The Lincoln Squirrel

News, features and photos from Lincoln, Mass.

South Lincoln/HCA*

Option E is not compliant, HCA consultant says

The Lincoln Residents for Housing Alternatives map of part of Option E for HCA rezoning. Not shown: the Battle Road Farm portion of the subdistrict.

(Editor’s note: the headline to this story was amended on November 30. See this clarification for details.)

Utile, the town’s planning consultant for Housing Choice Act rezoning, said this week that Option E would not pass muster with the state because it does not meet the law’s requirements.

With Utile’s help over the last eight months, the Housing Choice Act Working Group came up with four options for Lincoln to comply (Options C, D1, D2, and D3), all of which include the mall. But Lincoln Residents for Housing Alternatives (LRHA) argued against including the mall and proposed Option E, which they say gives the town more control over the mall’s future by excluding it from HCA rezoning while also minimizing new housing in the village area and its resulting congestion. Option E will join HCAWG’s four on the ballot at Saturday’s Special Town Meeting.

The HCA requires towns including Lincoln to allow 635 units of multifamily housing over at least 42 total acres, which can be broken into portions or subdistricts under certain conditions. One of those conditions, according to the state’s Section 3A guidelines (Chapter 5, Section a, Part ii), is that “no portion of the district that is less than 5 contiguous acres [of] land will count toward the minimum size requirement.”

“In the professional opinion of our consultant, E does not appear to be compliant because the south Lewis Street subdistrict is smaller than 5 acres and is not contiguous with the rest of the Lincoln Road subdistrict,” Select Board member Jennifer Glass wrote in LincolnTalk on the afternoon of Wednesday, Nov. 29. That verbiage is also on the HCAWG website.

Option E straddles the south side of the railroad tracks but does not include the parcels between the track and Lewis Street. Lincoln Road (though no actual parcels of land) connects the two pieces.

Also on Wednesday, HCAWG also posted updated maps and tables for its four options, which are slightly different from previous versions. “There are changes in the unit/acre calculations because our consultant, Utile, worked with the state to refine calculations when there are significant wetlands involved,” the group wrote. “The allowed units/acre will be written into the zoning bylaws and is a maximum, regardless of the size of the units.”

The new slide deck also includes maps showing the likelihood of housing development in each subdistrict based on its current status. Option E has the largest amount acreage of allowed multifamily housing in parts of town other than the village area and thus the lowest amount that is likely to be developed.

LRHA meeting draws more than 170

The LRHA held a heavily attended Zoom meeting (video here) on Wednesday evening to review all five options, make the case for option E, and answer questions, which viewers could post using Zoom’s chat function (though not verbally). The typed questions were visible to the meeting hosts but not the audience, and the hosts acknowledged that they couldn’t get to all of them in the 90-minute session. Utile’s analysis of option E from earlier in the day did not come up.

After the meeting, the LRHA wrote on LincolnTalk that they are “are parceling out the remaining questions to the presenters best equipped to answer them. We’ll post those questions and answers as soon as we can collate them.”

One of the questions that came up again at the session was why the town was putting the HCA options to a vote now when the state deadline for enactment isn’t until December 2024. “If the state sees we’re working in good faith on a solution, I’m sure the roof doesn’t cave in on Jan. 1, 2025,” said Bob Domnitz, a former member of HCAWG and the Planning Board.

Town officials have said they’ll need the extra time in case the March 2024 vote doesn’t result in a bylaw acceptable to the state, which has not given any indication either way about whether it might be flexible about the deadline.

Option E going forward

Utile’s opinion notwithstanding, Option E will still be on the ballot on December 2, and whatever option voters choose that day will also be submitted for a compliance check. However, if they vote for option E and the state rejects that plan after review early next year, it will not be on the warrant in March. In that case, “the working group and the Planning Board would have to go back through a public process again” to fix the problems to bring the option into compliance, Glass said at the November 27 Select Board meeting.

Town officials have already submitted Option C to the state for a compliance check, though they don’t expect a state reply much before the final vote at Town Meeting in March.

Officials have also said that if Option E prevails, the town will offer a separate article at the Annual Town Meeting in March asking voters to rezone the mall to allow a mixed use of commercial and multifamily housing.

Town Administrator Tim Higgins noted at the November 27 Select Board meeting that the commuter lot, even though it’s part of the town’s HCA rezoning, cannot be sold or leased for development without Town Meeting approval because it is town-owned land. He also reiterated that recent executive sessions of the Select Board concerning a piece of property are not about the commuter lot and that “there is no specific proposal in the works that’s currently under negotiation.”

My Turn: Look at all the options for HCA rezoning

By Peter Braun

In the interest of enhancing rational discussion about the proposed rezoning options, I am repeating and elaborating on the gist of a comment I posted a couple of days ago in the Lincoln Squirrel in response to Ruth Ann Hendrickson’s article.

This is not just an Option C vs. Option E debate. The Working Group and Select Board have wisely offered us some potential alternatives, which I view as potential compromise solutions. As a lawyer, I was always interested in potential compromises, so I appreciate their having offered some more choices than just Option C or bust.

Options D-1, D-2, and D-3 all offer the same benefit as Option C in terms of rezoning the mall and rezoning some other parcels in South Lincoln. In fact, they could have been labeled C-1, C-2, and C-3. And they all include large amounts of areas that are understood to be highly unlikely to be developed (Lincoln Woods and Ryan Estate). Those unlikely-to-be-developed areas, as well as the unlikely-to-be-developed areas in North Lincoln included in several options, are, to my mind, just benign puzzle pieces to satisfy the state’s 42-acre requirement.

Rather than be distracted by these benign puzzle pieces, I have tried to focus on where the real action is, in South Lincoln. That’s where the public transit is. That’s where our commercial area is. That’s where we have pointed to for many years as the area for some sort of “walkable village.” That’s where the Working Group has appropriately focused.

In trying to sort out which of these four “C-related” options are preferable, the question for me is how much South Lincoln development besides the mall itself are we willing to enable by right, now and forever. I am totally in favor of by-right rezoning for the mall itself, and I trust their judgment. That will entail a large addition of housing and much-needed revamping of the mall’s commercial and public spaces. How much more by-right development in South Lincoln do we want, and how likely is it to occur?

Jennifer Glass’s excellent presentation materials at this week’s Mothers Out Front meeting very well articulated what our choices are in terms of what areas could be developed in reality, depending on what the property owners and potential developers decide to do. As I understand what was presented, in the case of D-3, our choice is the mall plus the properties across the street (essentially between Ridge Road and the Ryan Estates, going several blocks in from the road), with a maximum collective potential of 262 new housing units. For D-1 or D-2, focusing only on their South Lincoln aspects, it’s the mall plus the properties across the street and the properties within the Lincoln Road/Codman Road/Lewis Street/railroad tracks rectangle, with a maximum collective potential of 383 new units. For Option C, it’s the mall plus the properties across the street, the properties within the aforementioned rectangle, and the properties further along Codman Road down to 117, with a maximum collective potential of 480 new units. The tale of the numbers: 480 vs. 383 vs. 262.

There are many factors that would drive whether and how much of these areas other than the mall (which has its own development trajectory) will actually be redeveloped for multi-family housing. Among these factors are assembling (buying) enough contiguous parcels, septic infrastructure, wetlands, and parking (which, in my mind, could realistically necessitate designing for one or possibly two cars per housing unit). As others have mentioned, all of these factors and their cost would be balanced by potential developers against the multiple other opportunities that are sure to arise in other communities as the impact of the HCA takes hold. In the meantime, in the absence of an effective crystal ball, all we have to go on are the maximum developable units articulated by Jennifer.

My personal opinion is that D-3 offers us a big chunk of what many want — redevelop the mall and open the door to nearby by-right multi-family housing (across the street) — and offers what some, like me, may want, which is a chance to see what happens if as many as 262 new housing units and the inevitable car-usage are added to that area, before we enable even more within the aforementioned rectangle and along Codman. Others may have a different risk tolerances and/or may anticipate that the amount of development enabled by Option C or one of the other Ds will be significantly less than the maximums.

Reasonable people can debate the merits of all options. But, again, we do have multiple options. My two cents, in hopes of stimulating rational dialogue.

“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.

Correction

In the November 22 article headlined “Panel adds fifth rezoning option after pressure from citizen group,” a quote was misattributed. It was David Cuetos, not Ben Shiller, who said, “We’re trying to avoid actively talking about the spirit of the law, because it has no real meaning when you think about it profoundly.” Cuetos then added, “Every one of us has a different interpretation of what the spirit of the law is.” The story has been updated.

My Turn: In support of Option C

By Ken Hurd

At one of the recent forums hosted by the HCAWG (Housing Choice Act Working Group), one particularly insightful resident posed a poignant question to the proponents of an alternative Option E. She asked, “What is it you stand for?”

Although there was no immediate response, we now know the answer, according to the mailing most residents recently received about a meeting planned by proponents of Option E. You can find it on the back of the flyer under the label “Our Guiding Principles,” and I would like to highlight what I see as some inconsistencies.

Create more affordable housing

Many proponents of an alternative Option E express concern that the HCA limits the percentage of affordable housing to 10%. Because Lincoln normally requires 15% affordable units in any multi-family development, the delta of their concern is 5%. In Lincoln’s case, the HCA requires zoning that will allow 635 units, and 5% of that would be 32 units. As a reminder, the HCAWG responded early on to the residents of the Ridge Court Condominium property, a.k.a. the “flying nun” apartments. Despite the fact that this property is one of the most logical to include in the rezoning, they asked to be excluded in order to preserve the 36 units of relatively affordable apartments that already exist. The HCAWG agreed, and the delta of this exclusion represents more than the 5% about which the alternative proponents are so concerned.

Protect commercial retail in our village center

To anyone who has paid any attention to the state of retail services in Lincoln Station over the last ten years, they might have noticed a decline or turnover in establishments and an increase in vacancies. This is occurring not just at the mall but in the entire Lincoln Station area. As noted in the 2010 Comprehensive Long Range Plan, “the town needs to be receptive to more housing near the train station,” and as was predicted in 2010, “small businesses currently operating around the train station may find it very difficult to survive in the future unless the area includes more housing and, ironically, more businesses.” Absent more housing, existing retail will most likely continue to wither away.

Safeguard Lincoln’s wetlands protection bylaw

As noted multiple times by the HCAWG, all underlying regulations required by the bylaws of Lincoln will continue in effect, and that includes all wetland protections currently in place.  

Focus on locations with existing infrastructure while minimizing the need for greenfield construction

If this means rezoning Battle Road Farm, it would appear that this is no more than a tactic to subvert the intent of the Housing Choice Act since condominium regulations make it nearly impossible to create new housing in that location.

Preserve historically significant properties

A worthy goal, but with the few significant properties that exist in the Lincoln Station area, this could most likely be accommodated by any of the options with a minor adjustment.

Honor the legacy of past generations’s work to create a variety of housing choices and multi-family housing

Most Lincolnites, particularly those who know the town’s history, will agree with this statement. Time and again, previous generations have stepped up to do more than Lincoln’s fair share in preserving open space while also increasing our housing stock to accommodate a variety of needs. In my opinion, it would be a slap in their ancestral faces to shirk our responsibility to the region by raising the drawbridge and rezoning for the least amount of new housing possible while claiming compliance.

Save our key in-town parcels from HCA’s 90% market-rate zoning mandate, allowing funds from Lincoln’s limited Affordable Housing Trust to be more wisely spent for much-needed low- and moderate-income housing units in Lincoln

To me, there is no correlation between saving in-town parcels and using AHT funds for needed housing. This “principle” advocates for nothing more than kicking the can down the road toward inaction. 

Finally, I think we can all agree that the Housing Choice Act is forcing our hand no less than in many of the surrounding communities. I hope that we can rise to meet this challenge as past Lincoln residents have done so many times before. There is no question in my mind that we can be as creative as our forbears and find solutions that will maintain the town’s character that we all cherish. I sincerely believe that this will be best achieved by voting for Option C.  

So please, join me in supporting Option C as the best way to revive the Lincoln Station area as well as to meet our responsibility to the region by creating more actual housing consistent with our town vision statement, namely:

“Fostering economic, racial, ethnic, and age diversity among its citizenry through its educational, housing and other public policy.”

“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.

My Turn: Reject Option E if you support fairness in Lincoln

By Jonathan Soo

All Lincoln residents should feel threatened by how Option E supporters changed the rules so that they could force a plan developed in secret by an unaccountable private group onto the December 2 Town Meeting ballot and making what should have been an unofficial survey into a binding vote* for the plan that will be presented at the March 2024 Town Meeting.

In 2022, after the MBTA Communities Act was signed into law, the town created a detailed plan describing how it would develop a zoning bylaw. The town committed to having a town working group create a new zoning bylaw, followed by public hearings leading up to the March 2024 Town Meeting.

The town’s Housing Choice Act Working Group (HCAWG) collectively spent hundreds of hours evaluating and developing a number of options, gathering feedback from affected residents in a series of information sessions, and carefully ensuring that the proposed options meet not only the state’s requirements but also federal Fair Housing Act requirements, Lincoln’s Comprehensive Long Range Plan, and other obligations. 

This fall, a small group of people opposed to additional housing in the town center decided that rather than making their case in March, they would hijack the process by developing their own plan using every loophole available to make sure no new housing could be built there. This plan was developed in secret by a small group of self-selected insiders, with no minutes or records of who participated or even when meetings were held.

On November 14, the Select Board voted to change the rules of the game. It asked HCAWG to rubber-stamp Option E so that it could be added to the ballot without review, and announced that the informal survey at the December 2 Town Meeting would be changed into a binding vote to select the option to be placed on the March ballot, effectively adding a primary vote to the process with two weeks’ notice — with one of those two weeks being the Thanksgiving holiday.

Even if Option E was developed in a legitimate way, changing the December 2 vote from a survey to a binding vote is an incredibly unfair change to the process. It is simply not possible for town residents to digest and evaluate all of the options in just a few days, especially since one of the options has only been publicly known for a single week. Too many residents will be entering the meeting with no real understanding of the implications of voting for each choice, to be swayed by a few minutes of rhetoric before the vote.

On top of this, many residents will be unable to rearrange their schedules at short notice to attend the meeting, assuming they hear about the changes at all. Most residents interested in the process still have a postcard on their refrigerators describing the December 2 meeting as “‘Sense of the Town’ from residents via an informal paper ballot on preferred option – C or D.”

Of course, Option E was not developed in a legitimate way — not in any way that should be acceptable for the town to place on a binding ballot. By placing it on the ballot and stating that it is a viable choice for the March 3 vote, the Selects are saying that the town stands behind it morally, ethically, and legally. No zoning law developed in secret should be allowed on any town ballot.

Every Lincoln resident, no matter which of the town’s options they support (C, D1, D2, or D3), should go to Town Meeting and vote against Option E as long as it has not been rejected. 

* Editor’s note: Although the vote is binding, changes may still be made to bring the measure into compliance with state law if necessary — see the HCAWG website (Q&A #4 under “2023 11 22 FAQs).”

“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.

How will you vote on Saturday? Take a Lincoln Squirrel poll

How do you plan to vote on the three issues at the Special Town Meeting on Saturday, Dec. 2? Or if you don’t plan to attend, how would you have voted? If you aren’t a Lincoln Squirrel subscriber, see the item between the red stripes near the top of the right-hand sidebar on this page. The polls will close at 8 p.m. on Wednesday, Nov. 29 and the results will be reported in a Squirrel post and on LincolnTalk shortly thereafter. There is also a link to the polls on the public right-hand sidebar of the Lincoln Squirrel website for those who aren’t Lincoln Squirrel subscribers — please do not take any of the polls twice. Thanks.

Community center poll

[yop_poll id=”2″]

 

HCA rezoning poll

[yop_poll id=”3″]

 

The Commons rezoning poll

[yop_poll id=”5″]

My Turn: In support of Option C and more housing at the mall

By Ruth Ann Hendrickson

I support new and more affordable housing in Lincoln, and I’d like to see most of it in the area of the train station and the Lincoln Mall. I will therefore be supporting option C at the Special Town Meeting on December 2.

1. Option C is the best hope for retaining the retail businesses at the mall. I remember when the roof caved in and Donelan’s was out of business for over a year. We missed them terribly. If we even needed a pint of cream, we had to go out of town.

Retail is struggling all over the country, but I notice that West Concord (population 7,003 per census data: ACS 2021), which developed a large apartment complex near the Nashoba Brook a few years ago, has managed to retain real retail, not just banks and restaurants. I am hoping that with enough new housing in the mall area, we also could have a thriving retail center.

2. History shows that adding new housing enriches the town. Yes, change is always worrisome. When Farrar Pond Village near where I live was proposed, the neighbors were violently against it because of traffic fears. The traffic has not materialized, and Farrar Pond Village has turned out to be a wonderful place for Lincoln people to retire. Recently, because of the cost of housing, it has also attracted families with children, to the extent that they have built a playground.

When the town developed Lincoln Woods, people were aghast — a much denser than Farrar Pond Village, and right there in the middle of town! And yet I know someone who works at Donelan’s who is able to live there, and a friend of mine who has MS is also able to live there to be near her mother. This complex has definitely given living options to Lincoln people who needed it. The proposed new housing would again add housing for our children and those who work here.

3. Our agricultural heritage is safe. Remember, 40% of the Lincoln is permanently in conservation. Forty percent! Those fields will continue to be farmed by local farmers. Codman Community Farms belong to the town and will also remain in perpetuity. The trails we love to walk will always be there. Adding some higher density housing near the train station will not affect that.

4. Do not be fooled by Option E. Some think that, if we chose Option E, we can slow down and develop housing at our own pace under the Town Meeting process. Most of the towns around us, however, will have designated large areas as multifamily by right. What developer in his right mind would risk thousands of dollars to take a proposal to Town Meeting only to see it voted down, when he could easily go to the next town and develop something by right?

The RLF will be unable to replenish their endowment and revitalize the mall in this new housing development environment. Please vote to allow the RLF to develop the mall/housing complex by right. The RLF is a nonprofit whose mission is to assist the town of Lincoln in shaping its land-use destiny. History has show that they can be trusted to work to the town’s benefit.

“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.

Correction

In the November 22 article headlined “Panel adds fifth rezoning option after pressure from citizen group,” the Housing Choice Act Working Group vote on whether to recommend that the Select Board add Option E to the December 2 ballot was reported incorrectly. HCAWG member Kathy Shepard changed her initial vote from “abstain” to “no.” In favor were Michelle Barnes, Jennifer Glass, Andrew Glass, Darin LaFalam, Tim Higgins, Geoff McGean, and Terry Perlmutter. Gary Taylor and Shepard voted no, while Rachel Drew, Steve Gladstone, and Paula Vaughn-MacKenzie abstained. The article has been updated.

My Turn: Option E and more new housing

By Lynne Smith

I support new and more affordable housing in Lincoln and I’d like to see some of it developed as the town has always done it, especially at the Lincoln Mall owned by the Rural Land Foundation. I would also like to see the preservation of our small retail area and a more vibrant commercial center.

At the Special Town Meeting on December 2, using ranked choice voting, Lincoln will select one option to be rezoned as required by the state’s Housing Choice Act (HCA). Lincoln’s HCA Working Group (HCAWG) will likely present five options, one of which was created by the recently formed Lincoln Residents for Housing Alternatives (LRHA) and is called Option E.

The Lincoln Process: ~ 800 multifamily units over 60 years

Over the last 60 years, Lincoln has added almost 800 multifamily homes — 40% of our total number of housing units.* During this time, the town process allowed us to hold on to the rural character of our town while welcoming new families to moderately priced homes, accommodating older people in age-restricted developments, and insuring that over 15% of homes were “affordable.”

The Housing Choice Act: 635+ new units allowed

The HCA requires that Lincoln rezone to allow a minimum of 635 units and gives developers “by right” zoning, which means they can bypass approvals by the Planning Board, Zoning Board, and Town Meeting (editor’s note: as long as they adhere to some preexisting requirements concerning height, wetlands, etc.). A maximum of just 10% may be zoned as affordable. At 635 units, Lincoln is the only MBTA community in the state asked to zone for an amount of units over 25% of its existing housing.  The reason is that the state model includes Hanscom housing in its calculation of Lincoln’s units although the town is not allowed to rezone any areas there.

My Conundrum

I have been struggling with this conundrum: I want new multifamily housing at market rate or below. I want to get credit for our many existing units. While I want some units developed soon, especially at the mall, I don’t want more than we can absorb and plan for all at once. Among many concerns, the following stand out for me.

  • Lincoln Mall: This precious part of town near Donelan’s and the MBTA commuter rail stop is the logical place for new housing. The Rural Land Foundation has asked to have it rezoned to allow for mixed-use residential and commercial buildings. Recently, the HCAWG and the Selects have proposed that a new warrant article in March could ensure that traffic studies, parking, affordability, retail spaces, and other considerations would follow the Lincoln approval process. Option E is the only option that excludes the mall from HCA rezoning and would allow the town to shape the outcome collaboratively with a developer.
  • Affordability: Lincoln is an expensive town, made more so by property taxes, which are not offset by commercial development, and by our wonderful conservation land, which increases land value. Because of today’s high construction costs, “luxury” condos and apartments are now the norm for developers who want to make a profit. HCA allows towns to require only 10% affordable units. If Lincoln wants more, this means the town must subsidize affordability as we did for Oriole Landing—or look for developers who have a good track record for building low-cost, high-quality, sustainable projects.The nonprofit Community Builders, current owners and operators of Lincoln Woods, are committed to that mission. Because Option E excludes the mall from HCA development, the town would be able to negotiate higher affordability while still actively allowing new housing and commercial spaces.
  • Compliance and existing multifamily areas: Lincoln should get recognition for its existing multifamily developments. Rezoning some of these areas is a reasonable way to gain compliance with HCA requirements, which would make Lincoln eligible for state funds for infrastructure improvements such as our badly needed replacement water mains. Option E includes Lincoln Woods, Battle Road Farm, and areas along Lincoln Road as part of HCA rezoning.
Informed decision on December 2

I believe we can find a way to comply with HCA rules and also develop new housing units, especially at the Lincoln Mall, without sacrificing our Lincoln process. Option E will help us do just that. It would divide redevelopment evenly between the village center (45.7%) and North Lincoln (54.3%), would fully comply with HCA requirements, would avoid allowing for a greater number of units than called for, and would exempt Lincoln Mall development from HCA requirements. I hope everyone will review Option E here and be prepared to make an informed decision at the Special Town Meeting on December 2.

*~800 multifamily housing units developed over the last 60 years:

  • 1966: 21 condos, Todd Pond
  • 1970: 125 apartments, Lincoln Woods
  • 1977: 80 condos, Farrar Pond
  • 1979: 58 condos, Lincoln Ridge
  • 1981: 25 condos, Green Ridge
  • 1990: 120 town homes, Battle Road Farm
  • 1991: 25 age-restricted condos, Ryan Estate
  • 2000: ~262 age-restricted condos, The Commons
  • 2006: 32 age-restricted condos, Minuteman Commons
  • 2022: 60 apartments, Oriole Landing

Source caveat: Various online sites for each of the areas named may not have the exact number of units and dates are approximate based on available information.

“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.

Panel adds fifth rezoning option after pressure from citizen group

A map of Lincoln showing the town’s commuter rail stop (purple) and two bus stops (yellow).

(Editor’s note: this article was updated on November 26 with the correct vote totals.)

Residents will have a fifth Housing Choice Act option to choose from in the vote at the Special Town Meeting on December 2 — an option that adds allowed-by-right multifamily housing in various parts of town but removes them from the mall.

On November 14, the Select Board (on the recommendation of the Housing Choice Working Group) voted to allow residents to submit proposals in addition to the four they already agreed on (Options C, D1, D2, and D3). if they did so by noon on November 20. Lincoln Residents for Housing Alternatives (LRHA) submitted Option E, which town officials have sent to consultant Utile to review. The plan calls for adding allowed units around the Ryan Estate, Lincoln Woods, and Battle Road Farm. It also excludes the Doherty’s parcel and the north side of Lewis Street, which has some structures that are historically significant although they are not in an official historic district.

They argue that the mall’s commercial and housing redevelopment should not be included in the HCA planning because it would surrender residents’ ability to vote yes or no on a developer’s proposal at Town Meeting. Mall rezoning should be drawn up and voted on separately at Town Meeting in March, they say.

“This optimizes the town of Lincoln’s control of how we meet the HCA requirements — it meets the spirit and the letter,” Frank Clark of LHRA said at the HCAWG’s November 21 morning meeting. “Our option absolutely preserves the best flavor of Lincoln… this is probably the simplest and most low-impact method of meeting the requirements.”

“To me, the spirit of the law means a chance for more housing,” Select Board member Jennifer Glass said, noting that even if were to be technically allowed, more multifamily housing is very unlikely to be built around the Ryan Estate, Lincoln Woods, and Battle Road Farm. Option E triples the allowed density of housing at Battle Road Farm, but it’s a condo community in which every single condo owner would have to agree to a proposal by a developer.

“We’re trying to avoid actively talking about the spirit of law because it has no real meaning when you think about it profoundly,” responded LRHA member David Cuetos, who added, “Every one of us has a different interpretation of what the spirit of the law is.”

The goal of the HCA was “to create a likelihood of meaningful housing near MBTA stations,” committee member John MacLachlan said. “To ask us to vote for [Option] E is demeaning and belittling what we have done for a year…. Option E is essentially a vote to say no to the HCA.”

The future of the mall

“From a planning perspective, it seems to make sense to think about [rezoning] holistically, as the [HCAWG] has tried to do,” said Michelle Barnes, chair of the RLF Board of Trustees, which owns the mall. There has been speculation that the RLF intends to reduce the amount of commercial square footage (presumably because a greater concentration of housing would be more profitable for developers).

“It’s definitely not our intention to reduce any commercial footprint at the mall,” she said. 

In a November 20 email to the Lincoln Squirrel, Barnes elaborated: “All of our plans to date are conceptual so we do not yet know how much commercial space will be provided. Some of our current tenants may want less space, some may want more space and some may not want to continue operating at the Mall at Lincoln Station. We also would anticipate that any redevelopment may involve new tenants locating to the mall. As part of any redevelopment scenario, RLF’s goal will be to work with all of our existing tenants to accommodate their needs consistent with the economic viability of the mall. We are hoping to achieve more flexibility than we currently have to respond to tenants’ needs and market forces, while still maintaining a significant and meaningful footprint of retail and commercial space at the mall.”

Barnes also responded in her email to fears that Donelan’s was at risk of leaving the mall. “RLF feels it is critical for both the social and financial fabric of the Mall to have a well-appointed grocery store. As demonstrated when the roof collapsed in 2011 and Donelan’s was at serious risk of leaving, RLF is fully committed to trying to maintain a grocery option at Lincoln Station,” she wrote.

No other supermarket chain has expressed interest in the space, she added. “We are hopeful that increased density around the mall, along with the changing risk-return profile from new mixed-use development at the mall, would provide support to Donelan’s and other retail businesses. Ultimately, Lincoln residents control the future of a grocery store and other retailers at the mall by either shopping there in sufficient numbers or not.”

Barnes has said in the past that the RLF hopes to work with Civico (which built Oriole Landing) to design a mutually acceptable mall project, with the possibility of Civico eventually buying the property from the RLF. At the Wednesday meeting, she said “a sale is one of the potential results… but the person who purchases it isn’t necessarily the partner we’ve had this historical relationship with.” However, “we are predicating” any future sales agreement on inclusion of deed restrictions that would mandating a certain proportion of commercial use in perpetuity.

If rezoning the mall to allow some housing were brought to a Town Meeting as a separate issue, “you’d be asking the town to approve a number of units above and beyond what the HCA requires” in addition to Option E, said HCAWG member Rachel Drew. “Including the mall in the HCA is efficient because it tries to accommodate both of these objectives at the same time.”

Split vote by working group

The working group subsequently voted to recommend that the Select Board add Option E to the December 2 ballot when that board meets on November 21. Seven voted in favor: Barnes, Jennifer Glass, Andrew Glass, Darin LaFalam, Tim Higgins, Geoff McGean, and Terry Perlmutter. Gary Taylor and Kathy Shepard voted no, while the others at the meeting (Rachel Drew, Steve Gladstone, and Paula Vaughn-MacKenzie) abstained.

Glass also shot down previous requests that “none of the above” should be a choice on December 2. “The time to say ‘none of the above’ is in March when it’s an up-and-down vote,” she said.