Planning Board splits 3-2 on endorsing zoning amendments

Editor’s note: This story has been updated with links for the bylaw and accompanying map, and a quote by Trish O’Hagan was removed after she said it was inaccurate.

In a dramatic split echoing the townwide controversy about proposed zoning amendments, the Planning Board voted 3-2 on February 26 to endorse the bylaw they wrote to be presented at the March 23 Annual Town Meeting.

The board’s vote came after members made final tweaks to the bylaw based on Option C, which residents approved at a Special Town Meeting in December 2023. The outline of that option, which has been forwarded to the state for a Housing Choice Act compliance check, would allow multifamily housing clustered in South Lincoln, including over a redeveloped mall. Lincoln Residents for Housing Alternatives formed to oppose that idea, instead seeking to omit the mall from the HCA rezoning package and spreading permitted affordable housing around other parts of town. 

Board Chair Margaret Olson presented a compilation of HCA feedback they’ve received in recent months. Various residents have advocated for and against things like whether a fourth story should be allowed, limiting or increasing allowed parking, how to best preserve commercial activity, and even whether or not to pass over the measure at Town Meeting altogether and work on a new plan.

Given the divisiveness of the issue, “we are quite prepared to be given new direction if that is what the town would like us to do,” Olson said.

During the public comment period, Deb Howe worried that the amended bylaw didn’t address the notion of an underground or above-ground parking structure which might be needed to accommodate new residents as well as businesses. Ben Shiller argued that it would be very difficult to fit the 100 units of multifamily housing that the Rural Land Foundation has said it needs to sustain the mall’s economic viability.

“There seems to be a lack of analysis around implications of rezoning,” said David Cuetos, adding that the town-commissioned feasibility study for allowing more than the state minimum of affordable units was “badly bungled.”

Susan Hall Mygatt, who at last week’s public hearing suggested passing over the measure, said on Monday that while the board is apparently obligated to advance it to Town Meeting, “you’re not required to sell it or recommend we vote for it.” 

It was clear that a unanimous vote wasn’t going to happen when Ephraim Flint read a statement signed by him and fellow member Lynn DeLisi asking their fellow board members to go back to the drawing board and craft a bylaw with more public input and consensus.

While most residents agree that the town should comply with the HCA while also preserving the town’s character, there is “little agreement on how the rezoning should be done,” the statement said. Additionally, some of those who voted for Option C in December “have said they would have voted differently had they better understood the options and their consequences in more detail.” 

Flint and DeLisi suggested removing the mall subdistrict from the amended bylaw and then creating a committee of members “equal in opposing views” to work with the Planning Board on a compromise solution for other areas to rezone, including the mall. If their fellow board members didn’t go along with these suggestions, they asked that it be “formally stated” at Town Meeting that “two of the five Planning Board members were opposed to bringing this entire package to a vote at this time.”

How best to guide redevelopment of the mall has been a bone of contention along with where in town to allow multifamily housing. The board included the mall in the HCA bylaw revision because the state changed its guidelines last summer so towns could count housing in mixed-use subdistricts as part of its required total. “We took that opportunity because it would reduce the amount of units we would have to zone for elsewhere” in town, Olson said. “All along, we have tried to minimize the compliance footprint.”

“What [the RLF] has shown us to date, I would have liked to have seen a year ago,” DeLisi said. 

“You and me both,” Olson replied.

“We’re looking at zoning changes that are going to change our town for generations. We have to be careful and thoughtful about it and not be pushing too fast,” DeLisi said. “It’ll be a slim margin no matter what. Let’s try to get 80% of people at [a later] Town Meeting to say yeah, let’s vote for this compromise.”

But Olson firmly rejected the idea of the Planning Board not endorsing Article 3 on the Town Meeting warrant or passing it over altogether. “To me as a voter, if I voted for something that gave direction for the board and the board did not do that, I would be absolutely outraged,” she said.

Olson indicated that having the bylaw rejected by residents in March would not necessarily be a wholly negative outcome. “People get anxious when things are voted down at Town Meeting. I’m like, ‘That is information. We will take that information and act on it along the lines you are describing’,” she said. “I feel like we should do our duty as Planning Board members and present Option C as we were directed by Town Meeting, and if Town Meeting tells us ‘We have changed our minds,’ that’s fine… People talk about a silent majority — but we have no idea who’s the majority. We’ll hear from the town.”

“Developers are trying to sell a project that people want to live in, “ Nicholson said. “If you put so many restrictions on things, nothing will happen and that’s been the problem over decades. That’s why we are where we are. At some point you do have to take a little bit of risk and accept that it’s not going to please everyone.”

DeLisi and Flint eventually voted “nay” on the motion to endorse the HCA zoning bylaws as amended that evening, with the other three (Olson, Craig Nicholson, and Gary Taylor) voting “aye.”