likely already aware, the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) 
requires public entities to make “reasonable modifications” to their procedures 
to accommodate persons with disabilities.  What is “reasonable” is 
fact-specific and depends upon the nature of the program and the accommodation 
being sought.  However, any change that would result in a “fundamental 
alteration” to the program or service is not required.  A fundamental 
alteration is one that results in a change in the essential nature of the 
service or program.  Likewise, a requested accommodation is not required if it 
would result in undue financial and administrative burdens.

The very purpose of a town meeting is for members of the community to gather 
together to debate and vote of legislative issues of the Town.  Allowing some 
individuals to participate from a remote location fundamentally changes the 
public, legislative process. Moreover, such action is specifically not allowed 
by law.  During the COVID-era revisions to various municipal laws, 
representative town meetings were specifically authorized to meet remotely.  
That authority was extended several times.  During that same period, the 
General Court considered whether remote participation should be allowed at open 
town meetings; such a concept never received significant support, however, and 
was not

Re: [LincolnTalk] Fw: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting Re: Voting on Saturday

I also personally feel my rights are being violated under the equal rights law in MA. We have a bunch of lawyers in town maybe we can sue Lincoln and bring change and name the town administrators and town board. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 4:18 PM, Sarah Liepert  wrote:






Dear LT,




Please scroll down to see the reply of Town Administrator Tim Higgins, which I am sharing per his request. He includes the opinion of Town Counsel regarding the matter.




Above it, you will see my response to Jane Marie, advising her of Mr. Higgins's response.




Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General's Office) is not in agreement with the opinion of the Town of Lincoln's Town Counsel.




You may contact Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office, at 781-429-9286. You may also document your concerns with her. She is copied on this email as well.




All best,




Sarah Liepert

Trapelo Rd.





From: Sarah Liepert 
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 10:57 AM
To: Jane Marie ; bethany.h.br...@mass.gov 
Cc: Pereira, Dan ; Hutchinson, Jim ; Cannon Holden, Sarah ; Higgins, Timothy S. 
Subject: Re: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday
 

Dear Jane Marie,


Please get in touch with Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office as soon as possible. Her cell is 781-429-9286. She is copied on this email.


Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General’s Office) is not in agreement with the Lincoln Town Counsel’s advisory opinion. 


You may document your concerns regarding ADA Reasonable Accommodations with Bethany Brown.


All the best,


Sarah Liepert
Trapelo Rd., Lincoln


On Dec 1, 2023, at 10:37 AM, Higgins, Timothy S.  wrote:






 

Hello Sarah and Jane Marie 
 
The Town’s preparations for Town Meeting include a whole host of accommodation measures.  Remote voting is not one of them as Town Counsel has advised us that remote voting is precluded by State Law.  Below please find her formal opinion. 
  We are, however, live streaming the meeting so that folks at home will be able to observe and listen.  The instructions for tuning in are included on the Town’s website.
 
Thank you for your question.
 
Tim Higgins
 
 
Timothy S. Higgins
Town Administrator
Town of Lincoln
16 Lincoln Road
Lincoln, MA 01773
 
higgi...@lincolntown.org
781 259 -2601
 
 
 
 
Tim, this is to follow up on my initial response to you concerning reasonable accommodations at town meetings.  We understand that the Massachusetts Office on Disability has
 taken the position that remote participation in a town meeting is a reasonable accommodation for a person who cannot attend.  In our opinion, allowing remote participation in an open town meeting is specifically prohibited by law and would fundamentally change
 both the nature and the conduct of a town meeting.  
 
As you are likely already aware, the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) requires public entities to make “reasonable modifications” to their procedures to accommodate persons
 with disabilities.  What is “reasonable” is fact-specific and depends upon the nature of the program and the accommodation being sought.  However, any change that would result in a “fundamental alteration” to the program or service is not required.  A fundamental
 alteration is one that results in a change in the essential nature of the service or program.  Likewise, a requested accommodation is not required if it would result in undue financial and administrative burdens.
 
The very purpose of a town meeting is for members of the community to gather together to debate and vote of legislative issues of the Town.  Allowing some individuals to participate
 from a remote location fundamentally changes the public, legislative process. Moreover, such action is specifically not allowed by law.  During the COVID-era revisions to various municipal laws, representative town meetings were specifically authorized to
 meet remotely.  That authority was extended several times.  During that same period, the General Court considered whether remote participation should be allowed at open town meetings; such a concept never received significant support, however, and was not
 enacted.  Moreover, allowing one or a small group of people to participate remotely would result in undue financial and administrative burdens to the Town.  Not only would such a system be difficult and costly to implement, it would be highly disruptive during
 the course of the meeting and would require significant adjustments in the procedures that are usually followed.  Again, this position is not merely speculative.  The COVID-era relief discussed above authorized remote representative town meetings, but not
 hybrid representative town meetings.  The legislation extending such relief now states clearly that hybrid remote town meetings, i.e., with some people participating in person and

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

Please go back and watch the planning board meetings, this is not
obfuscation.

These details are important part of the Zoning.

Here are four examples of details that are in the zoning bylaws that no one
seems to know about.

1 what percentage minimum commercial will be in the Village?

2. What are the special permit options allowed in each zone?

3. Can parking be underneath buildings?

4. What site guidelines details are also included in each zone?

At least these three items are discussed directly in the zoning bylaws, but
have not yet been published to the general public

Again, please go back and watch the planning board meeting from last
Monday, then you will understand.

Without this information, everyone should just vote E to force this back to
discussion.

Else, vote No in March.

Rob

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:11 PM John Mendelson 
wrote:

> We are NOT being asked to vote on bylaws.  The HCA is a set of guidelines
> and we are being asked to vote for one of 5 zoning options that conform (or
> perhaps don't confirm in one case) to said guidelines.  We've been told
> repeatedly that bylaws are to follow and we will vote for one fully
> developed plan (or not) in March
>
> I find this continued obfuscation and distraction really frustrating and
> hard to hear as anything but an attempt to disrupt the process.
>
> John
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>
>> I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for approval at the
>> March town meeting.
>>
>> Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for a set of
>> bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred option would then be
>> presented for approval in March. Options C and D as being voted on tomorrow
>> are incomplete because we do not have answers to these questions:
>>
>>- Building heights/stories
>>- PB having override prower through special permits
>>- Commercial space requirements
>>- Allowance of fees in lieu of affordable units
>>
>> If HCA zoning is "exactly zoning by laws" why are we voting under
>> incomplete assumptions?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Margaret Olson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Town Counsel has advised us that we should not bring multiple potential
>>> zoning by-laws to town meeting. The state regulates how zoning changes are
>>> handled.
>>>
>>> A zoning article at town meeting is a straight yes/no vote on a very
>>> specific set of changes. We can not have any sort of multiple choice vote
>>> as we can for a "sense of the town" vote. So if we were to bring the zoning
>>> by-law changes for all five options to town meeting we would have five
>>> warrant articles. In what order should they appear? If the first one passes
>>> do we go on and vote on the others? As a voter who supports the HCA but
>>> doesn't like the variant that comes first in the warrant what should you
>>> do? Vote no, holding out for your preferred option, or do you vote yes to
>>> ensure we do comply? If all five are on the warrant what happens
>>> if multiple options pass?
>>>
>>> Margaret
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:59 PM Karla Gravis 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Given that, according the Chair of the Planning Board:

1.  "*Compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning by laws*"
2. "Z*oning by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance*"
3. These by-laws are not ready

 Then, why are we voting tomorrow?

 To emphasize how rushed this process has been, significant changes to
 the densities across options C and Ds were communicated on Wednesday
 evening (without any public meetings).

 The areas where the Planning Board hasn't agreed on the bylaws are:
 building heights/stories, giving the PB special permit powers to change
 densities and heights/stories, parking and allowing fees in lieu of
 affordable units. These are all critical questions as we evaluate the
 different options. How are we expected to discuss the merits of these
 options without a full understanding of those issues?

 LRHA has a stance on these open questions. Option E has a set of
 setbacks, height/story limits and floor area ratios for every district. We
 are distinctly opposed to providing variances to all of those items, as
 well as units per acre, through a Planning Board special permit.

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Margaret Olson <
 marga...@margaretolson.com> wrote:

> Compliance with the HCA is *exactly* zoning by laws. The zoning
> by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance. There is no way to 
> comply
> with the HCA without voting to amend the zoning by-laws.
>
> If the town votes down the proposed zoning by-laws in March, and the
> sense of the town is that we want to comply but the planning board
> presented an unacceptable set of regulations, then the planning board will
> go back to work and try again at a special town meeting at a

[LincolnTalk] Fw: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting Re: Voting on Saturday

Dear LT,

Please scroll down to see the reply of Town Administrator Tim Higgins, which I 
am sharing per his request. He includes the opinion of Town Counsel regarding 
the matter.

Above it, you will see my response to Jane Marie, advising her of Mr. Higgins's 
response.

Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General's Office) is not in 
agreement with the opinion of the Town of Lincoln's Town Counsel.

You may contact Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts Attorney 
General's Office, at 781-429-9286. You may also document your concerns with 
her. She is copied on this email as well.

All best,

Sarah Liepert
Trapelo Rd.


From: Sarah Liepert 
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 10:57 AM
To: Jane Marie ; bethany.h.br...@mass.gov 

Cc: Pereira, Dan ; Hutchinson, Jim 
; Cannon Holden, Sarah 
; Higgins, Timothy S. 
Subject: Re: Your request for Reasonable Accommodation at Special Town Meeting 
Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday

Dear Jane Marie,

Please get in touch with Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts 
Attorney General’s Office as soon as possible. Her cell is 781-429-9286. She is 
copied on this email.

Importantly, the Massachusetts AGO (Attorney General’s Office) is not in 
agreement with the Lincoln Town Counsel’s advisory opinion.

You may document your concerns regarding ADA Reasonable Accommodations with 
Bethany Brown.

All the best,

Sarah Liepert
Trapelo Rd., Lincoln

On Dec 1, 2023, at 10:37 AM, Higgins, Timothy S.  
wrote:



Hello Sarah and Jane Marie



The Town’s preparations for Town Meeting include a whole host of accommodation 
measures.  Remote voting is not one of them as Town Counsel has advised us that 
remote voting is precluded by State Law.  Below please find her formal opinion. 
  We are, however, live streaming the meeting so that folks at home will be 
able to observe and listen.  The instructions for tuning in are included on the 
Town’s website.



Thank you for your question.



Tim Higgins





Timothy S. Higgins

Town Administrator

Town of Lincoln

16 Lincoln Road

Lincoln, MA 01773



higgi...@lincolntown.org

781 259 -2601









Tim, this is to follow up on my initial response to you concerning reasonable 
accommodations at town meetings.  We understand that the Massachusetts Office 
on Disability has taken the position that remote participation in a town 
meeting is a reasonable accommodation for a person who cannot attend.  In our 
opinion, allowing remote participation in an open town meeting is specifically 
prohibited by law and would fundamentally change both the nature and the 
conduct of a town meeting.



As you are likely already aware, the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) 
requires public entities to make “reasonable modifications” to their procedures 
to accommodate persons with disabilities.  What is “reasonable” is 
fact-specific and depends upon the nature of the program and the accommodation 
being sought.  However, any change that would result in a “fundamental 
alteration” to the program or service is not required.  A fundamental 
alteration is one that results in a change in the essential nature of the 
service or program.  Likewise, a requested accommodation is not required if it 
would result in undue financial and administrative burdens.



The very purpose of a town meeting is for members of the community to gather 
together to debate and vote of legislative issues of the Town.  Allowing some 
individuals to participate from a remote location fundamentally changes the 
public, legislative process. Moreover, such action is specifically not allowed 
by law.  During the COVID-era revisions to various municipal laws, 
representative town meetings were specifically authorized to meet remotely.  
That authority was extended several times.  During that same period, the 
General Court considered whether remote participation should be allowed at open 
town meetings; such a concept never received significant support, however, and 
was not enacted.  Moreover, allowing one or a small group of people to 
participate remotely would result in undue financial and administrative burdens 
to the Town.  Not only would such a system be difficult and costly to 
implement, it would be highly disruptive during the course of the meeting and 
would require significant adjustments in the procedures that are usually 
followed.  Again, this position is not merely speculative.  The COVID-era 
relief discussed above authorized remote representative town meetings, but not 
hybrid representative town meetings.  The legislation extending such relief now 
states clearly that hybrid remote town meetings, i.e., with some people 
participating in person and some participating remotely, is permitted.  No 
similar authority is granted to open town meeting municipalities, however.



Where the Legislature has specifically authorized remote/hybrid town meetings 
for

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

2023-12-01 Thread John Mendelson

We are NOT being asked to vote on bylaws.  The HCA is a set of guidelines
and we are being asked to vote for one of 5 zoning options that conform (or
perhaps don't confirm in one case) to said guidelines.  We've been told
repeatedly that bylaws are to follow and we will vote for one fully
developed plan (or not) in March

I find this continued obfuscation and distraction really frustrating and
hard to hear as anything but an attempt to disrupt the process.

John

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:

> I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for approval at the
> March town meeting.
>
> Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for a set of
> bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred option would then be
> presented for approval in March. Options C and D as being voted on tomorrow
> are incomplete because we do not have answers to these questions:
>
>- Building heights/stories
>- PB having override prower through special permits
>- Commercial space requirements
>- Allowance of fees in lieu of affordable units
>
> If HCA zoning is "exactly zoning by laws" why are we voting under
> incomplete assumptions?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> Town Counsel has advised us that we should not bring multiple potential
>> zoning by-laws to town meeting. The state regulates how zoning changes are
>> handled.
>>
>> A zoning article at town meeting is a straight yes/no vote on a very
>> specific set of changes. We can not have any sort of multiple choice vote
>> as we can for a "sense of the town" vote. So if we were to bring the zoning
>> by-law changes for all five options to town meeting we would have five
>> warrant articles. In what order should they appear? If the first one passes
>> do we go on and vote on the others? As a voter who supports the HCA but
>> doesn't like the variant that comes first in the warrant what should you
>> do? Vote no, holding out for your preferred option, or do you vote yes to
>> ensure we do comply? If all five are on the warrant what happens
>> if multiple options pass?
>>
>> Margaret
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:59 PM Karla Gravis 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Given that, according the Chair of the Planning Board:
>>>
>>>1.  "*Compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning by laws*"
>>>2. "Z*oning by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance*"
>>>3. These by-laws are not ready
>>>
>>> Then, why are we voting tomorrow?
>>>
>>> To emphasize how rushed this process has been, significant changes to
>>> the densities across options C and Ds were communicated on Wednesday
>>> evening (without any public meetings).
>>>
>>> The areas where the Planning Board hasn't agreed on the bylaws are:
>>> building heights/stories, giving the PB special permit powers to change
>>> densities and heights/stories, parking and allowing fees in lieu of
>>> affordable units. These are all critical questions as we evaluate the
>>> different options. How are we expected to discuss the merits of these
>>> options without a full understanding of those issues?
>>>
>>> LRHA has a stance on these open questions. Option E has a set of
>>> setbacks, height/story limits and floor area ratios for every district. We
>>> are distinctly opposed to providing variances to all of those items, as
>>> well as units per acre, through a Planning Board special permit.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Margaret Olson <
>>> marga...@margaretolson.com> wrote:
>>>
 Compliance with the HCA is *exactly* zoning by laws. The zoning
 by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance. There is no way to comply
 with the HCA without voting to amend the zoning by-laws.

 If the town votes down the proposed zoning by-laws in March, and the
 sense of the town is that we want to comply but the planning board
 presented an unacceptable set of regulations, then the planning board will
 go back to work and try again at a special town meeting at a later date.




>
> --
> 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center as part of the mall

The town can not dictate a specific tenant to a property owner through any
process. The town can approach a property owner with an appealing offer.
All discussions to date of the proposed mall zoning will permit a use such
as a community center, and I will be very surprised if they do not continue
to do so.

[Note: I am not making any statement about where the community center does
or does not belong, only clarifying what is and is not theoretically
possible]

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:03 PM Peter Buchthal  wrote:

> I respectfully disagree.  I don't believe the Planning Board can specify
> the tenants and the terms for a future community center at the Lincoln
> Mall  as the Mall under Options C and D1-D3 will be developed by right and
> won't require a Town Meeting for a building permit.  I am not an attorney,
> but using google, I did not find any examples of a Town being able to
> pre-reserve space in a development built by right for the Town's use.  If
> you want the possibility of a community center at the Lincoln Mall, choose
> Option E.
>
> Peter Buchthal
> Weston Rd.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:53 PM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> The likelihood or not of the community center at the mall is irrelevant
>> to which option is chosen. It is equally likely or unlikely with C as with
>> E, or with any of the D options.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Karla Gravis 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Why would including the Community Center as part of the mall be a
>>> "project killer"? We could sign a 10/20/30 year lease. Wouldn't a developer
>>> jump at the chance to have a stable tenant instead of having to deal with
>>> constant retail turnover? Or is this comment an indictment of the viability
>>> of any commercial space at the Mall area?
>>>
>>> According to the town's economic feasibility study, a developer could
>>> consider charging ~$3 per sqft in monthly rent. For a 10,000 sqft CC, that
>>> would mean $360K in yearly rent. Compare that to the town's yearly debt
>>> service payment of $0.77M - $1.54M for the proposed CC designs.  The
>>> savings come from the fact that public buildings are much more costly to
>>> build than what private developments cost.
>>>
>>> In relation to the argument that the CC cannot be in the mall area
>>> because of LEAP, there is no need to have LEAP move to the mall. Remodeling
>>> Pod C (where LEAP is currently hosted) has been estimated at $3.5M. The
>>> non-LEAP portion of the community center designs being put to vote will be
>>> costing the town $12.5M - $21.5M. If the annual cost of the community
>>> center is $360k instead of $1M+, there will surely be some left to renovate
>>> LEAP.
>>>
>>> To be clear, this is not Civico's plan for the mall. If Option C is
>>> chosen, this synergistic combination will likely not happen. However, with
>>> Option E, this could very much be part of the project presented to the
>>> Town. We could tap TCB (The Community Builders - pun intended) to build a
>>> community center and truly affordable housing.
>>>
>>>
>>>

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:47 Paul Shorb  wrote:

> The CCBC has an FAQ linked here
> 
>  that explains
> why the community center should be located at Hartwell campus (as the Town
> has voted to approve multiple times) rather than at the Mall.
>
> Putting a community center at the Town center would be much more
> expensive, if it could be accomplished at all. As I noted in another
> post just now, shared spaces are efficient, since (A) seniors tend to
> use the facilities in the day and (B) school children do so in the later
> afternoon, walking from the school buildings to participate in Lincoln's
> Parks & Rec programs or LEAP.  Building a separate community center
> at the town center would still leave the town with the need to renovate 
> the
> spaces that would remain at Hartwell; I have heard the estimate of about
> $3.5 million for each of three pods at Hartwell.
>
> Also, I'm not sure how a community center at the Town center could
> actually be achieved. The Town center does not have sufficient
> available Town-owned space to build a community center. You therefore
> suggested including the Community Center as a required accessory use
> in the development of a future residential project at Lincoln Station.
> However, despite the rosy theory provided by your urban planning contact, 
> that
> sounds like a project-killer to me.
>
> Dealing with climate change is a big motivator for me. That pushes me
> in the direction of Option C, much more than getting a community center
> somehow forced into a future development of the Mall. If I'm right that 
> "required
> accessory use" would be a project-killer, then we would thus not only
> fail to get a community center built there, but

[LincolnTalk] Voting on incomplete options

I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for approval at the
March town meeting.

Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for a set of
bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred option would then be
presented for approval in March. Options C and D as being voted on tomorrow
are incomplete because we do not have answers to these questions:

   - Building heights/stories
   - PB having override prower through special permits
   - Commercial space requirements
   - Allowance of fees in lieu of affordable units

If HCA zoning is "exactly zoning by laws" why are we voting under
incomplete assumptions?



On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Margaret Olson 
wrote:

> Town Counsel has advised us that we should not bring multiple potential
> zoning by-laws to town meeting. The state regulates how zoning changes are
> handled.
>
> A zoning article at town meeting is a straight yes/no vote on a very
> specific set of changes. We can not have any sort of multiple choice vote
> as we can for a "sense of the town" vote. So if we were to bring the zoning
> by-law changes for all five options to town meeting we would have five
> warrant articles. In what order should they appear? If the first one passes
> do we go on and vote on the others? As a voter who supports the HCA but
> doesn't like the variant that comes first in the warrant what should you
> do? Vote no, holding out for your preferred option, or do you vote yes to
> ensure we do comply? If all five are on the warrant what happens
> if multiple options pass?
>
> Margaret
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:59 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>
>> Given that, according the Chair of the Planning Board:
>>
>>1.  "*Compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning by laws*"
>>2. "Z*oning by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance*"
>>3. These by-laws are not ready
>>
>> Then, why are we voting tomorrow?
>>
>> To emphasize how rushed this process has been, significant changes to the
>> densities across options C and Ds were communicated on Wednesday evening
>> (without any public meetings).
>>
>> The areas where the Planning Board hasn't agreed on the bylaws are:
>> building heights/stories, giving the PB special permit powers to change
>> densities and heights/stories, parking and allowing fees in lieu of
>> affordable units. These are all critical questions as we evaluate the
>> different options. How are we expected to discuss the merits of these
>> options without a full understanding of those issues?
>>
>> LRHA has a stance on these open questions. Option E has a set of
>> setbacks, height/story limits and floor area ratios for every district. We
>> are distinctly opposed to providing variances to all of those items, as
>> well as units per acre, through a Planning Board special permit.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Margaret Olson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Compliance with the HCA is *exactly* zoning by laws. The zoning by-laws
>>> are the implementation of HCA compliance. There is no way to comply with
>>> the HCA without voting to amend the zoning by-laws.
>>>
>>> If the town votes down the proposed zoning by-laws in March, and the
>>> sense of the town is that we want to comply but the planning board
>>> presented an unacceptable set of regulations, then the planning board will
>>> go back to work and try again at a special town meeting at a later date.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>


-- 
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.

[LincolnTalk] Fw: ADA information on voting rights Re: question

Hi LT. At the request of Tim Higgins per his email below, I will share his 
response via LT shortly.

In his reply, Mr. Higgins attaches the opinion of the Town of Lincoln's Legal 
Counsel, which is that Massachusetts Law precludes remote voting.

Importantly, the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office (AGO) is not in 
agreement with the opinion of the Town of Lincoln's Legal Counsel on this 
matter.

Please contact Bethany Brown, ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts Attorney 
General's Office, as soon as possible to document your concerns regarding 
Reasonable Accommodations. Bethany's cell is: 781-429-9286, and she is copied 
on this email as well.

All best,

Sarah Liepert
Trapelo Rd.


From: Higgins, Timothy S. 
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 3:34 PM
To: Sarah Liepert 
Cc: Terri ; Lincoln Talk ; 
bethany.h.br...@mass.gov ; Pereira, Dan 
; Hutchinson, Jim 
; Cannon Holden, Sarah 

Subject: Re: ADA information on voting rights Re: [LincolnTalk] question

Sarah
Please share my response to your email so that residents understand that 
Massachusetts Law precludes remote voting, as confirmed by Town Counsel.

Thank you.
Sent from Timothy S Higgins
Town Administrator
Town of Lincoln
781-259-2604
iPhone

On Dec 1, 2023, at 3:28 PM, Sarah Liepert  wrote:


Dear Terri and others on LincolnTalk who have asked this ADA-related question 
today, specifically regarding Reasonable Accommodations for disabled people who 
cannot appear in person at Town Meeting.

Shortly, I will forward to LincolnTalk the email that I sent to Town 
Administrator Tim Higgins this morning.

Please read the information attached in the email and contact Bethany Brown, 
ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office, as soon as 
possible to document your concerns. Bethany's cell is: 781-429-9286, and she is 
copied on this communication as well.

All best,

Sarah Liepert
Trapelo Rd.


From: Lincoln  on behalf of Terri via Lincoln 

Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 10:41 AM
To: Lincoln Talk 
Subject: [LincolnTalk] question

Hello Friends,

Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able to 
vote tomorrow?
I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.

I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)

Thank you,
Terri K



--
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Anne Warner

Completely agree with Virginia on this!!

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:26 PM Virginia Goodwin 
wrote:

> Literally the point is, NOT every registered voter has an "opportunity" to
> vote, when that "opportunity" is contingent upon physically being at a
> certain location on one single specific day for an unspecified (but
> extremely long) amount of time. Besides being highly discriminatory against
> people who are just busy or have other calls on their time, this is also a
> disability rights issue, for people like the original writer's mother, who
> cannot physically gut it out in the auditorium for hours and hours.
>
> As Adam says, an extended period of paper ballots, gods forbid possibly
> including mail-in ballots, so people can vote from the comfort of their own
> homes when they have time, gives many more people a *real* opportunity to
> participate in the vote than our current system.
>
> We have way better technology now than they did in the past. We have paved
> roads, gas-powered vehicles, reliable mail service, cheap printing, and the
> joys of the internet. We should embrace those technologies to expand real
> access to town voting to as many registered voters as possible.
>
> Virginia Goodwin
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:54 PM Adam M Hogue 
> wrote:
>
>> Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early
>> voting and absentee voting.  Just saying.
>>
>> *Adam M Hogue*
>> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:50 PM, Sara Mattes  wrote:
>>
>> This is the law in most towns in New England.
>> Every registered voter has an opportunity to vote on all issues, but you
>> must be present and counted.
>> The alternative is to turn that opportunity to elected officials to make
>> all decisions.
>> If that a more open, democratic way.
>> I chose the former where I have a chance to participate in direct
>> democracy rather than handing my vote to a second party.
>> Sara
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:43 PM, Adam M Hogue  wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not
>> allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting.
>>
>> *Adam M Hogue*
>> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln 
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Hello Friends,
>>
>> Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able
>> to vote tomorrow?
>> I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.
>>
>> I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
>> I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Terri K
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>
>

-- 
Anne Taubes Warner
warneran...@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.

[LincolnTalk] HCA Lincoln Mall Development and By-laws

2023-12-01 Thread Peter Buchthal

Again, I am neither an architect, nor a builder.  I do believe I have some
common sense.  Not a lot, but maybe a little.

I have read everyone's posts about the HCA and the Lincoln Mall.  I believe
everyone should vote for option "E" because people on the Planning Board,
although well intentioned,
don't have a crystal ball and are unable to  predict all the many ways they
need to shape and control the re-development of the Mall through bylaws.

As we all agree that the Mall is a development of critical concern for the
town, I find it much safer for the Town to allow a negotiation to happen
between a future developer and the town upon the town receiving a request
for a special permit along with plans and drawings.   Plans C and D1-D3
force the Planning Board to try and guess with bylaws all the ways the mall
could be built by right.  The Mall isn't hidden away from everyone in the
town down a road like many of the many other  Multi Family Properties in
town.   The Mall is front and center in the middle of our transportation
hub of the future and must maintain sufficient parking to allow our
commuters and customers of the retail stores we profess to value.

Let's slow everything down with Option E, require a special permit for the
redevelopment of the Mall and allow the town to work with a developer
individually with plans in hand  so that everyone can be happy.  Plans C
and D1-D3 force the town to only request 10% of the units be affordable and
consider every possibility ahead of time.   Mistakes in the bylaws most
likely will  be made, let's give ourselves a chance to have a successful
redevelopment for the town through a town meeting and Option E.

We will do better with Option E.

Peter Buchthal
Weston 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center as part of the mall

2023-12-01 Thread Peter Buchthal

I respectfully disagree.  I don't believe the Planning Board can specify
the tenants and the terms for a future community center at the Lincoln
Mall  as the Mall under Options C and D1-D3 will be developed by right and
won't require a Town Meeting for a building permit.  I am not an attorney,
but using google, I did not find any examples of a Town being able to
pre-reserve space in a development built by right for the Town's use.  If
you want the possibility of a community center at the Lincoln Mall, choose
Option E.

Peter Buchthal
Weston Rd.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:53 PM Margaret Olson  wrote:

> The likelihood or not of the community center at the mall is irrelevant to
> which option is chosen. It is equally likely or unlikely with C as with E,
> or with any of the D options.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:
>
>> Why would including the Community Center as part of the mall be a
>> "project killer"? We could sign a 10/20/30 year lease. Wouldn't a developer
>> jump at the chance to have a stable tenant instead of having to deal with
>> constant retail turnover? Or is this comment an indictment of the viability
>> of any commercial space at the Mall area?
>>
>> According to the town's economic feasibility study, a developer could
>> consider charging ~$3 per sqft in monthly rent. For a 10,000 sqft CC, that
>> would mean $360K in yearly rent. Compare that to the town's yearly debt
>> service payment of $0.77M - $1.54M for the proposed CC designs.  The
>> savings come from the fact that public buildings are much more costly to
>> build than what private developments cost.
>>
>> In relation to the argument that the CC cannot be in the mall area
>> because of LEAP, there is no need to have LEAP move to the mall. Remodeling
>> Pod C (where LEAP is currently hosted) has been estimated at $3.5M. The
>> non-LEAP portion of the community center designs being put to vote will be
>> costing the town $12.5M - $21.5M. If the annual cost of the community
>> center is $360k instead of $1M+, there will surely be some left to renovate
>> LEAP.
>>
>> To be clear, this is not Civico's plan for the mall. If Option C is
>> chosen, this synergistic combination will likely not happen. However, with
>> Option E, this could very much be part of the project presented to the
>> Town. We could tap TCB (The Community Builders - pun intended) to build a
>> community center and truly affordable housing.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:47 Paul Shorb  wrote:
>>>
 The CCBC has an FAQ linked here

  that explains
 why the community center should be located at Hartwell campus (as the Town
 has voted to approve multiple times) rather than at the Mall.

 Putting a community center at the Town center would be much more
 expensive, if it could be accomplished at all. As I noted in another
 post just now, shared spaces are efficient, since (A) seniors tend to
 use the facilities in the day and (B) school children do so in the later
 afternoon, walking from the school buildings to participate in Lincoln's
 Parks & Rec programs or LEAP.  Building a separate community center at
 the town center would still leave the town with the need to renovate the
 spaces that would remain at Hartwell; I have heard the estimate of about
 $3.5 million for each of three pods at Hartwell.

 Also, I'm not sure how a community center at the Town center could
 actually be achieved. The Town center does not have sufficient
 available Town-owned space to build a community center. You therefore
 suggested including the Community Center as a required accessory use
 in the development of a future residential project at Lincoln Station.
 However, despite the rosy theory provided by your urban planning contact, 
 that
 sounds like a project-killer to me.

 Dealing with climate change is a big motivator for me. That pushes me
 in the direction of Option C, much more than getting a community center
 somehow forced into a future development of the Mall. If I'm right that 
 "required
 accessory use" would be a project-killer, then we would thus not only
 fail to get a community center built there, but also fail to get the
 Mall redeveloped with higher-density near the rail stop and shopping,
 which would be the biggest potential climate win here.

 Paul Shorb
 (a member of the RLF Board but expressing my personal views here)

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:54 AM Ken Hurd  wrote:

> Hello LincolnTalkers,
> With apologies for expressing yet again my strongly held opinion as an
> architect concerned with what we build in Lincoln, I want to remind
> everyone why I and many others believe we should not build a community
> center on the school campus.  I still believe it should

Re: [LincolnTalk] Don’t box out yourself, Lincoln.

2023-12-01 Thread maureen

My husband and I absolutely agree with Sara and plan to vote option E on 
Saturday.
 
Maureen Malin and Chuck Kaman

> On 12/01/2023 12:21 PM EST ٍSarah Postlethwait  wrote:
>  
>  
> The main reason Civico is insisting the village center be included in the HCA 
> rezoning is so they can’t be required to have more than 10% affordable 
> housing… so how will that add equitable diverse housing in Lincoln? If they 
> had intentions to actually add real affordable housing, they would have no 
> issue with separating the village center rezoning from the very unrestrictive 
> HCA rezoning. 
> 
> By having the village center rezoning be a different warrant article, the 
> town can require affordable housing for families who earn less than ~$120k a 
> year/ 80% of the median income; and we can ensure more than 10% of the units 
> are reserved as affordable. Plus we save a significant amount of our limited 
> “affordable housing trust” funds by doing that, so truly affordable housing 
> can be built with it.
>  
> It’s a win, win, win scenario. 
> 
> Separating the village center rezoning from the HCA won’t even require a 
> supermajority at town meeting. Even rezoning outside of the HCA near the MBTA 
> only needs a simple majority 51% now. That's a pretty easy hurdle to pass if 
> the village center is presented with a reasonable UPA/ affordable housing 
> requirement and percentage.
> 
> The RLF has done some great things for Lincoln- but they can’t promise the 
> next owner(s) will have the same purpose. The RLF have stated multiple times 
> in public meetings they plan to sell to a developer in the near future. And 
> that developer will likely sell within a couple years once construction is 
> finished. Why wouldn’t we have it set in stone, rather than just crossing our 
> fingers and hoping they have good intentions?
> 
> The only way to truly ensure affordable housing will be built is to separate 
> the “village center” into a separate rezoning warrant at March Town meeting. 
> The only way to do that is to vote for Option E. 
> 
> Sarah Postlethwait 
> Lewis St
> 
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:36 AM David Cuetos  mailto:davidcue...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > The current draft of the bylaws for the Village Center District is tailored 
> > to meet a developer’s (Civico) wishes rather than the Town’s general 
> > interest. A majority of the Planning Board has so far supported that 
> > approach. There is no reason to believe that the imbalance of power will 
> > change after Saturday. If options C-D are chosen, the Town would be forced 
> > to decide between approving a set of disagreeable Village Center bylaws or 
> > reject HCA rezoning altogether. It is obvious in that scenario we would be 
> > dosed with a heavy ration of “approve this or the State will sue us” like 
> > we have seen so far in public presentations from the HCAWG. HCA and Mall 
> > rezoning need not be coupled. Vote E to retain control. Vote E if you are 
> > unsure what is the best approach and you want more time to consider.
> > 
> > To recap, these are the concerning bylaws:
> > 
> > * If the Mall is not developed under HCA, more than 10% affordable units 
> > could be required, as Lincoln has historically done. It gets even worse. 
> > There is a clause in the planned bylaws that would allow developers to 
> > skirt the 10% HCA affordable housing requirement by making a donation to 
> > the Town’s Affordable Housing Trust. No units would be reserved for 
> > households with an income lower than 80% of the median (~$120k for a family 
> > of four).
> > * There are minimal requirements for commercial space. The requirements 
> > discussed could be easily gamed by a developer. The RLF Chair admitted at 
> > the Community Forum of Nov. 8 that commercial space would likely decrease.
> > * Under HCA there is no possible requirement for commercial parking space. 
> > Residents could not be able to visit the Mall like they do today.
> > * There are no floor area or lot coverage ratios. This means lots can be 
> > clear-cut to maximize build-out, increasing the amount of impervious 
> > surface and reducing tree-cover .
> > * The draft bylaw discussed on the 20th allows a maximum 4 stories and 
> > height of 48' for buildings located 100 ft or more from the road. This is 
> > inconsistent with all public communications from the HCAWG, which set the 
> > limit at 3 stories and a height of 42’.
> > * Most concerning of all, the Planning Board would reserve the right to 
> > provide height, story, and density variances through a special permit. This 
> > would essentially render moot the discussion the Town is expected to have 
> > regarding the District’s proper bylaws, including number of units. This is 
> > an unprecedented clause in Lincoln’s history.
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 02:27 RAandBOB  > mailto:raand...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > Most house lots in town are zoned for by-right single-family housing. You 
> > > can’t build

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting Query

2023-12-01 Thread Jeffrey

Any Lincoln resident whose voter registration is up to date can vote in any
town meeting, and, of course, in any election; local, State, or Federal. I
just want to make this clear; I think the whole town knows this but some
comments on LT appear to confuse the issue.

The reason the elderly and other motion-restricted residents (whose voter
registration is current) do not get to vote is due to a lack of
transportation to town meeting/polling location.

Decades ago, I and others drove Ford Econoline Vans and Family Vans around
town to pick up such residents. I do not know what has happened to that
effort.

Thank you. Jeffrey L.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:44 PM Adam M Hogue  wrote:

> Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not allow
> for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting.
>
> *Adam M Hogue*
> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln 
> wrote:
>
> 
> Hello Friends,
>
> Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able
> to vote tomorrow?
> I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.
>
> I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
> I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)
>
> Thank you,
> Terri K
>
>
>
> --
> 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.

[LincolnTalk] FW: PLEASE CONSIDER VOTING FOR OPTION C AND D-1 TOMORROW

2023-12-01 Thread jrobbat

 

Hello friends, 

 

We hope you are well.

 

If you believe like we do that Lincoln needs it's commercial center and
should comply with the spirit and intent of the Housing Choice Act,  please
vote for "OPTION C"  at Town Meeting tomorrow, Saturday December 2.  

 

Although the Housing Choice Act is technically complex, at its heart, this
is a straight-forward matter.

 

Lincoln has proven over generations that we can manage the persistent forces
of change.Just look around at our sublime built and natural environments.

 

Our town leaders and we  share a sense of place . we perceive and experience
Lincoln in much the same way.

 

This matter of  density at a commercial and housing district in South
Lincoln is not new.Lincoln has constantly addressed it for the last 100
years.In our time in Lincoln there been charettes and in 2013 Town Meeting
voted unanimously for Lincoln's Comprehensive Plan.

 

Our Town meeting, our experience, our volunteer based system of government
assures that our voices will be heard as the development  process proceeds.
We will get what we want.

 

The stars are aligning now.the HCA is a response to a housing shortage in
Massachusetts  and the Rural Land Foundation, who has led us  by example for
decades, is in transition now.

 

 

Please vote for  Option C!

 

Best, Dana and Joe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

The Long Range Plan, now 13 years old, is great and the "Goals" you sent are
too. The public planning process to date has principally been about how to
comply w/ the HCA.where the zones that bring compliance might be. There has
been other great work.partnering with Selects, RLF and Lincoln Woods owners
on several matters has been outstanding. But for some.we'll soon see for how
many.change is too scary. 

 

People care about "sense of place". We perceive and experience Lincoln in
our special, idiosyncratic way. Emotions, children, grandchildren now,
imagination, old experiences,  stories we pass along, driving past our
churches and library, the look and feel of our authentic architecture, psalm
soup, our trails, fields and woods, Codman farm.these are characteristics
that we are hard-put to verbalize but make Lincoln central to our lives.
That make us feel attached to Lincoln and belong here. 

 

These emotions are popping in our subconsciousness when change is discussed.
So we push change away to places we cannot see it.Oriole Landing, The
Commons.

 

The design guidelines convert the Plan Goals  you sent me into a collective
sense of place vision that can assuage the fear of some people and with the
right committee and review process represent the interests of the town once
approval is given. Yes, this should have been a long public process.I feel
it would have helped a great deal. Now, there is little time particularly as
the Holidays and the pressure of town meeting builds. 

 

But it should begin now and include people who can articulate our collective
sense of place to the satisfaction of the community. And the town should be
assured that this or another committee will work ably with the developer in
the town's interest  once one is chosen.

 

Hugs, Joe

 

 

 

Lincoln is a town that cherishes its rural, agricultural character, its
small town heritage, its open space, and its historical legacy.  

 

 

The Town is committed to:

 

 

 

*   Achieving a balance between preserving these values while making
reasonable provision for citizens' safety and convenience;

 

*   Fostering economic, racial/ethnic, and age diversity among its
citizenry through its educational, housing and other public policy;

 

*   Excellence in its public educational system; and

 

*   The Town Meeting form of government and the traditions of civic
leadership and volunteer public service.

 

 

 

 

 

-- 
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Iwona Pawlikowska via Lincoln

I totally agree. Not everyone can be for the Saturday meeting from 9:00am-3:00pm. On Dec 1, 2023, at 1:47 PM, Kathleen Lomatoski wrote:A resident reached out to town leaders several weeks ago about Town Meeting and ADA compliance. I am not sure the final outcome. I believe the town leaders were consulting with the legal team. Kathleen Lomatoski klomato...@gmail.comOn Dec 1, 2023, at 1:27 PM, Margo Fisher-Martin wrote:Exactly!On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:16 PM Sasha Golden wrote:There's an ADA issue...On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:44 PM Adam M Hogue wrote:Unfortunately they can’t vote. Our voting laws in this town do not allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln wrote:Hello Friends,Does anyone know how residents such as the elderly or disabled are able to vote tomorrow? I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important. I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer. I do not see it on Town Web site (?) Thank you,Terri K-- 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.

[LincolnTalk] Community Center

2023-12-01 Thread Barbara Low

I wrote a comment saying Thank You to a post saying the Community Center 
belongs on the school campus. By the time the moderators approved my Thank You, 
it appears that I support a community Center at the mall. I DO NOT!

Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
Get Outlook for Android
-- 
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center as part of the mall

2023-12-01 Thread Paul Shorb

You are right, I don't know that it would be a project killer. That was
just my non-expert guess. If the town were willing to pay a high enough
rent for community-center space at a redeveloped Mall, I guess that could
work economically from the developer's point of view.

That would still leave the question of whether that is the kind of
community center that we want to have. Space at the Mall is limited, and
everyone seems to agree about wanting to keep as much commercial space
active there as shoppers will support. So my guess (again, non-expert) is
that a community center squeezed into what would otherwise be ground-floor
commercial space at the Mall would be small and dreary, compared to what
has been sketched out for the roomier, greener Hartwell campus (in
addition to losing the cost efficiencies and social benefits from creating
a multi-programmatic multi-generational space, previously discussed).

In any event, the above questions seem relevant only to what one wants to
vote for in 2024, when a final community center plan is put before Town
Meeting, not to the voting tomorrow. Margaret Olson has pointed out in this
thread that where you think the community center should be should be
irrelevant to which HCA option you cote for, since ending up with a
community center in the town center "is equally likely or unlikely with C
as with E, or with any of the D options". I haven't got my own head fully
wrapped around why that is so -- getting dizzy from trying to follow LT
today --  but I trust her to know!

Paul Shorb
(RLF Board member but sharing my personal views here)

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:

> Why would including the Community Center as part of the mall be a "project
> killer"? We could sign a 10/20/30 year lease. Wouldn't a developer jump at
> the chance to have a stable tenant instead of having to deal with constant
> retail turnover? Or is this comment an indictment of the viability of any
> commercial space at the Mall area?
>
> According to the town's economic feasibility study, a developer could
> consider charging ~$3 per sqft in monthly rent. For a 10,000 sqft CC, that
> would mean $360K in yearly rent. Compare that to the town's yearly debt
> service payment of $0.77M - $1.54M for the proposed CC designs.  The
> savings come from the fact that public buildings are much more costly to
> build than what private developments cost.
>
> In relation to the argument that the CC cannot be in the mall area because
> of LEAP, there is no need to have LEAP move to the mall. Remodeling Pod C
> (where LEAP is currently hosted) has been estimated at $3.5M. The non-LEAP
> portion of the community center designs being put to vote will be costing
> the town $12.5M - $21.5M. If the annual cost of the community center is
> $360k instead of $1M+, there will surely be some left to renovate LEAP.
>
> To be clear, this is not Civico's plan for the mall. If Option C is
> chosen, this synergistic combination will likely not happen. However, with
> Option E, this could very much be part of the project presented to the
> Town. We could tap TCB (The Community Builders - pun intended) to build a
> community center and truly affordable housing.
>
>
>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:47 Paul Shorb  wrote:
>>
>>> The CCBC has an FAQ linked here
>>> 
>>>  that explains
>>> why the community center should be located at Hartwell campus (as the Town
>>> has voted to approve multiple times) rather than at the Mall.
>>>
>>> Putting a community center at the Town center would be much more
>>> expensive, if it could be accomplished at all. As I noted in another
>>> post just now, shared spaces are efficient, since (A) seniors tend to
>>> use the facilities in the day and (B) school children do so in the later
>>> afternoon, walking from the school buildings to participate in Lincoln's
>>> Parks & Rec programs or LEAP.  Building a separate community center at
>>> the town center would still leave the town with the need to renovate the
>>> spaces that would remain at Hartwell; I have heard the estimate of about
>>> $3.5 million for each of three pods at Hartwell.
>>>
>>> Also, I'm not sure how a community center at the Town center could
>>> actually be achieved. The Town center does not have sufficient
>>> available Town-owned space to build a community center. You therefore
>>> suggested including the Community Center as a required accessory use in
>>> the development of a future residential project at Lincoln Station.
>>> However, despite the rosy theory provided by your urban planning contact, 
>>> that
>>> sounds like a project-killer to me.
>>>
>>> Dealing with climate change is a big motivator for me. That pushes me in
>>> the direction of Option C, much more than getting a community center
>>> somehow forced into a future development of the Mall. If I'm right that 
>>> "required
>>> accessory

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Lis Herbert

One obvious solution that seems like it should be manageable for tomorrow at least would be to allow people to cast their paper ballots as soon as they have checked in and filled them out. I know what I’m voting for, and since those paper ballots aren’t going to be modified during the discussion period, I can’t imagine why we can’t vote right off the bat. It would at least give people a window in the morning to participate.Sent from my iPhoneOn Dec 1, 2023, at 1:51 PM, Sara R via Lincoln  wrote:Agree Virginia and Adam!  How do we support making this change.Sara BrownSent from my iPhoneOn Dec 1, 2023, at 1:24 PM, Virginia Goodwin  wrote:Literally the point is, NOT every registered voter has an "opportunity" to vote, when that "opportunity" is contingent upon physically being at a certain location on one single specific day for an unspecified (but extremely long) amount of time. Besides being highly discriminatory against people who are just busy or have other calls on their time, this is also a disability rights issue, for people like the original writer's mother, who cannot physically gut it out in the auditorium for hours and hours.As Adam says, an extended period of paper ballots, gods forbid possibly including mail-in ballots, so people can vote from the comfort of their own homes when they have time, gives many more people a real opportunity to participate in the vote than our current system.We have way better technology now than they did in the past. We have paved roads, gas-powered vehicles, reliable mail service, cheap printing, and the joys of the internet. We should embrace those technologies to expand real access to town voting to as many registered voters as possible.Virginia GoodwinOn Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:54 PM Adam M Hogue  wrote:Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early voting and absentee voting.  Just saying. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:50 PM, Sara Mattes  wrote:This is the law in most towns in New England.Every registered voter has an opportunity to vote on all issues, but you must be present and counted.The alternative is to turn that opportunity to elected officials to make all decisions.If that a more open, democratic way.I chose the former where I have a chance to participate in direct democracy rather than handing my vote to a second party.SaraSent from my iPhoneOn Dec 1, 2023, at 12:43 PM, Adam M Hogue  wrote:Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln  wrote:Hello Friends,Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able to vote tomorrow? I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.  I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer. I do not see it on  Town Web site (?) Thank you,Terri K-- 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.-- 
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] ADA information on voting rights Re: question

2023-12-01 Thread Higgins, Timothy S.

Sarah
Please share my response to your email so that residents understand that 
Massachusetts Law precludes remote voting, as confirmed by Town Counsel.

Thank you.
Sent from Timothy S Higgins
Town Administrator
Town of Lincoln
781-259-2604
iPhone

On Dec 1, 2023, at 3:28 PM, Sarah Liepert  wrote:


Dear Terri and others on LincolnTalk who have asked this ADA-related question 
today, specifically regarding Reasonable Accommodations for disabled people who 
cannot appear in person at Town Meeting.

Shortly, I will forward to LincolnTalk the email that I sent to Town 
Administrator Tim Higgins this morning.

Please read the information attached in the email and contact Bethany Brown, 
ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office, as soon as 
possible to document your concerns. Bethany's cell is: 781-429-9286, and she is 
copied on this communication as well.

All best,

Sarah Liepert
Trapelo Rd.


From: Lincoln  on behalf of Terri via Lincoln 

Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 10:41 AM
To: Lincoln Talk 
Subject: [LincolnTalk] question

Hello Friends,

Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able to 
vote tomorrow?
I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.

I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)

Thank you,
Terri K



--
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.

[LincolnTalk] ADA information on voting rights Re: question

Dear Terri and others on LincolnTalk who have asked this ADA-related question 
today, specifically regarding Reasonable Accommodations for disabled people who 
cannot appear in person at Town Meeting.

Shortly, I will forward to LincolnTalk the email that I sent to Town 
Administrator Tim Higgins this morning.

Please read the information attached in the email and contact Bethany Brown, 
ADA Coordinator at the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office, as soon as 
possible to document your concerns. Bethany's cell is: 781-429-9286, and she is 
copied on this communication as well.

All best,

Sarah Liepert
Trapelo Rd.


From: Lincoln  on behalf of Terri via Lincoln 

Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 10:41 AM
To: Lincoln Talk 
Subject: [LincolnTalk] question

Hello Friends,

Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able to 
vote tomorrow?
I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.

I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)

Thank you,
Terri K



-- 
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.

[LincolnTalk] THE COMMONS EXPANSION

2023-12-01 Thread Christine M Campo

Hello LincolnTalk!



An email has been circling around in favor of the Commons expansion. I have
some close friends whose parents are also at The Commons but have a very
different take on the proposed expansion.  I have included below the
bulleted comments from the original email (in blue) and the coordinating
response (in black) on behalf of my friends.



I’m only the messenger here…



Town Meeting, December 2, 2023



One issue that is not on many people’s radar but a critical one for many is
the vote we will take regarding “THE COMMONS EXPANSION.”



It will come after the community center and before the HCA. There is
concern that many will leave for a break in between allowing a small
majority to make this critical decision.



Highlighted Concerns (in bullets) from the original email and responses (in
bold):



The Commons is a non-profit organization where all profits are funneled
back into the organization.
This is very misleading.  The owners keep perpetuating the idea that being
a non-profit is equal to doing nothing wrong. "Non-profit" is simply a tax
status. It is true that a non-profit cannot be owned or sold *- but
its assets can be*. There is little limit on what kinds of* expenses *a
non-profit can pay, including high salaries, and bonuses, and no control
over with whom they sign contracts and how lucrative they are. Because
Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRCs) are not regulated, there is
plenty of risk that these kinds of abuses can happen.

There are currently property systems failing with huge costs associated to
fix them - including septic, roof infrastructure and siding on almost all
buildings.
This is dramatic and not truthful- the entire septic system was just
replaced- and I have not heard about roofing issues (my mother has lived
there for almost 12 years). The only siding issues that have been
identified are on the skilled nursing building, and these are related to
contractor failures, which are being remediated. There ARE kitchen
deficiencies (too small for the current population, let alone an increased
population), carpet and painting to be done in common areas and the parking
is too limited. These have not been addressed because the property does not
have sufficient capital reserves to pay for all of the upgrades; the former
owners paid themselves big distributions rather than investing in the
property. And, when they sold, they took a lot of money out of the
transaction, instead of leaving it with the property. This is really one of
our biggest concerns; we do not want this to happen again. There are
currently no guarantees if the property is sold or profits generated from
the expansion, that the net revenues will stay with the property.

The expansion would generate an additional 1.2 million free cash flow that
would go directly into repairing and maintaining the property.
This is a huge point of concern as there has been a lack of financial
projections provided for the as-is buildout and the proposed expansion.
What has been provided to date *provides no detail* to how it is that this
buildout will actually generate $1.1MM in cash flow. If that projection IS
correct, then is 3+ years of construction all over the campus
(remember many of the people are on walkers, wheelchairs, etc.), worth
$1.1MM of cash, which will take 5 years to get there? Some of these units
sell for over $1MM alone. Something does not add up.



Running elderly housing in general is an increasingly costly endeavor and
not permitting the Expansion would increase an already substantial resident
monthly assessment to increase.
Not clear that: a) monthly fees won't go up anyway as they have every year
and b) that the way to improve that is by adding more units, which require
taking on new debt= more expenses.  AND more residents will require more
dining room space and staffing for services; they are already struggling to
provide sufficient staffing for the current population.  The
owner/developer has estimated this project will require a minimum of
$12-$14 million more debt and it is already carrying approximately $105MM
of debt now. This will add to an increasing cash flow burden on the
property.



The Commons is part of a Pilot tax program and pays the town taxes making
it one of the only non-resident tax bases in Lincoln.
The Commons does make a “Payment in Lieu of Taxes”, which is good for
Lincoln (tax revenue), but that will be the case whether or not the
expansion takes place.



Residents are well aware of the years of construction and inconvenience but
are still willing to support this because of the financial needs of the
property.
Residents have been told that this expansion “MUST go through” by the
management and a "pro" group led by the resident council. Management cannot
be neutral. It is their job to get the expansion passed. They are pushing
this expansion instead of providing balanced information to the whole
community. Residents who are against the expansion report feeling

[LincolnTalk] Evening shopping at deCordova I Store TONIGHT!

2023-12-01 Thread Mary Balogh

The *deCordova I Store* will be open for extended hours this Friday,
December 1, alongside the Twisted Tree Café for their Holiday Celebration
event from 5pm - 9pm.

Event:
*EVENING SHOPPING at deCordova I Store*Date:  *FRIDAY, DECEMBER 1*
Hours:  *4 PM to 7 PM*
Special: *20% DISCOUNT off of GLASS ORNAMENTS*

The *Twisted Tree Café* will be open from *5pm - 9pm* for an evening
of *seasonal
dishes* and *drinks*.
These evening events have been wildly popular--make an evening of it with
some shopping at the Store!

[image: image.png]

The Trustees | *deCordova Sculpture Park and Museum*
51 Sandy Pond Road  |  Lincoln, MA 01773
781.259.8692 Store
-- 
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.

[LincolnTalk] Option E enables a CC at the Mall (if we so choose)

The main point of my comment was to counter the assertion that including
the CC in the mall is a "project killer". I would argue, given the analysis
I laid out below, that having a stable, long-term tenant like the Town of
Lincoln would actually be an incentive for certain developers (perhaps not
a Civico which seems more interested in flipping properties than being
long-term owners). A CC at the mall would be a win-win for residents and
developers.

I concur with Peter. Options C and D would rezone the mall, providing the
owner total freedom to pursue any plans. The town could not require the
inclusion of a community center in a developer's project.

Option E, on the other hand, preserves the town's ability to influence what
is built at the mall. We could have a requirement put to town vote to
couple the community center with any multi-family residential development
at the mall

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:03 PM Peter Buchthal  wrote:

> I respectfully disagree.  I don't believe the Planning Board can specify
> the tenants and the terms for a future community center at the Lincoln
> Mall  as the Mall under Options C and D1-D3 will be developed by right and
> won't require a Town Meeting for a building permit.  I am not an attorney,
> but using google, I did not find any examples of a Town being able to
> pre-reserve space in a development built by right for the Town's use.  If
> you want the possibility of a community center at the Lincoln Mall, choose
> Option E.
>
> Peter Buchthal
> Weston Rd.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:53 PM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> The likelihood or not of the community center at the mall is irrelevant
>> to which option is chosen. It is equally likely or unlikely with C as with
>> E, or with any of the D options.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Karla Gravis 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Why would including the Community Center as part of the mall be a
>>> "project killer"? We could sign a 10/20/30 year lease. Wouldn't a developer
>>> jump at the chance to have a stable tenant instead of having to deal with
>>> constant retail turnover? Or is this comment an indictment of the viability
>>> of any commercial space at the Mall area?
>>>
>>> According to the town's economic feasibility study, a developer could
>>> consider charging ~$3 per sqft in monthly rent. For a 10,000 sqft CC, that
>>> would mean $360K in yearly rent. Compare that to the town's yearly debt
>>> service payment of $0.77M - $1.54M for the proposed CC designs.  The
>>> savings come from the fact that public buildings are much more costly to
>>> build than what private developments cost.
>>>
>>> In relation to the argument that the CC cannot be in the mall area
>>> because of LEAP, there is no need to have LEAP move to the mall. Remodeling
>>> Pod C (where LEAP is currently hosted) has been estimated at $3.5M. The
>>> non-LEAP portion of the community center designs being put to vote will be
>>> costing the town $12.5M - $21.5M. If the annual cost of the community
>>> center is $360k instead of $1M+, there will surely be some left to renovate
>>> LEAP.
>>>
>>> To be clear, this is not Civico's plan for the mall. If Option C is
>>> chosen, this synergistic combination will likely not happen. However, with
>>> Option E, this could very much be part of the project presented to the
>>> Town. We could tap TCB (The Community Builders - pun intended) to build a
>>> community center and truly affordable housing.
>>>
>>>
>>>

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:47 Paul Shorb  wrote:

> The CCBC has an FAQ linked here
> 
>  that explains
> why the community center should be located at Hartwell campus (as the Town
> has voted to approve multiple times) rather than at the Mall.
>
> Putting a community center at the Town center would be much more
> expensive, if it could be accomplished at all. As I noted in another
> post just now, shared spaces are efficient, since (A) seniors tend to
> use the facilities in the day and (B) school children do so in the later
> afternoon, walking from the school buildings to participate in Lincoln's
> Parks & Rec programs or LEAP.  Building a separate community center
> at the town center would still leave the town with the need to renovate 
> the
> spaces that would remain at Hartwell; I have heard the estimate of about
> $3.5 million for each of three pods at Hartwell.
>
> Also, I'm not sure how a community center at the Town center could
> actually be achieved. The Town center does not have sufficient
> available Town-owned space to build a community center. You therefore
> suggested including the Community Center as a required accessory use
> in the development of a future residential project at Lincoln Station.
> However, despite the rosy theory provided by your urban planning contact, 
> that

[LincolnTalk] Why I support Option E

2023-12-01 Thread Deborah Howe via Lincoln

An impressive list of people have signed a letter here endorsing Option C for the HCA zoning article, and I
applaud their cohesion. My view is similar to theirs -- to see smart redevelopment of the South Lincoln area,
and "to create a vibrant, welcoming center for this town." I absolutely agree that the Mall must be
redeveloped for mixed-use commercial/retail and multi-unit housing; I don't think anyone disputes that fact.
(I'd love to see some housing developed for those of us in the middle-tier of income; housing opportunities
for us are scant in Lincoln.) My view differs from the Option C group in that I feel extremely uncomfortable
voting for redevelopment of the Mall without seeing any site plans. The HCA Working Group held a Zoom on
9/21, and made a presentation to a small group at Lincoln Woods on 9/28. They showed a rendered perspective
of the view from Lincoln Road north to the proposed building intended to replace Something Special's
building. Unfortunately there were no other drawings of the rest of the planned development, behind the
Lincoln Road frontage. And we have not seen any drawings since, though Michelle Barnes (for whom I have a
great deal of respect) has said that Civico intends to build a U-shaped building facing Lincoln Road. When I
asked about parking at the redeveloped Mall -- parking for commercial interests and for housing residents --
Michelle explained that once construction is done, the developer would likely build a parking structure in
front of Donelan's. A two- or three-story (or, by right, even a four-story) parking structure in front of
Donelan's -- in what we'd all like to see become the "vibrant, welcoming center of town" -- would,
I think, work against that goal. Again, I am not comfortable voting for such a radical possibility without
seeing at least schematic site plans. What gets built, how the site layout is configured, how likely
commercial activity will be to stay put, given the greater profitability of housing -- right now, the RLF can
help determine those things. It will have no say once it has sold the site to a developer. And while I
support the RLF (I even contributed in 2012 to help the RLF buy the DeNormandie land north of Route 2, 5
months after I moved to Lincoln), I believe that Lincoln should retain its ability to rezone the parcel. I
support Option E because it removes the Mall from the HCA zoning process. Lincoln surrenders its ability to
determing its own home rule course for the Mall if it uses the HCA to allow by-right development rights
there. And while the Town will of course require site plan review, and can enact a demolition delay (a
one-year hold on construction, after which the developer can proceed without further intervention from the
Town), whoever owns the Mall property may build at will. And housing is a more profitable land use than
commercial use. By removing the Mall from the HCA zoning process, Lincoln will retain the right to exercise
its legacy of careful planning and design. Removing the Mall from the HCA process will give us 9 more months
to refine the HCA redevelopment plan without developer pressure. And it will let us exercise the greatest
flexibility in zoning the Mall for a thoughtful balance of housing, commercial/retail use, commuter rail and
mixed-use parking, and (I certainly hope) some open space that will be a benefit to all who visit what can
then become our "vibrant, welcoming center". Lincoln is a wonderful place; its legacy of open-space
conservation has made it an incredibly valuable asset to those of us who live here and those who visit. I
believe that -- despite other communities also releasing land under HCA for housing development -- in the
eyes of a smart developer, Lincoln is still a plum waiting to be picked. I will vote for the greatest town
participation in rezoning the Mall, and so I will be voting tomorrow for Option E. Sent from iCloud--
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Debra Daugherty

That's a pretty awesome idea.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:36 PM Caitlin Hogue 
wrote:

> So why can't a vote happen after town meeting that incorporates whatever
> amendments get added? Why must it occur during town meeting?
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:24 PM Andrew Payne  wrote:
>
>>
>> Adam wrote:
>>
>> Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early
>>> voting and absentee voting.  Just saying.
>>>
>>
>> The challenge with open town meeting and early/absentee voting has always
>> been:  whatever is being voted can be amended on the fly by resident vote
>> at the town meeting.
>>
>> You submit your early/absentee vote for option "Q", and you later find
>> that after *vigorous* debate at TM, Q was amended to include (say) a
>> heliport for coal-powered helicopters, or a town-wide pneumatic tube system.
>>
>> One "see most of you tomorrow" resident's view,
>>
>> -andy
>>  https://payne.org/lt-disclaimer/
>> --
>> 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center as part of the mall

The likelihood or not of the community center at the mall is irrelevant to
which option is chosen. It is equally likely or unlikely with C as with E,
or with any of the D options.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Karla Gravis  wrote:

> Why would including the Community Center as part of the mall be a "project
> killer"? We could sign a 10/20/30 year lease. Wouldn't a developer jump at
> the chance to have a stable tenant instead of having to deal with constant
> retail turnover? Or is this comment an indictment of the viability of any
> commercial space at the Mall area?
>
> According to the town's economic feasibility study, a developer could
> consider charging ~$3 per sqft in monthly rent. For a 10,000 sqft CC, that
> would mean $360K in yearly rent. Compare that to the town's yearly debt
> service payment of $0.77M - $1.54M for the proposed CC designs.  The
> savings come from the fact that public buildings are much more costly to
> build than what private developments cost.
>
> In relation to the argument that the CC cannot be in the mall area because
> of LEAP, there is no need to have LEAP move to the mall. Remodeling Pod C
> (where LEAP is currently hosted) has been estimated at $3.5M. The non-LEAP
> portion of the community center designs being put to vote will be costing
> the town $12.5M - $21.5M. If the annual cost of the community center is
> $360k instead of $1M+, there will surely be some left to renovate LEAP.
>
> To be clear, this is not Civico's plan for the mall. If Option C is
> chosen, this synergistic combination will likely not happen. However, with
> Option E, this could very much be part of the project presented to the
> Town. We could tap TCB (The Community Builders - pun intended) to build a
> community center and truly affordable housing.
>
>
>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:47 Paul Shorb  wrote:
>>
>>> The CCBC has an FAQ linked here
>>> 
>>>  that explains
>>> why the community center should be located at Hartwell campus (as the Town
>>> has voted to approve multiple times) rather than at the Mall.
>>>
>>> Putting a community center at the Town center would be much more
>>> expensive, if it could be accomplished at all. As I noted in another
>>> post just now, shared spaces are efficient, since (A) seniors tend to
>>> use the facilities in the day and (B) school children do so in the later
>>> afternoon, walking from the school buildings to participate in Lincoln's
>>> Parks & Rec programs or LEAP.  Building a separate community center at
>>> the town center would still leave the town with the need to renovate the
>>> spaces that would remain at Hartwell; I have heard the estimate of about
>>> $3.5 million for each of three pods at Hartwell.
>>>
>>> Also, I'm not sure how a community center at the Town center could
>>> actually be achieved. The Town center does not have sufficient
>>> available Town-owned space to build a community center. You therefore
>>> suggested including the Community Center as a required accessory use in
>>> the development of a future residential project at Lincoln Station.
>>> However, despite the rosy theory provided by your urban planning contact, 
>>> that
>>> sounds like a project-killer to me.
>>>
>>> Dealing with climate change is a big motivator for me. That pushes me in
>>> the direction of Option C, much more than getting a community center
>>> somehow forced into a future development of the Mall. If I'm right that 
>>> "required
>>> accessory use" would be a project-killer, then we would thus not only
>>> fail to get a community center built there, but also fail to get the
>>> Mall redeveloped with higher-density near the rail stop and shopping,
>>> which would be the biggest potential climate win here.
>>>
>>> Paul Shorb
>>> (a member of the RLF Board but expressing my personal views here)
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:54 AM Ken Hurd  wrote:
>>>
 Hello LincolnTalkers,
 With apologies for expressing yet again my strongly held opinion as an
 architect concerned with what we build in Lincoln, I want to remind
 everyone why I and many others believe we should not build a community
 center on the school campus.  I still believe it should be located in
 Lincoln Station, particularly now that our small commercial area is in play
 because of the Housing Choice Act.

 As I wrote last year, "I fully support building a new facility, but it
 has long been my opinion that such a major investment by the town should be
 deployed where it is most needed - namely in the Lincoln Station area.  For
 more than ten years since Town Meeting approved the Comprehensive Long
 Range Plan, in which the revitalization of Lincoln Station was
 overwhelmingly one of the highest priorities, the area has lain dormant and
 in serious need of a catalyst to jumpstart its transformation into the
 compact,

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center as part of the mall

Why would including the Community Center as part of the mall be a "project
killer"? We could sign a 10/20/30 year lease. Wouldn't a developer jump at
the chance to have a stable tenant instead of having to deal with constant
retail turnover? Or is this comment an indictment of the viability of any
commercial space at the Mall area?

According to the town's economic feasibility study, a developer could
consider charging ~$3 per sqft in monthly rent. For a 10,000 sqft CC, that
would mean $360K in yearly rent. Compare that to the town's yearly debt
service payment of $0.77M - $1.54M for the proposed CC designs.  The
savings come from the fact that public buildings are much more costly to
build than what private developments cost.

In relation to the argument that the CC cannot be in the mall area because
of LEAP, there is no need to have LEAP move to the mall. Remodeling Pod C
(where LEAP is currently hosted) has been estimated at $3.5M. The non-LEAP
portion of the community center designs being put to vote will be costing
the town $12.5M - $21.5M. If the annual cost of the community center is
$360k instead of $1M+, there will surely be some left to renovate LEAP.

To be clear, this is not Civico's plan for the mall. If Option C is chosen,
this synergistic combination will likely not happen. However, with Option
E, this could very much be part of the project presented to the Town. We
could tap TCB (The Community Builders - pun intended) to build a community
center and truly affordable housing.

>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:47 Paul Shorb  wrote:
>
>> The CCBC has an FAQ linked here
>> 
>>  that explains
>> why the community center should be located at Hartwell campus (as the Town
>> has voted to approve multiple times) rather than at the Mall.
>>
>> Putting a community center at the Town center would be much more
>> expensive, if it could be accomplished at all. As I noted in another
>> post just now, shared spaces are efficient, since (A) seniors tend to
>> use the facilities in the day and (B) school children do so in the later
>> afternoon, walking from the school buildings to participate in Lincoln's
>> Parks & Rec programs or LEAP.  Building a separate community center at
>> the town center would still leave the town with the need to renovate the
>> spaces that would remain at Hartwell; I have heard the estimate of about
>> $3.5 million for each of three pods at Hartwell.
>>
>> Also, I'm not sure how a community center at the Town center could
>> actually be achieved. The Town center does not have sufficient available
>> Town-owned space to build a community center. You therefore suggested 
>> including the
>> Community Center as a required accessory use in the development of a future
>> residential project at Lincoln Station. However, despite the rosy theory
>> provided by your urban planning contact, that sounds like a
>> project-killer to me.
>>
>> Dealing with climate change is a big motivator for me. That pushes me in
>> the direction of Option C, much more than getting a community center
>> somehow forced into a future development of the Mall. If I'm right that 
>> "required
>> accessory use" would be a project-killer, then we would thus not only
>> fail to get a community center built there, but also fail to get the
>> Mall redeveloped with higher-density near the rail stop and shopping,
>> which would be the biggest potential climate win here.
>>
>> Paul Shorb
>> (a member of the RLF Board but expressing my personal views here)
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:54 AM Ken Hurd  wrote:
>>
>>> Hello LincolnTalkers,
>>> With apologies for expressing yet again my strongly held opinion as an
>>> architect concerned with what we build in Lincoln, I want to remind
>>> everyone why I and many others believe we should not build a community
>>> center on the school campus.  I still believe it should be located in
>>> Lincoln Station, particularly now that our small commercial area is in play
>>> because of the Housing Choice Act.
>>>
>>> As I wrote last year, "I fully support building a new facility, but it
>>> has long been my opinion that such a major investment by the town should be
>>> deployed where it is most needed - namely in the Lincoln Station area.  For
>>> more than ten years since Town Meeting approved the Comprehensive Long
>>> Range Plan, in which the revitalization of Lincoln Station was
>>> overwhelmingly one of the highest priorities, the area has lain dormant and
>>> in serious need of a catalyst to jumpstart its transformation into the
>>> compact, vital, walkable village center that was a stated goal at the
>>> time.  A community center in such a location would be the equivalent of an
>>> anchor store in a retail setting, and by virtue of attracting more people
>>> on a regular basis, it would create more opportunities for a clustered
>>> cross-current of activities spawning greater

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Caitlin Hogue

So why can't a vote happen after town meeting that incorporates whatever
amendments get added? Why must it occur during town meeting?

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:24 PM Andrew Payne  wrote:

>
> Adam wrote:
>
> Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early
>> voting and absentee voting.  Just saying.
>>
>
> The challenge with open town meeting and early/absentee voting has always
> been:  whatever is being voted can be amended on the fly by resident vote
> at the town meeting.
>
> You submit your early/absentee vote for option "Q", and you later find
> that after *vigorous* debate at TM, Q was amended to include (say) a
> heliport for coal-powered helicopters, or a town-wide pneumatic tube system.
>
> One "see most of you tomorrow" resident's view,
>
> -andy
>  https://payne.org/lt-disclaimer/
> --
> 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

Yes, the zoning by-law is a legal document. Specifically, a law.

Yes, the zoning can contain requirements on glazing.

In zoning there is always a tradeoff between writing very specific
requirements into the zoning and more flexible controls such as special
permits. The advantage to specific requirements for both the town and a
property owner is that everyone knows exactly what is required and exactly
what is permitted. The disadvantage is that any change requires a vote by
town meeting, and between the planning board's need to draft the change,
the legal review, the required public process, and the town meeting
schedule this takes at least a year. That's a long time if the town and the
board realizes that the regulations that seemed right at the time actually
aren't, as happened with our first pass at zoning regulations controlling
rooftop solar. For the lighting portion of our zoning the board started
with incorporating a set of standards into site plan review, gained some
experience, and then incorporated the lighting requirements into zoning
(via a vote at town meeting).

The advantage of a special permit process is it's more flexible. It gives
the town negotiating power as a special permit (as opposed to "by right")
can be withheld.

An example: on height the town could do any of the following in the zoning:
- specify an maximum height by right with no exceptions
- specify a maximum height by right with unspecified additional height
available by special permit from the planning board
- specify a maximum height by right with specific additional height
available by special permit from the planning board
- either of the above special permit processes with the special permit
power given to some other town board.

All of those options have their advantages and disadvantages.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:46 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:

> Right, so Option C and D, when implemented in zoning by-law for March,
> will prevent a community center at the Village Center unless you
> explicitly add a clause to Zoning By-Law that forces that Zone to have 'x'%
> Sq Ft of ground floor that is not housing or parking.  Right now, the draft
> says 60-70% of the ground floor can be housing or parking so there would be
> no way to fit in a full grocery, bank, cleaners etc and a community center
> in these new buildings.  Plus no way a developer would choose this anyway
> because luxury housing is the most profitable.  They have to recoup their
> costs from the high sales price that RLF will command.
>
> Only option E would give us the time and flexibility we need for this
> complex project.  Then the town can hire a master planner/designer to come
> up with an integrated set of options that is more satisfactory to a broader
> set of its constituents.
>
> And per your other point regarding the design guidelines, are you saying
> that these guidelines (e.g. glazing) will be actually added to the zoning
> by-laws which I believe is a legal document?
>
> For the last time, I am not scare-mongering.  This is just a way of trying
> to discredit the analysis I have done.  I and many other volunteers are
> trying very hard to present to folks what is realistic instead of just
> assuming everything will be kittens and rainbows with Option C.  You have
> to look at the details!
>
> Rob Ahlert
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:27 PM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> Tomorrow we are voting on the approach to HCA compliance. At a very high
>> level answering the question: Where are we putting the multi-family housing
>> for HCA compliance? This is a "sense of the town" vote. No matter the
>> result of that vote we will not be compliant with the HCA after the vote
>> and we will not have zoning regulations that implement HCA compliance.
>>
>> In March we will vote on the zoning by-law. The zoning by-law will
>> implement the approach chosen on Saturday. The zoning by-law controls the
>> characteristics of the built environment. In addition to height, setback,
>> and story restrictions, zoning by-law specifies what uses are legal (e.g.
>> retail, residential, etc),  what glazing is required (e.g. no blank walls
>> facing the street), parking, the process by which projects are reviewed and
>> approved, inclusionary zoning, for mixed use buildings any restrictions on
>> where the commercial/retail activity is located and the amount of
>> commercial/retail space, and the design guidelines.
>>
>> If the zoning by-law presented at town meeting in March is not acceptable
>> to the town it will be voted down. The planning board will at that point
>> need to solicit additional feedback, adjust the proposed zoning, and try
>> again at a subsequent special town meeting.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:01 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>>
>>> Then why are we having a binding vote tomorrow?
>>>
>>> I guess if we approve Option C, D tomorrow and they write the bylaws in
>>> such a way that prevents a community center, then we can vote down the
>>> whole package in

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Andrew Payne

Adam wrote:

Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early
> voting and absentee voting.  Just saying.
>

The challenge with open town meeting and early/absentee voting has always
been:  whatever is being voted can be amended on the fly by resident vote
at the town meeting.

You submit your early/absentee vote for option "Q", and you later find that
after *vigorous* debate at TM, Q was amended to include (say) a heliport
for coal-powered helicopters, or a town-wide pneumatic tube system.

One "see most of you tomorrow" resident's view,

-andy
 https://payne.org/lt-disclaimer/
-- 
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.

[LincolnTalk] Lincoln Squirrel absence

2023-12-01 Thread Alice Waugh

Unfortunately, the Lincoln Squirrel will not be able to cover tomorrow's
Special Town Meeting or Monday's multiboard meeting in real time. I'm
flying to London in a few hours to be with my stepsister and stepfather,
who is failing fast.

Please feel free to email reactions or summaries of what happens — and be
clear about whether you intend your words for me privately, or would like
them to be a "My Turn" piece in the Squirrel. I hope to watch the recording
of both meetings once they're on the town website, so if anyone would like
to note the approximate time where something especially important is said,
that would be very helpful (I won't report on anything that I can't confirm
myself from video or in writing). I'll have my computer and excellent WiFi
and plan to keep posting as circumstances permit. Thanks for your
understanding.

Alice Waugh
Editor, The Lincoln Squirrel
617-710-5542 (m)
lincolnsquirreln...@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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Sara R via Lincoln

Agree Virginia and Adam!  How do we support making this change.Sara BrownSent from my iPhoneOn Dec 1, 2023, at 1:24 PM, Virginia Goodwin  wrote:Literally the point is, NOT every registered voter has an "opportunity" to vote, when that "opportunity" is contingent upon physically being at a certain location on one single specific day for an unspecified (but extremely long) amount of time. Besides being highly discriminatory against people who are just busy or have other calls on their time, this is also a disability rights issue, for people like the original writer's mother, who cannot physically gut it out in the auditorium for hours and hours.As Adam says, an extended period of paper ballots, gods forbid possibly including mail-in ballots, so people can vote from the comfort of their own homes when they have time, gives many more people a real opportunity to participate in the vote than our current system.We have way better technology now than they did in the past. We have paved roads, gas-powered vehicles, reliable mail service, cheap printing, and the joys of the internet. We should embrace those technologies to expand real access to town voting to as many registered voters as possible.Virginia GoodwinOn Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:54 PM Adam M Hogue  wrote:Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early voting and absentee voting.  Just saying. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:50 PM, Sara Mattes  wrote:This is the law in most towns in New England.Every registered voter has an opportunity to vote on all issues, but you must be present and counted.The alternative is to turn that opportunity to elected officials to make all decisions.If that a more open, democratic way.I chose the former where I have a chance to participate in direct democracy rather than handing my vote to a second party.SaraSent from my iPhoneOn Dec 1, 2023, at 12:43 PM, Adam M Hogue  wrote:Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln  wrote:Hello Friends,Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able to vote tomorrow? I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.  I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer. I do not see it on  Town Web site (?) Thank you,Terri K-- 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Kathleen Lomatoski

A resident reached out to town leaders several weeks ago about Town Meeting and ADA compliance. I am not sure the final outcome. I believe the town leaders were consulting with the legal team. Kathleen Lomatoski klomato...@gmail.comOn Dec 1, 2023, at 1:27 PM, Margo Fisher-Martin wrote:Exactly!On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:16 PM Sasha Golden wrote:There's an ADA issue...On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:44 PM Adam M Hogue wrote:Unfortunately they can’t vote. Our voting laws in this town do not allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln wrote:Hello Friends,Does anyone know how residents such as the elderly or disabled are able to vote tomorrow? I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important. I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer. I do not see it on Town Web site (?) Thank you,Terri K-- 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

Right, so Option C and D, when implemented in zoning by-law for March, will
prevent a community center at the Village Center unless you explicitly add
a clause to Zoning By-Law that forces that Zone to have 'x'% Sq Ft of
ground floor that is not housing or parking.  Right now, the draft says
60-70% of the ground floor can be housing or parking so there would be no
way to fit in a full grocery, bank, cleaners etc and a community center in
these new buildings.  Plus no way a developer would choose this anyway
because luxury housing is the most profitable.  They have to recoup their
costs from the high sales price that RLF will command.

Only option E would give us the time and flexibility we need for this
complex project.  Then the town can hire a master planner/designer to come
up with an integrated set of options that is more satisfactory to a broader
set of its constituents.

And per your other point regarding the design guidelines, are you saying
that these guidelines (e.g. glazing) will be actually added to the zoning
by-laws which I believe is a legal document?

For the last time, I am not scare-mongering.  This is just a way of trying
to discredit the analysis I have done.  I and many other volunteers are
trying very hard to present to folks what is realistic instead of just
assuming everything will be kittens and rainbows with Option C.  You have
to look at the details!

Rob Ahlert

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:27 PM Margaret Olson  wrote:

> Tomorrow we are voting on the approach to HCA compliance. At a very high
> level answering the question: Where are we putting the multi-family housing
> for HCA compliance? This is a "sense of the town" vote. No matter the
> result of that vote we will not be compliant with the HCA after the vote
> and we will not have zoning regulations that implement HCA compliance.
>
> In March we will vote on the zoning by-law. The zoning by-law will
> implement the approach chosen on Saturday. The zoning by-law controls the
> characteristics of the built environment. In addition to height, setback,
> and story restrictions, zoning by-law specifies what uses are legal (e.g.
> retail, residential, etc),  what glazing is required (e.g. no blank walls
> facing the street), parking, the process by which projects are reviewed and
> approved, inclusionary zoning, for mixed use buildings any restrictions on
> where the commercial/retail activity is located and the amount of
> commercial/retail space, and the design guidelines.
>
> If the zoning by-law presented at town meeting in March is not acceptable
> to the town it will be voted down. The planning board will at that point
> need to solicit additional feedback, adjust the proposed zoning, and try
> again at a subsequent special town meeting.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:01 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>
>> Then why are we having a binding vote tomorrow?
>>
>> I guess if we approve Option C, D tomorrow and they write the bylaws in
>> such a way that prevents a community center, then we can vote down the
>> whole package in March.
>>
>> Option C and D lock us in with HCA zoning on the mall which essentially
>> means no community center. How do you build a community center when a
>> developer will only want housing?
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:56 PM DJCP  wrote:
>>
>>> What is she to confirm when nothing has been written or passed??? It's
>>> all drafts. People have been making this point over and over but it's
>>> easier to resort to scare tactics.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:54 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>>>
 Let’s ask Margaret to confirm which parts of the zoning bylaws would
 prevent these large structures. As long as it meets the technical
 requirements of the zoning bylaws for that zone, it can be built.

 I watched them working on them the other night and did not see anything
 that would stop this.

 And don’t confuse the zoning bylaws with the site guidelines, which are
 just guidelines for developers to stay in the planning board’s good graces.
 Site guidelines don’t have teeth.

 Happy to be corrected, but these are the types of details that need to
 be explained clearly before we vote. People need to understand what they
 are voting for

 Rob

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:44 PM RAandBOB 
 wrote:

> You are ignoring the controls provided by the actual zoning bylaw for
> these new by-right parcels. This is just scaremongering.
> Ruth Ann
> (She, her, hers)
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 11:59 AM, Robert Ahlert 
> wrote:
>
> 
> Thanks for asking.
>
> What I want is a well thought out design process, which cannot happen
> with all of these points up in the air at the same time.
>
> We need more time. We have more time.
>
> I’m worried about large monolithic housing structures in the mall
> parking lot and eventually replacing Donelan’s and on the commuter rail
>

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

Massachusetts law also supports representative town meeting. This still
maintains the exchange of ideas and the structure of town meeting, but each
town meeting member is elected by their neighborhood.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:29 PM Adam M Hogue  wrote:

> Exactly Virginia, having debate and open forums, Lincoln talks we have
> debated.  Using ballots opens it up to more people and it becomes more
> democratic.
>
>
> *Adam M Hogue*
> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 1:24 PM, Virginia Goodwin 
> wrote:
>
> 
> Literally the point is, NOT every registered voter has an "opportunity" to
> vote, when that "opportunity" is contingent upon physically being at a
> certain location on one single specific day for an unspecified (but
> extremely long) amount of time. Besides being highly discriminatory against
> people who are just busy or have other calls on their time, this is also a
> disability rights issue, for people like the original writer's mother, who
> cannot physically gut it out in the auditorium for hours and hours.
>
> As Adam says, an extended period of paper ballots, gods forbid possibly
> including mail-in ballots, so people can vote from the comfort of their own
> homes when they have time, gives many more people a *real* opportunity to
> participate in the vote than our current system.
>
> We have way better technology now than they did in the past. We have paved
> roads, gas-powered vehicles, reliable mail service, cheap printing, and the
> joys of the internet. We should embrace those technologies to expand real
> access to town voting to as many registered voters as possible.
>
> Virginia Goodwin
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:54 PM Adam M Hogue 
> wrote:
>
>> Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early
>> voting and absentee voting.  Just saying.
>>
>> *Adam M Hogue*
>> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:50 PM, Sara Mattes  wrote:
>>
>> This is the law in most towns in New England.
>> Every registered voter has an opportunity to vote on all issues, but you
>> must be present and counted.
>> The alternative is to turn that opportunity to elected officials to make
>> all decisions.
>> If that a more open, democratic way.
>> I chose the former where I have a chance to participate in direct
>> democracy rather than handing my vote to a second party.
>> Sara
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:43 PM, Adam M Hogue  wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not
>> allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting.
>>
>> *Adam M Hogue*
>> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln 
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Hello Friends,
>>
>> Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able
>> to vote tomorrow?
>> I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.
>>
>> I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
>> I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Terri K
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

There are a number of zoning controls that can control both the size of
buildings and their characteristics. We can do anything from a Texas style
free for all to a Nantucket style mono-style. I presume we will land
somewhere in the middle. We are currently discussing mandating both a
certain level of glazing and glazing transparency (i.e. no blank walls and
no papered or boxed over windows). The design guidelines will (I believe)
discuss articulation (i.e. edges; no long stretches of flat wall). Both the
Friends of Modern Architecture and several architects have already
volunteered to help get this aspect of the zoning right.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:55 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:

> Let’s ask Margaret to confirm which parts of the zoning bylaws would
> prevent these large structures. As long as it meets the technical
> requirements of the zoning bylaws for that zone, it can be built.
>
> I watched them working on them the other night and did not see anything
> that would stop this.
>
> And don’t confuse the zoning bylaws with the site guidelines, which are
> just guidelines for developers to stay in the planning board’s good graces.
> Site guidelines don’t have teeth.
>
> Happy to be corrected, but these are the types of details that need to be
> explained clearly before we vote. People need to understand what they are
> voting for
>
> Rob
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:44 PM RAandBOB  wrote:
>
>> You are ignoring the controls provided by the actual zoning bylaw for
>> these new by-right parcels. This is just scaremongering.
>> Ruth Ann
>> (She, her, hers)
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 11:59 AM, Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Thanks for asking.
>>
>> What I want is a well thought out design process, which cannot happen
>> with all of these points up in the air at the same time.
>>
>> We need more time. We have more time.
>>
>> I’m worried about large monolithic housing structures in the mall parking
>> lot and eventually replacing Donelan’s and on the commuter rail parking lot
>> as well. And maybe even Doherty will have four stories with a special
>> permit from the planning board
>>
>> I just don’t see how this doesn’t happen once this property is HCA zoned
>> and turned over to a for profit developer
>>
>> They won’t want commercial, they won’t want a community center. All they
>> want is luxury housing and parking. And they will get exactly what they
>> want because these parcels are zoned as HCA and the zoning bylaws permit
>> without a special permit
>>
>> If you are in doubt or if you think we need more time, please vote for
>> option E
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:43 AM DJCP  wrote:
>>
>>> Do you want a community center at the mall or do you want affordable
>>> housing and commercial space?  Can you please make up your mind?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:08 AM Robert Ahlert 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Agreed, great idea!

 Only option E would allow community center at the Mall

 Else, RLF will sell to the highest bidder under HCA zoning for housing.

 Rob

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:57 AM Robert Hicks  wrote:

> I too support Ken Hurd's recommendation that the Community Center be
> included as part of the redevelopment of the Lincoln Station area.
>
> Please write in - "None of the Above" on the article at the Special
> Town meeting.
>
> --
> Bob Hicks
> rchi...@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.
>
>
-- 
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

Exactly Virginia, having debate and open forums, Lincoln talks we have debated.  Using ballots opens it up to more people and it becomes more democratic. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 1:24 PM, Virginia Goodwin  wrote:Literally the point is, NOT every registered voter has an "opportunity" to vote, when that "opportunity" is contingent upon physically being at a certain location on one single specific day for an unspecified (but extremely long) amount of time. Besides being highly discriminatory against people who are just busy or have other calls on their time, this is also a disability rights issue, for people like the original writer's mother, who cannot physically gut it out in the auditorium for hours and hours.As Adam says, an extended period of paper ballots, gods forbid possibly including mail-in ballots, so people can vote from the comfort of their own homes when they have time, gives many more people a real opportunity to participate in the vote than our current system.We have way better technology now than they did in the past. We have paved roads, gas-powered vehicles, reliable mail service, cheap printing, and the joys of the internet. We should embrace those technologies to expand real access to town voting to as many registered voters as possible.Virginia GoodwinOn Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:54 PM Adam M Hogue  wrote:Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early voting and absentee voting.  Just saying. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:50 PM, Sara Mattes  wrote:This is the law in most towns in New England.Every registered voter has an opportunity to vote on all issues, but you must be present and counted.The alternative is to turn that opportunity to elected officials to make all decisions.If that a more open, democratic way.I chose the former where I have a chance to participate in direct democracy rather than handing my vote to a second party.SaraSent from my iPhoneOn Dec 1, 2023, at 12:43 PM, Adam M Hogue  wrote:Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln  wrote:Hello Friends,Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able to vote tomorrow? I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.  I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer. I do not see it on  Town Web site (?) Thank you,Terri K-- 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

I agree with Virginia and Adam on this one.

I know Andy Wang has some good ideas on this topic as well

Rob

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:25 PM Virginia Goodwin 
wrote:

> Literally the point is, NOT every registered voter has an "opportunity" to
> vote, when that "opportunity" is contingent upon physically being at a
> certain location on one single specific day for an unspecified (but
> extremely long) amount of time. Besides being highly discriminatory against
> people who are just busy or have other calls on their time, this is also a
> disability rights issue, for people like the original writer's mother, who
> cannot physically gut it out in the auditorium for hours and hours.
>
> As Adam says, an extended period of paper ballots, gods forbid possibly
> including mail-in ballots, so people can vote from the comfort of their own
> homes when they have time, gives many more people a *real* opportunity to
> participate in the vote than our current system.
>
> We have way better technology now than they did in the past. We have paved
> roads, gas-powered vehicles, reliable mail service, cheap printing, and the
> joys of the internet. We should embrace those technologies to expand real
> access to town voting to as many registered voters as possible.
>
> Virginia Goodwin
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:54 PM Adam M Hogue 
> wrote:
>
>> Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early
>> voting and absentee voting.  Just saying.
>>
>> *Adam M Hogue*
>> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:50 PM, Sara Mattes  wrote:
>>
>> This is the law in most towns in New England.
>> Every registered voter has an opportunity to vote on all issues, but you
>> must be present and counted.
>> The alternative is to turn that opportunity to elected officials to make
>> all decisions.
>> If that a more open, democratic way.
>> I chose the former where I have a chance to participate in direct
>> democracy rather than handing my vote to a second party.
>> Sara
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:43 PM, Adam M Hogue  wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not
>> allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting.
>>
>> *Adam M Hogue*
>> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln 
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Hello Friends,
>>
>> Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able
>> to vote tomorrow?
>> I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.
>>
>> I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
>> I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Terri K
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

Tomorrow we are voting on the approach to HCA compliance. At a very high
level answering the question: Where are we putting the multi-family housing
for HCA compliance? This is a "sense of the town" vote. No matter the
result of that vote we will not be compliant with the HCA after the vote
and we will not have zoning regulations that implement HCA compliance.

In March we will vote on the zoning by-law. The zoning by-law will
implement the approach chosen on Saturday. The zoning by-law controls the
characteristics of the built environment. In addition to height, setback,
and story restrictions, zoning by-law specifies what uses are legal (e.g.
retail, residential, etc),  what glazing is required (e.g. no blank walls
facing the street), parking, the process by which projects are reviewed and
approved, inclusionary zoning, for mixed use buildings any restrictions on
where the commercial/retail activity is located and the amount of
commercial/retail space, and the design guidelines.

If the zoning by-law presented at town meeting in March is not acceptable
to the town it will be voted down. The planning board will at that point
need to solicit additional feedback, adjust the proposed zoning, and try
again at a subsequent special town meeting.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:01 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:

> Then why are we having a binding vote tomorrow?
>
> I guess if we approve Option C, D tomorrow and they write the bylaws in
> such a way that prevents a community center, then we can vote down the
> whole package in March.
>
> Option C and D lock us in with HCA zoning on the mall which essentially
> means no community center. How do you build a community center when a
> developer will only want housing?
>
> Rob
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:56 PM DJCP  wrote:
>
>> What is she to confirm when nothing has been written or passed??? It's
>> all drafts. People have been making this point over and over but it's
>> easier to resort to scare tactics.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:54 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>>
>>> Let’s ask Margaret to confirm which parts of the zoning bylaws would
>>> prevent these large structures. As long as it meets the technical
>>> requirements of the zoning bylaws for that zone, it can be built.
>>>
>>> I watched them working on them the other night and did not see anything
>>> that would stop this.
>>>
>>> And don’t confuse the zoning bylaws with the site guidelines, which are
>>> just guidelines for developers to stay in the planning board’s good graces.
>>> Site guidelines don’t have teeth.
>>>
>>> Happy to be corrected, but these are the types of details that need to
>>> be explained clearly before we vote. People need to understand what they
>>> are voting for
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:44 PM RAandBOB  wrote:
>>>
 You are ignoring the controls provided by the actual zoning bylaw for
 these new by-right parcels. This is just scaremongering.
 Ruth Ann
 (She, her, hers)

 On Dec 1, 2023, at 11:59 AM, Robert Ahlert  wrote:

 Thanks for asking.

 What I want is a well thought out design process, which cannot happen
 with all of these points up in the air at the same time.

 We need more time. We have more time.

 I’m worried about large monolithic housing structures in the mall
 parking lot and eventually replacing Donelan’s and on the commuter rail
 parking lot as well. And maybe even Doherty will have four stories with a
 special permit from the planning board

 I just don’t see how this doesn’t happen once this property is HCA
 zoned and turned over to a for profit developer

 They won’t want commercial, they won’t want a community center. All
 they want is luxury housing and parking. And they will get exactly what
 they want because these parcels are zoned as HCA and the zoning bylaws
 permit without a special permit

 If you are in doubt or if you think we need more time, please vote for
 option E

 Rob

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:43 AM DJCP  wrote:

> Do you want a community center at the mall or do you want affordable
> housing and commercial space?  Can you please make up your mind?
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:08 AM Robert Ahlert 
> wrote:
>
>> Agreed, great idea!
>>
>> Only option E would allow community center at the Mall
>>
>> Else, RLF will sell to the highest bidder under HCA zoning for
>> housing.
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:57 AM Robert Hicks 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I too support Ken Hurd's recommendation that the Community Center be
>>> included as part of the redevelopment of the Lincoln Station area.
>>>
>>> Please write in - "None of the Above" on the article at the Special
>>> Town meeting.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bob Hicks
>>> rchi...@gmail.com
>>>
>> --
>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

Exactly!

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 1:16 PM Sasha Golden  wrote:

> There's an ADA issue...
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:44 PM Adam M Hogue  wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not allow
>> for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting.
>>
>> *Adam M Hogue*
>> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln 
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Hello Friends,
>>
>> Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able
>> to vote tomorrow?
>> I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.
>>
>> I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
>> I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Terri K
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Virginia Goodwin

Literally the point is, NOT every registered voter has an "opportunity" to
vote, when that "opportunity" is contingent upon physically being at a
certain location on one single specific day for an unspecified (but
extremely long) amount of time. Besides being highly discriminatory against
people who are just busy or have other calls on their time, this is also a
disability rights issue, for people like the original writer's mother, who
cannot physically gut it out in the auditorium for hours and hours.

As Adam says, an extended period of paper ballots, gods forbid possibly
including mail-in ballots, so people can vote from the comfort of their own
homes when they have time, gives many more people a *real* opportunity to
participate in the vote than our current system.

We have way better technology now than they did in the past. We have paved
roads, gas-powered vehicles, reliable mail service, cheap printing, and the
joys of the internet. We should embrace those technologies to expand real
access to town voting to as many registered voters as possible.

Virginia Goodwin

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:54 PM Adam M Hogue  wrote:

> Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early
> voting and absentee voting.  Just saying.
>
> *Adam M Hogue*
> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:50 PM, Sara Mattes  wrote:
>
> This is the law in most towns in New England.
> Every registered voter has an opportunity to vote on all issues, but you
> must be present and counted.
> The alternative is to turn that opportunity to elected officials to make
> all decisions.
> If that a more open, democratic way.
> I chose the former where I have a chance to participate in direct
> democracy rather than handing my vote to a second party.
> Sara
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:43 PM, Adam M Hogue  wrote:
>
> Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not allow
> for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting.
>
> *Adam M Hogue*
> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln 
> wrote:
>
> 
> Hello Friends,
>
> Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able
> to vote tomorrow?
> I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.
>
> I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
> I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)
>
> Thank you,
> Terri K
>
>
>
> --
> 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Sasha Golden

There's an ADA issue...

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:44 PM Adam M Hogue  wrote:

> Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not allow
> for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting.
>
> *Adam M Hogue*
> *Cell: **(978) 828-6184 <(978)%20828-6184>*
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln 
> wrote:
>
> 
> Hello Friends,
>
> Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able
> to vote tomorrow?
> I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.
>
> I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer.
> I do not see it on  Town Web site (?)
>
> Thank you,
> Terri K
>
>
>
> --
> 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

Then why are we having a binding vote tomorrow?

I guess if we approve Option C, D tomorrow and they write the bylaws in
such a way that prevents a community center, then we can vote down the
whole package in March.

Option C and D lock us in with HCA zoning on the mall which essentially
means no community center. How do you build a community center when a
developer will only want housing?

Rob

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:56 PM DJCP  wrote:

> What is she to confirm when nothing has been written or passed??? It's all
> drafts. People have been making this point over and over but it's easier to
> resort to scare tactics.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:54 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>
>> Let’s ask Margaret to confirm which parts of the zoning bylaws would
>> prevent these large structures. As long as it meets the technical
>> requirements of the zoning bylaws for that zone, it can be built.
>>
>> I watched them working on them the other night and did not see anything
>> that would stop this.
>>
>> And don’t confuse the zoning bylaws with the site guidelines, which are
>> just guidelines for developers to stay in the planning board’s good graces.
>> Site guidelines don’t have teeth.
>>
>> Happy to be corrected, but these are the types of details that need to be
>> explained clearly before we vote. People need to understand what they are
>> voting for
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:44 PM RAandBOB  wrote:
>>
>>> You are ignoring the controls provided by the actual zoning bylaw for
>>> these new by-right parcels. This is just scaremongering.
>>> Ruth Ann
>>> (She, her, hers)
>>>
>>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 11:59 AM, Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>> Thanks for asking.
>>>
>>> What I want is a well thought out design process, which cannot happen
>>> with all of these points up in the air at the same time.
>>>
>>> We need more time. We have more time.
>>>
>>> I’m worried about large monolithic housing structures in the mall
>>> parking lot and eventually replacing Donelan’s and on the commuter rail
>>> parking lot as well. And maybe even Doherty will have four stories with a
>>> special permit from the planning board
>>>
>>> I just don’t see how this doesn’t happen once this property is HCA zoned
>>> and turned over to a for profit developer
>>>
>>> They won’t want commercial, they won’t want a community center. All they
>>> want is luxury housing and parking. And they will get exactly what they
>>> want because these parcels are zoned as HCA and the zoning bylaws permit
>>> without a special permit
>>>
>>> If you are in doubt or if you think we need more time, please vote for
>>> option E
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:43 AM DJCP  wrote:
>>>
 Do you want a community center at the mall or do you want affordable
 housing and commercial space?  Can you please make up your mind?

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:08 AM Robert Ahlert 
 wrote:

> Agreed, great idea!
>
> Only option E would allow community center at the Mall
>
> Else, RLF will sell to the highest bidder under HCA zoning for housing.
>
> Rob
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:57 AM Robert Hicks  wrote:
>
>> I too support Ken Hurd's recommendation that the Community Center be
>> included as part of the redevelopment of the Lincoln Station area.
>>
>> Please write in - "None of the Above" on the article at the Special
>> Town meeting.
>>
>> --
>> Bob Hicks
>> rchi...@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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

2023-12-01 Thread DJCP

What is she to confirm when nothing has been written or passed??? It's all
drafts. People have been making this point over and over but it's easier to
resort to scare tactics.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 12:54 PM Robert Ahlert  wrote:

> Let’s ask Margaret to confirm which parts of the zoning bylaws would
> prevent these large structures. As long as it meets the technical
> requirements of the zoning bylaws for that zone, it can be built.
>
> I watched them working on them the other night and did not see anything
> that would stop this.
>
> And don’t confuse the zoning bylaws with the site guidelines, which are
> just guidelines for developers to stay in the planning board’s good graces.
> Site guidelines don’t have teeth.
>
> Happy to be corrected, but these are the types of details that need to be
> explained clearly before we vote. People need to understand what they are
> voting for
>
> Rob
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:44 PM RAandBOB  wrote:
>
>> You are ignoring the controls provided by the actual zoning bylaw for
>> these new by-right parcels. This is just scaremongering.
>> Ruth Ann
>> (She, her, hers)
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 11:59 AM, Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Thanks for asking.
>>
>> What I want is a well thought out design process, which cannot happen
>> with all of these points up in the air at the same time.
>>
>> We need more time. We have more time.
>>
>> I’m worried about large monolithic housing structures in the mall parking
>> lot and eventually replacing Donelan’s and on the commuter rail parking lot
>> as well. And maybe even Doherty will have four stories with a special
>> permit from the planning board
>>
>> I just don’t see how this doesn’t happen once this property is HCA zoned
>> and turned over to a for profit developer
>>
>> They won’t want commercial, they won’t want a community center. All they
>> want is luxury housing and parking. And they will get exactly what they
>> want because these parcels are zoned as HCA and the zoning bylaws permit
>> without a special permit
>>
>> If you are in doubt or if you think we need more time, please vote for
>> option E
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:43 AM DJCP  wrote:
>>
>>> Do you want a community center at the mall or do you want affordable
>>> housing and commercial space?  Can you please make up your mind?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:08 AM Robert Ahlert 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Agreed, great idea!

 Only option E would allow community center at the Mall

 Else, RLF will sell to the highest bidder under HCA zoning for housing.

 Rob

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:57 AM Robert Hicks  wrote:

> I too support Ken Hurd's recommendation that the Community Center be
> included as part of the redevelopment of the Lincoln Station area.
>
> Please write in - "None of the Above" on the article at the Special
> Town meeting.
>
> --
> Bob Hicks
> rchi...@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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

Let’s ask Margaret to confirm which parts of the zoning bylaws would
prevent these large structures. As long as it meets the technical
requirements of the zoning bylaws for that zone, it can be built.

I watched them working on them the other night and did not see anything
that would stop this.

And don’t confuse the zoning bylaws with the site guidelines, which are
just guidelines for developers to stay in the planning board’s good graces.
Site guidelines don’t have teeth.

Happy to be corrected, but these are the types of details that need to be
explained clearly before we vote. People need to understand what they are
voting for

Rob

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:44 PM RAandBOB  wrote:

> You are ignoring the controls provided by the actual zoning bylaw for
> these new by-right parcels. This is just scaremongering.
> Ruth Ann
> (She, her, hers)
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 11:59 AM, Robert Ahlert  wrote:
>
> 
> Thanks for asking.
>
> What I want is a well thought out design process, which cannot happen with
> all of these points up in the air at the same time.
>
> We need more time. We have more time.
>
> I’m worried about large monolithic housing structures in the mall parking
> lot and eventually replacing Donelan’s and on the commuter rail parking lot
> as well. And maybe even Doherty will have four stories with a special
> permit from the planning board
>
> I just don’t see how this doesn’t happen once this property is HCA zoned
> and turned over to a for profit developer
>
> They won’t want commercial, they won’t want a community center. All they
> want is luxury housing and parking. And they will get exactly what they
> want because these parcels are zoned as HCA and the zoning bylaws permit
> without a special permit
>
> If you are in doubt or if you think we need more time, please vote for
> option E
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:43 AM DJCP  wrote:
>
>> Do you want a community center at the mall or do you want affordable
>> housing and commercial space?  Can you please make up your mind?
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:08 AM Robert Ahlert 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Agreed, great idea!
>>>
>>> Only option E would allow community center at the Mall
>>>
>>> Else, RLF will sell to the highest bidder under HCA zoning for housing.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:57 AM Robert Hicks  wrote:
>>>
 I too support Ken Hurd's recommendation that the Community Center be
 included as part of the redevelopment of the Lincoln Station area.

 Please write in - "None of the Above" on the article at the Special
 Town meeting.

 --
 Bob Hicks
 rchi...@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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

Well Sara, you can also have direct democracy on the ballot with early voting and absentee voting.  Just saying. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:50 PM, Sara Mattes  wrote:This is the law in most towns in New England.Every registered voter has an opportunity to vote on all issues, but you must be present and counted.The alternative is to turn that opportunity to elected officials to make all decisions.If that a more open, democratic way.I chose the former where I have a chance to participate in direct democracy rather than handing my vote to a second party.SaraSent from my iPhoneOn Dec 1, 2023, at 12:43 PM, Adam M Hogue  wrote:Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln  wrote:Hello Friends,Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able to vote tomorrow? I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.  I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer. I do not see it on  Town Web site (?) Thank you,Terri K-- 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Don’t box out yourself, Lincoln.

2023-12-01 Thread RAandBOB

How do you know what Civico wants? You don’t.Ruth Ann(She, her, hers)On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:21 PM, ٍSarah Postlethwait wrote:The main reason Civico is insisting the village center be included in the HCA rezoning is so they can’t be required to have more than 10% affordable housing… so how will that add equitable diverse housing in Lincoln? If they had intentions to actually add real affordable housing, they would have no issue with separating the village center rezoning from the very unrestrictive HCA rezoning. By having the village center rezoning be a different warrant article, the town can require affordable housing for families who earn less than ~$120k a year/ 80% of the median income; and we can ensure more than 10% of the units are reserved as affordable. Plus we save a significant amount of our limited “affordable housing trust” funds by doing that, so truly affordable housing can be built with it.It’s a win, win, win scenario. Separating the village center rezoning from the HCA won’t even require a supermajority at town meeting. Even rezoning outside of the HCA near the MBTA only needs a simple majority 51% now. That's a pretty easy hurdle to pass if the village center is presented with a reasonable UPA/ affordable housing requirement and percentage.The RLF has done some great things for Lincoln- but they can’t promise the next owner(s) will have the same purpose. The RLF have stated multiple times in public meetings they plan to sell to a developer in the near future. And that developer will likely sell within a couple years once construction is finished. Why wouldn’t we have it set in stone, rather than just crossing our fingers and hoping they have good intentions?The only way to truly ensure affordable housing will be built is to separate the “village center” into a separate rezoning warrant at March Town meeting. The only way to do that is to vote for Option E. Sarah Postlethwait Lewis StOn Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:36 AM David Cuetos wrote:The current draft of the bylaws for the Village Center District is tailored to meet a developer’s (Civico) wishes rather than the Town’s general interest. A majority of the Planning Board has so far supported that approach. There is no reason to believe that the imbalance of power will change after Saturday. If options C-D are chosen, the Town would be forced to decide between approving a set of disagreeable Village Center bylaws or reject HCA rezoning altogether. It is obvious in that scenario we would be dosed with a heavy ration of “approve this or the State will sue us” like we have seen so far in public presentations from the HCAWG. HCA and Mall rezoning need not be coupled. Vote E to retain control. Vote E if you are unsure what is the best approach and you want more time to consider.To recap, these are the concerning bylaws:If the Mall is not developed under HCA, more than 10% affordable units could be required, as Lincoln has historically done. It gets even worse. There is a clause in the planned bylaws that would allow developers to skirt the 10% HCA affordable housing requirement by making a donation to the Town’s Affordable Housing Trust. No units would be reserved for households with an income lower than 80% of the median (~$120k for a family of four).There are minimal requirements for commercial space. The requirements discussed could be easily gamed by a developer. The RLF Chair admitted at the Community Forum of Nov. 8 that commercial space would likely decrease.Under HCA there is no possible requirement for commercial parking space. Residents could not be able to visit the Mall like they do today.There are no floor area or lot coverage ratios. This means lots can be clear-cut to maximize build-out, increasing the amount of impervious surface and reducing tree-cover .The draft bylaw discussed on the 20th allows a maximum 4 stories and height of 48' for buildings located 100 ft or more from the road. This is inconsistent with all public communications from the HCAWG, which set the limit at 3 stories and a height of 42’.Most concerning of all, the Planning Board would reserve the right to provide height, story, and density variances through a special permit. This would essentially render moot the discussion the Town is expected to have regarding the District’s proper bylaws, including number of units. This is an unprecedented clause in Lincoln’s history.On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 02:27 RAandBOB wrote:Most house lots in town are zoned for by-right single-family housing. You can’t build just any house on these lots, however. The building is governed by side lot and front lot setbacks and by height, wetland and septic restrictions, among others.

Similarly, the new zoning for by right multi family housing/retail will restrict the possibilities for buildings. The planning board is in the process of developing new bylaws. Right now they disagree among themselves. Their continuing discussions will be held

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

2023-12-01 Thread Paul Shorb

The CCBC has an FAQ linked here

that explains
why the community center should be located at Hartwell campus (as the Town
has voted to approve multiple times) rather than at the Mall.

Putting a community center at the Town center would be much more expensive,
if it could be accomplished at all. As I noted in another post just now, shared
spaces are efficient, since (A) seniors tend to use the facilities in the
day and (B) school children do so in the later afternoon, walking from the
school buildings to participate in Lincoln's Parks & Rec programs or
LEAP.  Building
a separate community center at the town center would still leave the town
with the need to renovate the spaces that would remain at Hartwell; I have
heard the estimate of about $3.5 million for each of three pods at Hartwell.

Also, I'm not sure how a community center at the Town center could actually
be achieved. The Town center does not have sufficient available Town-owned
space to build a community center. You therefore suggested including the
Community Center as a required accessory use in the development of a future
residential project at Lincoln Station. However, despite the rosy theory
provided by your urban planning contact, that sounds like a project-killer
to me.

Dealing with climate change is a big motivator for me. That pushes me in
the direction of Option C, much more than getting a community center
somehow forced into a future development of the Mall. If I'm right
that "required
accessory use" would be a project-killer, then we would thus not only fail
to get a community center built there, but also fail to get the
Mall redeveloped with higher-density near the rail stop and shopping, which
would be the biggest potential climate win here.

Paul Shorb
(a member of the RLF Board but expressing my personal views here)

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:54 AM Ken Hurd  wrote:

> Hello LincolnTalkers,
> With apologies for expressing yet again my strongly held opinion as an
> architect concerned with what we build in Lincoln, I want to remind
> everyone why I and many others believe we should not build a community
> center on the school campus.  I still believe it should be located in
> Lincoln Station, particularly now that our small commercial area is in play
> because of the Housing Choice Act.
>
> As I wrote last year, "I fully support building a new facility, but it
> has long been my opinion that such a major investment by the town should be
> deployed where it is most needed - namely in the Lincoln Station area.  For
> more than ten years since Town Meeting approved the Comprehensive Long
> Range Plan, in which the revitalization of Lincoln Station was
> overwhelmingly one of the highest priorities, the area has lain dormant and
> in serious need of a catalyst to jumpstart its transformation into the
> compact, vital, walkable village center that was a stated goal at the
> time.  A community center in such a location would be the equivalent of an
> anchor store in a retail setting, and by virtue of attracting more people
> on a regular basis, it would create more opportunities for a clustered
> cross-current of activities spawning greater social interaction."
>
> As many will recall at last year’s Town Meeting, there was serious concern
> about the cost to build it, and I am of the opinion that there are better
> ways to accomplish this than spending anywhere from $18 to $24 million of
> taxpayer money to do so.  As was recently suggested to me by an experienced
> urban planner, why not include the Community Center as a required
> accessory use in the development of a future residential project at
> Lincoln Station?
>
> As he said, “With clear program requirements and project parameters to
> guide the design of a new project, developers can be very efficient in
> realizing a good project on time and within budget.” Moreover, “It would
> be a plus to any potential developer's proforma to have a confirmed tenant
> (assuming COA long-term lease) for … an active community use in purposely
> designed ground level space. This strategy would minimize the cost to
> Lincoln upfront financing for design and construction, replace public
> project inefficiencies with professional development expertise, and as such
> the new Community Center facility may be more affordable to the town's
> stressed taxpayers."
>
> As I also wrote last year, I believe  it would constitute the classic
> suburban planning error to create a new facility that stands alone at the
> school and, like the suburban mall, accessible only by car.  In addition,
> because of school protocols, there would be very limited inter-generational
> co-mingling until after school hours, if at all.  And, even if there
> weren’t a greater  awareness about the effects of climate change, wouldn’t
> it make far more sense to locate a community center where there are already
> other crucial

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

Wait, if the RLF 4 acres is rezoned HCA, then wouldn’t it be sold to a
private developer?

Do you think that they would create a rental space that might then be
utilized for COA activities?  Is that what you were suggesting would happen
Margaret?

Just trying to understand how we can make this happen.

Maybe the commuter rail lot would be better for this?

Rob

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:05 PM Lynne Smith  wrote:

> Thank you for the clarification, Margaret.
>
> Lynne Smith
> 5 Tabor Hill Road
> Lincoln, MA 01773
> cell:  781-258-1175
> ly...@smith.net
>
>
>
> On Dec 1, 2023, at 11:52 AM, Margaret Olson  wrote:
>
> There is nothing that would prevent the RLF from providing or preserving
> the option of community center space.  And, since it would likely be a
> long-term lease arrangement, it would spread the cost over the life of the
> lease with the upfront construction costs borne by the developer.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:44 AM Lynne Smith  wrote:
>
>> Option E is the only HCA option that would allow us to think about
>> including the Community Center at the Mall.
>>
>> Lynne Smith
>> 5 Tabor Hill Road
>> Lincoln, MA 01773
>> cell:  781-258-1175
>> ly...@smith.net
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 8:53 AM, Jane Appell  wrote:
>>
>> Ken,
>>
>> You make a great point. The community center and housing zoning came up
>> at different times as separate issues. But,  For good planning and to
>> provide the most benefit to the town as we would like to see it, it makes
>> sense to look at them both together while we have the chance.
>>
>> Jane
>>
>>
>> Jane Appell, Ph.D.
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 7:54 AM, Ken Hurd  wrote:
>>
>> Hello LincolnTalkers,
>> With apologies for expressing yet again my strongly held opinion as an
>> architect concerned with what we build in Lincoln, I want to remind
>> everyone why I and many others believe we should not build a community
>> center on the school campus.  I still believe it should be located in
>> Lincoln Station, particularly now that our small commercial area is in play
>> because of the Housing Choice Act.
>>
>> As I wrote last year, "I fully support building a new facility, but it
>> has long been my opinion that such a major investment by the town should be
>> deployed where it is most needed - namely in the Lincoln Station area.  For
>> more than ten years since Town Meeting approved the Comprehensive Long
>> Range Plan, in which the revitalization of Lincoln Station was
>> overwhelmingly one of the highest priorities, the area has lain dormant and
>> in serious need of a catalyst to jumpstart its transformation into the
>> compact, vital, walkable village center that was a stated goal at the
>> time.  A community center in such a location would be the equivalent of an
>> anchor store in a retail setting, and by virtue of attracting more people
>> on a regular basis, it would create more opportunities for a clustered
>> cross-current of activities spawning greater social interaction."
>>
>> As many will recall at last year’s Town Meeting, there was serious
>> concern about the cost to build it, and I am of the opinion that there are
>> better ways to accomplish this than spending anywhere from $18 to $24
>> million of taxpayer money to do so.  As was recently suggested to me by an
>> experienced urban planner, why not include the Community Center as a
>> required accessory use in the development of a future residential
>> project at Lincoln Station?
>>
>> As he said, “With clear program requirements and project parameters to
>> guide the design of a new project, developers can be very efficient in
>> realizing a good project on time and within budget.” Moreover, “It would
>> be a plus to any potential developer's proforma to have a confirmed tenant
>> (assuming COA long-term lease) for … an active community use in purposely
>> designed ground level space. This strategy would minimize the cost to
>> Lincoln upfront financing for design and construction, replace public
>> project inefficiencies with professional development expertise, and as such
>> the new Community Center facility may be more affordable to the town's
>> stressed taxpayers."
>>
>> As I also wrote last year, I believe  it would constitute the classic
>> suburban planning error to create a new facility that stands alone at the
>> school and, like the suburban mall, accessible only by car.  In addition,
>> because of school protocols, there would be very limited inter-generational
>> co-mingling until after school hours, if at all.  And, even if there
>> weren’t a greater  awareness about the effects of climate change, wouldn’t
>> it make far more sense to locate a community center where there are already
>> other crucial services such as the post office, grocery store, cleaners, a
>> cafe and restaurant, not to mention the potential for more housing?
>>
>> Earlier this week I wrote the Selects about including an option to vote
>> for “None of the Above” at tomorrow’s Town

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

2023-12-01 Thread RAandBOB

You are ignoring the controls provided by the actual zoning bylaw for these new by-right parcels. This is just scaremongering.Ruth Ann(She, her, hers)On Dec 1, 2023, at 11:59 AM, Robert Ahlert wrote:Thanks for asking.What I want is a well thought out design process, which cannot happen with all of these points up in the air at the same time.We need more time. We have more time.I’m worried about large monolithic housing structures in the mall parking lot and eventually replacing Donelan’s and on the commuter rail parking lot as well. And maybe even Doherty will have four stories with a special permit from the planning boardI just don’t see how this doesn’t happen once this property is HCA zoned and turned over to a for profit developerThey won’t want commercial, they won’t want a community center. All they want is luxury housing and parking. And they will get exactly what they want because these parcels are zoned as HCA and the zoning bylaws permit without a special permitIf you are in doubt or if you think we need more time, please vote for option ERobOn Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:43 AM DJCP wrote:Do you want a community center at the mall or do you want affordable housing and commercial space? Can you please make up your mind? On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:08 AM Robert Ahlert wrote:Agreed, great idea!Only option E would allow community center at the MallElse, RLF will sell to the highest bidder under HCA zoning for housing.RobOn Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:57 AM Robert Hicks wrote:I too support Ken Hurd's recommendation that the Community Center be included as part of the redevelopment of the Lincoln Station area.Please write in - "None of the Above" on the article at the Special Town meeting.-- Bob Hicksrchi...@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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

The owner of the mall property is the RLF, not Civico.


On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:36 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait 
wrote:

> There are already 4 story buildings being proposed at the mall to be able
> to fit the 100 units Civico is insisting on… the only way the mall could
> add a community center is if another floor was added, making it 5 stories.
>
> At what point do we say that’s enough?
>
> Sarah Postlethwait
> Lewis Street
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:53 AM Margaret Olson 
> wrote:
>
>> There is nothing that would prevent the RLF from providing or preserving
>> the option of community center space.  And, since it would likely be a
>> long-term lease arrangement, it would spread the cost over the life of the
>> lease with the upfront construction costs borne by the developer.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:44 AM Lynne Smith  wrote:
>>
>>> Option E is the only HCA option that would allow us to think about
>>> including the Community Center at the Mall.
>>>
>>> Lynne Smith
>>> 5 Tabor Hill Road
>>> 
>>> Lincoln, MA 01773
>>> 
>>> cell:  781-258-1175
>>> ly...@smith.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 8:53 AM, Jane Appell  wrote:
>>>
>>> Ken,
>>>
>>> You make a great point. The community center and housing zoning came up
>>> at different times as separate issues. But,  For good planning and to
>>> provide the most benefit to the town as we would like to see it, it makes
>>> sense to look at them both together while we have the chance.
>>>
>>> Jane
>>>
>>>
>>> Jane Appell, Ph.D.
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 7:54 AM, Ken Hurd  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello LincolnTalkers,
>>> With apologies for expressing yet again my strongly held opinion as an
>>> architect concerned with what we build in Lincoln, I want to remind
>>> everyone why I and many others believe we should not build a community
>>> center on the school campus.  I still believe it should be located in
>>> Lincoln Station, particularly now that our small commercial area is in play
>>> because of the Housing Choice Act.
>>>
>>> As I wrote last year, "I fully support building a new facility, but it
>>> has long been my opinion that such a major investment by the town should be
>>> deployed where it is most needed - namely in the Lincoln Station area.  For
>>> more than ten years since Town Meeting approved the Comprehensive Long
>>> Range Plan, in which the revitalization of Lincoln Station was
>>> overwhelmingly one of the highest priorities, the area has lain dormant and
>>> in serious need of a catalyst to jumpstart its transformation into the
>>> compact, vital, walkable village center that was a stated goal at the
>>> time.  A community center in such a location would be the equivalent of an
>>> anchor store in a retail setting, and by virtue of attracting more people
>>> on a regular basis, it would create more opportunities for a clustered
>>> cross-current of activities spawning greater social interaction."
>>>
>>> As many will recall at last year’s Town Meeting, there was serious
>>> concern about the cost to build it, and I am of the opinion that there are
>>> better ways to accomplish this than spending anywhere from $18 to $24
>>> million of taxpayer money to do so.  As was recently suggested to me by an
>>> experienced urban planner, why not include the Community Center as a
>>> required accessory use in the development of a future residential
>>> project at Lincoln Station?
>>>
>>> As he said, “With clear program requirements and project parameters to
>>> guide the design of a new project, developers can be very efficient in
>>> realizing a good project on time and within budget.” Moreover, “It
>>> would be a plus to any potential developer's proforma to have a confirmed
>>> tenant (assuming COA long-term lease) for … an active community use in
>>> purposely designed ground level space. This strategy would minimize the
>>> cost to Lincoln upfront financing for design and construction, replace
>>> public project inefficiencies with professional development expertise, and
>>> as such the new Community Center facility may be more affordable to the
>>> town's stressed taxpayers."
>>>
>>> As I also wrote last year, I believe  it would constitute the classic
>>> suburban planning error to create a new facility that stands alone at the
>>> school and, like the suburban mall, accessible only by car.  In addition,
>>> because of school protocols, there would be very limited inter-generational
>>> co-mingling until after school hours, if at all.  And, even if there
>>> weren’t a greater  awareness about the effects of climate change, wouldn’t
>>> it make far more sense to locate a community center where there are already
>>> other crucial services such as the post office, grocery store, cleaners, a
>>> cafe and restaurant, not to mention the potential for more

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

There are already 4 story buildings being proposed at the mall to be able
to fit the 100 units Civico is insisting on… the only way the mall could
add a community center is if another floor was added, making it 5 stories.

At what point do we say that’s enough?

Sarah Postlethwait
Lewis Street

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:53 AM Margaret Olson 
wrote:

> There is nothing that would prevent the RLF from providing or preserving
> the option of community center space.  And, since it would likely be a
> long-term lease arrangement, it would spread the cost over the life of the
> lease with the upfront construction costs borne by the developer.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:44 AM Lynne Smith  wrote:
>
>> Option E is the only HCA option that would allow us to think about
>> including the Community Center at the Mall.
>>
>> Lynne Smith
>> 5 Tabor Hill Road
>> 
>> Lincoln, MA 01773
>> 
>> cell:  781-258-1175
>> ly...@smith.net
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 8:53 AM, Jane Appell  wrote:
>>
>> Ken,
>>
>> You make a great point. The community center and housing zoning came up
>> at different times as separate issues. But,  For good planning and to
>> provide the most benefit to the town as we would like to see it, it makes
>> sense to look at them both together while we have the chance.
>>
>> Jane
>>
>>
>> Jane Appell, Ph.D.
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2023, at 7:54 AM, Ken Hurd  wrote:
>>
>> Hello LincolnTalkers,
>> With apologies for expressing yet again my strongly held opinion as an
>> architect concerned with what we build in Lincoln, I want to remind
>> everyone why I and many others believe we should not build a community
>> center on the school campus.  I still believe it should be located in
>> Lincoln Station, particularly now that our small commercial area is in play
>> because of the Housing Choice Act.
>>
>> As I wrote last year, "I fully support building a new facility, but it
>> has long been my opinion that such a major investment by the town should be
>> deployed where it is most needed - namely in the Lincoln Station area.  For
>> more than ten years since Town Meeting approved the Comprehensive Long
>> Range Plan, in which the revitalization of Lincoln Station was
>> overwhelmingly one of the highest priorities, the area has lain dormant and
>> in serious need of a catalyst to jumpstart its transformation into the
>> compact, vital, walkable village center that was a stated goal at the
>> time.  A community center in such a location would be the equivalent of an
>> anchor store in a retail setting, and by virtue of attracting more people
>> on a regular basis, it would create more opportunities for a clustered
>> cross-current of activities spawning greater social interaction."
>>
>> As many will recall at last year’s Town Meeting, there was serious
>> concern about the cost to build it, and I am of the opinion that there are
>> better ways to accomplish this than spending anywhere from $18 to $24
>> million of taxpayer money to do so.  As was recently suggested to me by an
>> experienced urban planner, why not include the Community Center as a
>> required accessory use in the development of a future residential
>> project at Lincoln Station?
>>
>> As he said, “With clear program requirements and project parameters to
>> guide the design of a new project, developers can be very efficient in
>> realizing a good project on time and within budget.” Moreover, “It would
>> be a plus to any potential developer's proforma to have a confirmed tenant
>> (assuming COA long-term lease) for … an active community use in purposely
>> designed ground level space. This strategy would minimize the cost to
>> Lincoln upfront financing for design and construction, replace public
>> project inefficiencies with professional development expertise, and as such
>> the new Community Center facility may be more affordable to the town's
>> stressed taxpayers."
>>
>> As I also wrote last year, I believe  it would constitute the classic
>> suburban planning error to create a new facility that stands alone at the
>> school and, like the suburban mall, accessible only by car.  In addition,
>> because of school protocols, there would be very limited inter-generational
>> co-mingling until after school hours, if at all.  And, even if there
>> weren’t a greater  awareness about the effects of climate change, wouldn’t
>> it make far more sense to locate a community center where there are already
>> other crucial services such as the post office, grocery store, cleaners, a
>> cafe and restaurant, not to mention the potential for more housing?
>>
>> Earlier this week I wrote the Selects about including an option to vote
>> for “None of the Above” at tomorrow’s Town Meeting.  Absent any response, I
>> plan to vote for Option 3 ($12.5 million project cost)

Re: [LincolnTalk] question

Unfortunately they can’t vote.  Our voting laws in this town do not allow for all voices to be heard and do not allow equal access to voting. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:27 PM, Terri via Lincoln  wrote:Hello Friends,Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able to vote tomorrow? I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most important.  I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer. I do not see it on  Town Web site (?) Thank you,Terri K-- 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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

2023-12-01 Thread Paul Shorb

LEAP will not be moved 2/3 mile down the road; in any of the Hartwell-based
community center plan options, it will remain at the existing Hartwell
campus. Thus children will continue to be able to walk from school, as they
do now, to after-school programs run by the Town Parks & Rec Dept or to
LEAP daycare.

Those programs obviously need to remain at the Hartwell campus. If we don't
build the community center there, we'll still need to renovate
the old Hartwell pods for their current uses. I have heard an estimate of
$3.5 million per pod for each of those three pods (perhaps someone on
the CCBC could confirm). So among other considerations, there is a great
cost efficiency in remaking the Hartwell campus so it can both serve those
functions and the additional functions that have been proposed for an
inter-generational community center.

Paul Shorb
(on the RLF Board, but providing my personal view here)

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:31 AM V Saleme  wrote:

> Perhaps this has been discussed however and should LEAP be moved 2/3 of a
> mile down the road, how do we propose getting the children from the school
> to there as opposed to walking or being chaperoned (by staff) to current
> facility?
>
> VS
> —-
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:17 AM John Mendelson 
> wrote:
>
>> The myriad reasons why the Community Center (remember it is planned to
>> accommodate the COA, LEAP, and Parks & Rec) should NOT be located at the
>> mall have been well documented by the folks who've worked on the community
>> center plans for almost a decade.  The location at the Hartwells ie right
>> in the middle of our "institutional core" and easily accessible by walking,
>> biking, or driving.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:20 AM Robert Hicks  wrote:
>>
>>> point well made
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:03 AM Robert Ahlert 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Agreed, great idea!

 Only option E would allow community center at the Mall

 Else, RLF will sell to the highest bidder under HCA zoning for housing.

 Rob

 On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:57 AM Robert Hicks  wrote:

> I too support Ken Hurd's recommendation that the Community Center be
> included as part of the redevelopment of the Lincoln Station area.
>
> Please write in - "None of the Above" on the article at the Special
> Town meeting.
>
> --
> Bob Hicks
> rchi...@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.
>
>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bob Hicks
>>> rchi...@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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

2023-12-01 Thread Barbara Low

Thank you.

From: Lincoln  on behalf of John Mendelson 

Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 11:17 AM
To: Robert Hicks 
Cc: Lincoln Talk 
Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

The myriad reasons why the Community Center (remember it is planned to 
accommodate the COA, LEAP, and Parks & Rec) should NOT be located at the mall 
have been well documented by the folks who've worked on the community center 
plans for almost a decade.  The location at the Hartwells ie right in the 
middle of our "institutional core" and easily accessible by walking, biking, or 
driving.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:20 AM Robert Hicks 
mailto:rchi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
point well made

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:03 AM Robert Ahlert 
mailto:robahl...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Agreed, great idea!

Only option E would allow community center at the Mall

Else, RLF will sell to the highest bidder under HCA zoning for housing.

Rob

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:57 AM Robert Hicks 
mailto:rchi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I too support Ken Hurd's recommendation that the Community Center be included 
as part of the redevelopment of the Lincoln Station area.

Please write in - "None of the Above" on the article at the Special Town 
meeting.

--
Bob Hicks
rchi...@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.

--
Bob Hicks
rchi...@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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

2023-12-01 Thread Lynn DeLisi, M.D. via Lincoln

 Dear Ken,I totally agree with you. The more I see of the details for having a 
Community Center built on the school site, the more I see this as the wrong 
choice.I want the Town to have a Community Center, particularly to improve the 
space for seniors, but the school campus will not allow this because it needs 
to serve supplementary school programs as well there, such as an after school 
daycare program. The Traffic problem will lead to safety issues. Among many 
other reasons, the Lincoln station area is the better location. Why talk about 
putting housing units on the commuter lot when a community center could be 
there, if it is not going to be used for the commuter lot? There are other 
nearby possibilities as well that have not been looked at extensively.
But the vote tomorrow does not allow for a "none of these choices". So how do 
we see that this message is heard?The vote will look like the Town wants one of 
the 3!Why waste the architect's time from now until March?
Lynn DeLisiSouth Great Road On Friday, December 1, 2023 at 07:54:44 AM EST, 
Ken Hurd  wrote:  
 
 Hello LincolnTalkers,With apologies for expressing yet again my strongly held 
opinion as an architect concerned with what we build in Lincoln, I want to 
remind everyone why I and many others believe we should not build a community 
center on the school campus.  I still believe it should be located in Lincoln 
Station, particularly now that our small commercial area is in play because of 
the Housing Choice Act.
As I wrote last year, "I fully support building a new facility, but it has long 
been my opinion that such a major investment by the town should be deployed 
where it is most needed - namely in the Lincoln Station area.  For more than 
ten years since Town Meeting approved the Comprehensive Long Range Plan, in 
which the revitalization of Lincoln Station was overwhelmingly one of the 
highest priorities, the area has lain dormant and in serious need of a catalyst 
to jumpstart its transformation into the compact, vital, walkable village 
center that was a stated goal at the time.  A community center in such a 
location would be the equivalent of an anchor store in a retail setting, and by 
virtue of attracting more people on a regular basis, it would create more 
opportunities for a clustered cross-current of activities spawning greater 
social interaction."  
As many will recall at last year’s Town Meeting, there was serious concern 
about the cost to build it, and I am of the opinion that there are better ways 
to accomplish this than spending anywhere from $18 to $24 million of taxpayer 
money to do so.  As was recently suggested to me by an experienced urban 
planner, why not include the Community Center as a required accessory use in 
the development of a future residential project at Lincoln Station?   
As he said, “With clear program requirements and project parameters to guide 
the design of a new project, developers can be very efficient in realizing a 
good project on time and within budget.” Moreover, “It would be a plus to any 
potential developer's proforma to have a confirmed tenant (assuming COA 
long-term lease) for … an active community use in purposely designed ground 
level space. This strategy would minimize the cost to Lincoln upfront financing 
for design and construction, replace public project inefficiencies with 
professional development expertise, and as such the new Community Center 
facility may be more affordable to the town's stressed taxpayers."
As I also wrote last year, I believe  it would constitute the classic suburban 
planning error to create a new facility that stands alone at the school and, 
like the suburban mall, accessible only by car.  In addition, because of school 
protocols, there would be very limited inter-generational co-mingling until 
after school hours, if at all.  And, even if there weren’t a greater  awareness 
about the effects of climate change, wouldn’t it make far more sense to locate 
a community center where there are already other crucial services such as the 
post office, grocery store, cleaners, a cafe and restaurant, not to mention the 
potential for more housing?  
Earlier this week I wrote the Selects about including an option to vote for 
“None of the Above” at tomorrow’s Town Meeting.  Absent any response, I plan to 
vote for Option 3 ($12.5 million project cost) that has already been 
characterized as not sufficient to provide services comparable to what we 
already have at Bemis.
Please join me in rejecting the more expensive options 1 and 2 in order to 
redirect our efforts to take advantage of this moment in time to be far more 
creative, innovative and holistic in how we design and fund a Community Center 
that can also help transform Lincoln Station to its full potential as a truly 
vital, walkable village center.  Remember,

      we humans shape our environments at a moment in time, 

and then they shape us for decades to come.

Respectfully,Ken

[LincolnTalk] Community Center

2023-12-01 Thread Wendy Kusik via Lincoln

To my fellow Lincoln residents,
Lincoln needs a community center which will address the needs of parks and rec 
and COA /HS and Leap and other organizations. The Hartwell campus is the 
perfect place for such a center not at Lincoln station. Lincoln station would 
not have enough parking, parks and rec would need to stay at Hartwell, and you 
would loose the synergy that you get from a COMMUNITY CENTER. Also, there would 
be little green space at Lincoln Station for a COA center that contributes to 
the sense of well being, with open spaces around it.
The 50% option would be a waste of money, in my opinion. It doesn't include 
renovating Leap , which will need to be renovated for several million in the 
not to distant future. You will have two options to choose from that make any 
sort of sense. 
We have been talking about this community center for years, and multiple 
studies have been made regarding locations, renovating current facilities, many 
meetings with experts through the years. The outcomes of these studies are 
readily available at Town Hall if you have questions.

I have lived in Lincoln 40 years, served on the COA board for a total of 14 
years and counting. I am a retired geriatric social worker with 20 years 
experience. I am very aware of the multiple needs of this community, not only 
seniors but the community at large. I am also on the communications committee 
for the community center .
I am voting 100% option because that is the option that would allow for growth 
of services to this town and serve it well now and in the future years.
Many thanks for your time in reading this. Wendy Kusik



-- 
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.

[LincolnTalk] Rural Land Foundation and negative cash flow

2023-12-01 Thread Bijoy Misra

Friends,
The IRS filings as I posted before records that the RLF has been
in negative cash flow for years.  I am reproducing below -
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/46132391
Apparently it has not been successful in mobilizing the necessary
funding to run its overhead.  The overhead has become unsustainable.
RLF Board may think that it has a right to sell its assets to determine
its future, but to impose new arbitrary structures without town approval
defeats the basic RLF mission.  I am an environmentalist, I love green.
I am surprised that RLF is unable to secure public and private
funds in the present strong green economy.  Something really has
gone wrong.  I appeal all to examine and make some wise decisions
than selling land
Best regards,
Bijoy Misra
-- 
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.

[LincolnTalk] question

2023-12-01 Thread Terri via Lincoln

Hello Friends,
Does anyone know how residents such as the  elderly or disabled are able to 
vote tomorrow? I am pretty sure we can all agreetheir voices are most 
important.  
I see the question was asked several times here on LT.but no answer. I do 
not see it on  Town Web site (?) 
Thank you,Terri K


-- 
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Community Center

2023-12-01 Thread Tony Liepert

Hi All,
I've been reading with great interest the discussion about locating the
Community Center at the Mall (Town Center).

My take on this opportunity is different but aligns with comments that
Peter Buchtal has made several times on LT.

I've never understood, nor bought the argument, that LEAP, Parks and Rec
(PR), and Council on Aging (COA) should all be co-located, and would
benefit from being co-located. I also agree with Ken Hurd about suburban
architecture mistakes that require a car for access.

With the recent revelation that mixed-use development could count towards
HCA requirements, a re-examination of that basic assumption is warranted.

LEAP, and Parks and Rec, should stay on the school campus. They operate
independently of COA and would continue to do so.

COA should be located at the Mall and would become an anchor tenant there.
Seniors attending COA activities at the Mall could also do their shopping,
banking, eating, etc, thereby supporting the commercial tenants at the
Mall. If the Mall buildout is done correctly, seniors would be drawn to
down-sizing to the Mall area, freeing up their larger houses (and yards!)
to new families in town.

Seniors also have fewer cars, and don't drive them during rush hours.

Comments welcome,
Tony

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 11:19 AM John Mendelson 
wrote:

> The myriad reasons why the Community Center (remember it is planned to
> accommodate the COA, LEAP, and Parks & Rec) should NOT be located at the
> mall have been well documented by the folks who've worked on the community
> center plans for almost a decade.  The location at the Hartwells ie right
> in the middle of our "institutional core" and easily accessible by walking,
> biking, or driving.
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:20 AM Robert Hicks  wrote:
>
>> point well made
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:03 AM Robert Ahlert 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Agreed, great idea!
>>>
>>> Only option E would allow community center at the Mall
>>>
>>> Else, RLF will sell to the highest bidder under HCA zoning for housing.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:57 AM Robert Hicks  wrote:
>>>
 I too support Ken Hurd's recommendation that the Community Center be
 included as part of the redevelopment of the Lincoln Station area.

 Please write in - "None of the Above" on the article at the Special
 Town meeting.

 --
 Bob Hicks
 rchi...@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.

>>
>> --
>> Bob Hicks
>> rchi...@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.
>
>

-- 
Tony Liepert
tliep...@gmail.com
617 633 3521 (cell)
-- 
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.

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday

Basically she can’t. Much like myself who has Army Reserve training this weekend can’t vote as well. I have listened to the debated, looked at the proposals and I am well informed and like to vote for Option C but I can’t because we still follow town meeting rules from 200 years ago. Adam M HogueCell: (978) 828-6184On Dec 1, 2023, at 12:18 PM, Margo Fisher-Martin wrote:Hi Jane Marie, I do not know the answer to your question unfortunately. It seems unfair that many people are unable to vote tomorrow. I am curious as to how your mom feels about the proposed additional units at the Commons. I am really unsure of how to vote on this because I haven’t heard much feedback. From the photos that I’ve seen, it does not appear that adding The new units would be too impactful on the residents and neighbors nearby, but I really don’t know that for sure, and I would love to hear more feedback from people who live at the Commons or nearby. Thank you.Best regards,Margo MartinOn Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:37 AM Jane Marie wrote:

Good Morning,
My mother moved into The Commons in Lincoln
over the summer and has been following the discussion about Saturday's vote. Her new neighbors were giving her a bit of a run-down on what the Special Meetings are like and she's concerned she won't be able to attend. She has limited mobility and some medical
issues that would prevent her from sitting in an auditorium for hours at a time (not to mention the ongoing worry about covid in such a large group). How can she still vote without attending the meeting?

Thank you for any insight you can provide!

Jane Marie

Re: [LincolnTalk] Don’t box out yourself, Lincoln.

The main reason Civico is insisting the village center be included in the
HCA rezoning is so they can’t be required to have more than 10% affordable
housing… so how will that add equitable diverse housing in Lincoln? If they
had intentions to actually add real affordable housing, they would have no
issue with separating the village center rezoning from the very
unrestrictive HCA rezoning.

By having the village center rezoning be a different warrant article, the
town can require affordable housing for families who earn less than ~$120k
a year/ 80% of the median income; and we can ensure more than 10% of the
units are reserved as affordable. Plus we save a significant amount of our
limited “affordable housing trust” funds by doing that, so truly affordable
housing can be built with it.

It’s a win, win, win scenario.

Separating the village center rezoning from the HCA won’t even require a
supermajority at town meeting. Even rezoning outside of the HCA near the
MBTA only needs a simple majority 51% now. That's a pretty easy hurdle to
pass if the village center is presented with a reasonable UPA/ affordable
housing requirement and percentage.

The RLF has done some great things for Lincoln- but they can’t promise the
next owner(s) will have the same purpose. The RLF have stated multiple
times in public meetings they plan to sell to a developer in the near
future. And that developer will likely sell within a couple years once
construction is finished. Why wouldn’t we have it set in stone, rather than
just crossing our fingers and hoping they have good intentions?

The only way to truly ensure affordable housing will be built is to
separate the “village center” into a separate rezoning warrant at March
Town meeting. The only way to do that is to vote for Option E.

Sarah Postlethwait

Lewis St

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:36 AM David Cuetos  wrote:

> The current draft of the bylaws for the Village Center District is
> tailored to meet a developer’s (Civico) wishes rather than the Town’s
> general interest. A majority of the Planning Board has so far supported
> that approach. There is no reason to believe that the imbalance of power
> will change after Saturday. If options C-D are chosen, the Town would be
> forced to decide between approving a set of disagreeable Village Center
> bylaws or reject HCA rezoning altogether. It is obvious in that scenario we
> would be dosed with a heavy ration of “approve this or the State will sue
> us” like we have seen so far in public presentations from the HCAWG. HCA
> and Mall rezoning need not be coupled. Vote E to retain control. Vote E if
> you are unsure what is the best approach and you want more time to consider.
>
> To recap, these are the concerning bylaws:
>
>
>-
>
>If the Mall is not developed under HCA, more than 10% affordable units
>could be required, as Lincoln has historically done. It gets even worse.
>There is a clause in the planned bylaws that would allow developers to
>skirt the 10% HCA affordable housing requirement by making a donation to
>the Town’s Affordable Housing Trust. No units would be reserved for
>households with an income lower than 80% of the median (~$120k for a family
>of four).
>-
>
>There are minimal requirements for commercial space. The requirements
>discussed could be easily gamed by a developer. The RLF Chair admitted at
>the Community Forum of Nov. 8 that commercial space would likely decrease.
>-
>
>Under HCA there is no possible requirement for commercial parking
>space. Residents could not be able to visit the Mall like they do today.
>-
>
>There are no floor area or lot coverage ratios. This means lots can be
>clear-cut to maximize build-out, increasing the amount of impervious
>surface and reducing tree-cover .
>-
>
>The draft bylaw discussed on the 20th allows a maximum 4 stories and
>height of 48' for buildings located 100 ft or more from the road. This is
>inconsistent with all public communications from the HCAWG, which set the
>limit at 3 stories and a height of 42’.
>-
>
>Most concerning of all, the Planning Board would reserve the right to
>provide height, story, and density variances through a special permit. This
>would essentially render moot the discussion the Town is expected to have
>regarding the District’s proper bylaws, including number of units. This is
>an unprecedented clause in Lincoln’s history.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 02:27 RAandBOB  wrote:
>
>> Most house lots in town are zoned for by-right single-family housing. You
>> can’t build just any house on these lots, however. The building is governed
>> by side lot and front lot setbacks and by height, wetland and septic
>> restrictions, among others.
>>
>> Similarly, the new zoning for by right multi family housing/retail will
>> restrict the possibilities for buildings. The planning board is in the
>> process of developing new

Re: [LincolnTalk] Voting on Saturday