By Margaret Olson
On the issue of zoning: this is not a zoning by-law change. This is a use of the North Lincoln Overlay District, and it easily meets the purpose of the North Lincoln Overlay district:
12.5.1 Purpose
The NL-North Lincoln Overlay District is intended:
(a) to permit greater flexibility in the development of tracts of land by requiring few predetermined standards,
(b) to permit a developer to propose, and for the Town to vote on, a site development and use plan unique to a particular location,
(c) to permit the use of development standards more detailed than the general standards elsewhere in this By-law,
(d) to provide information for the Town to evaluate the potential impacts of a proposed development, and
(e) to enable the Planning Board to require adherence to a site development and use plan in the granting of a special permit.
Other North Lincoln Overlay District projects include Oriole Landing, The Commons, and the North Lincoln office buildings. Both the North and South Lincoln overlay districts give the town flexibility (via a town meeting vote) to approve uses outside of the base zoning and control over how that is done.
The downside is that development under the overlays requires a significant investment by the developer prior to approval without any guarantee that the project will go forward. The answer to “why Civico” is that there are few developers willing to do this: it’s expensive in both absolute terms and opportunity cost. The RLF and other landowners would be in a better negotiating position with respect to developers if there was more flexibility in the by-right uses (base zoning).
Olson is former chair of the Planning Board.
“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 Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.
Response: Overlay Districts Must Respect Constitutional Rights
Margaret Olson’s explanation of the North Lincoln Overlay District (“NLOD”) is informative, but it overlooks a fundamental principle: no local bylaw or overlay district may override constitutional protections.
While the NLOD may offer flexibility to the Town and to developers, its application must remain within the bounds of the U.S. and Massachusetts Constitutions. This includes respecting:
Due Process under the Fourteenth Amendment and Articles 1 and 10 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights: A developer or landowner must not be deprived of property or opportunity without fair notice and a meaningful chance to be heard.
Equal Protection: The Town cannot selectively favor one developer (such as Civico) over others through opaque or arbitrary processes.
Freedom of Speech and Petition under the First Amendment and Article 16: Residents and landowners retain their right to oppose development, speak out publicly, and challenge governmental decisions without retaliation or exclusion.
Takings Protections: The government cannot interfere with property rights in a way that constitutes a regulatory taking without just compensation, even under an overlay district.
Flexibility in zoning cannot come at the cost of transparency, fairness, or constitutional safeguards. The Town’s use of overlay districts must be lawful—not just expedient.
[Your Name] is a resident of Lincoln and an advocate for open government and civil rights.
Let me know if you’d like to tailor this for submission to a local newspaper or town meeting.
You said:
In other words the violation of due process is that the Sleext Board is not allowing g for an public open and transparent bid process where civico can be included. Arguably if public tax payer fu is are being used for the Panneta land then there should be a publkc auction of the property
ChatGPT said:
Here’s a revised version of your response that incorporates your point about the due process violation stemming from the Select Board’s failure to allow a public, open, and transparent bid process, especially if taxpayer funds are being used for the Panetta land:
Response: Overlay Flexibility Cannot Override Constitutional Rights
May 30, 2025
By [Your Name]
Margaret Olson’s commentary on the North Lincoln Overlay District (NLOD) highlights its flexibility, but this flexibility must not come at the expense of constitutional rights. Overlay districts are not exempt from the U.S. and Massachusetts Constitutions.
The core due process concern here is that the Select Board is not allowing an open, public, and transparent bidding process. If the Town is contemplating the use of public resources—especially taxpayer funds—for the acquisition or disposition of land like the Panetta parcel, basic fairness and constitutional due process require a public process where all qualified developers, including Civico, can participate.
Moreover, if the Town is using or facilitating the use of public funds to benefit a private developer through exclusive or preferential negotiations, then a public auction or RFP process may be legally required to prevent favoritism, ensure equal opportunity, and uphold public trust.
The Town must also ensure compliance with:
Equal Protection: It cannot arbitrarily favor one developer while excluding others.
Takings Clause: The government cannot burden private property rights without just compensation or process.
First Amendment Rights: Residents and developers retain their rights to speak, petition, and object without being excluded from participation or opportunity.
Overlay zoning must operate within the rule of law. Town leaders should remember: zoning flexibility does not authorize constitutional shortcuts.
Response: Overlay Flexibility Cannot Override Constitutional Rights
May 30, 2025
Margaret Olson’s commentary on the North Lincoln Overlay District (NLOD) highlights its flexibility, but this flexibility must not come at the expense of constitutional rights. Overlay districts are not exempt from the U.S. and Massachusetts Constitutions.
The core due process concern here is that the Select Board is not allowing an open, public, and transparent bidding process. If the Town is contemplating the use of public resources—especially taxpayer funds—for the acquisition or disposition of land like the Panetta parcel, basic fairness and constitutional due process require a public process where all qualified developers, including Civico, can participate.
Moreover, if the Town is using or facilitating the use of public funds to benefit a private developer through exclusive or preferential negotiations, then a public auction or RFP process may be legally required to prevent favoritism, ensure equal opportunity, and uphold public trust.
The Town must also ensure compliance with:
Equal Protection: It cannot arbitrarily favor one developer while excluding others.
Takings Clause: The government cannot burden private property rights without just compensation or process.
First Amendment Rights: Residents and developers retain their rights to speak, petition, and object without being excluded from participation or opportunity.
Overlay zoning must operate within the rule of law. Town leaders should remember: zoning flexibility does not authorize constitutional shortcuts.