South Lincoln/HCA*

The multifamily and mixed-use overlay zoning map approved by the Planning Board. Click to enlarge.

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.”

The Planning Board will vote on the revised zoning bylaw on February 26, but residents still have questions, and its fate at the March 23 Town Meeting is far from certain.

Echoing a frequent thread in discussions about the HCA rezoning, attendees at the February 20 public hearing worried that a site plan review won’t be enough to control what gets built when multifamily and mixed-use developments are allowed by right in parts of South Lincoln under the new state-mandated rules. 

“Site plan review has teeth in that we can insist the development be done in a manner that is consistent with the neighborhood and the design guidelines, but you can’t use it to make it impossible for the developer to do something by right,” Planning Board Chair Margaret Olson said. Developers can be fined and/or denied an occupancy permit if they don’t comply, she added.

Traffic from commercial and residential units is also a concern that the board can’t control ahead of time. “We will look at traffic as there are projects,” Olson said. A traffic study and any resulting mitigation requirements “are a negotiation with the developer.”

“Then what can you say no to?” resident Barbara Peskin asked. The answer: essentially nothing. As an example, for a single-family home, “the town and board cannot deny your right to build a house on your property,” Olson said. Screening, lighting and other aspects can be controlled, “but we can’t tell you we don’t like your house… we cannot refuse a by-right use.”

Resident Susan Hall Mygatt urged the board to pass over the measure at Town Meeting and schedule a Special Town Meeting in June or the fall to give more time to come up with a better bylaw while still meeting the December 2024 state deadline. 

The board’s alleged failure to respond to resident comments “makes the public forums look like a sham, and will exacerbate the unhealthy tensions that are now evident between the board and the Selects on the one hand, and many residents who do not feel they have been heard,” said Mygatt, reading from a statement. “I and others are concerned that if the proposed amendment receives barely a 50% vote, there will continue to be significant ill will within the town and it will fester for years. This can be avoided.”

Along the same lines, board member Lynn DeLisi asked if there was any way to delay the board’s February 26 vote, but Olson said there wasn’t, since the board also has to approve design guidelines before Town Meeting.

“For better or for worse, we have to follow the direction given to us by Town Meeting” in December, when residents voted to go ahead with Option C to allow all of the new multifamily development within South Lincoln, Olson said. “If the town has changed its mind, the town will tell us no by voting no. I don’t think any of us should be upset by that prospect. If it’s not approved, that’s OK — that’s part of the process… absent considerably more public engagement that we have time for before March, we have what we have… we are in this bind.”

But resident Louis Zipes urged the board to go ahead with the March vote despite the controversy. “You’ve done an excellent job of adjusting to the town’s needs,” he said. “We recognize that not everyone will be satisfied. You have the support of a silent majority in the town.”

By Barbara Peskin

I attended the Select Board meeting on Monday, Feb. 5 when a request for a massing study of Option C was discussed. Typically, a massing study is done for a proposed new building or project. In this case, because rezoning 70 acres and 38 properties under HCA has no specific project on the table, a massing study would have to be done for an imagined scenario of buildings and housing on all the different properties. The boards would decide on a scenario or range of scenarios for different building types and parcel groupings.

In my opinion, and the reason I signed and supported the request along with 110 others is that any 3D visualization of possible development makes me a more knowledgeable voter on March 23. I am open to voting yes or no on March 23 because I know we have until December 2024 to file our HCA compliance plan with the state.

At the Monday meeting, the Select Board chair said that the discussion was preliminary. He asked the Planning Board chair in attendance how a massing study could be used. In response, the Planning Board chair stated that whatever might happen with Option C is “wild speculation” and for that reason a massing study would not have meaning.

While I appreciate that a Planning and Select Board might have to live with “wild speculation” on five acres or five properties, it is difficult for me to understand why choosing a route of “wild speculation” on 70 acres and 38 properties in the Lincoln Station area is proper planning for a town, the people, the land, or wildlife. The town could choose less “wild” choices to comply with HCA and then plan for sustainable increased housing outside of HCA.

My ask of the Select Board now is that they have a broad discussion about this concept of “wild speculation” on 38 properties and what they think of that in terms of Lincoln’s future. As town leaders, could Planning Board and Select Board members tell us which 10 properties they think would be best/prime for development? What is their vision?

Should the Select Board move forward with a professional massing study, I hope they consider suggestions that came up at the Monday meeting. They could ask to see examples of a variety of buildings throughout the 38 properties. We could see different 3-story buildings with 10 units, 11 units and 25 units, representing the different sub-district densities. We could also see an example of some grouped properties and full buildout on those. For example, could we see what a 77 unit development on 7 acres might look like if the block at Codman Corner, Lincoln Road, and Lewis Street becomes grouped. We could see what a building on two acres with 22 units looks like. With 38 properties, we should be able to include a wide range of examples.

The results of the massing study could be provided to all residents through the town website. I hope the Select Board will continue the discussion and that a massing study or similar professional 3D representation will be made available to us ahead of the design guidelines forum on February 27.

“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.

Uncertainty and trepidation about future changes in the look of South Lincoln have been driving much of the discussion around the Housing Choice Act rezoning, particularly with regard to the mall. That concern arose again at the February 5 Select Board meeting when residents submitted a letter asking for a massing study to get a better idea of what the redeveloped mall might look like.

“There’s a fear that this thing could be massive,” resident Lynne Smith said. “There’s a desire to have some that goes a step beyond illustrations.” But Planning Board Chair Margaret Olson said that such a study would be “wildly speculative” in the absence of a concrete proposal from a developer.

A massing study is a three-dimensional representation of a proposed building’s shape and size in addition to its footprint, elevations (side views) and floor plans. “Such studies are done when there is a plan, but there is no plan,” Olson said at a Select Board meeting discussion on February 5. “Zoning sets out rules, and within those rules, there are a nearly infinite number of things you can do” in varying degrees of attractiveness and likelihood. For example, under current zoning, the owner of a conforming two-acre lot could theoretically build a 20,000-square-foot house by right. And the Planning Board still has to approve each project after a site plan review, she noted. 

Without first doing an analysis of the septic and wetlands characteristics of a given property, and knowing exactly what the property owner hopes to do, a massing study “would be completely meaningless,” Olson said.

“One hundred and ten people don’t think it’s meaningless,” responded resident Barbara Peskin, referring to the number of signatories to the letter (see her “My Turn” piece on the issue).

The Rural Land Foundation, which owns the mall, has shared conceptual drawings of what a three-story building with housing on the top two floors and commercial on the ground floor might look like, but neither the RLF nor a developer has submitted a specific proposal. 

The RLF unveiled one possibility to comply with the HCA at a January 18 public forum. Upcoming meetings and forums:

• Tuesdays, Feb. 13 and March 5 — Planning Board meetings on proposed design guidelines for the HCA district. Residents may use this form to comment on the draft. 
• Tuesday, Feb. 20 — Planning Board public hearing on the amended zoning bylaw, 7–8:30 p.m., Town Hall and on Zoom.
• Tuesday, Feb. 27 — In-person public forum on design guidelines hosted by the Planning Board and Housing Choice Act Working Group, 7–8:30 p.m., Lincoln School.
• Thursday, Feb. 29 — RLF public forum on the mall, 7 p.m., Zoom (passcode: 940342)

The January 25 article headlined “Planning Board unveils proposed HCA rezoning rules” mistakenly said that the newer Tack Room building at the mall was not part of the Village Center zoning subdistrict. In fact, the entire Rural Land Foundation property is part of the subdistrict, but the redevelopment proposal shared by RLF does not include the post office/Tack Room building.

Also, the ending time for the February 8 forum was listed incorrectly. It will be from 6:30 to 8 p.m.

The Mall at Lincoln Station (2016 photo)

The Planning Board has released a draft of its zoning map and bylaw amendments establishing new multifamily zoning overlay districts to comply with the Housing Choice Act on January 23. There will be several public forums and hearings before residents vote on a final draft at Town Meeting in March.

The draft is summarized and linked on the January 24 update on the Housing Choice Act Working Group website. Highlights for the mandatory mixed-use Village Center subdistrict:

• 33% of the floor area of all the buildings on the lot must be commercial
• At least 80% of the building’s ground floor frontage facing the public road and the first 100 feet of the primary access must be commercial or street-activating uses.
• If the total commercial development on the lot reaches 45,000 square feet of commercial use, the 33% minimum requirement will no longer apply. The Planning Board may reduce the required percentage of commercial uses by special permit upon a finding that economic and market conditions do not support the required amount of commercial space.
• There are several commercial uses that are not permitted, including service stations or repair shops, manufacturing and assembly, gun sales. Drive-through services are also prohibited except by special permit.
• A maximum density of 25 residential units per acre is allowed, and at least 10% of the units must be affordable housing units.
• There must be at least one parking spot for each residential unit. The number of spaces for commercial units will be determined by the Planning Board during site plan review. There will be no parking in front of buildings except as approved by the Planning Board.

The draft will most likely be amended based on public feedback gathered at several upcoming sessions:

• Thursday, Feb 8 — Zoning bylaw forum, 6:30–8 p.m. in person at Bemis Hall.
• Friday, Feb. 9 — Zoning bylaw forum, 8:30–10 a.m. via Zoom
• Tuesday, Feb. 20 — Zoning bylaw public hearing, 7–8:30 p.m. on Town Hall and on Zoom
• Tuesday, Feb. 27 — Forum on design guidelines (not yet released), 7–8:30 p.m., Lincoln School
• Thursday, March 14 — Town Meeting preview forum, 7–8:30 p.m. via Zoom

In the Village Center subdistrict, the mall’s bank building (currently two floors) and the Something Special building (currently one floor) are being proposed for redevelopment. That space totals about 13,000 square feet, Rural Land Foundation Executive Director Geoff McGean said in an email to the Lincoln Squirrel.

There are currently no first-floor vacancies in the Something Special building and one small unleased office space on the second floor of the newer Tack Room building, which is not part of the property being proposed for redevelopment by the RLF. Those two buildings have approximately 13,000 square feet and 12,000 square feet of rentable space, respectively, McGean said.

Asked if the RLF would raise rents (as calculated by square footage) in a redeveloped building, McGean was equivocal. “Out of respect for all the tenants, we can’t give you specific rent amounts and it would be premature to speculate on future rents since market conditions could change significantly by the time any new space is built,” he said. “We will work with all the tenants to try to meet their future needs. We anticipate that some of the tenants may want smaller spaces.”

It’s still unclear where the current tenants (assuming they plan to reopen in the redeveloped building) will go while construction is underway.

The post office and Donelan’s both threatened to leave in the early 2000s unless they got more space. That space was built only after a seven-year public process. The project cost about $9 million and was financed largely by a mortgage taken out by the RLF which it’s still repaying.

The Rural Land Foundation unveiled early concept sketches of what a redeveloped Lincoln Mall might look like with two floors of housing above a commercial ground floor.

At a January 18 Zoom forum, RLF Executive Director Geoff McGean recapped the RLF’s work since 2020, when they began looking at how to revitalize the mall while also adding housing. They first considered redeveloping all of the older easternmost building that includes Donelan’s. Analysis showed that the site could accommodate up to 100 units of housing while still including a “substantial but likely reduced amount of commercial space,” he said. However, this couldn’t happen unless Donelan’s was “removed or substantially altered,” and the RLF decided that was a no-go, even though including that amount of housing was thought to be the most financially viable option.

Instead, focusing instead on the rest of the older building, the RLF — aided by Union (designer of the Riverwalk housing in Concord) and a developer consultant — unveiled two visual concepts for 40 units of housing and 5,000–10,000 square feet of first floor and/or street-activating use space. Street-activating uses are those open to the public including  but not limited to shops, restaurants, lobbies, offices, and other service activities, according to a January 10, 2024 explanation posted on the Housing Choice Act Working Group web page. Such uses may also include “spaces accessory to residential uses in multi-family or mixed-use buildings such as fitness or community rooms.”

The two design directions — a traditional pitched-roof and a more modern flat-roofed look on the same footprint — would include one- and two-bedroom rental apartments of 600–800 square feet, but several residents said that’s too small for families. “This was a first attempt at maximizing the amount of units on that portion of the site,” McGean said.

Contrary to speculation by some, Donelan’s has “given no indication that they want to leave and is a critical tenant at the mall, he said. He declined to answer a resident question as to when their lease expires and whether a second phase of redevelopment would affect that space.

“Until they come to us saying they want to change the space, it’s important to keep it as is. If they wanted to downsize or add space, I think we would jump on that and work with them and try to create some housing along with that,” said McGean, who urged residents to shop there and at other mall businesses.

The Bank of America space will have to change, however. Even if they stay on after redevelopment, the drive-up teller window “would probably not be able to exist” since the car turnaround area occupies too much valuable space, he said. The bank also occupies a second floor, and McGean indicated that the RLF would welcome any desire by the bank to remain in the mall but downsize.

Earlier, the RLF had considered selling the entire four-acre property with conditions after the mall building was redeveloped but has since changed its thinking to maintain a ground lease. “We have to be comfortable as an organization and as stewards of property, leaving it so it can’t change in a way the town doesn’t want,” McGean said.

Although current plans call for retaining the mature trees along Lincoln Road, adjacent construction “will fatally damage their root systems,” and the canopies would have to be cut back as well, said resident Deb Howe, who is an arborist. “I would say those oak trees are probably toast.”

There are many hurdles to overcome if the redevelopment vision is to become reality, McGean said. Among the needs:

• Honoring the current tenants’ leases and trying to accommodate them in the refurbished mall
• Successfully negotiating with The Community Builders (owners of Linciln Woods and the wastewater treatment facility that serves both those homes and the mall) to upgrade that system to allow for expansion
• Attracting a developer willing to invest in a project
• Getting approval from the RLF’s mortgage lender to take down part of the property that’s acting as collateral for the loan
• Getting town approvals, including March 2024 Town Meeting approval of the proposed Housing Choice Act rezoning, incorporating feedback from community forums and neighborhood meetings and, eventual site plan approval from the Planning Board, which would probably involve a traffic study

McGean also assured forum attendees that the RLF is not going bankrupt, but is “hoping to attract investment in the mall to ensure the long-term viability of a town asset,” and is not “in bed” with a developer. Civico, which developed Oriole Landing, has been a “helpful advisor” but the town has not made any legal agreements with them or any other developer, he said.

Click on images below for larger versions with captions: