Opinion ID: 2291239
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Sufficiency of the Planning Board's Findings

Text: The Statute required the Planning Board, before approving the subdivision application, to make findings that the subdivision would meet the statutorily mandated criteria and would comply with the Town's subdivision ordinance. See 30 M.R.S.A. § 4956(2), (3) (Pamph.1988). [1] Glasser contends that the Board failed to make adequate findings on certain of those criteria and that therefore it approval of the subdivision application is nullity. There is no support in our decisions for any such draconian consequence of inadequate findings. At most, were we to find the record contained inadequate findings, we would remand the case to th Board and direct it to make further finding. See Valente v. City of Westbrook, 543 A.2d 1373, 1375 (Me.1988). In any event, we find no reason for a remand. The record as a whole does reveal what the Board found to be the pertinent facts. In its written decision approving the subdivision plan, the Planning Board stated: Having considered the subdivision criteria of Tile 30 M.R.S.A. Section 4956, and the criteria of the Northport Subdivision Ordinance, and based upon a finding that the application of West Bay Associates conforms with all such criteria upon the imposition of the conditions set forth below; it is hereby Ordered by unanimous vote of the Planning Board that the final approval of the subdivision of West Bay Associates be granted.... That conclusory statement standing alone does not satisfy the statutory requirement. The requirement, however, can be satisfied even in the absence of detailed findings as long as the decision is supportable on the basis of express of implicit findings revealed by the record as a whole. Valente v. City of Westbrook, 543 A.2d at 1375; Cunningham v. Kittery Planning Board, 400 A.2d 1070, 1079 (Me.1979). Because the record in the case at bar amply elucidates the administrative agency's reasons for its decision, the absence of specific written findings is not fatal to the Board's approval of the subdivision.