At the end of the day about our town values, which we need to establish collectively. Perhaps the Select Board can provide a motion to the town committee for how they recommend the town proceeds.
Our family lives on a 5.7 acre lot (60% wetlands) that borders that town center, with more frontage than any lot in the town center, .2 miles from the MBTA station. We'll live here until our kids graduate from L-S. When we pick and go, our house will get knocked down. Right now, we would sell it to a developer who I am sure would build the most gigantic single-family house possible. We abut the South Lincoln Business District, and I don't have the time to jump through the hoops to re-zone it. What should it be? 6 units? 65 units as the policy says? That is potentially 10% of the requirement in one lot. The metro Boston area is rapidly losing diversity and quality of life because of NIMBY policies. But it also doesn't make sense to clog the roads with traffic and compromise the quality of life and environment. Lincoln should receive some credit in the policymaking for its density of conservation land, which is a resource for the entire area. Perhaps that is what we need to advocate for to give us the flexibility to balance the priorities of our towns as we see fit. The most frustrating project for me is the one in North Sudbury right past Verrill that dumps all the traffic into Lincoln. Also a big thanks to all of the people, Margaret, the planning board, select board, etc, that are leading the analysis and conversation on this important topic. Ted On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 1:56 PM Stephanie Smoot <[email protected]> wrote: > It would have to be dense housing with little or no parking in to achieve > density to support public transportation and to force the residents to use > it. Plus new parking takes up a lot of space and causes stormwater > run-off problems. These models work well in small cities and big towns > like Newton that have many options for transportation for many hours of the > day. > > I dont know how many elderly will use the train since it is not accessible > and Covid is taking a bite out of ridership. Possibly students or young > couples who need to go into boston once a week to check in at office. I > could also see a couple full-time workers who could e-bike to work. > > The missing piece is that there already is a lot of apartments and condos > popping up around the perifery of Lincoln. Towns in our area are quickly > adding units where the land is cheaper, where parking can be incorporated, > and along edges where abutters from other towns cant participate in > process. Those units do not have public transportation, you need a car or > rideshare. A great place for residential development would be the old > Whole Foods/Purity Supreme in Wayland. They never made a real town center > out of the Stop & Shop former Raytheon site because they believed the > developers smoke and mirrors. Launchers Way on Oxbow Road also has a lot > of potential for some good dense housing on the Wayland Lincoln border. > > Regards, > *Stephanie Smoot* > > 857 368-9175 work > 781 941-6842 personal cell > *617 595-5217 *work cell > 126 Chestnut Circle > Lincoln, MA 01773 > > > > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 11:24 AM Allen Vander Meulen < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> It should also be noted that the “density” metric is measured on a per >> lot basis. >> >> Lincoln Woods has been cited in this thread as a “high density” >> development, but property contains a lot of wetland and conservation land, >> as well as a septic treatment plant set well back from the rest of the >> property - around 21 acres all told. So, with 125 units, its actual >> density is only about 6 units / acre - well under the state’s proposed “By >> Right” minimum for the Lincoln Station area. >> >> "The Commons" property is about 31 acres with around 209 living units, >> according to its online “property card”. So its density is under 7 >> units/acre. >> >> Oriole Landing (next door to The Commons) is about 6 acres - with 60 >> units, or 10 units / acre, and is therefore the town’s highest-density >> property - and both The Commons and Oriole Landing are quite far from any >> public transit. >> >> In other words, none of the major multi-unit developments in town are >> even close to the proposed requirement of 15 units/acre. However, as >> Margaret Olson said, this proposed “by Right” zoning can be modified by >> restrictions due to wetlands, conservation, and other considerations and >> controls imposed by the town. And, it will be some time before the >> proposed regulations are finalized - with a lot of negotiating and refining >> likely to happen between now and then. >> >> It is abundantly clear we need far more housing in this town for those >> with low to moderate incomes. Many employers in town (far more than most >> of us realize) need people willing to fill their low to moderate income >> positions. But with a very limited supply of affordable housing, most of >> these people have to commute huge distances to work here. Given a choice, >> they will choose to work closer to home and/or at businesses with less >> expensive transportation options. So, our local businesses, nonprofits, >> and service providers are struggling to find and retain adequate help: the >> issue isn’t the quality of work the environment, but whether their >> employees can afford to work here in town at all. >> >> From an Affordable Housing point of view, Lincoln is (in theory) in a >> good “place” right now, thanks to the addition of 60 units to our >> “Subsidized Housing Inventory” courtesy of the Oriole Landing project. >> Under current law, we should be safe for quite some time from high-density >> developments built without concern for harmonizing with the community. >> But, as the Housing Choice Act shows, the law is changing - and needs to. >> >> Personally, I welcome the Housing Choice Act as an important first effort >> to address those needs. However, it is far from perfect: the proposed >> regulations and guidelines that derive from it will need considerable >> refinement before they can work as the state intends for towns like >> Lincoln. I also expect that this is merely the first step in a series of >> moves the Commonwealth will make over the next several years to encourage, >> and eventually require, more low to moderate income housing as well as >> improved access to public transportation. >> >> I believe we must be thoughtfully proactive on these issues. Lincoln is >> already doing so through the work of SLPAC and the Planning Board - among >> other efforts. Ignoring or downplaying these issues will eventually lead >> to the town being forced into making difficult, painful, and expensive >> adjustments with no recourse - as has happened in several nearby >> communities. >> >> We need to continue to pursue more and better housing options here in >> town for all - doing so thoughtfully, carefully, and mindful of what’s best >> for not just ourselves, but for our neighbors and local businesses as well. >> >> - Allen Vander Meulen >> >> On Jan 24, 2022, at 20:48, Margaret Olson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The Housing Choice Act covers "by right" zoning. Specifically, to comply >> we would need to zone 50 acres at 15 units per acre. The Oriole Landing >> buildings are consistent with that density. >> >> The act does not address housing construction or the current multi-family >> housing inventory. It is concerned only with zoning. >> >> In other words, if we were to zone the entire 1/2 mile around the MBTA >> station for 15 units per acre, and none of the current owners either built >> multi-family housing or sold their property to a developer, we would be in >> compliance even though no new housing would be built in that scenario. >> Similarly, if we had 750 units in our current South Lincoln overlay >> district we would not be in compliance because the overlay requires town >> meeting approval. "By right" means that the property owner has the right to >> build at the specified density. The town is still able to apply regulations >> - building heights, design guidelines, site plan review, and other controls >> over the nature of the development. >> >> Margaret >> >> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 8:10 PM Joan Kimball <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I believe that many existing units count. Could someone please >>> clarify? Planning Board? >>> >>> Many of us want to help with the housing crisis in this part of MA. And >>> i appreciate that there are differing opinions. May we continue to be civil >>> as we are doing now. >>> >>> Joan >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022, 7:54 PM Debra Daugherty <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I guess I wish they would just take into consideration the housing we >>>> already have. There are 120 units next to the Hanscom bus stop (Battle Road >>>> Farm) not to mention all the HAFB units. That's a ton of units. There's a >>>> lot of open land on the Hanscom Air Field lot right across the street from >>>> the bus stop, but I'm not sure what the status of that land is. In town we >>>> have lots of units in Lincoln Woods right next to the train. Not sure why >>>> that shouldn't count toward our quota. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 7:06 PM Bob Mason <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I don't (yet) have a POV on the specifics of this legislation nor the >>>>> feasibility for Lincoln, but I do wonder about a moral responsibility to >>>>> reconsider wholesale housing policy in towns like Lincoln. >>>>> >>>>> It is my understanding that part of the housing crises that have >>>>> plagued San Francisco, Los Angeles and other metropolitan regions across >>>>> the US all have to do with too much NIMBYISM. At some point, for us to >>>>> have >>>>> a functional society, we need to rethink our physical infrastructure and >>>>> how that can create stronger communities, have greater economic impact and >>>>> reduce environmental pressures. >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the specifics of this legislation is untenable for the >>>>> geographical constraints of Lincoln, but maybe we need to lean even more >>>>> into being part of the metropolitan solution. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 6:49 PM Richard Panetta < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Margaret, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Would the property near the bus stop be an area of concern as well >>>>>> then? Or would most of that land be in the National Park district? >>>>>> >>>>>> Rich >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 6:45 PM Margaret Olson < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Sara, >>>>>>> The original map published in the Squirrel was incorrect. This is my >>>>>>> fault - I made that map and made a mistake in the GIS. This was brought >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> my attention in the comments; Alice contacted me and she updated the >>>>>>> article with the corrected map. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What the updated map shows is that in order to comply we would need >>>>>>> to rezone some of the current R1 (single family 2 acre) zone that is >>>>>>> within >>>>>>> a half mile of the station. Depending on how the regulations shape up >>>>>>> after >>>>>>> the comment period the town may be facing some difficult choices. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On the question of the MBTA station - we also have a bus stop, at >>>>>>> Hanscom. We are a bus service town under the draft rules. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Margaret >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 5:53 PM Sara Mattes <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Very interesting, and there will be serious push-back. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Note-"That is the message Massachusetts is sending to 175 cities >>>>>>>> and suburbs in the Boston area, as a bill passed last year to boost >>>>>>>> housing >>>>>>>> production begins to take effect >>>>>>>> <https://mass.streetsblog.org/2022/01/13/new-state-rule-would-force-suburbs-to-legalize-thousands-of-new-apartments-near-t-stops/> >>>>>>>> *.** Almost every jurisdiction in eastern Massachusetts, from the >>>>>>>> New Hampshire border to Worcester to the Cape Cod Canal…**”* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Certainly some serious pressure will and should be placed on State >>>>>>>> Reps. once other towns realize the implications. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Lincoln already has grasped the implications. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For Lincoln, as was shown in a recent article in the *Squirrel,* the >>>>>>>> land available, given the map proposed by MAPC and this new >>>>>>>> growth initiative (NOT a mandate), the proposed 750 units would have >>>>>>>> to fit >>>>>>>> into a very small land mass. >>>>>>>> In order to reach 750 units, we would need to redevelop with 5-6 >>>>>>>> story buildings, at a minimum. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It simply is not feasible. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We should all be contacting our current and future State Reps. to >>>>>>>> ask their positions, and to explain. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We have regularly added multi >>>>>>>> family housing, including affordable housing to our inventory, and, >>>>>>>> I expect we will continue to do so, but not in this manner. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sara Mattes >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *------* >>>>>>>> Sara Mattes >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jan 24, 2022, at 5:29 PM, Lynne Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> An interesting article for Lincoln. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://slate.com/business/2022/01/massachusetts-zoning-apartments-housing-transit.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Lynne Smith >>>>>>>> 5 Tabor Hill Road >>>>>>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/5+Tabor+Hill+Road+Lincoln,+MA+01773?entry=gmail&source=g> >>>>>>>> Lincoln, MA 01773 >>>>>>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/5+Tabor+Hill+Road+Lincoln,+MA+01773?entry=gmail&source=g> >>>>>>>> 781-258-1175 >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>>> To post, send mail to [email protected]. >>>>>>>> Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. >>>>>>>> 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 [email protected]. >>>>>>>> Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. >>>>>>>> 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 [email protected]. >>>>>>> Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. >>>>>>> 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 [email protected]. >>>>>> Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. >>>>>> 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 [email protected]. >>>>> Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. >>>>> 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 [email protected]. >>>> Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. >>>> 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 [email protected]. >>> Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. >>> 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 [email protected]. >> Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. >> 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 [email protected]. >> Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. >> 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 [email protected]. > Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. > Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/ > . > Change your subscription settings at > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. > > -- Ted Chan [email protected] / (781) 856-8686
-- The LincolnTalk mailing list. To post, send mail to [email protected]. Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/. Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
