Very helpful but is HCWG and Selects in agreement? Guess we'll find out on 11/21.
On Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 9:42 AM Benjamin Shiller <[email protected]> wrote: > I hope recent comments lead to a discussion as to what is the right amount > of development for Lincoln right now. So far, I feel the argument has been > binary, assuming that someone either supports housing (to the max) or wants > absolutely zero development and is accused of being a NIMBY. Yet, at least > in my opinion, we all would benefit by having a well-substantiated, middle > ground option that balances the needs to expand housing in Massachusetts (a > problem Lincoln cannot solve on its own) with the impacts of > overdevelopment (limited infrastructure like roads, which in Lincoln cannot > be widened) and the impacts on the cherished central area. I have had > concerns that the options initially put forth by the presenters were too > aspirational and lacked substance (e.g., # units that can actually be > built, impact on traffic, taxes, etc.). But I do not want to vote against > more development either. So, I am hoping that we can come together at town > meeting, iron out the issues, and find a great solution that nearly all in > town can be happy with. > > I have been trying to understand the issues better myself and created a > video focusing on just one aspect: how much higher is the actual number of > units that can be built. I tried to be completely unbiased and just > focusing on facts when creating this video, and hope many will consider > watching it: https://youtu.be/mqXo4TPw3MI > > > > In response to the Selects’ post about the December 2nd Special Town >> Meeting, I’d like to pose a follow up question. To quote Andy Wang, “all >> the ‘E’ alternatives provided by the Lincoln Residents for Housing >> Alternatives are set up so that the majority of the land that is re-zoned >> are on existing multi-family areas and unlikely to be developed…So in that >> case, whatever 10% 15%, 25% of 0 is still 0.” >> My understanding is the HCAWG was tasked with putting forth options in >> both the letter and spirit of the law. While I believe the voices of those >> who are opposed to the spirit of HCA should indeed be represented, that >> opportunity will come at the March Town Meeting. I am concerned that adding >> an E option to the December 2nd ballot puts us at risk of rendering the >> March vote moot. In essence, there could be a potential “no housing” vs. >> “no housing” vote on the March ballot, suppressing the voices of those who >> believe in the spirit of the law. >> My question is this: what will the decision process be at the November >> 21st meeting? Will the HCAWG exclusively decide whether to include a >> potential option E, or was this working group created with an advisory >> capacity only? If not, will it be a majority of the Selects who make this >> decision? >> Thank you to the Selects, Planning Board, and HCAWG for all your patience >> and hard work! >> Rebecca Blanchfield > > -- > The LincolnTalk mailing list. > To post, send mail to [email protected]. > 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]. Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
