Lincolnville development’s fate rests on court’s ruling

LINCOLNVILLE – Bulldozers began cutting into the sod on Munroe Field along Route 1 this week, building an access road to what developers plan as a 14-lot housing subdivision with extraordinary views of Penobscot Bay.

The work comes more than two years after developers Jim Munroe and Richard Nightingale filed an application with the town for the project, 18 months after a court overturned the planning board’s initial denial, and six months after the men secured final approval.

Even so, the work may have to halt, if an appeal filed in Waldo County Superior Court by the Conservation Law Foundation and two residents is successful.

On Thursday, Justice Jeffrey Hjelm promised to rule swiftly on a motion from the lawyer representing the developers that challenges the legal standing of the foundation, which is a Rockland-based environmental advocacy group, and residents Christopher Osgood and Corelyn Senn.

If the judge rules that the foundation, Osgood and Senn do not have the right to appeal, the development of the field will go forward.

Outside the court after the hearing, Munroe and Nightingale expressed frustration with the latest opposition to the project.

“We have waited long enough,” Nightingale said, explaining the decision to begin building the road, despite the unresolved legal appeal.

The men also questioned Osgood’s credibility in his claims. In the appeal, Osgood states that the value of his house on Route 1 would be diminished by the Munroe Field development, which is about two miles away, and that his right to views of the bay and islands across the field will be lost.

“Chris Osgood has done the same thing,” blocking views of the water from Route 1 by building a fence along the highway on his own property, Nightingale said. In addition, Nightingale said, Osgood’s new house is within a half-mile of an auto repair garage, which he said might affect his property values more than the upscale homes planned for Munroe Field.

Osgood was not present at the hearing.

Before the judge, the developers’ lawyer, Wayne Crandall, argued that law allows appeals of planning board decisions from those who can show a particular injury. Since Osgood and Senn do not own property next to the development, they cannot claim such injury, he said.

In documents supporting his standing in the case, Osgood listed his years of service in town and regional committees, some of which have worked to protect the beauty of the Route 1 corridor in Lincolnville.

“He certainly has demonstrated an involvement, but he has not demonstrated a particular injury,” Crandall said. “These people do not have a view easement over the property. They have not right over this property.”

Lawyer Terry Calderwood, representing the town of Lincolnville in defending the planning board approval of the project, told the judge a subdivision ordinance protects buyers of the property and neighbors, not the public at large.

“They’re not demonstrating that Christopher Osgood falls into any of the protected classes,” he argued.

Foundation attorney Peter Shelley agreed that neither Osgood nor Senn live within a half mile of Munroe Field, but that Osgood is a neighbor in the sense that he lives in the same scenic corridor that he has worked for years to protect.

The field, Shelley told the judge, is a property of local, state and national significance, and that the planning board made “fundamental errors” in approving the development.

On the question of standing, Shelley argued that Senn and Osgood participated in and followed the local review process, he said, as did the foundation.

An appellant does not have to show unique injury, Shelley said, but rather a potential injury. He cited case laws that refer to “common good,” and noted that the community has listed Munroe Field as an asset.

“This is a view that’s been discussed widely in town for decades,” Shelley said.

The judge promised to issue a timely written decision on the standing question.

Outside the hearing, Bill and Dot Munroe, who owned the property for years before selling it to their grandson and his business partner, said they would have liked to have seen the property be preserved by a land trust. In the late 1980s, the parcel was reportedly considered by the Land for Maine’s Future committee for purchase, but rejected.

The Munroes said they now feel they and their grandson have been treated badly by the opponents of the development. The younger Munroe and Nightingale said they will not consider any purchase offers from the Maine Coast Heritage Trust.

The only offer made by the trust was sent to the elder Munroes, they said, even though Nightingale and Jim Munroe had taken title to the land. The offer, Nightingale said, was so low, “It was kind of a joke.”