My Turn

Dear Lincoln friends and neighbors:

What vision of Lincoln do we share? Over the past several decades, our town has voted consistently for projects that preserve open space, increase access to housing, and protect our broader environment. With Lincoln Woods and the Ryan Estates, we have welcomed new residents in the village center giving them easy access to shopping, the train, our trails, and the schools.

The proposed zoning changes under the MBTA Communities Housing Choice Act (HCA) that we will vote on at Town Meeting invite us to continue sharing that spirit and vision of Lincoln. Can we trust our talented and proven leaders to balance concerns about the proposed level of development with the values we have consistently expressed? 

We, the undersigned, are confident that we can and that we will benefit by doing so, just as we have for decades. We ask that you join us in voting “yes” for the amendments to our zoning bylaws designed to implement Option C when we gather at Town Meeting on Saturday, March 23.

Briefly, here’s our reasoning:

• Residents have voiced strong support for rezoning near transit – twice: Large majorities both in September (76.4% for Option C at the State of the Town Meeting) and in December 2023 (55% for C; 6.9% for various D options at the Special Town meeting) to concentrate re-zoning at the mall and village center. These decisions were an affirmation that transit-oriented development makes environmental and climate sense and that it is most likely to contribute to housing and a more vibrant and sustainable commercial center at the mall. They also reflect the goals of the town’s 2009 Comprehensive Plan.

• The RLF-owned mall should remain in the HCA zoning plan. HCA-compliant rezoning will help the RLF to reinvest in the mall both to support our commercial center and contribute to transit-oriented housing for the town and the region. “By right” development makes any RLF mall reinvestment project less risky and therefore more attractive to investors.

• Lincoln’s proposed bylaws and design guidelines provide stringent controls on “by right” zoning. The Planning Board has listened to and incorporated many comments provided by opponents and supporters of this bylaw. Margaret Olson, chair of the Planning Board, has stated that the board has taken a conservative approach to the bylaws to address concerns about their impact, while still honoring the larger democratic preference for options that are more likely to create additional housing under the HCA.

• The proposal is ready for voting. Since the law was passed in 2021, an extraordinarily qualified group of Lincoln volunteers and staff have studied, invited active engagement, and listened carefully to comments from the community to bring us a sound proposal that not only complies with the HCA but also respects the values of the town. Community input has led to significant tightening of the bylaws, for example, by reducing the density of housing in the village center, and by imposing more stringent height restrictions and setback requirements.

Some Lincoln residents are asking us to vote down the proposed bylaws with the hope that some alternative, yet-to-be-articulated, consensus plan can be hammered out in the few short months before the looming HCA deadline. Our concern is that we already know what the alternatives are. These options disperse rezoning to parcels in town (Lincoln North, Battle Road Farm) that are likely to result in less housing and could take the RLF mall out of the HCA further restricting housing in that area and delaying revitalization of the mall.

The HCA will bring change. We have an opportunity to respond to these changes with generosity, creativity, and confidence as we have for decades.

Signed,

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

By Gail O’Keefe

The HCA zoning decision looming is based on an assumption that we have a housing crisis in Massachusetts. Politicians have linked development to diversity, claiming all towns must help the state in the housing struggle. However, in looking at recent building data from local cities and towns, it seems very likely that the housing crisis is really an affordability crisis, with housing being built that is too expensive for those needing affordable housing.

Earlier this month the Boston Globe reported on the housing boom in Everett — 1,600 new units under construction now, with a total increase of 16% added to their housing stock over the past few years. Only 5% of those units are “affordable” housing, leaving us to question how these units will offset the housing needs facing families.

On Zillow today, over 1,000 housing units are available for rent (and ~100 for sale) in Cambridge; Boston has over 8,000 available for rent, (~1,000 for sale). An additional 800 for rent in Somerville, with 75 for sale. In Waltham, many are available; a brand-new one bedroom will cost you only $2,700/month. In Lexington, 30 rentals, mostly one- and two-bedrooms available. Price range: $2,500- $5,000 per month. And here in Lincoln in mid-March, there are still five units available at Oriole Landing, as well as a few houses.

Clearly, supply is plentiful. Market-rate housing units are available, with hundreds more being built right now all around Boston.

The zoning changes under the HCA has buoyed developers, so the future will see a surge in housing stock. Why, then, are we rushing to jeopardize our grocery store and small retail area to build 100 units? Who are we really helping? Are there thousands of people to fill all these homes? Or is it the cost the real housing crisis? Will trickle-down really reduce housing costs?

HCA Option C simply adds to the volume of new units, 90% at market rate. What happens if we rush to build, alongside all the other MBTA-adjacent towns, and end up with vacant residential units while losing our retail in the deal? One of the state’s goals with the HCA is economic growth for developers. Is that a goal of Lincoln as well? If not, let’s make the zoning more attractive to townspeople rather than RLF’s “more attractive to developers.”

Lincoln’s planning board and the RLF have presented Option C as the only choice, yet other options were not fully presented to the town in the fall. We needn’t give up on affordability and diversity, and should not jeopardize our small but critical retail space. We only need to submit a plan by the end of 2024! There is plenty of time to come to a plan that aligns with the values and goals of our town.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

By David Onigman

I have lived in Lincoln most of my life. I grew up here, my mother and her four brothers lived here. I worked for various town departments through a Massport internship growing up in town, working for the Select Board, the Finance Department, and others. I attended Town Meetings growing up, running around microphones during public comment and running the soundboard. I sit on the Parks and Recreation Committee as well as the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee. I coach basketball in our Tri-Town league and I regularly perform music for my fellow residents at the Tack Room and Twisted Tree.

But none of that makes my vote any more or less important than every other voter in Lincoln. Whether you are a patriarch of the town, moved here in the 1900s, or moved here last year… whether you live in a large house on Blackburnian Lane, or live in multifamily housing on Wells Road, your vote counts once.

I have grown extremely weary of the slow drumbeat from the group of residents that opposes Article 3 at our upcoming Town Meeting that implies the will of the town is best measured by any means other than a Town Meeting vote.

Public comment at open meetings, the frequency of those comments, the passion behind those comments, LincolnTalk posts, emails to town officials, or other informal ways of gauging public opinion are no replacement for a democratic process where all votes are counted. In fact, any initiative to not have our votes be counted at the upcoming Town Meeting is a dangerous threat to our democratic process.

I applaud the members of the Planning Board that voted to move forward with the proposed bylaws so that we could indeed, as a town, all voters, vote “Yes” or “No” on the proposed zoning.

I support the proposed zoning. I believe the Housing Choice Act mandated by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is long overdue. I believe one of the many contributing factors to the housing crisis that Massachusetts and the county finds itself in is due to the exclusionary zoning bylaws towns like Lincoln adopted in the mid-1900s.

It is 2024 and our commercial center of town, which is also conveniently located near the commuter rail, does not have the appropriate zoning to allow for multifamily housing development. Left to our own devices, we have not done enough. The HCA is forcing our hand, and it is long overdue.

The commercial center of our town is where this zoning makes the most sense. “Spreading this zoning around town” is not smart municipal planning, in fact it contributes to suburban sprawl, and increases — not decreases — traffic. I also believe the Rural Land Foundation have been great stewards of the town, and the frequent questioning of their motives and lack of trust in the organization has been most disappointing.

But most disheartening has been the recurring talking point that residents like myself, who both support this zoning and also live in the proposed subdistrict, are motivated by our own financial interests and not our true beliefs as housing advocates. There is no way for me to convince someone otherwise if they just continue to say it over and over again, I suppose, but I wish more of my fellow residents who oppose Article 3 would trust me at my word that:

• Yes, I support this zoning.
• No, I do not have any plans to sell my property; it is my family’s original home and I love it.
• Yes, I would be welcoming if my neighbors on either side chose to further develop their property.

In closing, I would like to extend my thanks to all of the hours invested in this process to date, by everyone involved, whether we agree on the topic or not. I look forward to the upcoming Town Meeting vote to truly see what the majority of voters in our town support.

It is my hope that the “Yesses” will have it when we vote on Article 3. But if we don’t, you have my word that I will not decry the process. I will be disappointed in the outcome, but I’ll shake it off, and see how I can best advocate for my position moving forward.

Onigman is a Codman Road resident.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

By Trisha O’Hagan

Editor’s note: O’Hagan has said that her quote by her in the February 27 Lincoln Squirrel story headlined “Planning Board splits 3-2 on endorsing zoning amendments” was inaccurate, so it has been removed.

I attended the February 26 Planning Board meeting and felt I needed to respond when a community member emphatically told the planning board that they shouldn’t “sell” the zoning changes at the March 2024 town meeting.

Our Planning Board and Housing Choice Act Working Group have worked diligently to develop sensible zoning changes in line with the Housing Choice Act. They listened to all community members feed back and incorporated many of the residents’ suggestions into the zoning guidelines. And we should all be delighted that the planning board made some very last-minute changes (after checking with the state and our town lawyer) that may allow for including 15% affordable housing.

And lest we forget, they were working from the results of the 2023 December Special Town Meeting in which Option C received the most votes. This is how our town democracy works — we listen, we learn, we vote, and we respect the results of the election.

So it is deeply troubling to me that two members of the Planning Board “do not believe that the vote at the December Special Town Meeting should be taken as a legal act.” Since when does Lincoln have a Town Meeting and vote and then elected town officials decide that it is “not the right time” and advocate to negate people’s vote?

We will all have a chance to vote again soon at the March 23 Town Meeting. My hope is that Option C passes. I believe that Lincoln is a wonderful, welcoming and generous town and that we will embrace the opportunity to be a part of the solution to Massachusetts’ housing crisis. I hope we can build inviting, all-electric, multifamily housing close to our train and town center where people can walk and bike to our schools and shops and churches as well as Codman and Drumlin Farms and our multitude of trails. And I will always respect the results of the election, even if my choice does not prevail.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

By Rob Ahlert

When it comes to finding a solution to the Housing Choice Act riddle for Lincoln, there are many paths the town could choose to go down. When choosing which path to go down, an organization (e.g., our town) usually carefully identifies its options and the risks vs rewards for each, ultimately choosing the option which has the lowest risk and the highest reward. The conundrum we face in Lincoln is that the reward for one group (e.g., a lot more housing in one area) is in fact a major risk for the other group (too much housing in one area). So how do we as an organization (Lincoln) move forward to make a decision when we don’t even have the same objectives?

As you probably are suspecting, the right answer is to find a compromise.

OK, but how do we compromise? How do we not end up with a solution that only 51% of the population is satisfied with?

This is where sitting down together and documenting the risks/fears that folks have is critical.  And it will get very touchy because it’s hard not to quickly dismiss someone’s fears when you think you already have the answer. This is where talking, listening and documenting risks becomes critically important. What are the risks? Can we quantify and agree on the likelihood and impact on a 1 to 10 scale for each risk? Are there any obvious mitigations?

During a workshop or series of workshops, each risk can be graded on likelihood (1 to 10) and Impact (1 to 10).  The risk can either be “Accepted,” “Needs More Info,” or “Mitigated” and a workshop participant (or participants) can be assigned to take responsibility for that action. Below are some examples from a list of risks I’ve heard on both sides of the discussion.  

• Risk #1: Developers put in offers on over 50% of the parcels in the first year after maps are published.
• Risk #2: Developers will not build family-friendly three-bedroom apartments or condos.
• Risk #3: Traffic will be bumper to bumper on Lincoln Road from Five Corners to Codman Road, not just during the rush hours but also at other times of the day and on weekends.

These are just three examples. There are likely 50+ unique risks we could document if we had a workshop on this topic.

When faced with a decision that has a lot of risks, does leadership go ahead and choose an option that exposes the organization to potential large downside impacts, especially given that reversing this decision would be over a year away? I would hope not, especially in a consensus-driven organization like a town. This is not a private enterprise with a CEO, this is a town.

So we document a lot of risks/fears from folks on both sides of discussion. What do we do next? Now comes the really hard work. Do we decide to just accept one of these risks because both the likelihood and impact are so low? Are we aware of an immediate mitigation that we can apply that will lower the likelihood or impact? Do we need more information? How much time and money do we need to gather more info or mitigate?

If you’ve read this far, some of you are really rolling your eyes saying this is way too much trouble to go through to get to a solution to the HCA riddle. But that’s the point. By going through this trouble, we better understand risks that each other see and find a consensus solution, choosing a compromise path.

That is what Brookline did, that’s what we can do as well. On March 23rd, vote “No for Now” on the HCA-related article and then we can get to “Yes” together before December 2024 and easily comply.

Calling all leaders and/or project managers/therapists to the table!

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.