To the editor:
I have read the report as published in the Squirrel recently as well as having had a chance to read the full report. Unfortunately I cannot agree with the characterization that the report is as well conceived as has been indicated.
I have been a member of the SBAC (School Building Advisory Committee) II. We of the committee worked many hours to follow up on the earlier work of the SBAC I committee to ensure that all of the town’s concerns were fully addressed, coming up with a series of charrettes as well as a detailed report of our own which then was incorporated in our consultant Dore & Whittier’s work and which the Lincoln School Committee fully supported. Therefore I am distressed that the CMPC report pays little if any attention to the work that has gone before and thus it cannot but be biased in its direction. The best work through many years of numerous town committees has been to look at the full picture—this is called the Lincoln Way by many—and it is the only way to arrive at a measured conclusion inclusive of all the various citizen inputs.
Sincerely,
Peter C. Sugar
133 Chestnut Circle
Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Letters will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.
As a resident of this town since 1998 I have come over the years to have an appreciation for the Lincoln Way in all it’s strengths and weaknesses. It’s biggest strength is it’s inclusiveness and spirit of genuine community engagement. It’s weakness is that when compromise is required – we just can’t address everyone’s concerns – the Lincoln Way struggles. With the school addressing the concerns of every interested group results in a building that very few of us like – large, sprawling across the landscape, and very expensive. In at least one iteration internal circulation problems, created by a footprint that addressed everyone’s building footprint concerns, were solved by adding another cafeteria.
What I particularly liked about the CMPC report is that it distills a very complicated problem to a set of options that each represent a set of tradeoffs. It’s a great approach – it keeps the spirit of the Lincoln Way and gives us a way out of the log jam.
I thank all the people who volunteered large amounts of time and energy to the CMPC report and commend them for the approach they took.