Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Power Substation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press CMP for clearer site plans for Wadley Lane substation; council reiterates limited authority
Summary
Central Maine Power presented materials about a proposed Wadley Lane substation; residents and councilors said CMP’s visuals and location justification were inadequate and the planning board—not the town council—has decision authority.
Central Maine Power provided an informational update on plans for a proposed substation on Wadley Lane, and residents urged the company to provide clearer maps and stronger explanations for why the site was chosen instead of properties in the town’s industrial corridor.
The council heard the update from Tim (town staff), who prefaced the exchange by saying, “Remind you that the council has no statutory authority over the CMP project.” That limitation was reiterated several times as the discussion moved to questions from residents and councilors.
Mallory (councilor) told colleagues she attended CMP’s public presentation the prior Friday and said turnout was strong and most residents in attendance opposed the Wadley Lane location. “When pressed with…why couldn’t we consider the industrial corridor,” Mallory said, “I felt that their responses to that were inadequate.” She and others said CMP’s slides and photos did not orient viewers to the proposed site in enough detail.
Howard Hammerstein, a resident of 19 Hill Drive, asked whether the planning board might reject the project; councilors replied that the planning board is the decision-making body for land-use applications and that appeals of planning-board decisions follow the town’s appeals process. David McDerm (resident) likewise criticized CMP’s presentation quality and questioned how assurances from company representatives should be weighed when the presenters might not be decision-makers for the company.
Greg Thompson, a CMP community-relations representative, said the company took the public feedback seriously and would “look at a number of the sites that were brought up that evening” to review feasibility. “We are gonna look at a number of the sites…we need the time to review them,” Thompson said, and added CMP planned to pause public outreach for several weeks while staff analyzed alternatives.
Councilors and staff urged residents who want to submit concerns to use the contact information included in CMP’s materials and to engage the planning board, the body that will review the application. No formal action or vote was taken by the council; the item was presented for information and public comment only.
The council and several residents said they expect CMP to return with more detailed maps and a clearer justification for the site selection before any final planning-board action.
