At this point in the conversation, I believe we’ve done something meaningful -
*we’ve surfaced nearly every angle of this project and created space for
residents to get informed, ask tough questions, and form their own opinion.* We
still have a few weeks to go, and there are more opportunities to learn (see
here (
https://www.lincolntown.org/DocumentCenter/View/98415/Nature-Link-Timeline-4-30-2025?bidId=
) ).
I’ve asked my share of questions - both publicly and privately - and I’ve done
my best to distill what I’ve learned into this Letter of Support + Q&A (
https://docsend.com/view/h33hxc7zvdstqa2d ). Whether you agree or disagree, I
hope it helps clarify some of the complexity.
That said, one open question still feels unresolved - and I want to flag it not
just because I think it will influence how one might vote, but because *it
highlights why some debates may be missing the forest for the trees.*
The question: *How much of the Farrington land is actually buildable?*
This has come up a lot in arguments against the Conservation Restrictions
(CRs). Some claim the land is mostly wetlands already - so a CR doesn’t “save”
much because the land would go undeveloped anyway.
Here’s the issue: *whether the wetlands have shifted or not, the outcome is the
same - this land is at risk without permanent protection.*
Let’s walk through both outcomes of a wetland survey:
*
If the survey shows *wetlands have shifted from the studies done 20 years ago*
, then we’ve just proved the central point: *wetland boundaries are unreliable*
, and CRs are the only permanent tool we have to lock down land use.
*
If the survey shows *no shift* , then we’ve confirmed that much of the land is
still developable - which means *it’s valuable and unprotected*. CRs are still
the best way to prevent future buildout.
So yes, it’s fine to want an updated wetland survey (and I will always support
having accurate data). But if the goal is to use that data to decide whether
this land is worth protecting, I think we’re asking the wrong question. *The
risk isn’t tied to what the wetland map says today - it’s that the map can
change tomorrow.* That’s why I believe the CRs matter, regardless of what any
new survey might show.
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.
