A developer who filed a suit appealing the Saco Planning Board’s rejection of his 332-unit mixed residential development last year has lost his case before a Maine Superior Court that handles certain business cases.

Developer Loni Graiver’s complaint argued that the Saco Planning Board erred when it ruled in favor of his development at the preliminary approval stage but did not grant him final approval, even though he met all additional requested changes and conditions from the Planning Board and there was “an absence of any change in facts or circumstances.”

But Justice Thomas McKeon wrote in his filing, dated Aug. 22, that preliminary review and final review are distinct. “Nothing in the ordinance or Maine law compels the board to carry over its factual findings concerning an application for preliminary subdivision review to its decision on a final subdivision approval,” he wrote.

“The real losers here are the first-time buyers, divorcees and those looking to downsize who would have had beautiful new condos,” Graiver said in an interview, invoking Maine’s acute and ongoing housing crisis.

It’s not clear if the saga has officially come to a close. Graiver told the Courier on Aug. 29 that he is evaluating his options to appeal to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court and potentially bringing a federal lawsuit.

“I have not had a chance to digest the ruling with regard to the Lincoln Street development, but I fully support our neighborhoods and hope all sides can find a mutually accepted agreement that will work for all parties involved going forward,” Saco Mayor Jodi MacPhail said in a written statement.

Daniel Murphy of the firm Bernstein Shur, Saco’s legal counsel, said that the order “confirms that the Planning Board’s decision was not erroneous (and) vindicates the hard work and dedication of Planning Board members and city employees under challenging circumstances.”

The Planning Board granted preliminary application approval for the project in June 2023, but opposition toward the project grew steadily throughout 2023. It was largely spearheaded by a community group called Save Saco Neighborhoods.

In October, the Planning Board did not grant the project final approval, with the development failing to secure a positive vote on five criteria: traffic; sewage disposal; aesthetic, cultural and natural values; conformity with local ordinances and plans; and impact on adjoining municipality.

One negative vote on any of the criteria prevents a development from moving forward. In the ruling, the court stated that it was willing to remand some of the Planning Board’s findings on final approval – such as its rejection of the development on the criteria that it did not conform with local ordinances – but because the Lincoln Villages would have failed on other criteria, the court still denied the appeal.

In response to the ruling, multiple members of Save Saco Neighborhoods sent the Courier the following statement: “Save Saco Neighborhoods is glad to see that the state of Maine reaffirmed the city’s concerns about the traffic, safety and environmental impacts of the proposed Lincoln Street development.”

The project would not have met the need for affordable housing and preservation of green space in Saco, according to the group.

Late last year, after the Planning Board’s final ruling, Graiver told the Courier that he planned to price eight of the 288 of the two-bedroom units under $300,000, with the rest priced between $300,000 and $400,000.

Residents aired their opposition to the project during multiple hearings held in fall of 2023, citing concerns that the development was too big and that it would put pressure on traffic, among other objections.

Graiver, who claims this is the first time a local planning board has reversed its own decision, sees his legal quest as a fight against NIMBYism in Maine. NIMBY stands for “not in my backyard” and is often used as a shorthand to refer to people or groups opposed to new buildings near their homes.

Chelsea Hill, a Saco resident involved with Save Saco Neighborhoods, called the term NIMBY “politically lazy” and an “uncreative pejorative.”

In spring, after Graiver had filed his initial complaint, his legal team asked the court to add new claims, including one that a then-member of the Planning Board (who has since left) had a connection to the Save Saco Neighborhoods because he was a member of its Facebook group and was therefore biased.

The court did allow Graiver to amend his complaint based on this concern and allowed limited discovery to address the issue, but Justice McKeon ruled that the results of discovery did “not find sufficient evidence of bias” or require a trial of the facts to probe the matter further.

Courier reporter Sydney Richelieu contributed to this report.