[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Maine's Coastal rogram PIMWZS EEPORr August 1, 1985 to March 31, 1986 COASTAL ZONE TER INFORMATION CEN VN PAOS ABangor Eastport achies AugustaX7 Bar Harbor Okland Portland Kittery HT 393 M2 M35 AUG 1985- MAR 1986 /8 Oepartment MaineState Planning Office THE MAINE COASTAL PROGRAM management ordinances and policies to help guide development with Coastal Program as- In the early 1970's, several large industrial sistance. Coastal communities have identified projects were proposed along Maine's coast public accessways to the shoreline and improved including an aluminum smelter and two oil these sites for public recreation. Other com- refineries, that would have dramatically changed munities have initiated waterfront improvements the characteTof the coast. Coastal residents and which expand commercial and recreational Maine State government recognized that only opportunities, through a coordinated effort could they manage The federal, State, local partnership envi- wisely the coast's many valuable resources. sioned by Congress has an excellent track record In 1972, the federal government established in Maine. Maine's Fish Pier Program, first the Coastal Zone Management Act designed to planned by the Coastal Program, has resulted in forge a partnership between federal, State, and seven new fish piers along the coast, bringing local governments to improve coastalTesources many jobs to coastal communities. The cargo use and management. In 1978, Maine officially port initiative, developed by the Program, is adopted a Coastal Management Program. The responsible for a new cargo pier in Eastport and primary emphasis of Maine's program is to strike the proposed bulk calg0port in Searsport. Proj- a balance between resource management and ects to conserve fragile naturalTesources are also development activities and to supportTegional, numerous, supporting the Program's goal to and State agencies working on coastal manage- balance the conservation and development of ment issues. coastal resources. Since 1978, Maine's Coastal Program has had People interested in learning more about many outstanding accomplishments which can Maine's Coastal Program may contact the State be attributed to State, regional and local coopera- Planning Office at 184 State Street, State House tion. Many coastal towns have prepared com- Station #38, Augusta, Maine 04333 or call prehensive plans and adopted a variety of growth (207) 289-3261. Financial assistance for this report was provided by a grant from the MAINE COASTAL PROGRAM in the Maine State Planning Office, through funding provided by the U.S. Department of Ccnimrce, Office of Ocean & Coastal Resource Management, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. MAINE'S COASTAL PROGRAM Progress Report August 1, 1985 to March 31, 1986 Submitted to The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration Office of Ocean & Coastal Resource Management Washington, D.C. 20235 US Department of Commerce NOAA Constal Center Library 2234 South Hcb-= Avenue Charleston, SC -i9405-2413 Maine State Planning Office Augusta, Maine 04333 State House Station # 38 Tel. (207) 289-3261 T A B L E 0 F C 0 N T E N T S Page Coastal Issues & kccomplishments 1. New Tools for Managing Mainets Coastal Resources ....... 1 2. Improved Public Awareness of Coastal Issues ............ 2 3. The Cumulative Impact of New Development on tte Coast .................................................. 3 4. Shoreland Zoning Law Upheld ............................ 4 5. Preservation of Access to Jasper Beach .................. 4 6. Preservation of the Oyster River Bog ................... 4 7. Formation of New Land Trusts ........................... 5 8. Waste-to-Energy Projects ............................... 5 9. Leasing of Submerged Lands ............................. 5 10. Significant New Legislation Affecting the Coast ........ 5 Appendix A - 1985-86 Work Program PART I STATUS OF GRANT TASKS (CZ-109) 1. Improving Program core law enforcement and technical awistance A. DEP - Core law enforcement & administration ...... 9 B. DEP - Developing maps for the Sand Dune Law ...... 9 C. MMA - Code Enforcement Officers' Assistance Program .................................... 20 D. NRCM - Public Education about Maine's land use laws .............................. 20 E. Regional Councils: Technical Assistance to Communities ................................ 21 F. Shoreland. Zoning Administration ................... 22 Page 2. Local Program A. Coastal Planning Grants ............................ 23 B. Waterfront Action Grants .......................... 27 3. Interagency Coordination A. Federal Consistency ............................... 27 B. Coastal Advisory Committee ........................ 29 4. Local & State Program Adninistration A. Technical Assistance and Local Grant 29 Administration .................................... 29 B. State Program Administration ...................... 37 C. Critical Areas Program Support .................... D. Support for Local & State Grant Administration: Contractual Services .............. 39 5. Coastal Resource Analysis & Policy Development A. Growth Management and Cumulative Impact 40 of Incremental Development ........................ Contractual Services: (1) IF&W, key wildlife habitats .............. 0 ... 42 (2) SMRPC, inventory of town growth management 42 techniques ................................... (3) Land Use Mapping ............................. 43 (4) Wetlands Assessment, Paul Adamus (Eco, Analysts Inc.) .......................... 43 (5) Legal & Institutional, Marine Law Institute... 43 M (6) Digitization, of Resource Maps ................ . 44 (7) Evaluation of Land Use Trends, Maine Audubon ................................ 44 (8) Visual Inventory ............................. 44 B. Marine Research Plan, ARGO Maine 44 (DMR, Bigelow Lab, UMO) ........................... 45 C. State Information System .......................... D. Waterfront & Pier Study (MDOT) .................... 46 E. Management of Marine Wildlife (IF&W) .............. 46 PART II OTHER FEDERALLY REQUIRED REPORTS 1. Monitoring & Enforcement Activities .................... 47 2. Wetland/Estuary Report ................................. 47 3. Fisheries Management Activities ........................ 48 4. Hazard Management Activities ........................... 48 Page 5. Urban Waterfront & Commercial Harbor Projects ......... 52 6. Coastal Access Activities ............................. 64 7. Changes to Coastal Zone Boundaries & Management Authority ............................................. 65 8. Changes in Strengthening the Management of Coastal Resources ..................................... 68 9. Major Coastal Issues & State Role (see main body of the report) 10. New Publications Related to Program Implementation .... 69 11. SPO Organizational Chart .............................. 70 Appendix B - Exhibits B-1. Coastal Advisory Committee Minutes ......................... 71 B-2. Summary of Gulf of Maine Workshop, 20-22 August, 1985 ....................................................... 73 B-3. Coastal Wetlands ........................................... 75 B-4. L.D. 2167, An Act to Enhance the Sound Use and Management of Maine's Coastal Resources .................... 80 Coastal Issues & Accomplishments 1. NEW TOOLS FOR MANAGING MAINE'S COASTAL RESOURCES The 112th Legislature affirmed the State's strong commitment to the conservation, beneficial use and management of coastal resources with enactment of a comprehensive coastal initiative proposed by Governor Joseph E., Brennan. The bill (An Act to Enhance the Sound Use & Management of Maine's Coastal Resources, P.L. 784) sets forth nine legislative policy goals to guide coastal resource management, and implements these goals by providing improved local management tools in four vital areas: 0 revitalizing local waterfronts, 0 providing public access to the sea, 0 restricting development in flood prone areas, and 0 protecting natural and cultural resources. Specifically, the bill gives State backing to municipalities which adopt ordinances giving preference to water-dependent uses on the waterfront. It requires local planning boards when reviewing subdivision applications to deter-mine whether the proposals will adversely impact public rights for physical or visual access to the shoreline. It creates a Heritage Coastal Area list which will formally designate areas containing geological, botanical, zoological, historical or scenic features of exceptional state or national significance, for the purpose of encouraging their protection-on a voluntary basis. The bill addresses hazard management issues with provisions (a) requiring new construction to be sited at least one foot above the 100 year flood elevation, and floodway areas to be designated as resource protection zones in local zoning ordinances; (b) prohibiting State expenditures for development activities within designated coastal barrier beach areas; and (c) outlining cost sharing for disaster assistance to local governments. The legislative policy goals in this legislation will be further implemented by a companion bond initiative scheduled for referendum vote in November, 1986. The bond initiative will establish the following funds: 0 Maine Shoreline Access Fund, providing $3.25 million for State and local acquisition and development of public access along the coast. The fund will ensure that as our coastline becomes more heavily developed, places to reach the shore for recreation and commercial activities (e.g. clamming and worming) are not lost. 0 Waterfront and Pier Rehabilitation Program, providing $4 million to coastal communities for fish pier and other commercial waterfront improvements. - a 0 Marine Laboratory Development, funding improvements to the Department of Marine Res3urces Laboratory in Boothbay Harbor. This project will enhance the State's research ability and management of the fishery. 0 Maine State Ferry Service, providing $2 million for improvements critical to the residents and local economies of the State's many coastal islands. Additional steps to implement the legislative policy goals declared in the coastal management legislation will be developed over the next months, as individual State agencies examine opportunities within their own areas of responsibility. The unprecedented growth experienced by coastal communities today require a strong commitment to the work of coastal resource management at every level of government, if the timeless qualities of the Maine coast are to endure the changes of the next decade. (See also Task 4.A in Part I; and items 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Part II of Appendix A.) 2. IMPROVED PUBLIC AWARENESS OF COASTAL ISSUES Enactment of the new coastal management legislation may be attributed in part to increased public awareness and interest in coastal issues resulting from a series of over fifty public presentations which were made by SPO staff along the length of the coast. The presentations covered public service groups, chambers of commerce, and specially-organized public meetings. They made effective use of a warmly-received 20-minut e narrated slide program entitled The Maine Coast: A Time of Change produced by the State Planning Office, which is also generally available on request. Heightened public visibility of coastal management issues is a result of other SPO activities as well. These include the staff role in coordinating "Maine Coastweek 185,11 for which the Governor officially proclaimed the week of October 5-14 as "Coastweek"; and publication and distribution of a booklet on The Maine Coast: A Time of Change. Distribution throughout the coastal area of a poster, "Know What You're Doing Before You Build on the Coast," and television airing of two forthcoming public service announcements funded by the Coastal Program, will continue this public education effort into the future. (See also Tasks 1.D and 4.B in Part I of Appendix A.) -2- 3. THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF NEW DEVELOPMENT ON THE COAST Last year in Cumberland County twelve moratoria on growth were imposed to buy time for planning. In York County, local officials of six towns found it necessary to limit the number of building permits they will issue; one town has limited the number of new sewer hookups. One hardly need ask why. Population and housing growth in southern Maine not only have eclipsed all expectations, but they have run well beyond the capability of zoning and other tools available to the towns for land use management, as well as local administrative resources. What is happening in southern Maine inevitably will be affecting other areas of the coast as well, sooner or later. Between 1970 and 1985 a nine-town area in York County grew in population by 64%. One town grew by one-third over five years. Some of the planning boards in this area handle two to three hundred permit requests annually, and have little time left over for advance planning. The threat to Maine's character and resources is lot by lot, piece by piece, over time. A fragmented landscape is the result. We find ourselves saying no, we really don't have any good hunting areas any more, and no, you can't walk across that land or drink that water. Traffic jams, heretofore virtually unknown in Maine, now are common along Route 1. The cumulative impacts of all this activity result in a pressurized environment and lifestyle, and loss of Maine's special pace and sense of place. Portland already is touted in some circles as the San Francisco of the east. Though the comprehensive plans of most towns declare the importance of resources such as open space, ground water, wetlands and wildlife, few communities have effective ordinances for maintaining these values. At the State level, proposals for large projects are closely scrutinized, but only on a case-by-case basis. The cumulative effects of all permits on our landscape and natural resources is not considered. To grapple with this problem, the State Planning Office and Southern Maine Regional Planning Commission have undertaken a pilot project covering nine York County towns. Initial reports on natural resources, land use change, municipal capabilities for managing growth, the use of sewer and water extensions to direct growth, and the legal framework for growth management, will be available this summer. These reports, as well as the final results of the pilot project, should be of help to towns throughout the State which seek to control rather than be controlled by new development. -3- The next stage of the project will be to share with the towns the available data base and a variety of approaches to effective growth and land use management, non-regulatory as well as regulatory, and to provide specialized technical assistance. The project is being guided by local and State level advisory committees. The local committee consists of members of planning boards in the nine towns, the Regional Planning Commission, code enforcement officers and Conservation Commissions. Legislators, local planners, resource experts, the Maine Municipal Association, environmental organizations, a developer, and SPO policy and community assistance staff comprise the State-level committee. (See also Task 5.A in Part I of Appendix A.) 4. SHORELAND ZONING LAW UPHELD The York County Superior Court in March revoked a variance to height restrictions in the Shoreland Zoning Law in Old Orchard Beach. The variance would have allowed construction of a 142 foot high condominium tower, which would have been the tallest building on the Maine coast. (See Task 1.F in Part I of Appendix A.), 5. PRESERVATION OF ACCESS TO JASPER BEACH Jasper Beach at the head of Howard's Cove in Machiasport is a magnificant beach of polished volcanic stones, a unique barrier beach formally listed, with Coastal Program funding, as a critical area by Maine's Critical Areas Program. When the Town was threatened with loss of traditional access to the beach, the Machiasport Conservation Commission raised $15,000 in less than a year in a grass-roots fundraising campaign - a commendable feat in a town with a population of around 1,000. Fundraising was through extensive publicity via newspapers, radio, and mass mailing of brochures; donation cans at local businesses, donations for beach stones mounted as pendants; a slide show, benefit supper and lobster raffle. Matched with a $30,000 grant through the State, this money enabled the town to purchase a key parcel of land to preserve public beach access. (See also Item 6 in Part II, Appendix A.) 6. PRESERVATION OF THE OYSTER RIVER BOG In a "first of its kind" action in Maine, the City of Rockland conveyed conservation easements on 700 acres of city-owned land in the Rockland Bog to the Oyster River Bog Association. This was the culmination of a decade-long effort by conservationists to secure protection for the ecologically sensitive areas and its rare plants. This action guarantees that the land will remain forever wild, regardless of subsequent -4- ownership or shifts in the political wind. Coastal Program grants between 1979 and 1982 assisted the City in surveying and marking boundaries and in other bog resource management activities. The Rockland Bog is listed on the State's register of Critical Areas. (See also, Item 2 in Part II, Appendix A.) 7. FORMATION OF NEW LAND TRUSTS The Maine Coast Heritage Trust has reported formation of the Islesboro Islands Trust and four other land conservation trusts in 1985, bringing the total to twenty-six. The Islesboro Trust has already protected two important island properties in Penobscot Bay totalling 42 acres, Hutchins Island and a large portion of Spruce Island. In addition, the Trust has made a contribution to the Town of Islesboro for development of a comprehensive plan. (See also, Item 8 in Part II, Appendix A.) 8. WASTE-TO-ENERGY PROJECTS Ground was broken in July, 1985 for a $103 million power plant in Biddeford in York County, which will burn more than 600 tons of trash a day while producing 22 megawatts of electricity. To be operational by mid-1987, the plant promises to solve severe problems from over-flowing dumps experienced by numerous towns in the area. Similar plants to serve groups of communities in other parts of the coastal area are in the planning stages, solving problems of wastes seeping into ground water supplies while producing marketable power. The Coastal Program assisted in preparation of a draft Refuse Disposal District Enabling-Act enacted by the 1984 Legislature (P.L. Ch. 820) through a grant to the City of Brewer for the Penobscot Valley Solid Waste Project. (See also Item 8 in Part II, Appendix A.) 9. LEASING OF SUBMERGED LANDS Rules favoring water-dependent uses of submerged lands and discouraging upland uses were adopted by the Bureau of Public Lands in March, following the required public review process and consideration of in-depth comments from the SPO. (See Item 8 in Part II of Appendix A.) 10. SIGNIFICANT NEW LEGISLATION AFFECTING THE COAST In addition to the Coastal Management Act and related bond initiative reported above, there have been a number of other legislative accomplishments affecting the coast. These include the following: -5- Shoreline Access L.D. 2380 (P.L. 782), An Act to Confirm & Recognize Public Trust Rights in Intertidal Land. This bill affirms that the public trust encompasses use of intertidal land (the zone between the mean highwater mark and the mean low watermark) not only for "fishing, fowling, and navigation," but also for "use as a footway between points along the shore and use for recreational purposes," not including motorized vehicles. (See also Item 6 in Part II of Appendix A.) Authority of Harbor Masters L.D. 2313 (P.L. 692), An Act to Clarify the Authority of Harbor Masters. This law, to be repealed on April 1, 1987, provides a temporary solution to a controversy involving an apparent conflict between the Submerged Lands Law and the Harbormaster Law. The former authorizes the State Bureau of Public Lands to lease submerged lands; the latter makes assignment of moorings a responsibility of municipally-appointed harbor masters. P.L. 692 specifically authorizes municipalities to enact ordinances regulating harbor activity and providing for locating and assigning moorings. It also requires a minimum number of moorings for nonresidents in such ordinances, and orders the Department of Conservation to report to the Legislature by January 1, 1987 regarding the local and statewide harbor issues which have arisen. (See also Item 5 in Part II of Appendix A.) Endangered Plants L.D. 1997 (P.L. 595), An Act to Establish an Official Endangered Plant List. A Critical Area rogram initiative, this bill establishes an official list of endangered and threatened plants that are worthy of special conservation attention in Maine, to be prepared and maintained by the Director of the State Planning Office with the advice of the Critical Areas Advisory Board. (See also Task 4-C under Park I of Appendix A.) Freshwater Wetlands L.D. 838 (P.L. 485), An Act to Protect'Freshwater Wetlands. This law gives an estimated 30,000 acres of freshwater wetlands similar protection to that given saltwater wetlands under the Alteration of Coastal Wetlands Law, a Coastal Program core law. (See Item 2 in Part II of Appendix A.) -6- Protection of Water Quality L.D. 2283 (P.L. 698), An Act to Amend the Classification for Maine Waters and Change the Classifications of Certain Maine Waters. This law amends the Protection & Improvement of Waters Act, which is a Coastal Program core law, with a significant updating and upgrading of the water quality classification system. (See Item 8 in Part II of Appendix A.) 13e/ -7- Appendix A -- 1985-86 Work Program PART I - STATUS OF GRANT TASKS (CZ-109) Task 1. Improving Program Core Law Enforcement & Technical Assistance A. DEP - Core Law Enforcement & Administration (starting October 1, 1985) The number of DEP complaints in the Coastal Area fell from 165 reported for the summer quarter to 124 in the fall quarter and 89 in the winter quarter. Permit applications increased to 142 in the fall quarter (up from 137 in the summer), and up again to 250 in the winter quarter. The Site Location of Development Law accounted for just under half of the cases. Consent agreements were attempted in 26 cases in the fall, and 21 cases in the winter. See Tables 1, 2 and 3 for further details. Consent agreements resolved and pending are listed in Tables 4a and 4b. Examples of the types of enforcement and licensing issues handled by the DEP Land Bureau staff during the reporting period are summarized in Tables 5a and 5b. B. DEP - Developing Maps for the Sand Dune Law A Memorandum of Understanding for the conduct of this project by the Maine Geological Survey (MGS) was signed in September, 1985 by the MGS, the DEP and the SPO in accordance with the Interim Significant Improvement Benchmark for this task. The MGS is to prepare computer-generated maps of 60 miles of Maine's sand dune areas from Kittery to South Portland for use by the DEP in administering the Sand Dune Law. A marine geologist was hired for the project in February 1986 by the MGS. Work completed during this reporting period consisted of familiarization with the sand dune permitting process, and with the computer digitizing/processing system to be used. Arrangements to obtain Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), historic aerial photographs, and new aerial photography were initiated. A meeting of the interdepartmental Sand Dune Working Group was held to discuss progress. -9- Table 1 DEP CaIPUUNTS IN THE COASTAL AREA October 1 to December 31, 1985 January 1 to March 31, 1986 Status Downeast Cen tra I Southern Total Status Downeast Central Southern Total Resolved 7 3 5 is Resolved 5 5 4 14 Pend i ng 10 13 74 97 Pending 4 9 43 56 Deadfile 4 2 6 12 Deadfile -1 1 17 19 TOTAL 21 18 85 124 TOTAL 10 is 64 89 W"MMIMMMMM "M M"Mmm@ Table 2 DEP PERMIT APPLICATIONS IN THE COASTAL AREA October 1 to December 31, 1985 january 1 to March 31, 1986 SITE LOCATION DOWNEAST CENTRAL SQjTHERN TOTAL SITE LOCATION DOWNEAST CENTRAL SOUTHERN TOTAL Residential 4 15 19 Residential 2 16_ 25 43 Indust ri a I /Come rci al 5 15 20 Industrial/Commercial 5 3 33 41 Mining Mining 0 0 3 3 Solid Waste 15 4 5 24 Solid Waste 5 7 12 24 Retail Facilities 1 2 2 5 Retail Facilities 0 0 0 0 WETLANDS WETLANDS Outfalls, Cable, Waterline Outfal I s, Cabl es; ,Waterlines. Seawalls, Erosion Control 4 5 3 .12 Seawalls, Erosion Control 12 8 12 32 Railways, Piers. Ramps, Railways. Piers, Ramps, Floats 9 19 6 34 Floats 17 23 19 59 Dredging 1 1 2 Dredging 1 0 2 3 Dunes 3 12 15 Dunes 1 0 2 3 Fill 1 5 6 Fill a 1 1 2 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 1 2 3 MAINE WATERWAY CONSERVATION & MAINE WATERWAY CONSERVATION 2 2 DEVELOPMENT- 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 34 44 b4 142 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION 1 0 0 1 TOTAL 43 58 149 250 TOTAL STATE PROJECTS RECEIVED - 286 TOTAL STATE PROJECTS RECEIVED - 378 CZM TOTAL - 142 - 49.7% CZM TOTAL - 174 = 46% Table 3 DEP COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS & ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS IN THE COASTAL AREA October 1 to December 31, 1985 January 1 to March 31, 1986 Regi on/ Compl i ance Consent Agreement Referrals Region/ Compliance Consent Agreement Referrals Statute Inspections Attempted Resolved Pend i ng Atty. General Statute Inspections Attempted Resolved Pendi ng Atty. General Downeast -- Downeast -- Site Law 4 1 0 1 0 Site Law 2 0 0 0 0 Wetlands Law 10 1 0 1 0 Wetlands Law 4 1 1 0 0 Solid Waste Law 19 3 1 2 0 Solid Waste Law 4 2 1 1 0 Central -- Central -- Site Law 5 0 0 0 0 Site Law 3 0 0 a 0 Wetlands Law 3 0 0 0 0 Wetlands Law 0 0 0 0 0 Solid Waste Law 10 6 2 4 0 Solid Waste Law 0 5 1 4 0 Southern Southern Site Law I 1 0 1 0 Wetlands Law 4 9 1 8 0 Site Law 0 1 0 1 0 Solid Waste Law 14 5 0 5 0 Wetlands Law 0 7 4 3 0 Solid Waste Law 4 5 0 5 0 TOTAL COASTAL Site Law 10 2 0 1 0 TOTAL COASTAL Wetlands Law 17 10 1 8 0 Solid Waste Law 43 14 3 11 0 Site Law 5 0 0 1 0 Wetlands Law 4 5 5 3 0 TOTALS 70 26 4 22 0 Solid Waste Law 8 7 2 10 0 TOTALS 17 21 7 14 0 Table 4a DEP CONSENT AGREEMENTS IN THE COASTAL AREA October 1 to December 31, 1985 Resol ved 1. Town of Damariscotta - Damariscotta - Violation: Solid WasTe - Required: interim operation improvements, landfill closure, $500.00 penalty 2. Richard Condon - Augusta - Violation: So I TTVa-FTe - Required: solid waste removal, $875.00 penalty 3. Claude Dubois Excavating. Inc. - Biddeford - Violation: Coastal Wetlands - Required : permit application, $3.000 penalty 4. Sawyer Environmental Recovery Facility, Inc. - Hampden - Violation: Solid Waste - Requi red : remedial action plan, possible future penalties Pend i ng 1. City of Augusta - Augusta - Solid Waste 2. City of Belfast - Belfast - Solid Waste 3. Sawyer Environmental Recovery Facility, Inc. Hampden Solid Waste 4. Town of Boothbay - Boothbay - Solid Waste 5. Town of Sedgwick - Sedgwick - Solid Waste 6. Town of Brooklin - Brooklin - Solid Waste 7. Marcelle J. Whitney - Hampden - Coastal Wetlands 8. George D Craig - Bangor - Site L;cation 9. New England Baptist Council - Old Orchard Beach - Coastal Wetlands 10. Edward McCarthy - South ortland - Coastal Wetlands-- 11. John Schafer - Biddeford Coastal Wetla-nUs- 12. Arlene Lefebvre - Biddeford - Coastal Wetlands 13. Josephine McAteer - Biddeford - Coastal Wetlands (DUn-e_s_T_ 14. Town of Wells - Wells - Coastal WetlanTs--Munes) 15. Harry C. Crooker - Brunswick - Coa Stal Wetlands - 16. H.C. crooker & Sons, Inc. - Brunswick - Coastal Wetlands 17. H.C. Crooker & Sons, Inc. - Topsham - Site Location 18. H.C. Crooker & Sons, Inc. - Brunswick and West Bath - Solid Waste 19. Blow Brothers, Inc. - Old Orchard Beach Septage 20. P & D waste Transfer. Inc. - Old Orchard Beach - Solid Waste 21. Town of Yarmouth - Yarmouth - Solid Waste 22. Town of Topsham. -Topsham Solid Waste -13- Table 4b DEP CONSENT AGREEMENTS IN THE COASTAL AREA January 1 to March 31, 1986 Resol ved Pendi ng 1 . Town of Brooklin - Brooklin I . Ronald S. Anderson - Steuben - Solid Waste - Violation: Solid waste - Requi red: landfill closure and $1000.00 penalty 2. City of Augusta - Augusta - Solid Waste 2. Town of Damariscotta - Damariscotta 3. City of Belfast - Belfast - Violation: expansion of existing landfill - Solid Waste - Required: Amendment to closing plan and consent agreement, removal of waste 4. Slow Brothers, Inc. - Old Orchard Beach - Septage 3. Arlene Lefebvre - Biddeford 5. Town of Boothbay - Boothbay - Violation: Sand Dunes - Solid Waste - Required: remove part of structure- permit application for remainder removal . if denied - revegetate area - $800.00 penalty 6. George D. Craig - Bangor - Site Location 4. Josephine McAteer - Biddeford 7. Harry C. Crooker - Brunswick - Violation: Sand Dunes - Coastal Wetlands - Required: permit application - remove fill, if denied - $900.00 penalty 8. Harry C. Crooker - Brunswick - Coastal Wetlands S. Edward McCarthy South Portland 9. Harry C . Crooker & Sons , Inc. Topsham - Violation: Coastal Wetlands - Site Location - Required. Construct riprap according to permit - remove excess fill - $150.00 penalty 10. N.C. Crooker & Sons, Inc. Brunswick & West Bath - Solid Waste 6. John Schafer - Biddeford 11. P & D Waste Transfer :Inc. Old Orchard Beach - Violation: Sand Dunes Solid Waste - Requi red: permit application - remove structure, if-denied - revegetate area - $800.00 penalty 12. Sawyer Environmental - Hampden - Solid Waste 7. Town of Sedgwick - Sedgwick 13. Town of Topsham - Topsham - Violation: Solid Waste - Solid Waste - Requi redt operational improvements. closure, and $1,000.00 penalty 14. Town of Wells - Wells 8. Marcella J. Whiting - Hampden - Coastal WetlanZ-s7gunes) - Violation: Coastal Wetlands 15. Town of Yarmouth - YarTnouth - Required- permit application, remedial action. and $400.00 penalty - Solid Waste -14- Table 5a DEP ENFORCEMENT SUMMARIES October 1 to December- 31, 1985 January 1 to March 31, 1986 I . Homeland Gravel Pit - Saco 1. Anderson Landfill - Steuben LTI Staff is assisting A.S.'s office to gather evidence for prosecution A consent agreement has been drafted regarding violations found at Downeast of permit holders. Pit received DEP license in the 1970's. Disposal, Inc.. a private landfill owned by Ronald S. Anderson and located Conditions of the permit were not followed. Siltation of a stream in Steuben. Maine. The violations of the Solid Waste Management Rules and a hazard to public safety caused by steep slopes are issues. included no application of daily cover and incomplete application of final Case had been referred in 1984. cover on inactive areas of the landfill. The consent agreement includes. in part, provisions for the development of a ground and surface water 2. William Meredith - York monitoring program for the landfill. Staff is assisting A.G.'s office to gather evidence for prosecution 2. City of Belfast - Belfast of subject for wetlands violations. Highly visible violation referred to the A.G. in 1985. Staff is currently negotiating a consent agreement with the City to close its landfill which has encroached on a neighboring property and is 3. Old Orchard Beach - Town Transfer Station & Stump Dump contaminating ground and surface water. An engineer firm is drafting a Staff is assisting A.G.'s office to prepare suit against town. closing plan and installing monitoring wells. Various violations of permit conditions and open burning at facility 3. Eliot Transfer Station - Eliot are issues. Case was referred in 1985. Open burning at town run transfer station caused visibility problems for 4. P & D Waste Transfer, Inc Old Orchard local airport and neighbors. Staff worked with Town to correct problem. Town hired extra worionen. Staff is attempting to resolve a significant case of improper handling and storage of asbestos. 4. Garnache Gravel Pit - Biddeford 5. Merrill Cargo Port - Portland Staff is assisting A.G.'s office to gather evidence for prosecution. Complaint has been filed. Operator has no permit for 15 aqre gravel pit. Staff assisted neighbors to the bulk cargo port in having the BEP Issues include flooding damage to neighbor's property and siltation of reopen the license. The Board will reexamine noise, produced at stream. Case referred in 1982. facility and set standards after a public hearing. *Neighbors claim noise levels are greater than those described in the original 5. Sawyer Environmental - Hampden application to BEP. Staff has investigated and is attempting to resolve a significant case of improper disposal of special waste in a landfill not licensed for this material. Staff has drafted a consent agreement and is presently negotiating a settlement. Table 5b DEP LICENSING SUMARIES October 1 to Deceiber 31, 1985 3. Sawyer Environmental Recovery Facility, Hampden - Secure Landfill 11 Sawyer Environmental Recovery Facility of Hampden (SERF) proposed the construction of a commercial 8.7 acre Secure Landfill Site and 1. Shape. Inc. - Biddeford, Industrial Building Expansion associated leachate collection and management system for the disposal of oil ash, coal ash, ancillary power station waste, municipal solid The applicant, a manufacturer of extruded plastic components for waste ash, wood ash and oil spill debris. SERF was given conditional cassette recording equipnent. applied for a Site Location permit to approval under the Site Location of Development Law by the Board of expand its facilities in the Biddeford Industrial Park. The proposal Envirorrnental Protection on June 12, 1985 for this landfill. From was to enlarge an existing building from 56.000 square feet to June to December of 1985, in order to comply with the Conditions of 107,400 square.feet to provide additional warehousing and Corporate the Board Order. SERF submitted to the Department for review. testing offices. Shape owns three separate lots in the Industrial Park, each results of the landfill liner material. an operation manual, a having separate manufacturing facilities on it. Since the three lots contingency plan for leachate disposal, ground water monitoring were considered to be part of a *common scheme of developnent" under information, etc. which was approved by the Department in December of the Site Location Law, the review of the stormwater management plan 1985. In addition, on December 18, 1985 the Board approved a request included reviewing runoff calculations from all three lots. This was by SERF tD amend the June 12, 1985 Board Order to allow disposal of the most important issue in the review. The applicant proposed to other compatible wastes as well as waste oil and non-recoverable used install a detention basin to decrease the post-expansion peak flow of oil at the landfill. Review of this information and the amendment stormwater leaving the site. The project was approved. request involved many hours of review time by staff from October through December. All on-going conditions of the June 12 Board Order 2. Thayer's Y-KnDt Boatyard - North Haven, Piers, Causeway & Dredging have now been met for Phase I of the Secure Landfill and the Landfill has now begun operations. The applicant was a commercial boatyard on North Haven Island. The purpose of the project was to build a facility for a travel lift to 4. U.S. Amy Corps of Engineers - JonespDrt, Navigation Improvements enable the bDatyard to lift larger boats out of the voter. - Review of the project involved extensive negotiation with the applicant, In November of 1979, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers received a involving reductions in the size and extent of the structure and fill Consistency Detemination Concurrence with the Coastal Wetlands to be placed in the intertidal zone. The project had 3 parts: Alteration Act and was issued a Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act for Navigation a. Dredging a channel for boat access leading from deeper water to Improvements proposed to be undertaken in Jonesport Harbor. Due to the boatyard. funding, the Corps never proceeded with the project. Since funding b. Removing an old granite dock from the intertidal zone. became available in 1985, on October 15th, the Corps again requested c. Building new finger piers using the salvaged granite; and from the Department the issue of a Consistency Determination constructing a narrow causeway from the upland 'to the piers. Concurrence and a Water Quality Certification for the project. As originally proposed the fill would have covered a much larger The project involves dredging of a 100 foot wide. 8.foot deep adjacent area, to be used as boat storage. Staff felt that the fill entrance; the construction of two anchorages of 9 and 6 acres; and was excessive, and that upland area was available for boat storage. the construction of a 1200 foot rubble mound and cellular steel sheet The evidence did indicate, however. that severe winter ice build-up pile breaktater. After review of the project design by staff, the prohibited pile supported construction as an alternative to the Department re-issued the Consistency Determination Concurrence and fill. The applicant twice reduced the size of the area to be filled, Water Quality Certification on December 17 with the condition that finally arriving at the minimum amount that the travel lift could proposed construction dates and a water and resource quality operate on. The total area lost to new fill was comparable in size monitoring plan be submitted for review and approval prior to to the total area regained through removal of the old dock. The construction. staff felt that the net effect was a wash, in terms of habitat impact. In addition. the applicant agreed to implant the high marsh 5. John D. Morris - Rockland vegetation from the fill site to an adjacent area. The project was taken to the Board for a decision. The Board approved the project. Shopping center in Rockland consisting of 165.000 square feet. Center will accommodate two anchor tenants and shops of small retail business. The total site consists of 17 acres which fronts onto Route I just north of town. Special provisions for controlling erosion and surface runoff are part of the plans. mmm Table 5b (Cont.) The project is expected to cost $5.000,000 and financing will be 10. H. R. Hinckley I Co., Manset through Maine Savings Bank. The applicant has provided a plan to control interior traffic within the parking lot with the aid of Applicant proposed to install a travelift and place approximately landscaped barriers. The City will provide for public sewer and 3270 cubic yards of fill in a wetland in a small cove area in front water. All solid waste generated by this project will be disposed of of their Manset boat building facility. A pre-fab shop on piles was at the Rockland landfill. existing in the proposed fill area. The new proposal included tearing down the existing building on piles and filling in the area The increase in traffic will require widening Route I as well as the to build a service center/office building on a concrete foundation. installation of a traffic control light. The applicant has a demonstrable need for a travelift pier, however, 6. Maine Mall Road Associates - South Portland staff felt that there was an excessive amount of fill in the proposal and that it was unreasonable to create upland for the building when Shopping center in South Portland consisting of 100,000 square feet there were many upland alternatives available. The staff recommended on 8.8 ac rv . The site is located on the Payne Road just north of the denial to the Board and the proposal was denied by the Board. existing Maine Mall shopping center. 72,000 square feet of parking will provide space for 500 cars. Provisions for controlling 11. Hill Application, Phippsburg stormwater also include special provisions for filtering phosphorus before the stormwater reaches Clark's Pond. The increase in traffic Applicant is proposing construction of three 2-story residential will require the installation of a traffic control light as well as homes to be built on posts in a C-ZDne on Hunnewell Beach in some widening of the Payne Road. Phippsburg, Maine. The Sand Dune Regulations do not require that a The 5.6 million dollar project will be financed by People's Heritage building be built on posts in a C-7one. Bank. Public sever and water will be provided by the municipality. This project is located in an undeveloped back dune area that Solid waste will be disposed of at Regional Waste Systems disposal contains ancient sand dunes and uncommon pitch pine forests and rare site in Scarborough. plants. The applicant is purchasing the parcel of land from a land owner who owns a very large parcel of undeveloped land adjacent to 7. Philbrook Hotel - South Portland this parcel . ' This is one of the last contiguous parcels of undeveloped land near a sand beach in Maine. There is concern that Philbrook Hotel consisting of 4 stories, 120 rooms will be located on approval for the proposed three residential homes will result in Philbrook Avenue adjacent to exit ramp from 1-295. The parking lot establishing a precedent for further development in that area. will serve 122 cars. A special detention pond to filter phosphorus Another concern is that the predicted sea level rise will result in will be constructed. Some existing pines will remain. Other flooding in this back dune area within 100 years. additional trees and shrubs will be used to screen and landscape the building and parking lot. Public utilities will be provided by the 12. John Phillips - Ellsworth muni ci pal i ty. Financing for the 4.8 million motel will be financed by Howard Savings Bank. On 10/8/85. the Board denied Mr. Phillips applicatilon to develop a septage spreading site in the watershed of Branch Lake, the water 8. Coastline Inn Limited - South Portland supply for Ellsworth. Although the proposed spreading area met the siting requirements of the Department's regulations and presented The Coastline Inn consists of 54 rooms in a two story building negligible risk of water polluted, the Board decided that it was located on the John Roberts Road. Surface water runoff will be inappropriate to locate such a land use in the watershed of a public controlled by the use of a community storage basin. Phosphorus toter supply. removal will also be incorporated into the design. The parking lot will be landscaped, screened and will accommmodate 56 cars. Public 13. Rockport Marine, Inc. - Rockport utilities will be provided by South Portland. Financing of $800,000 project is being provided by State Savings Bank. The Board approved the filling of 0.2 acres of coastal wetland for the expansion of a boat yard. The boat yard was competing with the 9. Stanley Tanger - Kittery applicant's restaurant business for the limited space available on the applicant's harbor side lot. Expansion by filling of the wetland This project consists of a small shopping center on Route 1 in was the most economical way for the applicant to accommodate both Kittery. The area involved is 4.9 acres and will provide uses. approximately 50,000 square feet of retail space. Publi c water is provided, however, on-site sewage disposal will be used. Some trees will remain, but new planting of trees and shrubs will be used around the buildings and in the parking lot to control interior traffic. Financing for the $3,850,000 project will be financed by Casco Northern Bank. Table 5b (Cont.) 14. Harry S. Crooker & Sons, Inc. - Topsham January 1 to March 31, 1986 The Department approved Crooker's application for an after-the-fact permit to mine bedrock and remove borrow materials from a pit adjacent to the Androscoggin River. Crooker has appealed the Department's decision to require reclamation of the pit slopes to a Regional Waste Systems - Portland. Resource Recovery Facility. gra de of 2. 5 hori zontal to I verti cal . R.W.S. applied to the Board of Environmental Protection for permits to 15. Steven & Loretta Weigel - Wells construct a 500 ton per day resource recovery facility to serve approximately 20 towns in Southern Maine. Because of the nature of the The Weigels were denied an application to construct a duplex on a lot project and the fact that there were two third parties involved in the adjacent to Rachel Carson Wildife Refuge. The lot was located within application process. ten days of public hearing were necessary in order to a tidal mark. Though the house was to be constructed on posts, the adequately review the applications. This $85 million project was approved Department found that the project would unreasonably harm estuarine by the Board. I and marine fisheries. Penobscot Energy Recovery Company - Orrington. Resource Recovery Facility. 00 16. Town of Perry - Perry I P.E.R.C. applied to the Board of Environmental Protection for permits to Perry has applied for a permit to operate a transfer station and construct a 600 ton per day resource recovery facility to serve disposal area for demolition debris next to the Perry Town Office. approximately 18 towns in South Central Maine. This project also went to The site appears to be marginal due to soils limitations and hearing, however. many of the permitting issues have been resolved in the proximity to nearby residences as well as the town office. R.W.S. proceedings and the hearings took only two days. This $66 million project was approved by the Board. 17. Diamond Cove Associates - Portland Dictar Associates - Falmouth, Residential Complex and Golf Course. Diamond Cove proposes to rehabilitate 36 existing buildings into 134 condominium units. The buildings are located on about 90 acres of Dictar has applied to the Department of Environmental Protection for a Site Great Diamond Island. An additional 100 acres of the site will be Location permit to construct 124 single family dwelling units along with an subdivided into 74 single family house lots. 18 hole golf course. Sewerage will be disposed of with subsurface disposal systems on lots New England Baptist Council - Old Orchard Beach. Wetland Reclamation. where suitable soils have been identified. Lots without suitable soils will be connected to a proposed sand filter system which will The applicant is proposing to fill an abandoned salt water swimming pool be constructed to serve the condominium units. The effluent from the and recreate a productive coastal marsh. The project will require bringing filter system will be discharge to Casco Bay. in fill material to level the depression and then marsh vegetation will be planted. The Department has received numerous requests to hold a public meeting on the application. Those recluesting a hearing are primarily Bangor Hydro-Electric Company - Ellsworth, Project Relicensing. concerned with the state-wide precedent - setting impact that the project may have. It is an intensive, high density development in a The applicant proposes to relicense the existing Ellsworth Hydroelectric fragile island setting. Project, consisting of the Ellsworth Dam and Powerhouse (9.8 MW). Graham Dam, Lake Leonard, and Graham Lake. Environmental concerns include the impacts on continued project operation on: Recreation and other public uses of Lake Leonard and Graham Lake; Anadromous Restoration Programs for Atlantic Salmon and Alewives; and Water Quality in the lakes and the Union River below the project. 'm Table 5b (Ccnt.) Great Salt Bay Sanitary District - Damariscotta. Treatment Facility. E&R Development Corporation - Scarborough, Condominiums. The District has applied for a Site Location Permit to construct three The applicant is proposing to construct 3 condominium units on a 50,000 aerated lagoons with associated control structures and access roads. The square foot parcel of land considered to be a mixture of coastal sand dune project is part of the DEP/EPA mandated Capital Improvements Project to and coastal wetland. This parcel is located in an 'A" flood hazard zone. collect and treat wastewater generated by the-Towns of DamariscDtta and The units will be constructed on posts even though the applicant proposes Newcastle. to fill to create a back dune ridge and flat which would increase the elevation of the of the parcel above the 100 year flood elevation. The Ultrasystems, Inc. - Jonesboro, Power Plant Modifications. project includes a public access area to provide access to nearby Jones The applicant received approval to develop and operate a wood-fired power Creek and the Scarborough River. plant on March 27. 1985. The company has now requested a revision to the Sheepscot River Associates - Wiscasset, Hotel . site plans involving changes In the configuration of the structures on the site. The changes proposed will require changes in the stomwater The applicant proposes to construct a 3 story inn to be located on the management system. western bank of the Sheepscot River. The building will Involve 32,000 square feet of coastal wetland area. The project will be constructed on Richard Hill - Phippsburg, Residential dwellings. posts and will extend out into the wetland 240 feet and will affect 195 feet along the shore. Concerns regarding the project are the impacts the The applicant owns an option on a parcel of land on Hunnewell Beach for project will have on the wetland area and the projects compatibility with which he proposes the construction of three single family dwellings existing recreational uses of the area. This area is popular in that there supported on posts. This parcel of land is located on the back dune area are two historic schooners adjacent to the proposed development site. of a sand dune system in a C flood zone. The project area consists of undeveloped pitch pine forest and intermittant wetlands with cranberry Diamond Cove Development - Great Diamond Island, Portland, Residential bogs . N-veT-opm-e-nT. There has been substantial opposition to this proposed project from review Diamond Cove Associates proposes to renovate 36 former military structures agencies and from the public. The State Coastal Geologist. The Natural into 134 residential dwelling units and to subdivide about 100 acres of Resources Council of Maine and the Maine Audubon Society all believe that surrounding property into 74 lots for single family residential use. The the sea level will rise several feet within the next 100 years and, as a project has been scheduled to go to public hearing in April. result. the Hunnewell Beach Shoreline will be near or landward of the proposed site. The Department staff felt that the significant question of sea level rise and the erosion/accretion cycles at Hunnewell Beach were substantial enough to request a public hearing. The Board on February 26, 1986 approved the request for hearing. No hearing date had been set as yet. U.S. Amy Corps of Engineers - Kennebec River. Maintenance Dredging. The A.C.E. proposes to dredge approximately 50.000 cubic yards of material from the Doubling Point Reach area of the Kennebec River. The work will be performed by a Government Hopper Dredge over a 10 day period between September IS and October 1. 1986. Dredged material will be disposed of at an "in river" site with depths ranging from 82 to 100 feet. This site is 1. 7 miles south of the dredge area. The system development phase is expected to be completed by July, with actual map production to be completed between August and December, 1986. The Final Significant Improvement Benchmark for this task wa's changed to December 15, 1986. Expansion of the project to include coastal barrier beaches and wetlands, salt marshes, tidal flats, etc. not otherwise covered was proposed by the Coastal Advisory Committee for funding for 1986-87. C. MMA - Code Enforcement Officers' Assistance Program When the hiring by MMA of a full-time attorney to assist local CEOs could not be undertaken as planned, SPO and MMA renegotiated activities to be undertaken in this task. The Maine Municipal Association's legal staff will undertake the following revised activity schedule: a) Prepare case summaries of Rule BOK legal actions from District Court records in 8 selected coastal areas. b) Interview Judges, Attorneys, and local Code Enforcement Officers to determine the perceived strengths and weaknesses of Rule 80K. c) Prepare a report summarizing findings from the interviews and case studies, and recommend necessary actions for improvement. d) Revise as necessary the Rule 80K Code Enforcement Handbook for local officials. e) Draft amendments to the State law and Rule 80K to implement report recommendations. f) Prepare two articles for the MMA magazine for local officials on the subject of local code enforcement and Rule 80K. These tasks will be undertaken by MMA during the summer months and will be completed in September, 1986. D. NRCM - Public Education about Maine's Land Use Laws A Project Steering Committee met three times to develop concepts and background for the two television public service announcements (PSA's) and the poster. The Committee agreed that the television PSA should focus on the issue of development pressures along the coast and the need to manage that development. It was also -20- agreed that the poster should focus on informing the public about State and local land use laws and where to find out more about them. Work on one television PSA was nearly complete by the end of March. (It has since been completed and delivered to television stations.) Work on the poster was also begun. The poster will be distributed throughout the coastal area for display in town offices, libraries, etc. Once T.V. station and public reaction to the first PSA is measured, a second PSA will be produced by the end of the grant period. All aspects of the project are on or ahead of schedule. E. Regional Councils: Technical Assistance to Communities There are 144 communities comprising Maine's coastal area. Maine's Coastal Program relies on the Regional Councils serving these communities to provide much of the local technical assistance to planning boards and other local groups. This assistance includes technical reviews of major subdivision and development proposals requiring local approval, updating local zoning and land use regulations and a wide variety of other tasks; Because the majority of coastal towns in Maine do not employ full-time planners, the assistance provided by these agencies is relied upon by many communities. Five key local assistance tasks are being undertaken by the 6 coastal regional councils with Coastal Program funds this year. The tasks are: 0 Improving Local Shoreland Zoning - Regional councils will provide specialize shoreland zoning technical assistance to coastal communities with needs identified in earlier assessment work. Technical assistance will focus on improved ordinances, local administration and enforcement. 0 General Planning and Zoning Technical Assistance - Assistance to local planning boards, local boards of appeals, code enforcement officers and other local boards reviewing major development proposals and for,mulating local coastal policies. Products will vary based on the needs existing in each region, including workshops, model ordinances, revised ordinances, etc. -21- 0 General Training - Provide general training opportunities for local planning boards and boards of appeals on basic duties and responsibilities. Training will include at least one workshop in each region. Representatives from the regional councils, the Maine Municipal Association and SPO met several times to discuss the statewide coordination of workshops for local officials. Initially, a list of significant local planning issues was compiled and prioritized. The need for a uniform agenda for local planning boards, boards of appeals and code enforcement officers workshops resulted in review of outlines currently used by the several regional councils. All regional workshops will be publicized in the Maine Townsman to insure that local officials have adequate notification of both basic and special interest presentations. 0 Capital Improvements Planning - Regional Councils will assist the State Planning Office in distributing a Local Capital Improvements Handbook prepared by the State Planning Office and may provide additional assistance based on regional needs. 0 Growth Management Special Assistance - This task will allow each Regional Council to focus on local technical assistance specialized to meet specific local needs in their region. Each council developed a proposal and submitted it to the State Planning Office by February 1st. Activities undertaken under this task vary from specialized harbor management and groundwater protection workshops in Hancock County, coastal flooding studies and development of local management options in the Southern Kennebec and Mid-coast regions, to improved local mapping in Southern Maine to complement ongoing cumulative impact of development planning. F. Shoreland Zoning Administration (starting October 1, 1985) The Shoreland Zoning Law was amended by the 1985 Legislature to shift State agency oversight responsibility after July 1, 1985 from the State Planning Office to the Department of Environmental Protection. The SPO and the DEP signed a Memorandum of Understanding to continue Coastal Program support of -22- this function, effective October 1, 1985. The key position of DEP Shoreland Zoning Coordinator was approved by the State Department of Personnel in late December. Interviews commenced in mid-February, but the position was not filled until after the end of this reporting period. In the interim, the SPO continued providing shoreland zoning technical assistance to local officials and the public, answering numerous inquiries daily. The SPO also carefully followed a challenge to the Shoreland Zoning Law in Old Orchard Beach. In April 1985, the town Board of Appeals granted a 70 foot height variance to a developer proposing to build a 142 foot-high condominium tower. This variance opened the way for the construction of the tallest building on Maine's coastline; double the allowable height under the Town's own zoning ordinance. A neighborhood group successfully challenged the decision in York County Superior Court. On March 7, 1986, the Court revoked the variance upon finding the defendant had not satisfied all the necessary criteria of the undue hardship test. (See clipping reproduced on the following page.) Task 2. Local Program A. Coastal Planning Grants Well in advance of Interim Significant Improvement Benchmarks for this task, awards to 18 communities totalling $178,189 were announced on September 20, 1985, as shown in Table 6. Contracts were drafted and work commenced on all of them during the reporting period, with two exceptions: the Belfast City Council voted not to go ahead with the Commercial Street Wharf study, and a special York Town Meeting voted not to accept their grant for a harbor parking feasibility study. Comments on the status of various projects are as follows: _23- Court chops down beachfront tower By SID LEAVITT York County Bureau OLD ORCHARD BEACH - A local businessman wont't be allowed to erect the Maine coastline's tallest building. Danton Towers, a proposed 142-foot-high oceanside condominium, lost one of two necessary local approvals in a ruling issued from York County Superior Court Monday. While upholding a use permit granted by the Planning Board last April, Judge G. Arthur Brennan struck down a height variance issued a short time later by the Zoning Board. The Zoning Board granted a variance that would have allowed the building to be more than double the maximum height allowed under the town's 1982 shoreland zoning ordinance, a measure that itself had liberalized the town's previous shoreland height limit of 35 feet. A group of neighbors known as the Grand Beach Association challenged the project in court nine months ago, later getting "friend of the court" support from both the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and the Maine Audubon Society. Summarizing his 24-page decision, Brennan said attorneys for William M. Danton, who manages his family's properties here, hadn't shown adequate grounds for a hardship required by the variance. Danton originally had proposed an eight-story, 164-unit project that would have meant destroying the family estate, known as the Snow Mansion because it once was owned by the chowder family. When residents and some Planning Board members said they would like to see the mansion saved, Danton's attorney returned to the board with an alternate plan, again for 164 units but in a 16-story configuration with the mansion moved to one side of the family's oceanside property. Danton's attorneys had argued that the Planning Board had made saving the mansion a requirement of its conditional use permit, but Brennan said the applicant had volunteered to come up with the alternate plan. "The defendant voluntarily withdrew his first plan on the basisof an informal poll of three members of the board, and their recorded responses cannot reasonably be interpreted as support for a decision to require the preservation of the Danton family house," the judge wrote. Both the state environmental agency and the Audubon Society had argued that such a tall building would destroy the integrity of Maine's shoreland zoning laws, a tough set of measures against which town officials had to negotiate for months before getting state approval for their 1982 ordinance. That local ordinance led to a boom of oceanside high-rises here, encouraged by town officials anticipating a large amount of new tax revenue. Brennan didn't comment on the "friend of the court" matters except to rule that the DEP and Audubon Society had standing in the case. Even if Danton could have proved that the Planning Board required him to save his family mansion, Brennan said the applicant's argument for a hardship before the Zoning Board would have, failed another statutory test - lack of a reasonable return on property without the variance. An appraiser for Danton had testified that the 142-foot-high design would have returned $3.2 million while a 70-foot-high project, also with the mansion saved, would have returned only $2.1 million. However, Brennan said either figure would be a reasonable return, and he noted precedents in Maine law holding that "reasonable" doesn't necessarily mean "maximum". -24- Table 6 1985-86 COASTAL PLANNING GRANTS COMMUNITY PROJECT GRANT Augusta Kennebec River greenbelt area planning $ 51000 Belfast Belfast Waterfront: Commercial 10,000 Street Wharf Planning & Feasibility Study Boothbay. Harbor Waterfront Development and 11,044 Revitalization Study Bucksport Waterfront Development and 10,825 Revitalization Study Cape Elizabeth Impact Study of Cape Elizabeth 8,000 Park Areas Cutler Cutler Harbor Revitalization, 12,000 Development & Management Project Freeport Freeport Bedrock Aquifer 10,000 Protection Project Islesboro An Inventory of Public 4,640 Shoreland Access on Islesboio Kennebunk/ River Report & Coordinated 13,900 K*nnebunkport/ Local Ordinance Package to Arundel Protect the Kennebunk River Basin Machiasport Bucks Harbor Revitalization, 12,000 Development & Management Project Portland Groundwater Management Study 20,000 Randolph Randolph Riverfront Development 6,250 Plan Rockport Rockport Capital Improvements, 10,600 Plan South Thomaston To" Wharf & Boat Lending 3,000 Improvement Study Vinalhaven Vinalhaven Waterfront 10,000 Development Propct: Harbor Management Study and Town Landing Improvement Study Waldoboro Medomak River Us a Study 11,250 Vella Growth Management Plan for 7,500 Vella: Growth Management Ordinance Revisions and TDR Ordinance York York Harbor Public/Access 6,180 Feasibility Study -25- 0 Augusta The City has formed a citizens advisory committee and an advisory committee of State agencies and hired a consultant for its Kennebec River greenbelt planning study. Inventories of current land use and ownership along the east bank are in process. 0 Boothbay Harbor - Final products have been received for this project, in the form of preliminary engineering and management plans for a fish pier. The town is hoping for CDBG and Coastal Action grants to aid in project implementation. 0 Bucksport - The town's consultant completed a waterfront marketing analysis entitled Bucksport Marina Market Feasibility Study. The report, which includes a recreational boating survey, concluded that the Bucksport market area can support a 50 to 70 slip marina and recommended several measures for enhancing its success. The town also received design drawings for its overall waterfront park plan, prepared by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 0 Cape Elizabeth - The town is awaiting results of a survey of three neighborhoods impacted by park activity to determine the nature and seriousness of the impacts. 0 Kennebunk/Kennebunkport/Arundel - Completion of resource maps for the Kennebec River finishes a major portion of this project. 0 Randolph - A market study of the waterfront and downtown area has been completed in conjunction with the town's Community Development Block Grant project. 0 Rockport - The town has hired a consultant and is obtaining preliminary engineering information on top priority projects for its capital improvements plan. 0 South Thomaston - The town received engineering drawings for rehabilitating its town wharf and boat landing, and subsequently applied for a Coastal Action Grant for the reconstruction work. 0 Waldoboro - As part of its Medomak River Use Study, the town has completed preliminary engineering for rebuilding its in-town pier and applied for a Coastal Action Grant for implementation. -26- 0 Wells - Growth management and TDR (transfer of development rights) ordinance provisions have been completed. Final products are in draft form. B. Waterfront Action Grants (306A grants) Maine Coastal Program Waterfront Action Grants were announced on February 14, 1986. Types of projects eligible for funding include acquisition and development of coastal shoreland for public access purposes; low cost shoreline construction projects, such as small waterfront parks, pathways to the shoreline, and natural areas interpretation; and acquisition or rehabilitation of piers to improve public access opportunities to the water. Grants may not exceed $50,000 and require a 20 percent local match. Projects must be completed this summer. Five competitive guidelines for evaluating competing projects were included in the application package: (1) increase in access/use opportunity, (2) project preparedness, (3) immediacy of need, (4) adequacy of the needs assessment, and (5) previous use of Coastal Program funds for planning the project. Special Award Condition A-4 requiring submittal to NOAA/OCRM of budget information for Section 306A activities was changed to May 1, 1986, with accompanying change in related Interim Benchmarks. In compliance with these benchmarks, OCRM was provided with the announcement letter and application packet for Waterfront Action Grants (containing eligibility guidelines, competitive criteria, etc.) by letter of April 2, 1986. Task 3. Interagency Coordination A. Federal Consistency (starting October 1, 1985) The major federal activity reviewed for consistency during this period was the U.S. Air Force's proposed GWEN Radio Tower in Castine. The Air Force leased 20 acres of land on a hill on the Castine peninsula last summer and announced plans to erect a 300 foot radio tower by fall, 1986. "GWEN" stands for Ground Wave Emergency Network. It is part of the Air Force's national defense system linking strategic air bases via low-frequency radio waves, which would be unaffected by electromagnetic pulses emitted by nuclear weapons detonated in the atmosphere above the United States. -27- Local concerns were raised concerning the proposed Castine GWEN tower, including the visual impact of a 300 foot tower in an area noted for its scenic and historic values, and the proximity of the tower to existing homes. This Office notified the Air Force in October that a consistency determination for the GWEN tower proposal was required since it directly affected Maine's coastal zone. Additional information on the proposed towe-r and the site selection criteria used by the Corps was also requested. Subsequent to the receipt of additional information from the Air Force, the State Planning Office notified the Air Force in December that the proposed tower in Castine was not consistent with Maine's Coastal Program because the Air Force's consistency determination failed to provide-sufficient information on: a) alternative GWEN tower sites having less visual impact and b) nearby historic resources and the proposed tower's impact on them. The SPO requested specific additional information needed to review the proposed project. No further Air Force response was received by either the Town of Castine or the SPO for several months. During this time, uncertainty and rumors circulating about the Air Force proceeding as planned attracted considerable attention by the press. In early March, 1986, Governor Joseph E. Brennan wrote to the Air Force expressing his grave concern and strong disappointment over how planning for the GWEN tower was being handled, and reminded the Air Force that the Castine site wasn't consistent with Maine's federally-approved Coastal Program. Subsequent to the Governor's letter, Air Force Major General Thomas Brandt came to Augusta to meet with the Governor, local officials from Castine and Sherman (a non-coastal town also slated to receive a GWEN Tower), and State Planning Office staff. The result of this meeting was agreement that the Air Force would look for alternative tower sites which were more acceptable to State and local officials. The State Planning Office has been working with local officials and the Air Force since the meeting to facilitate the identification of more suitable tower sites. -28- B. Coastal Advisory Committee (starting October 1, 1985) The Coastal Advisory Committee met on October 17, 1985 to discuss draft legislative proposals to be submitted by the Governor in January, 1986, (1) to clarify public rights in the intertidal area, (2) to establish coastal management policies, and (3) to create a shoreline access protection fund. The Committee was briefed on the findings of its public access subcommittee and also discussed 1985-86 Coastal Program work program tasks. (See Appendix B for the Minutes of the Meeting.) In February, 1986 the staff solicited the Coastal Advisory Committee for special project proposals for Coastal Program funding for 1986-87. Committee members subsequently were asked to review and rank the twenty-four proposals received, in preparation for meeting'in April to select projects for funding. Task 4. Local & State Program Administration A. Technical Assistance & Local Grant Administration Ts-tarting October 1, 1985) (See Tasks 2.A & 2.B.) B. State Program Administration (starting October 1, 1985) Top priority during the reporting period was given to development and passage of coastal legislation. L.D. 2167, "An Act to Enhance the Sound Use and Management of Maine's Coastal Resources," drafted by the Coastal Advisory Committee and SPO staff, was introduced by the Governor in January. The bill was designed to sustain traditional maritime pursuits and public access to the water in the face of burgeoning development pressures, as well as to make a comprehensive declaration of State coastal policy. (See also the "Issues and Accomplishments" section of this report.) Success in achieving enactment of this bill may be attributed in part to (1) development and publicizing of a highly effective 20-minute narrated slide program entitled The Maine Coast: A Time of Change, and (2) public pr sentation of issues and proposals at over fifty meetings up and down the coast, including chambers of commerce, public service groups, and special public meetings organized with the assistance of each of the regional planning agencies, county extension offices and the RC&D Areas. Several representative news clippings are reproduced on the following pages. -29- Votefs"'in county"urged to support proposals to preserve Maine coast' .-@By Herb Cleaves After g a slide show thay, in, lelera=ere expected to be Down East Bureau showed =st between the high available program started, Flatebo sai developed coast of southern Maine an d. MACHIAS - Vote of Washington the rocky. headlands of Washington Also, the Marine Laboratory Devel- County were urged Turessday by a mem- County with its extreme tides and dom- opment Project, administered 'by the. ber of the staff of the State Planning inant fishing industry, Flate D bo dis- w:artment of Marine Resources, Office to help preserve the Maine coast cusseid protective legislation and three d receive *M,000 to improve the @by sup" =egislation and bond ssues that were proposed earlier laboratory facilities and enhance man coasta bo totalling sq.@ this month by Gov. Joseph E. Brennan. agement of the state seafood industry. million. 'Me legislation, she said, would be During a public discussion, Jean- Gro Flatebo. who subsfituteif for designed to allow municipalities to ex- Pierre Ragot of Bucks Harbor, a Richard Barringer, director of the =@ to public access in coastal fisherman, said that he was under the State Planning Office, said that about ions, manage hazardous areas impression that proposed federal bud- the land in the state bor- -such as flood-prone wetlands and bar- get reductions would eliminate the pos. ==coast and that half of the rier sites, encourage the location of wa- -sibility of the federal government's population of Maine lived on that lam: ler-dependent industries along the patching state money on any projects. At least 60 percent of the jobs in the coast and protect nbtural areas. Flatebo agreed that federal budget state were located in the coastal zone, Flatebo said that the bond issues, if cutting might pose problems, but had she said. approved, would involve spending a to- no specifics. available about the pro- .17he population of half a million tal of $9,565,000 to improve the coast. posed state projects. year-around increases to 4 million in The Maine Shoreline Access Fund, R.S. Nielsen of Whiting, said that $5 the summer, plating a. great stress on administered through the Department million seemed to be "a pittance" if the t1iis area," Flatebo saicL of Conservation, would provide $5 mfl- state planned to make a sincere effort Don for state and local acquisition and to acquire access to the coastline from Flatebo described the Maine coast development of public-access areas Kittery to EastporL As"a special place" that was being along the coast. Half of the total amout . John Pike Grady of Eastport said forced to change because of an on. would be avaflable to municipalities. that, excep"g . rt improvements in slaught by developers. A recent survey The fund would ensure that as the his communit rt y, ttle money had been of York County showed that $20 million coastline became more heavUy devel- spent in.Washington County that bene- ----fited the coast. As development was spent by developers last year oped, opportunities for harvesters of alone and that only eight pieces of coas. shellfish and marine worms would not @pr@ads north and east, -be said, tal land there remained available for be lost. Mainers "wW see the last piece of fat acquisition. 7be Waterfront and Pier Rehabflita- go into the frying pan." "Ibe amount of tourist 6fric has tion Program, administered tilrough The meeting was sponsored by the doubled in 10 years," &he said. .,Tour. the Department of Transportation, Cooperative Extension Service, repre- ists to Maine in the summer now repre- would provide $4 million to coastal sented by John Ahlin, and by the Wash- sent. the combined Populations of the communities for fish piers and other Ington County Regional Planning states of Rhode Island @ and commercial waterfront improve. Commission, represented by Nick Connecticut." ments. More that $10 million in match- Greer. -30- The Maine Coast: a time of change A TWENTY MINUTE NARRATED SLIDE PROGRAM IS NOW AVAILABLE FOR YOUR GROUP describing the Maine coast, its most pressing management issues and a legislative initiative to enhance the sound use and management of coastal resources. The Maine coast encompasses only 12% of the State, yet it contains nearly half the State's population and 060%. of its job opportunities. Governor Brennan's Coastal Advisory Committee determined that growth and development in the coastal area is a critical issue the State must address. While the southern coast is experiencing unprecedented growth, other parts of the coast are changing as well. Four major changes on our coast are most in need of attention. First, there is tremendous competition for our limited shoreline. Restaurants and condominiums are joining commercial fisheries and other -marine-related uses on the shorefront. Conflicts in Maine's harbors, fueled by increasing property values, are at a critical point. Public access to the shoreline is disappearing. Despite the importance of tourism, to the State's economy, and the desire of most residents to visit the coast, only 3% is publicly owned -- the smallest percentage of any state in the nation. Development in flood-prone areas needs better management. The 1978 winter storms caused $47 million in damage along the coast. Since then, shoreline development has mushroomed, increasing the likelihood of higher damages in future coastal storms. Finally, the pressures of growth are threatening those natural and historical features which make Maine unique. As these areas disappear, we are losing our C) heritage and important natural areas. The Maine coast is our natural resource to develop, manage, protect and enjoy. With careful stewardship, we can maintain its character and integrity for generations to come. (aOTJ:JO) (amoq) ;@u0,qd9-[--y4 ssaippv pa4ulam seiqeG U0TqBZTUB2JO aTdoad jo *oN OWEN *CCCVO @U-[EW 'eqSn2nV 'qC # UOT!1124S esnoH e4inS 'a3TJJ0 SuTuueld a4L4S aq4 04 4T Ulew Pue u'JOJ P--'q0'@44u --q4 4no TTTJ JO T9ZC-69Z 4B AOTSMITT9 qO2 TTr-O 'SIONVEM40 JO MT4 U :1MOD --VT%j aUU JO SUTMOtIS U 8AJ,-Sw 01 95ueqo 40 ............ 9L-uiq e Mseom ;j Buievy a 8LIJL Maine State Planning Office Bulk Mail State House Station # 38 US Postage Paid 1 Ounce Augus ta, Maine 04333 Augusta ME Permit @0. 8 J 7 IV M 1 -47- ILI lkai:t* Zi Staff photo by John Ewing Improved public access to the state's beaches hinges on pending legislation. Lawmakers asked to. protect coast The coastal legislation pro- "People are constantly asking facilities. By Bob Cummings poses nearly $10 million in bond . us how to manage growth, how to ' e $565,000 for Improvements Staff Writer Issues to provide for public access assure public access to the shore, to the state's marine research to the shore, to build ports and and how do we protect natural laboratory. This may be the year of the harbor 'facilities and expand the areas," Keeley says. *Authorization for cities and coast for the Maine Legislature. laboratory of the Department of "My feeling is that this Is really towns to amend their shoreland Legislators will be asked, to Marine Resources at Boothbay a grass-roots approach." zoning ordinances to give prece- enact the state's first comprehen- Harbor. The proposal is essentially a dent to marine related activities. sive program designed to improve The proposals seek to respond tool box of laws and financial * Expansion of opportunities public access to the state's coast, to the explosive growth of devel- incentives municipalities can use for outdoor recreation and en. to preserve and enhance water-re- opment in coastal cities and to help solve coastal problems. , couragement of coastal tourism. lated uses such as fishing, and to towns, according to David Keeley, Key provisions include: *Efforts to improve air and protect unique scenic and recrea- a natural resource planner for the e A $4 million bond issue for water quality in coastal areas. tional sites. State Planning Office. the rehabilitation of waterfront Everett B. Carson, executive The nine-part program is the Keeley said the plan grew out piers, docks and other facilities. director of the Natural Resources work of a Coastal Advisory Com- of increasing concerns by local *Another $5 million to help Council of Maine, called the pro- mittee appointed by Gov. Joseph officials and planning boards con- cities and towns pay for public E. Brennan and the staff of the cerned with the "unprecedented access to boating waters. beaches See COAST State Planning Office. level of development." and other public recreation Back Page This Section COAST posal "a giant step forward." He said it is "absolutely critical that the state begin to put together a comprehensive program to protect the long-term health of the coast." Jeffrey Thaler, advocacy director of Maine Audubon Society, agrees. He sees the proposals as allowing development, while protecting the qualities of the coast that attracted the developers in the first place. "It's not jobs vs. the environment. Jobs are created by a healthy enbironment and the loss of the environment means loss of jobs. Maine is killing the goose that lays the golden eggs." In some ways the bill is a coastal version of the state's two-year-old Rivers Law, in that it attempts to strike a balance between economic development and preservation. The bill creates what it calls "heritage coastal areas," assemblages of rare rock formations, plants, animals, historic sites and scenic vistas. It encourages local planning boards and state agencies to protect such areas in their decisions. In addition to the bond issue that would provide money to purchase public access to the shore the measure would also amend the municipal subdivision law to assure that developments do not impair "any rights of public access to the shoreline." And the measure would allow local planning boards to require developers to help provide public access to the water when subdivisions are created that border on tidal waters. Planning boards would have a choice of requiring that some of the land be preserved for public use or that fees be paid to create a fund to purchase other land. Municipalities would also be encouraged to give preference to fishermen, marinas, boatyards and other water-related industries by zoning shorefront lands for use exclusively by business and developments dependent on a shorefront location. The bill also recognizes the growing consensus among marine scientists that sea level is likely to rise rapidly in coming decades. It requires all new coastal buildings be built above the level of likely floods and sets up a fund to have the state help pay for the replacement of public facilities that may be damaged. Finally, the bill would designate areas of the coast that should be conserved in their natural state because they are fragile or particularly valuable in buffering storm waves. In such areas, the bill would prohibit the use of state money to build new roads or other public facilities and would forbid state financial assistance to private developers. Affected by the proposed rules would be a number of beaches in Washington, Hancock and Knox counties, as well as beaches in a number of southern Maine communities. The latter include Little River in Georgetown, Hunnewell, Small Point and Head beaches in Phippsburg, Stover Point in Harpswell, Jenks Landing and Waldo Point in Cumberland, Crescent Beach in Cape Elizabeth, Scarborough Beach in Scarborough, Etherington Pond in Biddeford, Crescent Surf Beach in Kennebunk, Ogunquit Beach in Ogunquit, Phillips Cove in York and Sea Point in Kittery. A major public information program is expected to begin this month to explain the new program, Keeley said. He said State Planning Director Richard Barringer expects to participate in 30 public meetings before the end of next month. An attempt will be made to reach a cross section of coastal residents and officials through appearances at service clubs, chambers of commerce, marine trade groups and planning commissions. Sizing up Gov. Brennan's - new coastal initiative "Turning to the environment," as Heritage Trust. He is right: scarcity, ums. The bill allows towns to zone this newspaper's report put it the next real estate promotion, everyone's de- areas for water-dependent uses.) morning, Gov. Joseph E. Brennan pro- sire to own a piece of the coast - all Another issue the governor's propos- posed a coastal initiative in his State of these factors have driven up prices- al doesn't address directly is the emp- the State speech to the Legislature I Tuesday night. which in turn have driven up real es- tying out of Maine's island I'm not sure the governor's motives tate valuations and taxes. in many communities - some of the oldest set- are entirely environmental, but I do cases, the temptation of a high price tlements on the coast which are rapidly think an effort to deal with coastal is- for the famdy farm has been too great becoming ghost towns. (The pier bond resist. In others, heavy property tax- issue money might help in some sues is a good idea. Maine's handsome to coast is under a lot ol pressure these David Platt es have made it hard for owners to cases:) Despite its references to pres hang on. Land gets subdivided and ervation, it doesn't address the coming days. The more prosperity and peop!e velop their piert (piers are important sold. Each time it happens, less of the catastrophe in aging island forests. It we have, the stronger the pressure is where the tide rises and falls 12 feet coast is left in an unspoiled state; each doesn't come to grips with environ- going to get. There's only so much twice a day, remember) is a commend- time it happens we end up with more mental laws that don't always make coast out there, and the way we treat it able idea. Piers are also a good way to people living along the coast. This is sense on islands or in coastal areas, now could haunt us for a long time. provide public access in an organized the "pressure" everyone refers to. and it doesn't do anything about the The governor's legislation does three way, instead of relying on the good will Someone has got to come up with an consequences of letting all those people' things. It states a set of policy goals for of coastal property owners. alternative to this system, and the gov- onto the state's beaches via the new the state, such as the prismotion of The governor's bills are a good start, ernor's legislation was an opportunity. access points. ports and harbors, the wise manage' but they don't do everything the coast Unless the Legislature amends it, the Brennan's coastal bills have been-- ment of marine resources, better pub- needs. In fact, they don't address one chance has been missed. (Not entirely: compared to the rivers legislation pro-- lic access to the shore and the important issue at all: taxes. Dave Keeley of the State Planning'Of- posed and adopted three years ago. in protection of certain natural areas.. "Property taxes, and relyinq on fice points out that the bill includes . some ways the two initiatives are simi- There are nine policy goals on the list. 'them to pay for education, is driving language to assist "water-dependent lar - both are efforts to encourage the Second, the legislation would amend the subdivision of coastal land," says uses" like boat yards, which some- use of scarce resources in planned state laws and programs to improve Bruce Jacobson -of the Maire Coast times can't compete with condomini- ways-, both offer a helping hand to access, do something about fools- who towns that want to manage their piece L9 insist on building houses in flood-prone of waterfrort better. areas, let towns zone their waterfronts But in other ways the initiatives are for water-dependent uses, and identify important natural and cultural areas. very differenE. One focus of the rivers Finally, the package includes three, bill was a licensing scheme for hydro- bond ! AhaLua lJ-pmvkle_money_- PA1460R DAILY Nfws electric projects; that wasn't neces- -srffie @state could buy coastal access sary in the coastal bill, which isn't points, help towns rehabilitate piers peppered with the same "balancing' and waterfronts, and fix up the state's and "significant economic benefits t@ marine lab in Boothbay Harbor. The the public" language as the rivers bill. lab is the facility where state scientists The bill's approach to the public ac- determine whether to close coastal ar- cess problem along the coast might be' eas because of red tide, among other described as more "conservative" things. than the approach thestate took in the That's the prQposal. It focuses. on rivers bill, or the way it has traditional- public access, an issue that should win ly provided access to lakes, rivers or it considerable public support. Excepl great ponds. That's because the coastal for a relatively small number of shore- legislation and its accompanying bond front property owners who'd like to be issue contemplate outright purchase. left alone, who could be against letting If we want access to our publicly own people walk along the beach? And even coast, in other words, we buy it instea these property owners might prefer of telling a landowner to let us cross ,r c @Ia se' own i S", .r@ property. state-owned access points to having the cois On balance, the governor's cois public tramping through their yards. ts initiativeisa positive one, and its The bond-issue portion oi the legisla- generate some interesting and tion provides some much-needed coas- discussion. tal pork barrel, if I may put it inelegantly. Helping coastal towns de- Va vid Platt is the NEWSsenior 18 Thursday, March 27, 1986 A. Mark Woodward, Editorial Page Editor 491 Main St., Bangor, Maine 04401 Wayne Reilly. Ass.istant Editor Tel. (207) 942-4881 Editorials Coastal development. The Energy and Natural Resources Com- Gov. Brennan's bill would provide some mittee is close to endorsing a watered-down modest remedies. It would expand the au- version of Gov. Joseph E. Brennan's coas- thority of municipalities to zone portions of tal-protection bill. This more modest ap- their waterfront solely for water-dependent proach still has much to recommend it, uses. It would also discourage projects in although some potentially valuable sections flood-prone areas. have been deleted. Three coastal bond proposals in the bill Much of Maine's economic strength tests 'would provide: on the attractions of its 3,000 miles of coast- 0 $5 million for acquisition and develop- line and the natural resources harvested ment of public access areas. Hall the money there. Yet ironically, this allure is now would go to municipalities. threatened by the very development it has 4 $4 million to go with an estimated $10 engendered. million in federal matching funds for fish Anyone who travels along the coast can piers and other commercial waterfront see the chopped-up parcels of property improvements. threatening the natural grandeur of the * $565,000 to improve the capability of the shoreline. Visitors increasingly cannot get Department of Marine Resources Labora- to beaches and scenic landscapes. Fisher- tory at Boothbay Harbor. 'men and other people financially dependent - A section of the bill allowing a community mpon shore access are having trouble main- to exact public access rights in coastal sub- taining their livelihood! in some places as divisions was deleted. So was one allowing tl ie price tag for shore property makes oth- the Department of Environmental Protec- ev uses more profitable. In some places de- tion to review shoreland zoning permits for ve4opers contribute to the destruction of the major projects to see if they conform with shoreline by building where waves pound in local shoreland zoning regulations. Both of a storm. these sections would have been useful to Sihcb problems are especially evident communities faced by development pres- south of Brunswick the closer one gets to sures incompatible with town plans. KittF--,ry. "Keep out" signs and waterfront The bill won't change the rights of current devePopments that block fishermen and vis- shoreland property owners. Rather it will itors Wilde have become more common than strengthen the efforts of communities, the wild stretches of coast that were avail- many of which are already grappling with able tc,i everyone just a couple of decades the problems posed by rapid development. ago. Farther east around such places as What's also important is for communities to Carrideo, Blue Hill and Mt. Desert, the update their shoreland zoning plans, be- strain o.1 development also is becoming in- cause only local vigilance can do the job of creasing,ly common. preserving the coasUine. 3 6 - Along with this major effort, the State Planning office (1) published a booklet on The Maine Coast: A Time of Change; (2) co-sponsored the 1985 Maine Conference -oT =and Trusts with the Maine Coast Heritage Trust, bringing together operating land trusts, people interested in forming new land trusts, state officials and allied groups on November 23, 1985; (3) coordinated activities for "Maine Coastweek '35," which took place the week of October 5-14, including production of a glossy brochure for publicity; (4) initiated steps for celebration of the third annual Coastweek during October 4-13, 1986; (5) conducted a survey of coastal towns to determine the extent to which they had been able to implement plans prepared with Coastal Planning Grants; and (6) prepared State grant materials, monitored grant benchmarks and award conditions, oversaw the OCS program and state agency and special project contracts, and participated in regional and national meetings and other state coastal management activities. C. Critical Areas Program Support (starting October 1, 1995) Between October 1985 and March 1986 the Critical Areas Program had two Critical Areas Advisory Board meetings resulting in 27 areas being added to the Register of Critical Areas, including twelve zoological, five botanical, four geological and six natural communities. The Register now contains 577 areas. Work during the reporting period centered on compiling 1985 field season data into two planning reports, one preliminary report and a 1985 Addendum of new rare plant locations to the Critical Areas Program's publication Rare Vascular Plants of Maine. These survey reporEs-increase our knowledge of Maine's rare features and will result in many new nominations to the Register. The Critical Areas Advisory Board submitted to the 112th Legislative Session an amendment to the Critical Areas Act to give the Program authority to create an official endangered plant list for the State. This bill successfully passed (L.D. 1997, P.L. 595) and will be the stimulous for much future work. The establishment of Heritage Coastal Areas under the State Planning Office's coastal initiative, L.D. 2167, will be under the guidance and direction of the Critical Areas Program, which assisted in drafting the legislation. An extensive effort to compile data. and delineate exceptional coastal natural areas is anticipated. -37- YORK COUNTY COAST STAR 9/18/85 Maine Coastweek '85 events include beach cleanup Maine's 3,500 miles of diverse coastline will be the focus of Coastweek '85 planned for the week of Oct. 5-14. Over 30 different coastl-oriented activities will be held around the state during this year's event, which is being sponsored by the Maine Coastal Program, the Sea Grant College Program, and the Natural Resource Council of Maine. According to spokeswoman Gro Flatebo, the purpose of Coastweek is to "help people, yound and old, learn more about Maine's coast and how to manage it wisely," Gov. Joseph Brennan, in an official Coastweek proclamation, cited the rich scenic, cultural and historical heritage of the Maine coast and urged citizens to actively participate in the week's events. "Development pressures along the Maine coast are at unprecedented levels and show no sign of leveling off," state Jerry Bley, one of the coordinators of Coastweek. "From the Portland waterfront to offshore islands we're witnessing a flood of development proposals. By raising public awareness of our limited coastal resources, we hope that people will be better able to make wise decisions about coastal development and preservation." Organizations from around the state have planned activities for Coastweek, now in its second year in Maine. A sampling of this year's offerings include a flight over the Maine coast, natural history hikes through Acadia National Park and the Rachel Carson, Wildlife Refuge, evening issues forums on current environmental topics, coastal slide programs, and several boat trips. Elementary and middle school teachers throughout Maine will be bringing Coastweek into their classrooms using a special education kit distributed by the sponsors. A new event for this year's Coastweek will be a statewide beach clean-up scheduled for Oct.6. The effort, dubbed the "Plague of Plastics," is modeled after a similar program begin in Oregon last year. Coastweek organizers are seeking school groups, local organizations and individuals to select a section of the Maine coast to clean up. According to Flatebo, "marine debris - ranging from styrofoam cups to discarded fishing gear - is being dumped into the ocean at an alarming rate, posing a threat to marine life." Data from the clean-up will be analyzed by the University of Maine at Orono's Wildlife Department. Coastweek sponsors have printed a calendar of the week's activities. To obtain a calendar and to sign up for the beach clean-up, write to Coastweek, Maine State Planning Office, State House Station No. 38, Augusta 04330, or call 289-3261. The last few months have seen a blizzard of mail pass through the office as 550 questionaires were sent to landowners of registered critical Areas. The questionaires are for a biennial survey to obtain up-to-date information on the status of Critical Areas as well as feedback on the Program's effectiveness. We found that some areas have been sold or had minor changes, but most were unchanged and remain protected by the landowner. The Critical Areas Program data base, including manual, geographical and computer "files", has been significantly upgraded and extensively used over the Past six months. The primary use has been local environmental review and land use planning. We have had at least 35 detailed requests. We have continued to cooperate with the Maine Heritage Program of The Nature Conservancy in expanding their computerized data base of Maine's rare elements. Over 100 requests for Critical Areas Program educational brochures and planning reports, including several from teachers who intend to incorporate them into their curricula, have been answered. We have also continued to aid in preparing a book on Maine's special natural areas, soon to be published. D. Su2port for Local & State Grant Administration: Contractual Services 0 Coastal Geology A Request for Proposals from a geologist very familiar with bedrock geological features of the Main coast was advertised in March, with a contract to be issued in May for inventorying significant coastal bedrock geological features. A special evaluation of undeveloped coastline in extreme eastern Maine is to be included in the project for consideration for nomination as a National Landmark. The area from Cutler to West Quoddy Head has exceptional natural values because of its outstanding bedrock geology. The product of this work will be a planning report with site descriptions of significant geological sites and likely recommendations for additional coastal areas to be added to the Register of Critical Areas. 0 Fisheries Management, contract with James Wilson In September the State Planning Office negotiated and signed a contract with Jim Wilson at the University of Maine - Orono to perform three tasks: -39- 1. Analyze the National Marine Fisheries Service blue sheets (fisheries price lists); 2. Prepare a paper for the Orono Trade Co nference on U.S. - Canadian Trade; and 3. Coordinate a consortium of 13 researchers to draft a proposal for a major research project on U.S. Canadian fisheries trade. These work tasks are completed and we are negotiating additional work tasks. Task 5. Coastal Resource Analysis & Policy Development A. Growth Management & Cumulative Impact of Incremental Development (starting October 1, 1985) Land development in Maine is outstripping local and State capacity to manage growth, protect natural resources and maintain the State's special character. This task is a pilot project to examine the cumulative impacts of development in a region of York County. The study is identifying resources most vulnerable to cumulative impacts and their capacities to sustain development, documenting development trends and land use patterns, and developing the most appropriate options at state and local levels to address the different impacts on these resources. The first portion of the study documents patterns and trends of development over the past decade through census data and aerial photography. Wildlife habitat, visual resources, groundwater resources, and wetlands are being studied to develop methodologies for ranking their vulnerability and value on both local and regional scales. An analysis of the effectiveness of the tools and planning processes currently used in the study area will be reviewed to determine whether findings are representative of the coast as a whole. A final component looks at practical legal options for managing resources identified. -40- Pilot SPO Program To Deal With Rapid Growth 3/18/86 SANFORD. - The rapid increase of land development statewide, particularly in York and Cumberland counties, has impacted several communities that lack the necessary controls to properly manage growth. As a result, the State Planning Office (SPO) has recently launched a pilot program in York County to study the situation and develop ways for towns to develop policies that will address the effects caused by development. According to Gro Flatebo, a natural resource planner with the SPO, growth management was rated the top priority by a regional planning committee, and the SPO received a $110,000 grant from the federal Coastal Program to form a study group supervised by the SPO and comprising of several state agencies including the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (MDEP) and the state Attorney General's office, local officials and the Southern Maine Regional Planning Commission. The study focuses on nine communities in York County, including Sanford, Alfred, and Lyman. Beginning last August, the study examined developement trends in the nine communities, and also how the towns were handling continued building growth through their zoning ordinances. The data collection process is continuing, said Holly Dominie, a SPO policy development specialist, with the intensity of development in the area being studied from different perspectives, including aerial photography and the location of groundwater aquifers. The process, which is being assisted by a local advisory committee comprising of residents and town officials within the pilot communities, is aimed at identifying land resources within the nine communities that are judged for both their vulnerability and importance, using criteria that includes wildlife habitat, visual (scenic) resources, groundwater resources, prime and important agricultural soil, wetlands, beaches, and undeveloped shoreland areas. Flatebo said there are 40 to 50 sites currently being examined on the visual resource criteria, but declined to name specific sites because of concerns previously raised by land-owners who fear the areas will be targeted by developers. She said the study is not meant to pinpoint land for development, but to 'raise people's consciousness and interest' in the valuable areas within their towns and how they can be protected through growth management. All of the sites are being graded on an A, B, and C scale, with A being the most valuable. Dominie said sites in Sanford and Alfred are located in the outskirts, featuring old agrarian landscape, open space, and diverse characteristics such as fields, ridges, and woods. In Lyman, rural areas are cited in the study, including some that feature agricultural land and ponds. Although the identification process is important, Dominie pointed out, "It has to go beyond acknowledgement." The study will exsamine the various methods of growth management used by the nine towns, and determine their effectiveness, a process often difficult for local planning boards because of the continual backlog of development proposals being considered. Based on a town's current zoning ordinance, the study will project what growth densities, land use patterns, and resource impacts could result. A regional overview aimed at the five coastal communities in the pilot program using trends taken from three periods - 1950, 1975, and 1984 - will also be developed. Once all necessary data is gathered, the study group will analyze each natural resource cited in the study and determine their physical limitations in relation to development, and identify areas that growth should not surpass, such as residential development in known groundwater aquifers. The study will also provide recommendations on practical methods communities can used to protect themselves from unrestricted development. Flatebo noted many communities in Maine lack specific controls in certain areas or resource within town. Because local planning boards must approve approve projects based on the zoning ordinance regardless of any weaknesses, "People become frustrated and feel growth is out of control," she said. By developing a comprehensive zoning ordinance that is "strong enough to withstand an army of lawyers," Flatebo said, communities can properly manage continued growth. One particular aspect of local planning and zoning controls is scenic value, Flatebo said. "By the time people wake up to the visual characteristics of an area it's already too late in many cases," she said. Flatebo also noted that although state laws primarily focus on air and water quality protection, developing safeguards for land resources is an area that needs improvement. At the same time, Flatebo pointed out, "We can't stop growth." Dominie stressed the study is not against development, but is designed to show the importance for communities to ensure it does not negatively impact on local resources. In fact, Flatebo added, development styles matching the natural characteristics of the area can actually enhance the location, thereby increasing property values. The study is expected to be completed by the end of the summer, and will be examined by officials at both the state and local levels. If the program is successful in encouraging towns to improve growth management methods, it can be used as a guideline for other areas in the state, Dominie said, adding, "If nothing else, it will result in some valuable data for towns and the DEP." Two advisory committees are helping formulate recommendations on this project, one at the state and one at the local level. The local advisory committee has met four times. Both groups have been briefed on the status of the project, with presentations by our sub-contractors. The meetings have been helpful in focusing follow-up work. An Interim Significant Improvement Benchmark for this task called for "a draft analysis of land i trends and appropriate growth management options at the State and local level" by April 1, 1986. Completion of the draft is expected in early May. The Final Significant Improvement Benchmark for this task was changed to November 1, 1986. Sub-contracted components of this project are as follows: (1) IF&W, Key Wildlife Habitats With considerable help from the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, important wildlife habitats in the nine-town pilot area were identified. This project organized information already collected, augmented by field-checks when possible. A ranking system was developed and the information mapped on a town by town basis. This project is a first step in developing information for towns to use in their permitting process. IF&W wants to orient their information to the local level because over 85% of development proposals are decided on the local level. They have submitted a proposal to the Coastal Program for special project funding to expand this methodology to the midcoast region. A draft report and maps have been submitted to SPO. We are currently working with their contractor to answer some land use questions on what types of activities have the greatest impact. (2) SMRPC, Inventory of Growth Management Techniques Southern Maine Regional Planning Commission (SMRPC) has mapped State and local permit activity, and assembled demographic data on how and where the region is growing. Growth trends have been projected to 1990 and local capacity to manage growth documented. A presentation of findings is scheduled for early May. -42- (3) Land Use Mapping Sewall Company has completed all the land use mapping for this project and currently is correcting the computer-mapped versions of the land use maps. The aerial photos flown in 1975 and 1984 are being interpreted, the most recent photos being in color infra-red. The color infra-red photos are considerably more reliable in identifying vegetation types. Consequently more wetlands appear on the 1984 maps. This could have important consequences for the State's regulated wetlands which were identified using black and white photos. (4) Wetlands Assessment, Paul Adamus (ECO-Analyst, Inc.) Of the 800 wetlands in the region, 321 were field-checked to collect information on 400 different variables. An additional 81 wetlands were evaluated with existing information. Of these 321, 120 were identified as being of high importance for the region in terms of unique value, providing important downstream services (i.e. flood control), and wildlife habitat. The fieldwork, analysis and draft report with recommendations have been finished. Information on each wetland is to be computer-mapped. (5) Legal and Institutional Constraints, Marine Law Institute The Marine Law Institute is finalizing its first draft report on legal and institutional considerations in regulating cumulative impacts. Included in the report is a review of the ability of existing Maine statutes to manage cumulative impacts. Case studies of Board of Environmental Protection permit reviews indicate that both legal and technical uncertainities have hindered consideration of cumulative impacts. A survey of efforts in other jurisdictions -- particularly, California, Florida, New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina -- revealed that while regulation of cumulative impacts is perplexing to most regulatory agencies, some successful attempts may prove useful to Maine. Also, analysis of NEPA cumulative impact regulations and relevant case law has provided insight into an effective definition of cumulative impacts. -43- (6) Digitization of Resource Maps Mapping of land use trends for both the nine town region and five other sample towns along the coast has been a slow process. The system being used is in a developmental phase with several users aside from SPO buying services. The most difficult portion of the contract is about half finished to date. The 1984 color infra-red photos have been entered and are being edited. Half the five towns are finished for the regional overview. The comparison year, 1975, has not been started for the nine-town region of southern Maine. This portion of the project has held up several other contractors (MAS and SMRPC). Once land use has been completed the natural resource data which is considerably easier to enter and edit, should not be far behind. (7) Evaluation of Land Use Trends, Maine Audubon Maine Audubon Society (MAS) is evaluating land use trends along the coast to see if the problems, opportunities, and patterns in coastal Maine are region-specific or similar throughout. They have completed the background work needed to evaluate the set of land use trend maps currently being digitized. (8) Visual Inventory A methodology and scenic inventory of southern Maine was developed in-house for this study. Over 50 areas of outstanding and noteworthy visual resources were identified and mapped. The maps are to be presented to local conservation commissions and planning boards to get their input and then will be computerized. B. Marine Research Plan, ARGO Maine (DMR, Bigelow Lab, UMO) During the period the Association for Research on the Gulf of Maine (ARGO-Maine) was formed. Members include representatives from the Department of Marine Resources, Bigelow Laboratory, University of Maine at Orono, Maine Geological Survey, and the State Planning Office. ARGO-Maine sponsored a major conference to bring together scientific researchers. (see Appendix B for a summary of the workshops.) Based on this, ARGO completed a research prospectus that identified the most pressing research needs in the Gulf. -44- C. Developing a State Natural Resource Information System The Data Management Committee of the Land and Water Resources Council met in September to review the draft RFP for development of a statewide natural resources data management system. The Committee consensus was that the $7500 budgeted was insufficient to accomplish the task; best estimates were that it would take five to ten times that amount for the desired systems analysis. The representative from Central Computer Services offered to perform a preliminary study at no cost, within a month, with estimates for performing the desired tasks in discreet stages. Subsequently the deadline was extended at CCS's request, but the product was not delivered. In conjunction with the Interagency Coordination Subcommittee of the Council's Ground Water Standing Committee, the Data Management Committee decided to scale down the project (1) to limit the analysis to groundwater, and (2) to undertake only "A report that analyzes State data management systems, their capabilities and agency needs." It was felt that this way the project could be accomplished within the funding constraints. Groundwater was selected as several agencies are now in the process of considering new data management systems for this resource. Also, many coastal communities are currently analyzing local groundwater resources and drafting aquifer protection plans and requesting State assistance for these efforts. Coordination in this area is critical, and the effort will serve as a good model for management of other natural resources data. An RFP has been developed for Phase II: "A report that analyzes the options available and recommends a data management system to pursue," and funds will be sought through the Coastal Program and other sources, such as Clean Water Act programs, to accomplish this more expensive part of the groundwater data management pilot project. The RFP for Phase I is now in'State contract review and will be advertised in April, 1986. We anticipate hiring a consultant in early May and completing the project by mid-July. The RFP includes as a second task an analysis of the Critical Areas Program which is also reaching a critical point in its need to computerize its data base. It is anticipated that this analysis can be included within funding constraints. -45- D. Waterfront & Pier Study (MDOT) The aim of the Maine Department of Transportation's Waterfront & Pier Study is to inventory general characteristics and specific facilities of each Maine port to analyze the demand for improvements, to establish guidelines for eligibility for State assistance, and to identify potential local projects. The inventory of existing conditions is approximately 85 percent complete. Only Kittery, York, Biddeford- Saco, Cape Elizabeth, Eliot, Kennebunk and Scarborough have not been inventoried. All navigation sections including the above ports, and all maps except for -@he above have been completed. Volume I of the Report is nearly complete. Preliminary need findings were presented to the legislature in support of the coastal bond proposal subsequently authorized for a November referendum. Inventory findings also supplement Army Corps of Engineers information on specific dredging projects (both need-work and maintenance). MDOT intends to complete the inventory early this summer, to contact municipalities regarding projects, and to hire an engineering consultant to assist in evaluation of projects. Final project decisions will be made after November. E. Management of Marine Wildlife (IF&W) The Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife is conducting aerial surveys of seabird and seal habita, ts. Building on work previously done for Casco Bay and the midcoast region, Penobscot Bay is being flown several times each season to identify areas of high wildlife use. Although seabird nesting areas are relatively well known, the habitats seabirds use while molting and overwintering are not known. Likewise, areas heavily used by seals are not known. This information will be helpful in both state and local siting and development decisions. Mapping and summaries for the post-nesting and winter seasons have been completed. There are nine more overflights to be made to complete the seasonal cycle. The study has been expanded to cover Blue Hill Bay. 14/ -46- PART II OTHER FEDERALLY-REQUIRED REPORTS 1. Monitoring & En forcement Activities (See section 1.A of Part I, Appendix A.) 2. Wetland/Estuary Report As of September 19, 1985, an estimated 30,000 acres of Maine freshwater wetlands came under protective custody of the Department of Environmental Protection. That was the effective date of the Freshwater Wetlands Act enacted by the 112th Legislature to give the DEP regulatory authority over freshwater wetlands similar to that which it has exercised over saltwater wetlands for more than a decade under the Alteration of Coastal Wetlands Law (38 MRSA 471-478, a Coastal Program Core Law. Specifically, permits are now required to dredge, drain, or fill freshwater as well as saltwater wetlands, or to erect a permanent structure in, on or over them. Unlike the Coastal Wetlands Law, the new law defines wetlands as "unforested" and of "ten or more acres" in size, and exempts modifications resulting from agricultural, forestry and oeat mining activities, hydropower projects and interstate pipelines. Freshwater wetlands over 10 acres in size were mapped by the DEP in response to a 1982 legislative mandate. Their total acreage was estimated but has not been systematically measured. The only available overall statistics on the extent of saltwater and freshwater wetlands were compiled by the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife in 1974; the only evidence of wetland loss, other than anecdotal evidence, is a compilation of filling and dredging permits. (See Exhibit B-3, "Coastal Wetlands." An outstanding success story in wetland protection is the recent conveyance by the City of Rockland of 700 acres of land in the Rockland Bog to the Oyster River Bog Association. A protective conservation easement prohibits land development as well as the operation of motor vehicles, guaranteeing that the land will remain forever wild, regardless of subsequent ownership or shifts in the political wind. Another outstanding success story, better known, is the creation of the Wells National Estuarine Research Reserve (formerly called "Estuarine Sanctuary"). A Sanctuary Manager was hired by the Town of Wells in January. In excess of $100,000 in road and parking lot construction services has been offered. Conclusion of land acquisition -.47- by the State and the Town of Wells in late April culminated more than four years of work toward the project by the State Planning Office. Instances of continuing pressure on the State Sand Dune Law are described in clippings reproduced on the following pages concerning the Hall and Rubin cases and permits requested for seawall construction. The 112th Legislature entered the seawall issue with enactment of L.D. 1729, permitting seawall construction in an area in Scarborough. See also Task 5.A (4) in Part I of Appendix A. 3. Fisheries Management Activities The Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife is preparing Strategic Plans for Fisheries Management for ten Maine rivers, pursuant to an agreement with the State Planning Office under the Maine Rivers Act. A completed plan is available for the East Machias River (prepared in conjunction with the Department of Marine Resources and Atlanti-c Sea Run Salmon Commission.) The success story of the renewal of the Kennebec River and restoration of clam flats near Phippsburg, at the mouth of the river, is described in the clipping reproduced below. Ne eded improvements to the DMR's Marine Laboratory at McKown Point, Boothbay Harbor, are a step closer as a result of approval by the 112th Legislature of L.D. 2250. The Act refers a $10 million bond issue, with $750,000 targeted for the Lab, for voter approval in November. Improvements will enhance the State's research capabilities and management of the fishery. (See also "Coastal Issues and Accomplishments".) 4. Hazard Management Activities L.D. 2167, An Act to Enhance the Sound Use and Management of Maine's Coastal Resources by the 112th Legislature addresses hazard management issues with provisions: (a) requiring new construction to be sited at least one foot above the 100-year flood elevation, and designating floodway areas as resource protection zones in local zoning ordinances; (b) prohibiting State expenditures for development activities within a designated Maine Coastal Barriers System; and (c) outlining cost sharing for disaster assistance to local governments. (See write-up under "Coastal Issues and Accomplishments.") -48- Court sand dune action could affect'second case PHIPPSHURG - Recent action ride, filed suit against BEP when Court, Sample succeeded in having by the Maine Supreme Judicial Oey were denied an after-the-fact the justice dismiss the count charging Court regarding the state send dune permit for an addition to their @sach that the sand dune law unconstu- law could affect a second case Pend- house. tionally takes property without just ing against the state Board of Envi- The Rubin case is expected to be compensation. The Superior Court ronniental Protection' heard in Sagadahoc County Superior and the Supreme Court upheld the Earlier this week, the Supreme Court in October. Sample expected BEP's denial of the Hall permit. Court unanimously upheld BEF& there will be two hearings. The fast But the Supreme Court sent the denial of a permit for Donald and one will determine if the BEP was Hall on" back to Superior Court, Virginia Hall, of New Hampshire, correct in denying the Rubins per- saying that it should not have dis- who built a cottage on a frontal send mission for the addition at their missed that count. It wantii testi- dune on their Hunnewell Beach Hunnewell Beach property. The mony to be taken regarding the value property. DEP Coastal Sand Dune judge would make a decision baud on of the Hall's property. I Rules prohibit building on a frontal facts in documents filed by the BEP Sample expects to have to do the dune. and the Rubins. same in the Rubin cam. In addition, the court returned the The second hearing would be The Halls built the structure on came to Superior Court, with in- similar to the Hall hearing, in that their property in 1982 after stoma. structions to look at whether the send Sample would attempt to show that severely damaged their cottap in dune law unconstitutionally takes thi RubirW property would not be 1977. property without compensating the rendered useless upon the removal of Rubin, a retired superior court owner. the addition. justice, build the addition about four A& long as there is enough evidence In their respective ca"s, the Halls years ago. to support a BEP decision denying and the Rubins will have to prove BEP denied both after-the-fact construction on sand dunes, the Su- that their property would be ten- permits after determining the preme Court would not reverse it. dered useless if they had to remove structures would interfere with the However, if a structure is built on a the structures constructed on the supply or movement of sand.' dune and BEP denies an after-ths- mud dunee. the erosion hazard and poes, a flood fact permit, the gate may be re- Sample compared it to the state hazard. sponsible' for compensating the "taking" land from residents in order owners for its fair market value. to build a highway. Eandowners must Assistant Attorney General Gre- be compensated by the state in that gory W. Sample expects a case similar cam, because they are deprived Of to the Halls to follow the same course. their property. Harold and Dorothy Rubin. of Flo- When the Hall cue was in Superior -49- Seawall plans to require that a wall be allowed replace the sand an the adjacent Board Of Environmental 1/86 - unless the, staff department properties as it erodes. regulations were amended. But Witherill said such a plan After months of discussion would be both expensive And Protection Prohibits erode and hearings. the rules, were difficult to enforce. changed - but not enough to "Because of these concerns Intertidal Filling And permit the Scarborough con- we have not recommended ap- struction in the opinion of proval of the project." Witherill Seawall Construction DEP staff Donald Witherill, the staff tells board members. "However, person who evaluated the appli- his solution appears to be the Two applications for construction that opposes project cation. only option by which the wall would have dramatically altered sand dune "The staff has reached the may be approved under the By BOB CUMMINGS conclusion based on the sand law". and wetland ecosystems were denied by the Staff Writer dune law and the rules, that a None of the owners Involved DEP in January. One application was for denial of the application is ap- could be reached for comment SCARBOROUGH - A sea. propriate," he writes In a memo this morning. Several of the construction of a 370-foot rock seawall in wall won't be built at Pine Point to board members. properties have been sold since front of four houses on Pine Point in to protect homes from the erod- The board will consider the the dispute- began two years ago ing waters of the Scarborough recommendations at a meeting and a majority of the affected Scarborough. Since the late 1970s, the BEP River if the board of the Depart- scheduled for 10 a.m. Friday In land Is currently owned by per- has recognized that seawalls accelerate the ment of Environmental Protec- Augusta. sons who are not residents of tion follows the Witherill said a wall Would the town. erosion of the beach fronting the wall, recommendations of its profes- cause the beach to erode even The sales followed a general accelerate erosion of adjacent unprotected sional staff. more rapidly, interfering with slowing down of the rate of ero- property, and prevent the replacement of A new department study says recreational uses and the natu- sion only small amounts of, a wall might protect against ral movement of sand. sand have washed away in lost beach sediment with sand from the minor storms, but would make Complicating the decision, recent storms. the erosion more severe during Witherill said, is the unwilling- The area Is known as Pil- dune system. major storms. ness of all persons living in the lsbury Shores. It is built largely Homeowners in the area have area to join in the wall construc- on land that was created when The board also denied an application to sought permission for a wall tion. He said erosion is most the U.S. Amy Corps of Engi- fill an intertidal channel located in the sand since the fall of 1983. when severe at the ends of a sea wall neers dredged the channel of dune system along Jones Creek on Pine great chunks of lawn fronting so partial construction would the river many years ago and the homes were chewed away result in damage to the neigh- pumped the sand onto an adja- Point. The applicant proposed to completely by ocean waters almost nightly. bors who do not want a wall. cent salt marsh. fill the half-acre channel in order to con- When a wall was turned He said a possible compro- The area has been temporari- down by the environmental mise would require the entire ly protected from storm waves struct five attached condominiums on posts. agency at that time, owners neighborhood to sign a cooper- by sand bugs. The channel holds approximately 18,000 sought help from the Legis- tive agreement that would re- Complicating the board's de- lature. cision is a dispute among pro- cubic feet of water during spring tides and Members of the Legislature's flooding conditions. The entire lot is Energy and Natural Resources Committee were sympathetic. A fessional geologists who have structions, beaches migrate flooded during a 100-year storm. majority threatened to amend studied the area. inland in response to higher Habitat, Feb. '86 the law regulating sand dunes Barry Timson, a marine geol- water levels. ogy specialist hired by the prop- Evidence of this are the peat any owners, blames the erosion bogs that underlie many Maine on the construction of a jetty at beaches. Scientists theorize the the mouth at the river by the sand migrated inland as the Army Engineers. waters rose, covering adjacent Spring '86 Joseph Kelley, a geologist salt marshes and bogs. L.D. 1729, An Act to Clarify the employed by the state Bureau of Kelley argues when walls are Sand Dunes Law. This bill was enacted Geology to advise on sand dune built, waves bouncing off the as amended with the amendment matters, however, says the pri- walls erode the sand In front strictly limiting the conditions under mary cause of erosion Is action even faster, and cause severe which the construction of a sea wall can of waves. washing away of the sand at the be permitted and limiting the impact of The dispute Is critical to the and of the walls. the bill to an area located in decision because department He estimates 50 feet of adja- Scarborough. The amendment also regulations prohibit seawall cent land might disappear it the deleted the portion of the original bill construction when wave action wall is constructed. which allowed the rebuilding or Is the cause. Timson estimates the maxi- replacement of permanent dwellings in The sand dune regulations mum loss of land at 5 feet. But the sand dunes system. are designed to protect the he says even if Kelley is right, a state's beaches. Sea level Is wall wouldn't do unreasonable rising worldwide. In the ab- berm since the adjacent homes sence of walls and other ob- would still be 70 feet away. IN 01 am Im IM M M M as on He said then have been "dramatic" improvements in recent yean, though the problem of untreated effluent remain . If anyone discovers a pipe dumping untreated sewage into the me they should notify the Department of Environmental Protection's Licensing and Enforcement Division %4 at 289-3365. W Winton said cottages are the number one source of contamination. For example, a septic system designed only for summer use becomes overtaxed and ineff"ve when the cottage ow. or decides to %A stay year-round. Another problem is that on W 1350 intertidal acres, only 802 of which are now Maine's rocky coast there is little soil for percola. 2: RIVER RESURREMON a public. tion of the effluent, and many septic tanks net on P But some Phippeburg: flats that an closed to the a skin of earth that covers bedrock. Finally, cottage Clam flats restored. open to harvest by th public do not he fallow. Depuration, a purification contamination is hardest to discover because there The Kennebec River in one step. closer to full process, is used by some state-certified workers to is no open pipe. recovery. The clam flats near Phippeburg, at the recover tainted clams. There are four plants in Boats contribute to the problem, too, though on mouth of the river, may soon be opened to shellfish Maine that use the ultraviolet light process to kill a much smaller acele. There are still many boats on diggers for the first time in the 38-year history of bacteria and virus contained in the contaminated the water that were designed before laws restricting clam flat regulation. shellfish. In the process, the shellfish transfer the the flushing of sewage -into coastal waters, so the The possible opening reflects improvements in contaminant from t heir bodies to the water an part problem intensifies in the summer when boats rill a sewage disposal along the Kennebec. Thirty years of the normal filtering process. The ultraviolet harbor and many people are living on their boats, ago towns from Augusta downriver to Bath sent light, radiating into another part of the tank, kill% mid Winton. Un their waste water. untreated, into the river. -The the bacteria and virus suspended in the water. At About 2,000 acres of Maine's intertidal zone are bacteria and viruses from this sewage make all filter Phippeburg, 520 acres are closed to the public but open only in the winter. This in because the cold feeding shellfish, such as mussels and clams, unfit open to depuration workers. water is less hospitable to the bacteria and viruses. for human consumptiom According to the DMR's Bob Lewis, 21.000 They are lea likely to reproduce, partly because of Hal Winters of the Department of Marine bushels of clams were saved, statewide. for human the temperature and partly because of higher R@sources said dry weather testing results indicate use by the depuration process. This represents oxygen levels due to the cold water. that the flats can be opened. When the wet weather almost $760,000. Since 1979, the DMR*has on an annual basis results come in. perhaps with the fall raine, t;be Lewis said therie are a total of 49,000 intertidal attempted to prioritize closed cl" flats, looking at DMR will make an official announcement. act" on the coast and about 8,000 are closed to the the value of the flat and who is the major polluter. Last Monday Phippeburg adopted a shellfish public, though some of these are seasonal closings. The DEP takes the results and tries to put an and to ordinance to control the number of harveaten who In terms of acreage, more of the closures are in the the contamination by making either a town or will enter the flats if the 130-acre, Atkins Bay tract eastern part of the state due to the high tides and individual homeowners improve their sewage sys- is opened. Selectman Fredrick M. Haggett is not uneven shore. Maine's southern coast is relatively tem. Sometimes state or federal funds are available. suprised by the possible opening because "the river smooth. Winters said it takes a few years to notice a has become noticeably cleaner." Twenty-five years Winters explained that sewage contamination of change after a source is controlled. He expects a ago, fieliennfin could catch no fish in the Kennebec; clam flats used to be much worse then it is now. In burst of re-opened flats next year. Five thousand now they can do quite well, he said., - a 1978 survey, state officials found 3500 to 4000 acres have been recovered in the last ten years, The Phippeburg closure is one of the biggest in open pipes leading into the ocean and Winters though at the same time new closings have been the state, said the DMR's Bob Lewis. There are believes at least that many more went unnoticed. ordered. I I Floodplain management generally is in a period of implementation and testing of existing laws and regulations. SPO technical assistance regarding floodplain management ordinances and development proposals has focused on coastal communities with greatest development pressures, those in York and Cumberland Counties. However, thirty other coastal communities have requested assistance. In additon, SPO has reviewed in excess of 100 development applications submitted to the DEP under the Alteration of Coastal Wetlands and Sand Dunes laws. It is evident from the increasing number of structures that are floodproofed and the increasingly sophisticated questions posed by local officials, that the understanding of floodplain management by local and State regulators has increased noticeably in the past few years. 5. Urban Waterfront & Commercial Harbor Projects 0 Local Waterfront Revitalization Projects (See Task 2, Part 1--of Appendix A.) 0 Sears Island Development Development of the Sears Island Cargo Port was halted by an August, 1985 ruling by a federal circuit court of appeals, which said that an Environmental Impact Statement must be completed prior to construction. A draft EIS was nearing final form by the end of the reporting period, with expected release in July. (See news clipping reproduced on the following page.) 0 Maine's Fish Pier Program As reported previously, six of the seven fish pier development projects started in 1978 with State support are now operating -- Portland, Kennebunk, Vinalhaven, Eastport, Saco and Stonington. The piers are providing needed berthing space, servicing vessels with fuel, ice and marine supplies, and offloading marine catches from fishing vessels, including groundfish, herring, crabs, scallops, shrimp, clams, mussels, lobsters and mackerel. In Rockland, the McLoon Wharf was purchased by the City and engineering plans largely completed for its use as a fish pier. Final details of pier reconstruction depend on results of a Management/Operational Plan for which the City issued a request for proposals. Financial assistance for preparation of the Plan is to be provided by a grant through Maine's Coastal Program. Reconstruction is scheduled to start this summer. -52- -Sears Island Work Still Goes On By Gretchen Gaffney With work scheduled to resume in Normandeau Associates of Mass, will do environmental concerns with secondary -By next fall we anticipate pier October, this $2.6 million dollar project is the environmental assays. "They ere development of the approximately l00 construction to be underway." states Don on hold. Causeway construction between solicited to do it (EIS) because they did acres surrounding the 50-acre primary Grant Searsport town manager. when Searsport and Sears Island was part of the original environmental construction site." Slates Connors, who questioned Tuesday about the hold-up in interrupted also pending the outcome or a assessment which was completed in 1984," adds that the decision also "pointed to the construction of the $28 million cargo pier state-filed appeal Of A district court ruling. states Grant. He anticipates. but did not adequacy of the environmental an Sears Island. The original permit for the causeway enumerate, problems with the EIS. assessment," which was required by the An August ruling by a federal circuit was revoked in this ruling because the Commenting from his office in Augusta Army Corps of Engineers before any court of appeals said an Environmental permit issued was for a bridge not a Tuesday upon the court of appeals construction began with the primary site Impact Statement must be completed causeway. While awaiting the appeal decision which stems from a suit filed by development. prior to the construction, decision. the state has requested that the Nancy Stone on behalf of the Maine group Long Range On hold are primary site development Coast Guard grant a permit for the of the Sierra Club, Maine Commissioner of When questioned as to how an construction contracts which were causeway. Transportation Dana Connors admits the unfavorable EIS for future secondary partially completed prior to the court Site ruling was a setback. development would affect long-range ruling. The $325,000 onshore site Some site development is complete. But. he quickly adds his department has community development which predicted preparation by Wardwell Construction of though, according to Grant. The nearly 2 given the Sears Island cargo pier project the creation of 2,750 jobs for the area if the Bucksport will continue. according to 1/2 miles of access road. of which the "its highest priority- and will continue the total 160 acres were developed. Connors Grant, to secure the site against erosion. causeway remains an undeveloped momentum to see the project to emphatically states that the "port will Dredging operations in the harbor area portion. is essentially finished except for. completion. stand on its own." He admits. although, offshore were nearly 2/3 complete when shoulder work. Connors is optimistic that construction that original design of the port placed slopped July 1, under terms of the The EIS is expected to take a year to will proceed as planned even with the value in its Promotion of further economic dredging permit, to allow marine life. such complete according to Grant. Although the year's delay and findings of the EIS. growth. as lobsters and shellfish. to mail and Federal Highway Administration will be -The court's decision addressed complete life-cycle processes. the lead agency overseeing the EIS. Connors is confident that the EIS not uncover any real issues of substance but will offer an additional time frame for follow through with the procedural processes of the laws. On this basis, Connors is asking Attorney General James Tierney to allow "us to go forward with the primary project, to complete the port itself and like port facility." Connors also adds that in their unfinished state the project could be more environmentally damaging, He gives as an example erosion of surfaces excavated and cleared during site preparation by Wardwell. Asst. Attorney Genera) Cab Howard stated that such a request, if submitted now, to allow construction completion, while waiting for the EIS, would be premature since am case is technically still in the circuit court of appeals. Once the case returns to the district court, the plaintiff, which is the Sierra Club, can ask the court to enjoin the DOT from further construction until the EIS is complete. Howard would not comment at ibis time as to negotiating strategies his Office would pursue between DOT and the Sierra Club once this request was submitted, What Grant and Connors anticipate as a problem during the delay is the loss of federal funding which had been secured through Community Block Development and Economic Development programs. The town Stands to lose $375,000 while the state Could lose $2,000,000 by the hold-up. Connors states the town ran reapply for the money but there is a risk of less funding available. Compounding this is the SEARS ISLAND CONSTRUCTION - Although the cargo part, photo taken last weak. The pier will be constructed at the the probability that the contracts to do work Is now Involved In litigation over an environmental impact right of the photo, The cleared ground is for future port will have to be re-negotiated due to statement. some work does continue as shown in this aerial facilities. inflationary pressures. -53- Rockland Fish Pier To Become A Reality by Stephen Betts been times since then when she feared a The McLoon pier is located off Weeks demolition of the dilapidated buildings on Staff Writer pier would never be achieved, but she Street. the wharf) would range from $400,000 to Former Mayor Mildred Merrill could not enthusiastically praised the Monday night The council also voted 4-1 to give Parks $610,000. contain her excitement over the Rockland action of the council. the go-ahead to proceed with engineering Parks said he anticipated it would take City Council's vote to realize a nearly Following a motion by Councilor Jean studies as well as to apply for necessary about four months to gain approval from decade-long dream of having a municipal Chalmers, another strong supporter of the permits to repair the wharf. the various regulatory agencies and that fish pier. pier idea, the council ratified an agreement Councilor Warren Perry voted against bidding for improvements could be done in Merrill applauded, along with fish-pier worked out by City Manager Harold Parks this motion and the purchase proposal. January. He said work, such as tearing supporter Arthur Thurston, as the roll Call for the pier purchase. The order requires that contracts for down buildings, could be done during the ended with a 4-1 vote Monday night to demolition and repairs be approved by the winter months. approve the purchase of the McLoon Wharf The state will pay 80 percent ($280,000) Of council and that total cost of all contracts Parks said renovation costs which were properties for $350,000. the purchase price. The remaining 20 fail within the available monies. estimated in May 1985 could increase In other action, the council agreed to percent ($70,000) will come out of The preliminary engineering studies because of inflation by next year, but he negotiate with Sawyer Environmental for Rockland's initial $150,000 contribution to presented by Wright-Pierce and C.E. added, the amount of work would be cut disposal of the city's trash. the pier project. Maguire indicate that there would be no back to meet the budget. in regards to the pier purchase, Merrill, The agreement, approved by the council, feet of berthing space that would have a a former two-term councilor, has been one is contingent on approval by both the water depth of eight feet or deeper at mean of the leading backers of a municipal fish Maine Department of Transportation and low tide. The remaining 220 feet of berthing pier for Rockland She pointed out that the federal Economic Development Ad- space will have less than eight feet. developing the harbor was one of her main ministration. The EDA awarded a $500,000 The plans call for a fender system along campaign planks when she ran for the grant to the city in 1982 which it has since the 370 feet of berthing space on the main council in 1977. Merrill said there have agreed can be used to repair the aging pier. wharf. The total renovations (including In Eastport things are looking up By John Hale NEWS Business Writer EASTPORT - The sky seems bigger ever Passamaquoddy and Cobscook bays. In Eastport, things are looking up "We have one of the deepest seaports after decades of decline and dashed an the Eastern Seaboard," said hopes. City fathers promote their com- Keezer, an insurance salesman. I munity with zeal and they can finally would bet we'd have a ship in here once point to some solid achievements. a week if it weren't for the strength of the dollar overseas." The big ships have been coming in Out on Cobscook Bay, they're grow- about once a month recently. The new ing thousands of Atlantic salmon in pier can accommodate a 700-foot ves- pens - and selling every fish they can sel. A crane that can lift 100 tons stands grow, On the multi-million dollar cargo ready and a 90-foot tugboat is perma- pier, longshoremen hope for a drop in nently berthed at the pier. the dollar so they can start churning Bob Wallace, manager of Federal out exports. Marine Terminals, says this year's ex- ports may reach 70,000 tons but that in a good trade year, exports would top Standing on the cargo pier that 100,000 tons, was. expanded for $3.6 million. Bob "All this went out of St. John before Keezer, chairman of the Eastport Port we started here," said Wallace. "We Authority, exudes pride. concentrate on the forest products in- More than 60.000 tons of cargo - dustry and we're talking with all of mostly pulp from the Georgia-Pacific them. Georgia-Pacific makes a great mill in Woodland - has left Eastport base for us." already this year, bound for foreign "We have 40 part-time workers aver- ports. That compares with 15,000 tons aging about $5,000 a year." Wallace in 1981, the first year Eastport began said We expect to get those people up soliciting export business. to a decent annual income." Matinicus Fuel Supply Could Hang In Balance by Stephen Betts Staff Writer An assessor for Matinicus Island has voiced concern to Rockland about plans for its city fish pier, a project she fears could exclude the oil tanker that provides fuel to the offshore community. The municipal fish pier committee met Tuesday and discussed a letter from Island Assessor Elizabeth Long Burr concerning conversion of the former McLoon Wharf to a city dock. "Rumor has it that development of the new fish pier in Rockland will mean an end to the ability of the William McLoon to use Rockland as a base," Burr said. The William McLoon is an oil tanker owned by Ed Polk of Rockland. Harry Hopewell of Vinalhaven and Eric Edwards of Southwest Harbor. The tanker has used the McLoon Wharf for a berthing space but the development of the pier could force them to move. "Inhabitants of Matinicus Plantation are understandably disturbed by this rumor. The cost of transportation to the island of 2 fuel oil, K-1 (kerosene) and gasoline is of great concern to us," the town official states. City Assessor Robert Peabody (the fish pier coordinator) said no decision has been made on whether the oil tanker can con- tinue to use the pier after it is converted. During the debate on buying the pier, however, statements were made by local and state officials that the pier could only be used for commercial fishing. Peabody noted that other wharves are reluctant to allow an oil tanker to dock because of the liability. He said that the manage ment/operational plan the city hopes to have compiled would help answer ques- tions such as whether the tanker could use the pier. He said if the state agrees to partially fund the study, it could be com- pleted by mid-May. In other action, the committee approved the preliminary plans for the pier as drawn up by engineers Wright-Pierce and C.E. Maguire. Paebody added there were rec- commendations for three minor technical changes of the proposal. Peabody said the final plans could be forwarded to the city within two weeks and explained that the current timetable is for construction bids to be solicited and selected in May with construction beginn- ing late in the month. -54- Commercial Fisheries News Portland Fish Pier, Portland, ME Spring 19% NEW ENG"NOS FIRST DISPLAY AUCTION READY PORTLAND FISH EXCHANGE FACILITY COMPLETE FISHERMEN AND BUYERS LINING UP TO TRADE 17, 7 @'t K@J C: -ate f 0 K' APki mm Over, 25@,'250 1012 pounoS of tr. be d1sp Square foot layec, In cc@oler-izh can be 00-pouncl auctton b 1@71splqyed ':Otes, 7 2 tot 'nS'. p - 'n the es to Sh Will pallet.,, Vi sion and work built Portland's waterfront This is = of hard work, The result is that the City of Portland outlying Pocf:,dinIot1her,=of Maine actually receive the $5 million. It vision, fa - 'i's a story now has a 19.5-acre, $22 million fish as well; it co . p en fe! atGokmore Years to get an additional abou =lh And irst display price for quality, get paid reliab Y $1.3 on for the cooler/auction th.=n ill I. eir= of F !jdson buildi When Reagan took office in i:..is about to start the f st the uction in the country, and Is ce, ction idea 1981 -related e@!;heddpi;l. of EDA was in jeopardy, and !he @tory, up to this point, it is an seeing a hub of private fishing Vvef. _Jrwahonal succm story, investment growing in that part of further I,, . 1978 State Planning with I, the project. Thal Portland This is a story of fishermen the waterfront. Office study. received the $6.3 million is testament refusing to stop at simply Ned=le to get the attention The display auction concept joined to concerted, informed f__ bY complaining - of fishermen up arid Of 'he City Council, where the fish pier project when Wilson every single individual III has doing something for themselves. it's a the late John W. Sturgis, in worked on the pier feasibility study served as part of the Maine story with many stars - the particular, took up the cause. The for C. E. Maguire, Co. Building a Congressional delegation during the be fishermen, city officials, and a few council established a Fish Pier Task pier, the study concluded, could be period. I professionals who have committed Force which took the project from justified If It was more than just a Along the way, there has also been 10 themselves to being part of the fi there. I pier - if it housed a display auction state andlocal support. Portland 1v received $5.3 million of a $9 million iridustry, and who have contributed For years, the Fish Pier Task Force and a fishing industrial park as well. their time, resources, ideas and met regularly, often once a week, at Wilson's involvement in the auction bond issue for fish piers - a turning " ri, 7:30 am. And the mee ings were well didn't stop there, though. He stared point for the project. The city has r 'se. po repeatedly come up with funding, is a story a t timing - with the r 'ect thr b. of ideas attended - by fishing industry Ij ough gears o and people. It's a story of local members, by state officials from a ganning an arguing as t e Fish Pier guided by City Manager Tim Honey people going up against slick number of departments, and by city perations Committee hashed out all who firmly supported the project. It's -elopers - and winning. These are officials and council members such the basic arguments between thif been a = ot dogged determination. local people who grew up together on Law Smith. interests of fishermen and the And t determination was there. the waterfront, who reinember their interests of dealers and processors, As luck would have it, in 1978 the outboard days, when they spent@ their The scene of the story must now which come out when you try to city hired Don Olsen as a planning time dodging cakes of crud coming shift to Orono, where a young decided whether or not there should assistant. Olben said then, as he I* down the river. economics professor had taken an be a display auction in Portland, and still saying now on the eve of his It's a story that should give interest in the falling industry. In if so, how. departure in mid-Febru6", that all he fishermen everywhere hope. The 1975 Jim Wilson received a &rank wanted to do is bring an operational Portland fishin Indust is creating afrom the University of Maine Sea First, though, the city needed fish pier to Portland. As Waterfront r future forlitscl?o'n the Portland Grant Program to study the ex 0 mon Administrator Olsen pursued one limit for t% for the pier. Getting funding waterfront. impact of the 200-mile onp7heod pier had its own, independent fund' it ther, always state's industry. That focu= source a er ano gant produced drama. Sen. Edmund Muskie is on th f h ' C greLn'cr =c It all started in February, 1977 at least two notable I eas: first, the responsible for the initial S5 million straying to when four Portland fishermen, Pete Maine Fishermen's Forum, which is Economic Development pastures. Kelly, Tommy Jordan Sr., Larry now in its 11th year, and second, the Administration (EDA) commitment. But as the city struggled for Scola and Stan Bayley complained to concept of a display auction in As the story goes, Muskie took the money, the project arpeared t 0 the City of Portland that berthing Portland, which is slated to open this 7gsgentahve from the Department stagnate. Some Peop e in the industry was getting too expensive, and too February or March. . trierce out on the Portland lost faith in the project. What is hard to find. A display auction, Wilson city fireboat in January and, at Important for this story, however, is As luck would have it, the on suggested, could open up the market 11 degrees below zero, wouldn't let that people in the industry did not in the city theVonnected witge:as by attracting other dealers and him in off the deck until he made the lose faith in the Portland waterfront. n commitment. Clark Neily, t n as now, the processors, making it easy for them Director of Economic Development. to oet access to fish in the quantities Since then, it has been a full time The scene shifts again, to one key N il he rd the fishermen's plight. and species that they want; it could job lirling up and actually getting the event which became the crucible lor Z2Y Zard it, and took it to heart. make a major pier in Portland benefit funding in hand. It took years to the larger development we are now weing. Once again, it started with a Brenda Tetraull. with the lessons learned in a number 1984, and eventually Tom Valleau, complaint. And once again. Those people we!e the. lead risk of zoning battles to preserve a special the city's Director of Waterfront leadership, this time from Ed Bradley, takers - the first private investors on working waterfront section of the city Facilities stepped in and suggested transformed it into opportunity. the new fish pier. It took guts. They and armed with the success and In 1980, fishermen in the Maine that Boston's Torn Fulham propose an had faith, at one of the worst at experience in Vessel Services, they - auction structure. Now, after iodation times for the local industry, that the were ready to, take the opportunities Fulham's report and more argument, (MFCA) rebelled against paying $25 the Portland Fish Exchange has a for docl@ing at the Maine State Pier, a moribund cargo pier, since they board of directors made up of major weren't getting any services in players on the waterfront. The board exchange. Fishermen were also upset These People, -(hr0ugh their own private fiSk and is an impressive group of people, with fuel prices in Portland. with impressive knowledge, who an The vision, have created a place for the fishing industry... putting in long hours to make the result: 25 MFCA members formed auction work. if anyone can, this Vessel Services, a business venture which_provided fuel and ice on the group will. pier. They hired David Leeman to Now, at the manage the operation. end of the story, it's industry would somehow turn that the new berthing shortages and important to realize this story is full As plans for the pier took shape, around. Once they made the real estate squeeze represented. of problems as well. The years have Vessel Services had a choice - either investment in Vessel Service!, they It is,the Vessel Services group, been just as full of mistakes and go out of business or take the gutsy were committed to making it work. committed to making the pier work, bungles as anything else, anywhere. route and get the fuel and ice contract During this period, others in the who have taken those opportunities. And there is still much to do. on the pier. That appeared hopeless. fishing indus vesting. too. In 1984, Davidson and Tetrault beat Portland still has berthing probi %7= alard- out big developers to win the contract perhaps even worse than before Portland Sebago Oil and Ice Co.,i Cozy Harbor, 77L - which was being displaced by Daggett, Gowen, Nick Alfiero, Reggie for the service building on the ter Portland Fish Exchange is untried. eminent domain for the pier. was . Lamb and many others made Their $1.7 million Marine irase Portland doesn't et have a reduction being given the contract as part of 4 1 their settlement. investments in other parts of the Center has been a huge gamble, and a plant, a must forya serious fish city. waterfront. hard financial fight, since the rest Of The city is perched on the edge of a But 'can do' prevailed. The T,,*=calof the, of the times, the pier is not yet operating In full major test to the marme.zone over a t of rdiand fishermen, led by Bradley, b'ected to Clark 0. Sebago swing.. condominium Ciect right next to the the arrangement and bid r t s t did not become bitter with the loss of Now many of the same group, led fish pier. Arid city has not yet themselves - and won. About h the the ice contract. As part of the Balzano and Bradley, have bought made a conunitment to pier original fishermen investors, joined Woodman grou 'th V. I p, wi Roger bson's Wharf. Stimulated by the management after Olsen leaves. by Bradley and Leeman, invested Woodman Jr.. Bennett is ively berthing problem, they What is done, though, is that the heavily in the $1.3 million project to involved in boats and wataecrtfront =tnalk% a $2.1 million leap and commitment of the industry le next s b are.developing the wharf for fishing has shown that regular peop e 0 take Vessel Services this I rec;p Sam Davidson, an accountant WL uses. The Hobson's development, make a difference. These peopican was increasingly involved with the For land was not staying still combined with Gowen's expansion on whose names make up a who's who fishing industry, was critical in either The city had been discovered. Berlin Mills Wharf, is insuring that of Maine fishing during the last 10 putting the package together. Most leading magazines are now the fishing industry will have a solid ha e given of their time on Since then, Vessel Services has been calling Portland one of the most block of waterfront to operate from. =C6, alsociations, and a V. ground for those involved. livable' cities in the country and commissions at the same time. TC 12% learned to work I .=her; young professionals and land Now it is time to pick up the And in looking at the group of they have learned to weath speculators have descended upon it. auction thread again. As with the fishermen and professionals who have inevitable ups and downs of a start-, When the 88 proposed condos on zoning, several years of hard made these investments in the up business: and they have learned to Central Wharf went on the market in bargaining between fishermen and waterfront, what is worth pondering merge the shoreside perspectives of 1985, they sold in three days for processors over the auction have set is what thg have done for the fishing attorney Bradley, manager Leeman, prices which ranged between the new Portland Fish Exchange up industry. These people, through their and accountant Davidson with $150,0W-$3W,000. ' - , . I .for solid success. Throughout this, own private risk and vision, have workiU fishermen perspectives, like By 1983, when the fish pier processors such as John Norton, Dave created a place for the fishing those Marshall and Carole actually existed, real estate presuire Bergson, Asger l2enson and Nick industry on the valuable Portland Alexander, Gerry and Linda Balzano, had become the driving force which Altiero, have.sta vigorously waterfront, a legacy for generations Charlie and Gail Johnson, Alden and helped shift the focus back to the involved. Of fishermen and processors to come. Marge Leeman, and Bobby and pier. The industry was ready. Armed The negotiations broke down in Robin Alden Peters The new berths at the Portl nd Fish Pier already are filled with 17 draggers of %0 feet or more. The open-display Fish Auction on the Pier will open this April 28th, providing new jobs and a marketing mechanism unique in the U.S. A fish plant on the Vinalhaven fish pier is landing 2-4 million pounds of fish per year, employing 50-65 people and serving 64 vessels. The $9 million State contribution to these fish piers came from a 1979 Bond Issue. The Program generated $8.2 million in Federal participation, and $5 million in direct private investment, in addition to $4.8 million in local participation. 0 Maine's Waterfront & Pier Rehabilitation Program Maine's Fish Pier Program has been instrumental in modernizing marine infrastructure, but many smaller projects have been bypassed. Recognizing that increased costs have made it impossible for wharf users to pay the entire bill, Maine's Coastal Program and Department of Transporation are now proposing a new program to assist with rehabilitation and construction on some of the small and medium-size piers used for fishing and commercial marine activities. Progress on a coast-wide waterfront and pier needs inventory to provide the basis for the program is described in Section 5.D in Part I, Appendix A. The next step is to hire an engineering consultant to assist in evaluation of proposed projects. Passage of L.D. 2250 by the 112th Legislature sets the stage for voter approval in November of a $10 million General Fund Bond Issue, including $ 4 million for harbor improvements. 0 Harbor Management Issues & Accomplishments The primary harbor management issue of the day is the growing conflict commercial fishermen of the traditional working waterfront and economic pressure for conversion of limited waterfront space to condominiums and marinas, illustrated by the sampling of clippings reproduced on the following pages. Portland's Central Wharf, to be renamed Chandlers Wharf, formerly providing tie-up space for about 25 commercial fishing and lobster boats, was the first to be claimed for condominium development. The Maine Times reported in September 1985 that "the sale of 72 units initially put on the market took only three days. Prices ranged from $155,000 to $403,000.11 -57- A tale of two waterfronts The increasing value of seaside real estate is causing a scramble for properties along the Port- land and South Portland waterfronts. Among the major properties in flux are: L THE GAULTBLOCK. The One Franklin Trust a is proposing 50,000-plue square feet of offices and 13 retail shops for this large property at the corner of Commercial Street and the Franklin Arterial, 0, across from Bath Iron Works. Michael Marin formerly the owner of The Roma restaurant, and 1P, Z. partners Norman and Anthony Reef plan to include a seafood restaurant and a bank within the complex. 2- THE CROSBY-LAUGHLIN PLANT. Farley 17 Industries of Chicago plans for a mixed use of the 12 acres containing the Crosby-Laughlin 'manufac- turing facility, the former National Distributors Building and the former Portland Engineering property. It is the largest piece of property in the 25 waterfront area owned by a single party. 3. MLDDLESTRERTSHOPPING CENTE)L-The small shopping center across from Pordanifs Public Safety Building is scheduled for redeve- lopment by the Liberty Group. Developers Michael Liberty and David Cope, the developers of Central Wharf's condominiums, plan toconstruct twooffice buildings. 4.. COMMERCIAL STREET A 31.9-million re- construction of Commercial Street is scheduled to begin in the fall of next year. It involves rebuilding tP the street and removing the railroad tracks. Most of the money for the project is from the state. 5 WEST SIDE OF THE MAINE STATE PIER: The city planning board is reviewing plans.for a taxpayer-financed $3.6-million Casco Bay ferry terminal and parking garage. The project in ex- pected to be completed in the spring of 1987. 6. PORTLANDPLER. General Propertieswill goto tions will take place. Talks are going on with I& PROPOSED CARGO PIER SITM the planning board this month with a proposal for potential processors who would locate at the pier. A task force headed by Portland Mayor Joseph a 20-unit condominium and office 'complex in the 1Z CARR BROS. BUILDING (The Chase Block): Casale is reviewing plans for a proposed $12-million two buildings they own. At the end of the wharf Ram Development Company is renovating the part cargo pier. The grotip is looking at the best site for where New Meadows Lobster is now located, of the block on Commercial and Union streets for the project and Portland Terminal Wharf 3 is being considered. owners Pete McAlaney and Rose Brooks plan a office space. venture with the city for a public park area and 13. Edwards Supply Warehouse: Dictar Associates 19. CHANNEL CROSSING RESTAURANT probably some shops. The city is also planning a is renovating the building for the new law offices of AND MARINA: Located on Front Street, the pedestrian walkway and lighting improvements on Drummond Woodauni Plimpton & MacMahon, the $'-million Channel Crossing operod a year ago and die pier. now owners. encouraged other investors into the South Portland waterfront area. The owner, Jamison Tavern As- 7. LONG WHARF. Tony DiMillo is planning a 14. PORTEOUS WAREHOUSE.-The Finch Group sociateg, is planning a half-million expansion to "hostel" to be adjacent to his floating restaurant at of Boston is about to start an 82-unit luxury double the size of the marina to 120 slips. the end of the wharf. The Boatel (a barge) would apartment house and health club. Porteous. Mit- contain about 120 rooniii. . chell and Braun has moved its warehouse opera- 20. PINE STREET TO WNHOUSES. Dick Wells & CENTRAL WHARF.-Constructionon ang&unit tione to a new building in the Stroudwater Estates is proposing an expansion of his townhouses. He condominium building, called Chandler's Wharf, is Industrial Park. already has four townhousee on Pine Street and his underway by the Liberty Group. It is the rust condo plan for three more is in the planning review stage on the water aide of Commercial Street. There will 145'HOBSONS WHARF: A group of fishermen is before city officials. be slips for pleasure boats at the wharf. purchasing the property from General Properties 21. THE D UNFEY CORP. CONDOS:- The Dunfey Inc. and has received a $1.62-million industrial Corp. has an option to purchase property on High 9. MILK STREET ARMORY. An earlier development bond and state guarantee for the deal. $7-million Old Port Regency Hotel proposal is It will be developed for fishing, boat berthing and Street near the Coast Guard Barracks. The com- being redesigned and additional investors are being for fish and shellfish processing. pany wanted to build 68 units but the city attorney sought by owners Armory Associates. Part of the has ruled that 68 is too many for the lot and has sent project will include a parking area now occupied by I& HOLYOKE WHARF. Bob Levine, Owner Of Dunfey back to the dxawing boards. &mberland Wharf, recently sold this property to the Jordan's Meats warehouse on Fore Street 22. PINE STATE B Y-PRODUCTS PROPERTY. Bar-Mar Realty (Gus Barber and restaurateur 10. CUMBERLAND WHARF. Owner Bob Levine John Martin). But no significant change can occur Harbor's Edge Trust of Massachusetts purchased has closed his Cumberland Cold Storage building thereyet because the major tenant, Maine Fisheries the 7.6 acres last year for W2,000 at a foreclosure and a Boston developer, the McCourt Group, has an Corp.. the city's largest seafood pi@oceswir,'has auction. The company wants to build condos but option to buy the property. McCourt wants to build another two years left on its lease. plane. are on hold until the city completes its condominiums at the site but the plan has been 17. PROPOSED WATERFRONT PARK: A rezoning. rejected by the planning board. The wharf is in the $40-million waterfront park, highlighted by a new .23. FORMER GENERAL ELECTRICand Greater W-2 marine zone that does not allow c.ondo Gulf of Maine Aquarium, is being planned for the Portland Development Commission shipyard development but McCourt in requesting a variance property where the International Ferry Terminal is properties: This 60-acre parcel - Spring Point - from the city. - located. The first proposal, which included a now is under option by a group headed by Al Glickman 11. PORTLAND FISH PLEM Work to accommo- international ferry terminal, a 100-room hotel, a that plans condos' offices, a marina expansion and date fish boats unloading and berthing has been restaurant, shops, offices, and parking, was turned industrial development. The proposal is being completed. as'well as construction of a vessels' down by the city. But the two parties are scheduled worked out by Spring Point Associates. services facility. Now being built is a $1.3-million to talk after Labor Day about what kind of plan (PA) cooler-auction building where wholesale fish auc- would be acceptable to the city. Mustration by Jon Luoina -58- From condos, and marine businesses Portland's working waterfront under siege PORTLAND, ME - A Boston At a September meeting with the developer will try again this fall to planning board, waterfront businesses get zoning challenges to allow a $15 argued for changes that would permit million condominium project at more flexibility in the marine Portland's Cumberland Wharf. protection zone. They proposed to: The McCourt Company, Inc. has Allow commercial, non-marine spent an additional $60,000 to pay off uses in the upper stories of buildings creditors and stall foreclosure more than 100' onto the wharves proceedings against Wharf owner Bob from Commercial Street. Levine until mid-October, said Austin *Allow Commercial Street Kegolino McCourt's project director. buildings that are in the restricted Meanwhile, McCourt will seek to zone to devote half their total floor Marinas, amend the waterfront's zoning space to non-marine use. ordinance. 'Retain the prohibition of McCourt spent $50,000 earlier this residencies, hotels, motels, meeting or condos summer to delay foreclosure during convention halls. an unsuccessful try to get variances to 'Preclude the elimination of any the zoning ordinance from the existing fishing vessel berthing. Portland Board of Appeals, It is also proposed that the attract Cumberland Wharf, the eastern amendments would expire neighbor of the Portland Fish Pier, is automatically in 10 years under a situated in the waterfront's protective sunset provision, boaters marine zone which prohibits housing- There will be a public hearing on McCourt wanted to create housing, the proposed zoning changes, though In the last 10 years, three major offices and build a 500' pier extension no date has been set. marinas have been built in Portland to provide berthing space for boats John Ferland Harbor alone. First was DiMillo's using the fish pier. Restaurant and Mari". with well In July the Board of Appeals over 100 slips. denied McC.urt variances that would DiMillo's, was designed for and' have allowed housing and eliminated specifically caters to large yacht standard guidelines for building owners. Other clientele are those height and setback. who annually find their way to Kegulino said McCourt will try to Down East waters from ports Call get a zoning amendment through the as far away as Tampa Bay, Fla., San Portland Planning Board, a process Diego, Calif., Chesapeake River, that ultimately requires approval by Washington, D.C., and numerous the City Council. other Eastern and Gulf port cities. The planning board's review of the In addition to DiMillo's, there is project would be slightly different Spring Point Marina, with more than that of the board of appeals, than 200 slips and full marine ser. said Lee D. Urban, McCourt's vices. plus the recently added attorney in Portland. The board of appeals intends to Channel Crossing Marina with a lei. give existing zoning flexibility by Sure restaurant and more than 100 reviewing changes on a property-by- 'lips. property basis, Urban explained. Added to this is the phenomenal McCourt would want the planning growth of marinas going up along board to recommend to the council the coast. including those at Handy changes in the overall zoning Boats in Falmouth, Yarmouth Boats ordinance or zoning map. in Yarmouth, Great Island Marina Elsewhere in Portland, in Harpswell, Robinhood Marine development issues continue to affect Center in Robinhood, Burgess the fishing industry. Marina on the Kennebec in Bath, City officials have given approval to in 88,unit condominium complex 'Maine is becoming at Central Wharf. Central Wharf had provided tie-up space for about Z5 the boat mecca of commercial fishing and lobster boats prior to its sale last March. New England with The condo units went on the thousands of ocean mark t for between $150,000 and $300,000 - and sold out within three enthusiasts days, according to developer David Cope of Liberty Group. Demolition transplanting of existing wharf buildings is in progress. Cope expects occupancy to themselves to Maine sin next June. The area will be known as Chandler's Wharf. (IS live-aboard boat The project gained notoriety because it is the first housing project owners or summer- on A Portland wharf. It is also the lint housing project guided by the long dockside city's new waterfront mixed-use zone. residents.' The zone makes housing a conditional use dependent upon Brewer's Boat Yard at Southport retention or relocation of fish boat Island. Blake's Marine at Boothbay berthing. Harbor, Brewees Marine East at Cope said it appears the 10 fishing Boothbay Harbor, Coastal Wharf at vessels remaining at Central Wharf Boothbay Harbor and the recently will eventually relocate to Hobson's expanded Coveside Marine, Wharf. Hobson's is getting redeveloped by a group that includes Christmas Cove. a number of fishermen. As a result, Maine is becoming Another development issue is the boat mecca Of New England occurring in the waterfront's marine with thousands of ocean enthusi- protection zone, where only marine asts transplanting themselves to or marine-related businesses are Maine as live-aboard boat owners allowed. City officials believe that or summer-long dockside residents. wine of the uses on two properties in And many number among the the zone may not satisfy zoning newest phenomenon in Maine - requirements. those who have purchased luxury Planning Director Joseph Gray Jr. coastal condominiums in order to sent letters to Samuel G. Davidson of participate in boating and to have a the Marine Trade Center on the safe harbor and winter storage. Portland Fish Pier and Parker Poole Condominium approvals In of Union Wharf. Gray told Davidson Boothbay Harbor alone have to explain the tenancy of a real estate reached more than 80 this year. company and a doctor's office in his This. coupled with other condomi- building, while Poole was questioned nium developments along the coast about other non-marine uses at Union Wharf. have enticed out-of-staters to extend their boating activities in -59- Maine from May through October. ~0 Casco Bay awash ~0qwith~b~4q6ats ~6qW~J~O~qM~F~qMU.~%~qM staff writer Never before has pleasure ~qF~M popular In ~0q=~6qL~q@~2qT~6qz never before ~b~q- ~U~qit ~q,~8q7m~a~d so ~q-~p~"~q- ~o~u get ~ir~i~v~q:~lved ~I~. ~q!~6qit- Ing or the first time this season. you'll find t~8q%~y~bu~qV~ng a boat is relatively u can become a boat owner for about the same ~r~e~. ~qu~ired~tobu~i~ra~0qm~.~6qr~0qM~0qT The problem comes when you're ready to put the boat in ~U~* water. Most ma~r~bu~i~s and public mooring ~ar~qm have 'waiting Il~as. in the central area of port. land Harbor, the more ~.~1~. t~qh~i~4qr~4qf~4qi~4qz years ~, acco In to ~f~i ~3 all ~I~I y private ~r~i ~rbor~n~m~naster I fry ~2d le are 'Ing three ~1 ~1. ar ~ ~q_C n ~a d~W~4q: ~o~p as h Sp~d. ~Ito ~ur~4qi ~b~2q7~-~q- ~11 ~4qg~n~a~rd ~Ya I Club ~Ian ~Pe ~. ~1. d d The reasons for the boom In the boat business ~Y~. ~qW Portland ~f~l~qa=s ~8qLer is cleaner than before. ~&~0 Fan illy recreation in pop- ~u~l~a~r. ~*~0 Coastal waters a~r MIR ~qC~4qA~R~U~n~8qd ~qc~r~qm~2qf~2qt ~0qM~qw~qi~qf~qt in ~a~qw~p~l~i~s~t~s~b~y FIE viewed more ~i~md more as r~e~c~. . ~qso~0qwh Pori~8q" reati~o~n~al resources. ~*~0 A healthy h~a~s interest ra ~a a~6q2 fuel relatively low. Sewage treatment cleared waters Even if public moorings become available, boat owners By JOHN ~FERIJ~AND condo in downtown Portland," Scherr said. quires less education and training. But have to be patient. ~S~t~af~[~qw~r~iter At Port Harbor Marine, operators of ~s~yrveys indicate more people would sell if Spring Point Marine, sales of they had the chance to learn the sport. ~ly The harborma~ster is general. Portland Harbor was a boat owner's are ~q;~q? ~15 pemen ~6q9~0q=~1~1 ~I~(~E~nowles add. -time employee with a nightmare until the construction of ~sew~a~qp the ~.~0~0~0 t~o 1~0~.~q4~0~2qW~6qZ~2q:~q@~y ~fu a part "We have no question th~At there's an in. 11~.~1~4me job description. Don4t treatment facilities in Portland ~a~n~id South: terest." he said. "But if we don't Provide be surprised If It takes him a The ~200-slip marina plans to add eight ~t~b Portland In the late 1~9~70~s. ~a~nd mother 30 sometime in opportunities to ~'~*~a~qm .~4q7~11 either ~b~u~y a while to respond to your moor- ~a~l~l~p~e no play ow. ing application. "Portland. as recently as 10 ~ye t~h~e ~f~t~2q=~8qr~q" ~P ~q_=~r ~q.~1~0~.~4q4a~n~ies ~.~. Investing heavily You must also become aware or didn't hold out the welcome mat' ~6q=~4 e~qj ~@:"~I~f I had another 100 slips. I'd have no = and storage area expansion$. mad of harbor rules. They change ~7~%omt~o~n Ring of South Freeport's Riti~l~qe~s problem renting them." said Jan Bowers~. use developments. ~4~1~@ try few years as ~qc~q?mmu-~. Marine Service. "It bold out t~h~e 'go a~w~2qw office manager. South Freeport Marino Se~r~0q= ph~o. nities mold their regulations to mat." After one year of operation, Channel bought 70 acres in inland F~r~e~ep meet current and projected The public investment In environmental Crossing has nearly tripled to include ~1~2~8 of a plan to double its boat storage cap~a~t~i~- ~c~o~nd t~io~ns. You'll need to read protection spurred private Investment in slips. About 25 percent of the people using ty to 400 over the next few years~, ~sal~id it the latest version of the local boating facilities. As each project Proved the marina am ~f~i~rst-~U~qm~e boat owners. owner Jeffrey ~Gurnh~am. harbor regulations to learn successful, other businesses got Into the "I don't think we've seen the to It The company has also Initiated a Port. fen, the mooring application ad. Marinas have joined shops, offices, y~e~L~" sold manager Kate Harmon~. ~q@~q?~4q=~'s land J~e~tport transportation service be- process, speed ~i~md wake laws, housing and commercial marine ~im. an awful lot of now boaters each year." - cause many of the 7S customers w~ho b~e~qf~qt and other details. pr~ove~ments in changing t~qh~qo personality of Portland Hairlines experience is part of at South Freeport Marine are from out at That brings up another Portland Harbor. a trend affecting all of the Casco Bay area. state. Issue: harbors and public The impact o~qf mar~i~n- ban b~qo~0qmd~r~at~qu~t~- The latest figures for recreational boat- And the company has applied for a policy. Harbors are getting I& ~- Ing from Freeport to Scarborough were dredge permit to a~l~l~ow co~nstru~c~i~qm of 10 management studies and new Consider what has happened over the compiled in a 1983 study conducted for more slips to handle South Freeport H~ar~@ zoning ordinances. ~H~arborma~s~. ~~q1~A~d live Y~q- t~he Greater P~O~qK~I~qM~& C~O~W~W~R of ~GW~A~M~l~k~p~ hoes ~q4row~ing transient boating ~m~a~rk~~et. ~I~qm~qw~e ~a~d~6qf~6qt ~T~h~e ~1~q-~ar~g~er bud. ~q@ ~1 ~@ - In ~Sou~6q* Port!" Po~rt~@~qU~sr~b~or Marino --~qm~s~at~& ~I ~ Many boaters ~r ~r ~ to South Freeport gets to provide ~2qM~I -Ume ~0qgew from 20 to 208 slips and C~h~at~me~l The report estimated about 2~.100 boats Harbor to pick up ~L~qL Bean tw- shuttle coverage. ~ro~a~zing created 1~2~8 ~o~i~l in t~h~e region. or one for every 62 People. buses that take them to ~F~r~s~op~or~Vs expand~. The irony of this Is that In Portland. DRUM Marina created The report said boating is increasing at ~a~n Ing downtown. many boaters use the water to 112 Slips. annual rate of 4 to 8 percent - a modest Yankee Marina In Yarmouth, which s~qec~qap~qe the struc~qh~qi~6qm of the A now 1~50~q-~qo~l~ip marina is proposed ~f~qo~qr figure that gains significance when one ho~qn~qie to 64 boats, Is put of a ~8qmu~l~t~ir~qd~il~l~qo.~q.~q. landlubber world. Sout~qt~qt Portland, Port Harbor wants to in. ~qco~qn~qa~qld~qe~qrs that boating growth In t~qh~qe area dollar proposal for a bigger marine and But few appear ~qd~qis~qc~qo~qu~qr~qa~08qp~qd. crease by 30 slips, a~0ql~qn~80qrd ~qatnu~qiri~qn~qa~qi is was stagnant just a few years ago. c~qon~4qj~qorni~qn~qium~qs~q. an inn, a restaurant. shops "I think people are lo~qo~ql~qun~4qg Posed as part of an ~qi~8qm condo= As in Portland Harbor. companies In the and offices. The condominium ~qv~qa~qiu~ql~qd ~qs~qo~qU at life very differently now, on Portland's Central Wharf. region am responding to growth in various for up to $~2qM~q,000. said Jan Bowers, office man. Pro& healthy boding economy is ~8qM Another strong illustration of ~qb~qo~qsti~qr~12qw~qs ger for Port Harbor Marine, ~qf~qlected in Increased tourism. strong ~qr~q*~6qW ~qW~76q7~q0~q2~44q4 selling schools have been estab- growth to its popularity at various income operators of South Portland's ~qe~ql business expansion~q. lished at Falmouth's Handy Boat Service and interest l~qev~qo~qis. Spring Point Marina. ~qD~qIM~qI~ql~qlo'~qs Marina expects to service I.- Inc. In the last two = and the company ~qI~8qU upper and of the market Is handled ~qI~ql~ql~qey feel they ~qy ~q90 000 traveling boaters This summer an expects its charter usiness to increase ~q9~q5 b places such as Handy Boat. when Air~q- around once in I~8qf~8qt so people tour the harbor on their way up and ~qp~00q1th~ql~q. year : Lid Jon. %clans are student sailors in advanced down ~80qC I e~q. racing classes, and South Freeport Made. might as well do what they the coast, said manager Bill S~qch~qe~qr~qr. ~2q. ~88qZe d~qo -a ~qgur~qe it they're going to ~q-rhe wonderful thing about being here as ~q'~qy where crews recently installed a ~q$1~q5.000 ~qy ~6q: bill, they may as well is th~qst~6qg~6qeop~qle can bring their boat, be next more popular than sailboats bemuse now computerized navigation system ~qf~qo~qr one d na p~qay for a boat.* to the d Port and sort of have t~qh~qe~qir am boat owners feet motorized ~qtr~qa~qn~qt~qi~8q-t re- bo~qa~ql. P~qo~4qm~q4~qt~qj~qo ~qF~qgg~qs~qr H~qO~qAA~qI~qL~qD 7~2q1~q34~q1~q,~qr~4q$~q- ~q-60~q- Harbormasters prepare for the onslaught of summer By Laudie Ledgard Kittery residents are not everybody else gets a mooring." required to pay a mooring fee. Newick said. Non-resident pay a flat fee of $50 Newick said her main concern is As summer fast approaches, the caretakers of York County's for vessels up to 25 fen in length having the harbor dredged. She harbors are preparing for the and $100 for boats more than 25 said the harbor was resurveyed Whether or not it's the thing to Habormaster David Emmons usual onslaught of people, feet long. last week by the Corps of do. people do want to moor in said there are usually about 80 particularly the commercial and Engineers for depths. but them Perkins Cove, some so badly they boats moored in the river and recreational boaters whose ap- York Harbor has not yet been any action taken have been on the waiting list for as there are presently 30 boat owners pearance is directly proportional Continuing a brief journey by town officials to get a dredging long as 10 years. Oil (he Waiting list for mooring to sun. temperature. and in some along the southern Maine coast, project going. "We're overcrowded and have sace. places, tuna. the second major port-of-call "It will be a problem, especially a big waiting list " Perkins said. The town charges no fees for Over the years, as summer and might be York. York has a fairly where to put the spoils,"she said. "But we have no problems that mooring there; boaters apply for a year-round populations increased, good-sized harbor with a northern "It's an issue I'm very concerned any other harbor doesn't have." space by writing to Emmons. harbors from York to Kennebunk and southern basin that rills every with." Other boat owners have the have been filling to the brim with summer with both commercial Wells Harbor option of berthing at one of boats. As a consequence, waiting fishing vessels and recreational Perkins Cove The great hope for the as-yet- several private marinas along the lists for mooring space have sailboats, A Little way up the coast and untapped potential of Wells rive,. grown and harbormasters work Harbormaster Sarah Newick, almost tucked away, a traveler Harbor is dredging, according to, "Oh, we're fine at the each spring to juggle available who wait appointed by the York comes to Perkins Cove in Harbormaster Roland Falconer, moment," Emmons said. "I space. Board of Selectmen Last year, says Ogunquit. Quaint and pic- who would like to see the Project don't foresee any problems. That This season in particular may it's a difficult harbor to navigate turesque, this cove is popular with get going later this year. depends on the congestion this be a booming one for area har- because of its strong currents. local fishermen, especially those "If the harbor was dredged, summer." bors. with dropping gas prices and As a result of a mandate from from Down East who follow the we'd have more boats than we The harbor area was dredged lower interest rates;- Yet the the U.S_ Army Corps- of, tuna each summer. have now," Falconer said during last year. There are single-boat problems that might result from Engineers last year, which ordered Harbormaster Bud Perkins said a recent interview in his office moorings, so there's no need to such a boom along the southern equitable mooring costs for those he is "pushing" to get 85 to 90 overlooking the harbor. worry about rearranging floats or coast are as varied as the coastline in York, Newick and the York boats in the cove this season. He said the harbor has not been setting up a bow-and-stern itself. Port Authority have spent their while keeping a sharp eye on more dredged for 12 years and in recent system. time completing a bow-and-stem than 40 individuals on the town's summers has posed a threat to "There's usually not much mooring plan for the south basin waiting list for a mooring space. some boaters. Last year,. he said, trouble," Emmons said casually. Pepperrell Cove and. working on the Yet while, Perkins is working out there were several serious ac- "We're hoping for a good year, Almost hidden by Garrish rearrangement of floats for the the logistics of mooring cidents when boats ran into with low gas prices and low in- island at the southernmost tip of north basin. - arrangements, much of what he jetties. terests rates." the state, Pepperrell. Cove is home "York is progressing." Newick does is being dictated in the The additional space, and the to mostly recreational boats and said last week, noting that under selectmen's meeting room At town resulting revenue it would the few fishing boats that moor her management, the south basin offices. provide, are two good reasons for Portland For those with dreams of there. moorings are completed and work Last week the' Board, of dredging Wells Harbor. There are Since Harbormaster John is under way for the north basin. Selectmen agreed to a number of presently 73 boaters on the traveling still farther north for a Emery resigned last month Town In that area she said, floats will recommendations made by a waiting list for moorings, berth, Portland Harbormaster Manager Eric Strahl said Kittery's be arranged into a three-row harbor advisory committee Falconer said, and calls come in Alfred Trefty advises boaters to Port Authority has been in- system that may provide space for composed of local fishermen, daily from more applicants. try elsewhere. terviewing prospective candidates additional bow-and-stern Specifically, selectmen had "It's one of the better harbors "I don't want to encourage for the harbormaster's job. In the moorings. Given the numbers of policy questions about how to on the Maine coast and it's them to come up here." he said. absence of a harbormaster, the boaters there, that space will be deal with boat owners who have protected," Falconer said. "There's little berthing for the cove is being supervised by Port highly valued. bought a bigger boat and require a Action taken earlier this year by fishermen we have here. All the Authority Chairman. Frank According to Newick's-annual larger mooring. Since the town's the Wells Board of Selectmen may marinas are full with waiting lists and the pier is filled." Frisbee. report to the town, there were 424 mooring waiting list is categorized alleviate some of the harbor's Strahl said the town operates a registered vessels moored in York by residency and vessel type problems. Trefty explained how Portland, facility for boat launchings and harbor Last year. In 1984, the (commercial versus recreational), The board agreed to expand the which has long been a commercial requires applications- for harbor held 361 boats. And this the board was unsure whether or town's jurisdiction of the harbor Port for everything from Fishing moorings. Presently he said there year, she said, there are already not someone requesting a larger into an area of the Webhannet draggers to oil tankers, has un- are "well over 100" names on the more than 200 PeOPle on the mooring space should be given River estuary previously left open dergone changes along its waiting list for moorings and the waiting list for mooring space. one, or moved to the bottom of for boat owners to moor at no waterfront in recent years, cove is filled with boats. Mooring space in York is given his or her category on the waiting charge, That move will bring resulting in some loss of space. "(The cove) has expanded over out on a first-come, first-serve list. more revenue to Welts through The state pier is now closed to the the past couple of yew," Strahl basis, and boat owners are The harbor committee decided mooring fees. which Falconer says Casco Bay Ferry Terminal and said. "Primarily because the required to provide their own such a request would be made in range from $60 to $130. Central Wharf is closed for people who have, moorings mooring tackle. writing to the harbormaster and The town is also considering condominium development. haven't given them up." Consequently, some folks, the boat owner's name would be temporary eminent domain What is expected to be a boon Boats in Pepperrell Cove are particularly commercial fisher- placed at the bottom of the list. proceedings to take areas of Wells to the local fishing industry is the berthed on single-boat moorings men, believe they should have The committee and the board also and Drakes Island beaches for the opening April 28 of the Portland and there is a Small pier for boats moorings before others. agreed on a few other changes. dumping of sand taken when the Fish Pier and Fish Exchange. The to load and unload passengers or "it works both ways. First. they asked for the harbor is dredged. Portland City Council recently cargo. Everybody wonders why reinstatement of transient Falconer says if the harbor was approved a $200,000 loan moorings, which in the past have dredged, he could get 150 boats guarantee and adopted a lease for been used primarily by tuna moored there "easily, without a fishermen who stay at the cove for problem. " the city-owned cooler-auction a few weeks as the tuna run, Town Wells, recently began charging building where fishermen will officials said some residents were private boat haulers who use the watch as their catches are auc- using the $100 temporary ramp at Wells Harbor. Other tioned to area buyers moorings to circumvent the revenue boosters might include a Trefty, said he received a few waiting list. parking charge for boaters who inquiries last year from boaters in Under the new policy, the leave their cars and boat traders in this area interested in mooring on mooring holder and the tem- the town-owned lot and the his waterfront, but none this yew. porary holder will pay a full possibility of taking over marina One change he's noticed is the mooring fee, a minimum $250. operations at the harbor after the attraction of more recreational The temporary mooring holder lease for the Wells Harbor Marina vessels to Portland harbor. can only come from the waiting runs out in 1988. "It was unheard of five years List. on a priority basis. Presently, Falconer is waiting ago." he said. "Now we have The most significant change for Wells to purchase more hundreds and hundreds and concerns a new policy for ap. mooring blocks while he spends hundreds more coming in." plying for a mooring. time taking up the moorings from Yet he was hopeful about plans it will now cost each applicant, the "free area." to put 100 more slips in the inner. including those presently on the "I ran honestly say I've had a harbor sometime in the future. waiting list, $150 to apply. If the lot of cooperation from the town But for now, much like her sister applicant receives a mooring, the manager and the board of harbors to the south, Portland is fee will be applied to the mooring Selectmen," he said. "They "full to capacity." fee. If the applicant withdraws realize the potential for this from the list. the fee is forfeit. harbor." "They're trying to eliminate the people on the list who are there Kennebunk River just because it's the thing to do," Farther north flows the Ken- Perkins said. "I don't approve. of.. nebunk River, also home to many it, but it's what they passed, so boat owners and fishermen. Yet fine... unlike the others, the safe harbor along the Kennebunk seems to have fewer problems relative to congestion or dredging. -61- Kennebunkport wants to protect the fishermen, but the fishermen'are skeptical Cape Porpoise, one of the last remaining harbors in southern Maine where a lobsterman can haul a trap without interference, has increased its chances of staying that way. Last week voters approved Sam- measures which they hope will keep the fishing 3@@ jt@, S vil lage just two miles north of Kennebunkport's tourist-oriented "Dock SquaW' safe from the blight of unchecked development they see spreading up the coast. M zi- Under the changes to the town's land use 'F7. if- ordinance, only marinas serving lobstermen and @ wl" fishermen will be allowed in Cape Porpoise, and hotels and motels are prohibited. The harbor will not go the way of the Kennebunk River, with its $100,000 yachts, condominiums and displaced fishermen - or so the voters hope. The 70 lobstermen who work the Cape Porpoise waters ought to be pleased. But the response of a group of lobstermen tending gear at the town pier last week was more skeptical than grateful. f Greeks "You've heard the expression,'Beware 0 bearing gifts'?" commented one lobsterman. Behind that remark lies a traditional social gulf between Cape Porpoise's natives, 90 percent of whom depend on the sea for their livelihood, and people who have moved to town from out of state. Of course the three lobstermen on the pier favored protecting their harbor. But they don't like laws telling them what they can do with their property. Also, having watched harbor after harbor along the E coast get turned over to yachtsmen and tourists, Fis ermen built the homes that line Cape Porpoise Harbor when they. could still afford to live they didret trust the law to stay on their side' h i f them out of town. "What I've seen happen ain't fit to print It looks there. Now. the risingcosts 9f I ving in Kennebunkport have driven many o like the developers are sitting in the driver's seat. They live in Town Hall," said the same skeptic, who patrons can eat in or sit outside along the shore,. look around and gay, "This would be a great place didn't want to use his name. - watchirig lobstermen haul traps. On one side of the for& motel or a condo." Board members included in "Town Hall" in this case is the board of water sits a lobster pound; on the other is a modest the more than 20 amendments to the land use selectmen, Planning Board and Zoning Board of canoe rental operation. In the nearby square, there ordinance one that would restrict marinas built in Appeals - with most of the changes that apply to is a post office, library, hardware store, art gallery, Cape Porpoise to- "commercial" (fishing and Cape Porpoise-coming from the Plannin BoarcL is a post office, library, hardware store, art gallery, lobstering) use, and another amendment that The reason Cape Porpoise has been singled out for inn, and a couple of restaurant& extends a current ban on motels or hotels of more protection is that board members see it as the next are the small bungalows built by fishermen years than 10 rooms in two areas of the cape to all areas. logical place along the southern Maine coast for ago, when they could stiff afford to live there. Now, Rather than mount an all-out attack against an tourist-oriented development. Until now, the cape half of them can't afford to live anywhere in explosion of condominiums and motels, the Plan- has been saved partly because its wet, ledgey soil Kezinebunkport because of its skyrocketing prop- ning Board has chosen an approach based on the - made it troublesome to build on. But a year ago, a erty values and taxes. proposition that if you can stop people from Kennebunkport sewer line was extended to Cape Just to the north, lobstemen, fishermen, and a yachting up to marinas and see.ing the great view Porpoise, reducing that drawback. handful of slimmer yachtsmen use the town pier for from both sides of the harbor, you can stop, the Cape Porpoise would be a developer's dream. It is fueling up and unloading.- But they can't tie up large-scale projects from following. That proposi- one of the last scenic jewels in a string of rapidly there; boats are all moored off shore. In the summer, tion has yet to be proved. tarnishing southern coastal gems. The harbor is day-trippers pause long enough to take in the view studded with islands that were the focus of a from shore, or from a canoe just offshore. Without preservation effort several years ago, when the a marina, -any yachtsmen stay only long enough to Kennebunkport Conservation Trust bought five of gas up at the town pier or down a bucket of fried them. clarns before moving on. At the top of one long, narrow ringer of the harbor That's just what the Planning Board wants them sits a tiny clam shack draped in fishnet where to do - keep on moving, before they take a good 6 2 - Harbor Masters Grou'p,,,.w-- Forms New Association Searsport Harbor Master Wayne more specific goals: encouraging effective Hamilton was one of a number of harbor and uniform harbor management, '@aasteri_fiom 6''Maine coastal, isla*nd and advancing the harbor master profession, tidal river towns unanimously voted to improvingharbor masters' know ledge and establish the state's first association of abilities, educating,tbe public as to the role harbor masters at a meeting March 18 in of harbor masters, prornoting regulations Bucksport.. 1. @ .i to enhance management of Maine's According to Cooperative Extension harbors, and strengg@er@ing comiyWnica- Service Marine Specialist Conrad Griffin, tion between harbor-@Masters and local, the new organization arose as a response state and federal ajehcies. to the "isolation" of harbor masters in Membership in t he association is open to some 115 Maine towns from Kittery to all Maine harbor masters and their Eastport. deputies or designees, Griffin said. Others. "This is an opportunity to bring harbor with an interest in harbor resources - masters together to focus on common marine operators, restaurant owners, concerns and exchange ideas and boatyard owners, seleetpersons. . town insights," explained Griffin, who, along managers, and concerned citizens - may with extension agents in coastal counti join as nonvoting associate members, lent organizational and educationa Member dues, which the board will set by assistance to the group. In the litic class of -membership, will support the arena, he added, the asssociation will, I association's activities. harbor masters "speak with one voice, giving them significantly more influence," "This is not an elite group," Griffiii The association's bylaws, prepared by stressed. . "The asssociation needs attorney Edward F. Bradley Jr., set forth everyone's participation." es, I al et Portland has experienced continuing pressure to loosen its W-2 zoning restrictions preserving three-fourths of Commercial Street's water side for marine-related enterprises. This included a.battle over a zone change to allow building of condominiums and offices on Cumberland Wharf, which was resolved when the developer withdrew his request at the end of September. With the help of a $ 1.62 million industrial development bond guaranteed by the Finance Authority of Maine (FAME), a group of fishermen managed to secure Hobson's Wharf for fisheries use, also in September. (See'also the discussion regarding submerged lands in Section 8 of Part II, Appendix A.) Dramatic increases in pleasure boats and marine development are reported all along the Maine coast. Voters in Kennebunkport in March, 1986 aproved changes to the town's land use ordinance to allow only marinas serving lobstermen and fishermen in Cape Porpoise, and to prohibit hotels and motels. The 112th Legislature adopted a policy of supporting and giving preference to water dependent uses that require shorefront locations, with passage of L.D. 2167, An ACT to Enhance the Sound Use and Management of Maine's Coastal Resources. The bill contains a provision specifically allowing municipalities to zone portions of their waterfront solely for water-dependent uses. The Legislature also enacted L.D. 2313, An ACT to Clarify the Authority of Harbor Masters, a temporary stop-gap until a complete review of Maine's laws affecting harbors and harbor masters could be accomplished. The need for such a review was one of the.issues behind creation of a formal Association of Harbormasters in March 1986. The Legislature in L.D. N M 2313 ordered the Department of Conservation to conduct a study concerning all local and statewide issues raised by the bill, to be reported with supporting legislation to the Legislature by January 1, 1987. 6. Coastal Access Activities The 112th Legislature, in L.D. 2167, An ACT to Enhance the Sound Use and Management of Maine's Coastal Resources, adopted an explicit policy of preference to water-dependent uses over other uses and promotion of public access to the ILI shoreline. As a step in implementing this policy, the bill contains an amendment to the State Subdivision Law directing towns to make a finding that a subdivision "will not have an th, undue adverse effect on ... any public rights for physical -64- or visual access to the shoreline," as a condition for subdivision approval. (An example of a town already doing t@at is described in the following clipping about South Portland.) A related bill, L.D. 2250, authorizes referral to the voters in November of a $ 10 million General Fund bond issue which includes $3,250,000 targeted for acquisition and development of land for coastal access. A program for public access to rivers was launched on March 26th when Governor Joseph E. Brennan accepted the first contributions to Maine's new Rivers Fund from leaders of sportsmen's, conservation, and environmental organizations. The Department of Conservation, which is administering the program, hopes to raise upwards of $ 30,000 annually through private donations. Grants will be available from the Fund to organizations and communities for river management and improvement projects, such as new or improved boat launching sites, picnic areas and other facilities needed for public river use. The Program is expected to be a catalyst for local volunteer efforts for litter clean-up, erosion control and other projects to promote high quality river recreation opportunities. Public access to ocean beaches continues to be a major coastal issue. As of the end of the reporting period, the State Supreme Court was scheduled by summer to rule on the controversial Moody Beach case, in which landowners sought to reaffirm property rights to the low water mark and exclude public access for recreation. The 112th Legislature took its own stand on the issue with passage of L.D. 2380-2- An ACT to Confirm and Recognize Public Trust Rights Intertidal Land. The bill states explicitly that the public trust encompasses uses of intertidal land including "fishing, fowling, navigation, use as a footway between points along the shore and use for recreational purposes." The news clippings reproduced on the following page provide further information. Public access to coastal islands is the subject of a study conducted for the Maine Bureau of Public Lands by the Island Institute. Released this spring, the Institute's Coastal Island Recreation Management Report makes recommendations for devTl-oping the recreation pofe-n-tial of 150 State-owned islands. 7. Changes to Coastal Zone Boundaries & Management Authority All of the items in Maine's 1984 Routine Program Implementation submission were fully resolved during the reporting period. Coastal communities and interested state -65- This model by Therrien Architects shown the Staff photo by Doug Jones proposed $9 million Breakwater Condominium project. Condo proposal hits snag on public access By JAMES SAUNDERS tract within the former East Yard, of which Staff writer its 174-unit Breakwater condominiums will be a SOUTH PORTLAND - The Planning Board put It plans over time to remove several giant old put The McCourt Co. on notice Tuesday night that shipyard buildings to clear that area. it expects the firm's proposal for a $9 million Beyond that, it came out, The McCourt Co. Inc. condominium project on the old World War II has a long-term option from Spring Point Associ- ates on roughly 14 more waterfront acres, the shipyard to include a public walkway around the former shipyards north end, extending to the waters edge. old breakwater and Bug Light. McCourt representatives replied that they had Midway through the review, board member never before encountered requirements for such Charles Kahill expressed his concern that the broad public access. matter before the city Is much bigger than Break- The company's project manager. Austin P. Regolino, said in the past the firm had provided water Condominium. points of public water access in waterfront projects "This Is a major decision for the city," referring but not the continuous stretch brought up. He said to the future of the former shipyards. It would weaken security in the proposed residen- It appeared, he added, "that it's not to be a tial development. working waterfront. I feel uncomfortable about But the board majority, with James Brewster having even preliminary approval before we have the most outspoken, told the Boston developers public Input." that on public water access, they face a new Some board members wished for a wider, experience here. long-term plan from McCourt. Following a two-hour presentation and review, At one point, Brewster argued that private board members gave 6-1 preliminary subdivision development should not mean private ownerwship plan approval with the provision that the water of everything. access they demanded be provided. "You don't own that ocean," he declared In a A great deal more board review plus a public raised voice to the developers, "arid you don't own hearing lie ahead on the road to final action. 100 percent of the view. We must keep our citizens Board members In Tuesday night's spirited as well as these tenants in mind." review made It clear that they are looking at a lot At one point when McCourt planning consultant more than the immediate McCourt proposal. Evan Richert said he "had a problem" with an The city - whether It wants to or is ready to or unbroken walkway concept of public access to the not - will find itself weighing the future of much water, Brewster quickly agreed. of the former World War II shipyards. "Mr. Richert, you've got a problem of about five The McCourt Co. on April 1 expects to votes (out of seven) on this board to address that acquire from Spring Point Associates a 41-acre walkway." -66- A coastal challenge. As would-be beachgoers have discovered The Maine challenge attempts to answer over the years, In Massachusetts a private objections raised by the Supreme Judicial beach can be very private - right down to the Court when Massachusetts legislators sought low-.water mark. to expand public access a dozen years ago. Massachusetts courts have consistently The court ruled then that any action that upheld a 340-year-old ordinance that gives usurped the rights of property owners without anyone owning coastal land the rights to the compensation would be unconstitutional. Intertidal lands as well - allowing the public With some 80 percent of the state's 1,200 to-use them only for fishing, fowling, and miles of coastline in private hands. the cost of navigation. compensation would be too great, and the bill Restrictions on the publics recreational died. use of its coastline are now being challenged The Maine bill argues that the public right in Maine - part of the Massachusetts colony, was always there, just not spelled out. which inherited Its colonial law. Massachu- Richard Delaney. director of the Massachu- settts officials should watch that challenge setts Coastal Zone Management Agency, not.- closely. ed that state officials have been watching a trend among courts In other states to expand Legislation which would add recreation to the public's rights to the coast. In Maine. the list of public uses permitted on privately where colonial rights of fishing, fowling, and owned beaches has been filed by state Sen. navigation have beef! the law. courts have al- Mary Najarian of Portland. She argues that owed use of the intertidal zone for skating, the absence of "recreation" In the colonial or- walking from one place to another, and for dinances does not mean that such things as hauling out a boat while visiting. swimming and sunbathing were explicitly Massachusetts has made great efforts in barred. recent years to purchase coastal property, and We think that fishing. fowling, and navi- plans to continue that policy. Legislators and gation were just the uses that were Important environmental officials should examine the in colonial times," Najarian said, "Recreation possibility of expanding the public's rights of wasn't important to them and so It was just access to beaches which remain In private not explicitly mentioned," ownership. AG supports public beach use By CHRISTINE KUKKA York County Bureau WELLS - The state attorney general Tues- day filed written arguments with the Maine Supreme Court urging it to affirm a precedent- se ing lower court decision that sanctions pub- lic access to Maine's sandy beaches. The state's highest court is scheduled by summer to rule on the controversial lawsuit that seeks to bar the public from the mile-long sandy stretch of Moody Beach. Two years ago, 69 Moody Beach landowners filed suit against the town of Wells and the state in an effort to block the public from the beach in front of their homes. Last July, a York County Superior Court justice dismissed the beachfront owners' claim of private rights to Moody Beach when he ruled that the beach was protected by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Noting the importance of the question, the lower court justice ruled that the issue had to be decided by the state Legislature. For the court to decide, he said, it would be necessary for the state to waive sovereign immunity protection. Because the beachfront owners had not asked the Legislature for a waiver of sovereign immu- nity before filing suit, Justice William S. Bro- drick dismissed the suit last July. As a result, beachfront owners lost their day in court to determine where public land and access began. In October, beachfront owners appealed Bro- drick's rulling, which basically endorsed the concept of sovereign immunity. While the Supreme Court considers the ap- peal, all other motions relating to the lawsuit are on hold in Superior Court. In his appeal to the Supreme Court, Sidney St. F. Thaxter, a Portland attorney who repre- sents beachfront owners, questioned the use of sovereign immunity to protect recreational rights. Thaxter cited Massachusetts court decisions that concluded that sovereign immunity protec- tion does not include recreation, such as bathing and walking along the shore area. There is a long history of case law in Maine based on colonial ordinances, that say a property owner's land extends to the intertidal zone, Thaxter argued. Massachusetts decisions that exclude recrea- tional uses from sovereign immunity protection are based on the same colonial law that Maine law is based on, Thaxter said. "We are not challenging the traditional rights of the public to fish and hunt along the intertidal zone," Thaxter said, "but we are challenging recreational rights." "The Massachusetts precedent must be re- jected for two reasons," Maine Attorney General James Tierney argued. State officials claim that Maine law rests upon the state's tradition of using Maine's scant supply of sandy beaches for recreational uses. "Second, quite simply, Massachusetts' view rests upon a misinterpretation and misapplica- tion of law and history," Tierney argued. Other states, including New Jersey, have ruled that sovereign immunity protection ex- tends to recreational rights, Tierney wrote. Thaxter contends that Maine was once part of Massachusetts and adopted the same colonial ordinance as the Bay State. State law in New Jersey is not based on the Colonial ordinances that Maine law is based on, Thaxter said. "The only state that has the same system of law as Maine, so that we can compare apples of apples, is Massachusetts," Thaxter said. Tierney argues that the state is public trustee of Moody Beach and that the public is entitled to access to Moody Beach based on two decades of past use. Thaxter is scheduled to reply to the state's written arguments within two weeks. Oral argu- ments before the Supreme Court are scheduled for March. and federal agencies were notified of all approved Coastal Program core law and other management authority changes by letter of November 14, 1985. Also during the period, all changes in the core laws made during the First Regular Session of the 112th Legislature (1985) were compiled and annotated, along with 1985 changes in most of the associated regulations which are now included as Coastal Program management authorities. This material will be the basis for a new RPI submission this summer. 8. Changes in Strengthening the Management of Coastal Resources The major change strengthening the management of coastal resources was the enactment of L.D. 2167, An ACT to Enhance the Sound Use and Management of Maine's Coastal Resources, described under "Coastal Issues and Accomplishments' and referenced under individual subject headings in this report. Additional changes not covered elsewhere are summarized below. In a largely unheralded but important move, the 112th Legislature passed L.D. 2283, An ACT to Amend the Classification System for Maine Waters and Change the Classifications of Certain Waters, which is a major revision to the State's water quality classification system. The new law brings Maine into compliance with the federal Clean Water Act by updating and upgrading the classification system. Among.other things it establishes: (a) a new class for the State's highest quality waters; (b) a new method for monitoring the toxicity of discharges to the state's waters; and (c) a strong State policy against allowing discharges which significantly degrade existing water quality. The new classification system will involve updating the quality level assigned to each of Maine's water bodies. Pursuant to adoption of the Submerged Lands Law in 1975, the Bureau of Public Lands in the Department of Conservation has been issuing leases and easements for the use of inter-tidal and sub-tidal land without giving consideration to the type of use proposed. Most uses until recently were marine-related. In March, 1986, following on an amendment to the Submerged Lands Law allowing the Director of the Bureau to base rental fees on desirability of use, and in response to increasing applications for upland uses of submerged lands, the Bureau adopted rules favoring water-dependent and associated uses and discouraging upland uses. Preliminary drafts of the rules were reviewed and commented on by the State Planning Office. -68- The shift in applications has been from leases for single piers for boat repair facilities, or docking for fishing boats, to piling and float systems for marinas or docking associated with multi-unit residential development. Easements are requested largely for single family recreational docking. Development pressures on submerged lands are strongest in Portland Harbor, where local fishermen are being bumped aside by residental development on the wharves. The financial strength of such development puts the fishermen at a competitive disadvantage, forcing them to move to usually less-desirable locations. 9. Major Coastal Issues & State Role (See Coastal Issues & Accomplishments section of this report.) 10. New Publications Related to Program Implementation � The Maine Coast: Time of Change, Maine State Planning Office, March 198b. � Capital Improvements Programming Guidebook for Maine Communities, Maine State Planning Office, May 198b.- � Maine's Intertidal Habitats: A Planner's Handbook, Maine State Planning Oflice7Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences, November 1985. � The Natural Resource Industries of Maine: An Assessment and Statistical Portrait, Maine State Planning Office/Finance Autgorr-tyof Maine, May 1986. � The Landowner's Otpion, A Guide to the Voluntary F-rotection of Land in Maine, by janet Milne, 6FU Critical Areas Program, 3rd Edition, 1985. � The Maine Seacoast, March 1986, one of a series comprising An Atlas of the Resources of Maine, prepared by and available from the Center for Research & Advanced Study, University of Southern Maine, and the Land & Water Resources Center, UMO. 15f/ -69- 11. State PlannjM office Organizational Chart March, 1986 S Clerk Steno III Director, mwiageffent Divis Clerk Typist III Policy Development Specialist(3) Ground Water Specialist (4) Business Manager I Land & Water Resources.Council Acc't. Clk. II Cl. Typist III r virector, - t)ir?ctor, Comamity Policy Division (5) Assistance Division (6)] State EconovdSt r__ Manager, Financial systems Analyst aqeMent unit (8) 0 Licy Dev. Spec.(7) Economist(19) I Senior Planner (9) -.-7e-nior Pl.anner(20) Senior Planner (113) , Senior Planner Senior Planner Managert Senior Planner 0 1) -Senior Planner ager, Pl. Uni Development Planner 11 (12) -Senior Planner -Sen Planner (22) nit Planner 11 (13) - Senior Planner -Planner 11 (23) -Planner 11 (14) . Data Res. Asst. -Planner II Research Tech..(15) Res. Assoc. I -Planning Super.(2 Data Res. Asst. (16) Cl. Steno III i@l. Steno 111 (17) Cl. Steno 11 (18) Coastal Program Staf other spo staff working on the Coastal 'Hir am (9) David Keeley, Program Manager (21) John DelVecchio (1) Richard E. Barringer (6) Janice Hird (10) Katrina Van Dusen (16) Mary Droege (23) Sherry Hanson (2) Linda Harvell (7) Holly Dcminie (12) R.G. Slakesley (17) Aline Lachance (24) Hal Kinthall (3) Karen Massey (8) Sam JCnes (13) Gro Flatebo (18) Lorraine Lessard (4) Paul Dutram (11) Hank Tyler (14) Richard Kelly (19) Steve Adam (5) Denise Lord (22) Marv Rosenblum (15) Naopta Edelson (20) Dana Little TAD (1) !ND e @ist(3) 41 .en @i Ifni 2111111 mmmmmmmmmmmm Exhibit B-1 Coastal Advisory Conmittee Minutes of Meeting, October 17, 1985 Summary of Action A. Call to order. The meeting was'called to order by Dick Barringer at 10:15 A.M. Dick suggested introductions be made which they were. B. Agenda 1. Ccmittee members were briefed on the Access Subcommittee's findings and were told they would receive a full report in several weeks. They were Information items also briefed on the status of the Council's Data Management Subcommittee work on their coastal program work task. 1. &boommittee Findings 2. Three draft legislative proposals were discussed including: David Keeley provided a brief overview of the work by the public access subcommittee. At the January, 1985 meeting this subcommittee � An ACT to Clarify Public Use of the Intertidal Area; was formed to review and make recommendations on ways to improve � An ACT to Create a Shoreline Access Protection Fund; and coordination between State administered public access programs. These � An ACT to Establish Coastal Management Policies programs focus on publicly owned and maintained sites and have well-defined user groups. The subcommittee determined four state agencies (DMR, IF&W, DOC, and SPO) are responsible for six programs that allocate $1.5 million a year to public access projects. Attendance The subcommittee recommended coordination between programs be improved, DW identify the level, type and geographic areas of Members commercial access needs, and that the Maine Coastal Program focus Richard E. Barringer State Planning Office access funds on types of projects not funded through other programs. Spencer Apollonio Department of marine Resources The Cbmmittee agreed three items needed to be done: John walker mine Association of Regional Councils a) David Keeley and Penn Estabrook were to work on a plan to determine commercial access needs. Alternates b) David Keeley will prepare a memo for the Governor requesting the Penn Estabrook Department of Marine Resources State Planning Office to oversee the improved coordination of Hollis McGlauflin Dept. of aivironmental Protection State access programs. Ken Spaulding Department of Conservation Rob Elder Department of Transportation c) The State Planning Office will send to members the summary report of the access subcommittee deliberations. others Mark Sullivan Department of Conservation 2. Coastal Program Work Elements Phil Ahrens Attorney General's office David Keeley briefed members on the status of State level projects Burt Cossaboon Greater Portland Council of Government selected by the CAC for funding in May, 1985. Karen Massey briefed Karen Massey Land & Water Resources Council members on the Council's Data Management task that is funded by the John DelVecchio State Planning Office Coastal Program. They have met once and are working with Central Charlie Colgan Finance Authority of Maine Computer Services on the project. Karen agreed to circulate minutes David Keeley State Planning office of their October meting to committee members. Mike Healey Verrill & Dana Minutes (cont.) Discussion items The staff was directed to revise the bill accordingly, incorporating I- Public Use of the Intertidal Area necessary changes to convert it from an appropriation to a bond issue, and Karen Massey provided an overview of the legislation and what it was to send a final draft out to Committee members before October 31st. intended to accomplish. Phil Ahriens briefed members on the status of the John Walker suggested the staff meet with a few local officials dealing Moody Beach lawsuit. He then commented an the bill and raised questions with public access issues to get their input on the bill. concerning: - whether a resolve would be more appropriate; 3. Cos tal Management policies - the status of the intertidal acceps bill submitted last session and held over for this session; David Keeley provided a overview of the legislation and Dick Barringer - wbether clarification of public trust would be injurious to other explained the financial item will be dbleted in the final draft. commn law purposes; - whether this bill may be considered a taking, and Spencer Apollonio suggested we broaden the.bill to incorporate the near - what the outcome of this bill, If submitted, would be. shore environment and marine opportunities in the Gulf of Maine. Specifically to include the coordinated rVearch program being developed by Mike Healey, representing the TkNm of Wells in the Moody Beach case, also ARM Maine. questioned the value of the proposed Act and felt this was not an appropriate time to consider such an Act. Penn Estabrook and David Keeley were instructed to evaluate how this After considerable dicusssion the committee agreed that Karen and Phil suggestion could be acconrodated in the legislation. would jointly draft a resolve that would accommodate the concerns of each John Walker suggested the SPO meet with the Maine Municipal Association to office. It would then be submitted to the Governor with a memo explaining review the legislation and to get their input. The committee agreed this the costs and benefits of pursuing this resolve. The Governor would then was desireable. make a decision on how to proceed. Mark Sullivan suggested including a reporting procedure to require the SPO to report to the Governor on the status of implementing the coastal 2. Public Access Protection Pima policies. After considerable discussion the suggestion was accepted. John DelVecchlo provided an overview of the legislation. Considerable Dick Barringer requested all agencies to provide comments soon so that they discussion focused on how well access needs along the coast are documented may be incorporated into the final draft which is due October 31st at the and whether this fund should support development and maintenance activities Governor's Office. related to coastal access projects. It was agreed the bill will be modified to incorporate the following: 4. Other Business � the funding source will be a non-lapsing 5 year bond Issue; John Walker inquired about progress on the Cumulative Impact Study. It was agreed the CAC would be briefed at their next meeting. � the amount will be several million and the SPO will consider in greater detail whether a trust is appropriate and politically feasible; Adjournment the meeting adjourned at 12:15 p.m. � the emphasis of the bill is on salt water shoreline acquisition with a portion available for development; � the bill will support small scale, low intensity projects (examples mentioned were rights-of-way to the water, small waterfront parks, etc.); dk/aal/19b � if a trust Is established the return could be used to support maintenance items. -2- -3- k1 No ON Exhibit B-2 SUMMARY OF GULF OF MAINE WORKSHOP 20-22 August, 1985, Portland, Maine GENERAL 2 Over 140 persons registered for the 3-day workshop which opened with The water column papers covered a broad spectrum of topics which tended to four invited plenary session speakers on Tuesday. The contributed sessions con- focus on the production of organic matter by phytoplankton and its subsequent sisted of talks and poster presentations which were presented on Wednesday and incorporation into pelagic food chains. The importance of vertical mixing for Thursday. the delivery of necessary nutrients at times of adequate insolation for primary production was stressed, and its effects on both overall plankton standing The contributed talks were divided into the broad categories of Geology, stocks and on particular species such as red tide organisms was described. Physical Oceanography, Wat er Column Research, Benthic Research, and Zones of high chlorophyll are concentrated in coastal areas, and are related Fisheries/General Research. The poster sessions were available for viewing to, but not perfectly associated with, zones of upwelled, cold, deeper waters. .throughout the workshop. Factors affecting productivity of phycoerytherin pico-plankton relative to that of larger phytoplankton were presented; it appears probable that this com- The workshop concluded with a round-table panel discussion of the high- petition is also controlled by light and nutrient delivery. A discussion of the lights of the meeting, impressions on where significant gaps in our knowledge turbidity characteristics of the various water masses in the Gulf showed the exist, and the identification of future research needs. potential for nepbelometry to . provide valuable input to study of plankton distribution, water mass transport and suspended particulate transport. A new A complete list of the participants in the workshop, their addresses and method for estimating secondary production indicates that food limitation for institutional affiliations, as well as the titles and abstracts of the plenary zooplankton dominates during the year. Distributions and grazing activities session talks and the contributed oral and poster presentations are attached. of midwater and benthic boundary layer planktonic beterotrophs were discussed in In this document we summarize the contributed presentations and the panel three papers'. A preliminary attempt was made to assess the controlling factors discussion, and highlight some themes that developed during the meeting. governing the concentration of dissolved organic carbon in the water column. Several papers addressed the possibilities available for comprehensive data collections, using newly developed technologies; these include satellite ima- CONTRIBUTED PAPERS gery, moored sampling devices, and advanced acoustic devices. One paper discussed the advantages of the Gulf of Maine as an optimal site for the The geologically-oriented papers focused on the geological history of the investigation of surface slicks. as barriers to satellite remote sensing and as Gulf of Maine. Particular emphasis was placed on the geologically recent gla- indicators of physical and chemical processes. cial movements and their past and predicted future sea level impacts along the Maine coast. The importance of the effect of geologically-determined substra- The benthic session covered both primary and secondary production processes, tes on present distribution of plant and animal communities was Ai common theme. -with a logical emphasis on the latter, as well as factors mediating the coupling The potential for mapping of these substrates in deeper waters using side-scan of these two themes. Two papers demonstrated that the enormous convolution of sonar was discussed. Relatively little modern process work in geology was he Maine shoreline makes possible a degree of macrophyte production that rivals discussed, the one exception being a paper on sedimentation processes in that of phytoplankton in the coastal zone. Another series of papers showed that estuarine intertidal areas. invertebrate population densities. sedimentary organic matter accumulation and nutritional quality, and nutrient regeneration rates and subsequent irrigation The physical oceanographic papers summarized the recent work and studies of nutrient-rich pore waters to the overlying water column all had distributions presently underway or proposed for the near future. Two speakers discussed that responded very closely to the previously described patterns of water column syntheses of data dealing with the large scale non-tidal circulation in the primary production. Water depth was shown to be an important modifying factor Gulf. one characterized the dynamics of Gulf bottom waters, and another pre- in these distributions. Two papers described the types of microbial activities sented very recent results of bottom water current meter measurements. One that account for the bulk of sedimentary metabolism. Two papers discussed the recurrent theme among many of these presentations was the potential importance roles of biological interactions and storm activity in controlling rocky bot- and variability of slope water intrusions into the Gulf. One paper dealt with tom plant and animal communities. Several papers addressed the controls on the variability of river discharge into the Gulf, which may have an impact on growth, pathology, distribution, and movement of several invertebrate species, coastal mixing processes. Several papers addressed vertical movement of water; including sea pens, scallops, polychaetes, and clams. A large collaborative these included a reevaluation of the influence of the Fundy power dams on study on lobster migration, using tags. was described. A most fascinating study changes in Gulf of Maine tides, a new method for calculation of wave spectra, of snail shell evolution over a period of some decades was presented. and the use of sea level changes in determining circulation patterns. Fisheries were addressed by an amalgam of studies an higher trophic level organisms in the Gulf. They included an entire ecosystem model of how Fundy tidal power development might affect fisheries production, a model of fish pro- duction based upon measured values of primary production and calculated secon- dary production, an evaluation of tidal pools as nursery grounds for fishes, and 3 4 several papers on applied fisheries studies. These included two papers on suspended sediment, from the shore across the banks to the basins need to be herring, one summarizing recent tagging efforts and another which synthesized examined. over 20 years of work to arrive at an hypothesis of herring production limita- tions in the Gulf. One paper discussed an apparent paradox in the distributions The importance of the bottom and midwater nepheloid layers have also of larval and adult cod off the Maine coast, and another served to emphasize assumed new significance. These apparently ubiquitous phenomena 'may support as the magnitude of fisheries landings which are unrecorded and wanted because yet poorly understood biological communities - from microbes to macroplankton - these fish are of no commercial value and hence discarded at sea. Factors and may be important to the dynamics of recently introduced pollutants such as affecting the potential of the Maine coast for mussel culture were described. PCB's. Along these same lines, there appears to.be a close association between One talk surveyed current marine mammal research in the Gulf. these layers and gelatinous zooplankton, which are reported via submersible observations to reach incredible densities. PANEL DISCUSSION As with virtually every other region of the world ocean, the importance of The round-table panel discussions were opened by brief statements from the picoplankton is becoming recognized in the Gulf of Maine. These organisms panel members as to the critical research needs presently outstanding, as they include heterotrophic bacteria as well as eucaryotic and procaryotic primary perceived them. Responses were overwhelmingly in agreement as to our lack of producers and their importance in the Gulf must be assessed if we are to make an adequate scientific understanding of the Gulf, particularly as to how each any meaningful measures of primary production. panelist felt this lack of knowledge hindered his own research or administrative responsibilities. Pleas were made for more long-term numerical data for Though not brought out during the workshop, we will need to assess the rote modelling purposes, for detailed bathymetric charts, for measures of short- of marine birds on production estimates. These consumers are assigned great term water motions such as can be revealed through the deployment of moored importance to the food chain dynamics in other parts of the world, yet their current meters, for sediment budgets, and for more work to be done on natural inflne ce in the Gulf of Maine remains unknown. gas deposits beneath the sea floor. The concept of "top down" modelling was suggested to be the most cost-effective approach to understanding important eco- Factors affecting the transfer of food from the water column to the benthos logical questions in the Gulf of Maine. This led to a discussion of the lack of need study. The fishery in the Gulf of Maine is largely one of benthic and modern instrumentation being applied to the study of the Gulf such as moored demersal nature. The roles of planktic heterotropbic efficiency, transpor- samplers and current meters. There are also gaps in appropriate expertise con- tibility of macrophytic debris, and roles of filter feeders in capturing food Cerned matters such as air-sea interactions. It was pointed out that th@se from the water column need to be addressed. -technologies and personnel will be necessary if we are to grasp the signifi- cance of such apparently important processes as the flow of slope water into the Gulf. SCIENTIFIC HIGHLIGHTS Much of the research discussed throughout the meeting was known, at least in part, by many already actively studying these waters. Still, there were some revelations. These are briefly discussed in the following paragraphs. It appeared that the influence of slope water flow through the Northeast Channel -is assuming new significance to both the physical and biological oceanographers. These flows are poorly understood at present but they affect not only the mean circulation within the Gulf. but the nutrient budget. depth of the pycnocline, and microbial dynamics, to cite just a few examples. An inter- disciplinary research effort is certainly needed at this time. Production and subsequent export of nearshore macroalgal detritus may make a significant contribution to the overall productivity of the coastal benthic environment. This hypothesis requires better productivity measurements than have been reported to date in order to be properly tested. The factors which control transport of particulate matter in general. sacrophyte detritus and m mm mm mml mm M m "=mom= mm Exhibit B-3 COASTAL WETLANDS Region 1 extends from Kittery to Cape Elizabeth, a distance of 313 miles. It is characterized by streams protected by barrier spits. Marshlands dominate Salt marshes are ecologically as well as economically important areas. (64%). The relatively low tidal range (2m) and extensive marshes do not leave These highly productive systems provide a generous flow of nutrients to mudflats; room for extensive flats. Mudflats cover 18% of the area while ledges and the ocean. Salt marshes are important spawning and nursery areas for fish constitute 4%. and shellfish. They serve as a natural filter for organic pollutants and heavy metals and provide important wildlife habitat. The low elevation of the upland and shallow offshore depths translate Into wide marshes and low relief. The average rise 300 feet from mean high water is In Maine, there are about 6,ODO salt marshes. A quarter of these (1,616) 24 feet. The marshes are 99% salt hay, meaning they are of relatively old age are less than D1 km2 (get acreage value) (KelleY et al. 1984). Maine salt in their evolution. Extensive peat deposits underlie these marshes. marshes are dissimilar from each other and differ from other salt marshes along the Atlantic Coast. Tte root of these differences lies in the varying tidal Region 2, the south central c4oast, extends from Cape Elizabeth to the St. amplitude from south to north, differential crustal warping along the coast George peninsula, covering over 1D17 miles, or 31% of the coast. This region is (some areas are sinking faster than others), the different sediment load each characterized by northeast-oriented peninsulas with intervening deep, narrow Ln receives and man's use and impacts. estuaries. Flats, especially mudflats become more prevalent (50), with marshes only common at the head of some estuaries. Ledges (13%) are found only at the The Maine coast is a series of embayments dominated by mudflats (48.5%). tips of peninsulas and on Islands. Beaches, predominantly flne sand, constitute Marsh and ledge ccxnprise 17.7% and 16.6%, respectively. Boulder beaches, only 5% of the area and are concentrated near the mouth of the Kennebec River. coarse-grained flats and make up the remaining 18% (Kelley et !1. The resistant bedrock of the peninsulas gives this region more relief along the 1984). shoreline. Kelley et al. (1984) have done extensive surveys of the Maine Coast and Region 3 encompasses Penobscot Bay and exteends north to Machias Bay, a this discussion, summarized in Table 1, Is adapted from their work. They distance of 1530 miles (47% of Maine's coast). It is characterized by broad classified the coast into four regions based on salt marsh characteristics (see estuaries containing numerous resistant granitic islands. Barrier spits are figure 1). uncommon, replaced by coarse-grained pocket beaches. Marshes commonly are narrow fringing deposits on the margins of estuaries and at the heads of river embayments. Tne shoreline is dominated by mudflats; (59%), with ledges (12%) and YORK COUNTY marshes (8%) of secondary importance. Extensive marshes have not formed in Acres Tide Salt Other Upland Total region 3 partly because of the high bedrock relief and the local paucity of Town Flat Marsh? Wetlands muddy rivers. Coarse-grained beaches and flats are more prevalent here than South Berwick 35 32 308 20,679 21,057 Eliot 255 163 403 12,192 13,013 elsewhere on the coast mostly due to bluff erosion. Kittery 568 324 154 10,822 11,868 York 83 470 1,131 34,257 35,941 Wells 200 1,725 395 37,297 39,617 Kennebmk 57 276 335 22,365 23,032 The northeast compartment, Region 4, is a nearly straight, high-cliffed Arundel 0 0 76 15,Y74 15,450 Kenne-bunkport 340 804 101 12.474 13,719 coast harboring protected estuaries. Region 4 extends from Machias Bay to Biddeford 0 157 239 19,311 19,707 Saco 0 304 446 24,081 24,831 Calais, a distance of 423 miles. Tte tidal range varies from 4.3m to 6.5m. The Old Orchard Beach 0 0 35 4,768 4,803 coast consists of a ledge dominated outer coast (249) and mudflat dominated TQrAL 1,541 4,254 3,623 213,620 223,038 macrotidal estuaries. The marshes are relatively young, evidenced by the high CUMBERLAND COUNTY proportion of Spartina alterniflora (49%), and in some cases appear to represent Scarboro 220 3,481 1,516 26,133 31,350 former freshwater bogs recently intersected by high tide. Otherwise, marshes Cape Elizabeth 0 0 258 9.079 9,337 S. Portland 483 0 88 7,702 8,273 only exist as eroding fringes along sheltered estuarine coves. Marshes comprise Portland 725 86 32 11,384 12,254 Falmouth 896 90 117 18,758 19,861 only 9% of the shoreline. This region has the worst relief. Cumberland 229 0 228 14,406 14,865 Yarmouth 83 21 0 7,903 8,007 Freeport 1,375 283 106 21,963 23,727 Brunswick 1,157 317 2,OD9 28,343 31,826 Table I Harpswell 1,917 50 42 12,015 14,024 Total Marsh per km. % % % 7,112 396 157,658 173,524 Area (km2) of coast marsh ledge flat 4,328 4 1. Arcuate Bays 26.44 .052 64 4 18 SAGADAHOC COUNTY West Bath 170 0 29 7,691 7,890 2. Indented Embayments 27-35 o167 26 13 54 Bath 40 0 402 5,858 6,300 Pnippsburg 1,276 885 773 16,879 19,813 3. Island Bay Complex 20-57 .0083 8 12 66 Topsham 0 0 840 20,404 21,244 Arrowsic 82 225 199 5,158 5,664 4. Cliffed Shoreline 4.51 .0066 9 24 58 Bowdoinham 0 0 1,092 2-2,553 23,645 Perkins Twp. 0 0 0 1,699 1,699 (Source: adapted from Kelley et al. 1964) Richmond 36 0 537 19,139 19,712 Woolwich 703 0 2,677 20,687 24,067 Georgetown 900 1,372 154 10,129 12,555 Table 2 is a town by town summary of tidal flats, salt marsh and fresh TCTAL 3,2D7 2,4a2 15,133 130,197 water wetlands done by IF&W in 1974. KENNEBEC COUNTY WALDO COUNTY Augusta Negligible 0 3,077 33,630 36,7o7 i Frankfort 2D1 325 300 15,374 15,999 Hallowell Negligible 0 108 3,582 3.69o Prospect 291 0 75 11,6Z7 11,702 Farmingdale Negligible 0 495 6,769 7,264 Stockton Springs 140 0 321 12,278 12,599 Gardiner 8 0 781 9 433 10,222 Searsport 326 0 511 18,343 18,854 Chelsea Negligible 0 692 11:824 12,516 Belfast 201 0 %6 20,599 21,565 Randolph 15 0 30 1,288 1,333 Northport 147 0 402 15,252 15,654 Pittston 0 386 20,435 20,895 74 Isleboro 898 0 250 8,819 9.069 Lincolnville 76 Negligible 1,778 23,279 TOTAL 97 0 5,569 86,951 92,b27 Winterport 2B3 110 447 22,538 TUTAL LINCOLN COUNTY Dresden 88 0 1,445 19,090 20,623 PENOBSCOr COUNTY Wiscasset 547 0 250 15,677 16,474 Westport 103 81 73 5,439 5,696 Bangor Negligible 0 513 21,622 22,135 Alria 0 0 221 13,411 13,632 Brewer Negligible 0 88 9,673 9,761 Newcastle 403 826 1,185 17,543 19,957 Hampden Negligible 0 499 24,066 24,515 Edge-comb, 73 26 208 11,588 11,893 Orrington 100 0 1,516 15,565 17,081 Boothbay 733 0 376 11,978 13,089 Veazie Monhegan Plt. 0 0 0 500 500 Waldoboro 1,341 0 2,2a2 44,373 47,996 T(YrAL 100 0 2,566 70,926 73,492 Boothbay Harbor 0 0 105 3.515 3,620 Southport 0 0 29 3,022 3,051 Nobleboro 181 0 6,446 8,574 15,201 Brooksville 7183 41 i,is6 20,404 21,631 Damariscotta 298 0 742 7,893 8,933 Castine 233 0 93 4,728 4,821 S. Bristol 327 0 56 7,464 7,a47 Penobscot 455 13 625 25,862 26.500 Bristol 265 0 744 21,745 22,754 Orland 0 0 3,a29 28,852 32,681 Bremen 368 0 696 9,419 10,483 Verona 249 0 . 0 3,998 3,998 Bucksport 197 0 1,628 32,874 34,502 TOTAL 4,727 933 14,860 201 t 240 221,749 Ellsworth 26 0 6,675 16,772 23,447 Blue Hill 30`7 0 709 35.592 - 36,3ol Surry 313 0 1,219 23,905 25,124 KNOX COUNTY Brooklin 281 0 176 11,707 11883 Sedgevick 74 19 659 16t998 17,676 North Haven 263 Negligible 52 7,422 7,474 Deer Isle 1,490 0 425 18,135 18,560 Vinalhaven 565 Negligible Z72 13,901) 14,172 Stonington 504 26 30 5,410 5,482 Camden 61 Negligible 1,220 11,334 12,554 Trenton 622 0 19D 12,339 12,529 Rockport 89 Negligible 1,069 13,532 14,6al Bar Harbor 653 30 1,716 26,719 28,465 Rockland 104 Negligible 483 7,816 8,299 Mt. Desert 439 24 1,644 24,031 25,699 Owls Head 455 Negligible Negligible 5,682 5,682 Tremont 32B 20 46 10,263 10,329 Warren 0 20 1,215 3D,509 31,744 Swan's Island 170 0 184 6,934 7,118 Thomaston 140 Negligible Negligible 7,247 7,247 Frenchboro 1,539 S. Thomaston 1,567 273 Negligible 8.561 8,834 S.W. Harbor 115 175 0 8,709 8,884 Cushing 63o Negligible 223 13,055 13,278 Cranberry Isles 423 33 0 2,010 2,043 Friendship 391 Negligible 393 7,762 8,153 Hancock 679 45 0 19,960 20,005 St. George 979 Negligible Negligible 13,855 14,834 Lamoine 1,407 56 35 12,762 12,853 Isle au Haut 2B 0 la2 Franklin 200 112 1,503 23,446 25,061 Sullivan 204 0 1,188 16,740 17,92B TOTAL 5,244 293 5,109 140,675 146,872 Sorrento 157 NA NA 2,580 Gouldsboro 1,056 157 1,322 30,746 32,225 Winter Harbor 84 0 142 7,889 8,031 T7 SD 0 0 220 T8 SD 0 0 1DI 10,663 10,764 Coastal wetlands are vulnerable both to natural loss and bum T9 SD 0 0 1,190 4,996 6,186 T10 SD 0 0 3,950 23,085 27,035 perturbations. Marshland Is eroded as the sea level rises. The ocean has risen Steuben 1,178 126 485 Z7,311 29,100 Cherryfield 0 0 145 2B.339 X inches in the past century. In Maim, the high tidal amplitude and sinking Milbridge 1,754 548 20 13,546 4@0 Harrington 2,770 3a4 0 11,503 14.657 coastline exacerbate the already rising sea level. Figure 3 illustrates the Centerville 0 0 2,692 26,20B 2B,900 Columbia 0 0 367 22,956 23,323 rate at which the Maine coast Is sinking, especially in eastern Maine where it Columbia Falls 0 0 149 13,594 Addison 2,261 589 1.049 24,295 IMP averages 9 mm per year. Approximately 5% of the coastal salt marshes are Jonesport 9(Y7 19 598 14,032 15,556 Beals Island 209 0 0 3,355 3.564 vulnerable to natural loss. These are concentrated In the northeast region Jonesboro 842 30 159 23.137 24,168 Roque Bluffs 652 153 0 6,724 7,529 (Kelley pers. oomm. 11/2/84). Marshfield 0 0 420 8,540 8,960 Whitneyville 0 0 is 9,326 9,344 Machias 373 983 275 7,541 9,172 Machiasport 1,339 109 199 12,565 14,212 In the past, coastal wetlands were viewed chiefly as potential sites for East Machias 545 169 5,776 22,452 28,942 Marion 0 0 - 14,Z72 14,272 development. Between the 1950s and mid-1970s wetland losses nationwide were Wniting 294 0 3o96 30,043 33,533 Cutler 1,015 54 789 Z7,435 29,293 wavy (Tiner, 1984). Although no records exist, the American Geographical Tre-scott Twp. 1,109 32 --17,593 ----- 18,734 Lubec 2,868 133 4 20,932 23,937 Society estimated that between 1954 and 1964, 1000 acres of the 15,300 acres of Edmunds 543 33 --24,698--- 25,774 Dennysville 117 0 185 9.312 9,614 important estuary habitat in Maine were lost to fill. The USF&WS has estimated Pembroke 1,053 V 606 17.098 18,7a4 Perry 1,209 35 1,715 19,145 22, 104 that 50% of this loss was in miscellaneous fill and 50% in dredging for marinas 00 Eastport 674 0 0 2,237 2.911 Robbinston 205 0 1,838 1700B 19,151 and channels (1.13C. 1977). Calais 213 0 4,Oa2 19,404 23,699 TOTAL 22,130 3,424 24,764 494,701 545,019 In 1968, Maine enacted an Alteration of Coastal Wetlands Law, requiring I Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. permits for dredging or draining coastal wetlands. The applicant must 2 Tide flat acreage not included in total. 3 Includes salt marsh and salt meadow. demonstrate that the proposed activity will not unreasonably interfere or affect the environment. Regulations were promulgated in 1979. Since that time, 203 filling permits have been granted, at the rate of about 12 per year (see figure 4). The Legislation regulating filling changed In 1972 and 1979 and could account for much of the variation The rate of permit approval in Maine appears to be declining but It is not a significant trend. However. the characteristics of permits have changed. 41i I vim References Rather than large scale proposals for filling marshlands, most filling proposals Anderson, Walter at al., 1984. Crustal Warping in Coastal are now for small areas within busy harbors (T. Brown, DEP, pers. comm., Oct., Maine. MaInW-GgRogical Service. 19B4). Kelley, Joseph, George Jacobsen, Heather Aimquist, 1984. Sedimentary Environments Along Maine's Estuarine Coastline in A Treatise on Glaciated Coasts. Table 2 and figures presents filling data on a regional basis. 2B% of all Tiner, Ralph, 19a4. Wetlands of the United States: Current Status and Recent Trends. USF?,WS. permits originate in York County, 11% in the town of Wells alone. Land Use Consultants (LUC), 19T7. Cumulative Impact of Incremental Development on the Maine Coast, working paper prepared for the Maine DEP and Committee on Coastal Development and Conservation. Mini-SyVosivn on Wetlana Protection in Mine, in Proc eedod, Mliational Filling permits Wetlands Asses@ June 17-20, 15bt), Por ine, County since 1967 Examples Dredging National Ass I 71tiA1So5RSfai1t1Me1Wet land Managers, pp. 300-324. York 57 Wells 22 35 Cumberland 42 South Portland 12 35 Portland 11 Harpswell 10 Kennebec 1 11 Sagadanoc 10 0 Lincoln 2B Boothbay Harbor 11 5 Knox 18 3D Waldo 6 10 Penobscot 3 0 Hancock 26 26 Washington 10 8 Total 2D1 151 Source: SPO Exhibit B-4 CRAPMR APR 25-86 j94 STATE OF MAINE 82 i@irjsua EW When evaluating candidate Heritage Coastal Areas, the following guidelines shall be consideredl A. Areas eligible for or listed on the Registe 'Ef- Critical Areas; an IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD B. Areas eligible for or listed on the National NINETEEN HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-SIX Register of Historic Places. Nomination forms for each Heritage Coastal Area shall contain a description of the area and its signifi- S.P. OSS - L.D. 2167 cance, its size and location and the names of Uii landowners of the features within the area. AN ACT to Enhance the Sound Use and Management of Maine's Coastal 3. Municipal and landowner consultation. No area Resources. may be included on the list of Heritage Coastal Areas until the State Planning Office notifies the landown- er of the features and officials of the municipalit Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as where the area is located at least 60 days prior to follows: designation. PART A 4. Designation of Heritage Coastal Areas. The Director of the State Planning Office, with the ad- Sec. 1. S MRSA 1331S is enacted to read: vice and approval of the Critical Areas Advisor 00 Board, shall designate Heritage Coastal Areas subject C:) �3315. List of Heritage Coastal Areas to review by the joint standing committee of the Leg@ islature having jurisdiction over energy and natural The State Planning Office shall develop and main- resources. tain the official list of Heritage Coastal Areas. The designation of Heritage Coastal Areas officiall 1. Definition. As used in this section, unless identifies and documents assemblages of exceptional the context indicates otherwise, the following te ms natural, historical or scenic areas on the coast that rms have the following meanings. merit special attention for conservation. A. "Heritage Coastal Areas" means areas contain- 5. Protection of features within Heritage Coast- ing an assemblage of geological, otanical, al Areas. The features identified within Heritage zoological, historical or scenic features of ex- Coastal Areas shall be protected on a voluntary ba- ceptional state or national significance. sis. Government agencies at all levels shall consider the importance of protecting the character of Heri- 2. Guidelines for identifying Heritage Coastal tage Coastal Areas in land use control and other ac- Areas. The State Planning Office, in consultation tions which they take. with the Maine Historic Preservation Commission, shall review existing reports and documents on coast- Sec. 2. 30 MRSA 14956, sub-13, as amended by PL al natural, historical and scenic areas in order to 2983, c. 458, �12, is further amended to read: Coa@tal Areas. The State Plannin document Heritage Office shall also undertake the necessary studies and 3. Guidelines. When promulgating any subdivision inventories to document the scenic and natural values regulations and when reviewing any subdivision for of candidate areas. 2-2206 1-1106 approval, the planning board, agency or office, or vision regulation or ordinance, comprehensive the municipal officers, shall consider the following plan, development plan, or land use plan, if any; criteria and before granting approval shall determine and that the proposed subdivision: A. Will not result in undue water or air pollu- K. The subdivider has adequate financial and technical capacity to meet the above stated stan- tion. In making this determination it shall at dardsn.L least consider: The elevation of land above sea level and its relation to the flood plains, the L. Whenever situated, in whole or in part, with- nature of soils and subsoils and their ability to in 250 feet of any pond, lake, river or tidal wa- adequately support waste disposal; the slope of ters, will not adversely affect the quality of the land and its effect on effluents; the availa- that body of water or unreasonably affect the bility of streams for disposal of effluents; and shoreline of that body of water. the applicable state and local health and water resources regulations; Furthermore, when lots in a subdivision have frontage on an outstanding river segment, as de- B. Has sufficient water available for the rea- fined in 1-A, the proposed subdivision a !ubsection sonably foreseeable needs of the subdivision; plan he require principal structures to have a combined lot shore frontage and setback from the C. Will not cause'an unreasonable burden on an normal high-water mark of $00 feet. To, avoid existing water supply, if one is to be utilized; circumventing the intent of this provision, when- ever a proposed subdivision adjoins a shoreland D. Will not cause unreasonable soil erosion or strip narrower than 250 feet which is not lotted, reduction in the capacity of the land to hold wa- the proposed subdivision shall be reviewed as if ter 80 that a dangerous or unhealthy condition lot lines extended to the shore. These frontage may result; and set-back provisions shall not apply either OD within areas zoned as general development or its E. Will not cause unreasonable highway or public equivalent under shoreland zoning, Title 12, sec- road congestion or unsafe conditions with respect tion 4813, or within areas designated by ordi- to use of the highways or public. roads existing nance as densely developed. The determination of or proposed; which areas are densely developed shall be based on a finding that, as of the effective date of F. Will provide for adequate sewage waste dis- this Act, existing development meets the require- posal; ments of subsection [email protected] G. Will not cause an unreasonable burden on the M. Will not, alone or in conjunction with exist- ability of a municipality to dispose of solid ing activities, adversely affect the quality or waste and sewage, if municipal services are to be quantity of ground watern; a utilized; N. The subdivider will determine, based on the 1. Will not have an undue adverse effect on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Floo scenic or natural beauty of the area, aesthetics, Boundary and Floodway Maps and Flood Insurance historic sites or rare and irreplaceable natural Rate Maps, whether the subdivision is. in a areas or any public rights for physical or visual flood-prone area. If the subdivision, or any par access to the shoreline; of it, is in such an area the subdivider will de- termine the 100-year flood elevation and flood J. Is in conformance with a duly adopted subdi- hazard boundaries within the subdivision. The 3-1106 4-1106 proposed subdivision plan shall include a condi- as, but not limited to, planned unit development, tion of plat approval requiring that principal site plan approval, transfer of development structures on lots in the subdivision shall be rights, open space zoning, clustered development, constructed with their lowest floor, includl@ng conditional zoning, contract zoning and zoning to the basement, at least one foot above the protect access to direct sunlight for solar ener- 100-year flood elevation. gy use. Sec. 3. 30 MRSA 14961, sub-11, as amended by PL B. "Functionally water-dependent uses" means 1981, c. 598, �1, is repealed and the following en- those uses that require, for their primary pur- acted in its place: pose, location on submerged lands or that require direct access to, or location in, coastal waters 1. Definitions. As used in this subchapter, un- and which therefore cannot be located away fro less the context otherwise indicates, the followipq these waters. These uses include, but are not terms have a following meanings. limited to, commercial and recreational fishin and boating facilities, finfish and shellfish A. "Comprehensive plan" means a compilation of processing, storage and retail and wholesale mar- policy statements, goals, standards, maps and keting facilities, dock and port facilities, pertinent data relative to the past, present and shipyards and boat building facilities, marinas, future trends of the municipality with respect to navigation aides, basins and channels, industrial its population, housing, economics, social pat- U-ses dependent upon water-borne transportation o terns, land use, water resources and their use, requiring large volumes of cooling or processin transportation facilities and public facilities water that cannot reasonably be located or oper- prepared by the municipal planning board, agenc ated at an inland site and uses which primaril or office. The plan, being as much a process as a provide general public access to marine or tidal document capable of distribution, may at succes- waters. sive stages consist of data collected, prelimi- 00 nary plans, alternative action proposals and, fi- Sec. 4. 37-B MRSA 1744, sub-12, as enacted by PL nally, a comprehensive plan to be adopted. In its 1983, c. 460, �3, is repealed. final stages, it may consist of a series of sub- sidiary but interrelated plans such as, but not Sec. S. 37-B MRSA 1744, sub-�2-A is enacted to limited to, a water and sewerage system plan, a read: land use plan, a shoreland management plan thWt- considers functionally water-dependent uses and 2-A. Assistance to local governmental units. As- public access to and use of the shoreline, a com- sistance to local governmental units shall be gov- munity facilities plan, a transportation plan,* a erned as follows. urban renewal or rehabilitation plan, an air or water pollution control plan and a park and open A. Whenever the President of the United States space plan. The comprehensive plan shall include declares that a major disaster exists in the recommendations for plan execution and implemen- State, the Governor may: tation such as, but not limited to, a capital im- provements program, renewal and rehabilitation (1) Apply for a public assistance grant programs, land use control ordinances and build- from the Federal Government under Public Law ing, safety and housing codes. The comprehensive 93-288 on behalf of both the State and local plan shall include mechanisms which will ensure governmental units for the purposes of re- continual data collection, reevaluation in light pairing or replacing publicly owned facili- of new alternatives and revision. The comprehen- ties within the disaster area or relocatin sive plan may include planning techniques su'@h public facilities outside of the disaster 5-1106 6-1106 area; are insufficient to m (2) Obligate.state financial resources, as penses, including add a condition for receiving such a federal penses related to the d grant, up to, but not in excess of, 25% of the total public assistance requested; and Sec. 6. 38 MRSA �436, sub- PL 198S, c. 481, Pt. A, 524, is (3) Enter into an agreement with the af- fected local governmental units to obligate Sec. 7. 38 MRSA 1436, sub-$ local financial resources up to, but not in acted to read: excess of, 10% of the total cost of damage to local public facilities, provided that 1-A- Commercial fishing activities, "Commercial the local share shall not exceed 10% of to- fishing activities" includes activities directly re- tal local annual operating budget, exclusive lated to commercial fishing and those commercial ac- of educational budgets. tivities commonly associated with or supportive to commercial fishing, such as the manufacture or sale B. If the President of the United States de- of ice, bait and nets and the sale, manufacture, in- clares that a major disaster exists in the State, stallation or repair of boats, engines and other the Governor may: electronic devices commonly used on boats. (1) Apply for a loan from the Federal Gov- 1-B. Densely developed area. "Densely developed ernment on behalf of a unit of local govern- area" means any commercial, industrial or compact ment if he determines that the unit will residential area of 10 or more acres with a density suffer a substantial loss of tax and other of at least one principal structure per 2 acres. revenues as a result of a major disaster and has demonstrated a need for financial as- 1-C. Floodway. "Floodway" means the channel of a sistance to perform its governmental func- river or other water course and the adjacent land ar- tions; eas that must be reserved to allow for the discharge a 100-vear flood without cumulatively increasing the (2) Receive and disburse the proceeds of water surface elevation of the 100-year flood by more any approved loan to an applicant local gov- than one foot. ernment; 1-D. Functionally water-dependent uses. "Func- (3) Determine the amount needed by any ap- tionally water-dependent uses" means those uses that plicant local government to restore or require , for their Primary purpose, location on sub- resume its governmental functions and certi- merged lands or that require direct access to, or lo- fy the amount to the Federal Government, cation in, coastal waters and which cannot be located provided that no application amount may ex- away from these waters. These uses include, but are ceed 25% of the annual operating budget Of not limited to, commercial and recreational fishing the applicant for the fiscal year in which and boating facilities, finfish and shellfish pro- the major disaster occurs; and cessing, storage and retail and wholesale marketing facilities, waterfront dock and port facilities, shipyards and boat building facilities, marinas, nav- (4) Recommend to the Federal Government, igation aies, basins and channels, industrial uses based upon his review, the cancellation of dependent upon water-borne transportation or requir- all or any Part of repayment when, after 3 ing large volumes of cooling or processing water that can not reasonably be located or operated at an in- full fiscal years following the major disas- land site and uses which primarily provide general ter, the revenues of the local government 7-1106 8-1106 public access to marine or tidal waters. cy's Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps and Flood In- surance Rate Maps, all proposed activities which are I-E. Maritime activities. "Maritime activities" permitted within the shoreland area must be shown not includes the construction, repair, storage, loading to increase the 100-year flood elevation. In addi- and unloading of boats, chancellery and other commer- tion, all structures built in the floodway shall cial activities designed and intended to facilitate have their lowest floor, including the basement, one maritime trade. foot above the 100-year flood elevation. 1-F. Pond. "Pond" means any inland body of water Sec. 9. 38 MRSA 1440-A is enacted to read: which has a surface area in excess of 10 acres, ex- cept where the body of water is man-made and in addi- �440-A., Public access tion is completely surrounded by land held by a sin- gle owner, and except those privately owned ponds In addition to controls required in this chapter, which are held primarily as waterfowl and fish breed- municipalities may extend or adopt zoning and subdi- ing areas or for hunting and fishing. vision controls to protect any public rights for See. S. 38 MRSA J440, as reallocated by PL 1985, physical and visual access to the shoreline. C. 481, Pt. A, �28, is amended by adding at the end Zoning ordinances adopted or extended pursuant to the following new paragraphs: this section shall be pursuant to and consistent with Zoning ordinances adopted or amended pursuant to a comprehensive plan. this section shall designate as a resource protection See. 10. 38 MRSA �447 is enacted to read: zone or its equivalent, as defined in the guidelines adopted pursuant to section 442, all areas within the �447. Functionally water-dependent use zones floodway of the 100-year flood plain along rivers and CO in the velocity zone in areas subject to tides, based on detailed flood insurance studies and as delineated Municipalities are encouraged to give preference, when appropriate, to functionally water-dependent on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's FloTd uses and may extend zoning controls to accomplis Boundary and Floodway Maps and Flood Insurance Rate this. Maps. This provision does not apply to areas zoned for general development or its equiv%lent, as defined A municipality may, within coastal shoreland ar- in the guide ines adopted pursuant to section 442, as eas, adopt zoning ordinances for functionall of the effective date of this paragraph, or within water-dependent uses. Municipalities may establish areas designated by ordinances as densely developed. districts within these zones to give prefereLice to The determination of which areas are densely devel- commercial fishing and other maritime activities. oped shall be based on a finding that, as of the e!_- fective date of this paragraph, existing development In creating such a zone, a municipality shall meets the definition in section 436, subsection I-B. consider the demand for and availability of shorefront property for functionally water-dependent All communities shall designate floodway areas, usesb as set out in this section, as resouLcue.iprotecttion zones as of the effective date of a co t"_s e. ry Zoning ordinances adopted or extended pursuant to into the regular program of the National Flood Insur- this section shall be pursuant to and consistent with ance Program or July 1, 1987, whichever comes later. a comprehensive plan. In those areas that are within the floodway, as Sec. 11. 38 MRSA c.c. 19 and 21 are enacted to delineated on the Federal Emergency Management Agen- read: 9-1106 10-1106 11 film WO me ON! m CHAPTER 19 rine communities and habitats, to expand our underm standing of the productivity of the Gulf of Maine and coastal waters and to enhance the economic value of COASTAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES the State's renewable marine resources; �1801. Findings and declaration of coastal manage- 3. Shoreline management and access. Suppor ment policies shoreline management that gives preference to water-dependent uses over other uses, that promotes The Legislature finds that the Maine coast is an public access to the shoreline and that considers the asset of immeasurable value to the people of the cumulative effects of developmeni- on-coastal re- State and the nation, and there is a state interest sources; in the con;erv t,beneficial use and effecti7e th:tlZn management o a. . resources; that development 4. Hazard area development. Discourage growt of the coastal area is increasing rapidly and that and new development in coastal areas where, because this development poses a significant threat to the of coastal storms, flooding, landslides or sea-level resources of the coast and to the traditional rise, it is hazardous to human health and safety, livelihoods of its residents; that the United States Congress has recognized the importance of coastal re- S. State and local cooperative management. En- sources through the passage of the United States courage and support cooperative state and municipal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 and that in 1978 management of coastal resources; Maine initiated a coastal management program in ac- cordance with this Act which continues to be of high 6. Scenic and natural areas protection. Protect priority; and that there are special needs in the and manage critical habitat and natural areas of conservation and development of the state's coasial state and national significance and maintain the sce- resources that require a statement of legislative nic beauty and character of the coast even in- areas 00 policy and intent with respect to state and local ac- where development occurs; (.71 tions affecting the Maine coast. 1 7. Recreation and tourism. Expand the opportuni- The Legislature declares that the well-being o ties for outdoor recreation and encourage appropriate the citizens of this State depends on striking a coastal tourist activities and development; carefully considered and well reasoned balance among the competing uses of the State's coastal area. The 8. Water clual ore and maintain the crual- Legislature directs that state and local agencies and ity* R:S:nd ity of our fresh mrin estuarine waters to al federal agencies as required by the United States low for the broadest possible diversity of public and Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, PL 92-583, with private uses; and responsibility for regulating, planning, developing or managing coastal resources, shall conduct their 9. Air quality. Restore and maintain coastal air activities affecting the coastal area consistent with quality to protect the health of citizens and visi@ the following policies to: tors and to protect enjoyment of the natural beaut 1. Port and harbor development. Promote the and maritime characteristics of the Maine coast. development and revitalization of the 11802. Definitions ma H;t. and harbors for fishing, transportation StIntMap and recreation; As used in this chapter, unless the context oth- ervise indicates, the following terms have the fol- 2. Marine resource management. Manage the marine lowing meanings. environment and its related resources to preserve and improve the ecological integrity and diversity of ma- 11-1106 12-1106 1 Coastal area. The "coastal area" encompasses aquatic organisms; that Maine's coastal barriers serve as natural storm protective buffers and are all coastal municipalities and unorganized townships on tidal waters and all coastal islands. The inland generally unsuitable for development because they are boundary of the coastal area is the inland line of Vulnerable to hurricane and other storm-damage an coastal town lines and the seaward boundary is the because natural shoreline recession and the movement outer limit of the United States territorial sea. of unstable sediments undermine manmade structures; and that the United States Congress has recognize 2. Coastal management. "Coastal management" the importance of coastal barriers through the Unite means the planning, development, conservation and States Coastal Barrier Resources Act of 1982, United regulation of coastal resource use by Federal, state, States Code, Title 16, Section 3509, established a regional and local governments. detailed process to identify coastal barriers and prohibited the expenditure of federal funds that sup- 3. Coastal resources. "Coastal resources" means port activities incompatible with the ability of the coastal waters of the State and adjacent shore- these fragile areas to accommodate those activities. lands, their natural resources and related marine and wildlife habitat that together form an integrated The Legislature declares that certain areas of terrestrial, estuarine and marine ecosystem. the Maine coast, because of their fragile nature, valuable habitat and their storm buffering abilities �1803. Report should be protected and conserved in their natural state and that it is inappropriate to use state funds The State Planning Office shall provide a report to encourage or support activities incompatible with no later than December 1, 1988, to the Legislature the ability of these areas to sustain these activi- detailing the status of poliCY accomplishments pursu- ties, ant to this chapter. As a part of this report, the Department of Environmental Protection and the De- 61902. Limitations on state expenditures affecting partment of Conservation shall prepard reports on im@ the syste 00 plementation of this chapter for which they are re sponsible. Except as vrovided in section 1903, no state funds or state financial assistance may be expended CHAPTER 21 for development activities within the coastal barrier resource system, including, but not limited to: COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM 1. Structures. The construction or purchase of �1901. Findings and declaration of policy any structure, appurtenance, facility or related infrastructure; The Legislature finds that Maine's coastal barri- ers and the adjacent wetlands, marshes, estuaries, 2. Roads, airports, boat landings. The construc- inlets and nearshore waters contain resources of ex- tion of any road, airport, boat-landing facility o traordinary scenic, scientific, recreational, natu- other facility on or bridge or causeway to, any ral, historic, archeological and economic importance coastal barrier; an that may be irretrievably damaged and lost due to de- v:lno:m:nct and adjacent to those barriers; that 3. Erosion. The carrying out of any project to M :n .a tal barriers provide habitats for migram prevent the erosion of, or to otherwise stabilize, tory birds and other wildlife and habitats which are any inlet, shoreline or inshore area. essential spawning, nursery, nesting and feeding ar- eas for commercially and recreationally important �1903. Exception to state prohibition species of finfish and shellfish, as well as other 13-1106 14-1106 1. Expenditure of state funds for coastal barri- The Maine Coastal Barrier System shall include ers for the following activities. State funds may be the following coastal barriers: expended on coastal barriers for the following activ- ities: 1. Carrying Place Cove. Carrying Place Cove; A. The maintenance, replacement, reconstruction Town: Harrington; or repair, but not the expansion, xcept where 2. Birch Point. Birch Point; Town: Perry; expansion is necessary in order to meet minimum design requirements, of state-owned or 3. Lubec Barriers. Lubec Barriers; Town: Lubec; state-operated roads, structures--or facilities; and 4. Baileys Mistake. Baileys Mistake; Townt Lubec and Trescott; B. Any of the following actions or projects pro- vided they are consistent with the purposes of S. Grassy Point. Grassy Point; Town: Cutler; this chapter: (1) The study, management, protection or 6. Seal Cove. Seal Covei Town: Cutler; enhancement of fish and wildlife resources 7. Sprague Neck. Sprague Neck; Town: Cutler; and habitats, including, but not limite to, acquisition.of fish and wildlife habitats 8. Jasper. Jasper; Town: Machiasport; and related lands and stabilization projects for fish and wildlife habitats; 9.- Starboard. Starboard; Town: Machiasport; (2) Recreational uses that do not Involv 10. Bare Cove. Bare Cove; Town.. Roque Bluffs; an irretrievable commitment of natural re- I sources; 11. Roque Bluffs. Roque Bluffs; Town: Rogue 01 Bluffs; (3) Scientific research, including, but not limited to, geologic, marine and fish and 12. Popplestone/Roque Island. Popplestone/Roqu wildlife; and Island; Town: Jonesportj (4) Nonstructural projects for shoreline 13. Flake Point. Flake Point; Town: Steuben; stabilization that are designed to mimic, enhance or restore natural stabilization 14. Over Point. Over Point; Town: Steuben; systems. 15. Pond Island. Pond Islandr Town: Deer Isle; 2. Authorization of state expenditures. The Gov- ernor may, after consultation with the appropriate 26. Thrumcap. Thrumcap; Town: Cranberry Isles; state agencies and the affected community, appro;@7e_ state expenditures or financial assistance available 17. Seven Hundred Acre Island. Seven Hundred ;;@Ithin the coastal barrier resources system for as- Acre Island; Town: Isleboro; sistance for emergency actions essential to the sav- ing of liv a, the protection of property and the pub- 18. Nash Point. Nash Point; Town: Owls Head. lic health and safety. 19. Little River. Little River; Town: �1904. Maine Coastal Barrier Syste Georgetown; 15-1106 16-1106 20. Hunnewell Beach. Hunnewell Beach; Town: soon as practicable after the enactment of this chap- Phippsburg; ter, the maps referred to in subsection 1, shall be 21. Small Point Beach. Small Point Beach; Town: filed, in the appropriate county registry of deeds. Phippsburg; 3. maps provided to agencies. As as pr C eleofa fter the date of enactment of this actTp,!b soon 22. Head Beach. Head Beach; Town: Phippsburg; chapter, the Commissio.ner of Conservation shall pro- vide copies Of the maps, referred to in subsection 1, 23. Stover Point. Stover Point; Town: Harpswell; and &-summary of this legislation to: 24. Jenks Landing/Waldo Point. Jenks Land- A. The chief elected official of each communit ing/Waldo Point; Town: Cumberland; in which a system is located; 25. Cape Elizabeth. Cape Elizabeth; Town: Cape B. All state agencies res onsible for plannin Elizabeth; And managing coastal resources; 26. Crescent Beach. Crescent Beach; Town: Cape C. State agencies responsible for administerin Elizabeth; state funding programs affected by the prohibi- tions of this chapter; and 27. Scarborough Beach. Scarborough Beach; Town: Scarborough; D. Coastal regional planning agencies. 28. Etherington Pond. Etherington Pond; Town: PART B Biddeford; 1 12 MRSA c. 431 is enacted to read: 00 29r. Crescent Surf. Crescent Surf; Town: 00 Kennebunk; CHAPTER 431 30. Ogunquit Beach. Oguncruit Beach; Town: MAINE SHORELINE PUBLIC ACCESS PROTECTION PROGRAM Ogunquit; 65201. Findings and declaration of policy 31. Phillips Cove. Phillips Cove; Town: York; and The Legislature finds and declares that public access to the Maine coast is of great importance to 32. Sea Point. Sea Point; Town: Kittery. people of the State who make their living in the ma- rine and maritime industries and to those who enjo 11905. Maine Coastal Barrier Resources System Maps the natural beauty of our coastal shorelines; that the State of Maine and coastal municipalities own 1. Maps; coastal barriers identified. Maine's less than 3% of Maine's shoreline, the lowest per- coastal barriers are identified on maps, available centage of publicly owned shoreline of any coastal for public review, at the Department of Conservation, state in the United States; that the Maine coast is Maine Geological Survey office in Augusta. They are experiencing intense development pressure that is referred to as the Maine Coastal Barrier Resources further limiting public access to the shore; and that Systems and are numbered consistent with the United the rising costs of coastal shorefront property, to- States Coastal Barriers Resource Act. gether with the diminishing opportunities for access to coastal shoreline, require the establishment of a 2. Maps filed in county registry of deeds. As state program to encourage and support the acquisi- 17-1106 18-1106 P, ;pr tion of shoreland areas for public uses. lish auidelines for the appropriate expenditure of money available in the fund. In establishing these 15202. Shoreline Access Protection Fund auidelines, the commissioner shall consider, among 1. Fund established. To accomplish the purposes other things: of this chapter, there is established a nonlapsipg A. Access to shoreline for shellfish and marine Maine Shoreline Public Access Protection worm harvesters and for other economic purposes; d.. Allund i, re ferred to in this chapter as the "fun come received by the Department of Conservation for the B. Public access to shoreline for scenic and Purposes of this chapter shall be recorded on the recreational Purposes; books of the State in a separate account and shall be deposited with the Treasurer of State to be credited C. The purchase of easements and property devel- to the fund, These funds shall be made available to opment rights; the commissioner for the purpose of implementing the Maine Shoreline Public Access Protection Program, es- D. The establishment and limited development o tablished under section 5202. public access ways and areas; an 2. Expenditure of funds. All money credited to E. The ability of a municipality or state agenc the fund shall be used to preserve and protect public to manage shoreline access in a manner that is access to coastal shoreland areas in accordance with consistent with the natural carrying caPacity of the guidelines established by the Commissioner pursu- the area accessed and to provide adequate -essen- ant to section 5202. As provided in section 5202, not tial public services. less than 50% of all revenue available from the fund shall be dispersed to municipalities located in the 3. Coastal municipality participation. Notwith- coastal area, as defined in Title 38, section 1802. standing any guidelines established pursuant to this No more than 10% of the revenues available in the chapter, at least 50% of all revenue available from fund may be used for the development of acquired ac- the fund shall be dispensed to municipalities located 00 cess areas. in the coastal area, as defined in Title 38, section 1802, for the acquisition or development of shoreline 1 �5203. Program guidelines access areas. The amount granted to such a municipal- ity pursuant to this section shall not exceed 50% of 1. Program established. There is established the total cost of the acg@!isition or development within the Department of Conservation, the Shoreline project. Access Protection Pr;gram, referred to in this chap- ter as the "p rgram. 0 r the 2urposes of encouraging 4. Public access. All Projects financed throug and supporting the acquisition and development of this program shall be made equally open for use by shoreland areas by the State Government and local all Maine citizens. governments. Any acquisition or development of shore- land areas supported by this program shall be under- taken solely to enhance, preserve or protect public access to coastal shoreland areas. The commissioner shall establish, amend or repeal rules of the depart- ment necessary to accomplish the purposes of this chapter. 2. Program guidelines. To accomplish the pur- poses of this chapter, the commissioner shall estab- 19-1106 20-1106