This is important information. The remaining question, for me, is how much of the Farrington land, are actual buildable lots? Is there any Farrington land, outside the CR that is buildable and could be more densely developed in the future? Or, are there any restrictions on the Farrington land outside of the CR? The access road off Page Rd. Makes all that land much more valuable, I would guess.
We know what CIVICO will pay for Panetta land….approx $1 million per existing lot, no? (For a point of reference, a property on Conant Rd.-7+ acres of farm land with 4 buildable lots-high on a hill, overlooking Valley Pond, deeded share to VP, abutting conservation land and meadows and Brown’s Wood-sold for $3.2 million…less than a million/lot on highly desirable land, in a quiet neighborhood ) We know that Farrington is giving CIVICO a certain amount of acreage for a septic system. How many acres and how otherwise buildable/valuable is that land? How much of that land is currently undisturbed/tree cover? With the information from Michelle, we are getting some critical information. Now, we have a few more pieces to give us a more complete picture. Who stands to gain comes into sharper focus. > On Jun 5, 2025, at 7:43 PM, Joseph Kolchinsky <[email protected]> > wrote: > > 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. >
-- 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.
