By Wayne E. Rivet

Staff Writer

SEBAGO — Over the years, Richard Merritt has served on several municipal boards, but he’s never encountered what was before him on Thursday night, Feb. 17 at the Sebago Town Hall.

“I’ve never had 12 appeals before, and I’ve been doing this for a long time. Maybe two or three — 12 is a lot…overwhelming,” said Merritt, who is chairman of Sebago’s Zoning Board of Appeals.

The appeals regard the Sebago Planning Board’s decision to approve a new quarry off Route 11 by Gorham Sand & Gravel at its Dec. 14, 2021 meeting. The town enacted in November a 180-day moratorium on mines, gravel pits and quarries, declaring the existing land use ordinance fails to adequately address or regulate quarry operations. Project opponents raised concerns regarding potential groundwater contamination, road damage, noise from blasting and truck travel, and dust pollution.

Gorham Sand & Gravel purchased the 200-acre site last April. GSG officials said the company checked with the town to be sure the use was allowed in that zone — the Village District. Ten acres would be used for quarry operations at one time, with a total of 42 acres being used over the life of the project, GSG officials said. GSG filed a Major Site Plan application with the Sebago Planning Board in late August 2021

With the moratorium in place, the administrative appeal process is set to begin.

The list includes 12 appellants, with eight different attorneys also involved.

Not knowing how long it will take to hear each appeal, the board decided to allocate two hours each night to hear cases. Merritt spent most of Thursday’s meeting trying to match up hearing dates to appellants’ schedules. There will be six meetings with the Town of Sebago and Marie Brume and Michael Cyr leading off on March 10. The hearings will be held at 6 p.m. at the Town Office.

Merritt encouraged the sharing of information at least a week before scheduled hearings. He asked all involved to leave e-mails with the board so a network of electronic communication could be created. 

Town Attorney Tim Murphy noted that the hearings will be “de novo,” meaning the Board of Appeals will be “starting from scratch,” will take “fresh evidence” and “come to their own conclusion.” Murphy said the Board of Appeals will look at the Planning Board’s decision, as well.

The opening hearing involving the Town of Sebago is “a matter of law,” Merritt noted. The town’s appeal claims, “The Planning Board erred as a matter of law in approving the property owner’s application for a Major Site Plan. The approval was in violation of a Moratorium Ordinance passed by the town at a special town meeting on Nov. 23, 2021. Pursuant to the Moratorium Ordinance, the Planning Board lacked the legal authority to approve the application.”

Attorney Murphy recommended on Dec. 14 that the Planning Board (PB) table the application while the moratorium is in effect. Planners, however, voted 3-2 to proceed with a review of the application notwithstanding the moratorium. Planners approved the project 3-1, one abstention to approve the application with conditions.

Also scheduled is Marie Brume and Michael Cyr. “We invested in our property based on the Comprehensive Plan. Our investment will be directly compromised by the approval of mining, quarrying and extractive industries. In addition to our mental and physical well-being,” they wrote in their brief. Brume and Cyr request the town hire independent experts“to study and measure” impacts — dust from quarrying rock, effect on water table and runoff, noise, increased traffic being a safety hazard (exhaust emissions), decline in property value, vibrations from blasting, wildlife disruption, light pollution — on the town.

Other hearings scheduled:

March 17 — Robert and Marcella Laliberte; Tina Libby-Hook and Richard Hook. Points of appeal: PB ignored clear guidance of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Ordinance, process not followed correctly, question public notification process.

March 31 — Eric Shute and Patricia Taylor; Sebago School Committee. Points of appeal: The School Committee believes PB failed to adequately consider and address impact that noise and vibration from the proposed quarry would have on neighboring properties, including Sebago Elementary School, as well as impact of traffic and effect on water supply.

April 7 — Joanne Stamplis; Christopher and Deborah Ross. Points of appeal: Similar to impacts stated in the Brume and Cyr appeal. 

April 14 — Kevin and Sandra Miner; Dale and Jennifer Miner. Points of appeal: Similar to impacts stated in the Brume and Cyr appeal. 

May 5 — Linda Boody; Deborarh Howard and Albert McDonald. Points of appeal: Similar to impacts stated in the Brume and Cyr appeal.