How would Leadership specifically address or correct the issue should there be one?
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 8:06 AM Garrick Niemiec <[email protected]> wrote: > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Garrick Niemiec <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, May 26, 2025, 8:43 PM > Subject: Fwd: [LincolnTalk] June 25 Special Town Meeting - Missing Info - > Nature Link, Conservation & Development > To: Jim Hutchinson <[email protected]>, Bodnar, Kim < > [email protected]>, Jennifer Glass <[email protected]> > > > This is what happens when leadership fails transparency > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Rosa Elena <[email protected]> > Date: Mon, May 26, 2025, 4:14 PM > Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] June 25 Special Town Meeting - Missing Info - > Nature Link, Conservation & Development > To: Lincoln Talk <[email protected]> > > > “My family has a right to do what they want to do and need to do in order > survive.” > > That’s correct. BUT - in this case, the Panetta land is part of a deal > where the town of Lincoln is being asked to chip in $1M of tax payer funds > and vote to change zoning laws permanently. A special town meeting was > called without requiring 200 signatures. Therefore, citizens are > justified (and dare I say obligated) to weigh in as we vote on this > matter, since this deal will affect us all. > > No need to name call and insult folks for expressing their opinion. > > Thank you, > Rosa > > > On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 11:50 AM Krista Panetta <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Dear Klaus, >> Quite honestly you have been a nuisance >> to my family since you moved in. My father has done nothing but help you >> out from the day you moved next door, the fact you are posting this is >> actually really disturbing. My family has a right to do what they want to >> do and need to do in order survive. >> >> You have been very disrespectful and I find this post extremely insulting >> and offensive. If you have something to say make your way over to my house >> and say it rather than hiding behind an email. >> >> That’s all. >> >> >> >> Please excuse typos sent from iPhone >> >> On May 25, 2025, at 10:50 PM, Klaus Dobler <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Dear *Neighbors*, >> >> A *Special Town Meeting *will be held on *June 25*, where voters will >> decide whether to rezone privately owned land into the *North Lincoln >> Overlay District*—a move that would allow the *Nature Link Project* to >> bypass Lincoln’s long standing zoning laws and build *20 homes on just 6 >> acres*, with significant impact to our conservation land and our >> neighbors. >> >> We believe every Lincoln resident deserves the full picture before >> casting a vote. >> >> Here's what you need to know: >> >> 1. *No Public Input in Calling the Meeting* >> >> Normally, calling a Special Town Meeting requires* 200 resident >> signatures*. While the Select Board has discretion to also call a town >> meeting, in this case, they decided to call a meeting on behalf of a >> private organization, the RLF, *without notifying a single abutter or >> resident in the area*. After the meeting was already scheduled, >> communication to the neighborhood has been minimal and misleading: >> >> ● Only *some* Page Road residents received a vague flyer. >> ● That flyer promoted a “neighborhood meeting” but *did not disclose the >> project’s full scope*. >> ● Many residents only learned about the 20-house development at the April >> 30 meeting—more than two weeks after it was approved by the Selects and *less >> than two months before the vote*. >> >> If the project is truly good for Lincoln, *why secrecy*? >> >> 2. *The Developer: Civico and the Profits at Stake* >> >> This meeting mainly exists to *enable Civico Development* to bypass >> zoning laws. They plan to: >> >> ● Build *17 new homes* and rebuild *3 existing homes*—20 in total—on a >> site that under current zoning would allow* only 3. * >> ● Avoid Lincoln’s zonings rule and increase density drastically. >> >> *Estimated revenue* (based on comparable sales in nearby towns): >> >> ● 14 homes x ~$1.2M = $16.8M ● 3 affordable homes x $0.4=$1.2M >> ● 3 larger homes (4,000–4,500 sqft) x ~$2.6M = $7.8M >> ●* Total: ~$25.8M * >> >> *Land cost to Civico? Just $3.3M*—roughly 13% of project value, far >> below the 20–33% range typical in suburban development. >> >> Normally, developers must dedicate part of their purchased land for >> septic systems, reducing the number of houses they can build. With this >> deal, Civico avoids this entirely by using Farrington’s land for the septic >> system, letting them maximize housing density (and profits) without >> sacrificing a single square foot. >> >> *Why should Lincoln enable this private windfall? * >> >> *3. No-Bid Development: Why Civico Again? * >> >> This isn’t the first time Civico has been granted a no-bid, >> developer-friendly deal in Lincoln: >> ● *Oriole Landing,* the *Mall redevelopment*, and now *Nature Link* have >> all followed this pattern. >> ● *No competitive process was offered, despite millions in potential >> profits. * >> >> Civico receives: >> >> *● Zoning exceptions● Public access to land for septic infrastructure * >> ● *Publicly funded trails* which increase housing value >> ● Below-market land prices >> >> In return, *Civico contributes very little*. If this project benefits >> the town, *why not open it to other developers*? >> >> *4. Conservation Deal Tied to Development—Why? * >> >> The Nature Link project is being tied to a conservation agreement with >> the *Farrington property*. But the funding for conservation already >> exists—from: >> ● The Town of Cambridge ● Private fundraising >> ● The Town of Lincoln >> >> *So why bind it to housing? *Because: >> >> ● Civico can then *use land paid for by the town for septic systems* and >> access roads, saving the developer money and increasing housing density. >> ● This means *public conservation land is subsidizing private >> development*, at no cost to Civico. >> >> Farrington’s land was meant for *preservation*, not as infrastructure >> for a private developer. *This sets a troubling precedent.* >> >> 5. *The “$3M Gap” Myth * >> RLF argues that if Civico doesn’t build these homes, the *$3M from the >> Panetta land deal won’t materialize*, and the conservation effort will >> collapse. But here’s the truth: >> ● The “gap” exists *only because RLF linked two unrelated land >> transactions*. >> ● Panetta land, 6 upland acres with 3 homes, is worth *$3M+ on the open >> market.* >> ● Even without Civico, *other buyers or developers could step in*, >> without needing zoning changes. >> >> RLF also claims Farrington needs a new access road via Panetta’s land, >> but improving the existing Route 2 access would cost only* $250K* (based >> on Farrington’s own prior estimates, adjusted for inflation). >> >> * A Flawed Deal—And a Better Path Forward * >> >> The proposed Farrington agreement represents a flawed compromise that >> depends on the construction of *20 single-family homes.* >> >> To enable this development, the plan would: >> ● *Clear-cut a forested section* of Farrington’s land, and >> ● *Install a large-scale septic system*—serving all 20 homes—at the >> property’s highest elevation. >> >> This elevated leach field would pose a *serious, long-term threat* to >> the protected wetlands below, which form a tributary of the* Cambridge >> watershed,* an ecologically sensitive and critical area. >> >> *A More Sustainable Alternative * >> The good news: *these 20 homes do not need to be built*. Existing >> funding is already sufficient to compensate Farrington for placing a >> conservation restriction on their land. The sole justification for moving >> forward with the Panetta purchase and related development is to provide >> Farrington with improved access to Route 2. >> >> But there is a smarter, lower-impact alternative. >> >> According to a study commissioned by Farrington—and adjusted for >> construction cost inflation—upgrading Farrington’s existing access point to >> Route 2 would cost approximately $250,000. This would provide significantly >> better access than Page Road and eliminate the need for environmentally >> damaging housing construction. If *Cambridge and Lincoln each >> contributed $1 million*—a modest increase over current commitments—they >> would more than cover this access improvement and secure the conservation >> deal *without new development.* >> >> *The Right Path Is Clear * >> >> This is a rare opportunity to do what’s right: >> >> *● Conserve valuable open space * >> *● Protect the watershed * >> *● Avoid irreversible ecological damage * >> >> And yet, the Rural Land Foundation (RLF) has returned to its familiar >> playbook: *fear-based messaging*. “If we don’t act now,” they warn, >> “Farrington will be clear-cut.” But these alarmist tactics have grown stale. >> >> Just last year, in the lead-up to the Housing Choice Act vote, the RLF >> publicly stated that *Civico would never return to Town Meeting* seeking >> project approval. Yet here we are, only a year later, facing that very >> scenario. >> >> They also claimed that *unit density at the Mall project couldn’t be >> reduced*—until they themselves introduced a late amendment at Town >> Meeting, *before any resident had a chance to speak. * >> >> *It’s Time for Accountability * >> >> We can—and must—pursue a conservation strategy that *respects both the >> environment and the community’s values.* The current proposal fails on >> both counts. We urge residents to demand transparency, challenge false >> choices, and support a solution that protects Lincoln’s future—without >> sacrificing its integrity. >> >> *Why This Matters to Everyone in Lincoln * >> Even if you’re not an abutter, *this precedent affects your neighborhood >> too.* >> >> If zoning laws can be bypassed quietly once, *what’s to stop it from >> happening again?* >> >> *Your Voice Matters.* >> Attend the Special Town Meeting on June 25. >> >> Demand *transparency, fairness*, and *accountability* from our town >> leaders. >> >> *Ask questions. Spread the word. Vote informed.* >> >> *Klaus and Iwona Dobler* >> *John and Cindy Li* >> *Dr. Jeff Sutherland and the Reverend Arline Sutherland* >> -- >> The LincolnTalk mailing list. >> To post, send mail to [email protected]. >> 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 [email protected]. >> 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 [email protected]. > 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 [email protected]. > Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/ > . > Change your subscription settings at > https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln. > > -- Rick
-- The LincolnTalk mailing list. To post, send mail to [email protected]. Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/. Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
