More than 100 opponents of the Maine DEP's proposed Act to Update the Site Location of Development Laws squeezed into the Joint Standing Committee on Natural Resources on Tuesday afternoon to protest the controversial LD 1268. All of us at Main-Land Development Consultants, which has led the charge against LD 1268, were humbled by the turnout and the testimony against the bill, which lasted more than two hours and gave voice to more than 45 challengers (compared to the six who spoke in favor, including a rep from the Maine DEP). The entire Main-Land team attended the hearing in a show of support, and the Livermore Falls office was closed for the afternoon (DEP meanwhile only had two representatives at the hearing and the State Planning Office was visibly absent).
Whether it was the private land owners who came to the state house from towns like Bingham, Norway and Roxbury; the Hampden planning board member; the Franklin County Commissioner; the economic development director for the town of Madison; the Gorham contractor; the president of Franklin Savings Bank; or representatives from the Associated Builders and Contractors of Maine, Wagner Forestry, the Maine Real Estate and Development Association, WBRC Architects, the Erickson Foundation, the Maine Aggregate Association, the Maine Association of Realtors and the Maine Municipal Association, all said "No!" to LD 1268 in a loud, unified and informed voice. While each speaker approached their testimony in a different way during the three hour hearing, all opponents spoke to their concerns about how rural Maine would be left behind by the bill, as would rural Maine landowners who would see their property values plumet if LD 1268 was to be enacted.
Even Rep. Tom Saviello (U-Wilton), who is a co-sponsor of the bill, spoke against it, saying it was a "solution looking for a problem" and that if enacted "this bill as written will continue our decline" in western Maine, which has been hit hard lately by job losses, including the impending closure of the Wausau Mill in Livermore Falls/Jay.
Speaking on behalf of the Maine Municipal Association, whose policy committee voted to oppose the bill, Jeff Austin said the crisis in much of Maine is not growth, but the struggle to survive. "Growth isn't the challenge; it's the loss of citizens and the loss of jobs that's the crisis. The question facing municipalities now is how do we attract more, not how do we manage growth," he explained.
Speaking neither for or against the bill was GrowSmart (whose entire mission is to prevent sprawl as Maine DEP claims this bill was intended to do claims) and the Maine Turnpike Authority, and even the Maine Association of Planners who spoke for the bill said they did with "cautious optimism."
The bill will now get sent to a work session where we and the other opponents hope the committee will have the sense to kill the bill by giving it an "ought not to pass." In the meantime, we encourage those concerned about the bill flood the Natural Resources Committee with letters of opposition. You can link to the committee's contact information here. And continue checking back here for the latest updates on LD 1268's progress.
You can read more about the hearing here in the front page story from Wednesday's Lewiston Sun Journal, or in Mainebiz's Wednesday Daily. WCSH 6 also covered the hearing, and we'll post that clip when it becomes available.
Thursday, 16 April 2009
Monday, 13 April 2009
Press Herald features site law change controversy
Just one day before the public hearing on LD 1268: An Act to Update the Site Location of Development Laws, the Portland Press Herald published this front page story on the controversial proposal, its potential impacts and the reasonings behind it. You can click here to see the story directly on the Press Herald's website, or read the article in its entirety below. Main-Land Development Consultants' owner Darryl Brown, who has led the charge against this legislation, was featured, as was Jeff Austin, a lobbyist for the Maine Municipal Association, who was quoted as saying the proposed revamp of the site law "is just too draconian." The fact that up to 40 percent of the DEP reviewed projects of the last three years would have been denied under LD 1268 underscores certainly that. MMA will attend tomorrow's hearing and speak out against the bill. Press Herald writer Tux Turkel did a nice job presenting the issue from both sides of the table. Perhaps coincidentally, the article on LD 1268 ran alongside one on the struggles of Maine graduates to stay in the state because of a tight job market here. These two issues are connected much more closely than one might think. Development isn't a dirty word, and the jobs and revenue opportunities development creates are critical to Maine's fiscal future.
Throughout the article and the forums we've held, DEP has claimed the bill is just a conversation starter, and "wish-list kind of stuff." While that may have been their intention, we see things a bit differently. It is our impression that had Darryl not gotten wind of this in the roundabout way he did, LD 1268 would have likely been enacted without much discussion or realization of its implications.
That said, we're glad that the forums and the buzz they've helped generate have caused DEP to rethink this proposal, and give more consideration to the input of those who would be more impacted by any changes (those on the
front line like developers, realtors, town planners, etc.) DEP has also conceded some scaling back as it pertains to the rules associated with the site law (not the law itself) as a result of Main-Land's forums. It is our hope that this experience will really help illustrate an effective model for how the public and the private sectors can work together for the betterment of the state. From where DEP sits in Augusta, it's hard for them to fully understand how their decisions impact those who have to deal with the consequences. Had this bill be enacted without discussion, it would have devastating effects, especially on rural Maine. But now, we think the legislation that we'll get in the end will be so much stronger thanks to Darryl's input and that of the others who have come to the forums and joined his cause.
We hope this article will generate a larger turnout for the public hearing, which will be held in Augusta tomorrow (Tuesday, April 14) at 1 p.m. in the Cross Building. Hope to see you there!
Bill seeks to overhaul growth management
State House: The proposal would guide the siting of development, but foes say it could be a project-killer.
By Tux Turkel, Portland Press Herald Staff Writer
With the recession as a backdrop, lawmakers will hear a proposal Tuesday for a major overhaul of the state law that guides large-scale development.
Supporters, led by the state Department of Environmental Protection, will make the case that Maine's Site Location of Development Law is outdated and out of step with more recent growth management objectives.
They're seeking changes that would steer big projects closer to communities' growth areas, along with updated rules that reflect today's best development practices.
The recession is a good time to consider such changes, they say, absent the pressures of a building boom.
But opponents, including developers and some rural town representatives, say tightening up the site law during a deep economic downturn makes no sense.
Darryl Brown, owner of Main-Land Development Consultants in Livermore Falls and a vocal critic who has organized a campaign against the proposed changes, says an overhaul would bring development to a standstill.
Bound to be hurt, Brown said, would be rural communities that hunger for new businesses and the jobs they can bring, such as the towns he works with in western Maine.
Debate over development tends to be emotional and controversial, fueled by strong feelings about local control, sprawl and finding a balance between preservation and growth to maintain Maine's sense of place. These elements will color discussion of L.D. 1268, the bill that would revise the site law. The public is invited to comment at Tuesday's public hearing before the Legislature's Natural Resources Committee, which begins at 1 p.m. in Room 214 of the Cross State Office Building in Augusta.
FINE-TUNING DEVELOPMENT POLICY
Maine's site law requires state environmental review of significant development, including commercial projects covering three acres or more and large residential subdivisions. Enacted in the 1970s, it hasn't had major revisions since 1995.
Staff from state agencies, including the DEP, the State Planning Office and Department of Transportation, have been meeting for the past year or so to evaluate the aging law.
Andrew Fisk, who heads the DEP's Bureau of Land and Water Quality, said the issues boiled down to this: "Is development in Maine happening where we want and the way we want?"
The agencies looked at projects approved under the site law from January 2006 to December 2008. It found that two-thirds of all major development took place in local growth areas, in towns that have made those designations.
"We're not claiming there's a huge crisis on the landscape," Fisk said. "We just think we can do better."
That feeling focuses on the imperfect relationship between the site law and the 20-year-old Growth Management Act.
The act encourages towns to designate growth areas through local comprehensive plans. The idea is to concentrate development around existing services and buildings, rather than scatter it across the countryside. Changes in the site law, Fisk said, would complement the policy goals of the growth act.
But the act's planning process – once mandatory – is voluntary these days, and nearly half of the state's 455 communities lack plans consistent with the law, according to the State Planning Office. Fewer still have enacted effective zoning and land-use ordinances to support their plans.
Many of these towns are in rural areas, where too much development isn't a problem. Changes that might discourage businesses don't sit well with people there.
TENSION OVER RECESSION TIMING
The proposed overhaul of the site rule "is just too draconian," said Jeff Austin, a lobbyist for the Maine Municipal Association. "It's just too much of a barrier to development."
The group will oppose the bill, but Austin said his membership is split. Towns with strong zoning and comprehensive plans like to see the state backing up their ordinances. But it's a different story in rural towns that don't typically feel growth pressure.
"A lot of this is psychological and emotional," he said. "These towns are saying, 'How can you just turn off the lights in my town?' "
At the DEP, Fisk said the agency doesn't want to do anything to hurt Maine's economy. And rule changes that would affect residential subdivisions, for instance, would have more flexibility and allow construction in rural areas, if developments met open space and other conservation guidelines.
Fisk also said the proposals are drafts and part of a process, not a final product. They will be refined after the give-and-take that comes from public input.
That's not how Brown, the development consultant, views what has taken place.
A former legislator, Brown said the public knew little about the DEP's intentions until very recently. When he found out early this winter, he organized a series of informational forums in western Maine to draw attention to the plans. Some of the forums were attended by the DEP.
In Brown's view, the site law doesn't need major revisions. Looking back over the past 10 years, he said he just doesn't see big problems with how development is taking place. Brown has spent recent weeks reaching out to developers, small-town officials and other opponents, asking them to send a similar message to Augusta.
"I'm hoping this bill is just killed," he said.
FURTHER STUDY MAY BE NEEDED
It was unclear late last week whether there was support for the measure from environmental and land-use planning advocates.
The Natural Resources Council of Maine said it hadn't yet formed a position. GrowSmart Maine, which promotes planned development and downtown revitalization, said it wants to work on consensus-building with communities and not engage in contentious debates.
At the Maine Municipal Association, Austin said he wouldn't be surprised if the bill is held over for more study and possible compromises. The bill's lead sponsor, Rep. Robert Duchesne, D-Hudson, has said the committee may end up recommending that the idea be studied by a stakeholder group.
Fisk agreed that more discussion may be the outcome of Tuesday's hearing.
"We're not saying this should happen now," Fisk said. "We're just saying we should have the conversation."
Friday, 10 April 2009
ADVISORY: Opponents plan to pack Tuesday land law hearing
MEDIA ADVISORY
April 10, 2009
Contact: Darryl Brown/Owner Main-Land Development Consultants
(207) 897-6752 or darryl@main-landdevelopment.com
Opposition turnout expected to be heavy at land law public hearing
-Up to 40 percent of recently approved projects would be denied under bill-
AUGUSTA- Opponents of a controversial piece of land development legislation plan to pack a public hearing held by the Legislature's Natural Resources Committee this Tuesday. They will be led by Darryl Brown, owner/president of the Livermore Falls based Main-Land Development Consultants, and his entire staff, who have been traveling around the state over the past two months educating stakeholders about the potential impact of LD 1268: An Act To Update the Site Location of Development Laws.
The bill was created by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, but by that agency's own admission, between 20 to 40 percent of non-residential developments reviewed in the last three years would likely have been denied approval had LD 1268 already been in place.
LD 1333: An Act to Establish Climate and Energy Planning will be heard at the same hearing.
WHO: The Maine State Legislator's Natural Resources Committee
Darryl Brown, President/Owner of Main-Land Development Consultants
Staff of Main-Land Development Consultants (including firm engineers)
Maine State Legislators, land developers, Realtors, town planners, etc.
WHAT: Public Hearing before the Natural Resources Committee on Act to Update the Site Location of Development Law –sponsored by Rep. Bob Duchesne (D- Hudson) and Tom Saviello (U-Wilton)
WHERE: Room 214 of the Cross Building
111 Sewall Street, Augusta ME
WHEN: Tuesday, April 14 at 1 p.m.
WHY: If enacted, the Act to Update the Site Location of Development Law would limit large scale non-residential development to designated growth zones as defined by a town's comprehensive plan (nearly 200 Maine municipalities do not have comprehensive plans), urban compact zones, census designated locations (only 25 percent of Maine communities are in these designated areas), or those areas served by public sewer systems. It would also give Maine DEP the authority to require performance bonds, potentially beyond what the municipality may already require, causing a redundancy.
-END-
ABOUT MAIN-LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS
Main-Land Development Consultants has been providing land use planning services including surveying, soils testing, mapping, engineering, permitting and wastewater design to both public and private projects throughout western Maine and beyond since 1974. The company, now in its 35th year, is based in Livermore Falls and can be found online at www.main-landdevelopment.com. For more information, call (207) 897- 6752.
April 10, 2009
Contact: Darryl Brown/Owner Main-Land Development Consultants
(207) 897-6752 or darryl@main-landdevelopment.com
Opposition turnout expected to be heavy at land law public hearing
-Up to 40 percent of recently approved projects would be denied under bill-
AUGUSTA- Opponents of a controversial piece of land development legislation plan to pack a public hearing held by the Legislature's Natural Resources Committee this Tuesday. They will be led by Darryl Brown, owner/president of the Livermore Falls based Main-Land Development Consultants, and his entire staff, who have been traveling around the state over the past two months educating stakeholders about the potential impact of LD 1268: An Act To Update the Site Location of Development Laws.
The bill was created by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, but by that agency's own admission, between 20 to 40 percent of non-residential developments reviewed in the last three years would likely have been denied approval had LD 1268 already been in place.
LD 1333: An Act to Establish Climate and Energy Planning will be heard at the same hearing.
WHO: The Maine State Legislator's Natural Resources Committee
Darryl Brown, President/Owner of Main-Land Development Consultants
Staff of Main-Land Development Consultants (including firm engineers)
Maine State Legislators, land developers, Realtors, town planners, etc.
WHAT: Public Hearing before the Natural Resources Committee on Act to Update the Site Location of Development Law –sponsored by Rep. Bob Duchesne (D- Hudson) and Tom Saviello (U-Wilton)
WHERE: Room 214 of the Cross Building
111 Sewall Street, Augusta ME
WHEN: Tuesday, April 14 at 1 p.m.
WHY: If enacted, the Act to Update the Site Location of Development Law would limit large scale non-residential development to designated growth zones as defined by a town's comprehensive plan (nearly 200 Maine municipalities do not have comprehensive plans), urban compact zones, census designated locations (only 25 percent of Maine communities are in these designated areas), or those areas served by public sewer systems. It would also give Maine DEP the authority to require performance bonds, potentially beyond what the municipality may already require, causing a redundancy.
-END-
ABOUT MAIN-LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS
Main-Land Development Consultants has been providing land use planning services including surveying, soils testing, mapping, engineering, permitting and wastewater design to both public and private projects throughout western Maine and beyond since 1974. The company, now in its 35th year, is based in Livermore Falls and can be found online at www.main-landdevelopment.com. For more information, call (207) 897- 6752.
Wednesday, 8 April 2009
Letter to the Editor: The Irregular (Kingfield)
Following Main-Land Development's March forum in Kingfield on the Act to Update the Site Location of Development Laws, owner Darryl Brown wrote a letter to the editor of the local weekly newspaper, the Original Irregular. The letter, ran in the April 8th edition of the paper, and you can read it in its entirety below, or here on the Irregular's website.
Encourage development, don't discourage it
To the editor:
On behalf of myself and my staff at Main-Land Development Consultants, I'd like to thank the 25 or so concerned citizens who attended our March 26 forum at Webster Hall on the Maine Department of Environmental Protection's proposal to update the Site Location of Development Law and its related rules.
Since we spoke in Kingfield, the bill has been given an LD number (LD 1268: An Act To Update the Site Location of Development Laws) and sent to the Natural Resources Committee, which means that now more than ever, we must be proactive in preventing this limiting legislation from being passed into law.
As I stressed during our presentation, never in my 37 years as a land use consultant have I been more concerned about the consequences of a piece of planning legislation than I am now. Based on our deep understanding of the current site law and our careful review of the proposed changes to it, I truly believe if these new initiatives are implemented, development in Maine will come to a standstill. In these trying economic times, our state leaders must be encouraging thoughtful, responsible growth in our communities, not outlawing it.
Many of the developers our firm works with throughout western Maine also live and recreate in the region, largely because they have a deep appreciation and respect for the area's natural resources. Given this, they are committed to protecting what makes western Maine so special.
Recent growth in the region that has attracted many visitors and the important job and revenue opportunities that are created as a result while concurrently preserving the region's resources is a testament to this. It also illustrates the effectiveness of the development laws already on the books. Sadly, many of the very projects that have been such a boom to the area in the past decade would have been flat-out prohibited under the proposed law and rule changes, without ever having been given a chance for review by the town's planners.
Micromanaging a developer's contractor list or requiring evidence of a loan or line of credit before a project is even approved doesn't fulfill the Maine DEP's stated mission to "protect and enhance the public's right to use and enjoy the State's natural resources." Instead, it ties the hands of those looking to invest in our towns and robs local governmental of the control over their communities.
The fact that so many concerned citizens - -from bankers to builders, town planners to state politicians- - have attended the forums we've put on these past two months around western Maine speaks to the region's clear commitment to its future and the smart growth that will ensure that future is a prosperous one. It is we the people who are the strongest stewards of our communities and as long as we continue to remind Augusta of this —whether by writing letters to our legislators or packing public hearings— it will hopefully remain that way.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 897-6752 or darryl@main-landdevelopment.com if you have more questions on the potential impact of LD 1268 on the Kingfield area or if you'd like to be kept informed of the bill's progress.
Darryl Brown, President/Owner Main-Land Development Consultants, Livermore Falls
Encourage development, don't discourage it
To the editor:
On behalf of myself and my staff at Main-Land Development Consultants, I'd like to thank the 25 or so concerned citizens who attended our March 26 forum at Webster Hall on the Maine Department of Environmental Protection's proposal to update the Site Location of Development Law and its related rules.
Since we spoke in Kingfield, the bill has been given an LD number (LD 1268: An Act To Update the Site Location of Development Laws) and sent to the Natural Resources Committee, which means that now more than ever, we must be proactive in preventing this limiting legislation from being passed into law.
As I stressed during our presentation, never in my 37 years as a land use consultant have I been more concerned about the consequences of a piece of planning legislation than I am now. Based on our deep understanding of the current site law and our careful review of the proposed changes to it, I truly believe if these new initiatives are implemented, development in Maine will come to a standstill. In these trying economic times, our state leaders must be encouraging thoughtful, responsible growth in our communities, not outlawing it.
Many of the developers our firm works with throughout western Maine also live and recreate in the region, largely because they have a deep appreciation and respect for the area's natural resources. Given this, they are committed to protecting what makes western Maine so special.
Recent growth in the region that has attracted many visitors and the important job and revenue opportunities that are created as a result while concurrently preserving the region's resources is a testament to this. It also illustrates the effectiveness of the development laws already on the books. Sadly, many of the very projects that have been such a boom to the area in the past decade would have been flat-out prohibited under the proposed law and rule changes, without ever having been given a chance for review by the town's planners.
Micromanaging a developer's contractor list or requiring evidence of a loan or line of credit before a project is even approved doesn't fulfill the Maine DEP's stated mission to "protect and enhance the public's right to use and enjoy the State's natural resources." Instead, it ties the hands of those looking to invest in our towns and robs local governmental of the control over their communities.
The fact that so many concerned citizens - -from bankers to builders, town planners to state politicians- - have attended the forums we've put on these past two months around western Maine speaks to the region's clear commitment to its future and the smart growth that will ensure that future is a prosperous one. It is we the people who are the strongest stewards of our communities and as long as we continue to remind Augusta of this —whether by writing letters to our legislators or packing public hearings— it will hopefully remain that way.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 897-6752 or darryl@main-landdevelopment.com if you have more questions on the potential impact of LD 1268 on the Kingfield area or if you'd like to be kept informed of the bill's progress.
Darryl Brown, President/Owner Main-Land Development Consultants, Livermore Falls
Monday, 6 April 2009
Public hearing for site law changes scheduled!
Since Main-Land spoke at our final forum on our concerns about the proposed changes to the Site Location of Development Law, the bill has been given an LD number (LD 1268: An Act To Update the Site Location of Development Laws) and sent to the Legislature's Natural Resources Committee.
It's there LD 1268 will be given a public hearing on Tuesday, April 14 at 1 p.m. in Room 214 of the Cross Building. Now more than ever, we must be proactive in preventing this limiting legislation from being passed into law. We hope you can attend this hearing and let the committee know what impact this will have on you and your community. Main-Land hopes to help pack this public hearing with those speaking out against the bill and by doing so, send a strong message to Augusta that if these new initiatives are implemented, development in Maine will come to a standstill at a time when we need it most. As we see it, this is not just an issue that should concern Maine's land developers or contractors or town planners, but every single resident who cares about the future viability of our great state.
If you are unable to attend the hearing on April 14, I encourage you to write a letter to your local Legislator and let them know LD 1268 cannot move forward as currently written. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Bob Duchesne (D- Hudson) who can be reached at RepRobert.Duchesne@legislature.maine.gov or at (207) 827-3782 and co-sponsored by Tom Saviello (U-Wilton), who can be reached at RepThomas.Saviello@legislature.maine.gov or (207) 645-3420.
It's there LD 1268 will be given a public hearing on Tuesday, April 14 at 1 p.m. in Room 214 of the Cross Building. Now more than ever, we must be proactive in preventing this limiting legislation from being passed into law. We hope you can attend this hearing and let the committee know what impact this will have on you and your community. Main-Land hopes to help pack this public hearing with those speaking out against the bill and by doing so, send a strong message to Augusta that if these new initiatives are implemented, development in Maine will come to a standstill at a time when we need it most. As we see it, this is not just an issue that should concern Maine's land developers or contractors or town planners, but every single resident who cares about the future viability of our great state.
If you are unable to attend the hearing on April 14, I encourage you to write a letter to your local Legislator and let them know LD 1268 cannot move forward as currently written. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Bob Duchesne (D- Hudson) who can be reached at RepRobert.Duchesne@legislature.maine.gov or at (207) 827-3782 and co-sponsored by Tom Saviello (U-Wilton), who can be reached at RepThomas.Saviello@legislature.maine.gov or (207) 645-3420.
Recently approved projects in Western Maine
While it's our proactive work of getting the word out about the disconcerting impacts of the Act to Update the Site Location of Development Laws that has put Main-Land Development Consultants in the headlines lately (and in towns across western Maine including Bethel, Farmington, Norway, Bridgton, Skowhegan, Auburn and Kingfield), we've been busy surveying, engineering and presenting client projects to planning boards across western Maine.
Here is a look at some of the projects we've secured approval for recently:
•Pleasant Lake Overlook - A 14-lot subdivision off the Powhaten Road in Otisfield received the green light from the town's planning board, as well as DEP Stormwater Management Law approval;
•Great Brook Preserve - An additional five residential lots that are part of this larger 66-lot subdivision off of Route 26 in Newry have been given the go-ahead from that town's planning board;
•And, the Town of Richmond has granted Site Plan Review approval to our client, the Maine Rural Water Association, so they can convert a former residential home into their new offices, which they'll move into from their current location in Brunswick.
Congratulations to these clients and continue checking back on the blog to learn about other projects around western Maine we are working on!
Here is a look at some of the projects we've secured approval for recently:
•Pleasant Lake Overlook - A 14-lot subdivision off the Powhaten Road in Otisfield received the green light from the town's planning board, as well as DEP Stormwater Management Law approval;
•Great Brook Preserve - An additional five residential lots that are part of this larger 66-lot subdivision off of Route 26 in Newry have been given the go-ahead from that town's planning board;
•And, the Town of Richmond has granted Site Plan Review approval to our client, the Maine Rural Water Association, so they can convert a former residential home into their new offices, which they'll move into from their current location in Brunswick.
Congratulations to these clients and continue checking back on the blog to learn about other projects around western Maine we are working on!
Tuesday, 24 March 2009
Planners' concerns on Site Law updates in the Morning Sentinel
Last Monday, Main-Land Development Consultants' President/Owner Darryl Brown was invited to give an overview to the town of Farmington's planning board on his concerns about the changes to the Site Location of Development Law. Darryl received this request from the board's chair, who had attended Main-Land's Farmington forum on the site law changes and was very concerned with what he heard. Betty Jespersen, a reporter from the Morning Sentinel who has covered the county for more than two decades, was at that Monday night board meeting, and wrote an extensive story for the Saturday Sentinel about Main-Land's quest to bring awareness to the proposed changes, and the concerns of town planner as to what the impact might be if these updates are approved by the Maine Legislature.
You can link to her story here, or read it below.
Land-use rule bill worries officials
By Betty Jespersen, Morning Sentinel Staff Writer
FARMINGTON -- A proposed change to development rules by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection is a significant concern for the chairman of Farmington's Planning Board.
"The changes are extensive enough ... that we felt there should be more discussion," said Chairman L. Herbert "Bussie" York.
One change would direct large-scale commercial and residential projects -- a pellet mill, a Lowe's Home Center or a 30-plus-lot subdivision -- to be built within a town's commercial center or designated growth area.
That may not be that much of a problem for towns with state-approved comprehensive plans that include established areas for future growth.
Towns without a plan, however, could find the DEP deciding where development should go, according to Darryl Brown, owner of Main-Land Development Inc. of Livermore Falls.
The proposed changes also would increase a development's buffer areas around sensitive land, add more requirements for subdivisions and give the DEP authority to approve or reject site contractors.
Brown spoke before the Planning Board last week. Andrew Fisk, director of the DEP's Bureau of Land & Water Quality, also spoke.
"We are not a lobbying firm ... but we are here to discuss public policy that we do not agree with," Brown said. "Not all the changes proposed are negative, but we have picked out the most onerous, and we feel the negatives far outweigh the positives."
Brown said an example of a project that probably would be rejected under the proposed rule change would be a large residential subdivision in the Carrabassett Valley area.
"The proposed restrictions that would limit that type of development would allow no disturbance of slopes greater than 20 percent," he said. "That would prohibit the construction of many roads across slopes to provide access to higher elevations." Other proposed changes, he said, would limit road and driveway grades to 8 percent. "That is totally unrealistic in mountainous terrain," he said.
"In nearly four decades as a land planner, never have I been more worried about the impact of a piece of legislation than I am now," Brown said.
DEP's Fisk said the agency realizes that significant policy changes are being proposed, "but the vast majority of the rule changes are already in the law."
Under the proposed legislation, if a community has no state-approved local comprehensive plan, large-scale projects could not be permitted in that town, Fisk said.
He said specifics of proposed rule changes, such as in buffers, setbacks and slopes, still are being worked out as public comments come in. He said the law and rules had not been modified for years. The agency decided to do a complete overhaul of the system, rather than doing it piecemeal, to present the public a comprehensive view of the law.
The site development law was created in the 1970s to regulate land development of large projects.
Farmington's code enforcement officer, Steve Kaiser, agrees that the state planning process could use improvement -- such as getting towns more help with their comprehensive plans -- and said he would welcome that change.
"But making such substantial changes to such a long-standing law needs to be thoroughly vetted," Kaiser said. "I think Farmington will be in good shape because we have such good local control. This will be more of a problem in the smaller towns that have not enacted good ordinances."
Brown said the DEP has not done enough to get the word out to landowners, developers, town officials and communities. Meetings the agency held in Augusta and Portland were not well advertised and even his own office was not notified, he said.
Fisk said the public will have a chance to comment at later meetings and hearings.
"This is not about the state seizing authority," he said. "We have had very constructive feedback during these meetings, and we will make changes and come up with responsible rules."
You can link to her story here, or read it below.
Land-use rule bill worries officials
By Betty Jespersen, Morning Sentinel Staff Writer
FARMINGTON -- A proposed change to development rules by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection is a significant concern for the chairman of Farmington's Planning Board.
"The changes are extensive enough ... that we felt there should be more discussion," said Chairman L. Herbert "Bussie" York.
One change would direct large-scale commercial and residential projects -- a pellet mill, a Lowe's Home Center or a 30-plus-lot subdivision -- to be built within a town's commercial center or designated growth area.
That may not be that much of a problem for towns with state-approved comprehensive plans that include established areas for future growth.
Towns without a plan, however, could find the DEP deciding where development should go, according to Darryl Brown, owner of Main-Land Development Inc. of Livermore Falls.
The proposed changes also would increase a development's buffer areas around sensitive land, add more requirements for subdivisions and give the DEP authority to approve or reject site contractors.
Brown spoke before the Planning Board last week. Andrew Fisk, director of the DEP's Bureau of Land & Water Quality, also spoke.
"We are not a lobbying firm ... but we are here to discuss public policy that we do not agree with," Brown said. "Not all the changes proposed are negative, but we have picked out the most onerous, and we feel the negatives far outweigh the positives."
Brown said an example of a project that probably would be rejected under the proposed rule change would be a large residential subdivision in the Carrabassett Valley area.
"The proposed restrictions that would limit that type of development would allow no disturbance of slopes greater than 20 percent," he said. "That would prohibit the construction of many roads across slopes to provide access to higher elevations." Other proposed changes, he said, would limit road and driveway grades to 8 percent. "That is totally unrealistic in mountainous terrain," he said.
"In nearly four decades as a land planner, never have I been more worried about the impact of a piece of legislation than I am now," Brown said.
DEP's Fisk said the agency realizes that significant policy changes are being proposed, "but the vast majority of the rule changes are already in the law."
Under the proposed legislation, if a community has no state-approved local comprehensive plan, large-scale projects could not be permitted in that town, Fisk said.
He said specifics of proposed rule changes, such as in buffers, setbacks and slopes, still are being worked out as public comments come in. He said the law and rules had not been modified for years. The agency decided to do a complete overhaul of the system, rather than doing it piecemeal, to present the public a comprehensive view of the law.
The site development law was created in the 1970s to regulate land development of large projects.
Farmington's code enforcement officer, Steve Kaiser, agrees that the state planning process could use improvement -- such as getting towns more help with their comprehensive plans -- and said he would welcome that change.
"But making such substantial changes to such a long-standing law needs to be thoroughly vetted," Kaiser said. "I think Farmington will be in good shape because we have such good local control. This will be more of a problem in the smaller towns that have not enacted good ordinances."
Brown said the DEP has not done enough to get the word out to landowners, developers, town officials and communities. Meetings the agency held in Augusta and Portland were not well advertised and even his own office was not notified, he said.
Fisk said the public will have a chance to comment at later meetings and hearings.
"This is not about the state seizing authority," he said. "We have had very constructive feedback during these meetings, and we will make changes and come up with responsible rules."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)