Got it-thanks.

> On Jun 5, 2025, at 8:38 PM, Scott Clary <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> While this is encouraging it doesn't justify this option  over other better 
> options for the town, Fairington and the environment. This is not comparing 
> Apples to Apples referencing the Conant Road 7 acre property. Those will be 
> conforming two acre lots. The Farrington Panetta deal involves hi density 
> cluster rezoning. Much more value there per unit.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> 
> Scott Clary
> 617-968-5769
> 
> Sent from a mobile device - please excuse typos and errors   
> 
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2025, 8:05 PM Sara Mattes <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 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] 
>>> <mailto:[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] 
>>> <mailto:[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] 
>> <mailto:[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.

Reply via email to