land use

A summary drawing of the Nature Link project supplied by the Rural Land Foundation.

(Editor’s note: This article was updated on June 17 to reflect a correction in the location of Joseph Kolchinsky’s property.)

The Planning Board voted unanimously to endorse the proposed Nature Link project at their June 10 meeting, echoing earlier actions by the Select Board, the Housing Commission, and the Historic District Commission.

“Lincoln will benefit considerably from this unique partnership,” the Planning Board said in a June 16 statement, noting that the town will “gain permanent protection of land long noted for its conservation value, the continuation in Lincoln of a unique nature program for urban youth, and a creative single-family housing village of mostly small homes that is aligned with Lincoln’s long-term planning vision.”

If the preliminary development and use plan for this project is approved at the Special Town Meeting on June 25, the developer (Civico) will still be required to submit a definitive plan, apply for a special permit, and go through site plan review by the Planning Board.

“The development of a neighborhood of 20 single-family homes, 17 of which are below the median size of single-family homes in Lincoln, including three with deeded income restrictions,” is in keeping with the Housing Commission‘s mission, the group said in a statement after their June 5 meeting. “This neighborhood provides much-needed new housing accessible to a range of households in a thoughtful, intentional and responsible manner.” The income-restricted units also ensure the proposed development maintains the town’s compliance under state 40B laws, they noted.

The Historical Commission likewise endorsed the project. Over the last century, “the town has followed a model of preserving open space that incorporates housing where the built form is subservient to nature and that opens the land to all through public trails,” the commission said in a statement.

The Farrington Memorial land has been farmed or used as a wooded sanctuary since the seventeenth century and is the site of the David Stone house dating from 1665, the group noted. The mission of the current occupant, Farrington Nature Linc, is to benefit residents of low-income communities by creating a connection with the natural world. “The project would allow Farrington to continue its historic mission on its historically important site” along with preserving the historic farm stand on the Panetta property, the HDC said.

On Sunday, June 15, some of those who have objected to the proposal (see “My Turn” pieces on May 29 and May 27) invited residents to an online meeting on Monday night to discuss their views. Almost 200 other residents urged approval in a June 8 “My Turn” piece, as did abutting Page Road resident Joseph Kolchinsky on May 29.

The Select Board voted on June 2 to formally endorse the Nature Link project on the Panetta/Farrington land with the following statement:

The Select Board believes this project will have a positive impact on Lincoln. It reflects the town’s core values, including conservation and thoughtful stewardship of our natural and built environments.

First, it conserves 77 acres of undeveloped land that have long been a part of the town’s open space plan. As the largest remaining parcel of unprotected land in town, preserving it represents a rare and significant opportunity. Funding will come from three sources: a contribution from the City of Cambridge to help protect its watershed, private contributions from Lincoln residents, and a $950,000 contribution from the town’s Community Preservation (CPA) fund. The board considers this a good investment of our CPA money.

Second, the community benefits from a wide variety of housing types. Each year, Lincoln loses moderately sized homes to demolition. This project will build 20 new detached family homes that share common land and amenities. Seventeen of the 20 will be three-bedroom homes between 1,650 and 2,000 square feet, and three will be four-bedroom homes of about 4,000-4,500 square feet. Three of the homes will be income-restricted, offering an opportunity for home ownership under an income-restricted model. Because the 20 homes will have common ownership of the land, they may not be torn down and replaced with large houses, keeping them moderately sized in perpetuity.

Third, Farrington NatureLinc’s mission is closely aligned with Lincoln’s values and vision statement. A deal that gives them the capital they need to stay on the property and introduce children to the wonder and magic of the natural world is in both their and the town’s best interests.
Finally, this opportunity for Lincoln would not be possible without the collaboration of multiple entities. The Panetta family wants to help conserve some of the land, including the farm stand that has been so important to them for multiple generations; Farrington is committed to fulfilling their mission and conserving their land; and the City of Cambridge is willing to partner with Lincoln once again to protect water quality. The project would not be possible without the Rural Land Foundation’s long-term commitment to Lincoln’s open space plan and its quiet persistence in listening to stakeholders, finding common ground, and making proposals like this possible.

For these reasons, we recommend that Lincoln voters approve the project at the June 25^th Special Town Meeting.

By Cindy Guo and John Li

I live at 96 Page Rd. Along with the residents of 99, 100, and 103 Page Rd., my family and I live immediately adjacent to the Panetta land, where a 20-unit high-density housing development is being proposed. All four of us spoke at the May 27 Planning Board meeting to express our deep concerns about the Nature Link project.

On the map below, our homes are marked with red crosses; Joseph [Kolchinsky]’s, by contrast, is marked with a yellow line. His house is located 2,000 feet away from the Panetta site. In contrast, my house is directly across the street; 103 Page Rd. shares a property line with the proposed development.

As direct abutters, we have been systematically excluded from RLF communications related to this project. Two of our households were never invited to any community meetings, and the other two only received a last-minute flyer for a neighborhood-wide event—distributed weeks after the Select Board had already scheduled a special town meeting at the request of Civico and RLF.

We sent an email outlining our concerns to the RLF chair on May 12, but we received no response. This stands in sharp contrast to the experience of the Farrington abutters, who live further down Page Road and on nearby streets. Many of them were informed about the deal well in advance of the public announcement and have had an ongoing dialogue with RLF board members.

This raises an important question: Why were we treated differently? The answer seems clear. The Farrington abutters benefit from the proposed conservation agreement, which would effectively lock in protection for their rear property lines. Meanwhile, they are far enough removed from the Panetta site to avoid the most significant negative impacts—construction, density, noise, traffic. As Joseph candidly stated at last night’s meeting, this deal gives him greater security against new housing behind his home than any wetland buffer could provide.

At Friday’s RLF meeting, my husband John asked why no alternative proposals had been considered. The executive director replied that housing had to be built somewhere and that “All parties have to make sacrifices.” When my husband asked Joseph how he could celebrate avoiding a single new neighbor while we will face 20, Joseph echoed the same sentiment: “We all have to compromise.” But this is not a fair or proportional compromise. It’s a burden placed disproportionately on a few households without their consent or inclusion.

We have found this process frustrating, disheartening, and at times even demeaning. But not everyone has turned a blind eye. We’ve spoken with many neighbors, including Farrington abutters, who have shown empathy, offered their support, and taken time to hear our concerns. For that, we are deeply grateful.

Everyone in Lincoln should care about this project—not just those who live nearby. First, Civico is again requesting nearly $1 million in taxpayer funding. This is after telling us last year they would never come back to the Town Meeting. They are acquiring the Panetta parcel at market value — re-zoned for far greater density than a private buyer would ever be permitted — and are also being granted several acres of Farrington land for free to install a septic system and additional housing. None of this would be possible without public subsidy.

Second, this sets a troubling precedent. If this rezoning succeeds, what’s to stop similar deals from being made elsewhere in town? Could your neighbor partner with RLF or another group to rezone and develop land next to your home?

We will continue to speak out against this flawed process and advocate for a fair and transparent solution. We hope many of you will stand with us.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

By Joseph Kolchinsky

Hello neighbors. I live on Page Road and abut the Farrington land. Like some of you, I was skeptical of the Nature Link proposal at first. But after spending real time with the details, I now believe this is exactly the kind of thoughtful, balanced solution we need in Lincoln. It protects land, supports an important non-profit, adds needed housing, and most importantly it heads off far riskier alternatives. Below I’ve laid out the top concerns I’ve heard and why I believe this deal is the right move for our town. Happy to have thoughtful discourse and welcome open-minds to the conversation. As you read on, I ask that you think of a phrase often used in the nonprofit world: Things happen to you, for you, or because of you. 

As a community, if we want to move our missions forward and take advantage of this opportunity, we need to take proactive steps to pounce on this opportunity and make it happen because of us. No one is going to step in and do this work for us. And, if left to chance, alternative outcomes are likely to, happen to us, and they likely won’t be nearly as good as what I believe the Nature Link project achieves.

Top Reasons to Support the Nature Link Project

• Conservation at scale — 77 acres of ecologically valuable land will be permanently protected from future development, preserving forests, wetlands, and trail systems for generations. This is the largest undeveloped, forested, and unprotected area in Lincoln.
• Avoids Dover Amendment risk — By putting Farrington into conservation and giving Farrington financial stability, we substantially reduce the looming risk of institutional-scale development on that land under the Dover Amendment.
• Adds starter homes — 20 modest homes (replacing 3 existing, 17 net) provide much-needed “missing middle” housing stock, helping young families and downsizing seniors stay in Lincoln.
• Supports 40B compliance — Some units will be income-restricted, helping the town meet its Chapter 40B obligations.
• Secures Farrington’s future — This deal stabilizes a non-profit with a mission to connect under-resourced youth with nature, allowing them to continue their work and stay in Lincoln.
• New trails will be made permanently available to all Lincoln residents through the conservation land carved out by this deal.
• What’s good enough for Cambridge is good for us — While “no septic system” is better than any septic system, the City of Cambridge has the most to lose here given they depend on the clean watershed to protect the reservoir as their water source – and they fully support this plan and are putting $800k in to back it up. If the people drinking the water support this to mitigate future risk, I think we should be aware of that future risk and support mitigating it, too.
• Nominal traffic impact — Estimated traffic increase is ~5-10%, a nominal amount that doesn’t warrant the concern. See further below for my analysis on the numbers.
• Transparent, enforceable plan — This is a tightly structured, multi-party agreement with baked-in protections, approvals, and community oversight – not an open-ended blank check to a developer. Farrington’s land is put into conservation through deeds and Conservation Restrictions (CRs), the developer is locked into approved plans, and Farrington’s use of the access road to Page Rd expires upon any transfer of ownership so it can’t be used in the future by other parties.

As a direct neighbor to this project, I don’t take change lightly. I will see and feel the impacts of 17 new homes more than most. It would be easy for me to oppose any development next door. But I choose to support Nature Link because I firmly believe it’s the best path forward for our community as a whole. It’s a rare instance where the community as a whole gets something positive: Farrington gets the funds to sustain its nature programs, Lincoln gets permanently protected land and walking trails, a thoughtful developer gets to build much-needed starter homes, and new families get a chance to make Lincoln their home. I’m willing to support the greater good and, based on recent discussions, believe most of my Page Rd neighbors do as well.

No plan is perfect, and it’s okay to have questions and doubts. I’ve tried to address the major concerns with facts and respectful reasoning further below. Our town’s discourse can certainly get heated — but at the end of the day, I think we all share the same love for Lincoln and want to see it thrive without losing what makes it special. Nature Link is a compromise that achieves that, by blending conservation and smart growth in a way that enhances our community.

I invite everyone to look at the official documents, ask hard questions, and satisfy themselves on the details. From what I’ve seen, the more you dig, the more this deal holds up as sensible and forward-looking. I’ll be voting Yes at the Special Town Meeting on June 25, and I encourage my fellow residents to consider doing the same. Let’s seize this opportunity to protect a beautiful piece of Lincoln while also shaping a future we can be proud of – one where our children and new neighbors can enjoy the same natural beauty and community spirit that drew us all here in the first place.

For a comprehensive Q&A on this topic, please see this document. I will continue to keep it updated as I learn more. Thank you for reading, and I’m happy to discuss further with an open mind and mutual respect.

Joseph and Jennifer Kolchinsky live at 83 Page Rd.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

(Editor’s note: This letter concerns the Farrington/Panetta proposal — for more information, see “Corrections and more information on Farrington/Panetta proposal” and this RLF slide deck.)

By Page Road residents (see below)

A Special Town Meeting will be held on June 25, where voters will decide whether to rezone privately owned land into the North Lincoln Overlay District — a move that would allow the Nature Link Project to bypass Lincoln’s long-standing zoning laws and build 20 homes on just six acres, with significant impact to our conservation land and our neighbors.

We believe every Lincoln resident deserves the full picture before casting a vote. Here’s what you need to know:

1. No public input in calling the meeting

Normally, calling a Special Town Meeting requires 200 resident signatures. While the Select Board has discretion to also call a town meeting, in this case, they decided to call a meeting on behalf of a private organization, the RLF, without notifying a single abutter or resident in the area. After the meeting was already scheduled, communication to the neighborhood has been minimal and misleading:

• Only some Page Road residents received a vague flyer.
• That flyer promoted a “neighborhood meeting” but did not disclose the project’s full scope.
• Many residents only learned about the 20-house development at the April 30 meeting—more than two weeks after it was approved by the Selects and less than two months before the vote.

If the project is truly good for Lincoln, why secrecy?

2. The developer: Civico and the profits at stake

This meeting mainly exists to enable Civico Development to bypass zoning laws. They plan to:

• Build 17 new homes and rebuild 3 existing homes—20 in total—on a site that under current zoning would allow only 3.
• Avoid Lincoln’s zonings rule and increase density drastically.

Estimated revenue (based on comparable sales in nearby towns):

• 14 homes x ~$1.2M = $16.8M
• 3 affordable homes x $0.4 = $1.2M
  3 larger homes (4,000–4,500 sq ft) x ~$2.6M = $7.8M
• Total: ~$25.8M

Land cost to Civico? Just $3.3M — roughly 13% of project value, far below the 20–33% range typical in suburban development.

Normally, developers must dedicate part of their purchased land for septic systems, reducing the number of houses they can build. With this deal, Civico avoids this entirely by using Farrington’s land for the septic system, letting them maximize housing density (and profits) without sacrificing a single square foot. Why should Lincoln enable this private windfall?

3. No-bid development: why Civico again?

This isn’t the first time Civico has been granted a no-bid, developer-friendly deal in Lincoln:

• Oriole Landing, the Mall redevelopment, and now Nature Link have all followed this pattern.
• No competitive process was offered, despite millions in potential profits.

Civico receives:

• Zoning exceptions
• Public access to land for septic infrastructure
• Publicly funded trails which increase housing value
• Below-market land prices

In return, Civico contributes very little. If this project benefits the town, why not open it to other developers?

4. Conservation Deal Tied to Development — Why?

The Nature Link project is being tied to a conservation agreement with the Farrington property. But the funding for conservation already existsfrom:

• The City of Cambridge
• Private fundraising
• The Town of Lincoln

So why bind it to housing? Because:

• Civico can then use land paid for by the town for septic systems and access roads, saving the developer money and increasing housing density.
• This means public conservation land is subsidizing private development, at no cost to Civico.

Farrington’s land was meant for preservation, not as infrastructure for a private developer. This sets a troubling precedent.

5. The “$3M Gap” Myth

RLF argues that if Civico doesn’t build these homes, the $3M from the Panetta land deal won’t materialize, and the conservation effort will collapse. But here’s the truth:

• The “gap” exists only because RLF linked two unrelated land transactions.
• Panetta land, 6 upland acres with 3 homes, is worth $3M+ on the open market.
• Even without Civico, other buyers or developers could step in, without needing zoning changes.

RLF also claims Farrington needs a new access road via Panetta’s land, but improving the existing Route 2 access would cost only $250K (based on Farrington’s own prior estimates, adjusted for inflation).

A flawed deal — and a better path forward

The proposed Farrington agreement represents a flawed compromise that depends on the construction of 20 single-family homes. To enable this development, the plan would:

• Clear-cut a forested section of Farrington’s land, and
• Install a large-scale septic system serving all 20 homes at the property’s highest elevation.

This elevated leach field would pose a serious, long-term threat to the protected wetlands below, which form a tributary of the Cambridge watershed, an ecologically sensitive and critical area. The good news: these 20 homes do not need to be built. Existing funding is already sufficient to compensate Farrington for placing a conservation restriction on their land. The sole justification for moving forward with the Panetta purchase and related development is to provide Farrington with improved access to Route 2. But there is a smarter, lower-impact alternative.

According to a study commissioned by Farrington—and adjusted for construction cost inflation—upgrading Farrington’s existing access point to Route 2 would cost approximately $250,000. This would provide significantly better access than Page Road and eliminate the need for environmentally damaging housing construction. If Cambridge and Lincoln each contributed $1 million—a modest increase over current commitments—they would more than cover this access improvement and secure the conservation deal without new development.

This is a rare opportunity to do what’s right:

• Conserve valuable open space
• Protect the watershed
• Avoid irreversible ecological damage

And yet, the Rural Land Foundation (RLF) has returned to its familiar playbook: fear-based messaging. “If we don’t act now,” they warn, “Farrington will be clear-cut.” But these alarmist tactics have grown stale.

Just last year, in the lead-up to the Housing Choice Act vote, the RLF publicly stated that Civico would never return to Town Meeting seeking project approval. Yet here we are, only a year later, facing that very scenario.

They also claimed that unit density at the Mall project couldn’t be reduced—until they themselves introduced a late amendment at Town Meeting, before any resident had a chance to speak.

It’s time for accountability

We can — and must — pursue a conservation strategy that respects both the environment and the community’s values. The current proposal fails on both counts. We urge residents to demand transparency, challenge false choices, and support a solution that protects Lincoln’s future — without sacrificing its integrity.

Even if you’re not an abutter, this precedent affects your neighborhood too. If zoning laws can be bypassed quietly once, what’s to stop it from happening again? Your voice matters. Attend the Special Town Meeting on June 25. Demand transparency, fairness, and accountability from our town leaders. Ask questions. Spread the word. Vote informed.

Klaus and Iwona Dobler, 103 Page Rd.
John and Cindy Li, 96 Page R.
Dr. Jeff Sutherland and the Reverend Arline Sutherland, 100 Page Rd.

(Editor’s note: The Rural Land Foundation plans to submit a response in the next few days.)

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.

The May 22 article headlined “June 25 Special Town Meeting agenda grows” misstated the proposed future ownership of the Farrington/Panetta land as well as the number of signatures required to bring a citizens’ petition (100 for a Special Town Meeting, vs. the 10 signatures need for a regular Annual Town Meeting). The article has been updated with information below from Rural Land Foundation Executive Director Geoff McGean.

The RLF is trying to arrange for Farrington Memorial, which owns 75 acres of land on the south side of Route 2, to get $3.1 million from a combination of the town’s Community Preservation Act fund, the City of Cambridge, and private donations. Farrington will retain ownership, but 65 of those acres will then have a permanent conservation restriction and trail easement held by the town. The remaining 10 acres where the Farrington Nature Linc buildings are now located will have a deed restriction that will significantly limit their future expansion.

In addition, some of the Farrington land (mostly wetlands) will be deeded by Farrington to the City of Cambridge for watershed protection purposes. That land will also have a permanent conservation restriction held by the town.

In a separate deal, developer Civico will pay $3.1 million in a single transaction for three lots that currently have houses. Two parcels (2.8 acres and 3.2 acres) are now owned by the Frank J. Panetta Trust and a third 14.1-acre lot is owned by the Paul Panetta Trust. The company will then build 20 starter homes, which will be sold to future buyers individually. The town is not involved in the financial negotiations for this transaction, and no town money will be used for land acquisition or housing construction.

After the housing is built, no major changes or additions to the Civico land can be made without the agreement of all the homeowners as well as Town Meeting, because the town is approving this specific development under the North Lincoln Overlay District. See this RLF public outreach slide deck for more details as well as maps and drawings.

(Editor’s note: this article was corrected and updated on May 25.)

The Special Town Meeting on Wednesday, June 25 will have up to five warrant articles — two each on the Farrington/Panetta proposal and on the community center, and one on an expected citizens’ petition.

The meeting will start at 6:30pm; barring something unforeseen, officials expect to get everything done that night. Everyone is hoping not to repeat the Special Town Meeting on Dec. 2, 2023 to vote on the Housing Choice Act measures, which stretched to 11:30pm and led to the creation of the Town Meeting Study Committee and purchase of voting clickers.

One of the warrant articles may be passed over, depending on the construction bids for the community center, which will be opened on May 29. If the low bid is higher than the $24 million budget, the town will have to find more money for the project to go ahead — either through a town fund transfer if the shortfall isn’t substantial, or a debt exclusion if more is needed. A debt exclusion measure would require a two-thirds majority at Town Meeting for approval as well as a simple majority at the ballot box at a special election the next day (Monday, June 26).

There will be a hybrid joint meeting of the Select Board, Finance Committee, and Community Center Building Committee on Monday, June 2 starting at 6:00pm to discuss funding strategy if the bids come in over budget. The agenda has not yet been posted but the Zoom link is here.

Farrington/Panetta

Two other warrant articles pertain to the Farrington/Panetta proposal. The first will ask for two separate zoning changes. One would allow a transfer of $950,000 already in the town’s Community Preservation Act fund to Farrington Memorial, which owns 75 acres. That sum is part of $3.1 million that will go to the organization from the CPA fund as well as the City of Cambridge, and private donations to the RLF. Farrington will retain ownership of the land and get a new access road from Page Road, but 65 of those 75 acres will have a permanent conservation restriction and trail easement held by the town.

In a separate deal, developer Civico will pay $3.1 million in a single transaction for three lots that currently have houses. Two parcels (2.8 acres and 3.2 acres) are now owned by the Frank J. Panetta Trust and a third 14.1-acre lot is owned by the Paul Panetta Trust. The second warrant article seeks a zoning change to allow construction of a cluster of 20 new starter homes and the other to allow Gerard’s farm stand and garden center to continue operating on the former Panetta land.

The company plans to build and sell the homes individually to future buyers individually. The town is not involved in the financial negotiations for this transaction, and no town money will be used for land acquisition or housing construction.

After the housing is built, no major changes or additions to the Civico land can be made without the agreement of all the homeowners as well as Town Meeting, because the town is approving this specific development under the North Lincoln Overlay District. See this RLF public outreach slide deck for more details as well as maps and drawings.

Other warrant articles

A fourth warrant article will seek approval to increase the town’s fiscal 2026 reserve fund “to address a couple of late-occurring budget challenges,” Town Administrator Tim Higgins said at the May 19 Select Board meeting. Those preliminary additional costs include $270,000 for remediating contaminated soil at the former Strat’s Place playground, which will be repurposed for Magic Garden; $172,000 for snow and ice mitigation; and about $100,000 for veterans’ benefits 

“These amounts are preliminary and we will have a better view of the potential recommendation on June 10,” Finance Committee chair Paul Blanchfield said. Voters OK’d an increase to the fund balance for FY26 to $849,000 in March. The reserve fund is part of the general fund and is intended to cover “extraordinary and unforeseen” needs of the town and schools.

The final Town Meeting article(s) will be a vote on at least one citizen’s petition. One has already been submitted and it’s at least possible there will be more, as the deadline for getting a petition with the required 100 signatures to the Town Clerk’s office isn’t until Tuesday, May 27 at noon.