FRYEBURG — The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed Tuesday a 2014 vote by the Planning Board that allowed Fryeburg Academy to use two parcels of leased land to teach outdoor classes and house administrative offices.

In the background for the court’s decision, Justice Ellen Gorman wrote that on Oct. 10, 2014, Fryeburg Academy submitted permit applications to the Planning Board for changes to the use of two parcels of leased land adjacent to the school.

Fryeburg Academy told the Planning Board that it wanted to use one of the parcels, known as the “land lot,” to teach outdoor classes, such as physical education and environmental science, and for storage related to the classes, and the other, known as the “house lot,” to house the admissions and advancement departments.

Gorman wrote that Fryeburg Academy believed the changes in use of the land were permitted under the town’s Land Use Ordinance, which identified a secondary school as a place where courses of study are taught.

The Planning Board subsequently approved the applications, on the condition that the land be used for secondary school purposes.

However, Gorman wrote that the Fryeburg Trust, which owns land abutting both lots, appealed the Planning Board’s decision to the Board of Appeals, claiming that the Planning Board had misinterpreted the Land Use Ordinance and that the change of use requested by the academy did not meet the requirements of the ordinance’s “secondary school” definition.

Code Enforcement Officer Katie Haley said that the Fryeburg Trust property abuts both lots, and that the sole trustee of the Fryeburg Trust is Barbara Graustein.

Gorman wrote that the Board of Appeals denied the Fryeburg Trust’s appeal, and that the trust quickly filed an appeal to the Oxford County Superior Court.

The Superior Court ruled that the Fryeburg Planning Board was correct in determining that the “land lot” would meet the standards of the ordinance, but overturned the Planning Board’s decision on the “house lot,” adding that the proposed admissions and advancement offices did not meet the requirements of the ordinance, since “no classes would be taught there.”

Gorman wrote that Fryeburg Academy appealed the Superior Court decision.

Mary Costigan, attorney for Fryeburg Academy, argued that offices for admissions and administrative departments are integral to a school running properly, and that they should fall under the ordinance’s definition of a school.

“The Planning Board interpreted the ordinance to mean that a ‘school’ is more than just a collection of classrooms,” Gorman wrote. “A review of the administrative record shows that the Planning Board did not clearly err in so determining.”

She wrote that the Supreme Court’s decision is for the Superior Court’s decision to be vacated, and for the Planning Board’s original vote to approve the applications to be upheld.

Haley said Wednesday in a telephone interview that following the Planning Board’s vote in 2014, Fryeburg Academy moved forward in adapting the lots into outdoor classrooms, and offices for admissions and advancement departments.

mdaigle@sunmediagroup.net

Copy the Story Link