To the editor:
I was heartened to read the story (“Residents wary of planned study on relocation of DPW,” August 14, 2017) about the July 31 Board of Selectmen meeting where several Lincoln residents voiced strong objections to the proposal within the South Lincoln Planning and Implementation Committee (SLPIC) to relocate the DPW facility to the undeveloped 37-acre parcel on Mill Street that houses the transfer station.
I spoke in opposition to the proposal, noting that the 37-acre Mill Street parcel is an environmentally sensitive site. Although some have referred to the parcel as the “transfer station site,” the transfer station actually takes up a very small portion of the parcel. The vast majority of the 37 acres are in a natural state and could easily be mistaken for Lincoln conservation land. The area is residential. Moreover, the Mill Street parcel sits well within the Cambridge Reservoir watershed.
Almost all of the many residents living near the Mill Street parcel are on well water. The activities of the DPW facility, fueling and maintenance of heavy equipment and storage of hazardous waste, would impose a risk to the water sources of homeowners in the vicinity of the parcel if the DPW were to be relocated there. In addition, the DPW activities would impose a risk of contamination to an important source of Cambridge’s water.
As a town, we owe a duty to our own residents to avoid subjecting any group of them to a substantial risk of harm through the actions of our elected officials. In addition, we owe a duty to the people of Cambridge to protect their water sources from contamination by pollutants.
Although I spoke of the Mill Street area at the meeting, the point I urged on the Board of Selectmen applies with equal force to every community in the town. The DPW facility has proven itself to be environmentally harmful. I asked the selectmen to adopt a resolution either prohibiting or strongly discouraging the relocation of the DPW to any area within the town that is substantially more environmentally sensitive than its current location. I happen to be aware of the sensitivity of the Mill Street parcel, but there may be other areas under consideration by SLPIC that are also sensitive (e.g., because of similar well water dependency). So far, SLPIC has not revealed any other alternative sites under consideration.
There are many other issues noted by North Lincoln residents who attended the Board of Selectmen meeting (a video recording can be found here).
One such issue is the enormous price tag of the proposal. Weston recently constructed a new DPW facility at a cost of $15 million. The remediation costs (at the current site) alone would run into the millions, and cannot be estimated precisely until the current facility is destroyed and remediation requirements fully evaluated. The overall expense would contribute to an inordinate tax burden and could crowd out other projects such as the new school building or the community center.
The enormous relocation costs (to any area) might be acceptable if all town residents would benefit greatly from adopting the proposal. However, the goal of the relocation proposal is inconsistent with the town’s history of development—as a zero-sum scheme, it would disadvantage one part of town to offer a phantom benefit to another part. In addition, the proposal would result in the taxpayer subsidization of a private commercial developer. Why should Lincoln residents incur a burden of tens of millions of dollars to subsidize a private developer?
I hope town residents will urge SLPIC to present a careful and thorough examination of the costs and benefits of the relocation proposal before asking the town to give $9,800 to a consulting firm to study the feasibility of relocation. The current request for funds from SLPIC—a vague, one-page letter that appears to assume that the selectmen are all on board—is completely silent on the potential taxpayer costs of the proposal, the potential for environmental harm, and even a justification for the ultimate goal. Why spend scarce public resources studying the feasibility of a proposal that has not been adequately justified and most likely would be harmful to the town if implemented?
Sincerely,
Keith Hylton
5 Oakdale Lane
Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Letters will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.
