Quick update after a conversation I had this morning with Michele Grzenda,
Lincoln's Conservation Director. As always, I've updated the Q&A document (
https://docsend.com/view/h33hxc7zvdstqa2d ) with this information if you're
looking for a comprehensive read.
*Summary:*
Lincoln’s Conservation Director, Michele Grzenda, conducted a site visit of the
Farrington property this past Monday and, in her professional opinion,
approximately *13% of the proposed Conservation Restriction (CR) area qualifies
as wetland (in-line with the 2005 At Risk Properties report).* This means *the
majority of the 65-acre CR is currently developable* - and therefore, highly
valuable to protect.
*Why This Matters:*
One of the more persistent questions in this process has been: Are we just
putting a conservation restriction on land that can’t be developed anyway? It’s
a fair question (though wetland boundaries do shift, bylaws change, etc - so
CRs are more effective/permanent than wetland designation). If the land is
already difficult to build on, then is it worth $950K to protect it?
The answer, based on this latest site assessment, is now clearer: *the land
being protected is buildable*. And that makes the CR both strategic and
permanent.
*What We Now Know:
* Michele Grzenda is not only Lincoln’s Conservation Director - she’s an
experienced wetlands expert with a degree in environmental science, prior work
as a Wetlands Scientist, and 22 years leading conservation departments (first
in Framingham, then Weston, now in Lincoln). On Monday , she walked the
Farrington land and performed a preliminary field assessment using two of the
three official criteria outlined by the Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection (MassDEP) for wetland delineation:
* *Hydrophytic Vegetation* (identify plants that grow in saturated soil)
* *Wetland Hydrology* (observe presence of water)
* *Hydric Soils* (observe soil with anaerobic conditions from standing water) -
not performed
Her conclusion: *Only 8.42 of the 65 acres qualify as wetlands - just 13%.* The
other 87% is not wetland under current regulatory standards. Even if you
account for wetland buffers (50-100 feet), *32–48 acres likely remain
buildable*.
*Why CR Still Matters - Even on Wetlands:*
Wetlands protections can shift. Boundaries move. Bylaws change. Regulatory
standards evolve. A CR is permanent. It removes land from the development
pipeline, regardless of what happens with zoning, wetlands policy, or ownership
in the future. That permanence is what we’re investing in.
*The Bottom Line:*
This is not an investment in swamps. *It’s a strategic, permanent lockup of
developable land* - much of it contiguous forest and habitat that we have
marked as land worth protecting on our 2017 Open Space and Recreation Plan and
land susceptible to development on our 2005 At Risk Properties report. It helps
avoid unwanted development. It strengthens conservation. It aligns with the
town’s long-term goals.
If you’re still working through your vote, I hope this helps. You can always
read the full Supporting Statement & Q&A here (
https://docsend.com/view/h33hxc7zvdstqa2d ).
Joey
Joseph Kolchinsky
--
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.
