Yes, discussions have happened, meetings have taken place, but plans are **not** final. How many times does this need to be repeated?
Listen to some Jethro Tull. Vote C. Good night. John On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 9:32 PM Karla Gravis <karlagra...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is absolutely **not** true. > > The HCAWG site says the following: "RLF has been working with CIVICO to > develop a vision for the Mall." ( > https://www.lincolntown.org/1327/Housing-Choice-Act-Working-Group) > > Ms. Olson confirmed in writing: "The RLF has met with the town to explain > what they would like to see in the mall zoning. They brought along > Civico." > > The SOTT presentation says: "The RLF is pursuing a redevelopment project > for the benefit of the Town and the Lincoln Station area as we feel it is > our best chance at improving the sustainability of commercial space at the > Mall." (page 33 from this presentation: > https://www.lincolntown.org/DocumentCenter/View/85116/2023-SOTT-HCA-Slide-Deck-wtih-Notes?bidId= > ) > > Ms. Barnes said in the November 8th forums that "current plans would bring > a reduction in commercial space at the mall". > > To say that the "there is no redevelopment plan for the mall right now" is > incredibly misleading, given all of the above and multiple public meetings. > > Respectfully, > Karla Gravis > Weston Rd > A resident not affiliated with any board in town, but very happy to see > board and town employees disclosing their affiliation > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 9:06 PM Sara Lupkas <sara.lup...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> There are no basic site plans for the mall because there is no >> redevelopment plan for the mall right now. The HCA options that we will be >> voting on tomorrow are to decide where to put the multi-family zoning >> districts, that's it. There is no development plan for the mall at this >> time, and no developer bidding on any project. Putting forward any site >> plans under these conditions would be extremely premature. >> >> Sara Lupkas >> Staff member of the Lincoln Land Conservation Trust, but these are my >> personal views and not an official statement >> Sandy Pond Rd >> >> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 8:03 PM Robert Ahlert <robahl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I can imagine a person that votes for C now in December, but then feels >>> hoodwinked because he or she later learns about other details in the >>> bylaws, that he or she which switch their vote to No in March. >>> >>> It would’ve been much cleaner if the planning board had published their >>> draft bylaws by now. It would also be much cleaner if we had some basic >>> site plans for the Mall. It would also have been much cleaner if we had a >>> better traffic study which included 5 corners. Etc. >>> >>> Let’s take another year to figure this out with some fresh sets of eyes. >>> >>> Sorry, I’m on repeat now. >>> >>> Rob >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 7:31 PM Karla Gravis <karlagra...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> With the approach taken, the PB will decide the ONE set of bylaws that >>>> will be up for vote in March. >>>> >>>> Let's see if an example helps. Height restrictions are an important >>>> part of the bylaws. Right now, the PB is considering allowing up to 48' (4 >>>> stories) in the Village Center. >>>> >>>> In March, the only two options might be: 1) Vote for the bylaws that >>>> include 48' heights or 2) do not comply with HCA. For many, either of those >>>> will be pretty bad options, and people will be forced to pick between the >>>> lesser of two evils. >>>> >>>> Another example, the PB is considering including a clause that says the >>>> PB can override any of the restrictions by special permit. Again, the vote >>>> in March might be 1) give the PB decision rights to override any >>>> restrictions or 2) do not comply with the HCA. What if most people don't >>>> agree with either? We are forcing residents into false choices. >>>> >>>> Tomorrow, we are voting on options but have no idea about any of these >>>> considerations. We could (should) have been presented with the option to >>>> choose 36' or 48' height restrictions, for example. Instead, we are letting >>>> the PB decide what to bring to the March town meeting. >>>> >>>> This is very much internally consistent. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 19:19 DJCP <djcp0...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> What you're saying isn't even internally consistent. How does the >>>>>> Planning board keep decisions to itself AND put things up to vote at town >>>>>> meeting? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 6:03 PM Karla Gravis <karlagra...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I am confused with this answer. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No one is denying zoning bylaws require a town meeting vote. In >>>>>>> March, the options will be 1) a certain, specific set of bylaws >>>>>>> (currently >>>>>>> undetermined) or 2) nothing (aka: non-compliance). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tomorrow, on the other hand, we could have given residents the >>>>>>> option to choose among different sets of complete bylaws. At the very >>>>>>> least, there should be 100% clarity on issues like height, number of >>>>>>> stories, ability to pay fees in lieu of affordable units, commercial >>>>>>> space >>>>>>> requirements and whether the planning board can provide variances on >>>>>>> those >>>>>>> or not. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I posit that the reason we are not being presented with all that >>>>>>> information is because some members of the planning board would prefer >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> make those decisions themselves rather than letting residents vote on >>>>>>> those >>>>>>> critical variables. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We understand that residents can try to influence what is presented >>>>>>> in March, but the PB will decide the final set of bylaws. In March, >>>>>>> residents will only be allowed to decide between that specific set or >>>>>>> non-compliance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 5:48 PM Margaret Olson <s...@margaretolson.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Once again, zoning changes require a vote at town meeting. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The planning board drafts the zoning and holds public hearings as >>>>>>>> required by law. The town then votes at town meeting. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Once again zoning changes require a vote of town meeting. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:53 PM ٍSarah Postlethwait < >>>>>>>> sa...@bayhas.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The HCA is NOT a set of guidelines. The guidelines were created by >>>>>>>>> the EOHLC. According to Ms Olson, "compliance with the HCA is "exactly >>>>>>>>> zoning by laws". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is why knowing the bylaws for the proposed subdistricts is >>>>>>>>> incredibly important. Why even vote on density and height restrictions >>>>>>>>> tomorrow, as all of these options have specified, if the planning >>>>>>>>> board can >>>>>>>>> just override everything and make it whatever height and density that >>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>> (or the developer) feels like adding. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Furthermore, Option E has been modified to fix the minor issue >>>>>>>>> that Utile thought may need addressed before submitting it to the >>>>>>>>> state. It >>>>>>>>> meets all the guidelines set forth by the EOHLC. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Option C was submitted to the state, however it was never deemed >>>>>>>>> compliant. Nor were options D1, D2 or D3. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Furthermore, option C was significantly changed on Wednesday and >>>>>>>>> will need resubmitted to the state to account for these changes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It’s unfortunate that you think we are trying to be disruptive, >>>>>>>>> considering the state actually modified the HCA model used to >>>>>>>>> calculate modeled units this week, due to the LRHA’s work >>>>>>>>> highlighting the >>>>>>>>> significant flaw that results in an overzoning of units. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This change removed over 400 additional units from option C that >>>>>>>>> could have been built, by right, on top of the 800 actual units that >>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>> allowed in the current option C being voted on tomorrow. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> While we are grateful that Utile finally listened to our concerns >>>>>>>>> and consulted with the state to address the issue with the model, It’s >>>>>>>>> unfortunate that the HCAWG members refused to sit down with us weeks >>>>>>>>> ago >>>>>>>>> when the issue was detected. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So if you call that disruptive, so be it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sarah Postlethwait >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Lewis Street >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Anyone interested in learning more about Option E and the >>>>>>>>> significant changes made to options C, D1, D2 and D3 this week can >>>>>>>>> learn >>>>>>>>> more here: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://sites.google.com/view/lincoln-hca-info/compare-the-options >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 4:10 PM John Mendelson < >>>>>>>>> johntmendel...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We are NOT being asked to vote on bylaws. The HCA is a set of >>>>>>>>>> guidelines and we are being asked to vote for one of 5 zoning >>>>>>>>>> options that >>>>>>>>>> conform (or perhaps don't confirm in one case) to said guidelines. >>>>>>>>>> We've >>>>>>>>>> been told repeatedly that bylaws are to follow and we will vote for >>>>>>>>>> one >>>>>>>>>> fully developed plan (or not) in March >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I find this continued obfuscation and distraction really >>>>>>>>>> frustrating and hard to hear as anything but an attempt to disrupt >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> process. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> John >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023, 4:02 PM Karla Gravis <karlagra...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am not suggesting that we bring multiple by-laws for approval >>>>>>>>>>> at the March town meeting. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Tomorrow we are asking residents to express a preference for a >>>>>>>>>>> set of bylaws through ranked choice voting, The preferred option >>>>>>>>>>> would then >>>>>>>>>>> be presented for approval in March. Options C and D as being voted >>>>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>>> tomorrow are incomplete because we do not have answers to these >>>>>>>>>>> questions: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> - Building heights/stories >>>>>>>>>>> - PB having override prower through special permits >>>>>>>>>>> - Commercial space requirements >>>>>>>>>>> - Allowance of fees in lieu of affordable units >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If HCA zoning is "exactly zoning by laws" why are we voting >>>>>>>>>>> under incomplete assumptions? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 3:42 PM Margaret Olson < >>>>>>>>>>> marga...@margaretolson.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Town Counsel has advised us that we should not bring multiple >>>>>>>>>>>> potential zoning by-laws to town meeting. The state regulates how >>>>>>>>>>>> zoning >>>>>>>>>>>> changes are handled. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> A zoning article at town meeting is a straight yes/no vote on a >>>>>>>>>>>> very specific set of changes. We can not have any sort of multiple >>>>>>>>>>>> choice >>>>>>>>>>>> vote as we can for a "sense of the town" vote. So if we were to >>>>>>>>>>>> bring the >>>>>>>>>>>> zoning by-law changes for all five options to town meeting we >>>>>>>>>>>> would have >>>>>>>>>>>> five warrant articles. In what order should they appear? If the >>>>>>>>>>>> first one >>>>>>>>>>>> passes do we go on and vote on the others? As a voter who supports >>>>>>>>>>>> the HCA >>>>>>>>>>>> but doesn't like the variant that comes first in the warrant what >>>>>>>>>>>> should >>>>>>>>>>>> you do? Vote no, holding out for your preferred option, or do you >>>>>>>>>>>> vote yes >>>>>>>>>>>> to ensure we do comply? If all five are on the warrant what happens >>>>>>>>>>>> if multiple options pass? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Margaret >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:59 PM Karla Gravis < >>>>>>>>>>>> karlagra...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Given that, according the Chair of the Planning Board: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. "*Compliance with the HCA is "exactly zoning by laws*" >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. "Z*oning by-laws are the implementation of HCA >>>>>>>>>>>>> compliance*" >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. These by-laws are not ready >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Then, why are we voting tomorrow? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> To emphasize how rushed this process has been, significant >>>>>>>>>>>>> changes to the densities across options C and Ds were >>>>>>>>>>>>> communicated on >>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday evening (without any public meetings). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The areas where the Planning Board hasn't agreed on the bylaws >>>>>>>>>>>>> are: building heights/stories, giving the PB special permit >>>>>>>>>>>>> powers to >>>>>>>>>>>>> change densities and heights/stories, parking and allowing fees >>>>>>>>>>>>> in lieu of >>>>>>>>>>>>> affordable units. These are all critical questions as we evaluate >>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>> different options. How are we expected to discuss the merits of >>>>>>>>>>>>> these >>>>>>>>>>>>> options without a full understanding of those issues? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> LRHA has a stance on these open questions. Option E has a set >>>>>>>>>>>>> of setbacks, height/story limits and floor area ratios for every >>>>>>>>>>>>> district. >>>>>>>>>>>>> We are distinctly opposed to providing variances to all of those >>>>>>>>>>>>> items, as >>>>>>>>>>>>> well as units per acre, through a Planning Board special permit. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 2:38 PM Margaret Olson < >>>>>>>>>>>>> marga...@margaretolson.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Compliance with the HCA is *exactly* zoning by laws. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>> zoning by-laws are the implementation of HCA compliance. There >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is no way to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> comply with the HCA without voting to amend the zoning by-laws. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the town votes down the proposed zoning by-laws in March, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the sense of the town is that we want to comply but the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> planning board >>>>>>>>>>>>>> presented an unacceptable set of regulations, then the planning >>>>>>>>>>>>>> board will >>>>>>>>>>>>>> go back to work and try again at a special town meeting at a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> later date. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>>>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>>>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>>>> Browse the archives at >>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>>> Browse the archives at >>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>>> Change your subscription settings at >>>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>>> >>>> -- >>> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >>> To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. >>> Browse the archives at >>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. >>> Change your subscription settings at >>> https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. >>> >>> >> >> -- >> *Sara Lupkas* >> >> -- > The LincolnTalk mailing list. > To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. > Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/ > . > Change your subscription settings at > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. > >
-- The LincolnTalk mailing list. To post, send mail to Lincoln@lincolntalk.org. Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
