Maine Dept. of Environmental Protection tells citizens no need for a public hearing on 300-foot Lincolnville pier application
The location of the proposed pier is at 37 Shag Rock Road, Lincolnville.
The location of the proposed pier is at 37 Shag Rock Road, Lincolnville.
LINCOLNVILLE — Citizens objecting to a proposed pier that would, if approved, extend into Penobscot Bay 300 feet from the Lincolnville shoreline, are asking the Maine Board of Environmental Protection to assume jurisdiction over the state’s permitting process. The Commissioner of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, however, told the BEP in a pre-meeting report that the DEP is procedurally correct in maintaining purview over the application.
Additionally, the DEP has refused a request from the citizens that it hold a public hearing for the project.
“Although your letters refer to general concerns related to protected natural resources and impacts to the scenic character of the coastline, they do not contain conflicting technical information regarding a licensing criterion,” wrote DEP Commissioner Melanie Loyzim, in a Dec. 21 letter to the citizens.
Lincolnville property owners had requested that the BEP assume jurisdiction over the application of Randall Ward and Kristyn Morrisey-Ward for a Natural Resources Protection Act permit to construct a pier system for residential use in Lincolnville. (Read Plans for private Lincolnville ocean pier draws opposition from citizens)
Lori Knowlton, Roger Inhorn and Victoria Masakowski, and Kavita Mohan and Shantanu Lal cited various reasons substantiating their written requests. Those requests were filed with the DEP and BEP in November.
Others who also requested a DEP public hearing on the application included John and Lucy Pincince, Vivienne McCaffrey and Maura DiPrete.
“We write to request that the MDEP hold a public hearing or that the Board of Environmental Protection consider assuming jurisdiction over this matter to ensure that the interests of neighbors, the local lobster and fishing industry, the community, and all other stakeholders are taken into consideration,” wrote Mohan and Lal, of Bethesda, Maryland, and who also own property in Lincolnville, on November 19. “At a minimum, we ask that the MDEP conduct an independent impact study to evaluate the concerns detailed below.”
Inhorn and Masakowski wrote that the notification process of the DEP to abutting property owners concerning the application was flawed:
“We are writing to request that the MDEP restart the notification process with a comprehensive list of abutting property owners as defined and hold a public hearing or that the BEP consider assuming jurisdiction over this matter to ensure that the interests of neighbors, the local lobster and fishing industry, the community, and all other stakeholders are taken into consideration,” they wrote. “This request is based on the fact that the application indicates that notifications need to be served to BOTH abutting property owners AND to those within one mile of the delineated project boundary. Our property falls within the one- mile radius. This notice was not served to us or other nearby property owners who are within the one-mile radius. We found out about the permit proposal on November 27, 2021 from a neighbor, not through any official source. We request that this notice process be properly implemented per the town tax maps to ensure that all opinions are heard.”
Another nearby neighbor of the proposed project, Lori Knowlton, wrote that she, also, had not been properly informed by the DEP.
But the DEP sent a memo to the BEP in advance of its Jan. 20 meeting, outlining the criteria by which the Maine Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner would recommend that the BEP assume permitting jurisdiction.
According to DEP rules, the public can request that the BEP take over permit review, but the application must be of statewide significance, and meet three of the four following criteria:
1) Will have an environmental or economic impact in more than one municipality, territory or county;
2) Involves an activity not previously permitted or licensed in the State;
3) Is likely to come under significant public scrutiny; and
4) Is located in more than one municipality, territory or county.
The DEP Commissioner said in her memo that the pier application does not meet three of the four criteria.
The pier would be in Lincolnville and, “it is not evident that potential impacts would extend beyond town boundaries,” she said.
“Regarding the second criterion, the Department has reviewed many development proposals similar in scale and is experienced applying the applicable standards under controlling laws, including the NRPA along with the accompanying rules,” said Loyzim.
Nor does the pier application represent a project of statewide significance, she said.
Furthermore, she wrote, the DEP will continue to review the pier application and will continue to accept and consider public comments, as long as they are submitted as, “soon as possible to allow adequate time to take those comments into consideration.”
She said the DEP anticipates issuing a licensing decision by March 10.
