[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Maines Coastal Program PROGRESS REPORT FEBRUARY THRXGH APRIL 1991 PA Eastport Bango ....... achias Augusta...: Bar Harbor Ckland Portland Kittery HT 393 .M2 M35 M- 'd 4@0 E FFB-APR Oepartment Maine State Planning Office 1991 M A I NE 'S COASTAL PROGRAM Progress Report February through April 1991 CZ521 (1990-91) Submitted to The National oceanic & Atmospheric Administration Office of Ocean & Coastal Resource Management Washington, D.C. 20235 US Department of Commerce NOAA Coastal Services Center LibrarY 2234 South Hobson Avenue Charleston SC 23405-2418 Maine State Planning office Augusta, Maine 04333 State House Station No. 38 Tel. (207) 289-3261 TABLE OF CONTENTS Task I Core Law Enforcement & Administration . . . . . . . 1 *A. DEP Core Law Enforcement & Administration B. DECD Code Enforcement Officer Training Program C. DECD -- Shoreland Zoning Technical Assistance to Regional Councils & Towns *D. Regional Councils -- Shoreland Zoning Technical Assistance to Towns Task 2 Municipal Grant Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . I Task 3 Coastal Policy Development: Allocating Maine's Marine Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Task 4 Program Management & Public Education A. Public Education Initiatives (1) Coastwe'ek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 (2) Shore Stewards Program . . . . . . . . . 13 (3) Gulf of Maine Program . . . . . . . . . 17 (4) Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 B. OCS Oversight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 C. Other 17 (1) Estuary Project Follow-Up . . . . . . . 17 (2) Enforcement Options Study . . . . . . . . 17 (3) Section 309 Enhancement Program . . . . 19 (4) New Section 306/309 Funding Application. 19 (5) CZ521 Time Extension & Reprogramming 19 (6) Wells dredging, Sears Island, access improvements, aquaculture, etc. 19 Page EXHIBITS E-1 DEP Quarterly Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 E-2 Shoreland Zoning News, Spring 1991 . . . . . . . . . . 51 E-3 Considering the Treatment of Nonconforming Structures in the Shoreland Zone, DECD/OCP . . . . . . 53 E-4 DEP Issue Profile, Permit by Rule (rev. 3/91) . . . . 56 E-5 Incorporating Coastal Policies into Comprehensive Plans, DECD/OCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 E-6 Performance Standards for Piers, Docks, Wharves & Other Marine Structures, DECD/OCP . . . . . . . . . . 62 E-7 A Progress Report on Maine's Growth Management Program, Colgan & Gale, March 1991 . . . . . . . . . . 66 E-8 Governor's Comments on Draft OCS Plan, 4/26/91 . . . . 71 E-9 The Ripple Effect, April-June 1991 . . . . . . . . . . 73 E-10 Quarterly Reports from Coastal Coordinators . . . . . 75 E-11 List of Products, CZ521 Award (1990-91) . . . . . . . 90 significant improvement Tasks prog5-91.rpt STATUS OF GRANT TASKS 1990-91 (CZ521) Task 1 -- Core Law Enforcement & Administration *A. DEP -- Core Law Enforcgment & Administration The DEP Land Bureau's quarterly report is reproduced as Exhibit E-1. See also the clippings reproduced below. B. DECD -- Code Enforcement Officer Training Program See the DECD's progress report reproduced below. C. DECD -- Shoreland Zoning Technical Assistance to Regional Councils & Towns See the DECD's progress report reproduced below. *D. Regional Councils -- Shoreland Zoning Technical Assistgnce to Towns See the DECD's progress report reproduced below and Exhibit E-10, Quarterly Reports from thg Coastal Coordinators. Task 2 Municipal Grant Program See the DECD's progress report reproduced below. Note that OCRM's Section 306 Financial Assistance Award Approval Memorandum established an April 30, 1991, Significant Improvement Benchmark for Coastal Management Grants under this Task. This Benchmark requires submission of a preliminary report to OCRM evaluating the effectiveness of the Coastal Management Grant Program. Inasmuch as communities are taking longer than expected to complete approved comprehensive plans and apply for Coastal Management Grants, no Coastal Management Grants have been completed; a project extension and postponement of the evaluation benchark will be requested in the near future. Task 3 -- Coastal Policy Developsent: Allocating Maine's Marine Waters Work is progressing as scheduled. The report initiated under CZ100 was circulated to State agencies for review and comment and presented to the interagency Marine Program Working Group. The report summarizes the level of activity in the State's marine waters; inventories the State and federal agencies that are engaged in planning or managing the uses of marine waters; discusses issues and problems with the current approach to managing those uses; and suggests several options for improving marine waters policy and management. 1 Developer likes DEP exemption 0 Windham has become one of four towns in Maine that can do tCWejust don't see the need of using faxpayers'dollavs at both its own environmental review. the state and local level to do (lie sainejoh twice.19 By JASON WOIYE rem I Debinih Richard, director of the DEP's Bureau of Und Quality 22 MAINE WEEKEND-Bangor Daily News, Sat.-Sun., May 18 - 19, ifigi Staff Writcr 31f /I I "That was a major factor for me," said The program is intended to avoid urine- compromise reached WINDHAM - The uncertain economy Gainerh owner of Maine Design and Devel- cessary review, ease the DEP's workload Airred developer Bill Gaines to weigh with opment Co. in Windham. State review "is a and give developers speedier approvals. caution the pros and cons or his plan to build time-consuming, slow, tedious process ... The state agency often duplicates the a medium-size, shopping complex along Route The longer you delay, the more expensive work town boarriq and planners now do. "We on island luxury resort 3W. and risky a project becomes." just drin't see the need of using taxpayers' The scale Upped in the project's favor Windham is the first community in the dollars at both the state and local level to do when Gaines teamed the state last week Pordand area given authority by the state the same job twice," said Debrah Richard, Environmentalists hail developer's cooperation added Windharn to the short Ud of com- Department of Environmental Protection to director of the DEP's Bureau of Land munities able to bypass lengthy state reviews Issue permits for certain development pro. Quality and the programs administrator. PORTLAND (AP) - A compromise for certain development proposals. jects without first seeking state approval. By stripping away a layer of regulation, the program can spare commercial and between conservation groups and a develop. "The battle against the in- er over a luxury resort being built on Great residential developers from waiting an Diamond Island will set the pattern far fu. tensive development of Great average of 10 months for DEP review,; after ture island projects in Maine, both sides said Diamond Island represents a local approval is granted. Thursday. Windham joins Lewiston, Auburn and Three groups that had fought the McKinley classic case of successful en- Bangor as the only Maine communities Estates project - the Maine Audubon So- registered in the program. it was begun in ciety, the Island Institute and the Casco Bay vironmental protection." 1972 and expanded in September 1.989 to Island Development Association - unveiled - Jeffrey Thaler, environmentalists' attorney include more projects towns can review on an agreement they had reached with the de- their own. veloper to withdraw their opposition. Portland is in the process of submitting an "We feel this plan represents economics opment restrictions and have the right to application, and Falmouth's formal applica- and environmental concern," said David Ba- enter the resort to make sure the covenants tion is in the mail to Augusta. tem@n, general partner in Diamond Cove are being obeyed, Urquhart said. By law, the DEP must review subdivi- Associates, the developer. "Both have an In addition, Maine Audubon will be given a skins of mom than 20 acres and commercial equal place and can be combined in such a non-voting seat on the homeowners' board structures of more than 60,01101) square feel- way as to create a project that is both eco- that reviews compliance with the develop. Gaines recalled past Projects which he nomically viable and economically sen. ment restrictions. sitive." Urquhart and representatives of the other As part of the agreement, Diamond Cove groups hailed Diamond Cove's willingness to IQ will reduce the second phase of its project to work out a compromise that took in 0 c- n aduned to local concems such as cleady this is not for everyone," does not completely detach com- create a luxury resort of condominiums and count their concerns. aesthetics, he said. 7bebarge said. munities from the state. The DEP single-family homes on the island in Casco "The battle against the Intensive develop. When a community applies for Windham's authority is limited to must be notified of each project Bay. ment of Great Diamond Island represents a die program, the state reviews the the commercial portion of the pro- pending before town - botards, and The developer already has invested $15 classic case of successful environmental pro- town's zoning ordinances, cornpre- gram, which allows it sole review of could decide to review any projecL million to transform parts of historic Fort tection," said Jeffrey Thaler, an attorney sold were on a barmucirstic tread, hensive plan and planning depart- structures with a ground area Also, as a safeguard, the depart- McKinley on Great Diamond into 40 town- representing the three groups nifil for more Um a year, only to be ment staffing. The local ordin- between 60,000 and lootoorl square ment has 45 days to review pmjects homes, build a sewage treatment plant and The groups feared the project, as orijm@l- approved withouit wW changes. ances must be at least as strict as feet or of those with a total floor area approved by a community, Richard maike other improvements, Bateman said. It ly proposed, "would set a precedent an trig- "Everyone agrees we need strin- the state's regulations, Richard between 100,000 and 150,01V Square said. has approval to build up to 134 ger a run of development sweeping gent reviews, but I've never under- be condominiums. norlheastward down the coast," he said. the said. feet. Wrindharn officials, too, will But after lengthy negotiations and court "This case proves that those who are now stood this need to go through For that reasoN many communi- Towns also can apply to review encouraged to seek assistance for battles with the three conservi tion groups, it attacking in the Legislature our environ- state proem as long as the local Ues are not equipped to handle the subdivisions between 20 and too answers to complicated questions has agreed to reduce the second phase of the mental regulations are seeking shortcuts communities can handle it@" he saki. added responsibility. acres, Richard %aid. Windham offi- about a project's impact on wet- project from 70 lots for single-family homes that would be disastrous to the long-term Eliminating the lag time also Falmouth Town Planner George cials. decided not to because they lands or wildlife habitat- to 39, the, groups announced Thursday. environmental and economic interests of bodes well for local taxpayers by Thebarge said town officials ana- feared quicker permitting would But for Gaines, "a is planning a More mportant, Diamond Cove has Maine," Thaler said. speeding up the time between lyzed carefully all ramifications of attract unwanted large subdivisions, cluster of five buildings to house agreed to development restrictions that the Diamond Cove originally filed an applica. application and a project's entry the program before deciding to Westra said. specialty shops, just the promise of conservation groups said will preserve Great tion for the project in 1985. A year later, the the tax rolls, said Windham Townn apply. They determined the town Projects exceeding the program's a quicker review process pleases Diamond Island's beauty and protect the state Board of Environmental Prolection at). Planner Steven Westrit. would not need to hire additional size limits still require full DEP him. fort's historic artifacts. proved the plan to renovate old brick build- staff or bear any other financial review nose below the minimums I-Mis is going to be a huge benefit But the project still must be approved by ings on the fort's parade ground into a Also, approval Is In die hands of@ the Board of Environmental Protection. The condominium complex with 134 townhouses, people who lom the community burdens, he said. require local review only. to a small developer like me," he board is scheduled to review the project June a heatedpool, tennis courts, restaurant and a be4 rather than a state agency not -We have everything in place, hit But participation in the program said. 12. new sewage treatment plant. "The magnificent headlands at the en- But the developer's plan to create a single. trance to Diamond Cove and other visually family subdivision as part of the resort drew significant shoreline lots are now set aside as opposition from both state environmental of- undeveloped open space recreatioh areas," ficials and the three groups. They feared it said Thomas A. Urquhart, executive director would damage scenic views of Great Dia. of the Maine Audubon Society. mond Island and harm water quality in Cas. . "The house sites have been pulled further co Bay. away from the shore to protect the island's Jean Dyer, president of the Casco Bay Is- natural scenic character. No construction is land Development Association, said she be- proposed on the historic batteries or within lieves the Great Diamond project will old-growth stands of trees," he salid. influence future island projects, forcing de- The developer also has agreed to guide- velopers to take into account environmental lines and covenants that will limit the cutting concerns. of trees and vegetation screening the resort "We definitely feel that this case is going to from view. The Three conservation groups protect its and maybe there won't be any also are given the right to enforce the devel- more like this," she said. Institute and Partners Reach Settlement in Landmark Great Diamond Isl. Case PORTLAND- After six and a half years deal withilic Ilay'sdcgraded watcruality cause the water ualm, to fill below the of successfully opposing the intensive dc and has not only led to the designation if mandate[ siandards, since Ili,- water ual- I i:A velopment of Great Diamond Island's Uasco Bayas a National Esumanc Sarx ill ny was already degradcd by the Portland S, co shoreline and the degradation of its uncr. arv. hut hasalso provided the inipcitis lot Water District'soverloaded Fi,l Frio I real- I,oc j lidal wetlands and belches. the Island In - important improvements in sewage dis- ment Plant. The imervenors appealed this inten stitinc,along svib partners. Maine Audit- posal in die greater Port landar c;i, " Conki Ing finding to the Environmental Protection men bon Society and Casco Bay Island I)cvcl nlo believes Ifen the Grc;ii I)unnond Is. Agency FPA) in Rosoin and were joined milte Opment A,ocialion CBIDA), have ncvo 1;rld ca,c will have a 10,111:1,;Ilng clf,ct hv Maine's Attorney ;cn-F;il ;ind Ili,- Con- tiatcd a sculenwrit of the remaining tk, t I along the coast of tvLiinc. " I tic fundamen- servalion Law Foundmion of Nev En- be vi opmein issues. On April 12, L A N IFF k, V gl:ITII built 109 1, thede,clorcrs. Diamond 8747 / In the mcannoic, Maine .tmil Cove Associaics DCA). for- It's taken a long tinic it) inake Sofne important Audubon Society led a suc. prole mally agreed I, binding rc- fill legislativecampaign to ally, surictions which will protect P oint about islandAttlelopment that will afft,cy riot pas a law banning new pri- ofthe from development forever Jukt Casco Bay hill Me entire coast ofAlairic" vate overboard discharge sew- INch Great Diamond Island' I I IV. Conklifig agc sysicnis Into Maine wa- new growth Ilinc/licnilock sl'u"I"s, ""Soch systems were shown I I Ls tin iue Ill SIOT IGII struciii res, ;I high incidence of DCA and its scenic headlands. failure and werc overwhelm- DCA "The key to this agreemem,"said 1cf- tal principle involved here is flat intensive ing DEP's moniforing and enforcement hoc frey Thaler who represented the Island island development is environmentally capabilitiesalong the entire coast. REP Institute and CBIDA, "is that Great Dia- tinsound, and I think- the regolmory arcr, When EPA indicmed it would deny Main mond lsiand*s most significant fcaurrc cics uulthccourtsconcorwith ihispoiniof DCA the fedcral license it needed to dis- Laws will be proiccied regardless of who owns view," charge off Orcal Diamond's west shore unco the piopetty 1-nosc the resloctions will *fire debaic over ;rc:it Diamond Icahcs and intertioal wetlands, DCA wal runwalithelmid 'Anadditiontoilicisland's Island's future began in 1984 Mien M A i,rcelioreloc;iicilicotitlillpii)einleepcr onict ouLiiintlingn;itkiralciturcs.tlic,tlirceiion ;il)pliccliothcl'oTtlandP]iintiing Boardand Diamond Wbil profit groups have been concerned about City Council In rezone their rcccinly :ic- which would easily inix with Hussey way. the dcvclopcr' financial abilily to com- Iiiircclowners[iipc)fl9g;icresofilicn,rtl Sound's larve 601 exchange At that time ing to pletc the phases of the complex project. cot end ofGrcai Diamond to pernnitcondo- DCA lurfliciogrced , ith the intcrvcnor to nego The first phase of the project, now essen minium development. After local review, guarantee an escrow account that .0Uld that iially completed. involves the renovation Portland approved the project soliject to finance the mainterience and rcplaccmcnt and ofapproximatcly 50ahandoned brickbuild state and federal review of the dcsiin and of the sewage treatment pkint*s euipment bank ings that once comprised the adininistra- location of the proposed sewage ti-ratiricrit over its lifetime. real c five complex of historic Fort McKinley plant. In 1985, CRIDA. Island Institute, The federal process also involved, at the S into more than 100 condominium units in and Kiinc Audubon Society intervened at Island Institute's reuest, a review of the coul, the interior ofthc island. The second phasc the state level and convinced REP to con- project's conformance with the standards cial c of the development, involving new rcsi- duct a public hearing on die project to of the Nadonal Historic Protection Act very dential construction on the shoreline, his examine such issues as the IKalif)n of the since Fort McKinley's gun batteries, fire and been the htcus of a lawsuit file] by the sewage pipe outfall proposed for the wa control towers, and associated military there developers after Maine's Board of Fnvi- ters off bleaches and cfarn Fiat% on Great structures were eligible for the National the, S ronmcnLal Protccfion 13EP) agree] with Diamond'swcitern shore. During thcpub Register of Hisioric Places. The Island inef Island Institute and it% partners that the tic hcarings,a number ofolher issues were Insdicue and its expert imcsscs partici- impo proposal 70 lots on Great Diamond Island's raised, such as asbestos removal from the paled in this review process but argued that reach scenic headlands could not meet the stan- military, buildings. Caf;ccr Bay Lines trans- the gun batteries located on Great Dia- dards of Maine's Site Location of Devel- portation toDiamond Cove, delineation of mond Island's spociactilar headlands were opment Act- the of] growth pinc/bcmlcxk forest, and still not adeuately proic"ed from devel- Mpart oftlicagreement, bcdcvclop- fin;inciilcapiciiyofthclcvclor,i,,-oiii- opment under ilicagreenicns reacheddor- crshavelifoiniscd Ili reduce dicirshorelinc I)lcc fire project. ing 11", review. subdivision to39 units and to place binding In December 1986. REP approved, In early 1989, DCA resubmitted to rinsuic6onson the island'sIcsignawd open over the objcctionsofthc intervenor.,, Phase REP its Phasc 11 Plan for a 70 lot subdivi- space prohibitingany future development. I of DCA's propossal to rcnovac tire exist- sionaround the periphery of the island. By in addition, DCA will drop its suit against ing fort buildings into 134 condominium his time the composition of the REP had RfTwhich sought lociverium ibcdenial of utios, and to locmc the scw;Il!c treatment almostcomplocly changcd, with only one I)CA'sproposcd 70lotsubdivision Island plantoutfall offilic island's wesicinshorc- mcni1wrircinnining frointhe 13wirdthai had News, Winter 1991). line, The intervenors had submitted icsw denied file carlier plan. Maine Auduhnn "It's taken a long time to make some rnony that the receiving waters of the pro- Society, Island Instituic.and CBIDA infer- important poinL,ibotitislanficvclopment posed sewage effluent were already dc. vented again, arguing ha the developers that will affect not just Casco Ray but the graded and were not meeting their state were ircsuhrominp, all essentially idetin ;it entire coast of Maine," observed Island minclitclwatcrtiilitycliificiiiiin.Ncv- plan that had been denied three years ca, Institne's Executive Director Philip crilicicss,BEPapproved ilienc-discharge I,t in 1996. Sfx, ilically. Maine Audol,"n Conkling. "First, this case galvanized to- on the basis that line new discharge into i al. slafe, and federal efforts to begin to Casco Raywamrswould riot inandlifitself ~0 Richard moves up DEP "streamliner" gets No. 2 post A top manager at the Depart- tor, introduced die permit-by- ~ers feel the municipalities are fore changing rules and proce- ment of En~v~i~ro~q=~men~t~zl Prote~c- rule system designed to speed not qu~al~:fi~e~c~i ~to make technical dures. and ~so~nl~e staffers have t~~o~n (DE~P) h~c, ~was identified ~t~h~e processing of app~!~icat~io~n~s eval u~a~ti~o~n ~s of traffic im pacts a n d been transferred between d~iv~- ~i ~~i~L~h streamlining the pe~r-m~i~t p~. ~o~- water ~r~u~n~c~@f~. Net there is little s~io~n~s without no~tJce~ ~e~s~s h~as been chosen ~i~o~ ~'~,~he ~t~a~l ~g~-.o~@~.~ip~s ~c~on~ip~l~a~in~c~t~ql that spot, ~i~n~t~aning~f~o~l review or enforce- But Richard ~savs ~lo~, m~o~@z~l~e No. 2 job ~i~i~i ~@~)~e d~epa~;-~u~n e ~r~.~! inspections showed one~-fi~fth of ~m~c~nt o~f violations by land bu- and high ~iur~l~l~ov~o~"~r - an ~est~i- D~eb~r~ah F-~cha~i d~, director o` the ~PoJ~e~c~ts had violations that re~a~@~j staff. mated 20 profe~ssi~on~a~] s~ta~f~t~'h~av~e the Land Quality Bureau fo~. were no* enforced by DE~F staff. ~-~qnere were 900 complaints left the bureau in the last ~i~l~l~, ~e~e three vears, savs he, focus ~as Th~e e~fff~ec~t, however, ~w~as to cut received bv the land bureau last years - is tied large!\- to low the ~n~e~%~, dep~,~.~,-~,~.~, co~n~l~m~is~s~i~n~n~e~. the processing time f~o~F p~7o~;~-ct~s ~y~e~a~l but only ~t~wo people to re salaries. will be ~o~r-e~x~t~c~r~n~a~l r~e~l~a~@~!~,~n~s~" i~r~@ under the state site law in half, spo~n~d in tile field," ~s~avs one ~"~'~N~e h~a~v~t tried to build cz- ar; e~f~f~Q~r~i ~:~o ~d~e~a~i with c~ri~n~ci~s~m of ~a~!~t~houg~h more ~t~h~a~r~. h~2~l ~'~t~s~ti~l~it~a~ke staffer. "That shows w~qb~a~t the r~eertr~acks ~[i~n~th~e D~E~1~1~ ~b~u~t~i~l is tile DE~? from ~b~u~s~;n~e~s~s as w~e~i~@ nno~e ~t~han s~t-~x.mon~'~h~s to p~i~o- level of commitment there is to still hard ~t~o compete the': as conservationists. cess~. The caseload carried by enforcement." salaries paid to private engi- ~Iro~ni~c~a~l~l ~,~~, s~t~a~f~f~e~s under P~j- analysts has beer. reduced, be- lron~ic~al~!y~, A~.~,ms~trong built a neers," Richard says. chard s~a~v poor ;tile: ~oa! C~l~l~l~:~S~e of the economic slow- reputation as a laugh enforcer, She adds ~th~a~: ~:~m~n~l~@ ~@~!~s h~a~, ~e ~ nicatio~n~s was one of ~h~e~, ~m~p~J~o.- down, although it still re~n-~t~ains~a~l b~u~t not based on cases submit- had their ~N~vo~i k ~s~t~i ~e~am~i~l~n~ed ~b~@ flaws. up to 45 cases p~erw~ork~er~. ~led by the land bureau. Fines t~he addition of ~a s~op~hi~s~!~:~c~a~t~e~r~' ~F~_~,~cha~r~d ~re~p~l~a~-~c~s Elizabeth Morale is low at tile land b~i~t- collected b~v the state went from computer svs~t~e~n~n that tracks Armstrong. ~w~ho submitted her r~e~au. say s~q=~"e~rs, in part because $290,000 i~n 1986 to $3.2 million projects and -frees ana~l~y~@~t~s fro~n~-~, resignation earlier this vea~r ~ie- ~o~t~he heavy but also last y~c~a~;~ a~h~nost all from the air having to file ~I~j~q~l~l~d~%,~l :~.~e~. po~rted~ly unde. p~i ess~u~r~e ~f~r~o~r~n because of what L~li~c ~- pe~rc~@~~-~, ~c~ quality bureau. ports. the governor's office, which had as interference by ~1~q@~'~ch~a~rd ~a~r~i~:~! Richard says her new job will ~li~k~e~iv ~S~-~@~!~c~ce~s~s~o~r~ received co~m~p~l~ai~nts~f~r~o~r~n d~v~i~s~i~o~;~-~@ directors ~i~t~) the ~ap~p~i~;~@~@~2- not need to ~qi~ocu~, a, ~MU~C~I~l ~O~o 2~CC~O~rc~i~ng ~i~o s~6~ur~c~e~E in me ~!~zn~L ~n~- about Armstrong's ag~g~-e~s- ~t~io~n process. S~ev~e~t ~a~l cited i~l~l- violation because of the effec- bureau, is ~&~-~c~e Sproul, dire~c~ ~~v~e approach ~t~o enforcing ~per- stances where Ibureau m~a~r~la~g- Live enforcement procedures put ~6qm ~v~:~,~!~3t~~o_~s~ i~n the A~i~i ~Q~u~a~l~:~i~v B~ur~e~p~.~:~ ~. ~. ~' e, ~s r~e~v~e~i se~t~! rec~o~n~lm~e~n~d~ati~ons into place b~\ ~-~kr~ims~tron~g The governor's office ~ha~s de- byp~iojec~t~a~n~a~lvsts~,- ~f~t~c~: p~c~i~-~s~on~n~! O~th~e~i ~,co~n~lp~l~a~i~n that Rich~a~id niec~!~L~he~c~l~-~.~a~iges,a~.-~.d~.A.~,~r~ns~tro.~,~ig ~app~t~a~@~S by tile' 2~P~P~:~~U~r~l~t~S~ does ~!~to! ~s~olici~@ st~a~t~f opinion be- could no~t be reached f~o~r co~i~l~l- A pal t~ic~u~!~2~7 sort point is ~t~he ~7~q/ ~~e~n~t. ~'~o~l~'s~t~a~ter~t~i~e~-~l, released ~b~l~- ~de~!eg~n~or~l ~c~l ~c~v land ~~e department s~ays~.~@~L~rn~n~stro~ng b~u~i~c~a~l.~ ~m~i~z~n~ag~e~is ~i~o left "to p~l~@rsue c~L~reer oppo~rtu~ni- municipalities - including ties o~u~:~s~i~d~e ~st~@~a~:~e go~ve~rr~i~nen~r " ~L~c~,v~is~t~o~r~! - ~t~- ~,~- ~: ~ev~!~ew ~m~aj~o: A; ~:`~e~l~and~~u~l~u~, ~e~@~t~:~ ~T~@~c~h~a~. ~d~. ~z projects ~l,~% fo~r~me. ~L~eWISLo~n planning direc- DEP s~t~a~f~l. In some cases. staff- DE~4qP's~6qtheme: less is more Dear. Ma~ri~o~t~t seems a~wful~k chipper for a guy ~m as killed in some last-minute legislative ~log-ro~l~l- ~ho'~s ~'~ius~i had his budget sla' 'bed. in~g. This time, DEP wants to expand the plan to The DEP commissioner, ho came by to visit include water pollution licenses as well - again !a week. is no Zen mas~te~r~,~qw but he's taken to the affecting municipalities, which operate most of h~e~m~e of doing more with less in a way which Maine's sewage treatment plants. would make a Maine Yankee proud. Douglas The idea is that those who pollute more should The Department of Environmental Protection Rooks pay more for their licenses; boilers at the old is one ~of~the most visible and oft-criticized ofs~ta~t~e Great No thern and ~IP mills would pay h~e agencies. ~lLs high-profile role in passing judgment Kennebec Journal most. Th~e~"idea is acceptable to most legislators, on malls, highways and paper ~im~ill expansions Editorial Page Editor but doesn't have much passionate support, so its often brings it into conflict with business and prospects are again uncertain. industry. Enforcing pollution regulations brings KENNEBEC PERSPECTIVES Finally, Marriott is taking up a suggestion from with it the delicate task of fining companies and some DEP critics that the department do more to - under Marriott - towns and cities as well. Marriott figures the state's cut of the card fees train local officials and businesses about how to Marriott's 1989 plan to fur~t her clean up Maine would be about $120,000 for the first year. The comply with state environmental laws. rivers became one of the biggest political footballs fund would b~e administered jointly by DEP and "A lot of times we hear that if in years, with legislative Republicans opposi the other natural resource departments. be ~t n~g ~.~0~c~i~l~i~qI~andown~er knew more heir own governor before a bill was finally "We figured the card would have a lot more the law, he wouldn~'~,~t have enacted last spring. The DEP has been involved appeal if people knew it would pay for things the committed the violation,' Mar- in the Maine Turnpike expansion, the Mail at state wouldn't do otherwise. If it just goes to pay riot~t said. "I don't think that's Augusta controversy, and is now angering people ~s ~qi~8qv~2qz always true, but sometimes it in South Portland who want to build a bridge over om~e bureaucrat's salary, they won't be is." wetlands DEP says must be prot ~t d. interested," he said. So a proposed bill would The department has been gi~qv~qen~e major new That seems a reasonable guess. My own is that designate S200,00~0 from DEP~'s responsibilities. And in the next two years, DEP the program might be a good ~way of helping the annual fine collections (now will be doing all these jobs with less money. "non-game" endangered species program. It's running about $3 million) to set Marriott took a look at what DEP was Supposed to be paid for by the "chickadee ~qA~6qY~6qA up classes through the technical supposed to accomplish, and requested S17.2 checkofr, on the state income tax form but never ~qMA~qRRI~6qM college system. million. The governor budgeted S12.6 million - Mee's its budget. As a result, the state doesn't These are all worthy ini~qt~qia. less than what DEP is getting now. And even that even know where its endangered species are until ti~qv~qes which would help DEP do its job and benefit doesn't tell the whole story. DEP was granted someone proposes building a dam or a power the state as well. Here's hoping they won't get ~q'~qo~q" ~q-91 budget, plant on a particular site. Every time mapping is in 2 legislative shuffle likely to be even worse only aminimal increase in its 1990 ~qth~qe. years when most state departments were growing proceeding at a good pace, another staff member usual, by leaps and bounds. When inflation is Is cut and the project sits on the shelf. Marriott seems resigned to his budget. It was considered, D~qEP~q's budget is substantially lower But even here Marriott doesn't have smooth pretty depressing last November, he admits, when - by perhaps 20 percent - than in 1987, when sailing. Rep. Annette Hoglund (D-P~qortland) has a Mc~qK~qetnan was breaking the news to department Marriott was appointed. competing "State of Maine" credit card bill heads that their budget plans were history. But So what's a commissioner to do? Improvise, by which would pu~qt all the money into the general now people have gotten used to it. the look of it. fund. Hoglund's bill has already had a hearing; Even if the Legislature does come up with more Marriott is pushing a number of legislative DEP~q's bill hasn't even been printed yet. money, Marriott doesn't set DEP getting much of initiatives. The one getting the most press The financial stakes are higher ~qAith another it. "The priorities are Human Services, Educa- attention so far is a scheme (no snickers, please) Marriott initiative, a proposal to pay for DEP tion, Corrections," he said. "Not DE~qF.~q" to sponsor a "Maine Environment" credit card, enforcement actions with higher licensing fees for Doing more with less - Marriott seems to ~qb~qe with the proceeds to provide grants for private p~qo~qU~qt~qi~qf~qio~qn-e~qm~qitt~qi~qn~qS s~qt~qoo~qke~qs~qiL~qa~qcks~q. attempting the impossible. But he has no and community environmental projects. A similar bill nearly became taw last year, but choice. ~q. 4 IIIIII Im M M IIIIIIINII MM W min litl ij continual experience); and replace the recertification exam with a requirement fnr continuing education. See attached update on the CEO rules for more details. 1.1h, R \I,k TASK 1C -- DECD Technical Assistance . ................. . Shor(Llan(j Zog),M ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITN' DFIVE11.01INIFiN F DECD/OCP Coastal staff continued work on Shoreland Zoning OFFICT OF COMPREIIF`,NSfVF PLANNING related initiatives during this quarter. Two sets of "model,, May 15, 1991 Shoreland Zoning performance standards one on docks, piers, and wharves and the other an bluff erosion are now in final draft TO: Bob Blakesley, State Planning office form and will be printed for distribution to municipalities during May and June. These standards are more stringent than those FROM: Francine Rudo4*,--T..ara Risser, Erik Carson, and Linda provided in the DEP minimum Shoreland Zoning Guidelines and may be Boothby adopted by municipalities in lieu of the DEP minimum requirements. Office of Comprehensive Planning, Coastal Program Copies of the completed model standards will be included in the next quarterly report. RE: Coastal Program Progress Report, 2/91 - 4/91 ------------------------------------------------------------------- DECD/OCP staff have also been working with Maine's Floodplain 1990-91 GRANT TASKS management Program to produce a model combined Shoreland Zoning - Floodplain Management Ordinance. We are responding to requests TASK 1B -- Local Code Enforcement officer Training from a number of communities interested in having only one local ordinance address these two topics. We expect the model to be This quarter has been extremely busy for the Code Enforcement completed sometime during the next quarter. officer (CEO) Training Program. A significant amount of time has Ln been devoted to preparing the field guide on recognizing and Requests for the model shoreland Zoning permit forms have been delineating wetlands in Maine and organizing the wetlands workshops strong. Copies were distributed to municipal Planning Boards to be held this summer. Several reviews of the draft field guide through the Regional Councils during March and April and (being written by Ralph Tiner of the US Fish and Wildlife Service availability of the publication was announced in DECD/OCP's in MA) were completed and supplemental materials, such as maps and newsletter NEXUS. As a result, we are receiving additional lists of information sources, were provided to the contractor. requests for copies of the forms an a daily basis. workshop planning has involved establishing a structure for the program, obtaining commitments from instructors, selecting DECD/OCP staff, as back-up to DEP staff, have been responding consultants, and identifying fieldwork sites. Additionally, to routine technical assistance requests from the Regional discussions were held with DEP Shoreland Zoning staff on councils, municipal officials and the public on Shoreland Zoning establishing appropriate and enforceable standards for defining the questions. DECD/OCP staff also participated in a workshop upland edge of a wetland. sponsored by the Greater Portland Council of Governments on other activities have included: completing the electrical Shoreland Zoning/Planning issues for towns along the Cousins River. codes training manual and holding workshops in five locations; planning upcoming plumbing cod 'e workshops; assisting towns with the development of sample CEO job descriptions (required for the DECD/OCP staff have begun work on a project with two major certification process) ; and drafting a training syllabus for the objectives: to provide incentives for coastal property owners to next two years (see attached CEO Training Syllabus and Exam either move or demolish structures subject to the threat of erosion Schedule for 1992-93). and flooding; and to develop a more direct link between actual coastal erosion rates and local and state zoning and/or permitting other notable events include pending modifications to the CEO decisions. The impetus for this initiative is Maine's desire to certification rules. As a result of the controversy discussed in become the fifth state in the nation certified to participate in the last quarterly report, the legislature is currently working on the Upton-Jones Program (or the new program currently being an Act that will change the rules to: remove training and considered by Congress to replace Upton-Jones) administered by the certification of electrical inspectors from OCP's jurisdiction; Federal Emergency Management Agency. certification would allow exempt CEOs with at least 3 years of experience prior to 1990 from Maine to assist coastal property owners whose structures are in certification examinations (only in areas where CEO has had danger of imminent collapse due to erosion and flooding to either Stme I Intsw S(ation f 30. Auguvi, Nlai,ic 04313 - Off,,,-, w 219 (.,pitM Su-I N@Phn-e (207) 2811@000 demolish or relocate the structures. Funds for demolition or of the Act. Thus, we anticipate that many of the "inconsistent" relocation are made available through flood insurance policies. towns listed above will eventually adopt consistent plans. To become certified under Upton-Jones, Maine would have to DECD/OCP Coastal staff also spent considerable time discussing demonstrate that the state has: a state-wide requirement that work plans and public participation efforts, reviewing draft prohibits new construction and relocation seaward of an adopted sections of local comprehensive plans, and meeting with local erosion setback; and an established, complete, and functional. data planning committees to discuss issues and proposed implementation base of mean annual erosion rates for areas of coastal shorelines strategies. Coastal communities a!@sisted during this quarter subject to erosion. At this point, it appears that we will have to include: Stonington, West Bath, Yarmouth, Damariscotta, Cutler, first develop mean annual erosion rates and then use that York, Brunswick, Addison, Belfast, Deer Isle, St. George, Cape information to revise existing state laws and/or regulations (i.e. Elizabeth, and Harpswell. shoreland Zoning and Natural Resources Protection Act) so that setbacks in particular areas of the coast are consistent with the See discussion below on Coastal Management Grants. erosion rates for those areas. Interagency Coordination DECD/OCP staff, with assistance from the Maine Geological Survey, have begun analyzing existing maps, photographs and other DECD/OCP Coastal staff participated in monthly coastal program data sources to identify the erosion prone areas of the coast that coordination meetings to share information on state agency are vulnerable to development (i.e. not publically owned) . We are activities related to coastal issues. Staff also worked with the also also working with DEP staff to identify whether and how interagency dredging subcommittee to complete revisions to Maine's appropriate state laws and regulations could be linked more closely dredging policy draft document. with erosion rate data. subdivision Review Standards Growth Management Progra DECD/OCP Coastal staff reviewed "new and improved" model During this quarter, DECD/OCP Coastal staff reviewed 4 subdivision standards for local planning boards prepared by the comprehensive plans from coastal communities for consistency with Southern Maine Regional Planning commission for OCP. Particular Maine's Coastal Policies -- Newcastle, Alna, Trenton, and attention was paid to developing appropriate standards for wildlife Southport. Copies of the review comments are attached. This habitat protection that are meaningful for municipal planning brings the total number of coastal plans reviewed to 12. The purposes and at the same time satisfy a number of concerns raised following list indicates which of these 12 plans are presently by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. consistent with the Growth Management Act and which have been adopted by the Towns to date: Casco Bay National Estuary Program Richmond - adopted, not consistent During this quarter, DECr)/OCP Coastal staff worked with DEP Warren - not adopted, not consistent and the Casco Bay Local Government Advisory Committee on a proposal South Berwick - adopted and consistent to establish a Water Quality Resource Center and technical Edgecomb vote scheduled for May, consistent assistance program for towns in the Casco Bay watershed. A funding Dresden adopted, not consistent proposal was developed and submitted to EPA for consideration. It Surry - adopted, not consistent approved, DECD/OCP will receive funds to work with local planning Woolwich adopted and consistent committees on the water resources sections of their comprehensive Wiscasset vote scheduled for June, not consistent plans and the subsequent development of land use ordinances and Newcastle adopted, not consistent other implementation measures (see attached proposal). Alna - vote not scheduled yet, not consistent Trenton - vote not scheduled yet, not consistent Task 1D -- Regional Councils Southport - vote not scheduled yet, not consistent Quarterly reports from each region are attached, showing the It is important to note that most plans submitted to OCP for review progress being made in coastal communities on the adoption of for the first time are found to be "not consistent" with the Act. revised Shoreland Zoning ordinances. It is clear from these In most cases, the major objections are related to the future land reports that at least 50% of the towns will not complete the use plan (i.e. town-wide zoning and other land use controls), a revisions by this summer and will require additional assistance difficult topic for small towns to address. With OCP's comments next fall to meet the DEP's December 31, 1991 deadline. Many of and recommendations in hand, towns are then revisiting the future these communities are waiting because they are in the process of land use plan and modifying them so that they meet the requirements working on their comprehensive plans and would like to complete the low Ow I I b@ I tlt@ 1, IL A I 1@1 I I I I I 1 .4 1 A planning process before tackling any rezoning projects. making steady progress. The consultant anticipates that the work should be completod on time. During this quarter, DECD/OCP provided the following day-long program for the regional Coastal coordinators: Wells The Town of Wells has almost completed the portion of their March 26, 1991 - The day focused on DEP's Non-point Source Control planning process that has focused on consensus building and policy Program and some legislative and program updates. setting. work an the grant should be completed on schedule. The next meeting is scheduled for May 28th. B. Wateijront Action ra t Projects Task 2 -- Municipal Grant Programs The projects in Fastport, Calais, and Bangor are moving ahead A. Coastal Planning Grant Proiects on schedule. The following summarizes the status of each harbor/waterfront In Frankfort, a recent Town Meeting, prompted by a small group planning project. of citizens who opposed the ongoing maintenance expenses the Town would incur with the park project, voted to "unaccept" the WAG Belfast funds. This happened despite the fact that the Town approved local The City of Belfast got off to a slow start on their grant, funds for the project and acceptance of grant funds last year and but is now making steady progress. The inventory section of their had begun the final design plans for the park. The Selectmen, plan is nearly complete and the Harbor and Waterfront Planning however, are proposing to vote on the project once again. It is Committee is beginning to discuss goals and policies for the possible that this project will move forward, but if so, it will waterfront. The Committee's efforts are being frustrated somewhat most likely require an extension. due to a couple of major issues that are currently being resolved along the waterfront. One of them is the sale by the City of the The South Portland project is also on hold pending budget railroad that runs along the waterfront (see article in Portland deliberations by the City council. Given the City's fiscal crisis, Magazine) . The other issue is a potential buyer for the abandoned there is serious concern about its ability to provide the local Penobscot Poultry building. matching funds this year. The project remains a high priority, and every effort, including a request for private donations, is being The consultant is concerned that the Committee may need a made to come up with the needed matching funds. grant extension. More time may allow the Committee to address these issues more completely as decisions on them will be made C. Coastal Management Grants shortly. To date, three communities have applied for grant funds. Richmond and South Berwick were described in the last progress Biddeford report. We have entered into a contract with South Berwick for the The City of Biddeford's Comprehensive Harbor and Waterfront Salmon Falls River Plan. Richmond's Plan is still not consistent Committee has held several meetings and a number of public hearings with the Growth Management Act, so we have been unable to move in different neighborhoods along the Saco River. Their consultant forward with their grant for a Harbor Management Plan. The third anticipates that work on the grant will be competed on schedule. funding request has come from the Town of Woolwich to examine options for wastewater treatment in the Days Ferry village area Eastport along the Kennbec River. We will be working with Woolwich on the The city of Eastport's Coastal Planning committee is making development of a work plan for the project during the next quarter. steady progress on their grant and should complete the work on time. Freeport The Town of Freeport's Coastal Planning Committee is making steady progress on their grant. The Committee anticipates the need for a slight extension (an additional month) so as to allow for adequate public hearings. St. George The Town of St. George's Harbor and Waterfront Committee is performance standards are part of a model. subdivision ordinance fo, Technical Assistance Loci Maine's municipalities. Tamara Risser April 3 - Met in West Bath with co-chair of the Towns Comprehensive Planning Committee and with their consultant to go over comments on Meetings the Town's draft comprehensive plan. February 12 - Attended meeting of the St. George Harbor and April, 8 - Attended meeting in Wells, the first of five meetings waterfront Planning Committee to answer any questions the committee between the wells Harbor Planning Committee and a consultant hired had and to review progress on the grant. tinder the towns coastal planning grant to facilitate consensus February 13 - Met with Fred Todd, LURC, Rich Baker, DEP, and Lee building and setting policies for the harbor. Sochesky of the International Waterway Commission, New Brunswick to April 9 - Met in Bath with the city planner and representatives discuss aspects of Maine's shoreland zoning controls and how they from towns along the Kennebec River to discuss the feasibility of could be incorporated into regulations for the Provinces in Canada. establishing a nonprofit entity to obtain a tour boat route for boat trips up and down the Kennebec. February 13 - Met with representatives from the United States United Kingdom Countryside Exchange Planning committee to discuss April 16 Met in Wells with the Harbor Planning committee.. a coastal planning project that will be conducted by an international team of planners this summer. The group will look at April 18 Met with planner from Yarmouth to go over preliminary environmentally sensitive tourism and green belt planning in the land use plan for the town. Penobscot Bay region. The team expressed a desire that there is a liaison between the team and the Office of Comprehensive Planning. April 22 - Met in Wells with the Harbor Planning Committee. February 22 - Met in Stonington with Town Manager and members of Other the Comprehensive Planning committee to assist them in pulling General grant administration and technical assistance has been together components of their comprehensive plan. provided to the following Towns as they draft their comprehensive plans: Stonington, Yarmouth, West Bath, Belfast, Deer Isle, St. OD February 25 - Met with other coastal program staff, the planner George, Cape Elizabeth, and Harpswell. from Yarmouth and DEP representative to discuss model regulations for piers, docks and wharves. Provided information to the City Planner in Bath regarding waterfront revitalization - grant sources, and general planning February 28 - Attended meeting of the Freeport Harbor and materials on waterfront development. Waterfront Planning committee. Provided assistance on shoreland zoning to Coastal Planner at the March 6 - Met with state flood plain coordinator to discuss Eastern Mid-Coast Planning Commission. development of a combined model flood plain/shoreland zoning ordinance. Answered questions over the phone concerning shoreland zoning issues. March 8 - Attended the Maine Fisherman's Forum in Rockport. March 11 - Met with consultant working on coastal plans in Francine Ru4off Biddeford, Belfast, and St. George to go over materials and assess progress on the grants. Meetings March 26 - Attended Coastal Coordinator meeting on the DEP's March 7 - Meeting with Town Planner of South Berwick concerning nonpoint source pollution program. coastal Management Grant for public access plan for Salmon Falls River. March 28 - Gave a presentation to communities in the Cousins River watershed (Freeport, Yarmouth, North Yarmouth and Pownal) on March 11. - Meeting with Damariscotta Comprehensive Planning environmental features of the Cousins River watershed. Committee regarding the inventory and analysis section of their draft Plan and proposed future land use plan. April 2 - Met with Fred Hurley, Inland Fisheries and wildlife to go over performance standards for wildlife protection. The March 27 - Meeting with Casco Bay Local Government Advisory 111111fi 1111110 1 '1 1 @@I I 1 4 1-1 Me I= im iiIIIiiffiII 115111 11111110111 NMI Committee about proposed OCP technical assistance strategy on water quality issues. March 28 - Meeting with staff at Municipal Resource and Planning office of Lincoln County about Shoreland Zoning technical assistance activities. March 28 - Meeting with Edgecomb local officials about proposed revisions to their Comprehensive Plan. April 9 - meeting with Edgecomb, local officials on further revisions to their Comprehensive Plan. April 17 - Meeting with Brunswick Town Planner on revised work plan for Comprehensive Plan development April 19 - Presentor at two sessions of the Maine Harbor Masters Annual Meeting and Training Program -- one on mooring regulation and planning and the second on harbor management and comprehensive planning. April 22 - Meeting with Hancock county Regional Planning commission on Shoreland Zoning technical assistance issues. April 22 - Meeting with Washington County Regional Planning Commission on Shoreland Zoning technical assistance issues. %D April 22 - meeting with Cutler Comprehensive Planning Committee on their draft Plan. April 23 - Meeting with Chair of Addison Comprehensive Planning Committee on their work plan and public participation program. ~0 NEW SHOR~qEILAND ZONING PERMIT FORMS N~0qM~A~I~qC Vill The office of Comprehensive Planning, in coordination with the Department of Environ- mental Protection, has developed a new set of model Sh~or~el~and Zoning permit forms. The forms are designed to help municipalities with th~e ~admin~str~at~ion and enforcement of local or- din~anc~e~s adopted under the Mandatory Audubon 'refuses to'. ~r ~.~1h~orcland Zoning Act. ~2qP included in the package are: a 6 page permit Organization "As soon as they say 'We accept Monday~*~s ~wa~r Of~f~,w~qord~q, application form; a special permit ~applica~l ion won't ~sit with We~qU~4 the REP decision.' we'll partici- latest round in the bat ~c b~qe~qtw~qe form for variances, conditional uses, or special ~3 pate," Urquhart said. "We just [own and the Audubon. a bait don't see the p~oin~( of essentially shows no sign of slowing exceptions; a shorc~la~nd zoning permit harbor co~irn~t~qnittee negotiating an issue that has already Urquh~ari said the Audubon been unanimously decided." at an April 10 public hear checklist for use by the CEO; and a La ~s~t November. ~th~e REP shot Augusta to speak against a ~qb permit form ~to be posted at the c~a~n~- until it accepts down ~an application front ~th~e Army would amend the state's ~s~truc~lion site. Corps of Engineers to dredge Resource Protection Act, R BEP~'s decision to 200~,000 cubic yards of sand from ~s~en~lially allow Wells H~qir~qb~qor Planning Boards and CEOs are en- ~q@~qJc~qc ~qs the inner harbor. Th~e state agency dredged. ~ courag~ed to modify these forms to fit ~not dredge. agreed with testimony from the The hill. sponsored by S~qen I he specific requirements of local or- ~qq/~.~7/ Audubon, the Department of En- hen Estes. is one of, two In dinancc provisions and administrative BY Joe Dynan ~viron~n~icn~i~a~l Protection ~and scientists ~tr~oduc~ed in the legislature ~S,~.~, ~.~@~@ f~r~or~n. the Maine Geological Survey urging of Wells officials. The procedures. The forms can also be WELLS - Th~e first meeting of a against t~h~e dredging. A 4~5~@minu~t~c bill is sponsored by R~qep. modif~ed to serve as the general build- committee formed to draw up ~a ~f~irc~s~en~t~a~ti~on i~n favor of dredging by Carleton, and specifically ad the Iowa ~o~l Wells holed to win ~;~my ~t~h~e Wells harbor project. ing permit application form for a future plan for Wells Harbor was support. Urquhart calls ~th~e bills an municipality. Copies of the model per- more notable for who wasn't there The Audubon's position contrasts run" by the town and accused mit forms are available from the Office than who was. sharply with (he position of ninny officials of "changing the The Maine Audubon Society. a W~ells~'o~ffi~c~i~a~l~s~. which was outlined when yo~u don't like ~t~h~qe wa of Comprehensive Planning or your ~lo~r~ig~i~o~n~e outspoken opponent of a by Jack Lyons, chairman of the shake o~u~t.~** Regional Council. Any questions or proposed dredging of the harbor, h~as harbor p~l~a~n~'~c~ommit~l~ec ~and a mcm- A[ Monday's ~'e ~q@mg~q,~. ~qho comments concerning the forms refused to participate as a member of ~he~r ~i~f the town's Harbor Ad~O ... ry ~b~e harbor p~l~an~'c~qo~qm~qmi~l~l~e~qc r~qefu ~~~) should he directed to Fran Rud~of~f or the Wells Harbor Management Plan ~C~omm~i~n~c~e~. Committee. ~lei the dredging issue domin~qa Tammy Risser at OCIP ~8qE~ql The harbor committee held its First ~"T~h~e harbor ~qO~r~n should not lead -discussions. "It is only one meeting Monday afternoon at Wells anyone ~to ~qWieve the town concedes pon~en~t of the whole plan Town Hall and began discussions on in any way, shape or form their shouldn't get hung up on ~qth~qe a blueprint for ~t~h~e harbor's future. intent t~o dredge," L~N n, ~aid early ing~." town manager ~)on~a~qth~qan Thomas Urquhart, executive di- in Monday's mcc~ii~n~,~!. said. rector of ~the Maine Audubon, said Lyons also crifi~ci~f~ed the Audubon A way to bring the ~iow~qWs the town's reluctance to accept a for "standing on the sidelines" dur- flats. which arc closed b~qec~qa unanimous decision by ~th~e stale's ing ~th~e planning process. and said pollution, back up to state ~qs~ql~qa Board ~o~f Environmental Protection the ~s~o~ci~e~ly -as only ~"in~ter~e~m~ed in keeping the harbor as a w~, against the dredging was the reason ~nu~ini~p~u~l~afing it for their own hen- harbor for fishermen arid for the Audubon's refusal. ~e~fi~l~.~" ~lion~al boaters, protecting ~qth ~4q0 M Audubon Society boy~4qc ~4~D Members of the group say they arc concerned that ~Thomas Urquhart, executive getting it accomplished?'" Wells still has plans to dredge its harbor~. director of the Maine Audubon He said the Audubon S ~qP~qF~q1~q4 Society. said the group believes the agrees with the Maine D~qe~qp~qa By TED COIIEN dredging application, town is using state mnn~ey to pursue of Environmental P~e~n~t~ection Staff Write, ~3a~ck Lyons, chairman of the I for~. dredging the harbor, even though dr~ed~ong the harbor would c~qau b~or Planning Committee.. coin. the state ha~s ~m~j~ect~ed the plan much ecological damage. "~qDre W~F~L~L~S - The Maine Audubon p~l~a~in~ed as (lie Panel began a series because of environmental concerns. the harbor is not an op~qti~qo .'society refused Monday to attend of meetings that tile Audubon Though state planners have told said. the ~f~i~mt meeting of the town's Har- Society is "interested in manipulat~- town officials not to use the planning Barry Lawson, a Mas~qsach ~bor Planning Committee, saying t~hat in~g us" by refusing to support the grant ~i~f~, prepare another dredging consultant the town has hired I the only real plan the tnwn ha~s ~for ~tnwn's dredging plans. application, Ur~c~lu~d~iat~l said, that is ~f~or-rn~, ul~at~e t~he harbor plan a the harbor is dredging iL He and Town Manager Jonathan exactly what the town i~s doing. ask the Audubon Societ~0q@ ~q-g But town officials, who have failed C~art~er~mid th~e A~n~du~t~ion Society was "In fact," he said, "the harbor help plan the future of.the ha to get state permission to dredge the o~f~f~i~er~ed a seat o~i~l the committee but management plan is proceeding Member-, of the Harbor Pla harbor, denied they will use a $5,~0~0~0 refused the town's request to help from the point, 'We need to dredge Committee said they plan to state grant to prepare another plan the harbor's fi~lt~ur~e~. this harbor. ~How do we ~go about what would happen to the ~qharl ~6qP~qr 1 ~8q1~2q1 ~8q1~q1~q1~6q1~2q1~2q1~q1 ~2q1~2q01 Bull ~6qM on, ~0qM ~0 4 objections to State lists ~2qo~0qmprehens~ive plan ions. Ices for growth ~re~qt~4qV explicit ~qI~q)resden c~qV~,More~' co~%~F K~qJ ~'~qTh~q" state ~P~,~1~,~1~n~n~,~,~'~q@~'~,h ~p~i Ian on ~ina an s~u`~a~'~e~g~qy~q@ ~tcontrols. t~h~r~ouw~g~e~lrc not d~, t~o ~'~b~e ~E~L ~'~S~'~o ~n~aI, ~and ~d I ~K~J ~C~O~4q=~2q= ~l~ic hearing on th ~R~6qTd b~i~n~eshousin~g I~r h~e I~.~e ~, ~, .,.',.Put ~1~1 ~9. ~e~x ~0qN~q,~.. were ~,~r ~1~1~0~1~1 a~'u~- ~b~b tio~n~s. ~,~h~e~q@~i~v~e lit n w~i s t~qT~n ~p~'~S ~1. ~1~q2~. ~'~,~f ~f ~U~, ~ob~je~ct~i~t~i~z~h I despite ~5 It ~t h ~O~uu~' ~n~' ~qpr~esd c~qtnno~l ~f~o~T~w~'~s~yme ~m~' th~e 'Info r~id~ed~. ~e~n ~t~ow~n~a~rd~p~Thu~rstda~, Is ofhd~oc~u upgrade ~c~' coin ~:~o~u ~" ~a~r ~O~A ~t~o 1~4~-us~'n~g i~t'~hh"~qoh~e~'~, future Wa some ~P~a years ~itw~,~, members say they ~a~"~~-~q@~T~qn~an~,ing costs ~0~' ~,~s~a~l~@~l ~qm~qn said c~0~,~`~dd~P~q@~qUd~,~,~,~. ~,d ~It~i ~0 ~'~0 ~'~,h I viable, s~h~' h~e ~'~qF~l~q@ he draft ~- ~q@~.~Is~l~~q" b~qa~qs~qe~qd~q@ ~, ~f`~qc~qI~,~q@~z~@n~q; ~.s~e~e ~0~P~,~.~j~q_~, ~i~s no, dp~- ~n~d n~o me~'~qd~q@~j topic ~'n~ess ~qic~4q@~o ~q-~'~,~Oo~n~qer~'~s~qo ~ps~g be ~w~'i ~qf~qut~0qu~-~0qr~0qe a c~orr~i~m~Mts f`~qw~m ~qa~l~"~'~Id ~qe~qseo ~P~.~1 ~ework ~lf~P~c~'~,~'~,~i~'~1~'~n~qs~.~,, it w~qW ~OA~P ~'~qc~r~c~lo. A Plan ~0~e ~a~n !dents, ~qhou ~0 ~0 d p ~r~ep~r~esen~t~in~,~.~n~,~,~s it at fforester~pwit~e~q'~.~II ensure ~I~O~0qW ~r~d ~t~a~l~l income~pto ~-~n ~qgr~q@~qce~qr~l~'~@~qO~u~t ~o~f o~q;~@n, a~nd ~S~,~,~2q;~,~cr~i~o~a~qv~ed by t~qi`~,en~1~qn~1 wn, ~w~th Plan p, ..~i~t c~oc~' I of land use in ~1 nt~l~o ~0 ~r~_~i~s~, i's ~irwom~a~n than ~q- ~o~r~s~, 25,~,~d levels town beg~0q:~d~"~c~o~n~t~"~'~i~"~. Cu ~:~@~i~,~,s stated of _h~e Th ~-s Growth ~q!~1~q@~qan p t~q@~q@~v~rd P~,~a~n ~"~' ~r~ed ~a~a ~I~4qX~I~,~qo~qe~a~r~q@~q:~,~'~,~O~,~q@~,~. Th~e "a' ~1~_~q@~t town ~r~n~e~s t~a~e~.~c~e~r~t~i lie he ~2qa~-~2qf Ing ~sI~v~qi~qd~qe~, ~I~c to n~,~'~q@w n ~qcy as ~e~v ~Lev~cs~c~iu a ~. ~p~an~, ~m~q? ~q@~@~,h~er ~qi~t ~q:~qr~,~r~.~"e~M ~.9~.~'~,9~qu~P~1~,~`~qa~nt ~'e~d pub re I ~I~n~i~o~qr~n ~t~o ~i~c~' C~O~r~P~;~. see beyond their~t,~q@O~t ~c~o~qj~q@~q!~, nil ~h~q2~0 ?~n~b~, ~t~e ~0 rt ~-~q@~q:~n~e~Y ~qn~qa~v~qp Said adding that,, ram D~Y ~nners unity ~,~,~.or a, no' ~in the town ~i~i~, hd~q;~i~n~ts ~@ ~L~"~'~q@~q~'~aid ~q1~1~r~I~1r~'~.~.~.~,~s h~,~,~Ip ~q"~,~'~g~qn~q"w~qld, ~qO~'~I~@~n~,~in ~"~"~t~'~a~t~i~f~v~qe~q@n~C~i~t~ich h~r~~s~ Ing "long, ..~.~s~, ~sd ~,~v~. wa~q@~0q@~T~t1~9o~c~,~2q:~,~,~,,tSe ~qaw~, ~~m~e~n~, S~,~u~y ~h~.~b~th ~i~o~i~on econo~rnt~0~'~. ~o~Y~5 ~c~' ~~ ~c~~'~i~n ~6 or ~O~@ ~"~u~`~qi~.~@`~qa~1~0v~n~,~:~-~,n~t w~a~s noted ~T~. ~O~"u~a~,~',~qi~- ~. e ~l~ed ~2qn~, ~,~'~e~, ~.~, t.~,~e w~@~n~'~cincreases ~qj.~q@ P~P u~i~g~n ~, I ~~1 ~1~,~0~1~1~qa ~l~q"~qJ ~t~h' ~1-~7 ~f~"a........ ~qP~'~e~'dth~, pro ~j~al ~0, -a ~qI~,~,~n~d ,or ~n~~. ~wh~.~,~,~,o~,~, rite ~T~qhe Plan ~C~n~,~I~I_SC~a~1~eC~o~rn~T~nCTC ~nu~,~.ac Iwh~i e~,~,p~l ~'~f~s~,~'a~g ~@wc~r~rk ~i~t ~a~l C"~y Te~v~,~._~,1~.~1 am ~t~o.~, rid ~S~M ~"~s ~c~o~m ~u~"~q:~Cn~pri~~q;~, ~a~nd ~v~en~t~c~ua~T~I~c~ls in ~~qi~qZ~'1~q@~1~6~L ~3~p~o~se~q4~0~S~e~s ~0~q"~' for ~ for the ~c~t~i ~b~e~r~s ~0 specific ~ss~e ~P~' s~- h~i~lr~i~l ~t~ur bu~l~in~e ~k~, a ~hu~r~s~"~. ~1~,~,h~,~,~, rid totes~' d ~qVaT~nn~ak` ~t~o ~qand I I ~1~1~1~,9~b~c~j~$~'t~i~On`n" th~e P~lt~@~@ ~p~r in ~f~-~,~.~,~,~.t ff~.~.~,~,~,~Is.b~l ~r~ict ~T~e ~O~V ~'~0~nof ~'~h~t ~c~r~a as so ~g~q;~qT~b~'~l~ic f~qa~`~q@~"~t~'~e~s ~q@~1~1~0h~@~,~`~qn~@~qrt ~y d~is~t ~L~b~Is ~ ~9 ~c~l I on ~0 ~0- ~S~"~. ~ob ~I~f~i~c~i~e~nIin% ~t~q@~, ~qo~i~in~d~@~a~qm ~r~c~@~o~u~l~c~a`~qn~s~q@ on~e ~S~@~I~C~O~qt ~'~I~C~L~, Of ~1~1~W ~c~l The ~enI~qc~"~I~'~qs~e~k~"~qO~f ~'~0~P~'~qc~,~'~,c ~p ~O~r p~l~a~on~qo~l~e I In, TO _~,~t~c~r~lr~o~n~t ~1. oa ~s~ i~r~i~l~q@~,~f ~S~, ~t~u~,~n~p~il~k~@ ~1~1 h~o~l~"~i" f~O~1~C~P~T~O~'~,Tt~qi~,~,~.s ~th ~'~qa~ql~8q@`~,~r~q@t ~0 ~ b~, ~u ~jto ;,group ~q@~c~r~i~,~j~u~l ~P~@~b~l~" future ~"~i~'~al ~i~r~a ~'~0~o~a~. for a- ~r~q@w~'~1~1 T ~qPd ~P~l~qo~pt~I~c~qt~q" ~'~,~@~, ~1~qp~nd-`~qu~,~, d~i~f~f~e~r~"~t~i ~e~ff~er~enc~e~s ~qO~q'~c~qC~o~r~r~e d~ia ~"h~e S~a~lt~@~6~'It~t~er Of ~1~@~6 ~@~V~h~qitch h~a~s ~'~P~'~,~q@~'~n~qg~qs, ~q:~qadn~in ~-~f~f~i~r~qi~n~@~qd growth ~'~.~,d`~qe`~,~S~qo i d ~e n ~t ~i ~fY~w ~,~w ~qd~r~o~.~)~. ~'~s n~ ~. S ~~r~o~p~c~'~s~e~m~o~r~"~I~t~t~'~~0 in co~n~p,~qc~q@ screening ~U~.~1 aere To ~t~ec~t~ion ~I~qi~qnt~e~t~e and local concerns as an~, ~0~q@ firm ~a~n ~I~.~,~qd ~u~c~2q&~t~4q@wee~qs~a~id `~e~V~'~`~qr~On~' W ~th ~@~.~.~s .~0, p~r~u~qde~i try ~h ~t~l~,~o ~c~or~i~6~@~,~qV~i ~n ~p I ~n ~T~, ~t ~i ~I~q"~,~g though ~C~IT ~Pr~oSde~q@.. ~'~i~s~, ~"~"~a~y~l ~, she ~V ~_~~1 ~o~f the rare Plan,, ~, ~e~v protection ~'W~1 fell ~it cha ~1 ~e ~th~l~l~q! are in resource ~V~s~u~r~cd s~inc ~"~'~O~o d~,~q@~@ ~'~u~n to like ~_J~qU ~d~e in the d use to ~m~a~dd~in, ~i~t~l~l~qi~s~c~qn~q@ ~m~a~n ~n~a~n~"~, ~r ~P~l~a~r~, ~c~o zones ~s were me ~a~n ~r~2qV ~l~4~a~-~w ~ff~e~r~,~2q= ~i~n ~1~,~c~o~qn~"~q""~qb~qu~, ~.h ph~i~l~-s~O~P h~i~c~a~l d~qi~, ~n~ia~j~q@~, ch~a~n~q@~e~s~-~h~, to be held at ~e~n~t ~.~,~i~a~g~, I will ~q@~@ a final ~1~,~i~r~tr~i~D~g~Ir~l~, ~q@~, ~e~v~i~s~t ~-~0~,sa, he Thu~, ~1~1~0q&~r~r~i~e~n~u~0qp ~q!~8q@~q, ~l~i~q@~q,~q, ~q'~l~e~qe~qf~"~'~O~"~n~i~yons for ~-~s ~a~et~u~i~l~e~d ~S~I~u`~l~y ~L ~i~" ~u~sd"I n~, Ie~tw"n ~and th~e ~m~u~n~i~t ~"~it said. ~c exists ~b-a ~"~'~q@~,~h~m~e~mp~C~i~can~f~O~qsh~c~o ~fcommittee. members want ~t~o ~r ~i~qcr~id ~s ~m~a~i n I~n~1~1 ~'~n h~i~,~t~on~J~L~@c~o Committee growth ~a~r of town ~g in rural and ard~, ~Db~ert ~a~re, during ~the~s~e ~t~w~o ~se~s~s" ~I~'~d~A ~f~t ~dI' :I Performance ~str~u~men~t~s t~in ~l~b~@ ~s~t~su~id ~i~n~qg ~T~r~i~n~, I 1.,, 6~, ~c a~c~'~,~i~On`p~O,k a' ~z~on~i~t on by ~1~1 ~fT~on ~been~foi n ~"~'~o T~n~a~c~,~, ~, ~a~n~a develop.~f~u ~d of ~S~"~Co~l depend ~S~e~b~.~So Technics was~mI~. ~a~n~d ~w~&t~.~8q@~n~I~.~Y~i~n~,h~e ~@~n ~d~at~ionf~OT h~e ~.~"~. Plan ~u~' the eastern ~6~n th ~4qgn~su~l~t~in~g s~q@t~tB ~25 ~ubl~iche~aring I ~I~a ~'~qfor m~i~t~te~e p~l~i~an~n~, I ITo ~~'~q:~n ~q@~-~Pr~"~p nd uses along the Sac ~,~,~,~,~q,~s~1~,~qs~1~,~a~n~1~n~1~,~0~,~, ~s~el~ec~t~ed ~sm~s~, ~qne~mI~n~,9~q,~p~n~@~4q7 -A ion~te~'~i~on ~n~t~a~l ~0~B~e~,~, Chr~It~k~In~, C~levlend,~c ~1~1~5 ~q'~i ~q'~C~qo~b~qu TO~.~f~i ~T~,~- ~qt~4qU~qT~Y~. ~l~i~, and ~t~qhe At~I~Ont~'~c ~a~~' ~'~"k on run, Biddeford P~l~a ~4qn~l~,~@~O~0qX~l ~. ~p~l~e n ~th ~at ~P~-~qou~l ~dT~n,n~wl r~el~a~t~@~O~n~s to ~S~L ~6qX~i~c ~acc~e~qW ~I~, ~e~n~, th ~"~e~"~T a nature ~p~e~q@~g~o~,~e~r~n ~ag ~T~.~V~i~de the ~T~',~i I. ~i~-~c~l~u~d- ~q@ develop u~niver~s~itY~0~0 ~-~'~qg~,~a~n~o, ~,h~le~o~l~, ~'~h~a~r~c~l~,t ~Ie~s ~' ~O~n~qd~q@ ~T~n~i~l ~e~s in h~e Ting ~t~o ~p~t~h ~v~l~u ~a~b~l ~e ~n~y Ile ~o~nd~qa~v~S~S In' c~c~, ~1~6~1i~i~n~d~; th~e~q"~c ~0~1~) ~' uI~p ~u~m~,~tt_ ~e S ~C~o~R~i~v~e~r ~l~qb~i~l~'~ty of ~G~a~r~y~p~e~l~m ~c~r~,~1~q6~q@~n~S~i"`~qO~qr~d~.~. a ~'w~n ~P~q' previous ~`~q"~.~q@~,h ~e ~'h ~"I~'d ~_~)~,y c~cnc~i~q@~'~2q; n ~h~qi~@~,~i~c C~' Suggestions. ~n~,~., ~re~T~ng, ~b~e~, ~an ~'~T of ~r~iter~v~-~,~- I ~-~1 ~e~4qLw~'~y~' ~dC~ni~n~g ~p~y ~c~o~, ~ven~L ~Ycoastal Or~"~, ~0 T~,~0qr ~O~r~i p~l~a~n~n~,~q,~, h~-~-~I~i0 ~th ~"c ~o~o~,~S ~'~r~i~f~o~, ~I~,~, ~p~re~s~@ ~i~s A Town ~o~n~- ~S~eb~a~-~go Te~c~'h~q@~'~. rner~c~i~o~l ~q"t~,~e~I~. ~b~o~n~g ~qnt ~,~i~.~,~d~@ ~p~u~l ~'~)~q6~NE r ~Nvater~qfr~O ~y~c,~@ ~qMr~i~c h~i~,~g ~r~i~t~S~S.. ~f~o~r ~n~o~l~,Sig of ~C~O~M Don lead consul ~-~s~l ~i~'~s~, uses; ~q@~ark end le d fo wood island nd~r~@~f~f~e~"~'~Io~n w~a ~f~i~t~e ~O~L ~H~O~,~b~o~l ~M~-~S~te~" co~llsic -re ~- ~4q=~h ~t a~d n Or to be ~.~. ~q@~q@~on~l~l ~X~pT~e~qs~s~i~,~c~o~f~"~,~1~1 ~w~n~, I' ~i~n~g~nhe G~-~' ur~b~s~n ~r~e r~e-~n~i~n~'~" ~9~1~, ~n~q@ ~_~0qS~_~C ~8~0T. To ~@~@h~st ~"~I~e~nt should u~n~i~q~u~, ~qbh~e~r~i~qW~e~- ~'~f~r~o~n~'~.~; ~B~@~qi~qd~le~l~@r~qu~l ~l~i~f~"~'~qO~q"~' Study ~q@~8q@ie q~L~iest~qiO~qn~s ~,u~,~c ~P~o~n T~h~e~m~o~n~,~q@~e~qm~c ~1~, 2 B~i~ddef~o~s~qea~p~pe0~o~l "I ~1~1~ur~al ~S~L~' ~d~ev~e~l~o~p~-~e~n ~t~P~,~- ~an a~v~b~l~i~c park ~or~e~a_~S~. ~n ~L~.~0~T~o The ~,~,~i~s ~b~e ~done~7ate~r ~a~ct of ~A~c~t~i- a~2qN~n~y~p nm~ot to .4~q;~8qn ~R~o~u~.B~t~o ~l~u~u~nc~l~u ~g~"~I~. C~O~m land ~and -~8t~e~T C~l. ~nt ~q@ ~t~a~tr~e~l~i ~e~3~1 ch ~n~i ~c ~qTe~side~qi~i~q@~'~I~i~qi f ~'h~e Tiv~er ~t~,`~qr~qi`,~qn~qpD~1 s~p~.The ~&ve~l~- In~'~'T.~-~It~'~n ~n '.'a ~p~- ~H~er~. cross. ~nmen~qw impact? ~T~t~i,~er~e~c~.pe I f~is`h~- ~1~P~. ~.~,d c~h~B~y~ac ~q"~i"~ic ~8q= ~, ~an~d Mn~g a'"'. ~I~l~id5 S~o.~. ~i~,~,e~, ~1~w~l ~D~M~i ~'~@~'~d~. a ~I, d ~.~q;yt~on): Th~e ~U~'~b~'n ~qT~O as ~R. ~I~n D~o~c~qme~T~d e~'d ~f~- c~o~ast~a ~-T~I~qD~O~I~l~qge ~s~n~,~8~P Rive h~e R.~Vt~@ ~.~c~q:~10~1~"' tion~! ~V~, ~q@~qp~qe~is t~h~e~irr~i~p~t~i~ct~o~fater~h CO~-~T~@~,t~q@~q"~.~qI~n~n~.~ing ~b~"~qd~, ~'~.~@~,~'~d ~f~,~2qron ~T~i~v~e~y~e~II ores ~,Community i~"go heI~eSouth ~O~.~"~b ~P~I 'I ~" ~l~v~u~,~q@ ~1~, ~f~u~t~u~y rings ~c~~- fu~lu~i~r~, C~an h~isc~Oas~L~8 ~n~i ~t~q@~e ~v~el~opme~n~, ~D~'~Te~c~L~OaWhat i~qs~eTt~be ~t~e ~m~e~, at ~cl~im~p ~qT~1~1 It 2. ~"~1~. T~q7 ~p a ~o~c~i~m~e~n~d~.~t~i~o ~.~b~a~,~l~'~. ~(~'~a c~, D~c~@~' U: ~f~. Ins- ~q@~,g~ire~o~t~l~tr ~S`~qm~t ~O~,k ~o~qf~th~qe ~q@~-~,~qc~- desired Cher~- ~he cc,".2~l~qi~" ~ST T ~e~, ~n-~4qv~0qw~o~.~,~-~'~.~, ~w~.~t~e~rf~c~n~,~.f~aci I I~- ~cT~u~l ~n~ver~q@~qc~!~qr~bt~w~. ~n~a~l~i~n~s~t~@c~t~ion~l ~r~n~od~a~@ ~f~U~,~LheT devel ~g~h w ~c~ql boundaries int~eT~4 ~f~o~r ~,~I~- ~1~q0~'~e~'uc~o"~@~'o~uth~-~ft~h~l ~S~"~O ~'~c~c~o~m River th~e a~f~r~i~o~n pm~, 3 P~o ~It~'k~h~n~d ~s~ac~c, 3~-Th~e~l more ~2~nt~4q@~, lend use ~loni~qT~i~g ~m~us ~qj~qak~s a b~e ~q:t~*~t ~q!Biddeford . much ~c~@e T C~OT~'~T~" ~i~s ~a~c~t~i~v~e~@ h~e ~Q~" bl~e with int~e, g~T~ity Of the ~n~V use can i~t Lake? ~.dpool -districts ~co~m~p~,~. . ~B~idd~ef~o ~i~d~.~,~. ~y~@~rn~eb~un~k~P~or~l~- to ~r~o~n~o Richmond residents OK comprehensive plan By ELIZABETH COXE reduced density zoning in outlying areas, a repeal henSive plan advisory board. ~K~J Correspondent f the cap on permits issued per year, Sometimes citizens need to be reminded, and ~2qond fewer restrictions on development rights and sometimes forced through regulations, to be ~q0 RICHMOND - A thr~qC~qC~q-~qYear struggle to craft n Commercial growth. responsible, he said. a growth plan for Richmond ended Wednesday as More than 1~q50 people attended the meeting to Some 70 meetings have been held on the plan citizens approved a new comprehensive plan, act on the comprehensive plan article, a solid since 1988, Robbins said. The plan was reviewed complete with some Ilth-hour amendments waste and recycling ordinance, and four appro- by state officials, returned with suggestions suggested by a citizens group. priations to supplement previous votes. and resubmitted, and prepared fo~qr public vote at The plan, described as an official expression of Richmond's new plan was the first in Maine to a special meeting last fall. the community's vision of its future, will guide receive state approval, although there is some Robbins said commentary by George Smith development of new land use ordinances, officials question about how the amended document appearing in the Kennebec Journal just before the said. will be viewed in Augusta. fall meeting generated anger against the Town Manager Nancy Churchill said the plan Consultant Mark E~2qyerman, of Market regulatory nature of the plan, bringing more than does "the sorts of things that help a town become Research in Portland, advised citizens to approve 300 people to the November meeting. well managed and efficient." a plan they were comfortable with and worry later Smith's comments contained incorrect assump- Some citizens who believed the plan was too about state endorsement. tions, Robbins said, but added he was pleased restrictive had developed seven amendments and The plan represented a balance sought between they spurred citizens to finally join the process. explained them in a handout. individual freedoms and the needs of the town, Ey~qerman later said further amendments to the Alice Wh~qe~qe~qler~q.and others in the group proposed said Jay Robbins, chairman of the compre- plan could be made at any time. The interagency Marine Program Working Group, which was informally established to coordinate Maine's marine programs and to assist in the development of the project, met several times. The group's dredging subcommittee drafted a letter for Governor McKernan requesting Maine's Congressional delegation to seek Congressional authorization for a General Investigation along Maine's coast by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The primary focus of the Investigation would be to determine Maine's dredging needs, dredged material disposal options, and related impacts. Prior meetings between the dredging subcommittee and the Corps produced agreement that such an investigation be requested. A Corps-State agency team will be established to guide the project if funding is provided. The newly re-established Cabinet-level Land and Water Resources Council (see next page) created a formal Marine Policy Committee as one of six new standing committees. The Marine Policy Committee consists of representatives from DMR, DEP, SPO, DECD, IF&W, BPL, MGS, and DOT, and supersedes the informal marine Program Working Group. The Commissioner of Marine Resources serves as chair and the State Planning Office provides staff support. The Council requested that the Committee meet monthly and charged it with coordinating State marine policy, resolving conflicts between agencies, identifying and investigating emerging marine policy issues, and serving as a ready resource for the Council to respond rapidly to issues as needed. Task 4 -- Program Managemen 't & Public Education A. Public Education Initigtives (1) Coastweek & Coastal Cleanups -- The Coastal Commmunications Coordinator began contacts with corporate donors, with regional coordinators for Coastal Cleanup, and with a designer regarding the schedule and content of this year's poster, and worked with Maine Audubon to coordinate Coastweek/Cleanup promotional efforts with Audubon's Sea Fair (an environmental fair planned for the second day of Coastweek). (2) Shore Stewards Program -- The NEWS second issue of the Shore Stewards Program newsletter, "The Ripple Effect" (see IN BRIEF Exhibit E-9) was mailed to over 600 VJ individuals and groups along the coast. Grant for coastal waters 11h r/f I AUGUSTA - The Shore Stewards Program The Shore Stewards Advisory Committee has awarded S3,650 to five community groups to protect Maine's coastal waters, awarded $3,650 in the first round of local The stewards program is a new public-private :@rtncFrshup administered by th Maine Commu- grants for projects including volunteer ty 0 ndation and the Vaine Coastal Pro am . water-quality monitoring, an estuary lillwas iormed in 1990 to offer information and anciall support to citizen groups interested in a grade school poster protecting Maine's coastal waters. traveling display, fin During the next five years, an endowment of contest, and a middle-school curriculum on $500,000 will b built to fund local grants. Contribu tions freom foundations, corporations, pollution of coastal shellfish beds. The and individuals are being sought. The first groups to receive funds are the Shore Stewards Coordinator helped organize Brunswick Marine Resources Committee, the Damariscotta River, Association, the Georges the first Water Quality Monitoring Fair, River Tidewater Association, the Vittery Conser. vation Commission, and the Woolwich Shellfish which attracted more than 250 people. C4aservation Conunission. More information on the Shore Stewards Trust Fund or local nts program can be obtained from the Sbc!@: Stewards Program, State 13 House Station 38, Augusta 04333. or by calling 299-3261. LAND A14D WATER RESOURCES COUNCIL MEMBERS April 1991 (Chair: Cal C. Edwin Meadows, Commissioner H. Rollin Ives, Commissioner Areas: Coordination/facilit Department of Conservation Dept. of Human Services Priorities of Sec. 3 station #22 Station #11 Areas (propo.8"d 289-4900 289-2736 Alternate: Sue Bell Alternate: Don Hoxie Watcr-Resvr-c-a*-Coznm-1 (Cha i r: De (Staff: St (289-3826) Areas: Wellhead Protecti un T Dean C. Marriott, Commissioner Water R esources M ana Dept. of Environmental Dana Connors, Commissioner River Resource.,.,. Mana Protection Dept. of Transportation T,akp Policy Develop Station #17 Station #16 289-7688 289-2551 (Chair: Wi (Staff: Jo Alternate: Paula Clark Alternate: Paul Minor Areas: Section 309 Asses9me (582-8740) (289-3131) ocean Resourcen Marine Debris Lynn Wachtel, Commissioner John Jaworski DredJng Policy Deve Dept. of Economic & Executive Director Auaculture Permitti Community Development Androscoggin valley COG Submerged bands Station #59 125 Manley Road (Chair: Ly 289-2656 Auburn, me. 04210 (Staff: Ka Alternate: Kay Rand Alternate: Areas: Resources, Coordinat (289-6800) Elery Keene, Director Feedbmck/ueries fro North Kennebec RPC Next round planning Sec. 309 Assessments William i . Brennan, 7 Renton Avenue Natu ral Hazards Commissioner Winslow, Me. 04902 cumu lative Inpa Dept. of marine Resources (873-0711) Station #21 Hydr_=X_ejjg_ensin Comm. (Chair: R 289-2291 Dr. Gregory N. Brown (Staff: B Areas: Coordination & polic Alternate: Lewis Flagg Vice President Resource uestions i for Research and Public Service William J. Vail, Commissioner 201 Alumni Hall Dept. of Inland Fisheries University of Maine (Staff: Wa wildlife Orono, Me. 04469 Areas: Program coordination Station #41 581-1504 Ecological Rese 289-3371 Alternate: Natural Heritag Alternate: Fred Burley Gregory White, Director Endangered Spec Environmental Studies Center GIs initiative & Pro Richard R. Silkman, Director 11 Coburn Hall Sec. 309 Assessments State Planning Office University of Maine Wetlands (propo Public Access ( Station #38 Orono, Me. 04469 Special Area Ma 289-3261 (581-1490) HarXtt1ng"cvc1oPmLent--oDn- (Cha (Staff: C r Bernard W. Shaw, Commissioner Carol Michel, Director Areas: Promotion of indu t Department of Agriculture Land & Water Resources Council Increasing Value-Ad Food and Rural Resources State Planning office Coordination of mar station #28 Station #38 Expansion of market 289-3871 289-3261 Alternate: Esther Lacognata Lan"-* -Reulalin-j,=m. (Propose (Staff: (289-3511) Areas: Regulating, permitt Enforcement Options Sec. 309 Assessment siting Of Coas Facilitie ~0 Proposed marina divides Bass Harbor Tourist industry, fishing industry in a culture clash By William C. Hid~1.y ~qV~; ~P ~qf BASS HARBOR (A De~8qZ~q@~.~4q@~,~'~q@~q!~' 0 ~P ~Z sardine cannery and sees an op rtun~ity ~ n Papen looks at the o~ld Underwood ~po to make money - a place to build a "boa- ~el" and marina for tourists and their yachts. ~1p~152;3048;48;52q& Fisherman Gene Lawson looks at the boarded-up factory - at its peeling paint and weathered wharf - and sees recent history repeated. Once again, the tourist industry is muscling out the fishing industrv. >~8qC~2qt~8qe~4qd But ~L~@awson and 65 other fishermen who work out of Bass Harbor are drawing the line They are fighting the Von Papen ~l~q~p~l~@~- ~1~@~1~1~, project, hoping to set a pre~e~w~i- ~n~0qA~e ~1~1~, ~, ~, gve fishing ~l~l~@~r~e~t~:~L~s ~t~1~w ~L~i~n~d~c ~C d ~L~a'~ds ~4qT ~s~ub~i~l~l~C~r~9~c ~'~0~1~.~1~c ~@~, ~d~,~- to ~qg~r~a"~'~, of Ill ~1~1 ~, ~)~n~l~v ~i~t ~0~)~, ~2q0 ~1~3~1~11~7~q0~L a land ~C ~qB ~6qT ~@c~lte~if~l~l~o~l~lt ~1~,~3~@ I-~,~ib~i~-~n~e~rg"~' ~' ass ~ql~z~qi~l ~e I n~o~t ~k~l~n~1`~C~Z~"'~)~"" ~l~qj~o~qd.~q@~q!~i ~. ~q@ or ~l~l~qi~u 1' ~0~1 ~t~qh~e (IS ~'~0 ~@r~o~ieC~, ~" 0 .~1~0, ~t~i~s~I~n~n PC Jere ~(~i~t ~t~h~e are, pn~@~e~O~. ~S ~q4~q4B~ass Wit D~qO~C~"~t 1~@~%l~a~l~l ~U~qe~s ~pr~o 'Cis late, ~t~h~_~l~t~l~f ~~qV~q@~l~c ~"~N~' ~C~( ~i~c it ~a~l~, not, ~~ ~_~C~1~5~10~1 ~@~5~1~C ~"o ~s~t~l~p~l~l ~, ~t ~'~l~ce~@ ~-~C ~S~!~, Marina decision I~~, ~Y~I~T~I~IJJ~I~I~4q@ ~qC~'~, praised ~F~E ~p~r~,~p~o~@ Underwater land ~q4 ~oll to ~1~)~1~0~c~@~, ~ge~n~C~ protected by state a ~p~r~c~2p~ a~l()~n~@~, By WILLIAM C. HIDLA~Y ~Z~@ ~d~c ~o~l~, Associated Press Writer ~r~1~; ~0~1)~n~l~e~n~k~s ~c~o~'~,~I~s~@ ~I~'~Z~i~p~e~i~l~, BASS HARBOR - Local fish- A ~e~,~,~l~s~, ~erm~en won a victory Tuesday in their ~Q~1~1 Oros battle to block a proposed marina when a state agency rejected the a precedent for project, setting ~B~,~4~i~y similar developments along the ~0 o ~[ ~3"' 2~, , Maine ~c a~s~t. Ed Von Pap~-n, an entrepreneur ~I~~)~Q~s~c a ~-~2~6-~100~1~' from Massachusetts, envisioned ~6q7`~- ~7 slim ~1~1~V~;~ ~'~1~1~,~I~) ~, ~s~t~s turning an abandoned sardin~e-can- ~q- I ~_~ ~~, toll ~ning factory and wharf at the mouth ~j ~Csin 1~10 ~S~t~e~r~' of Bass Harbor o Mo D r~i ~W~, un~' ~'~ee ~U~k ~l~o~c~a ~ ~qP ~,~t~r~e~l~," Island into a manna for 84 boat, I)CC ~i~: with a 26~-room "boat,, " for tourists ~b 'Ale ~.~'~I~l~k~qm~, to, out ~n~o~k~s~e ~i cruising th~e coast. But local lobs~term~en opposed the car ~5~S~h~i~n~qg project, fearing they would be driven Fishing boats are moored in Bass Harbor Monday during a snow storm. Fisherman there won ~t~qWr battle to collie ~t~h~i out of the harbor by wealthy tourists block a proposed marine - background at left - when a state agency rejected the project. ~l~e~s~d~a~@ II who don't care for the noise and ~o~t ()rise smell that comes with fishing. Bass Harbor, a village of about of Design Service engineering con- these provisions of the law into s rTuesday, the state Department of 400 people that is part or the town of su~l~u~ints of Portland. consideration and act accordingly." b~l~ic Von a~iCon~s~erva~Lion~'s Bureau of Public Tremont, is located at ~th~e southern Ware estimated that Von Pap~en In rejecting the lease, the bureau lion of ~t), ~r~r~L~ands rejected the application of tip of Mount Desert Island, the already had spent ~$300,000 on the ruled that the proposed marina "will ~-~1eVon P~apen's group, Mount Desert home of Acadia National Park and project. If completed, he said. the directly and indirectly interfere with ~C~S~C~I ~r~sReally- Trust, to lease the sub. wealthy summer tourist colonies like. project would cost between ~$4 fishing," destroy a small area of sub merged, state-owned land beneath,. Ba~r Harbor. ~- ~ ~@~; million and ~$6 million. . lobster habitat and create hazards on the proposed marina's floating boat ~ I Conkling contends that fishermen "I think developers are going to foggy days to 'fishermen from sups. ~: ~-~, ~. have been driven out of ~the island's - look two, three and, four times incr~ea~sed-boat traffic. Ile decision set a precedent other harbors by marinas catering to before they invest in property like It also -found that th~e~-~q,~q:~p~roj~ec~t because it was the fir t test of the summer yacht owners., this," W~qi~qr~qj~qe 'said Tuesday. "Now* would hurt ~qthe~q"oper~qa~qtions of C.H. land bureau's determination to "The fishing industry is virtually you've set p~q@e~qo~qedent and if this Rich Co., a lobster- and fish-b~qu~qyi~2qq enforce new provisions in the state's gone from Bar Harbor, S~qca~ql Harbor comes up again in a small waterfront business adjacent to the abandoned Submerged Lands Law aimed at and Northeast Harbor and it is area, the Bureau of Public Lands has factory, and lead two local bo~qat-r~qe- protecting commercial waterfronts, dramatically reduced in Southwest to look at this decision." pair yards to shift their business ~qof~2q@~q@~q,~qci~qi~qs~ql~ql said. Harbor," Co~qnkling said. "Bass Under changes made in 1989, the away from serving fishermen to ~q1. the big picture, I think this Harbor is the last working water- Submerged Lands Law directs the serving only pleasure boaters. decision will mean to fishermen up front on Mount ~6qP~qe~0qt~8qi~8qw~'~q.~q.~q1s~ql~qa~qnd. bureau to grant a lease ~-fo~qr.sub~q- pite ~qth~qe.ob~qj~qec~qtio~qns of ~qi~qt~qical~ql and down the coast that the state of P~qc~qn~q*od merged land only if ~qth~qe project will ~qr ~qan town officials supported Maine is serious about protecting But ~4qi~qx~qm~4qiu~qlt~qant~8qi working for~q'V~qo~qn not unreasonably interfere with the project as a way of expanding their industry even in a down cycle," Pap~qe~qn disputed that contention and 'fishing or other existing m~qi~qarine uses Tremont's tax l~qi~q@~qa~qse mind making use said Philip W. Conkling, executive ~q. said Tuesday he plans to appeal the ofthear~qea." ~q' of the abandoned Underwood can- director of the Island Institute, a decision in Superior Court, raising It al~qso~q*s~qt~qipula~qtes that ~qth~qe~q'propo~qs~qed ning factory. The red cannery non-profit group that promotes the the prospect for a drawn-out legal project must not "unreasonably building, its paint peeling and its balanced use of Maine's islands and battle. They also said he would diminish the availability of services wharf rotting, has been vacant since coast. continue seeking the two other and facilities necessary for commer- 1978. Conkl~qin~qg~q, whose group sided with permits he needs for th~qe project cial marine activities," such as Tr~qemoi~qt~qt Town Manager Gretchen Ila the Bass Harbor fishermen against from the state D=men~qt of boat-repair yards. Strong said the decision to deny the the pro~2q)~qect, said the decision would Environmental Prot and the "This is the first case that we have lease was disappointing. make at more difficult to build U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. used those provisions," said Stephen "~qIbe~qre is not a lot of business in marinas in about two dozen other 'Ilia was a ~qv~qemendous invest- Ofiv~qeri~q, resource administrator with the town of Tremont," Strong said, fishing harbors in Maine, from ment of out-of-pocket money by Mr. the Bureau of Public Lands. "What "I think it would end up being good Swans Island to Cundys Harbor on Von P~qap~qen for which he gets no that does, as a precedent, is it says for the town. I think a lot of it is just Casco Bay. return," said Bob Ware, the owner the bureau is really going to take resistance to change." 15 ~0 7 ~C4 ~q6~. ~0 ~U~, ~V ~'~n ~qu~qt~-~qs~0qo~'~0qi ~9 ~'~6qs ~C~, 0 ~4qo~4qe ~,~t~i~r ~.~S~1~1~- ~8qV~q_ ~O~@ ~0 ~0 ~qs~6qA~6qA~- ~i to. ~0~1 ~V~; ~u~n IV Working Waterfront Protected b Bass Harbor Marina Denial ~2qY ~:~J~:~7~5~L~-~-`k~N~,~P ~lnap~rc~c~c~dcntsc~iting~casc~,~i~t~l~iimpli~- time into ~th~e future." Unclcrchangc,~.~@ made c~~i~on~s~f~or ~i~t~i~c ~c~mir~e c~o~.~!s~@~. ~t~h~e Bureau of ~to the Submerged Lands L~a, in 19S~@~-~'~. ~"unr~e~3~- ~g~; pro,,o~s~cd d~ev~el pm n~i~s must no~t Public ~L~an~ds~;B~PL) in mid~~N~I~ar~ch denied ~~ ]~,~:~:~'~z ~ic~, It ~r~n~'~,~i~r~!~n~n~' d~c~,~c~l~op~c~7 ~i~r, ~s~o~m~H~~, ~in~t~er~f~cr~qi~c~) ~, itch ~f~ish~;n~,~,~@~:~Pr ~(~,~i~t~)~,- ~c, ~-~S ~P~;~:~r~h~or, a rural f~is~!~@~jn~Z ~j~)~L~t~c~@ ~o~n tile ~i,~m~i~, marine uses 0~1 ~t~h~e ~a~r~., ~:~. I he ~J~u ~c~^~@ ~D~c~,~c~- ~I~c~as~@~@ ~4qV ~P ~;~~~!. ~.~1 ~L ~lh~l~~@~@ Of ~"~l~.~i~t~i~l~l~ ~' ~~1 ~!~S~;~@~r~d~ :~i~~ko~g ~an~is~BP~I-~th~c~au~th~ori~t~@ ~toc~i~cn~, ~@~@ood ~to ~Kn~o~, ~Lh~c ~s~i~n~i~c is ~L~r~@ in., to ~L~I~ML ~"u~nr~c~aso~n3b~]~, diminish ~th~c ~a~,~;~i~i~I~abi!- ~@ ~z ~- ~-~1~c~, ~0~1~, ~k~yol~'~s~er~vi~cc~and~" ~_~q1~2qN-~, I ~f~ac i I i I ics for c~om m~er~L i ~a~t ~0~1~, A ~4qV ~~~,~, I ~co~, marine ~a~c~ti~t ~n~i~c~s~." such ~a~s ~b~o~a~t~y~a~rd repair ~-~,~; ~4q% ~6~n 0~, ~d~q, ~n~l~c~@ to m~c~lrir~t~@~s~- said Th~c~r~cs~z~i i~th h~er hu~sb~a~ndM~aur~i~c~e ~@ ~ards. ~~h~.~,~,~-ho~:~i~l~on~, Vol (I o,n th~e C~H. Rich C~omp~:~iny that whole- In r~ejcc~u~m~, Vo~n P~ip~c~i~l~'s proposal, ~%, ~j1c, lobsters, shrimp. scallops and other ~BP~L found ~Lh~a~' the project "will directly s~~f~o~c~,d for a large number of Bass Harbor and indirectly interfere with fishir~0qt in a ~l~p ~ ~l ~0~0~-~1~, (~I~l ~qV~, ~0 ~0~4 ~qT~P ~~hcrm~en. number of ways. First. B~P~L~'s ~f~irdin~g dc- Y ~g~a~ti~v~e impacts ~to ~th~e CH. In Ju~I~x of 19~S~k) Mount Desert Really scribed ~th~e nc~g ~t~o ~r~us~t and one OfiL~S p~a~@ ~inc~rs~. Ed Von P~ap~en Rich Company as significant and cited ~th~e of ~~las~s~3chusct~Ls, 3pplic~d to ~BP~L for a "incompatibility between a marina and a ~0~e~. ~0 ]case of 2 acres of Maine's sub~uidal prop- working, fishing-related business.~" The ~0q*~'~C~" ~4 ~~y in Bass Harbor ~to dredge a basin for an Bureau further found ~tha~t"~the projec~icou~ld ~6qt ~4~slip marina and boat launching ramp. also preclude future use of the harbor by ~e ~1~0~; ~@~q9 ~0 ~'~14 0 her plans of tile dc~,~c~I~cp~cr~*s c~a~J~l~cd for M~aricul~turc, Products L~td~., which is con- ~6 cc,-. ~0 ~1~1~0 ~6qs ~t~i~l~. tile construction of 26 room boa~Lcl and ICMP~]~BLingasmo~]~Lcondi~b~aninga~r~K~]u~-ans- ~c~o ~i~r~p ~0 ~V~; ~0~"~qs parking facilities ~f~OTcruisin~g ~touris~Ls~a~i~th~e port facility." Finally, the Bureau described ~1~P ~_~q% ~@ ~0 ~P ~1~,~% - the project's unreasonable nega~i~qtiv~qe effects ~(~9 A Id Underwood Canning FaC~qL~q0r~qy site. A~qi though ~qth~qe Project was opposed by the on the neighboring b~qoa~qtyards, L~qit~i~ql~qle Island ~q0~q0 town's Harbor COMM ~qAI~qC~qC and byov~qer4~q0~q0 Marine and Bass Harbor Marine, which ~6q1~q6 ~qW registered voters who si~qz~qn~qc~ql a petition would be forced for economic reasons to objecting to ~qth~qe project's impact on fisher. shift their businesses away from servicing ~q0 men a~qr~q@d on the character of the town. th~qe the fishing ~qf~qi~qr~qc~qt to servicing recreational ~q0~q,~q.~16qs ~q1~q1 project won narrow approval of ~qth~qe plan- boats. ning board before being reviewed by state "I think it is additionally significant," authorities at BPL and DEP. said Conk~qlin~qg. "that BP~qLfr~qarn~qed this deci- A group of Bass Harbor's fishermen sion in ~qL~qermsof~qLhecumul~qa~qdveimpac~qLstha~qL and commercial businesses on the Bass have already occurred in other fishing har- ~P~_ ~0qe_~.~4qA ~1~qW Harbor waterfront requested assistance bors within the Mount Desert region, be- from ~qth~qe Island Jns~q6~q1U~q1~qC ~qt~qo present their C~q2USC this establishes a broader precedent." ~c~o~n~c~qems in Augusta. ~q"Pa~qn of ~qthe reason According toThomasMoffison~q,~qB~qP~qL~q's ~t~h~e Ins~qULU~qIC agreed ~qt~qo get involved is that Director, Von Pap~qcn has riled for an ad- this proposal is ~qthe first ease ~qt~qo be reviewed ministrative reconsid~qer~qa~qdo~qn of ~qt~qhe deci- under ~qt~qhe ne~qw Submerged Lands Ac~qt~q,~q" sion and a spokesman for ~qt~qhe developer has said Philip C~qonkling~q. "and therefore it indicated that a court chal~qknge will fol- would set important precedents for a long low. 16 Participants heard talks and tested different water-quality monitoring methods and equipment in hands-on workshops. Evaluations of the Fair were enthusiastic, and plans already are laid for follow-up workshops in 1992. (3) Gulf of Maine Program -- The Coastal Communications Coordinator contacted a long list of organizations in Maine, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Massachusetts and New Hampshire to update and verify information for the forthcoming Gulf-Links; also, worked on format for the publication, and on other new Gulf of Maine publications (e.g. an executive summary of the monitoring program and the Action Plan.), and arranged for a volunteer to assist with the Gulf of Maine Program. (4) Other -- A new Coastal Program traveling display and brochure on Nonpoint Source Pollution were prepared in cooperation with the DEP's Nonpoint Source Program. (See "You are the Solution to Coastal Pollution," reproduced below.) The general Coastal Program display was used at the weekend-long Fisherman's Forum in Rockport, ME; an Earth Day Fair in Boothbay, ME; and the Northeast Environmental Conference at Tufts University in Medford, MA. Work was begun on a new Coastal Program brochure. Finally, it was arranged for the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program to publish 5,000 copies of Maine's Charting our Courae, an activity guide for grades 6-12 on water quality in the Gulf of Maine with revisions for Massachusetts. B. OCS Oversight -- Coastal Program staff attended a three- day meeting of the Dept. otthe Interior's OCS Policy Committee. The major items of discussion were the Draft Proposed Comprehensive Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Oil Resource Mangement Program, 1992-1997, and the Dept. of Energy's National Energy Strategy. Coastal Program staff prepared comments on the draft proposed program for the Governor's signature (see Exhibit E-8). C. Other (1) Estuary Project Follow-up -- Reports published under Maine's previous award for improved estuarine management were distributed to conservation commissions, teachers, planning boards and concerned individuals. Technical assistance was given to conservation groups interested in promoting town support for regional management of coastal watersheds. (2) Enforcement options Study -- Formal re-establishment of Maine's interagency Land & Water Resources Council at a meeting on April 9, 1991 (see page 14) now will give the enforcement options study the needed status, attention and participation. Among a number of Council Standing Committees agreed upon will be an environmental law enforcement committee. The immediate order of business for that committee will be to complete the enforcement options study, with staff support from SPO. 17 YO Ll Information vlbl from the Information available are the Solution i Nnpint Source from the Maine Coastal Program P11LJti Program on water uality, to - -1, Nonpoint Source Pollution, R con:7nl Han" and related coastal issues: Coastal Pollution iook for Nla;ne Timz)er Ha vesting Booklets: 0-,erations: Best Nlianagertient Prac- iceci Available !rom the Ma;ne - The Estuary Book-A primer describ- Fuest Service, SHS L22, Auusta, ing Maine estuaries, threats to coastal A simple guideto waterualitv and what can be done -Point Source Non prctect our coastal resources & Se,4;men Cor-L:01 Fan- Pollution 7 Deveo-:,men- Best ,Ianage- The Estutuv Profile Series-profiles of 19 Maine estuaries; available sin!v and what it means `ractices or as a set from the to Maine's Nvaterways 7 V,:aershec: ;,n Action Guide to lrnprov;ng Maine Waters Coasf-Links: A Resource Guide to Maine s Coastal, Organization; Charting Our Course: An Actr-'% Guide 'or Grades 6-,, 2 on Wa er uai,, in the Gul o 'Maine Sight"n Ls: A Listing of Maine's Coas:a:/,Iarne V; Jeo Rez_-_::1-es C r o: a i n e: 1,-, s ta in in S fA IV -01' Heritage conn Ir Sho e StewaTdsi Help save ou:- coast- An ediucational d:s-)av 7reoa-e` :ne, one :-ec a' a Maine Coastal Pr o ; 7 Caii t,e Mame Coasta' Frograzi at: 4'ne State 280-5261 o, wrize: SHS3S, Aueusta,ME Mal P*ann;ng 0;:1C- 0, Sfa- Ho,,se V 2- -3261 2C -7 6a2k2=0i 6A6ne S(2Au2f2ion'2Io '4C8OASTALP4OL2LI-40 I2c Yes, Ycu are" Whe-r,e: %-o,-: !:N e inlan,4 - Sko",he im zan or Dover- Fox crof t, Limestone, Bethel- or on the coast- Dar-nariScotta, Castine, Stonington, Br-1!ns%,:ic!K-%,o,: can hcln protect and improve the uality of coastal waters by thoughtful use of the )and and waters around vou Individual actions and changes in the way we do things can improve local water uality and water uali-y downstream Polluted inland waters eventualiv reach the sea-flov,-ing down brooks and creeks to rivers, and into estuaries (coastal tidal rivers) and bays along the coast Our waters are threatened by pollution from the way we use the land and waters This pollution, carried by stormwaters, ground waters, and land run-off, to lakes, rivers, estuaries, bays and eventually the open sea, is called Nonpoint Source (NPS) Pollution Noripoint Source Pollution is a gm What YOU can do A few ideas 6gn07g Problem in Maine Waters 1 Maintain your car Fix oil drips and An estimated 187,000 acres of inflate tires properly to reduce wear S,ounciwater auifers are polluted by Where does Nonpoint Source 2 Pick up litter Trash on,the roadside NPS pollution and fail to meet safe Pollution come from? or street may wash down the rivers to drinking water standards Leaking the sea underground oil tanks and improper Of course, every pollutant has a source, 3 Maintain septic systems Bacteria and agricultura! chemical applications are but non-point source pollution comes from nutrients can leach from poorly main- potential sources of contamination to many dispersed sources that are difficult to tained septics and pollute groundwater, drinking water wells pinpoint Prevention is the best method to rivers, lakes and estuaries Over 1,000 miles of streams in reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution 4 Garden responsibly Apply fertilizers Maine are seriously contaminated due Land uses contribute to Nonpoint sparingly Consider alternatives to Source Pollution Erosion from construction to NPS pollution, including run-off sites plowed fields, logging operations and pesticide and herbicide use from roads, parking lots, land clearing 5 Stop erosion Spread straw on bare onerat6ions and construction sites other activities which bare the earth, strips earth around landscaping or constTuc- Thousands of acres of potential away topsoil and adds sediment to inland and tion sites shellfish beds along the coast are closed coastal waters Parking lots, driveways and 6 Always dispose of boat wastes prop- to harvesting because of N4PS bacterial roads add oil and other pollutants to storm erly Use shoreside pump-out and trash pollution from land run-off, ma0Ifunc- water run-off Malfunctioning septic systems collection stations instead of overboard tioning septic systems and other and livestock yards may add nutrients and disposal sources bacteria to waters 7 If you are involved in construction, Manv harbors along the 11,1aline i Water uses also add pollutants Engine logging, or farming activities, contact the coast, ciogg'ed with recreational boat oils and gas from boats at a marina and nutri- Department of Environmental Protection ts ents from fish farms add to coastal pollution NPS Program for free booklets on Best each summer, have experienced poor water uality from overboard dis- Management Practices, that reduce NPS charges of sewage from boat toilets (3) Section 309 Enhancement Program -- Coastal staff reviewed draft guidelines and forwarded comments to OCRM. A detailed working outline was developed for the assessment reports, following the draft guidelines, and filled in with available information gathered on each assessment area. A Notice and Coastal Priorities Survey (reproduced below) were mailed to about 400 coastal town officials, coastal newspapers? coast-related organizations and conservation groups to obtain public participation in establishing priorities between the nine assessment areas. Standing Committees of the Land & Water Resources Council (see page 14) will advise on priorities and review draft assessments and strategies. (4) New Section 306/309 Funding Application -- Coastal staff developed a draft budget and application for August 1, 1991 to July 31, 1991 in coordination with participating agencies. OCRM comments and further guidance on the draft were being awaited as of the end of the reporting period. (5) CZ521 Time Extension and Reprogramming -- As indicated in the DECD's Quarterly Report we are now anticipating a need for a time extension and reprogramming for Maine's CZ521 Award, in connection with the municipal grant program and other matters. A request will be submitted shortly for OCRM approval. (6) Wells dredging, Sears Island, access improvements, aquaculture and other miscellaneous topics See clippings and other material reproduced below. 19 STATE OF MAINE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT JOHN, R McKTRNIANI J@@ STATE PLANNING OFFICE RICHARD H. SILKIVIAN 0 OVE R r,: c', R DIRECTOR ANNOUNCING AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE ON' THE MAINE COAST By returning the enclosed survey, you can influence public management of Maine's resources. The Maine Coastal Program would like to hear your concerns and what, if any, changes you would like to see to state programs, regulations, policies, laws or other initiatives. This information will be used to draft assessment reports on priority issues. These reports will characterize the problems identified, outline goals, and recommend further action.'Please note on the survey form if you would like to receive copies of any assessment reports. The reports will be available for review by the end of the summer. Please return the survey by May 30 to: Maine Coastal Program, Maine State Planning Office, Station 38, 184 State Street, Augusta, ME 04333. For more information, call Jenny Ruffing at 289-3261, or write the Maine Coastal Program. This survey is part of an effort to enhance the management of Maine's coastal zone, pursuant to the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act as amended in 1990 (Sec. 309). 40, VIM KA 184 STATE STREET, STATE HOUSE STATION 38, AUGUSTA, 20 AINE 04333 TEL. (207)289-3261 FAX 5756 Name/Organization: Address: -Phone: By MAY 30th, please return to: J. Ruffing, Maine Coastal Program, State Planning Office 184 State Street Station 38, Augusta, I@E 04333 .......... am . . ...... . . ..... ..... ...... .. ......... ............ . ......... ... .-... ............ .............. ...... ............. .... .. ............. . ....... ..... ... ...... . ........ ..... . .......... ....... . ....... ........... ........ ........ .-.... ................ ...... .............. ........ . ........ .. . ............. .. ................... ..... ...... ............. ........... ........ . . ................:... ............. ............... .......... ..........-..... ... .. ........... .................. . ........... X.4 Fn . . .. ... . .... ....... x.... . ........... .... .. .... .. . ..... ... . .. .. ... .... ..... "heck to Indicate your receive level of concern Why? an assessmept Issues high med low (Continue on reverse side if necessary) repert Coastal Wetlands. Threats to wetland & estuarine natural habitats & functions from filling, development, pollution, & other human activities. Coastal Hazards. Threats to life & property from coastal storms, erosion & sea-level rise; enforcement of land use restrictions in hazardous areas. Public Access. The need for improved public access to the coast for recreation, harvesting of resources, & other purposes: Marine Debris. Threats to water quality, fisheries & wildlife from plastics & other litter in the marine environment, Cumulative Adverse Impacts of Growth. The need for State & local land use controls to minimize adverse envITOTUnental impacts of coastal growth & development. Special Management Areas. The need to designate certain areas for special management to protect unique or especially valuable features or resources. Ocean Use Management. The need to plan to ensure sustained availability of ocean resources & to minimize conflicts between different users. Location of Energy-related and Government Facilities. The need for better policies & procedures for siting federal government facilities (e.g. military facilities, post offices, weather stations) & energy-related facilities (e.g. radio- active waste storage sites, power stations, waste to energy trash incinerators, hydro-electric facilities) which are of greater than local significance. I I Fresh and Tidal Water Pollution. The need to reduce coastal water pollution from sewage treatment plants, industry, stormwater run-off, boating, agriculture, urban development, roads, timber harvesting & other sources. Other Issues. (Please describe-continue on reverse side if necessary) 21 May 1991 Public Notice US AMY S Public Notice. 13 111: May 6, 1991 of Englneer Application No: File No: New England Division In Repty Flefw To: Operations Directorate. Navization Division COORDINATE CRlo 1 -0 -- " -1-1-1 MAINMYAWE nUMGMC OF THE 8 FODT ElTIRAMM CHAR4EL 1 5000 f " I"', "" I' Tl'o WELIS HARBOR FEDEM NAVIGATION PROLTECT b-- "-.I. WEI.LS, KkME Army Corps of Interested parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Engineers, New England Division, plans to perform -work in the RR navigable waters of this Division under the provisions of Section 404 G'3' of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-217) and to authorize such E work in accordance with Regulation 33 CER 209.145. Attachment NO. 1 5- -E lists pertinent laws, regulations, and directives. .......... 0 and 6=e of Work: The proposed Federal work Involves =6Vt6Le dredging of the tS foot entrance dumel at the Wells Harbor Federal navigation project. Maintenance dredging of about 15 000 cubic yards of clean sand will remove shoals from the 8-ft MA SSACIUSE I IS J't-vt. '.I channel between the bend in the jetty and deep water in the Atlantic. ...... . (Attachmert No. 2) The work will be performed by the Government owned special purpose dredge CURR11= contingent on availability of the dredge, all reuired approvals, and funds. The dredge will remove the material C "Y from the bottom and dispose of it in a nearshore site off of Wells 3 Beach. The work will be performed. during a two week period in June S or July. Work is similar to that performed last year. LOCATION 6 Additional Information: Additional information may be obtained from Ed O'Dormell, Navigation Branch, 424 Trapelo PoM, Waltham, MA 02254-9149; telephone number (617) 647-8375. Collect calls will be accepted workdays between 9-00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. 7 71 @r FARSHORE DISPOSAL SITE t 7) 7 7. 0 ~0 Tell's stands a~l~qa~ne On ~qh~~l~qr~qbor ~qc~1~8qredg~q, ~h~ ~~@~~@~~c~a~fi~a~l~l b~, ~,~,~a~,~, ~l~Igh~, ~a~l~v~a ~e~s~uh~t,~li~l~i~ld ~,~r~h~e ~"~'~u~'~l~3he It' ~I",~n ~1~, ~o~fI~th~e ~o~i~l~,A ~a~g~o ~I~, a ~"~'~w~n ~I' that it, WELLS ~qY~qC~qC~.~T ~q@~E~p While h "~i"P~li~c~k~In~i ~,to ~r~q/~,~q/~? I ~w king ~0C Said be~. ~q! tire ~th~e '~es ~h~ad ~, ~P~8q% itself ~T~h ~@ on ~th~e ~h ~6q% that ~th ~i~n~@ C~a~u~gh~l~cfull~, ~c~h~,~, ~40r~ he middle gain ~f~l~"~L~l~.~, ~ack~el ~u~l ~,~.~1 in ~f~a~l~v~a~, ~0tell a Size Of the I "~I~c~i~l~"'I ~ad~t~n~I~I~(~o~.~qd ~U~l~'~O~n~. So at the ~c~e to ~e~o~l~n~;~)~o ~r~i~n~ed~g~e ~q@~n~h accord ~O~.Army C ~)~'~I~I~V~L~' harbor ~-~, Over ~th~e d~r~ed, I" ~l~e~c~l~o~l~en Ed Don,,,, ~OrPS Protect h~a~J. ~f~i~t~' ~'~S~o~l ~th~e ~1~1~1 111;, last ~M~q; Of dealc ~'~m~J~'. ~:~1 the ~off~, ~2p~p~p~p~p~1p~p~p~~Y ~1~10~1 be ),tiler ~'~a~t rule Orp, ~.-said Wed c- ~E~" ~M~II, ~(~"~'~) bill~, ~j~;~l~@~f ~@~c~,~,~L so ~"~1~4~1 ~j~/~)~p~j ~p~s ~I~f ~E ~.easy Over an I ~u~1~1~I~C~"~l~, ~) ~qh~.~.~c In~, ~h~"~9~1 ~l~e~, a ~s~4~n~d~b ~1~1~-~1da~y. ~i~l~l ~)~,~l~d h -It ~d~o~, can, Of ~1~1~9~,n~e~er~,~. ~, and file Or I ~I~l~l, the $tat Wit' the Sit dow, ~.~1~p~p~"~"~ .'a Ill- d talk ~O~?~Jd be willing ~1~0 ~8~11 1 ~8 ~:~1~1 for ~th~e~d~o~p~c~d ~'~@~'~)u ~dresult ~i~n "'It ~;~l d~c~;~, , n~W~,~lh the D~E 'he Projecta~wn "~0 g~r~.~, ~l~cd~g~i~n~p TheI In Part. ~i~nc~'~e~. ~D~EP b~.h~e I ~" 'A, ~a~l~l~(~]~h~P~' Stan ~' Would hav ~- of suggested Position fie, ~1~.~1 dc r~e~, ~(h~e ~o~r~k ~D~E~P ~a~r~l~h~e~r cc ~a' ~th~e d~c ~1~0 often ~I~,~, g~e~!~l~in~g ~I~l~l~01 file ~r~e~d~y~" ~I~I~I~,~, ~COnly ad, ~f~l~a~rr~m~l~, ~C~or~n~mis~s~i h~e, ~fr~edg~,~. "I of ~MOffer ~l~u~l~t~r~u~l if On 'I kno~@~ ~b~, r~ed~e~ed on ~;~1~,~1~, r~c~(~l~g~c Me"~h~-IC~e~"~l~li~t~i~l would is ~"~W~,~C~0 -,Do~y~i~v i I I ~-but Dean The b Inc &I ~8~,Y ~l~if~t~ic ~'~h~e A~n~n~e~l~l.Ing In 1. we r~qF ~c ,~a~r~t ~'g ~b~"~'~i~"~"~Id~s ~'~)~"~n ~I~n I ~th~e d~orp, II` Of ~l~b~e h~a~l~)~p~v (Ind" ~v ~I~l~i dif at all n~o~t ~a~n ad ~"~n~'~)~"~, )~E~P ~S~C~ ~c~'~e ~(~6~c ~dr~od that Corp., said ~e~p ~l~o~s~c~o~Iills ~, a1~9n~v~o~c~a~f~t h~e D~E~l~r~I ~C hinted r~n~l~,~, b~e )Ste, ~l~e~j~, c~(~o~l~l ~a~t filing For~0~4~A~, ~C~ql~i~cof all move ~l~er, I ~, not ~I ~p ~1~IL~-~1 A~J,~c~k~,~1 ~th~e~i~l~l ~t~orfron, ~- `~n~1~Y not b~,~' ~h~P~'~c~v~c~l Would ~h ~I~n~e, av~e In ~a~r ~I~f~i~e-~7 ~"~g~@ ~a~n'I ~7~1,~u ~1~I~l~l~cr~@ S~c~l~,~c~l said~0~4~th~e dred ~"` current get ~S~O~,~, ~ e ~C~r~6~,~r~ps R~e~")~@~. d~a~n~. Willing ~t~o f~r~o~n~? ~th~e ~s~e~n ~r~Q~e~, ~C~O~q"~, Ili, ~g~o. Position ~e~c~l~n~c,~d~@~, ~I~I~I ~"~I~"~r~l ~r~o~l May have that ~th~e ~r~, on Would b~e l~i~e that , ~l~l~c,~@ Indication ~c~"~n~i~n~i~'~l~i~c~, a, ~T~"~L~*~1~)~1~1~,~b ~1~1 fee ~I~l~"~L ~'~h~e h~i~f~1h~,~, ~'~@ Said ~'~*~Th~e ~b. ~10 ~c~o rs; ~r~l~o~%c a r~e,u~l~q; ~"d ~I~n~c~e ~l~h~, ~n~e~" ~Id b~e ~1~0 ~i~g~g~e~s~t ~b~a Me fro ~s~u~b"~fi~l~t~ed accepted ~h~e~r a~l'P~t~ic~a~ii~O~.~, ~" ~q"~,~@ ~IOf ~th~e ~I~'~v~o~, In the ~Cthe ~CR~e~r,~,~,i to ~s~o~, ~O~f ~'h~e ~)a~t ~I~n,~, r~e~j~ec~I~l~o, ~o~l~? NJ.7~'~c ~"c~t~m~er~t ~g~e~t the ~crr,~er ~f~o~r ~i~l~l, ~O~rp~s~~Was~0~1~1 ~I~l~l~en~d~,~3~t~h~e Project ~o~r~p~' ~10 Of ~t~0~l~,~h ~I, ate Pr~c~,~,~L~i~.~,~, ~n~-~, an, ~c~l.~,~c ~I~n~a~k~'~A ~s~. C~c~Id~e wiled~, 'ejected b ai "'lent ~c~"~:6~0~1~1~"~i~"~? ~@ ~2p~p~ ~,~rp' 'as' ~i~t h~, ~i~f ~E~@ ~'~u ~n~l~.~,~q; Marriott~w~er ~Y I~*~h~i~c~;, ~ch rc~c~o~n~r~l~)~e, ~n~%~"~r~un~l ~"` (~b~e D~, ~(~b Make~' ~c~@~Je~ns~e~ ~- ~-~I~i~i-o~r~m~, ~a~' ~I~nL~e that a~S~w~e ~4~- think ~C~tak ~Cn~I on n~i~b~c~, ~n,~a! Prate r~,~f ~Chate ~wa~s Ing th~e to use I O'Donnell ~S~S~n d~ee a airs ~th~e ~a~r~r~o~l~o~c~i~l~on~, ~l~v~l~,rkc~j ~Co~I~l~lpr~,~.~I~)~l ~4 ~SoOd ~$~h~e Say ~th~e ~r~a,~,n edge that ~If 'bout'', ~P~O~I~C~3~ ~, ~S~o a b~e ~or so ~I~c ~"~", ~h * ~L~O~U~cedge ~.~. wrong approach~n~I~ng through Ill ~O~v~,~ ~r~l~u~" L`,~I, ~'~O~@~n got ~,~S~,~e~,d~f~r~u~f~f~s Would ~A~4~3 hope W~,~f~), ;I r~t~, ~ih~c ~a~,~l~h ~e~@~ ~6~. I'll, ~1~7~", He added Would ~n~o~t ~9~0 into ~S IS that ~i~n, With P~o~s~i~t~i~" Ing rely So ~o~tn~e~lhin~SIOther I"h slue~, ~s~o u h~a~l town " make~-~l~j~'~r~i~n ~I ~e~P~, ~-and added "~n~u~ch on d~r~ed~.- the aor~a~N I~,d'A'~~M lee ~"~4~~, ~-~q@, ~~a~nd ~th~e dredging Would find ~-h~e ~f~,~,~,~, ~9to r S~h~e ~"~' ""I ~-~, ~I~q;~, f~r ~)r~b ~l~ec~k1~0T~i~l~c~o~n,~@ L~' ~~, that ~h~e a ~I~U~I~I~I~P~,~) ~o~l~l~"~"~. ~e~. I h~th~e cited ~' ~'~Is~c~l~r~O~l~a~,~, Move. ~. ~(~)~.~I~l~l Only Costs of ~add., ~d, ge. ~l~V~e~l~l~, In Push ~h d~.~)~i~f~; the L~l,Alluding ~1~. If ~l~i~e ~d~u~t'~d ~i~l~l More... Is also ~f~ ~- Ing fo- ~a~t~, at hL al ~t~h d ~c~o~u~l~" ~C~o~n~l~i~n~to ~C ~tw~o Sid acing long ~-~-n~u~l~l~In~dc hall ~I~, ~4~f~qt~"'~1~1~1 ~IL~I ~' hoped Conlin ~t~o ~l~a "~'~, ~M) ~.~, ~'~n~. ~(~1~) ~-r~i~(~,~,~, ties ~10 fit! of ~t~h~i~l~l h~eIfor ~)~)~,~.~s~o ~e~s can ~t~e~.b~go~l~i~'~l~e ~i~d. ~-~.~1 up ~U~-~I~t~h ~a~r~bo~, O~n~e an ~'~d ~O~rJ~,o I~I~, ~b, ~" ~Io~-~n . ~cin s~a like, Fo~i~c~,~" a~e~1.~6 ~1~.~'~. have trying (a ~1~,~1~1 a think- sand ~1~,~r~a ~r~. ~o~cs~"~'~I ~1~1 down the ~c~o~o~l~p ~5 so~i~n~e~qf~l~o~l~h~e~r nature,, he "~Or~n~i~s~, ~@~i~n CitingI~1~6~C ~I~l~n~p~a~c~r ~a~, fthe ~qh th~.~, or'. ~sa~l~i~l~q"~n "ere 1~. 1 ~f~h~a he ~c~z Oafish ~'~6~0 'We ~c~a~n 1 ~1~1- ~i~n~, fill ~I~, will, Sand. j~i,~j~s~l ~t~o~: ~~~~ ~Lngla~t~id Coastal Campaign Winter 1991 ha~l Terrible 10 Update ~~~~~ ~~~~~"~l~l ~'~!~,~;~t ~C~h~l ~, It ~n~u~m~e~d ~I~,~, a.::, ~: ~:~, \~, ~@~, E~,~,~p~~a~,~;~~i L~o~w~:~u~.~' ~C~a~mp~ai~g~,~:a ~T~e~tr~i~b~l~, Teti list. Die, Terrible Teti Project seeks it. - e~ ~u~ ~l~q~l~!i~@~nc, ~,~:~d~; ~~m~i~n~,~n-~1~,~,~;~~Z~:~,~@- ~,~,~I ~i~t~a~tc~a~n~df~edcra~l~l~e~v~e~l~, ~I~l~i the h~e~lic~f Ill at fi~t~i~l~l ~u~np~le~mc~m ~l~a~tio~n of ~e~r~l~s~f~in~@ EDITORIALS ~6 ~c~l~l~m~~w~i, Projects are ~n~an~ic~a~f~t~e~l the Ter- ~~~~~ Ten b~.~~d~o, ~u~n~t~in~i~her~o~qf~qf~i~c~t~o~r~l a~n~d~a~'~, of~q~@~c~@~po~i~;se~i~ii-i~ron~t~y~ien~talco~t~id~i~ictorpr~oposals.Aco~n~i- ~ ~~~~~ 'real) and ~n~c~@ ~"~I~s~a~"~g~o~"~t~h~, ~T~c~@i~.~'~,~l, 7~,,~@~,~1~,, ~l~Q~Q~!~,v~i~l~I.f~o~,~h-in file lieu ~t~tsu~e. ~Upd~a~ies~,~n~; Two ~T~ernble Teti targets folio% In nature's way -A ~~ I~~ -E~~~, ~2qY~4qC~qC ~qr~,~q(~, ~q/~q@ 1 ~.~q11 AES Defeated hv Bucksport has all ~th~,~@ best existing technology for ~qN~8qW~qI~qls Harbor Dredging Let's stop this right now. The Wells Harbor project has ~f~lu~ti~on control the vote in Buc~k~spo~n become a political football, tossed between the Department ~qRo~a~rd ~1~1'~qe~,ul~d seem to demonstrate that the Defeated of Environmental Protection and the Army Corps of S.T.O.~. organizer elected ~i~t~) p~t:~,~q~)~L do ~n~ol want ~th~e pl~a~i~l~t.) In late November the Maine Board Engineers. Town ~C~ou ~o~cil The firm pr~opo~ses to burn 1,500 of Environmental Protect ion issued aA glimmer of hope was dashed a year ago when the ~Env~ron~m~e~n~i,~il~k~s~i~, ~s~co~t~@d~a~b~w ~(~o~r-~)~f ~c~n~:~il ~p~e~r d~a~.~N. shipped ~h~v b~ar~e~t., ~-~f~r~o~u~l ~w~c~a~c~r~n P~enn~syl~v~a~Di~a~, to produce una~mm~o~u~s decision to den), the Arm Army Corps insisted that a DEP approved dredging. while v~~~~~~.~2p~p~~i~h~v B~o~1p~p~ ~J, ~!~A~0 M~c~g~a~'~a~lt~s of electricity. ~I~t seeks Corps application to dredge 200,~0DO doable, was economically unfeasible and imprac~tica~l~l. The 0~~~~~q&~ when ~L~h~c B~u~c~k~s~p~o~r~l-~N~i~ai~n" cubic yards of sand and sill from the town once again was caught in the middle. Planning Board Noted ~I~l~i d~er~i~N ~I ~1~;~.~(~c pcrr~r~u~@~s~aon to annually ~e~rni~t 2,~4~0~o W~cbhann~e~t Ri~%cr'~s estuary at Wells ~o~n,~iru~. dioxide and 140 tons of Harbor. The Friends of th~e Rachel The Corps argument, although based on financial and ~~~~~~and 70~ni~n~g ~I~X~'~TMi~l ~I~,~, ~c tons of sulfur co~l~fir~d cogeneration plan on'~th~c v~el~a~ti~l~e or~g~ani~i~c~ompound~s~; by means Carson National Wildlife Refuge led practical considerations that the harbor would only have to Penobscot Rivet~ of a 415 fo~.~o~f stack. Plans call for a the fight in opposition to the dredging be dredged again soon, raises the issue which the DEP then After five month., of public hear. cogeneration arrangement to sell steam in order to prevent the predicted throws in the town's end zone. The question becomes in~~~ voluminous l~e~s~t~imo~m and ~Sc~orc~, ~I~l~i neighboring Champion ~Int~erna~tion- erosion of adjacent mar~sh~U~nd. Other twofold. Can a harbor that needs constant dredging be of newspaper articles and ~.an advert~~al Inc. for its paper making process. FRIENDS concerns included loss or environmentally sound? Can the town convince the Corps ing campaign, ~t~h~e seven member pl~q'~qs Five of the seven planning board mcm- marine resources and wildlife habitat, that it is a sensible project while econ~ion~i~f~i~ca~l~]y impractical? a~t~'~! hers are employees and stockholders ~ing board considered all t~h~e evidence of Champion, including the sole d~i~s~- as well as the increased impact of boat and voted down the project 6-1. ~qn~o i~n~gac~tivi~des on ~t~h~emarsh/m~arine At recent legislative committee hearings on changing ~~~ England Coastal Campaign sorter. ecosystem following dredging. laws which would allow the harbor dredging over the named th~ Applied Energy Services In related developments S~TO~Y For two years the FRIENDS re- objections of environmental concerns, committee members (AES) proposal as its ninth target in ~org~aniz~c~r Don While was elected to the quested a federally funded~, inde- did listen more carefully when the talk came to the the ~nrribl~ Ten project in June, 199~0~. Buckspor~t Town Council with ~t~h~e pendent environmental impact economic hardship of fishermen. State ~~~pay~ers Opposed to Poll u- highest number of votes in the ~Nov~em- statement to objectively eva~Jua~r~e t~he But in the end the town's argument was not strong ~~o~ (S.TO~P.) leads the battle to dc~f ~.cat ~b~er~e~l~ec~lion~. In January, 1991 two planned project and the alternatives. enough. ~T~h~e committee said no, clearly on the side of ~b~ AES proposal because of its ~n~e~g~a- large ad, ocacy groups, the Cons~erva- Several BE~F members agreed an EIS environmental concerns. tiv~ impacts on air quality, destruction ~ti~'~m Law Foundation and th~e Natural isn~e~ed~ed. of wetlands and ~qth~qe need to conserve Resources Council of Maine added Instead~q, Wells officials now seek to At least one person suggested the town should look energy first before turning to burning their arguments to the over twenty weaken the state's Natural Resources elsewhere for its fishermen to moor their boats, an idea not more ~.fossil fuels. other groups in opposition to ~qth~qe Protection Act so harbors previously without merit, but which would take time, but no less AES has decided to continue the project during an EPA'scoping session dredged by the Army Corps ran avoid energy than the effort so far on th~qi~4qi dredging. fight to build the plant and is currently rc~qv~qardin~qg dcv~q'~qlo~qpmcn~qi of the ~qenvi~qron- ~qw~qfis~qf~qing state review. Wells officials So where to now? ~2p~ pursuing state and federal permits mental impact statement for ~qth~qe AES also seek to have the Maine legislature before it comes back to the Pla~qn~qnin proposal. They urged the EPA ~qto c~qx- disregard the BEP~q's decision by ~qapp~qi~qr ~q"~6qM~qe~qlls~q!sh~qou~qld,~qco~qnvince~q. the A~0qi~qmy ~2q!~q:~0q;~6q@~,~qrps to dredge to ~q9plore efficiency measures and power ing ~qt~qhe dredging through a planned ~qOv' ~8qm~q4ke the-harbor' Board wit ban appeal of i~qt s decision. ~12qO~ql~ql~qe~q'f~8q@r ~qf~qis~ql~ql~6q@ hich w~q'a~q"s to th~2qi~q@~q,~8qb~6qE~6qP and at rmen~q,~q,~qs~qi.~qp~qto~qject w The decision to pursue ~qth~qe process plants that create fewer pollutants as second bill. least swallowable to came despite the comments of on~qe alternatives. The FRIENDS are concerned environmentalists. ~~4 prominent Director of A~qE~qS, Russell about this attempt by a special interest ~qT~0qhen it needs to rethink how it uses its sho~qre~qla~qnd. Is it Train. who stated in a ~qIc~qt~q(~qer to N.E.C.C. to weaken and disregard Maine's ~qen- Possible that economic hardship could be avoided by taking Iasi August "It may well ~qb~qe that the ~n~s ~P~P he ~o~f ~0 ~a~id a viron~qtr~qien~qlal laws. T~qo express your a regional approach to solving the fishermen's plight? Does people of Maine will no~qtwan~qt a power opinion on this matter contact: commercial benefit end at a town line? ~q-rip~q(ion, no matter Ill plant of a~ny dc~qsc Honorable Governor John M~qcK~qer~qn~qam, what environmental standards designed State House-Station I, Augusta, Maine, Is it unreasonable to think that 3 town which is home to ~ and operated~, situated ~qon ~qth~qe Maine 04333. For further information contact ~,the Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge, Laudholm coast. If that proves it) ~qh~qe the case, o~qi~ql~- FRIENDS president Glenn Evans at Farm and the Wells National Estuarine Research Reserve, ,io-~qk AES will ~qahidc by ~qth~qe decision.' P.O. Box 42~q7, Ocean Park, Maine could also preserve and nurture a process by which the ~(~(~;~i~,cn~th~a~(AE.~q'~q,~qd~qaim~q@~qih,~qt ~qi~ql~ql~qe~qp~qlan~qt 04063. Ocean meets the coast in a natural evolutionary process? ~ 23 ()n Pe 'kins Cove @e*rc Tvad@ 1@ an plans and specs -d Cove dredge dz'i' we A be ready to start conmi-ti, . David Goodrich of "" Corp, programs division said Frida% not necessaray lGioonod'rich said, however. that s "'" veying work to prepare I(ir the dredge a, well ., the bidding pr-t@c,, immediately to select a contractor will push the lianic [,it the project into th, 1112 year. which begins Oct. forthcoming I Richi no%. in the '92 budget, By Joe Dynan there -are no funds for starting I construct ion 1. - he said. Goodrich estimated (hat the Corps would be OGUNQUIT Congressional pressure just about read% to start construction has forced the Army Corps of Engineers to bN Oct. 1. 199i. proceed with the dredging of Petkins Cove, " but a Corps staffer Laid this week that The Corps had halted work on the Congress will have to step in once again projects earlier this year because before the project can be completed. President George Bush's proposer Last week, Maine Sens. William Cohen budget for 1992 recommended tr@t Lnd George Mitchell announced that the funding be discontinued gM was resuming work on nearly 200 Goodrich. however. said ftirther federally authorized projects, including six congressional action on the dredge is in Maine. The Corps' scition was in re- expected. -If I were a betting man, spitanse to a non-binding resolution passed odds are that there will be probably by the Senate March 19. be some revisions to the '92 bud- get." he said. -All indications are nib that Congress is going to do some- thing. " - Ogunquit town manager James McMahon said Tuesday he was un- der the impression from Cohen and Mitchell's announcement that all funding had been restored, and was hoping that the dredging could begin ---Editorial next Januarv or Februar%. It doesn't really change an)- Ails ,.I thing.- McMahon s id Tuesday . but Sears Island added, ''I'm curaious to know whether the senators are going to U.S. District Judge D. Brock Horrhy starts on construction, court tests and fund these programs next year." last week removed the final legal barrier controversy over Sears Island, but 10 Both Kathr)n Gesi. spokesman for to completion of the Sears Island cargo years after the initial bond issue, and de- Sen. Cohen and Kristen Amerling. port. spite relentless pressure from a well-fi- spokesman for Sen. Mitchell said It has been almost a decade since the ranced and litigious national this week that the senators would Sierra Club began its deliberate obstruc- organizaLion, the state can point to continue to support the project. ti on of this project, but public interest in progress: The Congressional resolution also the container port has not wavered. In 10 *The access causeway connecting the mentioned a beach nourishment years, the project has become even more island to the mainland is finished. program on Drakes Island Beach it, vital to the regional economy as the glob- eThe road from the causewav to the Wells. but William Hubbard of the Corp., said that project is contingent al marketplace has touched New Eng- shipping and warehouse area has been land, and Maine. completed. upon the dredging of Wells Harbor. Judge Hornby's opinion, confirming the *The terminal site is cleared and pre- which the state has refused to allow. appropriateness of a U.S. Coast Guard liminary grading of the warehousing and Hubbard also said Drakes Island decision not to require congressional ap- trucking area is finished. Beach may receive sand from an proval for con e Dredging in the environmental restoration project struction of that the Corps has scheduled for port area is com- causeway to Sears leted and replace- fiscal 1992. That project. which P Island (indicated ment clam habitat Hubbard said is only proposed in the by an arrow in the has been built. '92 budget, calls for the Corps to 'accompanying pho- restore up to 10 acres of land at the a The short .to), provides new connect- end of Lower Landing Road to salt causeway marsh. momentum to the 7@j ing the primary am project, which has storage area on the The had been filled in when proceeded in island to the pier is the Corps originally dredged Wells herky-jerky fash- in place. Harbor in 1967. Hubbard said there ion because.of the What remains to was "potential that the Corps would national :)Sie .rra be done? Construc- be there next year to look at that."*, Club's peisisterit tion of the pier it- Drakes Island residents have sent legal challenges, .. self, final grading, petitions to both the Army Corps Sears Wand is a and connecting and the state's Department of En- textbook example of how the procedural utilities and the rail line to the terminal vironmental Protection for the m- safeguards built into environmental regu- site. Work, however, will be delayed until Placement of sand lost to erosion at lation offer even a lone special-interest the state submits yet another pile of en. the northirn end of Drakes Island Beach. group the opportunity to frustrate, and vironmental documents to federal review "We could put that sand on the possibly scuttle any project, even one agencies. That's been the history of Sears beach if that's what people want.- such as Sears Island, which twice re- Island. ceived the overwhelming support of The recent move to Portland by Hapag- Hubbard said. but added that a final Maine voters and, interestingly, has not Lloyd, a container-ship company with decision hadn't been made. been attacked by any of Maine's aggres- trutjor facilities in Halifax specializing in sive and outspoken environmental shipments to Europe, is concrete evi- organizations. dence of the shipping potential of a mod. Discussion of the project began in 1972. ern container port midway along Maine's A study released in 1978 confirmed the coast connecting this state to Canada and feasibility of locating a container port at world markets. Sears Island. On Nov. 7,1981, the voters of To be competitive in this marketplace, this state approved a bond issue of $10 Maine-made and Maine-produced goods million for design and initial construction need an inexpensive means of bulk ship work on the facility. ment. The sea offers that potential. Sears Island, along with Portland in the south In spite of the Sierra Club's first legal andEastport in thenorth, arethedoors to challenge of the project in 1982, the elec- opportunity. torate went back to the polls the next The passing of time has confirmed year, 1993, and decisively approved ad- Sears Island's critical importance to the ditional funding for the Sears Wand ecionomic.life of this region. Maine has development. waited 20 years for this port. It will have The 1960s have been a series of aborted to wait longer. It will be worth it. 24 40 THE WETLANDS alone the Fore River in Port- area to accommodate a replacement for the land :re i the foc us 0fl debdateo over whether bridge (background) linking Portland and South bridg bu Ider will be a owe fill part of the Portland. (AP Photo) 13 -0 @ -21,11 /? I Preservation vs. development Portland bridge, wetlands latest battle ground PORTLAND (AP) - In a state with an esti- mated 5 million acres of wetlands, more than "When ... 3 acres of wet- th 05e01 the other five New England states com- bined a classic environmental battle is brewing lands are going to take prece- over ihe rate of 3.4 acres of salt marshes and dence over the economic mud flats. At issue is whether bridge builders will be well-being of an entire com- allow ed ,a fill a stretch of coastal wetlands along the Fore River to accommodate a re- munity, I think things are pla cement for one of the state's most chronical- out of balance." iv congested orIdges, a 75-year-old span linking 15 ortland and South Portland. - Christopher Hall With Manne's economy on the skids, business for Maine Chamber of Commerce & Industry groups say they sense an emergiIng backlash agains t what thev contend is overzealous regu- of an entire community, I think things are out of lation that threaIens to block job-producing balance." public works projects and private ventures, Hall saidsuch imbalance becomes more criti- South Portland residents and city officials cal during tough economic times when busi- determined to avoid destruction of one of the nesses can no longer afford to absorb the higher community's oldest neighborhoods are pitted costs of meeting environmental goals. against federal and state environmental offi- Business groups complain that the presence cials equally steadfast in opposition to the loss of wetlands is often used to block or delay proj- of prime coastal wetlands. ects without regard for their economic impact. Environmental groups, business and public "If the area has a few. characteristics of a officials are awaiting the outcome of the contro- wetland but is not a high-value habitat area, we versy, which has crystalized debate about would bend toward using the land - with miti- whether state and federaIregulators have gation --m if Lhe project were economically sig- struck a proper balance between wetlands pres- nificant," said DeLrdre O'Callaghan, legal ervation and development. counsel for the Environmental and Economic Questions about Wetlands preservation have Council of Maine. surf faced on other major projects in recent Under pressure to maint#in protection stan- months,including the proposed widening of a dards, environmental officials say the best way 30-mile section of the Maine Turnpike and can- to meet the challenge is to educate the public struction of the state's third-largest shopping about thevital role wetlands play in areas rang- mall in Augusta. from wildlife habitat protection to flood wetlands considerations surrounding the control. MaII at Augusta already have been resolved A bill before the state lAgislature to ease and the turnpike project does not appear likely wetlands restrictions on cranberry growers to rise or fall on the wetlands issue. But as it may be the first of other initiatives to remove stands now, the $165 million replacement for the some of the protections granted by the state, Portland Bridge would either cut through South said Beth Nagusky, staff attorney for the Na- Part and's Knightville neighborhood or skirt tural Resources Council of Maine. the shoreline and require that the 3.4 acres of "At the federal level Lhere's a good deal of W!@ lands be filled activity, unfortunately, to boLh change the de- ,definitely becomes a more difficult issue finitionof wedands, and to change the protection when you have a development in such close afforded wetiands," Nagusky added. proximity to so many people," said Lissa Wi- An estimated 20 to 25 percent of Maine con- doff of the State Planning Office, author of a sists of grassy, shrub-laden or forested areas 1988 study on Maine's wetlands. sometimes covered by shallow water, accord. Adv ocates for business say the dispute points ing to Widoff's study. The vast majority are up the need to Lake account Zif economic as well irdand bogs, marshes and swamps. as environmental factors when considering Although Maine has more wetlands than the wl@ether to grant a wetlands permit. rest of New England, only 157,500 acres of the We think it's a huge concern," said Christo- estimated 5 million acres are coastal wetlands, pher Hall, assistant general counsel for the Widoff says. And of those, there are 80,000 acres Maine Chamber of Commerce & Industry. of mud flats and ortly 19,000 acres of salt marsh. "When you get a situation like you have in South The three acres that would be lost if the Portia nd where 3 acres of wetlands are going to bridge passed over it provide a habitat for shell- take precedence over Lhe economic well-being fish and marine life. 25 ~0 agree on n~, ge~,~6qtou Agencies b~" ... ~q@~6~8qd~' te a The C~OM~I)TO~M~I~'~S~P Would 'known as' the ~M~d~ bon ~@~idge-~tha~t serves ~the save some w~e~qda~r~lds and ~4~9~T~I~ii5 i~s the best we're going to do. C~rh~e m~.am commuter route between Knight~N~qil~ql~e~, but would compromise) accomplishes the public policy goals of South Portland and Cape E~bz~ab~eth Lake ~two more businesses. getting traffic s~epa~ra~fc~c~qifi-om the downtown ~area.~9~@ and Portland, Because ~the new bridge %will ~be higher, officials ~s~aY ~J~er~tr~e ~F~. Bryant, South Portland c~i~t~) manager traffic will be disrupted less often by B~Y~JOHN I~l~L~k~LY openings for ship ~t~r~-af~f~i~c a~n~d JOHN RICHARDSON Several property owners who 5 ~1 a~qf~qf Wn the competing concerns of city, The compromise design would would be affected by ~the change met I I I state and federal officials~ carry the new span over mud flats ~u~rith city and Maine Department of State uranspo tion and env~I~r~O~z~l~ However, o~Mci~als said ~the com- on piers, curve inland to avoid a Transportation officials ~F'r~icl~ay, but ~me n~t~a~l officials s~ay ~th ~cy ~h~a~v ~e promise route Will require the state saltwater marsh and link up with there was little initial response and reached an agreement that has a to take by e~n~t~ir~sen~t domain ~t~w~o Broadway, staying away from the owners declined to comment after good chance of overcoming ob~s~i~a- more Waterman Drive business Knig~htvi~l~le and Mill Cre~qck business the meet;~.~ng~ ~c~les stalling construction of a ne~w properties, bringing ~the total to areas. The plan would permit Despite dis~appo~intm~qe ~n I that b~-~idge b~et~v,een Portland and South three. Waterman Drive, which now carries businesses will be affect~E d. S~o~.~" Portland. The compromise alignment, south~bound traffic off ~the existing Portland City Manager Jerre R ~T~he plan min~L~r~niz~e~s the de~struc- which still must be approved b~v bridge, ~t become a two-way street Bryant said the city would accept Lion of coastal we~d~and~s and ~c~bv~e~r~L~s federal environmental regulators, ~1'~qs for ~l~oca~l~o~t~ra~f~f~ic only, the compromise. t~i-a~f~f~i ~c ~8~-~a~" from South Por~il~and'~s a variation of the wetlands route The new bridge will replace ~the downtown neighborhood, satisfying that faced ~ce~r~lain rejection. ~e~n~dst~ing drawbridge completed in Bridge compromise reached Stale transportation a~nd envlr~onm~en~tal o~ffi~c~I~a~Ls have agreed on a ~des~Ign for a new Portland Bridge that would avoid wetlands and satisfy ~S~cu~lh Po~r~l!~and ~conce~ws about ~tr~a~qf~qt. State St. DEP still opposes bridge plan: Commercial St. By JOHN RICHARDSON' Cl~e~ar~ly'~th~er~e needs to b~e a r~s~e~@ Marriott said the DEP staff will PORTL F Gu~ G~f~tnn~et~t Service bridge " Marriott said. "I think ..put together a formal ~r~ecommenda- ~.~qZ~q@~T~qs~2qy~ql everyone would want it done sooner tion for the board within a few rather than PORTLAND - State and federal later, and I think we weeks. He said the process could nta~l officials last week suggested a way that could happen: take Jorge, if ~I~AD~OT -ants to add ~7~q77 ~nvironm~e reaffirmed their opposition to a They (the city councilors) have anything to its appl.ic~atio~n. Portland Bridge replacement plan chosen to go a different route" that A three-week period for public that would destroy coastal wetlands, would unnecessarily destroy a va~lu- comment ~@ill follow issuance of the KN~)GHTV~ILLE and said the decision by the South able natural resource. s~tl~aff~'~s r~eco~m mend ~a~tion. The B~E~P Fore ~)~q4~qiv~&r Efforts Portland City Council ~:0 stick i~t~h to protect ~@~e~z~l~and~s have then will hold a meeting and allow ~0. the proposal will only delay it. become more aggressive is) recent limited public input. They're looking at a long time years because Of an increased uncles- b fore there's a resolution to this standing o~f their value and a m~a~ssi~@ ~c The board can immediately decide ~ b~~a ~us~e ~@~e~'r~c going to fight it and historical ~iossor~t~hc resource nation- whether to grant the p~ermi~l~, table SOWS he f~eds are going to fight it, ~" wide, environmental officials say. th~@ issue to obtain more information said Maine Department o~f En~viro~n- or set up a Public hearing to get input mental Protection Commissioner Wetlands provide habitats for from members of the community. ~p~l~a~r~n Dean Marriott. marine wildlife and migratory birds. Ifappro~v~ed byth~eBEP~, however, and serve as atur~al flood buffers the city and MDOT still must Set Marriott said he is mystified and and pollution ~n filters f~o~r Marine ~a~p~pT~OVa~I fr~om~:~,~th~e Army Corps of frustrated that the City Council, in a estuaries. Engineers. The 'Corps also has decision heartily supported by resi- A federal official also expressed expressed opposition to the city-. dc~~s, on Wednesday rejected a disappointment ~-i~th the City Coun- backed plan. D~P-f~av~ored route that avoids 3.4 ci~l's decision. City officials were aware the plan MU f~la~i~l~l ~r mud flats and salt marshes "We warned the (Maine Depart- may face ~ir~ej~e~ct~ion by the agencies, ~~~y"~fisn~qo~ing the bridge into the city's m~ent of Transportation) and the city and that a regulatory block now downtown in the Knigh~tville~-Mill that the (bridge plan) they're still could set the planning back years. Creek area. seeking was not likely to get a But councilors said Wednesday. The city-backed plan would put permit, - said Matthew Schw~eisb~erg, the), could not abandon a plan the new, bridge on the western edge senior w~e~i~land ecologist in the New developed through 10 years of ~he Kni~ghtvi~lle peninsula, away England regional office of the U.S. studies and favored Overwhelmingly ~ It from downtown and along the Environmental Protection Agency. by the community in order to accept shoreline, requiring filling of wet- "We have said it many times in a mor~i~e environment-friendly alter- ~~ ~X and~s where a variety of marine many ways." native that has only been discussed ~qR~qa creatures live. for a few weeks.' The EPA has the authority to veto Marriott said the D~EP alternative federal a pro~val by the U.S. A~t ~y officials and residents ~a~nd a my ~. - ~@ ~qw~~@~l would have gained speedy Corps of ~qf~ing~ineers~. buC~s~iin~'e~ss owners in the Knight- app rov~qa~ql~q. The S165 million bridge will be vil~qle-Mill. Creek neighborhood arc The replacement bridge. connect- paid for by state and federal dol~qf~qi~qs~qrs~q; united behind. the ~qIcity-~qback~qed prc~q,~q4~q@~q, ing Portland and South Portland but MDOT had- ~qa3k~qed :the,, City', p~qos~qs~qid~q: ~8q"u~qi~q;~04q4_J~qt~q'~q,~8q@~q%~q@ou~qld ~qj~q'~qt~qa~qsk~qe:~qi cc~qm~qm~q, Will ~q6 ~-~qa~qu ~4qr ~qT- ~qf~qt~qy~q- ~.~o~v~er,~qr th~qe.~q; Fore R~qiv~qer,-~q. has. been ~q, Council to decide wh~qe~qt~qh~2qi .~0q@~qi~qi d, "its-. ~qf~qav~q6~qred.-.p~qlan~q,~q7~qt~qit~qit~qt~qi~qi~qf~qr~qis~q)~qr~qr~q6~8qa~qi~6qrt ~qt~qit~ql Mill ~q9 b~u il~qt by the Maine Department of regulatory r~qe~qj ction. Where the ti~qal and commercial district. Transportation. bridge will Iand~qe~6qin Portland, at State "They (the DEP~q) are strictly Commuters face narrow and and York streets, has not been looking at the physical part of the curvy lanes on the existing bridge, disputed. environment and are not weighing which requires frequent repair. Marriott stopped short of Su~qa~qr~qru~ql~ql i~qnto.~qth~qe equation the human Freight and oil companies also say teeing a rejection at the state level, environment," said South Portland business is restricted by the narrow noting that the final decision will be Mayor James Soule, who added h~qe draw of the 7~q5-ye~qar-old bridge. made by the Board of Environmen- still hopes to reach a compromise. "I Already, the wetlands con~qtro~qv~qe~qi sy tal Protection, the policy-making hope the DEP does not have their has pushed the earliest possible arm of the agency that decides on feet dug into the mud nat~qs ~qsod~qe~qep co I tion of a ne~qw span from 1995 appeals and precedent-setting that they can't dig themselves out of ~1. ~2qW~I~q. issues. a political stand they made." 26 ~0 ~2qF~8qW~_ ~i~t ~T~j ~I~E B A~SI~N~ON V~IN~A~LHA VE~N~q-A~eri~al view looking through the Basin's narrow entrance ~1~0~. Ord ~t~he property donated to Maine Coast Heritage Trust on ~ihe~f~ar shore. Chris Ay~r~" photo, essence of the N~or~l~beas~t Coast lie., in V~i~na~l~ha~ven~~s Basin. Mammal, hird~ and marine li~qfe~n~t~e~e~l ~tb~e~n~@ T~he miracle Vinalhaven~'s Basin Will Be Protected by Gift of ~T~h~e fides affects all lift, ~I~l~i~t~h its ~qto Maine Coast Heritage Trust ~qA~'~r~I~t~'~q5~' r~j~@~j~,~tb~m. ~I~ti~sap~lace~c~if~t~bes~ea~, a~?~jd~,~i~t~l i~t is surrounded ~kyf~ares~t-~and all of it embedded In ~T~he old rock that gives ~T~h~e V~INA~LHAVE~N-Morc than two miles of The parcel given by the Williams to entire coast its c~barac~ter. - sh~OTCf~T~O~n~t on the pristine tidal cove on Maine Coast Heritage Trust is directly ~f M ~7~b~, ~C~.~.~: V ~i~na~lh~aven known as die Basin, have been across the cove from the Basin's entrance. ~h, M.i~ll~l~i~t~d A L~O~,~, do~m~t~e~-~d ~Lo~Ma~in~e Coast Heritage Trust by ~T~he property also contains mature spruce Ti., ~1.~4, ~F-~A~, Mr. and Mrs. Ralph Williams. The gift was f~OT~CS~LS, a small pond, and exposed granite annour~ecc~l in late F~ebru~a~U~. bluffs that offer views of the entire Basin ~qn~e 220~-acr~e parcel, one ofthe largest and Hurricane Sound b~ey~ond.The gifta~l~so undeveloped parcels on ~t~h~e cove, was do- includes three small islands and many nated ~to the conservation group to protect ledges that are "haul-out sites for harbor "the land's rare beauty and ecological seals. value," said Jay Espy, trust president. Espy noted that ~the William~ses~'gift is The Basin is an almost completely significant in a time when towns can spare landlocked cove with a narrow entrance little money for open-space protection and forming a s~e~t of ~uda~l reversing falls. Bald state programs are financially threatened. eagles, osprey, and herons fish the tidal run --Co~ndensed~qfr~om~the Bangor Daily News, ~L~l~z area', many s~l~e~h~a~e~d in~l~e~L~l Felru~oy ~1~1, ~199~1 - Jim's Head Secured by MCHT ~l~k~l~a~m~e Co~@~i~s~t Heritage Trust has fun her (radii io~n~a~l p~u~b~li~t. us~e for hik~in~p. cu~t ravines and ~c~n~ishin~g~, ~s~t~irl licit), secured p~ern~i~m~i~en~t protection of :i A~(~cordi~ng ~i~t~) ~N~ICHT~'s S~i~c~\~\~;~t~n~l~ship ~qm~k~i~.- s~o~ysN~or~d~e~n~ ~"I'l~ic ~c~on~ih~i~m~t~o~o~n ~is 1, ~l~i~tr~il~l " il~d ~c~o~:~i~s~i~zil ~l~i~c:~0~1~o~nd i~n eastern Director. C~OFO~lin~e Nord~e~n. ~t~h~e b~e~;~l~k~l~l~\ spc~o~act~i~k~ir." ~W ~'~i~@li~tng~i~on Comm ~Nv~i~th ~t~h~e ~p~u~nh~a~s~c of this short trail lies in i~ts ~a~bil~m to The ~pu~r~c~l~i~;- of ~.~1~~1~1~1 ~, ~l~i~c~,~i~,~i ~1~-~1~1~1 O~f~.~1~1~1~1~1~, Head i~n L~u~h~c~@. The dr~am~m~ic access a v~ar~i~c~t\ ~o~l shoreline. -Yot~j Ila~% ~c tinues ~1~\~1~0 IT's ~c~on~in~ii~in~i~en~t ~10 p~r~e~s~c~'~A ~I~@o~m~t of land ~ad~ioi~n~s the Trust's Boot the cobble beaches, fishing weirs and i~ng ~r~ap~id~l~% v~ani~sh~,n~g ~p~t~ibli~c ~:~,,~-~c~e~s~s I i~v.~id pr~op~c~n~@~. and ~i~id~d~s ~signi~f~i~c~an~i~l~\ to ~r~e~h~li~v~e ~c~;~f~ln~i ~o~f f~i~r~dl~e~x~~s ~\~Iis~t~ak~c: and rights along ~Ni~ain~e~'~s m~o~@~i ou~i~s~t~and~ing ~@~t ~mr~e~i~d~i ~of pr~e~s~e~n~ed ~c~o~as~il~i~t~i~c ~1~1~1~:~1~1 ~11~1~c~l~, a f~e~\~N m~inu~ic~s k~i~t~er vou ~(~-~:~i~n he natural coastline, no, c~m~e~nd~s more than three miles standing ~o~n 120 fool cliff,, with w~m ~c front ~B~ai~l~t~n~'~s ~1~%~li~s~t~ak~e harbor ~to Boot ~W~9 ~c~o\ ~c. The ~;~,~c~c~l~i~,i~l~i~ti~on ~cu~ln~im~3~l~e~, :in ~ar ~LILIO~L~I~@ ~I~'~l~e~g~o~o~:~1~1~1~0~1~1 ~P~M~C~C~S~@ ~I~NU began in 1988. Mien Maine Coast Heritage Trust ~0~0CHT~) purchased Western Head ~qandGr~qe~qr~qi~qt ~ql~qi~qc~qiclinC~qt~qi~qt~qi~qerf~qr~q(~qin~q)~qt~ql~qie~q.~q@.~qime clev~qel~qo~qp~qcr who ~qo~qu n~qed Jim's Head. On ~qD~qe~q(~qem~qber 26 ~q1~q09~q0. the Machias Sim, f~qin~qa~ql~qk ~qa~q(~qc~qep~qt~qed ~qN~qIICHTs offer ~qing~qs ~ql~qk~qin~qk of $1 ~q1~q0~q,~q00~q0 lot l~qin~qi~q'~qs Head. a six acre ~qprop~qe~qm ~qX\ i~qth ~qV~4qi~qn~qil~qe o~qfshor~qe frontage. ~qV The hank ~qh~qad held the pr~qo~qp~qe~qm since March of 1990 i~ql~ql connection with a ~qi~qn~qo~qng;~qig~qe ~qd~qc~qf~qaul~ql~. Development plans for~qth~qe headland had called ~qfor~qth~qe~qcon ~76q1~q" ~qs~qI~qn~qi~qc~qt~qi~qon ~qo~ql~q"~qup it) ~qd~qir~qcc r~qe~qsicl~qcr~qw~qc~q@ No", ~qth~qc p~qeni~qn~qs~qtik~qi is ~qf~qor~qc~q@~qer pro ~qt~qe~qc~ql~qed from t~qh~qe ~qd~qir~qe~qa~qt of ~qd~qe\~qelopm~qent and -ill remain in its natural s~qa~q: t~qe Ali exist ~qing fi~qx~qv~qi~qp~qa~qt in linking ~qjim'~qs Head I~qr~qb~qe b~qo~qild ~qc~qU~qf~qfs ~qo~qf~qj~qI~qm~q'~qs Head in ~qL~qi~ql~qi~qb~qe~q@ r~qi~qs~qc~qe~qn~qt~qh~q- added Ina ~qIb~qr~qe~qr~-m~qa~qr ~0q~~qc~qb ~qo~qf~qf~qar~qt~qer,~qer ~qt~qr~qi~ql~qd ~q%i~qth Boot will he im~qpr-~qed to c~qoa~qx~qthne ~8qmw~qed ~qM~q-~qm~qc~q-~qI~qr~qr 27 ~0 Land Consc~i~rvation Totals 1990 A crc~.~1 Vr~o~f~t ~( ~(~c~d 4~~6~0 1 IQ! ~L~~.~1~1~C~~I~I~, 12~0~0 ~l~l~l~ro~k~l~@~!~h gill of kind ........ 2 ~i~o ~l~b, I III ~,~Qh ~p~or, h~:~j~I~L I If I.~M~i! 2~1~,~@~, ~s~h~u~r~v~i~i-on~t AM- Pr~(~i~(~vc~tcd. 36 2-~1 ~Fr~i~fi~r~r ~)~s~j~j~n~j~, ~p~r~o~l~e~c~i~c~d ....... 0 Com~p~l~e~i~c~i~l P~ro~i~cc~l,, ~. ~. ~ ~ ....... 26 State votes to buy pond, 550 acres near Augusta ~n~i~v~n~j ~@ ~1~)~, ~i~n~g the ~I~@ ~)~I~a~j in r~e~ag~, ~p~v~t ~i~n~m~i~c~i~t~i~l, ~pro~l~t~-~L~t~L~-~1~1 ~thro~L~l~g~h ~1~1~1, ~-~L-~o~c~i~a~t~ed Nos~, ~qP~, ~.~1 -1, ~, \~a~tt~r~a~v~n~-~e things about ~d~i~s p~e~,:~o of ~V ~r~a~q@~, I- ~j ~1~2 ~j~-~ ~ir~w~h~i~t~hn~g ~I~q~6 island, in said Jame~s B~er~na-~r~c~~th~c AUGUSTA ~-A~s~L~a to ~b~o~cd~, ~L~h~a~l ~M~-~a~m~i~ng ~O~f~l~i~c~e ~o~f~f~l~c~i~a~@ ~v~l~v, ~1~1~I~L~-~~r ~L~-~1~1~i~r~c~l~\ I ~I~I~L ~n~i~:~I~j~(~,~r~j~I~N ~of~c~i~,n ~a~c~i~l~i~t~u~e~s~i~a~nd~iorp~ub~) p~l~e~s~e~:~,~-~,~a~t~l~u~n ~s~er~e~s is coord ~i~n~a~t~o~r fo~r t~l~i~c -~-~-~n~t: '~m~cn~[~" o~w~r~i~gh~l ~t~i~l~f~l~-~ bu~t~e ~S3~0~0,~0~0~0 board ~,~nic~h ~qcr~i~d~o~-~s~e~d the ~n~@~~: :,I on ~ej~'~, ha~s voted to con~q@~q@~z~@ ~t~o~-~,~,d ~t~h~e ~$4~50~,~0~0~0 p~l~i~rc~l~:~@s~e of ~5~5~@ ~N~I~CH I hill ~f~i~L 1~1~1~1~.~1~1C~I~I ~u~l~a- ~'~~I~o~n~id~a,~ acres s~u~r~roun~d~@~l~@ I~, ~j~1~,~-~t~,~(~.~;, u~tide\e~l~o~t~)~ed pond just ~s~o~u~i~qr ~l~qi~. 'You \~,~o~u~i~d~n~'~t ~c~v~,~)~e~c~t to Find a ~n~i~c ~c ~an~,~l p~t~ih~il, ~:~,~g~,-n~k ~I~c, M~a~l~l~i~c~'~s ca ~r~) ~j ~U~0~1~ small ~D~o~n~c ~w~a~t~c~r~s~q@~,~ed ~U~! Stich ~6~0~@~0 Ja~rni~e~s Pond %vot~u~l~d ~b~e~c~~)~:n~l~@ [)I;- P~-~o~x~z-~m~:~@ ~'~o a large population c~f~-~-~n ~:~!2~!1~(~1 property that tile ~i~A~n~d ~ior -~e ~o`~u~g~u~s~L~a ~@~M~o~s~t ~r~i~a~l~i~d~s ~o~l~.~, ~t~h~c~u ~M~a~m~e~'~s Fu~,~.~ur~e Board h~z,~@ ~:~i~t~;~: size ~i~r~. this pail of ~Lh ~e state ~h~a~c cna~s~e~d ~@~h~e ~p~m ~c ~e ~e ~d ~s ~3 ~5 ~L~o~t~r~c Go, ~e~!op~n~ie~n~: ~O~n ~t~h~e~!~-~.~1 ~, ~; ~o~! ~o~~. T:~i~E ~qW~- acres includes ~a~l~i ~l~a~n ~I~l~l~i~f~l~i~on bond ~!~s~s~t~i~c ~!~n~t v ~a~p~p~;~(~;~@~e~d ill ~!~!~;~j~~~ ~L~e~S~s ~t~h,~! ~e~x~c~e~p~: ~m~i~l~h~o~,~@ ~: ~e~n~l~xn~@ ~s~m~-~a~~I lots, ~Berna. ~d said T~h~@ Pond, ~,h~;c~i~,~. is used f~O~7 B R I E F L Y The pr~o~p~e~n~v~.~. ~c~i~l~r~i~e~j~i~f~l~@ (,-,mod ~1~), Lh~e ~Ha~l~lo~,~,~e~l~l W~i~t~e: Di~s~L~n~C~L ~N~'~s I l~n~@~canoeing and ~r~r~o~s~s~-~c~o~un~t~:` Paz',, of Ha~Jowe~l~l~ F~arn~i~z~n~gd~a~!~c ~a~i~@~,~; ~"~g is the ~c~u~r~r~e~r~"~, ~sou~rc~e ~o~' I ~i~;~@~: ~"~Il~a~t~chest~e~, it ~%~I~iI~I be managed ~I~)~,~.~' ~&~n~j~i~l~a~r~i~g ~w~a~t~i~e- Easement protects the state Inland Fisheries and ~%V~:~(~I~:~ The water district put ~U~iep~!~u tile ~D~ep~&~-~t~inen~t per~t~y up for sale because t~h~o~- ~co~n~d 163-acr~e farmstead ~-~L~n ~add~i~.`~on~a~; ~qM~,~5,0~0~0 ~j:~je c~a~m~i~r~: ~me~o~! fe~d~e~n~d-~I wa~t~e~r~-~q~u~a~l~;!~.~, purchase is anticipated ~,~I ~n~n~@ :~@~j~e ;~t, ~s~t~a~i~l~d~@d~s ~N~k~i~f~f~i~o~i~i~t con~s~'~m~x~t~i~z~i~n of on Topsham river ~qjOf Ha~l~lo~,~,~el~l~, and S25.~0~0~0 ~l~i~a~s I~b~o~o~i~l ~i~r~q"~,~qI ~c~ian~t ~'rh~e district ~is ~n~i~a~, ~p~, ~.~1m~i~sed ~bv an ~ano~i~n~i~n~o~l~i~s ~ri~o~l~l~'~)~. ~M~9 ~a~r~r~a~n~v~eme~t~i~L~, to d~,-a~%% ~I ~q' I ~Ls ~va~te~r Tile ~per~r~n~an~e~;~i~l protection of I ~G~'~j I ~'~I~"~cat~i~on is ~l~l~!~l~e Of ~Q~@~,~@ ~i~l~lo,~: ~t!~:~-~? ~w~,~@~:~i~! ~,~e~l~l~s ~u~t Ch~e~i~s~c~a. acres of ~13~,~ad~l~e~v Pon~.~,~' Fa~n~n ~u~l T~o~p~s~;~l~z~l~m~i ~@~A~a~s ~i~u~:~M~ou~n~c~i~-~d ~T~je~sd~:~i ~*~, ~L~"~.~. tile ~13.~-u~n~s~-~-~A~wk-T~t~ip~sha~n~n L~i~:~u~; a~nd ~i~'~M~a~in~e Coast H~er-~,~.~L~a~L~-- ~1-~u~s~" The ~f~-~.-~m c~c~):~:~@~@~2~a~l~s ~a~@~, of ~4~0-a~cr~e ~Br~a~c~h~e~y Pond and fru~n~L~qge or, ~O~i~c C~aL~han~c~,~.~, ~Nv~e~: The donors are Frederick and Florence Call. wh~f.~, have lived on the Property for 3~@ years, and ~w~ho signed ~Lhe ~P-asement ~I~t~Iond~a~v ~A~i~Lh land trust ~F~l~n~esiden~t Br~oo~k~q@ S~todd~a~r~a Th~o easement will pr~ct~e~d ~Lh~e fam~i's wetlands, meadows, and f~o~i - ~es~t~s. The Calls ~wr~il~l keep t~he pro- p~er~ty a~nd continue to live there. Conservation trust to help Cumberland buy island ~qp~qt~q-~q,~qH~q- ~qP~q@~q@~q, ~qH~qo~qm staff rep~qor~qL~qs ~q-~q1 ~. Island, president of the U-ust. pro~qte~qc~qLion zone, and ordered Bet~qLs The Oceanside gift is the first ~q'~8q1~q5~4q1~ql~qi/ Robe~qi~qt D~q. Be~qL~qLs of Connecticut to stop building. commitment~q, although ~qt~qhe town h~q&~q, CUMBERLAND - The ~qO~qcea~q-~q"~q- bought the L~qi~qny treeless island two Betts filed a lawsuit~q, which he indicated a willingness to contribute side Conse~qi~qwa~qdon Trust~q, a land trust miles off Ch~q-e~4q6ea~qgue Island for agreed to drop if the town wo~qL~qdd buy $15,~q000. dedicated ~qto preserving islands in ~qthe is nd~q. Berle says Oceanside will donate $70 DDO in 1989 with hopes of building L~96qt~qt~q'mon~qth, after state and con- Casco Bay. has pledged $15.~q0~q00 to a secluded family retreat $~q6~q,~q0~qW immediately and contribute help Cumberland officials purchase But town officials, who had used a servation organizations declined ~qto another $10,000 to match a similar Stockman Island. purchase the island from Betts, the ~q'~2qV~qe felt it was essential that defective map in issuing a building Cumberland Mai~qa~ql d and Islands private donation. ~qu~qr~qc~qh S~qt~qo~qck~qt~q-na~qn be taken out of ~qt~qhe hands permit~q, later discovered that Stock~q- Trust decided to p an ase Stockman The trust needs to raise $~q95,~q000 to ~qit ~qe town and private reimburse Bet~qLs for the island and of a private developer who w ~qs to man, a valuable seabird nesting ~qv~qA~qLh the help of th build," said Roger Berle of C~qL~q,~q1~q7 ground, ties in a natural re~qsoulrc~qe donations. his constru~qc~qton costs. 28 ~0 Proposed LURC Bills Spark Inter-Island Dialogue ~q1~5~1~-A~A~0q4 ~N~Cw~-~r review standards, ~t~o enforce violations and February ~2~7 and in written comments to t~h~e securing building permits were s~t~ro~n~g~l~) by Annette S. ~N~ae~@~e~l inspections of these pr~ovi~sions~,and ~t~ocon- committee, residents from M~onheg~3n, registered. By the end o~f~th~e hearing, it was Director, Ecological Services duct public hearings as required by law, M~a~tinicu~s, Dix, Marsh, Crichav~en,Lo~uds, clear to committee members that ~t~h~e ~un~or- The outcome of this bill would have and ~F~z~g~l~c islands, ~W~enc~4~J by widespread ga~m~z~cd islands have very different cir- During this past winter~, legislators and been to divide ~th~e governing r~esp~c~ir~is~ibi~li- media coverage of ~th~e proposed legisla- cumstances from the unorganized main- citizens have gained a n~e~w awareness of ties for these islands between the state and tion, testified that ~t~he bills were inappro- land communities, and although these b~i~ll~@ ~th~e islands regulated by the L~andU~s~eR~e~gu- the island residents. Zoning would be the priate and ought no~t to pass. As ~qagl~e could not be recommended as written (the ~l~a~ti~on Commission (~LU~RC). Three bills islands' responsibility while all other Te- i~s~la~nd~er Bob Quinn commented on LD committee later voted "ought not to pass- presented by Senator Linda Brawn (R- ~spons~ibi~bties associated with governance, ~#217, "This bill makes about as much sense on LD ~#217 and LD # 226), changes were C~am~d~c~n~@ ~i~r, ~t~h~e Committee on Energy and nonetheless needed in ~th~e way islands are Natural R~qm~ur~c~e~s in ~e~a~r~I~v F~e~br~u~t~a~n ~a~t~- managed by ~L~U~R~C. tempted ~t~och~an~g~e the zoning ~T~esp~on~s~ib~i~li- ties on populated islands under L~U~RC regu- Participatory Status lation. ~The bills were a result of some development furor on ~M~e~t~in~ic Island, in During the two work, sessions that followed the hearing, the Energy and N~a~tu- ~.~es~i~er~n Penobscot B~a~). Although ~t~hcs~@ bills did not survive committee review, rail Resources Committee discussed ways the, did raise important issues and have in which islands could have grc~a~t~erp~ar~ti~ci- ~s~p~ark~c~d ~an ongoing d~i~a~l~o~cu~Q ~b~e~t~,~c~en p~a~tion in ~t~h~eL~URCr~e~g~u~l~a~to~r~y process. A~t LU~RC officials and island r~es~i~o~c~n~i~s~ a meeting sponsored by the Island Institute on February 2~8, LURC island residents discussed this same question among Local Control at Issue themselves and came up with several ideas Though the 321 islands and ledges to create opportunities for citizen input, regulated by ~I_~URC represent only a ~frac- gain LURC recognition as a constituency, ~t~i~o~n of ~L~U~RC jurisdiction ~a~s well as only and gather inter-island support. one percent of the total number of islands, To create opportunities for citizen i~n- they d~o~mpr~e~s~c~r~i~l~a~n im~por~m~n~ic~o~n~s~u~n~u~e~nc~y, put, they suggested creating their own l~o- ~w~t~h~e ~r~e~c~e~m~l~e~gis~l~a~t~i~v~i~t process made c~l~ur cal review boards, which could then b,~, L~URC jurisdiction includes i~sl~@~ir~ids ~p~op~u- added to LURC~'s of~f~i~6al circulation list ~z~o~. Review and Comment o~;~, ~I~t~i~e~d ~Nca~r-rou~nd ~and s~e~a~s~o~n~:~i~h, b~v com- for "Request for ~tn~u~n~i~t~i~c~s Such ~a~s M~a~l~i~n~i~c~u~s. ~M ~l~n~h~c~@~a~n~, P~cndingApplic~3~tion."Th~i~@~@~~o~t~i~ld~@~,i~,~~c~th~, ~F~a~g~Ic. ~L~o~uds~. a~nd Cri~c~h~a~,~e~n. citizens review status on applications at- In addition ~to its task of ~T~e~gu~l~3~ti~on ~f~ec~t~in~g ~th~eir~is~la~nd. M~a~tinicu~s~and M~on~hc- ~Ni~a~in~c~*s timber regions, ~LU~RC ~w~as m~an- gan already have this status, and have found ~d~m~e~d in ~19~34 to zone ~th~e sparsely p~op~u~- i~tv~e~r~y helpful. They have caught ~tc~c~h~r~o~c~@~l ~l~a~t~cd islands. Based on uses and activities errors on applications and h~av~eh~adoppo~t~- current at that time, three zoning districts ~tuni~ty to raise concerns with an assigned w~e~i~e appointed: General ~I~v~I~n~m~g~em~e~n~t, ~L~URC project analyst. G~c~n~qm~i~l D~e~v~c~1o~pm~c~m~, an~d Resource P~r~o- Islanders ~f~ur~d~i~c~r~su~g~gcs~i~e~d ~L~h~a~i~L~URC ~t~e~c~t~i~on. Seventeen years later, as use ~l~i~@~i~t- staff prepare a summary of ~t~h~e existing terns have changed on ~t~h~e islands, LURC LURC re~gu~@~a~i~e~s 321 islands and ledges off ~t~he coast o~qfM~aine. in addition to its rules, highlighting key areas, to be d~is~trib- has ~b~e~c~r~i working ~" ~a~h~, ind~i~N ~id~ual i~s~)~Dr~id~s r~e~sp~o~nsi~&~ti~ryf~or ~a large portion of the ~s~f~a~t~e~'~s inland territories. In all. LU~RC ~u~t~ed to island residents for review. Local to address sp~e~c ific zoning i~ssuc~s~q-s~uch a, regulates ~n, ~o thirds of ~t~he store ~o~f~)~tf~oi~@e. comments could then be incorporated in Monh~e~gan~'~s Maritime district complete(' the revision ~o~fL~URC~'s Land Use C~om~pr~e- last year. As L~U~RC updates i~ts own Land such as taxation, would ~r~cm~ainw~a~h ~L~URC. ~asaskin~g~a f~lock~of~gu~Hs to w~a~tchov~e~r your h~er~is~iv~e Plan. David B~ou~l~t~e~r has said he Use Comprehensive Plan in accordance ~LD ~#2~1~@ did ~n~o~t even begin to describe bait barrel.~" The islanders' concern fo- will assign staff to prepare this ~s~umm~u~i~,. with ~t~h~cGr~ow~i~l~i Man~ag~em~en~tAc~to~f 19~8~8~, how the citizen councils would address cused on ~th~e difficulty of taking on the To increase LURC~'~s recognition of ~L~URC director David Boul~t~er has offered zoning issues and whether there would be administrative responsibilities for zoning islands as a c~ons~ti~tu~en~c~)~, islanders sug- to meet with island residents, to gain their adequate checks and balances in ~P~1~2C~C ~t~o as proposed in LD ~#21~7. Islanders r~e~i~t~er- gested dedicating a portion of an existing input on how current standards can be monitor land use decisions and avert the s~t~ed that they do not have the time, ~ex~p~e~ir~- stiff person's time exclusively to islands. revised ~10 recognize some of the unique enormous potential for conflict of interest ~tis~e, or even, in many cases, the interest in This would give the islanders consistent aspects of the islands. situations. protecting the islands from unrestricted contact with someone on ~th~e ~s~taf~fwho has ~T~his past February, however, in re- ~Tb~e~s~eco~nd~qW ) (~LD#226) would have development. inpu~to~n policy and zoning questions, R~a~t~t~i~er sponse ~to frustrations expressed by lard- prohibited ~LURC from changing zoning Even more s~Mi~en~t was their point that than representing a single interest group, own~er~son M~e~tinic Island s~e~ekin~gbuild~i~n~g without the consent of the landowners. ~LURC, as an outside agency, does not the staff person would be knowledgeable permits from LURC, Senator Brawn ~in~u~c~)~- This u~n~iq~ueprivi~le~g~e (it is n~o~t~ev~en~gran~t~e~d introduc~e~a local conflict of inter~es~L M~a~tin- in and would bring a comprehensive p~e~r- ~duc~ed ~LD#~21~7, L~D#~2~26~, and ~L~D#~22~7. to the organized municipalities in Maine) ~i~c~us~Fi~r~s~l As~s~es~s~orC~lay~i~onPh~ilbro~ok com- ~sp~ect~iv~e to island issues. David Bou~l~t~er hits These bills were designed to shift some of could conceivably result in unc~h~o~ck~e~d d~e- mented, "As someone who has had many approved this idea and will bring it before there ~gu~l~a~t~or~y responsibilities from the slate v~elopm~en~L occasions to observe LU~RC in action, both the commission at one of i~ts monthly meet- to the local ~q@i~f~i~z~e~n~s. ~T~he third bill (~LD ~N 227) would have as an impartial bystander and as an in- i~ng~s~. The largest bill (~LD ~#217) would have made it legal for development ~to take place valved participant, I have been impressed To increase inter-island support, is- required ~Lhep~o~pula~t~ed unorganized islands in a ~gensi~t~ive wildlife area, providing the with the level of professionalism exhibited lande~nsugg~es~t~ed forming their own LURC owned by at least three persons to form residences were occupied only part of the by ~t~h~e staff as well as their willingness to Islands Advisory Council, composed of -citizen councils" to take on the zoning year. work within their mandate to protect the members of the individual review boards responsibilities currently managed by ~q'unorganized~q' territories but still allow for from each island. As an organized group LURC. These councils, elected by an is- Islanders Raise Concerns controlled development." ~20q"~20qt~qi~qin~qt~qe~qr~qe~qs~qm~qdi~q&~0qWd~qc~qc~q)~qmmuni~qties.~qi~q@~.~qc~q, land majority, would ~qb~qe required to estab- A~qt the same time. complaints from would convent as needed when issues of lish land u~qs~qedistric~qts~qand site dev~qe~ql~qo~qfm~qc~qm, At a public hearing in Augusta on Me~qt~qinic residents about the difficulty of concern arose. T~qh~qey would be able to inter- act c~qol ~ql~qo~qc~qt~qi v~qe~ql y with ~qLURC s~qm~qff and c om - mission members. They Would represent div~qe~4qm island interests and would bring important issues and concerns to the fo~qr~qc- front. There remains some unfinished busi- n~qe~q;s~qs in all of this. T~qh~qe issues on M~qe~qdnic Islands Island have y~qe~qt ~qLob~qereso~qlve~qd. A~qsd~qev~qelop- m~qe~qn~qt pressures move out to ~qt~qh~qe islands, a balance must be struck between the need to Who shouldreguI~qC~qL~6qU~q-~q_ development? preserve s~qu~qn~qe-~qid~qer~qn~qi~qfi~qed natural T~qt~qS~qi~qal~ql~qr~qe~qts mid the need to uphold private property rights. But bemuse of the events this past winter, ~qLURC staff and commission mem- 29 bers will be working more closely with island residents, and island residents will be working more c~ql~qo~qr~qs~qe~qly with each other. ~0 ~0 W~i~n~d~-~d~r~i~n~x~x~t surf heavily damaged this building in Camp Ellis ~i~n Saco. ~6qP~i~-~2qw Ra~6qM~q-~*~q-sto~8qrT~6qn causes havoc in Maine ~4~D The storm dumps 4.8 Power Co.'s 48~0,0~00 customers with- out electricity at the peak of the inches of water at Portland The ~T~o~o~st rainfall measured storm S~u~nd~a~q@ night, said CM~P sp~o~- kesm~an Mari~c I~s~hka~r~i~tan. International Je~rpor~t~. during a ~24-hou~r period in About 3~.200 customers, most of Portland by the National them in so~u~th~em Maine, remained From staff reports Weather Service, compared without power Monday and power with Sunday's total: wasn't expected to be restored until MIA As many as i,~0~0~0 homes in south- 1) Oct. 6-7,~1~96~2~- 7.71 inches today for ~appr~o~tma~t~p~ty 1,000 cus- ~7~@ ~ em Maine remained without power 2) Sept. 11, ~) 954: 7.~49 inches torner~s~. The outages were seat- ~he heaviest min~st~orm in ~3) April ) -2~, 1975: 5 26 inches ul~t for crews to today after ~L t~ered, making it dif~f~i~L ~V a year swept over the state, ~ca~u swig 4) M~ay 16-~17~,19~16:~'~4.~8~6 fix them, C~MP officials said. floods that l~killed a 2~-year~-~old girl in At the storm's pe~a~l~k~, gusts of up to northern Maine inches 49 mph were recorded in Portland ~5) May 11-12,1989:4.66 Samantha Churchill was washed inches with winds as strong as 61 mph downstream in Man Hill at about hitting Portsmouth, N.H., t~he ~i~v~s~o ~am. Monday after her family weather ~s~e~qm~e~e ~s~ai~d~@ abandoned its car in waist-high April 21, 1991: ~4.21 inches Storm-flooded r~oad~t ~qwde travel- water an a washed-out part of Smith ~in~g diff~i~cu~l~L but some of the most Road, state police ~sa~a serious inconveniences were self- Her father, Harold Churchill, inflicted, said Portland Public Works r-~Ain at the Portland International Director George ~F~La~-herty~. jetp~or~t between early Sunday ~a~nd -we put the barricades up where ~.~4q4b Monday a~f~te~f~f~loon, the heaviest sin- it floods and people get Out~, move swift water. ~gle rainstorm since a 4~.~6-~inch ~t~he barricades, drive unlit they stall State ~7~t~o~oper David McPherson dre~n~ch~br~ig in May ~I~qM, a~c~c~O t~o out and they float," Flaherty said. rdi~ng found the girl downstream and per- the National Weather Service. ~qT1~1 never understand it." winds felled trees, mapped ~7be storm overloaded the Port- formed C~qM but she was pr~on High ~o~un~te~d dud at ~Ar~oo~s~t~o~o~l~t County power lines ~a~nd ~t~O~qW~led ~a~t least a land Water ~D~is~tr~ic~k sewer system ~r~'~d ~C~*~" Medical Center ~i~n Pres~e~fue We. dozen utility po~l~i~qm ~W~a~q@ about Bob Morrison ~s~h~a~w~j~s $and from a storm deal~. in front ~o~f his ~T~he ~s~U~r~m 4A inches of 30~,000 to 35~,000 of Central Maine Beach A~"~mu~e home in X~c~i~t~n~q6~w~i~l~t Monday. Casco Bay on Sunday when ~lus v~mwed the damage late Sunday, ~1~1 figured, we~A ~T~U just sneak in a ~p~l~i~m~s ran ~a~g~r~our~qA ~qf~qt 30~-f~oot ~N~D~- said he worries that the ~arw won't Tuck: shower before I go," said boat, doted on land beside his stand up to ~6~qA~qM worms~, ~F~o~l~d~b~a~l~l; who f~a~irg~ot that his water Haley Road home was ~b~i~m~m ~a~g its "If vie ~d~m~% am ~i this situation pump runs on electricity. ~His wooden platform. ~t~his year, we ~m~ay have one more shower was short-lived. sending overflows into Casco Bay ~n~t~er~e w~a~s no major structural Year before that area of Camp ~qM ~1~1 showed up at the hotel with all from three dozen ~ou~l~le~ts across damage, just some scratches~, But is ~1~0~5~V~3~0h~n~s~t~(~M said- this soap in my hair." said Feldberg, F~o~r~0~a~nd. The di~sc~l~u~irge was diluted its ~X~nd of frustrating because my Johnston said city officials Will t~r~qy who is still assessing the damage to and unavoidable, said district ~Ge~r~q- car is t~mpp~ed in the mast of ~the to convince state and federal o~f~f~i~- his three-bedroom home. oral Manager Joseph Taylor. ~qb~qoa~qV Arey said. ~qdA~qLs to launch a ~qp~qr~qi~qD~0qiect to r~qec~qon~qf~qi- Classes were canceled in Wells 'Without ~q(overflows) we'd get ~qto~qo Every coastal community in York gur~qe We jetties a~qnd re~qs~qtom the and Ogunqu~qit because school ~qoffi- million or 1~q50 million gallons a day County reported street Gooding, dunes to Protect the area ~qf~qi~qv~qi~qn the ci~qals worried about ~qch~qi~qldr~0q- wal~qi~qci~qng and the treatment facility would downed trees or ~qa~qi~qnapp~qed utility ~qO~qm~qa~qn~q@ to school where power lines wore wash out," he said 'We would never Imes. Cm~qP~q's Michael Bel~qand said dam Berwick Academy also was be designed to handle (a st~qo~0qm like A~qt Camp Ellis in Sam, an Eastern workers in ~qt~qhe Birth Hill Road am closed Sunday's), we'd always have Avenue home that was heavily ~qo~q(~qY~qo~qr~qk were ~qWr~qi~qaz~qe~qd at the damage, in Berwick police said a tree fell overflow~q" damaged ~qi~qn a March storm was to trees and utility ~qp~qD~ql~qe~q& on a house on Blackberry Hill Road~q. The storm forced Senate Majority further pummeled by Sunday's *One of our guys - said it looked Damage estimates were not imme~q- L~qk~qader George Mitchell to cancel wind-driven surf, and dinner like a Scu~qt~q! missile had landed di~qv~qi~qe~qly available~q. speeches on Monday at the ~qUn~qc~qo~qln patrons at Wormwoods Restaurant th~qe~qr~qe~q4~q" Boland said. "it looks like a ~qhu~qn~qi~qc~qar~qie came School in V~qinal~qb~qave~qt~qt~q, the North an Bay Avenue were evacuated When a 75-~qfo~qo~qt-t~qall fir tree through in a lot of places~q,~q" ~qBe~qland Haven Community School and the when police asked the owners to crashed do- On Hal ~4qf~4qt(l~qb~qerg~q's said ~qIs~ql~qes~qbor~qo, Central School~q. close because the streets were ~qb~8qwt porch in Ogu~qnquit, he ~qga~qth- St~qq~0qf~0qf writers ~qM~qa~qr~0qf~0qt ~04qf~04qt~qle~qr~qt John In ~0qM~qde~qr~q7 Point Richard Ar~qey ~4qf~4qtoded ~qor~qed some b~qe~ql~qo~qr~qg~qi~qn~qg~qs ~qw~qi~qd prepared H~qo~qo~q4~qy, Ji~qU Higgins and Brent was drowning of a summer awl on Sam ~qU~qw~qw ~qU~qw~qk ~qJ~qo~qh~qn~qst~0qM ~qw~qbo ~qb~qD spend the not in a b~qot~qe~ql. ~qM~qo~0qM contributed t~qo Otis ~qf~qt~qp~q0r~qL 30 ~0 Pollution-Prevention Tactics in the Guff of Maine bV Melissa Waterman powered by 250 billion gallons of fresh water that enter t~he~ gulf each year from the region's rivers. The vertical mixing brings critical MAINE nutrients into warmer, sunlit wa~l~ers, where phy~lopl~ank~to~n are able to grow, ~0~.~1-~1 ~i or "bl~i~t~t~im." Phy~t~op~lAnk~lon ~are critical Polo~. to the ecology of ~th~e gulf because they ~f~l~o~h n-~1 A" serve as the base of its diverse marine food chain. Over ~to~o species of birds. 73 species of fish. and 26 different urban sewage. Combined se~i~ver many acres of coastal wetlands overflows in ma~t~iv cities allow nearly mudflats by diking and filling. species of whales, porpoises, an~d seals reside in the gulf. untreated sewage to enter the bays and Estimates ind~ic~al~e that in flip, f harbors of the gill(. The result has been Canadian maritime provinces. ever-~f~incr~e~a~sing closures of productive approximately ~6~5 percent of ~qIi In New Englund, an ai(I ~sh~e~l Ifish fiats (tire to contamination by marshes an~d fiats have ~b~t~mn a] proverb is being used as the fecal c~olif~orm bacteria. lost entirely. An indeterminate philosophical foundation The effects of population growth are of acres of coastal wetlands ha most acute during the summer months. filled along the ~co,~i~z~;~t of [lie. ~qthr n which to build a During recent decades. t~he gulf region of' ~6qVif~qfrent kind of marine has grown in status as a summer tourist protection program. destination. Acadia National Park in The study concluded ~qh ~q Maine and Canada's Fu~nd~v National exhaust and oil dr~ippi Park In New B~run~s~v,~irk draw huge from the ~5,000 cars ~qth Although the Gulf of Maine remains numbers of people. each Summer; in through Boo~thb~oy Har a fertile body of water, there are signs 1988 Acadia alone had over 4.5 million ~e~'v~e all heard a relative or friend bottom contours of the gulf make it a of changes occurring i~n its system. The visitors. Many visitors travel along the daily during the summ W~admon~ish in a cautionary tone: semi-enclosed sea, almost entirely effects of the states' and provinces' scenic coastal rou~l~e~s. such as U.S. months could account "Remember, an ounce of prevention is separated from the Atlantic by increasing populations sire apparent not Route 1. contributing ~to lead levels. worth a pound of cure." While trite, underwater banks, of which Georges only on crowded highways and in r~u~mpo~in~t-~s~ourc~e runoff from the roads this proverb may well hold true both Bank is the best known. The major coastal parks. but within the gulf itself. to the Gulf lit Main, a~nd d _ - for personal behavior and for the avenue through which cold ~r~ice~en In the years between ~1~95~0 ~and 19~80, region's air quality. Some say the loss has affected management of marine water bodies. waters enter the gulf is the 761~-foot huge swaths of agricultural and forested A National Marine Fisheries Service fisheries, since estuaries and as Around the notion we see strong deep Northeast Channel. lands disappeared from the gulf coast. study in 19~82 in ~R~oo~lh~b~ay Harbor, wetlands serve as nurseries ~qfor environmental protection programs The gulf is surrounded by the states, In Rockport, Maine, for example, Maine, revealed lead levels in crabs as OF commercially valuable sp~qe~qc~qi emerging only after evidence of of Massachusetts. New Hampshire. and developed land within file. town high as those found in animals from plummeting populations of ~qbl~qa degradation of land, air, and water Maine and the provinces of New borders increased by 300 percent. As Ne~w York City and Philadelphia and other mig~r~a~lnry bird specie becomes Inescapable. Millions of Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Recently, more land is developed. less land is harbors. Research into the history of further clues that critical c~qo~qr~qist~qi~qi dollars era poured into the laudable the states and provinces came together available to act as a natural filter for ~Bo~othb~ay Harbor unearthed no habitats along the entire eastern t~i~v~sk of "cleaning up" the Chesapeake or (~a create a program to protect the Gulf runoff. As a result. more po~l~en~t~i~ally industrial activities t~hat might account seaboard are disappearing. the Great takes. However, in New of Maine and its abundant natural harmful substances site ~s.~ep~t into the for ~th~e. lead. Nor were the products of T~h~en there are. the multiple I England the old proverb is being used resources before harm occurs. gulf. the municipal sewage. treatment plant elements entering flip. Gulf of M as ~t~h~e philosophical foundation upon The gulf's reputation as a rich fishing Large tracts of land developed for found to b~e the ~cu~lpri~l. ~The study system. Everyone ~i~s familiar ~qwi which to build a different kind of ground stems from a seasonal housing create a problem of sewage. concluded flint exhaust and oil highly degraded environment ~qa marine protection program. abundance of phy~topl~ankt~on. To grow. treatment. Much ~of the. gulf coast is drippings from the 5~.0~00 cars that pass O~r S~a~l(~f~f~l~l harbors with v~arVing The Gulf of Maine is one of the these microscopic. free-floating plants either r~ockv, and hence unsuitable for a ~thrnt~igh ~R~oothb~ay Harbor daily during of severity, all the major ports ~qi~qt world's most productive water bodies. depend upon available nutrients and standard tank and field septic system, (he summer months could account l~o~t gulf sorter from the. effects of ye Its plentiful resources supported Native sunlight. In the Gulf of Maine. or composed nf sandy glacial ~o~u~l~w~ash ~the lead levels. Studies such as this pollution. However, a less ~qvi~qsi~qb American populations and drew bevies phytoplankton ~ar~t~. abundant because soils, which can only marginally filter indicate that the s~l~e,~idy increase i~n problem is posed by the. t~i~qnmer of European settlers to its shores. The the surface and bottom waters mix the effluent of individ~n~al septic. seasonal tourists, ~i~vh~i~l~e beneficial for rivets that eviler ~thr,~gulf. A~ql~qtho~qt vigorously, This vertical mixing is systems. In addition, ~a~s cities such a~s the immediate ~ec~o~n~otr~iv, may have, a U.S. ~a~nd Canadian federal g~qov~qe (Waterman Is a Program Planner for the driven by the strong tides and currents Portland an~d St. In~f~i~n grow, their long-term ~eff~m~t on the gulf. reg~u~h~r~i~l~e a ~i~m~u~t~ed number ~qi~qf i~qt~q] Cliff of Maine of the Maine State that flow through the gulf. The gulf's antiquated ~s~ew~a~g~i~! ~tr~e~a~f~fn~e~o~l ~sv~st~rm~s Over the centuries. both file toxic elements, a multitude of ~qt P~in~t~inin~g Agency I counterclockwise current. in turn. is provide onIv minimal ~Ir-~f~o~o~-~t~i~t of ~PT~OVI~T~IC~e~S and states have converted substances for which standards NOVEM~B~ER/D~ECEMB~ER 19~% 17 ~1~6 ~0 ~'Baykeeper~' would keel ~4~0 The Friends of ~4qQ~ts~c~o be hired until the right person is was es~t~ab~qli~qshe Bay want to hire an found. environmental "It could be a fisherman, it could ~cate the public advocate for the bay. be a scientist~, it could be an ~envir~on- The bayke~qe m~en~U~dist. We don't know," P~er~l~ans full-time posi~qb said. "Ultimately, you'd like to see a to keep a cl~qo~qs By CLARKE ~qe~AN~MEID mixture of skills and wisdom found mental health A fin ack wh~a in a fish~erTna~n, a scientist and a as a catalyst ~h t~q:~e surfaces Off the Maine 5~fa~qf~qf Writer good people person." interest in It. Coast. ~in the ~ckground is the Mi. Desert Rock ~Marm~e Research Station of The. Friends of Casco Bay Since the beginning of the year, Pollution ~qp the College of ~I~l~u~t Atlantic. environmental group is searching members of ~Fri~en~c~L~s of Casco Bay have been s for a ~"bayk~eeper" to be a steward and the Marine ~Iaw Institute at the years, and ~qLh and watchdog of Casco Bay. . ~ University of Southern Maine have named a f~qecle The group has started raising discussed creating a bayk~eeper malting $2 mill money, is looking for a donated boat *position for the bay, a huge estuary years to m~qen ~E~M~W~A~L~r With a little hell) from the National and this weekend will s~t~aut advertis- that stretches from Cape Elizabeth bay. ing for the position. to Cape Small in P~hippsburg. The baykee Audubon Society, Atlantic puff~ir~is ~a~r~e -~V~-~1~0 returning to former ~o~es~ting islan~c~t~!; ~o Donald W. Per~ldn~s Jr.; p~r~@sid~qent The position is modeled after the erated much Maine. T~h~e Gulf of Maine is s~(ill of the group, said a ~h~~tyke~ep~rer won't Hudson River ~"riverkeeper,~" which couple of m~qe relatively h~e~a~l~1hy as an ~ecosys~l~e~n~i. Adjoining stale's and provinces are working together to keep it that -,~iV~ ~0 Establishing a Gulf of Maine Environmental Award program to give towns fac recognition to the p~ol~lu~lion prevention ~v ~.~4 ~q:~ct~i iti~es of industry, org~r~iniz~ati~ons, SOUTH PORT~I~,A ~D ~LAP) -- It also could nd individuals. People living in the Portland th~e s~ewa~l~qt~qe f~qe ~q_~7 It is ~antici~f~i~n~t~ed fire( the council will area will have to p~ay higher sew- owners and ~qb~qt adopt the draft action plan in June age treatment fees to help clean P~cr~t~l~and. ~8q@~8qW up Casco B~ay ~by upgrading mu- "This would 1991. However, ~t~he plan will always be considered a blueprint and will be tion the single reviewed and revised within five years n~ici~p~a~l treatment plants. ~.~q-~,~n T~h~e state and federal go in~g~th~a~t the ci of adoption. With commitment and vern- its annual c~qap~qi support over the next decade from t~h~e ments are pressuring the towns n ..... p~la , said M and cities on Casco Bay to ~i~m public. the state a~nd provincial prove their aging sewage treat- Soule. ~"T~qh~qe ~qe ~go~v rnmen~ts, and the two federal m~ent plants because they are ~I feet ... on the ~qc ~q- governments, the blueprint will grow major contributor to water unbelievable." ~f~t~b 11- ~0- ~A~q@ ~K~@~.~W into a sound and long-lived The P~or~qtl~qan environmental protection program. pollution. South Portland, which wa~s which include their citizens. including generations yet environmental protection activities by sued last year by the U.S. ~En- brook and ~q(~q:a~qt~q) to come. ~. .~." With this language. the members of [be council. Highlights The Council on the Marine. v~ir~onm~ent~al Protection Agency d~ertak~i~ng a sit Governors and Premiers echoed the from the action plan include: Environment, although still young, may for discharging raw and partial- cost of $7.2 mi principles stated in ~T~he United Nations' Reviewing state and provincial turn nut t~o be the best avenue for om~mu~qniti~qes repo" Our Common Future (1987) ~0 ly tr~e~a Led sewage into t~he bay. is which called for sustainable oil-spill contingency plans to identify ongoing cooperation among the states among the first to develop a plan and Brunswick methods for improved cooperation in and provinces on R spectrum of marine to improve its sewage pl~a ~r~i~t. costly sewage development of the world's resources. the event of a major spill Issues. Development of the action plan ~ect~s mandated The findings of the agreement The proposal, estimated to cost p~ar~tm~ent of and initiation Of 8 regional Monitoring from ~$7 million to ~$9 million, will Protection ~qand acknowledged that the gulf In its ~0 Developing a regional database of Program are just two examples of the more than double the capacity of Sewage treat present state is, for the most part, current and historic environmental date council's Initiatives within the Gulf Ih~, city's ~17~-y~e~ar-~old treatment Casco B~a~q% ~qc healthy. The fear was (hat without In a format accessible throughout the Program. Efforts to develop a regional plant ~and ~a~r~ld a system to take likely will ~qI~q@~qr in prompt protection efforts by the states region environmental consciousness around chlorine. o~ut of the treated wafer. improvements and provinces. the long-term health of the gulf find expression in a variety of the p~if would be jeopardized. ~0Identifying additional sites within The 1~98~9 agreement established a ~h~e gulf region that will provide habitat public education materials, Council on ~the Marine Environment as for migratory birds and devising a collaborative da~t~a-man~agem~en~t projects. a new international rg~an~iza~t~i~on regional plan to support protection of and professional workshops. ~0 Historically. the Gulf of Maine has Composed of appointed members from the sites served as the physical and economic the five jurisdictions, the council's ~0 Evaluating the need for a common link between the three states an~d two responsibilities include developing a critical habitat mapping system provinces. In practice, t~his g~eo~-po~li~tic~al program for monitoring the quality of link has proved to be strong and the region's marine environment and ~0 Supporting a regional study and writing a 10-y~e~nr Gulf of Maine Action valuation of restoration and mitigation productive, as the G~ul( Working Group a h~a~s shown. Clearly, the strength of the Plan. ~1~q@hnique~s used in gulf coastal An Initial draft of the action plan was wetlands and other coastal habitats of Gulf Program comes from its genesis as released by ~the council in December regional concern an indigenous effort of the states ~en~d provinces. Although it is too early to 1990. Its thrust Is prevention; its theme ~a~r Developing a Gulf of Maine Marine predict the outcome of the program, the is cooperation. By fostering ~* Mammals Protection Plan in order to congenial relations among the Working communication among the states and set priorities for protection of critical Group, the Gulf Council~. and the provinces. by improving availability of habitats g~r~i~v~ern~or~s an~d Premiers hold great information throughout the region, by promise for improved stewardship n~f augmenting existing monitoring ~0Initialing an agency personnel pro~grams---by these and a multitude of .Change program that will promote tire this fertile, but ~fra~gil~r,~. water other cooperative ventures. the plan exchange of ideas and information body. In this case. ~an ounce of prevention might eliminate the need for paves the w~a~y for future compatible a cure. c~i NOVEM~B~ER~/~D~EC~EMBF~R 1~9~q% 19 ~0 urni~8qyg the Tide Val, 3, No. 2 Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment Apri~l/May 1991 Industry and Science join Forces in Gulf Research Bath Iron Works, a major U.S. shipbuilder, and the Bigelow ~Lab~OT~a- Dennis ~T~av~l~o~,~, ~torv for Ocean Sciences have launched a ~l~o~"~n~g-~t~e~rm research program to director of the determine the environmental impact L~b~o~,~a~to~n~: of the Kennebec and Andr~o~s~co~g~z~i~n ~i~r~@~d~i~c~o ~J~�~4 ~0qJ~0qW river system or. ~t~h~e ~Gu~l~(of Maine. ~r~q@~ne~be~c~@ ~ IV ~i A~n~d~w~.~q@~D~g~g~,~,~A I ~. ~, ~. ~80qB ~, ~s ~tu~at~ed on th~e banks of., River ~M~P a ~C~,~: Maine~s Kennebec River, kicked off ~th ~G~u~l~f~o~'~f~m~@~;~n~e~ $~J~,~C~@~0~0~,~0~0~,~@ "~n~d~o~'~,~;n~)~cn~t goal w~i~th~a Photo ~@~y ~$~1~0~0~,~0~0~0 pledge ~t~o~N~va~rd a perpetual research effort. William E. Haggett, B~IW chairman d chief ~e~@~2p~p~p~1p~1p~fficer, a" t ~a~ckn~ow~l~Ld~g~C~d ~tha research might discover B~R~Y is a pollution ~5o~t~i~r~c~c~. "We war) ~t to continue as a strong economic factor in Maine,~" ~h~e said, "while avoiding any pr~ac~t~i~c~c~@~s Action Plan Draws Reviewers' Comments which could have an unacceptable ~en~. v~i~ro~n~m~c~n~t~a~l impact," Haggett also After nearly a year of review reviewers, prompting the question of ~p~l~ec~l~F~ed to 5~c~c~l,~, financial Support ~t~o~,~- and revision, ~t~h~e draft Gulf of Maine how much a Plan "of this size and the ~c~nc~l~owm~ent from other industries Action Plan ha~s begun to identify scope will realistically accomplish." ~a~nd organizations along the river. priorities for action in th~e Gulf region Residents of nine New Brun- The ~R~onn~e~l-~e~c-And~r~o~sco~g~gi~n Comments from over 75 private s~i~vi~ck communities worked with is second only to the St. John as the organizations, ~i~nd~widua~l~s, and state, Janice Harvey, coordinator Of the ~Ba~\ largest river ~q;~N~ls~t~em in th~e Gulf of provincial and federal agencies have of Fundy Project, ~t~o ~pT~o~%~id~e specific' Maine~. ~Its w~a~qit~er~sh~ed encompasses helped identify flaws within th~e draft comments on the draft Plan. I~qV~N~I~s~q~u~ar~c~, miles ~o~f Maine and New Plan as well as some of the most Hampshire with an approximate pressing issues facing the states and Their 54-page summary water flow of 37.5 billion gallons a provinces. contains 37 recommendations com- ~y~e~a~r~@ M~an~), Of the comments piled from citizen comments made at community meetings held in ~qJa~nua~r~@ The river's plume, flowing received focus on the need for the Plan and February. This summary was ~S~o~U~t~hw~e~s~t along ~t~he coast, c~ar~r~i~c~s to d~e~t~c~rmi~n~Q funding Sources, ~B~e- presented at the Working Group ~si~i~s-~,~x ~nd~ed sediments, wastes and cou~nt~abi~l~it~y and responsibilities meeting held in March. ~a~s~5~v~c~l~a~l~cd pollutants ~t~h~a~@ ~s~c~i~o~n~t~i~s~t~s among agencies. ~su~s~,~,~@~cc~t have ~- Revision of th~e draft Action a pronounced impact on As o~n~e c~omm~e~n~to~r noted, Plan based on the comments received environmental quality of the Gulf. "Without specifics in the Plan, it will is underway. A final draft of the Plan Despite its size, little r~e~s~p~arch be easy for governments to agree will be presented to the Council on ~t~h~e ~ha~s been conducted near the mouth of without realizing the implications of Marine Environment at their summer this river system. Initial funding the actions proposed.- The scope of meeting in Bar Harbor. ~9 coupled with long-term commitment ~t~h~e Plan was also an issue to many to the program - The Kennebec Area Research Endowment (~K~.A~.~R~.E.~)-wil~l provide the first scientific attempt to study the river ~sy~s~t~ern~'~s influence over a~n extended ~t~im~q@~. KENNE~qBE Scientists at Bigelow La~bora- ~qC ~tory, an independent oceanographic In the program's first year, WATERSH~q@~qD ~i~ns~qii~tu~t~i~on in B~oo~t~bbav Harbor, view Bigelow scientists will stress the need ~K.A.~r.E~a~s a self-sustaining program to inform business, government and of environmental stewardship sup- private citizens about ~K~.A~.R~.E. and parted by a coalition of industry, the h~o~%~v it can serve as a focal point for private sector and the public. environmental research and education Dennis Taylor, Bigelow in mid-co~as~t Maine. director, says the program ~r~e~p~r~e~-~wr~i~t~s Initial emphasis will center on a d~qC~qp~q3~qT~qt~qUT~qC from traditional ~qe~qnvi~qr~qon- the estuarine and coastal waters mental research efforts in that it between Mon~qb~qeg~qan Island and Cape pr~qov~qid~qess~qu~qpp~qo~qr~ql for long-term, Elizabeth, including Casco Bay, and rather than short-term projects. the quality of freshwater flowing into Dr. Peter L~qar~qs~qcr~qi, senior the area. scientist at Bi~qg~qo~ql~qow and principal Project areas include resource ~qinv~qc~qs~qti~q@~qa~qt~qor for ~qY.A~q.~qP.E~q., first ~qs~qu~qg- mapping and evaluation, hydro~qgra- g~qes~qt~qed that ~qt~qh~qe Kennebec and Andr~qo- p~qh~qy~q, contaminant distribution ~qand ~qs~qo~qa~qg~qgin Rivers might be a source of transport, biological effects studies Casco Bay p~qo~ql~qh~qi~qtion after studying and the natural history of important scientific reports of high concentra- ecosystem components. tions of toxic substances in the b~qav~q. A ~q12-m~qem~qb~qe~qr Adv~qi~qsorv Board of scientists, environmental ~qa~qn~4q@ business representatives oversees the program. ~q8 Mier ci~qr~qc~qu~ql~qa~qt~qi~qp- ~qt~qf~q@~q, ~qC-~q!~q- M~q,~q,~,.~qc ~qr~qf~qa~q!~q@~q@~q, ~qt, ~q!~qP~q, K-~qe~qb~q.~q-~q, ~qm~qy--~qt~qe~qn~q; 33 3. Monitoring plan is completed Gulf of Maine The Council Is Marine Environmental completed the Gulf Monitoring Plan COL1116d] oil the Marine Env] roll ill ent March. In February, the Committee state I louse Station H39, August-', Main(, CA333 strategy which they will present to The Committee met recently with a attended the January, 1991, Woods Ho focused on appropriate methods for Gulf of Maine Program Highlights monitoring program and on how the m February 1991 used. 4. Environment Canada continues sl Environment Canada recentl0F 6ontrib 1. Funding the Gulf of Maine Program is released to support activities from the Environment Canada, like the US In September, 1990, the Gulf Secretariat and the EdT11011d Atmospheric Administration, is a me Muskie Institute of Public Affairs in Portland, Maine, and has been exemplary in its coin began exploring non-governmental sources of fundin that- during the past three years. They ar f program. In contribution. oin@ might be used to support elements of the Gul- February Funding t e Gulf of Maine Program was released. The report focuses on three items - private found,)1ions 5. Draft Gulf Action Plan review likely to support the Program, charitable donations and The comment period for the draft t( Is on February 15. Comments on the con @SMS tax-related issues, and examples of funding initiative waterbody management efforts. The r(,port were received from the provinces from comparable provides a series of recommendations for the Finance multitude of environmental organiza Network to begin work on- comments will be made during the WUNSWICK Gulf Working Group. The Secretariat has entered into a subseuent contract to identify in greater detail individuals and corporations -in 6. Canadian Green Plan released .AR-W@ the Gulf region that have or are likely to provide slirport The Canadian government released th for conservation-related initiatives in the Gulf. In this year. The Green Plan lays forth WP94W addition, a funding case statement for the Program wi I I be by the federal and provincial g prepared. general public to support a sustain Dp..=.f Special attention is focused on the - WS-k. Network begins work 2. Gulf Financial Examples of sections that are par AOM The Finance Network received a copy of Funding the G11117 of region and to council activities in -.(@. materials during the month. The Maine Program and other Network consists Of nearly 20 professionals in the reion government support for ef with extensive expertise in financing. In June, the Network spots" over the next five will submit recommendat ions to the Council on four issues: plans. how can the Council supplement and complim(-,nt - development of a 5-year Oc existing fundraising efforts among pr i1pppp at reducing the disch organizations in the Gulf? persistent debris into th how should a Gulf-wide non-profit entititY - implement the compliance P0 structured to solicit and distribute private support provisions of the Canadia for the Program? . how can the Program identify the most appropriat'E, People interested in learning mo private funding sources likely to support the Proo;an)? encouraged to call Environment Cana * what are the essential elements to a public/privat.v partnership that can support the Gulf Program? ~0 Pe~8qnob~4qs~'~4qc~4qo~qt` On ~9 'ranked fourth Most Basin Mills put's Penobscot ~2q9~q,~6q9 most-endangered rivers list-, I. D~,~, Commission for Basin Mills' Washington BUr~e~au A spokesperson for Bangor Hy- Endangered rivers dro indicated that the company The 1~0 ~U~@~S~. ~f~ly~w~s ~r~n~os~t ~w~x~lan~g~e~e~d by m~8q4~qA~q'HINGT~q'N - An environ- would respond to the American ~hyd~(o~o~le~ctr~i~c darns, mining ~op~e~ra~t~io~m~, ~t~a~q, group here ranked the Rivers press conference, but did pollution, land development and other ~qFe~l~ql~obs~c~o~t as one of America's not do so Tuesday. m~an~@~-m~a~d~e threats: "ten most-endangered" scenic According to Huntington, the rivers Tuesday as a result ~of i~8-f~o~ot-ta~qll Basin Mills dam Colorado River, Arizona Bangor Hy~qdr~o-E~le~ctr~ic Co.'s pro- would create a 325~-~a~cr~e reservoir A~ls~ok end T~a~l~sh~onsh~i~ni rivers, posed ~3~8-m~eg~aw~a~tt darn at Basin of still water extending 3.6 miles Alaska and Canada Mills, that would impede the move- American River, California "More than $~io~o million his ment of salmon up river to ~t~he~tr Penobscot River, Maine b~e~c~i~~, spent to clean up the Penob- spawning grounds. scot so that it can support Atlan- Susquehanna River. tic salmon again, Basin Mills The Maine Public Utilities Commission dealt ~t~he project a Pennsylvania would reduce the chances of re- major setback last July when Upper Mississippi River, storing the salmon from 79 per- three commissioners voted to r~e' Upper Midwest cent ~to 39~' percent," said ject the dam application, dec~qlar~- Columbia and Snake rivers, Matthew Huntington, ~c~o~n~s~e~r~v~a~l in th~er~ewa~s no immediate need Lion associate for American Riv. ~q9 Northwest ers, which has opposed for electric power produced by Gunnison River, Colorado the project. The PUC decision construction of an), new dams does not prevent Bangor Hydro ~P~a~s~s~a~i~c~~S~i~v~er~, ~qN w jersey ~acr~os~@~, Maine~'s largest river. ~8 ~2p~p~ from continuing to pursue a fed- New ~R~q@~a~r~, North Ca~x~o~l~i~n~a Huntington said his ~s~s~e~s~s~- a ~er~al permit. merit of chances for restoration Among ~the other rivers cited of ~t~he Penobscot salmon ru~n was as being the "most endangered' I based on a study by the U~,S~. Fish by American Rivers were the and Wildlife Service, Colorado, upper Mississippi, Co- s"~1~0~: ~A~i~n~e~d~c~a~n ~N~o~t~s ~q"~1~J~Q~H ~m~a~q~r~*~" Since 1973, American Rivers has helped w~i~n protection for lumbi~a and Snake rivers. other rivers on the group's more than 9~,3~qM miles of ~ri~0~er "The problems affecting these ~qn~9~l, list, in order, are: the Al~sek under the federal Wild and Sce- rivers are symbolic of problems and T~a~t~shenshini rivers in Alas- nic Rivers System, However, facing other rivers that are being ka; the American in California; American Rivers President ~K~ev- treated as sewers, industrial the Susquehanna in ~qPennsylva- in Coyle said ~6~D~O~,~0~00 miles of the backyards and generally abused ~n~ia; the upper Mississippi in the nation's 3.5 million river miles around the country," Coyle said. U~0qf~0qfer Midwest; the Columbia "already lie motionless behind T~qhe Colorado River in Arizona an the ~qSn~qA~-~e in the Pacific dams ... (and) countless more headed the n~on-profit group's Northwest; the Gunnison in Colo- are drained nearly dry or choked sixth annual list of rivers most rado, t~he Passaic in New Jersey with po~l~l~u~t~i~qm" threatened by hydroelectric and the New River in North American Rivers opposed dams, mining operations, pollu- Carolina. Great Northern Paper Co.'s Big- tion and land development. The The Colorado River, which A dam project during the last de- rivers are considered for the list helped carve the Grand Canyon, cade and has filed as an based on the significance of the is threatened by the Glen Canyon intervener against ~qBangor-~qH~y- river, the degree of threat to its Dam 16 miles upstream from the dro'~s application before the Fed- waters and the imminence of t~qhe Grand Canyon National Park, eral Energy R~e~gu~qf~,~q@~tory threat, Coyle said. Coyle said. U.S. wildlife service opposes Basin Mills The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- r~qious questions about the project on Friday to request intervenor vice has announced its intention and also wanted intervenor sta- status. to intervene in opposition ~qt~qo the tus in the FER~0qC proceedings. Review of the Basin Mills proj- proposal to build a new dam at The town of Bradley has inter. ect by F~qERC is expected to be a Basin Mills in Orono when the vened in support of the $115 mil- long proem, perhaps r~qunn~qin a project is reviewed by the Fed- lion project. year or more. The project a~ql~4ql~qs~qo eral Energy Regulatory An attorney for the Depart- requires a permit from the Commission. ment of t~qhe Interior, of which the Maine Department of Environ- Last week the Environmental U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is mental Protection and the Maine ~;516qL U U C ~p u m M ~b ia ~s d s a ~w ~nhw~. ~44;6328;44;72q$~1 G ~'~s u~' ~o~n ~R ~P ~,~_~, .... ~i~c ~R~1~, N~ew Rive Protection Agency said it had ~qs~qe- a part, wrote to F~0qERC officials Public Utilities Commission. 35 ~0 ip~o~o N~( ~R~l~ ~1~) NUMB ~i~l~md~o - .... I. I ~(h~.~. ~f~o~l~l~m~'~.~. lion" Growing pains in Maine salmon aquaculture ~I~,~V tile I of M~.~1~ rin~e R~e~,~o~u~i~cv, (~I)~KI~R) ~t~o~id~e~i ~Ow ~-~;~t~M~v~, Aq~o~a~, ,~1~1 ,o~n~sidv~a-~a~h~I~c growth potential. concerns can ~@~o~i ~t~e~w I III fact, t~i~t~,~, M~.~1~in~e ~'~t~a~t~e Plan- ~i~n ~un~iv~i-~gi~n~g ... By 1992, a number III o~t~1w~, ~S(~a~t~v N~CR~I ~i~s funding ~a project in- ~n~i~ng Office estimated that ~b~v d~o~s~try. the ~C~conof~nic ~k~-~w~i~v~d It~, treat the growing ~1~1~1~1~)2~, the ~e~c~o~n~o~n~l~i~c Valise ~o~f In PISS~, I", -~m~i~l~l~,~l~e~, ~w~v~ ~( III value of f~arn~ied v~s ~f~l~r~l~l~l~C~d S~0~1~1~1~1~0~1~1 WOU~ld n~e~ar~l ~%~ were withdrawn d~uc it, local sa~in~io~n (will) ~r~w~t ~n~.qm~w ~m~i~.~,~,~p~@~@~w~o~l~l~i~l~l~e I~n~e~all~s ~t~o~ad~a~r~l t~h~e state's regal~- i~nd~o~s~irv~and almost ~e~q~oal ~lh~a~l opposition~. Coll, ~C~1~1~1~0~ho~i~l~l ~O~w nearly double lease; ~l~e~.~i~s~v~s are i-~@~i~cd ~i~t ~l~a~t~orv framework t~o~enc~our~age ~o~f tile ~P~,~o~t~a~to ~ind~t~i~st~ry. ~M~a~i~l~l~e ~, p~o~l~en~t~i~a~l~adv~e~r~~"~. ~i~t~i~l~l~'~o~r~t ~o~l~nq~- h~v~app~l~i~c~a~T~I~C~S option~I Ills A~QUACUL ~s~i~n~o~i~qi~-~s~c~a~l~e, ~h~ic~a~l salmon farm- economy needs ~a~(~l~o~a~c~t~i~l~tu~l~e~, ~oa~ct~i~l~t~or~e resulted i~i~i~,~l ~h~-~gi~s~l~a~ that of tile ~q;~q;~'~O~ph~o~l~i~. Cavilled ~i~t good Maine. have i~n~g enterprises. ~i~n~(~] ~t~h~e state's clean w~at~er~s~,~stlit- five bill (~LD 23~52)~ A, pro- state'- lobster , Cal ~if ~con~l~l~q:~1~1~1~(4~@~y when years. Cont ~T appear,; ~qs~qt The pro~qj~e It by ~t~h~e Marine able water temperatures, and posed, tile bill I~"~( ~I~~I hove industry and one -~1~11-~ol~l ire o~p~c~r~a~t~i~o~o ~I.~;~i~%~%~-~I~i~istit~i~t~i~coftl~i~t~-~t~)niversity strong tides ~o~n~c~our~ag~ed~a mini- increased v~a~ri-~i~s cr~ivir~o~n- mounting p (if ~Nf.~iin~c ~c~kh~o~o~l (it ~I~iw deals ~b~oor~n ~I~l~i lease applications i~n n~iv~i~i~(~al control~, ~thr~o~t~t~,~-~,h: ahno~st equal ~es~s and ~c~r~e.~1~l~ed ~@~, ~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~"~.r will, ~, ~(~x~g~a~l ~M~o~h~m~i~, ~iha~( of ~th ~ for Pro- tile late ~1~9~F~A~)~,~ (See ~d~i~a~g~r~a~i~n on ~- ~R~e~'~t~r~i~,fiv~e ~'~ifi~o~v~, and mo~l~'~i ~e motin~g Local Salmon Farming facing page.) t~orin~g ~i~t~-q~uir~e~n-~o~t~s; potato indt~i~s~try could h~av~o ~hc~en resolved operations~q,~q( ~Op~"~l~a~t~ion~s in Down East Despite t~h~e growth (if the ~- R~us~hictions on ~t~h~e use of ~t~h~row,~"~l~, ~O~w ~l~o~a~@~i~i~l~g process~. lower ~qe~qn~qv~qi~qv M~,~ii~i~i~e.~'~*U~iit~iert~l~ieNCR~igr.~i~i~it, ~aq~u~a~c~o~ltur~e industry i~n Maine, pesticides, ~f~ec~q&-~i~nd~a~nt~i~bio~l~- ~1h~e D~op~a~i t~i~n~e~n~t ~i~f ~K~l.~irin~e Allowing ~qs~qt Maine~s ~n~-g~o~l~a~t~or~v framework it is still comparatively ~s~i~n~a~l~l~. ~i~c~s~; R~e~s~o~u~r~c~,~" ~qW~M~R) did )ilia ~c~o~l~l~- o~b~l~a~i~l~l lease is ~h~v~i~n~g examined to identify Only 19 f~i~nfi~s~h ~i~q~u~a~cu~l~t~or~e ~- ~Irn~p~o~r~i ~i~i~i~n~i~l~a~t~io~n on ~S~o~l~"~l~l~s~; d~o~c~t ~;~I p~u~bli~( hearing, and the as they ~qme -~ay~s t~i~t address public policy ~l~e~ises~,~q@~ct~ipyi~i~ig5~O~O~icre~,~%~,~,ire , Operator bonding require- project ~%~,~,~.~I~, sited i~n proximity r~eq~uir~v~qi~qn~qe~qn c~(~,~ii~c~er~i~is~%vl~iile~.~itt~l~i~esa~i~i~i~eti~i~i~i~e currently active i~n t~h~e state, ,,calls. to a ~n~oi~n~l~ic~r ~(~i~f ho~r~n~e, whose th~e~rn of ~qr~qe~qq~qt ~C~o~CO~L~l~ar~a~g~e growth of t~he ~aq- p~r~o~r~luci~ng 890 metric tons of T~h~e legislation n~i~e~t with O~%V~oc~r~@ ~C~oIn ph ~I n~e~d ~o~f~e~X~c~e~s~s~i~v~e as Costly~q, ~qo~ql (~~ t~i~a~c~t~il~t~or~e industry, especially ~cu~i~tur~ed salmon. ~l~i~t contrast, strong resistance front ~t~h~e ~aq~ noise Ind ~o~f L~Ii~I~Ii~(~_~I~I~i~I~V With ~es~s~a ry~. I by ~s~ni~a~l~l-~s~c~a~l~e operators. The ~n~av~i~g~a~l~i~o~n~a~l .~1~o~.-S to t~h~eir ~Op~qp~qo~qr~qt r~t~,~i~,~,~t~i~l~.~i~ti~(~i~i~isareb~eit~i~,~g~ro~i~ilp~,~ir~(~@~d ~of F~o~nd~.~y~, just northeast of was referred to ~I ~s~t~i~l, o~n~i~mi~l- ~1~,~ropc~i-~h~e~s~. n~a~t~er~"~qWr~qati ~w i~1h those of New Brunswick, Maine, ~i~s estimated to exceed tee fair modification ilia- ~I~t~y ~o~.~o~id~i~n~I,~, D~MR siting ~r~Q~i~t~n~"~qI~q'~ql~qo~qt Canada, to determine how ~lo- 4,200 metric tons. Estimates t ~her study ~(~,~i~t: ~s~t~and~ord~s, l~c~s~@~ron~s~c~i~vn~ti~ou~saq- r~e~quir~en~qi~qen ~c~a~l ~b~e~r~i~efi~t~s might be ~encour- front W~ashingtonSt~at~e indicate ~- The likely environmental ~o~ac~t~il~l~or~t~-~op~t~-r~ati~o~n~s h~avcd~an~i- ~C~or~p~@ of 1~q7~q1 ~ag~vd~. t~hat 4,4~(~X)~n~i~et~ric tons of ~f~ar~t~n~ed ~i~m~p~l~c~l~s ~I~f ~fi~n~fi~s lore aged the in~i~o~g~e (if ~th~o industry. currently ~qa~ql ~@ ~h,~(~I~l~l~.~1~r~o~j The findings will include salmon were prod~t~ic~ed i~n 1989, and ~if ~s~t~a~l~e~a~nd M~and~a~l~o~u~x~, I~v~as~e~s f~m all ~o~p~er~n- lure op~qer~qa~qli recommendations for p~oblic and Western Europe produces ~f~ed~e~ml laws; ~l~or~s ~w~ou~l~t~h~i-~I ire I h~o p~u~bli~c~a~nd problem m~qa policy makers for r~e~d ucing~b~ar- over ~8~0~A~qW metric trials. ~- The ~e~conon~l~i~, ~imp~a~c~i~s of ~lh~e ~i~nd~o~,~t~iv ~I~l~l~a~t ~.~1~1~1 ~aq~u~o~c~t~d~- when file ~qF~q, ri~v~i ~s In entry by small-scale ~op~- Growth (if t~i~t~(~- in~d~u~s~trY, ~e~xi~stin~v~, stale ~pol~i~t-v ~(~i~n the ~i~ni~nir~o~ur~n ~l~ec~ti~o~n Ag~qe~qn ~c~i~a~to~ar~s, reducing opposition, however, May he c~o~n~s~t~r~'~l~i~n~e~d~ ~e~an~e~ig~i~n~g ~aqu~,~w~ol~l~m~e ~i~m~i~t- ~si~l~i~og and ~woni~lo~t~i~n~g r~e ~oir~e- its plan to and increasing local benefits. A ~-n~i~epr~(~i~lifer~iti~(~ii~i~i~)f~lp~l~i~li~c~iti~(~@~i~i~s ~t~r~y~' ~I~n~ent~s designed ~t~o ~I~N Ioid q~envi- charge lic~qen handbook will ~al~s~ob~v~i~tr~ep~ar~ed ~h~as raised environmental Con- ~0 ~q@~a~rcomr~n~e~nd~a~lion~s ~(~(~i~t ~a~dd~i- r~on~r~nun~t~,~)~l in~ip~o~c~t, ~i~n~,~] ~o~s~e AC~O~F~qa~qnd I to assist small-scale operators cern~s and led to conflicts with ~t~i~on~a~l policies to ~add~i~c~s . ...... ~o~l~i~l~l~i~c~t~, ~th~a~t~r~"~'~qid~q"~ql~qi~ql i~n dealing with ~t~he complex competing marine uses, ~cre~at- both ~bv ~t~h~e i~n~,h~i~s~irv~,~in~d Maine ~1~VO~-~I~ld ~1~1~C~F~1~1~4i~t Sig- ~S~l~a~t~e~A~nd F~qCL s~l~a~l~v~and ~f~ed~e~r~a~lr~eg~ull~a~tory~pr~o- in~r resistance and o~ppo~;~i I ion c~er~n~s ~"~i~ti~c~an~l~Iv ~f~i~~,~m ~t~h~e adoption ~(~i~f ~t~l~o~i~wnw~qo~qt~qs~q, Th~( ~A~bo~l~l~t ~I~b~e ~'~.~1~q;v~iroon~ic~n~i. a approach~, permits ~q;~qir~q( groin. - handbook will offer to salmon ~a~t~i~t~i~ac~ul~t~ur~e ini~li~a- Th~e~so~l~i~commi~l~t~o~, s ~s~l~otIv ~a-i~s~l~anc~e i~n preparing an ~aq- lives. These concerns threaten w~,~,~,~,~s re~c~e~n ~fly completed and r~e~qui~Y~e~qin~qe~qn ~t~w~c~o~lt~ur~e least- application, to in~i~p~e~d~e fu~t~or~e development sent ~I~l~i t~i~t ~es~t~a~t~e~l~v~i~l~i~s~h~l I Ill- ~w~i~l~l~i ~l~o~t~, Slaw, I I ~op~on annual ~i~ni~t~s ~v~qill r, co~mp~Iv~i~n~g with environmental of~a~b~oon farming i~n Maine, ~v~s- ~5~, ~gn~if~i~c~ari~t r~e~co~n ~iI ~n~i~vn~d~a~tion~@. fish ~prod~m-t~ro~n levels. All ~q~e~a ~c~r~a~ti~o~n~q.-~qlu~qn~qo p~eci~a~l~ly if they lead to ~c~o~st~I~V The M~iri~n~e Law ~l~n~,~l~i~l~w~e l~mr- ~(~a~r~t~o in Maine are ~a~g~e~m~-~i~"~q, Ilia and i~n d~e~V~vIopi~n~i; ~I ~b~o~sin~es~s p~r~v~-~I~c~.~1~*~s~e ~s~orv~ary~s and ~exp~en ~c~u~ir~c~t~i~l~k~, ~Ir~o~i~l~o~l ~ali~k~(~@ r~c~t~ard- ~t~i~c~ip~'~l~l~ed in ~th~e~s~u~h~. ~on~'~t~i~l~i~l~l~e~c~"~, ~s~i~rm~"~l~urv~. ~s~iv~e monitoring ~r~e~q~oir~em~ent~s. ~1~1~1~1~1~1~y~, C~"~'~I~l~l~i~a~l~"~.~1 It~,~- I.- of Owl~, ~,~/~"~. This objects ~I~,p~rr~a~lion~, l~o t~i~t~(~, ~l~e~g~i~s~ht~or~e banned finfi~sh ~a~tl~- ~,~g~o~t~ot~r~, ~l~i~t ... l~i~l~ori~n~,; ~ond ~O~c~a~l c~m~~6~onn~ic~t~i~t suggests ~t~o~c~u~l~t~i~tr~e i~n ~qJuIv~, ~1~9~9~0-~su~ch ~C~on~l~i~l~l~o~v~s ~I~"~c~i~l~i~l~l~, ~p~a~g~c~ ~i~o~,~l~i~n~g large ~2 ~0 1~ ~ COMMERCIAL FISHERIES NEWS ~ APRIL I~NI Our intention wou~Ld Maine budget shortfall be to ~use ~l~qi~ce~nsefee increases to support to take DMR toll Law enforcement. Bin 1~3~q@ Deep cuts include enforcement, science DM~R ~W~M~A~U~qW~on~c AUGUSTA, ~)~@~qE - ~T~he Maine Service, with the exception of its director Department of Marine Resources (D~MR) Phil Av~e~ril~l~, will also be ~e~xased if ~th~e could be mired in the state's deep financial D~M~R'~s budget is not reinstituted~.~, In trouble, and forced to make cuts that would addition to the proposed 25 layoffs, 14 'lash away at the agency's very vacancies will not be filled, and both the foundation. Proposed D~MR budget cuts operating and capital expense budgets will call for the elimination of two whole be slashed. divisions, several programs, and 16~% of Burton Blanch. former president of the ~h~ ~d~ep~2~r~tm~en~t's personnel - all starting Maine A~qUa~CU~ILU~M Association. was July I. twenty five people, in~rlud~in, ~12 s~l~i~t~ick~od ~to learn ~of the extent of h~e marine patrol officers, could be laid off. DMR~'s proposed budget cuts. The D~N~IR~'s bleak future is tied directly ~"Aqua~cu~l~tu~ir~e is bringing millions of to Maine's battle to accommodate a doll= into the state ~O~qW were never here pro~4q*t~od %I billion budget shortfall in the before," he said. "it has done mom for next bi~en. ium, fiscal years (~FY) 1992 and economic development in o~ur area procedure called "bumping" within state within the Bureau of Marine Science once ~993. The D~MR accounts for only 3/~10 of (Cobsrook Bay. Eastport~, Lubec) than government which allows personnel with the procedure begins. ~% of ~the L~O~qW state budget~, which is about anything else. We ~(~a~qu~a~cu~ltur~i~ns) need ~the most s~e~r~tiority to have the greatest job Regarding the general whittling away of what it costs to fund less than two days of the D~MR. The DMR has always been a security. Though the positions of scientists the department, Jeff Karlin, executive school for grades K- 12. But it, along with bare bones op~era~i~ion anyway. This is one working on groundfish, herring, and other director of the Maine Sardine Council and every other agency in state government, is area that shouldn't be ~C~UL" species appear safe, the people currently president of Associated Fisheries of Maine, being asked to bear a proportional burden In addition to what is currently known staffing those positions could be bumped said, "It's in the best long-term interest of of whatever cost-cutting measures are about the D~qW~'s budget proposal, fear of out of their slots by ~L~qW~-off people with ~t~h~e fishing industry to support the concept required ~t~o balance ~the budget. ~t~h~e ur~iknow~n is also great. ~T~l~iere is a higher ~q"~ority. ~T~l~qw~c is sure to be chaos of a strong marine agency in Augusta, one In their grueling struggle to find new ways to save money, some legislators have gone so far as to propose eliminating ~th~e that can work as an advocacy group for the License fee increase come in. And ~qf~qtt's why 14 vacancies DMR a, a cabinet level agency - instead industry." In ~mid~-M~arch~, t~he budget negotiating can't be filled. maybe combining it with other natural K~ae~li~n added, ~"~B~es~i~o~d~e~s the enforcement process promised to be nothing short of -We originally went into this with the, resources agencies like ~t~he Department of issue, I think maintaining some core of miserable. On March 18, still bleary-~ey~i~x~i operating pr~t~imis~e that we would ~n~o~t do inland Fish and Wildlife and the scientific focus i~s also important~. Maine from ~s~u~lling a $170 million budget shortfall anything with marine patrol," said Brennan. Department of Environmental has to coordinate with other states in data for ~the Current fiscal year, legislators on the "But when we tried to eliminate S1~.7~8 Conserva~don. Another proposal has called collection and management, a~n~d without a Appropriations Committee~ began taking a million from our budget without rutting f~ combining the DMR~'s Bureau of fairly strong marine agency, we won't be hard look at M~c~K~ernan~'s proposed $3 ~2 marine patrol, it eliminated other p~r~Ogra~r~ns Marine Patrol with ~th~e State Police. able to five up to our commitment with bill= budget for the next biennium. completely. ~Tb~e~r~e was no way around it. In February and March, the commercial other states." DMR Commissioner Bill Brennan, ~T~he direct public health and resource fishing industry was just beginning ~to learn After reflecting a bit, Jack ~merr~m of the Operating under strict guidelines from the assessment ~fu~r~ict~i~or~is had ~to be maintained the extent of what this budget haggling M~LA claimed that lobs~t~erm~en ',at the dock governor's office, was responsible for as our primary responsibilities." could mean for the D~MR~. level" have often had a difficult time reaping submitting ~t~he DMR's portion of that Brennan said the governor will ~a~q" While fishermen often complain about benefits from ~t~h~e scientific arm of DMR, "so overall budget. introduce a bill on behalf of the D~M~IR ~to ~~~ department - bicker with it, criticize it's hard for us to support the scientific After calculating "full service costs- - double all license fees - something the it., even fight against it - the thought of community within the ~d~epa~nm~e~n~t~,~" he said. taking into account inflation and increased DMR had also hoped to avoid. But not having a D~MR a~t a~l~l, ~o~r of having a "But the ~M~LA board of directors took a expenses Mich as fuel - ~th~i ~VMR figured according to Brennan, all the department's crippled DMR~, has been a new and unanimous vote this winter to preserve ~t~h~e it needed $7.85 million ol~"~g~e~neral fund licenses combined only generate ~$800~,000 ~~~~ein, idea f~o~r man, ~Of them, warden service, which is underfunded and money ~to operate at its present capacity - less th~ar~t 15% of the cost of running David Dow, ex~rcu~tive director of ~T~l~e underpaid to begin with. To make a cut during ~F~Y '92~, which begins July 1, 1~99 1, ~t~h~e department. In comparison, the ~~~bsi~c~i Institute in Orono, put it this w~ay. like that is ridiculous considering ~th~e scope and ~$8.3 million for ~FY ~'93. Inland Fish and Wildlife Department "Whether many people like ~to believe it of their job." But for ~the first fiscal year of ~th~e generates more than S14 million in license or no~t, the D~MR and the industry are like David Cous~ens, one Of MLA~'s two vice biennium, Brennan was required to draft a fees. brothers. Brothers often fight, but blood is presidents, put it a different way. budget that included a mandatory 8.4% "Our intention would be to use those thicker than water. I think that maintaining ~"~I think i~t~'~s important we keep the reduction from his admittedly inadequate mor~t~i~c~s (~g~e~n~t~a~u~ed by ~mc~r~e~s~i~s~e~d license f~c~i~es~q) the integrity of ~t~he ~DMR with a rabine~t D~N~qM together as a cabinet level ~FY ~'91 budget~. An additional 3~% cut over to support law ~e~n~fo~r~r~e~m~en~L~- said Brennan. level commi~ssionership ~i~s i~n~ip~or~u~in~t." J~e~Par~t~m~ent because in the future, if they ~FY '91 was mandated for the ~F~Y ~'93 Anyone wishing to comment on the Without question, ~th~e industry has been are funded to ~qf~qt level they should be ~* budget~. The results? A DM~R budget DMR~'~s budget should contact legislators unanimous in i~ts support for ~th~e DMR~'s funded, they could be very helpful to the ~- package Oat ~to~i~al~s $6.07 million for ~FY on both ~the appropriations and marine Bureau of Marine Patrol. ~T~h~e D~N~IR has fishing industry. The potential is there,- '92 and $6A5 million for ~FY ~'93 - not resources committees Of ~the Maine already received hundreds of signatures on ne said, "but if you dismantle it, the enough to even fund the existing staff of Legislature. two petitions - on~e from Knox County ~:~)o~t~rn~dal won't be there anymore.* 156 people. That's where the 25 layoffs Janke ~qK Plante a~~d one from Deer Isle - that "strongly oppose any action by the Maine Department of Marine Resources or ME forum pulls industry together Governor ~lo~t~in McK~e~r~nan ~R~. ~to ~f~o~ce~i~h~, layoffs or reduce ~th~e equipment of any ROCKPORT, ME - These am ~w~1i~n~g Setting ~th~e record straight will take ~t~h~e Marine Patrol Officers.' times for commercial fish~erm~e~t~L Gr~a~t~i~n~d. ~a~nd energy of all these in In a letter to the House and Senate fish stocks in New England am said to be commercial fishing. chairs of ~th~e Appropriations Committee, in a am of "crisis," ~an~d-~gil~l~n~e~t activists ~7~1h~e intensity of these issues was Ed Bl~ackmore, executive director of ~th~e ~a~rt gaining ground, marine mammal illuminated by ~qf~qt forum's broad Maine Lobs~t~ermen~'s Associa~L~ion (~M~LA), advocates are making their presence felt. leadership representation: Dr. William said, "Maintaining a level of enforcement Now more than ever, ~f~ish~qe~qrm~qe~qr are Fox, head of ~the National Marine Fisheries at least equal ~qt~qo the 1990 level i~qs a MUSL becoming &wart of ~qt~qh~qe big money behind Service ~4qO~4qO~qTS); NMFS Regional Director In these hard economic Limes, ~qth~qe ~q- temptation to break the law to sustain ~qIP~qC~qC~4qW interest J~qI~4qM~qP~qS~q. ~qM~qMY'~qr~qe having to Dick Rot; a third of ~qt~qh~qe N~qew England income will be even greater, especially if ~8q" with a new. unsettling feeling that the Fishery Management Council- and industry low enforcement is at a reduced level." system~q. and their ~qfu~4qwe~q. art being driven leaders from a host of associations. B~ql~qackm~qort said, "Law enforcement is by ~qso~qn~qi~qe~qLhing more powerful than many ~q. Fishermen questioned them ~qt~qe~qad~qer~qs, and ~the one thread that holds ~qa~ql~ql present and Wert aware of before. from Fox's luncheon speech, searched for future fishery managers together. Fishery Nowhere has this sense of rta~qli~qi,~q,~qt~qion clues about N~qN~qT~qS~q'~qs expectation for ~qth~qe science will be wasted effort and public been more apparent than ~qat the 1991 Maine futurt~q. While nothing w~q#s settled by the health will ~qb~qe endangered~q, pollution will Fishermen's Forum, held in Rockport end of the three-day event, the forum be increased, and dealing in illegal product March ~q1-10. This need to rebuild served to pull together an industry that is will be commonplace. Funding for law ~qV~qoundfish Stocks, to find a new direction wrestling with i~qts future. enforcement should receive high priority." ~q60 ~ql~q0~qb~qi~ql~ql management, to make the In recognition of one who has worked ~qaqu~qacu~ql~qt~qure permitting process a realistic undauntedly ~qto preserve ~qth~qe rights and Science cuts one. sobered but also roused the hundreds in~qt~qe~qr~qts~qu of fishermen, ~qth~qe forum board of Within DMR, Marine Science and of people who attended the forum. d~qin~qec~qt~qors and industry associations paused Marine Development bureaus art slated ~qto In the hallways, in the bar, ~qs~qer~qnin~qar ~q&~q[u~qr on Saturday evening to pay tribute to Lucy be hit at least as hard as Marine Patrol. seminar. participants cum to the same Sloan. Sloan, a ~qlong~q-~qtime industry The department's entire Pathology and conclusion: fishermen everywhere have to representative. is leaving for Japan this Physiology divisions are scheduled to be Pull together on this one - ~qt~qopr~qe~qm~qirv~qe surr~quner. Her presence and participation in ~c~l~qur~qi~qi~qn~qa~qm~qd. ~qThe Fisheries Technology commercial gear types, rebuild groundft~qsh the system will be sorely missed. ~qk~qe of stocks~q, reduce ~qT~qh~qe ~qt~qa 37 m~qan~qn~qe ~qIn~qu~qa~qr~qn~qa~qb~qi~qo Janice ~qM. Plante ~0 G~ound~qf~qish management Developing the science behind the pla'n C~0~1~4~f~A~K~O~qI~C~IA~L ~il~e~i~.~1~7~1~1~11LA~I~C~S A~l~I~E~qW~S ~~e Department ~q-~.DMR-N ~A~qi~8qp~r/ small~-scale of sampling for ~q=~qE ~'~8qr~' juvenile fish= and ~~~ ~tia~qld ~la~rg~er~-~s~c~a~l~e surveys research program of ~sp~e~dfic fishing that investigates grounds. Sampling various aspects Of s~ina~u and juvenile groundfish ecology along the coast of catch. ~7~qU total length of all cod Landed, fishes in the Sh~e~ep~isco~t~Moo~th~ba~y, region has Maine. The pro~gr~a~im, funded by the both legal and sublegal~, averaged 20.4~"~, or been done using beach s~d~n~qm push ~m~is, Spor~~~f~is~h Restoration Act and matching just over ~th~e legal mi~rl~imurn size of 19'. fy~i~e nets, a bea~lm trawl, and fish ~qnp~& funds ~f~t~orn ~E~M s~i-~, includes a series of T~l~x largest cod landed, on the days w~e ~T~his sampling his started the process of ~~~ ranging from parry boat sampling ~to were s~ea sampling, was just under Yin documenting the seasonal abundance and beach ~s~eining for juvenile fishes and length. Fishing locations depended on ~th~e distribution of ~un~a~ll fishes ~i~n ~t~h~e investigating the ecology of selected pon of ~d~ep~ar~tur~t~, ~ca~p~u~ti~n~'s intuition, and Sh~e~ep~sco~t Bay, a reputed spawning ground fishing grounds. ~7~b~e project began in July weather. ar~ld nursery area for cod. Tl~is past yew of 1989 and will continue through 199~L4. In an attempt to identify fi~nfish over 2,0~0~0 fish representing 30 species ~ ~~h~e overall objective is to build a spawning areas and nursery areas along ~th~e were caught, including some reportedly database~ o~o ~the state's fi~nfish resources cast, DMR reviewed the scientific rare species for th~e Gulf of Maine, such as that will a] ~)w DMR to make informed literature as well as old laws and existing young-of-~th~e-y~e~ar bluefish and mackerel decisions ~Y~,~:~gard~in~g resource management. regulations relating to ~t~h~e mom common ~sc~ad. This sampling will continue and will The management intention is to rebuild ~ground~ifish species. Surprisingly, very be expanded to include ~d~ie Saco River Ma~r~~~'~s fish stocks for commercial and little information is formally documented, estuary in the spring of 199 1. recreational harvesting. most of ~th~e information being anecdotal. In September of 1989 a ba~thym~e~tri~c an~id In ~he fi~qm 1-1~/2 years of the study the During this ~1~q= year these data were side-scan sonar survey of the Inner Kettle D~qW contacted parry boat owners and incorporated into a series of fact sheets ground, a fishing ground outside ~th~e operators in ~L~k state and conducted s~e~a known as "Fish Facts" and were made S~b~e~eps~co~t Bay, was conducted. ~7bis is the sampling on a number of vessels. This last available to the public a~t various sportsman first part of a mom extensive study of suff~n~er was die first full season (May shows, ~th~e Maine Fisherman's Forum, and selected fishing grounds along the Maine through October) and s~ea sampling w~as even L.L. Bean. Over 5~,000 sets of Fish coast aimed at documenting the ecological conducted on 12 of the suite's 17 party Facts were distributed to the public. relationship between ~th~e fish and t~h~e boats which target gr~ou~r~i~d~F~ish. Die party To further t~h~e exchange o~(informa~tion grounds themselves. boat fl~ec~t (boats licensed to carry more and views between all groups of fishermen ~7b~e Inner Kettle survey results am than six passengers) is concc~nu-~q@~L~ed in ~th~e and to help focus DMR~'s research efforts, being interpreted with ~th~e assistance of the southern half of the state although charters a groundfish advisory group will be Maine Geological Survey and will ~b~e are ~va.~, table from York to ~Eas~tpo~n~ On estab~bsh~ed in 1991. The DMR has published as part of ~t~h~e survey's efforts to ~he ~2 days of sampling, 1,067 fish were established similar groups for both herring map the Maine Coast~. At least two other~ ~~~.J~~ ~t~ry 231 recreational fishermen with and shrimp and the meetings have been ~a~q= will be studied as pan of ~t~his work to ~~d being the targeted species in most su~i~cc~e~ssful in information exchange. allow for quantitative comparisons ~n~~~~~~c~e-~i~s and accounting for 7~% of the Fieldwork ~h~a~s taken on two app~r~oa~qi between Maim's fishing grounds. Regional Updates: Northeast Corporate fish giants ~4qZ recover from ~'89 ~1~-~@~*~I~* ~8qf~qf Although nothing to write home about, 1990 turned in some surprising results mandate rebuilding measures have forced By Nancy Griffin the New England Fishery Management Field Editor Council to consider limited entry. closures and other unpopular remedies. Ne~w En~cland fishermen h~3~,~~t been hit by sa~w more cod. plenty of pollock~. ~t~he double ~@ h~anin~i~@ of economic recession very little haddock. and scrod has been Fish Exchange a~nd decimated f~is~@ stocks, If that ~w~e~r~er~i~l way off." says Gerry F~r~a~to~l~li~lo~, president enough. ~groundfishemen were bludgeoned of the New England Fish Exchange, better ~t~r~y a report that called for a 50% cut in land- known as the Boston Auction. -~nc buyers ings re~gion~-v~vide in order to rebuild stocks. say the prices are high; the fishermen say Compared with historic levels, 1990 they're l~ow. I think they're probably fair. landings from the Northeast's major com- but the fish ~ar~cn~*~l ~th~erc.- m~ercial fisheries were wa% down. However, Gloucester fi~sh~ermc~r~i found themselves sonic strong year classes of traditionally with a slightly longer season and increased ~impor~tan~t~,~spe~cic~s gave fishermen a bit of a cod landings from their traditional Stellwa- Ground~f~ishermen boost ove ~19~89. ~g~en Bank and Jeffreys Ledge grounds dur- N~e~venh~e~,~e~s"~. there is r~eal.conc~em about ing spring. But that may have gotten them face big changes ~th prospects for 1991. Accordingly. the in trouble. ~c 602 guidelines that define o~v~erf~ishin~g and "The bad thing that resulted [fro. the ~q7~8q7~q7~2qZ, ~q_~1~7 higher landings] was Amendment 4 from the council." says Angela S~qi~qunfi~f~lipo~q, head Cod of ~qth~qe Gloucester Fishermen's Wives Asso- ~q90~q,~q0~q00 ciation. Along with other provisions. Am ndmen~qt 4 calls for s~qea sampling from ~q8~q1~q1~q1~q0~q0~q0 Feb~qe I through July ~q31. 199 ~q1. if sampling sh~4q' more than 20% of Scallop-meat-count woes ~qO~qw~qs 70,000 juvenile cod after a 500-~qlb. , ]-hour tow' dra~qgge~8qm~qen may be ordered to switch from 60.000 their present 5 1/2~q" mesh to a special 6~q" mesh - pan diamond, pan square. And if Co-op limps along 5~q0,000 that fails to keep the juvenile catch down, closures ma~qy be Ordered. ~q40~q,~q000 "The), s~0qLy we've o~qv~qerfi~qshed those ar~qeas~q,- says S~qanfillipo. **We say a lot of The Portland (Maine) Fish Exchange, regular big boats. which didn~q*~qt get the: 30,000 people have made a good living landing launched in 1986, limped through financial price for their product. They wen I to legal species. legal size. We heard the com- crises that threatened to scuttle it during its Gloucester for a fe~qw months. but they- ~r~s ~-~@~,~N t~qY~qf~ql I ~2qU th ~s a~q@~8qp~qq~8qj~q@~.~. y~, ~8qp~q@wS~. e~4q@~.~qq 20,000 plain~qts~q, so we went to the July meeting. infancy. But 1990 proved to be a boom came back in December." ~0q1~0q0~q,~0q0~0q00 ~qE They tabled the issue. Then they passed year at ~qt~qhe country's first display auction. ~qT~qhe problem plaguing many Am~qeric this amendment at the September meeting, Sales jumped to 20.470~q,000 ~qlbs. ever - cash no. - affected the Point ~60qZ ~q1~q! ~qJu~8qZ~ql~4ql~q@ ~q9~q. ~qw ~0q0 hen we weren't there, when not too many 19~q89's 16,881~q,000. "We were going gang- Fishermen'., Co-op during 1990. ~qT~qhe co-op -of-~qth~qe~q-~qar~qt fish-~qh~qan~qd~qi~qi-~qI people were paying a~qnen~qtion.- busters," says General Manager Dennis opened i~q1~q5 state 8~q6 '87 ~q'88 ~q'89 ~q'~0q90~q* Closures could b~qe as long as 1 1/2 Frappi~qe~qn "We had a substantial increase in facility in 1989 only to see the ~qgroundfis~ql~qi months. and Sanfi~qHip~qe~q, terms that po~qs~qqibil. small boat activity with extremely high- n~qe-~qr- drop ~q.~q, ~qth~qe same lime. Landings ~6qE] Value ) i~qty "a disaster" for the otherwise stable quality fish. Un~qf~qi~qi~qir~qtuna~qtely some of ~qt~qh~qe ~q.~q.~qThe mortgage doesn't go down becau~qm ~q(x 1,000 Its.) ~q(~qx ~q$~q1~q4~q0~q0 Gloucester ~qn~qe~qc~qt. influx of day boats displaced some of our landings do.** says one long-time obse~qrv~qo~qt 38 ~0 ~"Bu~t the co-op is meeting its obligations. p~any~'s three mid-sized trawlers and a fac- Kuwait. also hammered ~th~e New Bedford The %~cr~iou~s career fishermen are buckling tory ship, which continued to fish after ~th~e fleet. ~T~h~e cost of an average 1~2-day trip for do, ~n and ~or~k~in~e harder. If any port sur- shutdown, offloading in Gloucester. Mean a scallop boat increased b~) about" ~$3.~000, ~i~t~'][ ~be Point Judith." while, O~'Hara's trawler processor. the culling d~o~@n on ~th~e Crew's share. Thereby One of Point ~Jud~i~:h~*~@ most vocal Fisher- Constellation, moved to Alaska to target contributing to l~o~ler morale. higher men. Fred M~a~t~t~er~a. suffered a setback. too. Pacific cod and other species for the for- ~tum~o~,~er and greater general unrest. In 19~@~9. he took a chance on ~s~@ordfishin~g eign, headed-~and-~g u tied market. with e~n~i~an~e~l~em~en~i ~d~@~n~f~in~ei~s and ~t~n~]o~y~ed Lobster Price Worries spectacular success. But in 1990, the same Sca~qPops and Crew Strife High landings and price ~-o~c~s topped the year ~n~c ~was chosen a N~a~t~io~nol Fishe~in~i~o~n Cre~@ problems. including a mu~tin~@ list in 1990 for New England lob~s~termen. hi~g~h~~jne.. The n~c~@ mana~g~em~en~t~p~lan aboard a 73~ scallop~er~, plus ~scallop-mea~t- When the final numbers are in, last year included a ban on d~r~if~in~e~t~s. He fought the count miseries, b~es~c~i ~th~e h~i~gh~l~in~e N~e. could b~e the best an record in terms of ban and offered h~i~s boat us a sea-sampling Bedford fleet. The yea was perhaps best pounds landed. Prices. however, were described by industry long-timer Mart, fri~gh~tfu~ll~,~@ l~o- T~h~e glut of product o~i~l ~t~h~e Manley: "On paper it looked good, bu~t it market ~in laic summer prompted the usual Yell~qowtail Flounder wasn't." lie-ups with ~th~e usual results - little or no 30,000 Scal~l~opers fought against the much- relief. maligned ~36-me~a~ts/~l~b. measure. wrapping up the year at a heated December session Lobster 25~,~000 with New England ~ou~n,~i~l member,. A~T 1~4~q0~,~0~9~0 - the meeting. fishermen argued against ~l~i~m- tied ~entr~). closures, license moratoriums. 20,000 enforced ~,~a~t c~,~,r~ic~,ion, "1 120,000 - ~,~,~,h~e~r ~@u~g~g~es~l~e~d regulations ~lh~a~@ ~@~o~u~ld r~epl~ac~-~,~, the Treat count as a conservation ~1~q0~q0~,~0~0~0 ~- 1~5~,0~0~0 m~c~a~,ur~c Compliance with the count has proven so difficult that many scall~op~er~s will no ~8~0~,~9~0~0 ~10~,000 longer sell at the ~juc~tio~n. and m~a~n% d~i~r~i~f~er~s ill no longer buy directly from the boats. ~q60~,~0~q0~0 fearing liability. Art October crackdown ~5~,~0~0~0 That a, National Mantle Fisheries S~cr~,~i~c~t enforcement agents Seize 14 trips and fire 27 other fishermen and dealers for under- ~0 sized scallops led m~an~@ sc~al~lop~er~s to dump 20~, ~0 ~'86 ~'87 ~'88 ~'89 ~'9~q0~* their catch., Rapid expansion of the scallop fleet ~q0 Landings ~qF~-~qj Value from 46 to ~140 vessels over a ~14-y~e~ar ~8qU ~(~x 1.000 ~lb~s~l (X ~$1~000) period has led to a fundamental change in '8~q6 ~'87 ~'88 ~'8~q9 ~'~q90~* cr~e-h~ui~n~g methods. Once, a skipper could hire f~i~Ocrmen he kn~e~%~v p~er~sonall~@ or Landings ~2qM Value ~c~"~e I To ~pr~o~'~c ~t~h~, -car ~~, elect ~c ~@~r~l ~@ho~s~e reputations he could quic~kl~@ d~i~sce~m ~(~x 1,000 ~lb~s.) ~(~x $~1~,~0~0~0~) d mammals. H~e called ~b~) talking to other skippers. No~w'cap~t~a~in~s ~a~n~d this issue ". s~a~@ ~ih~ev must often hire inexperienced ~o~u~t ~o~v~, ~,~d ~l~" keep ~f~i~c~h~@ ~q people Tile~) don't kno.~, and sometimes the The o,~ersupp~l~y did. however. have a In ko~c~k~l~an~d. ~N~I a to ~C~. F~.J. ~qd~'H~ara ~& preen cr~e~@ members turn out to be drug po~ien~ti~al~l~) positive side - heightened I...... ~@~, ~I~f~l~y~ea,o~ld fish p~l~oce~,~,i~r~t p~l~a~w~ awareness of the impor~l~a~nce of marketing. d~l~i~,~,~, ~h~e go into withdrawal during Fishermen. dealers and pound-keepers in ~,~l~i~m ~do.- ~~t Ap,~i~i and ~1~,~,~d off ~is 2~8 trips and d~emar~ld to be returned to port. Maine are developing a lobster promotion ~c~r~,. A ~l~c~@ r~o~on~th~s later, o-c~r Frank The event that made crew problems most ~o~u~n~c~, ~(~@ ~l~i~;~a., ~en~t~@r~c~,*~.~, ~F~ui~l~i~., p~l~@~, ~:~,~@ %i~s~i~b~i~c occurred last summer. ~uh~en the I ~lh~3~t -~1~1 hopefully expand their ~@~nj-- of ~1~,~id, ~o~t order to win con- ark~el base, and harvesters rcgion-.ide c~r~e, ~o~l the Barnacle Bill demanded to b~e To ~lizin~g the importance of working ~r~o~@~i~, to -ppl~,, ~f~,~,h ~to the U.S. Arr~i~l taken home during an offshore trip. The are r~ea ~0 H~a~rj ~an~d his f~irn~i also entered a guilt) captain refused, so the crew allegedly together and developing common strafe~. plea to charges of m~isl~ab~eling seafood trashed the vessel and threatened him ilk g~ies. from C~a~l~l~ad~i ~a~s originating in the United knives and hammers. After barric~adi~n~g Still, 1990 left a bad taste in the mouths ~S~!~:~L~l~c~@ The c~a~%~c also involved at least four of New England ~l~o~b~s~i~cTm~en~ They claim himself in the wheelhouse. the skipper that ~Wcau~s~e of increases in the minimum ~N~l-~s~a~chL~l~@~e~l~t~s proc~e~%~sor~s~ called the Coast Guard, which boarded the s~iz~e of h~ar~ves~t~abl~e lobster over the past ~\~;~i~t~i~on~;~d S~e~n Pro d~t~~c~i~'~i fi~@h processing vessel in Nantucket and arrested the crew three years. l~obs~te~qm~en are at a distinct dis- plow ~@~, R,c~l~L~,~@~,d ~O~lU~t do-, .thin week, Further, theft on board has increased in ~.dv~an~ta~ge to Canadian. who are able to ~h~e O'Hara f~a~cih~t~@. ~@~;c~t~im to the ~spra~@~l- New Bedford, the country's biggest land smaller lobsters. And at year's end, money-making port, and skippers fre- N~ew Englanders were lobbying their ~I~c~gis- Scallops quently blame ~th~e widespread drug use as la~lur~es and the council to prevent imple- 1~0~0~.~0~00 ~- the reason that boat galleys are stripped of mentation of the third minimum-size food and TVs and VCRs disappear from ~n,r,~a~,~c Further. the council is looking at 90~,000 ~- their vessels. ~the possibility of trip limits and limited Skyrocketing fuel costs, which affected entry to protect the lobster stocks and pu~t ~8~0~,~0~0~0 ~- every port following the Iraqi invasion of an end to constant ~inCT~t~R~S~C~S in fishing 70,000 - effort. Alternatives to traditional fisheries are ~60~,0~00 ~ growing. Salmon aqu~acul~ture is increasing 50,000 in northeastern Maine and Atlantic Canada. Farming sites and yield continued to ~q40~q,000 increase in both areas. Additionally. Maine's sea ~qu~qmh~qin f~qis~8q" 3 a ~q0 stabilized. In fact, one urchin expert says, "It's not just a hit-and-run thing. ~qh seems it 2~6q:~q-~q0~6q:~q0 will become a regular pan of the fisheries picture in Maine," with a h~qa~qt-~qv~qest of around ~q9 million lbs~q. to 10 million Ills. a year. The ~q0 price went up in 1990. averaging about ~q'8~0q6 ~q'87 ~q'88 '89 ~q'~0q90~q' 40~q;Ab. ~40qE Landings ED Value NATIONAL FISHER~ YEARBOOK 1"~q] ~q(x 1.000 lbs.) ~q(~qx ~q$~q1.~q0~q0~q0~q) Ing C,~qin~qad~qi~qa~qn company's multimillion- d~qo~ql~qi., hor~qtf~qall~q. blamed on a gr~qe~qa~qll~q@ d~qir~qn~qin;~q@~qh~qed Canadian ~qc~qod ~qqo~qck. Although ~qthe N~qa~qlSea plant left 202 ~qshor~qe~qsid~qe workers unemployed. it had no impact on f~qi~q@h~qc~qrrnen since the plant pro- ~qc-- I n~qr, ~ql~qoc~q.~qi~ql~q:~q@ caught fish, ~qor~qt~i~q, imported cod bloc". F.J. O'Hara & Sons. h~qo-~q,~qe, d~qid bu~q, some Main~qe-c~qau~qch~qt product. inc~qlud~qt~qn~q@ some from the ~qc~qo~qn~qi~- 39 I I I . II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 40 1 I. Status of C nsent Agr ements and 80K Actions. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A. Consent Agreements Resolved qTATL HOUM MATION 17 -r,0rT1 KIAM 01111 DOVNEAST 1. J(in Dawson. Southwest Harbor Mr. Dawson constructed a pile supported deck and repaired a house which extends over thp coastal wetland without obtaining a permit. The consent agreement requires an after-the-fact permit application, MEMORA"DUM removal of the additions to the [email protected] and payment of a $550.00 monetary penalty. TO: Robert Blakesley, State Planning Office CENTRAL FROM: Pat FIS01- inistrative Assistant, Bureau of Land Quality Control 1. Edward Gall, Augusta DATE: May 15, 1991 Edward Gall failed to obtain a transfer order for ownership of a retail SUBJ: Coastal Zone Management Quarterly Report lumber yard and reconstructed the lumberyard into a commercial office February 1. 1991 through April 31, 1991 building, without Department approval. An after-the-fact (ATF) permit amendment and a civil penalty of $3,100.00 was required in a consent agreement. Attached please find the quarterly report for February 1, 1991 through April 2. George McAuley, Belfast 31, 1991. The report consists of the following "work products* as required under Section B of the Memorandum of Understanding between the SPO and DEP: George McAuley placed unstabilized fill within a freshwater wetland. The case is several years old and was dropped based on a reassessment 1. Quarterly list showing the status of consent agreements; of impact and prioritization of pending caseload. IT. Quarterly narrative of major applications, enforcement activities, 3. Ocean's East Aquarium, roothbay Harbor problems, issues and accomplishments; Ocean's East Aquarium constructed a ramp and a permanent floating wharf 111. Quarterly report on federal consistency review and coordination without Department approval. The case was dropped because Ocean's East activities; was foreclosed upon and is now out of business. TV. Quarterly report on changes in statutes, rules and regulations; and 4. Paul Whitehead and Alden Jordan, Boothbay Harbor V. Quarterly report on the Shoreland Zoning Law. Paul Whitehead and Alden Jordan placed sand below the normal high water mark of West Harbor Pond without Department approval. The case is several years old and was dropped based an a reassessment of impact and prioritization of pending caseload. 5. Jack Mays, Augusta Jack Mays placed debris in Togus Pond without Department approval. The case is several years old and wag dropped based on a reassessment of impact and prioritization of pending caseload. CENTRAL SOUTHERN 1. Edward Benjamin, Cape Elizabeth, NRPA, (river, stream or brook), 1. Donald Drake, Lincolnville. NRPA, Great Pond $500.00 penalty: comply with ATF permit. if approved; and reqtore area. 2. Anthony Correa, Edgecomb, NRPA Coastal Wetland If denied. 3. Misty Bay Development Corp., Newcastle. SITE LOCATION 4. James Rutland, LincoInville, NRPA. Great Pond 2. Nero Construction, Inc., Wells, NRPA. (dunes), $1.000.00 penalty. 5. James Rutland, Lincolnville, NRPA. Great Pond, 2nd case 6. Carter Realty Trust, Northport, NRPA (river, stream, or brook) 3. Francis Grubb, Falmouth, NRPA and Section 413 (river, stream or brook), 7. Mill Cove Associates, Boothbay Harbor, SITE and NRPA, Coastal Wetland $2,500.00 penalty; and area has been restored. 8. David Oman, Lincolnville, NRPA (river, stream, or brook) 4. Arthur McDermott, Falmouth, NRPA (great pond) and Section 413; SOUTHERN $1,000.00 penalty; and remove fill by June 30, 1991. 1. Harbor Corp., York, SITE LOCATION 2. John Callaghan, Wells, NRPA, Sand Dune 3. John P. Martin, Saco. NRPA, Coastal Wetland B. Pending Consent Agreements 4. Emmett Murphy and Amity Construction, Wells, NRPA, Coastal Wetland 5. Land Bank. Inc.. Scarborough. SITE LOCATION AND SECTION 413 DOWNEAST 6. Maietta Construction, Inc., Scarborough. SITE LOCATION AND SECTION 413 1. Steele Construction & M.E. Astbury, Ellsworth, NRPA, Stream Alteration 7. City of Biddeford, Biddeford, NRPA, Sand Dune 2. Acadia Village Resort, Ellsworth, NRPA, Stream Alteration 8. Robert and Gary Bourassa and Robert Blair, Wells, NRPA (river, stream, 3. Charles Foster, Ellsworth, NRPA, Stream Alteration or brook) 4. Lawrence Stanley, Swans Island, NRPA, Coastal Wetland 9. Gino Romano. Ogunquit, NRPA, Section 413, Coastal Wetland 5. William L Nancy Kales, Bar Harbor, NRPA, Stream Alteration 10. Louis Grubb. Falmouth, NRPA, Section 413, (river. stream, or brook) 6. Steve LaFreniere. Ellsworth, NRPA, Great Pond 11. Julie and Everett Gerrish, Kennebunkport, NRPA, Sand Dune 7. 128 Recreational Associates. Sullivan, SITE, NRPA, Great Pond 12. Roger Pratt. York, NRPA. (river, stream, or brook) 8. Sheldon Heartstone, Bangor, NRPA, Stream Alteration 13. Frank Begley, Kittery, NRPA, Coastal Wetland 9. Donald Pelletier, Hampden, NRPA, Stream Alteration 14. Dolcor Amusement Corp., S.c,. NRPA (river, stream, or brook) and SITE 10. Edmund Gillespie, Southwest Harbor, SITE LOCATION LOCATION 11. Harold HacQuinn, Inc., Bar Harbor, SITE LOCATION 15. Cascade Water and Amusement Park, Saco, SITE LOCATION 12. Cape Aquarius, Ellsworth. SITE LOCATION 16. Covey Johnson, Portland, NRPA, Freshwater Wetland 13. John Mahar, Pembroke, NRPA, Coastal Wetland 17. Fore River Terminal. Inc., South Portland, NRPA, Coastal Wetland 14. Brown Brothers Trucking, Pembroke, NRPA, Coastal Wetland (Upland) 15. John McIntyre. Eddington, NRPA. Freshwater Wetland 18. Paul Lovejoy, Biddeford, NRPA, Freshwater Wetland 16. Edith Trapp, Deer Isle, NRPA, Stream Alteration 19. Peter E. Hogland. Peter E. Hogland, Jr., Portland, NRPA, Freshwater 17. Look Construction, Jonesboro, NRPA, Stream Alteration Wetland and Section 413 18. Royce Gael. Jonesboro, NRPA, Stream Alteration 20. James, George and Harold Kouloheras, Saco, NRPA, Sand Dune 19. Steve LaFreniere, Sullivan. SITE LOCATION 21. C:R. Douville Excavating, Inc., Saco, NRPA, Sand Dune 20. Emery Shute, Stockton Springs, XRPA. Stream Alteration 22. Shaw Enterprises. Portland, NRPA, Freshwater Wetland 21. Guy Bouchard. Orrington, NRPA. Stream Alteration 23. Delta Realty, Portland, NRPA, Freshwater Wetland 22. Webber Oil, Blue Hill, NRPA, Stream Alteration 24. M. Jerome Chase, Jr., Eliot, NRPA, Freshwater Wetland, (Upland) 23. Richard Hopkins. Bucksport, NRPA. Great Pond 24. Roy Stone. Winterport, NRPA. Stream Alteration C. 80K Actions Resolved 25. Weldon Tripp, Winterport, HRPA. Stream Alteration 26. Bruce Hesse, Stockton Springs. NRPA. Stream Alteration DOWNFAST 27. Richard Neville, Frankfort. NRPA. Great Pond 28. George and John Gaddis, East Machias, NRPA, Stream Alteration None 29. Look Construction, East Machias, NRPA, Stream Alteration 30. Dysart's, Hampden, SITE LOCATION CENTRAL None -2- SOUTHERN None -3- 11. 80K Pending 3. Spruce Point Inn Partners, Boothbay Harbor (previously pending; update) DOWNEAST Spruce Point Inn Partners caused unauthorized soil discharge to a coastal wetland: performed unauthorized structural repair in a coastal 1. Calvin Nichols, Perry, NRPA, Stream Alteration wetland; and built multi-unit housing in a shoreland zone without 2. Reginald Thompson, Deer Isle, NRPA, Coastal Wetland Department approval. A consent agreement was to be drafted but the partnership has since dissolved and the property foreclosed upon. The CENTRAL Current owner is pursuing necessary permits. No further enforcement action is expected, 1. Robert Mahn, Waldoboro, NRPA, Freshwater Wetland 2. Stuart Smith, Rockport, NRPA. Floodplain Wetland 4. Robert Hahn, Waldoboro (previously pending; update) 3. Edward Dardis, Newcastle, NRPA (river, stream, or brook) Robert Hahn placed fill in a freshwater wetland for the purpose of SOUTHERN expanding an access road, without Department approval and despite prior notice of permit requirements by the Department. Consent agreement 1. Burton Seymour. Freeport, NRFA, Freshwater Wetland negotiations began but have been unsuccessful. State representative Marge Kilkelly ((D) Wiscasset) has proposed legislation on behalf of Robert Hahn to exempt such wetland filling activities from Department II. Narrative of Significant Applications, Enforcement Activities, Problems, permit requirements. The Department is pursuing resolution of the Issues and Accomplishments. violation in district court. Significant Issues 5. Forest Peaslee, Jr., and Steven McGee. Gardiner (previously pending MDIFW/DEP action; update) The Land Bureau Enforcement staff have been referring all logging operations which cause a siltation problem to the Water Bureau. In the Forest Peaslee, Jr., and Steven McGee, while conducting a logging Downtast Region this is a significant number of complaints, and a operation, placed soil in and adjacent to four streams without significant impact on the environment. The Water Bureau does not have the Department approval and destroyed a beaver dam in violation of Maine resources to deal with these problems. We have seen many small streams Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) regulations. The destroyed by the carelessness of a skidder operator. We recommend these DEP and MDIFW worked cooperatively and pursued the case in district complaints be handled by the Land Bureau enforcement staff who have the court, where in March, 1991, a consent decree was approved by the court stu training and the expertise to adequately resolve the violations. and signed by involved parties. Th- lecree required extensive site Ln repairs and a civil penalty of $2,000.00. Major Enforcement Actions 1. James Rutland, LincoInville (new) 6. Frank and Dianne Begley. Kittery Point In 1989, James Rutland performed unauthorized grading and improperly The applicant removed an ex;.ating 12.5 foot by 16 foot platform installed riprap along Megunticook Lake. In 1990, with resolution of attached to his existing permanent dock on Spruce Creek, and replaced the initial violation pending with the Department, James Rutland placed it with a new 14 foot by 31 foot deck. Expansion of this structure stone and gravel in and along Megunticook Lake without Department requires a permit under the Natural Resource Protection Act. approval. The Department Is pursuing respective consent agreements with Mr. Rutland to resolve each of these issues. The expanded deck has impacted, and will likely destroy. all existing salt marsh vegetation (Spartina patens and Spartin alterniflora) under 2. George C. Hall and Sons, Inc.. Thomaston and Rockport (previously the structure due to excessive shading of the vegetation. Inn addition pending; update) to the destruction of coastal wetland habitat, loss of the vegetation undermines the stability of salt marsh sediments, leaving the shoreline George C. Hall and Sons, Inc.. expanded a commercial storage yard, exposed to erosional processes. altered a stream, caused an unlicensed discharge to a stream, and placed fill in a freshwater wetland without Department approval. The project will probably be denied due to the lack of justification Negotiations have begun for settlement by consent agreement. The Maine for loss of habitat and stabilizing vegetation. Attorney General's office has reviewed the cases and has agreed to accept referral of the cases if settlement by consent agreement cannot -5- be res,@hed. -4- 7. Harbor Associates. Southwest Harbor 10. West Cove Boat Yard,ISorrento The applicant proposes to construct a 164-slip marina at the site of an This project involves replacement of approximately 100 feet of old cannery wharf and dock located in Southwest Harbor, Hancock County, bulkhead/ retaining wall in an intertidal portion of Frenchman's Bay in Maine. The purpose is to provide dockage and service for an increasing Sorrento. Fifty feet of the bulkhead will be replaced in its current number of private and commercial watercraft in the town. The applicant position. The other Fifty feet will extend into the water 3-4 feet also proposes to grade and cover with gravel an approximately 6.600 more than the existing bulkhead. Gravel fill behind the exisLing square foot upland area within 25 feet of the spring high tide mark, bulkhead is currently washing into the intertidal zone. for a parking area; and construct a 3 foot high stone or concrete retaining wall around this parking area. 11. New England Salmon Co., N. Lubec The proposed marina will occupy 320 feet of shoreline and extend This project involves construction of an 8 foot by 120 foot pile approximately 600 feet into the coastal wetland below the normal high supported pier in Lubec. The purpose of the structure is to provide water mark. These dimensions include both the existing wharf; a 50 access to existing salmon pens. An existing fill and timber abutment, foot by 12 foot dock to replace an existing 190 foot long one; an 8 by landward of the proposed pier will be reconstructed. The abutment will 12 by 12 foot operations shed on the wharf near the head of the not be enlarged. replacement dock; and an array of permanent floating slips, secured by approximately 140 pilings spaced about 40 feet apart. connected by a 12. Northeast Petroleum Corp., South Portland ramp to the replacement dock. The float array will have a width of approximately 490 feet and a length of 380 feet. The pilings will be The applicant requests approval to dredge approximately 16,000 cubic made of CCA-treated oak, the ramp of aluminum, and the floats of yards of soft bottom out of the Portland-South Portland inner harbor. lightweight precast concrete covered by 18 inches of CCA-treated wood. The project is maintenance dredge; the last dredging in the project area took place in 1985. The project is intended to improve berthing 8. Central Maine Power Company space at the applicant's fuel terminal for larger, deeper drafted tankers. Dredging will extend to 40 feet below the mean low water The applicant proposes to relocate existing 115 kilovolt (kv) and 34.5 mark, with one foot allowable overdredge. The dredge area abuts the kv electrical transmission lines which run from Portland to South fuel loading dock and is entirely subtidal. Disposal of dredge spoils Portland under the Fore River. The project also involves the is intended for the Army Corps' Cape Elizabeth ocean dump site, relocation of an existing natural gas pipeline which is attached to the approximately three miles off shore. Fore River Bridge. The submarine cables and natural gas pipeline are being relocated to accommodate the construction of a new Fore River Project Impacts: Concerns exist about the quality of material to be A. Bridge. A trench for the utility lines will be dredged using a deck dredged. However, since the project area was last dredged in 1985, the Ch barge equipped with a 100 ton crane. Dredged spoils will be most polluted of sediments in the area have already been removed. transported offshore and dumped at the Portland Disposal Site. The Water quality issues about the reintroduction of contaminated sediments project area lies in the 1,690 acre Fore River estuary, a five mile into the water column will be addressed during the review process. long river which drains into Casco Bay and separates Portland from South Portland. Probable DEP Action: Approval with conditions for public notification of the dredge spoils disposal route. and timing the dredge so as not to 9. Stephen F. Dunlap interfere with fisheries. The applicant proposes to construct a pile supported dock with a 13. Alice Pacious, Wells permanent float on his property at Broad Cove in Cumberland. The dock will include four 4 foot wide, 45 foot long wooden trusses supported by The applicant is requesting permission to repair and maintain an 10-12 inch pressure treated or oak braced piles. A 15 foot long ramp existing seawall on Wells Beach in Wells. The seawall is a vertical will access the walkway from the upland. The 12 foot by 16 foot float concrete bulkhead type, rising approximately eight feet above the will be secured by four large piles driven deep into the mud. The beach. Damage to the wal@ is the result of long term decay of northern reaches of Broad Cove form a very productive shallow marine concrete. No fill behind the seawall was washed out by scouring wave ecosystem with a broad bank of cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) action, and no fill is proposed for the project. grading into mudflat. Ribbed mussels (Modiolus demissus) are growing Project Impact: The project will have minimal additional impact above among the cordgrass rhizomes. Eelgrass (Zostera marina) is abundant in the offshore waters. The warm shallow wa@ers in Broad Cove are also that of the existing seawall provided the replacement and repair work home to a large population of horseshoe crabs (Limult pR-ly_p mu@). a !5 !LIEL- does not enlarge the dimensions of the wall. species with a very restricte d range in Maine. Probable DEP Action: Approval with conditions that the applicant not -6- expand the size or move the location of the seawall. -7- lqlmli@@1111 loll 14. Walmart, Rockland 17. Diamond Cove Associates, Great Diamond Island Diamond Cove Phase 11, Portland, Maine The only major coastal zone site project processed in this quarter was the receipt of the Rockland Wal-Mart application. Received for The applicant proposes to create 39 residential house lots on the processing on April 19. 1991. This project involves the renovation of grounds of Fort McKinley on Great Diamond Island. The applicant's a retail marketing center. An existing 78,000 square foot strip mall previous application to create 70 residential house lots on the same will be demolished and replaced with the proposed 93,000 square foot parcel of land was denied by the Board of Environmental Protection in Wal-Mart store. Also proposed for the 12.46 acre parcel is the filling February of 1990. The Board Order denying the previous application of 0.34 acres of Class 11 wetlands to facilitate the development. To cited multiple environmental concerns including the impact to the water mitigate this wetland loss the applicant proposes restoring 0.15 acres quality of Casco Bay resulting from the use of an existing overboard of previously filled wetland and enhancing 0.53 acres of existing discharge wastewater disposal system, the impact on the scenic wetland. This mitigation proposal attempts to compensate the etland character of the area, impacts to historic sites on the parcel and losses at a 2:1 (compensation:altered) acreage ratio. impacts to an old growth tree stand on the parcel. The applicant has attempted to address all of these concerns by reducing the number of The total cost of the proposed project is $5.3 million dollars. Other proposed lots to 39. All of the proposed lots will be serviced by issues involve traffic flow and adequate infrastructure development. subsurface wastewater disposal systems, eliminating any reliance on the existing overboard discharge system. 15. Applied Energy Services, Inc., Bucksport 18. Bath Iran Works, office Building, Bath The applicant proposes to construct a coal fired electrical generating facility that will generate approximately 180 megawatts of electricity The applicant proposes to develop a 64,000 square foot office building, that will be sold to Central Maine Power Co. and other New England a 1,280 square foot gate house and a 8,560 square foot maintenance utilities. This project will also provide up to 100,000 pounds of building in their Bath ship building facility in areas already steam to be piped to the Champion Paper Hill in Bucksport. This developed. Approximately 2.5 acres of parking is also proposed on facility is expected to cost approximately 300 million dollars. previously developed sites around the facility. The applicant is also seeking after the fact approval for several projects previously exempt The proposed site is located on Rt. 5 in the Town of Bucksport and under the Site law. occupies 14 acres of land on the east side of the Penobscot River. This site is presently an active oil terminal owned by the Sprague Co. 19. Cattle's Shop N' Save, Inc., Scarborough -th. The project will include a 400 ft. high stack, numerous large buildings The applicant proposes to develop a 52,000 square foot supermarket and J to contain boilers. generators. and fuel storage. These buildings will 17,000 square feet of retail buildings with 230,000 square feet of occupy 2.5 acres of land. The outside storage areas, parking and roads pavement Including parking and loading areas, all on a 24.5 acre site. will occupy 2.6 acres of land. A 4 acre utility corridor for the steam The applicant will also construct a connector road covering 2.1 acres. line will be developed from this project to the champion Mill. This Four existing structures on the site will be modified as part of this corridor contains a small wetland area. project. They propose 3,684 square feet of fill; 904 square feet of dredging in a N.R.P.A. wetland; filling of 2.49 acres; discharge of This project will also require new docking facilities in the Penobscot stormwater to a wetland: and filling in a smaller wetland. The River as well as an intake pipe and a discharge pipe to be used for applicant maintains that this wetland is not protected under the cooling water. N.R.P.A. Coal that will be used to fuel the project will be brought up the 20. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Scarborough Penobscot River by barge. The facility will produce approximately 450 tons per day of 'fly ash and bed ash. The waste ash will be transported The applicant proposes to develop a 114,324 square foot store with in enclosed containers to an out of state disposal site. 376,075 square feet of pavement including entrance and 733 parking spaces, all on a 22.48 acre site. 7.4 acres of wetlands are on site; This project is also being reviewed by the Bureau of Air Quality 2.93 acres are to be filled; and creation of 3 acres is proposed as Control and the Bureau of Water Quality Control. mitigation. None of the wetlands to be impacted are protected by the N.R.P.h. Mitigation is being done as part of the Army Corps of 16. So. Maine Technical College, South Portland Engineers review. This is an after-the-fact request to permit all post 1981 construction and new request to permit the renovation of four of the existing oldel brick buildings on the campus. The campus abuts Casco Bay. Extensivi@ site work has been completed In the post both before and after implementation of the site location of development law and the entire site is generally stabilized. 21. Barletta Co., Inc.. Rocky Hill Quarry, Eliot Ill. g1jarle r IReport on Federal Consisten e Ity C , dina SY @tc_t Lq-. This project. consists of a 125 acre quarry on a 301 acre site with removal of 25 million cubic yards of material by drilling and blasting The following is a list of federal activities in the coastal zone, over 50 years. Stone will be crushed, screened and washed on site. including a summary of significant projects and consistency reviews. Five acres of pavement is proposed. There is a great blue heron rookery on site. Two public water supply wells are on adjacent 1. U.S. Navy - Access Road Wetland Fill (Application Phase). Winter properties. This project has been accepted for processing and sent out Harbor to review. The Navy proposed to fill over 0.17 acres of wetiand for an access road to an existing housing development. The Navy submitted its application of January 9, 1991. On January 18, 1991, the DEP sent the Navy a letter requesting additional information on specific aspects of the project. The Navy indicated its expected timetable for submitting the additional information was by February 19. No such information was submitted on this application by this time, however, numerous phone calls between Navy and DEP representatives attempted to coordinate the submittal of the required information. On March 29, 1991, the application was returned as unaceptable for processing. 2. U.S. Navy - Satellite Operation Center Modifications, Prospect Harbor On March 7. 1991. the Navy proposed modification to the existing facility. The modifications involve installation of a replacement wastewater disposal system, installation of a new dome antenna, and construction of a new 40 by 60 foot metal building. The Navy indicated that the entire site is within the 100 year floodplain, but did not identify the floodplain or wetland extent on plans :ubmitted. Other information was also not included in the ubmittal. DEP reviewed the submittal and on March 12, 1991, CO forwarded a letter to the State Planning Office Indicating that the submittal did not contain sufficient information to enable the Department to concur that the project met the standards of the core laws of the Coastal Zone Management Act. In the March 12 letter, DEP indicated what information would be needed to concur with the Navy consistency determination. _10- 61 L I @ @ ''1 11 In IV. C@@ @ne_qin Statutes, Rules and Regulations, V- Rep t %It ies On March 23. 1991, revisions to Chapter 303 Permit-by-Rule Standards became effective. These regulations, first adopted in February of 1988. allow During this reporting period staff efforts were directed toward municipal certain activities subject to the Natural Resources Protection Act (NRPA). adoption and staff review of local shoreland zoning ordinances which are at to proceed by simply filing a Notification Form with the Department and least as restrictive as the current State of Maine Guidelines for Municipal Shoreland Zoning OrC abiding by standards pertinent to the particular activity. inances. With the December 31 deadline approaching, the spring and summer town meeting periods will be significant factors in This amendment allows more activities to proceed under this process while the towns' success or failure to meet the deadline. at the same time strengthening or adding new standards, particularly those relating to erosion and sediment control. Also, a 14 day waiting period The text for the next issue of the Shoreland Zoning Newsletter was drafted from the time of notification receipt and submission of *before' and and was readied for printing. Articles include topics on shoreland zoning *after* photographs are now required for most activities to document mapping; annual reporting by code enforcement officers; a supplement on compliance with the regulations. Examples of new activities now eligible non-conforming uses written by the Department of Economic and Community under the regulations are: Development; and a question and answer section designed to help towns with their ordinance revisions. The newsletter will be mailed In mid-May. -construction of sewer line crossings Articles for another newsletter to be mailed by the end of June are -replacement of wastewater disposal systems currently being written. -maintenance clearing of debris from Intake and outfall pipes The amount of technical assistance in the form of workshops was reduced -restoration of natural areas ("undoing" human alteration) significantly during this reporting period for two reasons. First, the -replacement of retaining walls (subject to certain restrictions) spring town meetings began in March and numerous towns adopted updated -installation of utility lines across coastal and freshwater wetlands, ordinances. Those ordinances must be forwarded to the Department for provided they're along an existing traveled way review and approval. The department must review. and approve or disapprove In calendar year 1990 the Bureau received approximately 2500 Notification ordinances within 45 days of receipt of those ordinances or they are Forms. It is our hope that by expanding the scope of these regulations, automatically approved. Thus, staff must plan to spend most of the next more people will legitimately undertake activities subject to the NRPA and year in the office to handle this administrative workload. If all of the be exposed to the types of precautions necessary to prevent resource state's cities and towns meet the December 31 deadline each of the two degradation. It is also hoped that by reducing staff time processing full staff members will have reviewed approximately 250 local ordinances and applications we will be able to spend more time in the field and increase accompanying zoning maps. our presence In the community. The second reason for the reduced outside training and on-site field activities is the State's current budgetary problems. For a six week period only one shoreland zoning staff member remained in the shoreland zoning unit as the administration prepared to eliminate active state oversight of the shoreland zoning law. The Legislature, however, decided to keep state oversight of the program. and restored the unit to two persons at least until the end of the current fiscal year. Thus far, the unit has reviewed updated ordinances for 32 municipalities, including 10 coastal communities. The ten coastal towns whose ordinances were reviewed by staff during this reporting period are: Swan's Island, Isleaboro, Searsport, Richmond, Mount Desert. Columbia Falls, Winterport, Baileyville, Wells, and Prospect. Generally, the ordinances are substantially in compliance with the guidelines. The most significant problem encountered regularly is that some of the local zoning maps are not as complete as they should be. In other matters, the unit met twice with representatives of the Department of Economic and Community Development to discuss wetlands training for -12- local code enforcement officers. Under that department's code enforcement officer certification program. training will be provided this summer. Thus, some coordination between DEP and DECD is very necessary. -13- Also, staff has appeared at legislative hearings and work sessions to discuss legislation relating to shoreland zoning issues. In particular, after hearings, it appears that forested wetlands will be exempted from shoreland zoning requirements, that code enforcement officers' reporting requirements will be reduced to once every two years; that variance applications will no longer be required to be forwarded to the Department for comment; and that the Commissioner will now be able to disapprove, or approve with conditions. a local ordinance without the need for a public hearing. These provisions are contained in legislative document 1992. Although the unit's workshop schedule has been curtailed, staff participated in workshops or other technical assistance forums for the Cumberland County code enforcement officers. the towns in the Cousins River watershed, the North Kennebec Regional Planning Commission, the town of Westport, the City of Auburn and the State Department of Agriculture's private landowner's class relating to timber harvesting regulations. The next quarter will again be primarily devoted to reviewing ordinance amendments and publishing another issue of the shoreland zoning newsletter. Ln 0 -14- ~0 ~~ ~~2p~ont ~d~~~c of those ~at~tachn~ic~n~is~. r~e~st~0~ti~n~g in ~a required. ~2qf~2qtment of ~~~-n~fi~a~~~ expansion ~l~oward ~t~he water. To comply Jos#*, be p~4a~' ~2qEnv~ql~qr~qon~qme~q' With the intent ~o~f~th~e law and g~ui~d~c~lin~e~s~. expansions Regarding wetlands zoning. the DEP will expect a ~Bu~r~e~su ~of~~,~L~v~n~d Quality ~q6o~r~itrol, Stoic House ~qs~qt~qa~ql~ql~qo ~~1' ~~~ main portion of the s~truc~t~i~n~c ~l0W~aR~I the front 250 foot resource protection zone adjacent ~to m~m~i~cr- Volume 5 Number ~1~ S~qpr ~~lge of ~~ in~r ~~t~tachn~i~c tits ~sucha~s stairs, landings, ate and high value wetlands unless the Department and ba~~~~nt bulkhead do~i~)r~s, may ~no~t be permitted of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife agrees that a lesser il ~uch expansion occurs within ~l~l~i~c required setback depth is acceptable for a par~licular w~e~i~l~and~. ~4qSHORELAND ZONI :~~a for structures. Qu~es~(ion #7 Similarly, new stairways for the sole purpose of gaining access to, or egress from, a structure need One of the criteria for areas to be placed in the DON'T FORGET THE MAP ~t~i~l~ql~qe~qs~qt~qi~q( ~ot he considered when determining a structure~'s Resource Protection district is "Areas of two (2) or ~shouk ~~t~~ck, provided that the stairway, ~a~nd landing, if more contiguous acres supporting w~e~tl~and vegetation Fisher any, is no wider than five feet anti extends no closer and h~ydric soils, which are not part of a fr~eshwa~te~i or By now, many towns are well along i~n the process of to the water than is necessary to accomplish their coastal w~et~iand as defined, and which are not preparing revised shor~cland zoning ordinances to Coas purpose. If th~ elevation at the top of the stairway or surfici~ally connected to a water body during normal meet the December 31, 1991 deadline set by ~t~h~e landing is greater than four feet above ground level, spring high water". Does this mean t~hat municipali- Boat (I of ~F n v iron mental Protection. Ma~nyofth~e ~1~.1~q1~qC S I ~~~ stairway should be constructed such that it ties must zone wetlands two (2) or more acres in size townspeople working on these revisions are discov- ties ~q10 parallels ~h~ wall of the structure rather than extend- everywhere such wetlands exist? ering that once t~h~e text of the ordinance is~,up~dat~cd to upland ing toward the shoreline. include the new ~shor~e~l~and areas and stand ~urds, there of cer~qt Answer: is still a lot of work to be done in preparing t~he areas ~qc If the above provisions are rollow~ed~, any floor area zoning map that goes with t~h~e ordinance. In fact, series involved in the stairway and landing need not be No. Only wetlands two (2) or more acres in size there are a number of towns which have incorpo- Sporn counted toward the 30% floor area I imitation. within the 250 foot shor~e~land zone as defined in 3~9 rated the Guidelines into their ordinance ~'~and Survc M~.R.S.A. section 435 must receive resource protec- adopted them at town meeting, b~ut have not Coln- the U. Oue~~ion #6 tion zoning. Wetlands outside the shor~eland zone ple~t~ed a revised zoning map. T~hose communities need not receive sbor~e~land zoning protection. Of have not completely ~m~et the requirements of the I~n id~qe ~fa municipality adopts a Resource Protection course, if a w~etland is 10 or more acres in size it Shore~land Zoning Law until those maps are pre- is imp district, must it always be 250 feel in width? must receive ~shor~eland zoning protection according pared, and approved by the DER great to statutory requirement as a "freshwater wetland". stream Answer: To assist in the shore~land mapping effort, we would yo~qu ne Question #8 like to offer a reminder as to what information is id~qenti Not always. For example, if an area has a steep available to identify and locale the n~ew areas to be slope adjacent to a waterbody but ~th~e area of slope What is a ~0q1~brested we~t~qland"? zoned. Map extends back only 100 feet horizontally from the normal high-water line, a municipality may elect to Answer: Freshwater Wet~qland Maps zone only that first 100 feet for resource protection, ~q"eD placing the last 150 feet in a residential district. Also, ~qne Mandatory Shor~e~land Zoning Act, 38 M.R.S.A., Early last year the DEP sent to each municipality maps ~~~ DEP requires only the I ~q0~q0-y~ear flood plain to be section 436-A~q(5-A) defines a forested we~tland as "a several copies of the State of Maine Guidelines fo to ~qacc zoned for resource protection. Beyond the limits of freshwater we~t~land dominated by woody vegetation Municipal Sh~orela~nd Zoning Ordinances, and a ~z~onin ~~~ flood plain a resource protection zone is not that is 6 meters tall or taller". freshwater wetlands map for that community. These 7~.5 mi maps identify the non-f~orested freshwater wetlands which which am 10 acres or more i~n size, ~and include the using DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION wildlife habitat rating of those wetlands. The D~EP shorel BUREAU OF LAND QUALITY CONTROL will expect each municipality, at a minimum, to STATE HOUSE STATION 17 identify and establish zoning around the wetlands Using identified on those maps. Communities that wish to AUGUSTA, ME 04333 extend shor~c~land zoning to areas around forested wetlands, or smaller wetlands as well, may do so. However, if your town zones only tinder the provi- sions of the shorc~land zoning law, these areas ~c~an ~~ 04333STAT~BSTAT not exceed 250 feet in width. ~qC~0q( 3~C~R ~SLAKESL~E~T HE STAT~j PLANN~rNG OFFICE The wildlife habitat ratings on these maps is impor- 19 STATION 38 AUGUSTA tant because the DEP Guidelines specify that und~e- SH ME 04333 vc~I~op~ed areas adjacent to moderate and high value RE wetlands are ~to h~e designated as a Resource Protec- ~0qs~ql~qi tion District. Areas adjacent to low value or unrat~ed T~qI wetlands call be zoned to reflect the current uses in BE the area, or is a residential or ~similardistric~t~. Any 4 Answer: flitill it asicrocale the sucarnsand wetlands which need INLAND GUIDELINES shor to b zoned because all ofthe streams, and most, if not AVAILABLE When reviewing locally adopted ordinances, it will , of e wetlands are identific(l. This also makes be the shorcland zoning unit's position that shoreland "I'll transferring the wellands, as shown on the Freshwater Over the past several months the DEP staff has received areas meeting the criteria for resource protection zone comments from a number of non-coastal towns that using the zoning which have fewer than one principal structure T011 Welland Maps tothe scaleof the base mart inuchcasicr. DEP Guidclincs is difficult because of all the references to per 500 feet of shoreland or wetland frontage, when their coastal issues. and standards along coastal waters mitt wet- zone Finally, if you need assistance in identifying the lands. In response to those comments the DEP has prepared these areas extend for more than one thousand feet ram. ch has all of these be designateda% a Resource Protection or similar nica or wetlands in your town, or in preparing a n in an version of the Guidelines whi zoning p. your regional planning council may be erercrices cdited out. Copies of these Guidelines are district. With regard to areas meeting the criteria for "Pla available at the DEP in Augusta. or from your Regional Resource Protection zoning due to the presence of able to help. Planning Cooncil. The inland version of the guidelines is slopes greater than 20%, 100 year nood plains, or ue also available on computer disk. wctland areas in excess of 2 acres, the DFP will DEC PROVIDES SUPPLEMENTAL reuire Resource Protection zoning except in situa- The GUIDANCE tions where these conditions are limited to the area expa included in this newsletter is a supplemental package CEO ANNUAL REPORTS DUE within IW feet of a great pond classified GPA ora sell) drafted by staff of the 1krianment of Economic and river flowing to a great pond classified GPA, Or area Community Development (DECD) for municipalities in January the Department mailed to each municipal within 75 feet of the normal high-water line of the which wish to adopt more stringent Provisions for non- code enforcement officer a copy or the annual reporting another water body or upland edge of a wetland, and to I" conforming structures than are contained in the State o form for shorcland zoning activities ror the year 1990. are otherwise protected by buffer strip provisions in expa Manic ud lines rot Municipal Shorcland Zonin Se rcporL were due by March 1. 1991. if you are a ordinances, We wish to %tTcss that the information municipa) code enforcement officer and haven't com- the municipal ordinance. Ans "vi in nECD's supplemental package is optional pIcted the Form and returned it to the DEP's shorcland and should not be looked upon as minitnum standards. zoning unit please do so promptly in areas adjacent to moderate or high value wetlands, Whi a% identified by the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (DIF&W), the DEP will reuire Re- and source Protection zoning unless the municipality has ing developed a district designation in consultation with acce uestions and Answers developed" area may be established in accordance DIF&W which adeuately provides for the long- or fl with the existing pattern of developmcni, or in term protection of the resource. Stich adistrict might aPPI Much of the content of this newsletter consists of a accordance with the standards contained in the include pmvisionsfor a low density of development exP uestion and answer forniat. We arc attempting to municipal shoreland zoning ordinance in effect as of (such as described above) with increased lot size, toe provide answers to some of the more commonly March 24, 1990, when the new state guidelines buffer strip, and clearing standards. Ifamodified ume asked uestions as municipalities undertake the task were adopted. Resource Protection district is developed, the mu- area nicipality shall provide the Department with docu- excl of updating their local shorcland zoning ordinances nd administering those ordinances. If you need The exception to the above is for significantly mentation that the established district and standards pro further discussion of any of these issues please developed areas adjacent to great ponds. Adjacent will provide adeuate protection to the resource, as oft contact the DEP's shorcland zoning unit at 289-2111. to great ponds, the minimum setback, frontage, and agreed upon by the Department of Inland Fisheries are lot size reuirements for significantly developed andWildlife. wou uestion #11: areas shal I be no less than 100 feet, 100 feet, and fI 20,000 suare feet respectively, even if the existing uestion #3: purl Must [be newly updated minimum lot size, frontage, pattern of development is more dense than these dec and setback reuirements be incorporated into local standard-,. The wetlands maps provided by the DEP to our town orw ordinances regardless of the current pattern of are small in scale. In fact, the line delineating the that development? In order to achieve the goals of the shoreland zoning boundary of (he wetland represents nearly 250 feet law, municipalities which adopt lesser lot size, of distance on the ground. Call wetlands delinea- 6u Answer: frontage and setback standards for"significantly tions be made using the maps provided by DFP or developed" areas should consider offsetting that our locally adopted maps drafted from those DEP 1-10 Th newly revised State of Maine Guidglines for greater density by further limiting expansions on provided inaps? res Mnicial Shomland Zoninp Ordinances contain existing development. Ans increased lot size, frontage, and setback reuire- Answer: merits. While these new standard% are appropriate in uestion #2: Soil relatively undeveloped shorcland -areas, in "signifi- Municipalities adopting shorcland zoning maps cnly developed" areas municipalities may chobse The State's guideline ordinance reuires undevel- which are based on wetlands maps provided by the Min to adopt lesser standards. Significantly developed oped areas meeting the criteria for Resource Protec- Department should include language which clearly gui residential areas am areas which contain on average, tion zoning be so designated in a municipal ordi- indicates that the actual boundaries of the wetlands Illel at least one residential structure per one hundred reet nance. What density of existing development is may differ from those shown oil the maps, since the buil of shore frontage over it distance of at least one necessary for the area to be considered developed, maps prilvided by the Department were generated strit thousand feet of shoreline. ScIback, frontage, and and therefore not reuire Resource Protection or based (in acrial photography interpretation. The :1110 l ituirements for residential areas which similarzonin0e. actual boundaries must be determined based on site current y meet the above criteria for a "sign i ficantly inspections. Below is an example (if language that - Tbo 2 3 CONSIDERING THE TREATMENT STRUCTURES IN THE SH NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES po A non-conforming structure is defined in the DEP oth Gu idelines as a structure that does not meet the dimensional a reuirements for setback, height, or lot coverage. Structures Ge that were in compliance with dimensional reuirements at me the time of construction may become non-conforming when tri new regulations are adopted. no les The treatment of structures that fail to meet the dimen- sta sional reuirements contained in DEP Guidelines should be based on local conditions. The degree to which such struc- tutes should be controlled will vary from municipality to municipality depending on the nature of the shoreline, the number of non-conforming structures, and the ottent to which the structures are nonconforming. Municipalities will N treat non-conforming structures differently depending on are how shorcland areas have developed in the past and, how for municipalities want their shorcland areas to develop in co [he future. Addressing issues associated with non-conforming struc- the tures may take some time. However, municipalities that wa adopt specific ordinance language for non-conforming tri structures will have ordinances that will be easier for the h Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) and Planning Board to administer, will aid the Planning Board and CEO in making consistent decisions, and will avoid misunderstandings on Be the part of applicants. By clarifying how non-conforming ler structures can expand along shorcs, municipalities can pro- vidc better protection of water uality and scenic resources. MA8R48E The following discussion rocum on structures that are A, nonconforming vAth respect to the reuired shoreline set- W DECD Office of Comprehensive Planning back. These are structures that are: 1) less than 100 ft. from wO great ponds classified GPA and rivers flowing to those thik-64t6Whisti0nti4mes fif Ii4klikiii'4M 0W16'fifis th'it*th6 Department (D1E'CD)-2p2p1ppeveloped to Y Protedti6n's Guideli0m r0i iiiii',;2ppp2p2peiiilid.,,Zogifig.,',Ordinincis (hiieinarter DEP !8WII0I8N8V2I811111 - Exr0*1to I C- Id, l'iii"iti i d I a1ppp2pp2ppppn pan- 7 6_' 61bg statillin i-elife t67A;,o26Iaftd 2011ii& The jii4m or these bul- vftunlbiilihii 2mth additional lan2&age to use in Ae"WL iiak]1241-6eil ficei 6o44i0f0f0i8kiiiii-sklid easier loadminister and en- 6X Id'h 'c0*Pi#'S`.of* the b ines, effective lift a i 03. ion 124 EP Guil I a 6ha c"' i " "' a 01111 1 'bpia.artk*giiliblefroin'!egionaI Councils th S I onhig Wit it P A ;108b A 76u Th ,,pl.,n,l do, of a welland hall not inefease, thr. cril*ng that footprint within the setback this, n : Our town does not allow non-conforming structures to A L.1pAirGD,5,f expand unless the expansion meets dimensional reuire. u* I-triN meats. Can we prohibit non-conforming structures from ex. elp panding within the reuired 3hortland zoning setback even ir non his means that some structures will not be able to expand at I ru all? shor A. Yes. Municipalities can enact ordinances that art stricter 11 I FVpAo4iorJ 50 6XP40SIN than the DEP Guidelines. pans ov: TbKrl W WTHJtJ Municipalities interested in doing this should prohibit P expansions that fail to meet dimensional standards from taking rega place unless the applicant is able to obtain a variance from the forn Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA. In order to grant a variance, 8see 2H4WL. the ZBA must determine that strict compliance with the 12& regulation would cause unusual hardship or extraordinary dif- pr ficulties because of exceptional or uniue conditions of topog. A-0w raphy, accc& location, sh&M size or other physical features C D of the site refer to Title 30-A section 4353 for further infor. Joe: heptitin ofthe stnictum dng within the reuiredsetback cannot expand by more than 30 ofthe mation. .- Ifloor area or volume ofthe portion ofthe structure Idng within the setback, during the lifetime ofthe stnicture. It is very difficult to imagine a circumstance where a ZBA A- would be justified in granting a variance for an expansion. be m Backing up this approach is the view that an expansion that Bero . It our municipality belle v DUN Guidelines adeuately By taking this approach, administration of the ordinance is fails to meet dimensional standards further increawA a non- ing limit expansions within the Whack, how can we amend DEP greatly simplified due to the fact that the local CEO does not conformity and therefore should be prohibited. This approach that is in keeping with the gencral planning philosophy that non. can Guidelines to make this clear? have to be involvcd in determining whether expansions meet conformitics should be phased out over time. care the 30 criteria outlined in DEP Guidelines. Also, A; Mdpitkscbsoingtorplaieexpowslons occur- municipalities do not need to act up a process whereby such It should be pointed out that non-conforming structures ring within te setback In this manner, should odd the fol- expansions can be monitored over the lifetime of a structure. may be able to be relocated so as to become conforming at adm lowing language to theead otporagroph 12C11c orthe AJI expansions illustrated above would be prohibited. which point they are aflowed to expand according to dimen. how nP Guidelines. sional standards. An ins inwards a stat" bDdZ irihat= 0"Irm- Of In order to do this, the following changes should be made to wed is an im'Waft that d=.Ws tha hort- --*--*--- Section 12C1: delete paragraph a; rename paragraph b Freeport's Zoning Ordinance includes language allowing whe n=Mfi, setback digtonnn from the alware 'Migg distance - paragraph a; rename paragraph c as paragraph h and for a limited one-time nonconforming expansion to take place firet action in setback resulfing ho shall take into account the red change it to read: provided an applicant is able to obtain a variance from the fail at de-fin There shall be an cxpausion within the ZDA. Municipalities interested in pursuing this approach w LCUkCd=tbAck should delete 12C1c and replace the language in be d should be noted that DEP officials consider exp from The normal bigh-water lone of a mmIt;[ bodL tributary 124C1s with language similar to that found in Freeport's area ansions strearn or i,pland cdgaoJA.1T1Ja20L lwd the water in this manner. Municipalities choosing to Ordinance: ions area u alternative approaches should keep their CEOs informed. 2 Municipalities could allow the portion or I he structure A h,,;Id*ng or structom whieh 6 rinn-confiarming wilh what : Can municipalities Umit expansions of lbe tM 11- lying within the reuireti setback to expand by 30 as out- EcWd in the dimensional standards of thit OrAnanct; - can rtc In B, C and D? fined in DEP Guidelines, but prohibit the expansion from in- RX act be Zp,ndrd ,I,rgcd nr oncreAsed mdem such aWandprl dor creasing the structures footprint within the setback. This or ralarlicel parlbrin compUrA with the. dompnional RIAndardl they A. L cpolides can do this by forthisr spe4f4ting bow would only allow for vertical expansions to take place within of this OrdinAncr- Hoy&-mr. the Zoning Board of Appcak Wallis expansions can take plane within The mulrtd sdboclk. Below the sdback.Again, the part of he structure lying outside or mAgcant a varoAncc for a nne-t;mp tMantion limited in 15 are a couple or optlm& the setback could expand as long as the expansion met other mak controls cg. height limitations, front and side setbacks, and at the gLcK floor men and total vnlttmp of an exitflng DEM- M 1 Municipalities could prohibit co"nsion from occotiving percent Doervegetated surfice. Applicants may be allowed to conform;n, hu*ld*-& or structure and a nar-tiMLOVAnsioll0A curri within the reuired sdbwk, while slit! allowing pottions of he expand within the setback by adding shed dormers to cape 25 for residential structurrn lortated in the Resource Protec- Real structure lying outside of the reuired setback to C1111"fild boosts etc Again, administration would involve calculating [inn 7,n,c. Once Provided such expansions meet other reuirements such as and tracking expansions. The above language only allows expansions that rail to mect only height limitation, front and side ArAbKkf. lot coverage, etc. dimensional standards to occur under very rare circumstances one-1 Backing up this approwh is the rationale that my evantion to order to implement this option, Section 12C1c when the ZBA can justify granting a variance. Ile provision taking place within the reuired setback arca increases the should be changed to read: also limits the size of the expansion allowed by variance. What c roachosesti upon the setback. As measured nsiong made within the reuored setback from the nor- he provision does not do is address issues concerning expan- bow from th setback ftnc such in FMM panion towards the water. expansion is vkmed as an cx- mal high-water line sions that go towards the water and expansions of structures' tufts if a non-ronfnrming building or structure Ls N if a large majority of structures are 25 feet from the shore, and or destruction MaX be IC"OnStru"IC"I 01 mptucd_4@dcd demolklird or rrmovcd by or for its owner it shall not ar located entirely within the setback, allowing 30% expan- LhAL bc rebukit or rolared oceld in conformity with the 7 sions to occur within the setback could have a serious impact 1) a mmit ig cilitained-3jahiajont-ycar of the datc of said space reuirements of [his Ordinance. 6W on water uality and scenic character. damngc or destruction and. Municipalitics should contact their regional councils Municipalities having townwidelcitywide zoning will already ham a section in their ordinance cleatfing with Don-cord- 2) t%A recrinstructio.n or for assistance in rewriting ordinances. All ordinance C its. Municipalities cam haw stricter regulations for noncon- ifir. water selback changes should be reviewed by the municipal attorney. 2 forming structures that are located within the shoreland zone - determined I* [he Planni -Board (of CECO-ig-accuiditacc C as opposed to other lea sensitive areas of town. Due to ad- with the ptjEp= of this Ordinance, P misrativ issues, however, municipalities are not en- in nn -,&c shall a structure be reornggructed or replaced so ANDROSCOGGIN VALLEY COG C couraged to extend the 30% criteria to other zoning districts. a in increase its nnn-conformity, Nothing In this section shall Contact: John Maloney P paml the demnittion or the remains of any. h ilding so 125 Manley Road B TE RECONSTRUCTION OF da-slittli or destroycil. Auburn ME 04210 783-9186 NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES The above changes do not address the size of the expansion, EASTERN MID-COAST PLANNING COMMIS- The DEPs Guidelines itilow noti-conforming structures k, but other issues. Ile first sentence in boldface closes a loop SION Contact: Carol Shaw 81. t less than the reuired setback from the shore that are hole whereby an owner of a non-conforming structure may 9 Water Street A A damaged or destroyed (see referenced section for decide it would be advantageous to intentionally destroy it so Rockland ME 04841 594-2299 description of destroyed or damaged) to be reconstructed or as to be able to rebuild to a greater degree than might other S GREATER PORTLAND COG C A Ile DEP Guidelines further Mate that the wise be allowed. The second sentence in boldface clarifies that Contact: Richard Seeley P reconstruction or replacement can only take place ifi 1) a per- once the damage has occurred, the remaining structure can be 133 Oxford Street S mit is "d within one year of the damage, destruction, or destroyed for purposes of rebuilding. To address the size Portland, ME 04101 774-9891 removal and; 2) if the rexxinstrudion or replacement is in issue, an additional paragraph should follow the above revised V compliance with (he water setback reuirement to the greatest paragraph stating: 14ANCOCK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION C p extent as determined by the Planning Board in ac- Contad: Greg Lounder 6. cordance with the purposes of this Ordinance- If the, Board (or CEO) determine-% that (hc Xrl)laccment R R #4, Box 22 M structure cannot meet setback reuirements the allpficant Ellsworth, ME 04605 667-7131 event to which this section can be properly ad- InImt clemondrair. in the Hoard for CEO) that the portirin o Wred will depend on three factors- 1) the amount of the mWacement structure Ldny within the setback will nl ex- M UN. RESOURCE& PLANNING LINCOLN CNTY damage that has occurred to the structure; 2) municipal ceed the total fir" Area or volume the that would ha been Contact: Robert Pratt Otted withi records of building permits and property tax assessments (to pcrm in thesetback tinder section 12(c)(1) prior to P.O. Box 249 determine the actual size and value of the structure before the darnagrordr-strugl*rm Wiscasset, ME 04578 882-6358 damage has occurred) and 3) the municipa2Ws general ap- Further language should follow this paragraph stating: pc towards expansions of nonconforming structures. s) Apponmd replatzmant structures shall not be allowed to The DP has expressed concern over the fad that a liberal und= further cMatisinns within the setback- or, interpretation of the terms "reconstruction" and "replace- could result in a replacement structure being built in a If the volume or flow area of the pWicin of the replace- manna that igporeg the 3D% expansion limit within the ment structure located wiih*n the setback is lc--% than that orn setback. in other words, a person whose structure is which wrnild have been Itcrinitted within the setback-* the damaged or destroyed could concrivably be allowed to Board (m C8M may littant subseuat pcrmits to allow the reconstruct their bulding, making the portion lying within the gradurg,, in coand within the, setback in it% maximum allow- setback larger than would have otherwise been allowed if die able- extent structure were sound and the owner sought to capand by the Financial assistance for the preparation of this document allowable 30. From an Administrative standpoint. the Planning Board or CEO mug have information on the floor area and volume of COASTAL PROGRAM, through funding provided by th . a ciptailly chooses to anew now-coalbraning drvK- the portion or the structure lying within the setback prior to amended, administered by the Office of Ocean and Coast r to expand by 30% within the shorelaod setback, bow damage. Tkis information is used to calculate the 30% expan- and Atmospheric Administration, under award #NA90A should DEP Guidelines be amended so that replacement sion. If (a) above were enforced, the Board or CEO would will not ezeeed the 30% expansive limit? confirm that the replacement structure did not result in a greater amount of floor wra or volume within the setback. Th A. first artegraph is auction 12 (C)(3) should be municipality would need to assure that future expansions changed to nod: could no( take place within the setback. If a municipality All, _fwxai"MrnnnZ which in Iniested I,,xs than th@@ chooses option (b) above, it must have the capability to track r hrk fregn the normal heph-waler fine of a water expansion reuests over the lifetime of a structurc and limit bg rt gresjo- nr upland cd= of, wetlAnd whkh is them according to records. by fire-or Sol than ally. the following paragraph should precede the remain- his aML b2 more ing two paragraphs found in this section of DEP Guidelines: M% of .rlrrt 3MIM nr th, strugure before such dgim,gc 4 n n 041 A 'N"4 DEP ISSUE PROFILE PemiiL hy Rule WRIWA Permit by Rule (NRPA) 01191 'AThere can I get additional information? revised: March 1991 contact: (207)289-2111 For more information, contact a Land Bureau staff member at the DEP office nearest you: Background Permit-by-Rule regulations first became effective on February 15, 1989, for cortain a Portland 312 Canco Drive, Portland, ME 04103 activitics covered under the Natural Resources Protection Act (NRPA). Tile (207) 879-6300 regulations identify activities taking place in or adjacent to wetlands and waterbodies that should not significantly affect the environment if carried out * Augusta State House Station 17, Augusta, ME, 04333 according to standards contained in the regulations. A person proposing to do (207) 299-2111 work that qualifies for Permit by Rule is required only to file notice with tile Department of Environmental Protection. s Bangor -- 106 Hogan Road, Bangor, ME 04401 (207) 941-4570 The regulations were recently amended, effective March 23, 1991, to expand the types of activities eligible under Permit by Rule and to include additional 9 Presque Isle -- 1235 Central Drive, Presque Isle, ME 04769 requirements further ensuring that these activities will not significantly affect the (207)764-2044 environment. In addition, the regulations were reformatted so that each activity section contains all the definitions and standards needed by applicants. Vniat is the intent of Permit by Rule2 Permit by Rule is intended to save applicants the time and expense of filing a permit application with DEP, while at the same time providing direction in the form ofstandards as to how a work activity must be carried out. Ln What am the major provisions of the amended regulations? A 14-day waiting period and submission of "before" and "after" photographs are now required for most activities to document compliance with the regul ations. New activities now eligible under the regulations include: * construction of sewer line crossings * replacement of wastewater disposal systems a maintenance clearing of debris from intake and outfall pipes e restoration of natural areas ("undoing" human alteration) e replacement of retaining walls (subject to certain restrictions) * installation of utility lines across coastal and freshwater wetlands, provided they're along an existing traveled way New requirements associated with existing activities eligible under Permit by Rule include the following: * a straight 25-foot buffer is now required f0T disturbance activities (instead of scaled buffers, dependent on slope) * soil disturbance is restricted to when the soil is saturated (instead of being based on calendar dates) FA o culvert sizing requirements under stream crossings have been downsized and bridges or other spanning structures are required less often J91 - 1. printed on recycled paper Permit by Ruh! (NRPM-2 Permit by Rule (NRI'A)-3 What is the range of activities now eligible for Permit by Rule? Lq any additional information required by DEP? The following activities may be eligible: Yes. A location map of the project site is required. And for all activities except moorings (Section 5), general permi':: rs:- state transportation facilities (Section disturbance of soil material adjacent to a wetland or waterbody 11), and stream crossings (Section 10), one or more photographs documenting the placement of intake pipes and water-monitoring devices condition of the existing activity area ("before") must be submitted. Once an activity is completed, additional photographs documenting its compliance maintenance, repair, and replacement of structures and wastewater with the regulations ("after") must also be stibmitted to DER disposal systems Is there a fee for Permit by Rule? placement of moorings At present, no. ButDEP will begin charging a nominal fee in the near future. movement of rocks or vegetation by hand When can I begin work? Upon DEP's receipt of a complete and accurate form, you may begin work after placement of outfall pipes (including ditches and drain tile) waiting 14 days. You may wish to send the notice certified mail/return receipt requested or hand deliver it and have it date-stamped. Activities under Section 10, placement of riprap Stream Crossings, are exempt from the 14-day waiting period. a construction of crossings (utility lines -- including sewer lines, pipes, If the notice is found to be deficient, DEP will contact you within 14 days of and cables) receiving the notice. construction of stream crossings (bridges, culverts, fords) DEP will not contact you unless the notice is deficient or it appears that your project does not qualify for Permit by Rule. However, a staff member from DEP, general permits for maintenance, repair and reconstruction, or replacement the Department or Inland Fisheries & Wildlife, or the Department of Marine Ln of state transportation facilities Resources may inspect the site to determine if the work was carried out in compliance with the rule. 9 restoration of natural areas (i.e., "undoing" human alteration) How long is the permit valid? N1 propose one of the eligible activities, how do I know if I qualify for The permit is valid for 2 years, provided you comply with all the standards. 11 PP, your activity is not complete at that time, you may file another notice provided the First, you should obtain from DEP copies of the NRPA and the Permit-by-Rule regulations have not been revised to exclude your activity. Standards (DEP Rule Chapter 305) and turn to the section for your proposed activity in the Permit-by-Rule Standards. If I qualify for Permit by Rude, do I need other permits? Perhaps. Permit by Rule does not take the place of any other local, state, or federal Second, read the applicability section at the top of the page, which describes in approvals you may need. In specific instances, activities may require a shoreland further detail what activities are included and where they are included. For zoning permit from your town, a lease from the Bureau of Public Lands example, the movement of rocks or vegetation by hand (Section 6) applies only to (207-289-3061) if your work extends onto state-owned submerged lands, or a permit work using nomnotori zed equipment and does not apply to work in coasta I or from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (207-623-8367). freshwater wetlands. What if I don't qualify for Permit by Rule? Third, read all the standards contained in the section pertaining to your activity. If your activity does not qualify, you must file a complete application form under If you can meet all of the standards, you are eligible for Permit by Rule. the NRPA. These forms are available from DEP's Bureau ofLand Quality if I am eligible, what's the next step? Control. You must file notice of your proposed activity on a form provided by DEP. The three-part form enables you to submit two copies to DEP (one will be sent to the appropriate municipality) and to keep one copy for your records. Incorporating Coastal Policies into Comprehensive Plan.-.4 office of Comprehensive Planning -- Coastal Program MARINF PE,SOURCH, MANAGJ-'.M1-;NT January 1991 Coastal Policy #2: Manage the marine environment and its related The Comprehensive Planning and Land Use Regulation Act (th,, A(:i.) resources to preserve and improve the ecological integrity and diversity requires that local growth management programs for coastal of marine communities and habitats, to expand our understanding of the municipalities be consistent with Maine's nine Coastal Manacement. communities and habitats, to expand our understanding of the policies. The Policies were enacted by the Legislattire as I art of the productivity of the Gulf of Maine and .@astal waters and to enhance the 1986 Maine Coastal Act, 38 M.R.S.A. 1801. Although the concerns economic value of the state's renewable resources. addressed by the Coastal Policies are similar to many of the state goals established by the Act, the Policies provide more specific direction for For a coastal municipality, the Plan should identify whether or nc!:@ coastal municipalities. Coastal communities should use the Policier; as there are significant Ynarine resources (shellfishing and worming areas, a guide in identifying local issues and problems related to oorts, fisherics, other marine habitat). If there are marine resources, the harbors, and coastlines and in developing community goals, Policie.,.,-, and implementation strategies. Plan should: - describe any trends associated with closings/openings of The Department of Economic and Community has published a guidebook shellfish areas, and, if known, identify the reasons why designed to help municipalities identify creative solutions ::.o coa!:;tal shellfish areas are closed (e.g. sources of contamination, such management problems and issues (Coastal Management-.1e-qbnj_cl11Ss:_A as sewage treatment plant, overboard discharges, indL[Strial Handbook for Locpl OflicLa s Ogtolzter 9-88). Local planninz-. committees discharges, etc.); may find this document valuable in the development of coastA@ sections of comprehensive plans. Free copies of the handbook are a%,a'-lable from - as part of the local or regional economy section, discuss the the office of Comprehensive Planning (State House Station 13-2, Augusta, importance of marine resources; ME 04333, 289-6800). - assess the adequacy of existing local ordinances to protect and W The following sections should be used as a "checklist" by coastal manage marine resources (e.g. resource protection zoning, local OD municipalities in determining whether a local comprehensive nian shellfish management programs or ordinances, etc.); and adequately addresses the nine Coastal Policies. - identify the likely impacts of future growth and development on PORTS AND HARBORS marine resources (e.g. contamination, loss of public access, need Coastal Policy #1: Promote the maintenance, development and to protect water dependent uses, etc.) revitalization of the state's ports and harbors for fishing, if significant marine resources exist within municipal boundaries. transportation and recreation. the Plan should contain policies and implementation strategies aimed a-- If a coastal municipality has one or more.11harbor" areas, the Plan protecting and/or managing these resources. should: NOTE: Some communities are having difficulty with this topic area due to the lack of data provided by the DepArtment of Marine Resources - contain a basic description of harbors and associated facilities, (DMR). While DMR has not been routinely providing information to towns, including water dependent uses (see discussion on wazer. dependent they will supply data to individual towns if they receive a specific uses under "Shoreline Management" below); request. Thus, coastal towns should be encouraged to contact DMR to obtain information on shellfish and worming areas (and which areas are - identify existing issues related to harbors (e.g. overcrowding of closed), fisheries, fish landings data, and the number of commercial dock facilities, lack of parking, unsafe mooring alignments, fishing licenses (by species) issued by DMR to individuals within a facility improvement needs, etc.); and particular town(s). Contact person at DMR is Mike Moser at 289-229 - based on growth projections, identify anticipated future needs state ifouse Station 21, Augusta, HE 04333. (e.g. more parking areas, additional moorings, additional boat access facilities, etc.). If harbor issues are identified, the Plan should include appropriate policies and implementation strategies to address then). ling =I 101,17j- INE MANAGEMRITI'--AND -ACCESS 1, tans should include clear implementation measures to carry out Coastal Policy #3: Support shoreline management that gives preference to th,- po I icios, such as establ ishing WDU zoning districts, water-dependent uses over other uses, that promotes public access to the p,irchasing land, providing infrastrlicture, etc. shoreline and that considers the cumulative effects of development on coastal resources. Jliihlic Access .As described in the Coastal Policies handbook, we are concorn-1 TO F;ome degree, public access to coastal waters is an area of about three topic areas here: rnnccin for all coasta.1 municipaliti.es. Thus, each local Plan should: � providing for water dependent uses; - contain a hasic description of public access sites and facilities and important private facilities. Regional access facilities � promoting public access to coastal waters; and used by local residents should also be included in the. inventory. If there are no public access facilities in a community, the Plan � Considering the cumulative aspects of coastal development. sh0uld note this fact; In most plans, these topics tend to be part of discussions on land use, identify existing public access needs (i.e. the types of sites recreation (access), marine and/or natural resources, and and facilities needed, such as boat raTnp,, parking areas, harbor/waterfront management. Jt doesn't matter where in the plan picnic/swimming areas, walking trails, etc.); and shoreline management issues are addressed, as long as they are covored. based oil growth projections, identify anticipated future public Water-Dependent Uses access needs. For obvious reasons, this topic is of greater significance in If public access issues are identified, the Plan should include those coastal towns with a significant commercial fishing/recreational appropriate policies and implementation strategies to address them. boating industry than it is for towns with little or no direct economic reliance on coastal resources (e.g. towns along tidal stretches of .0imu-1ative _Impacts rivers) . Thus, the emphasis placed on this issue by each town will vary. Concern about the cumulative impacts of development was a major reason for enactment of the Growth management Act. From a coastal - At a minimum, all coastal towns should include an inventory of perspective, the Comprehensive Plan should address the protection of significant existing water dependent uses (WDUs). It is helpful those resources that have been or will be impacted by the cumulative Ln if the inventory indicates the location of WDUs (either a map or effects of development. Some suggestions are as follows: written description). As part of this discussion, it is important to note any trends (increases or decreases) in WDUs. Identify coastal resources that are vulnerable to the cumulative Also, if significant, the contribution of WDUs to the local effects of coastal development (e.g. scenic areas, productive shellfish economy should be noted. areas, water supplies (saltwater intrusion), etc.) - Plans should also indicate which areas of the shoreline - Evaluate whether existing Shoreland Zoning Districts are may be suitable for future WDUs. Minimally, towns should appropriate. Are sensitive ecological areas zoned for resource reference (and discuss the accuracy/relevance of) the WDU maps protection or limited development? Are zoning districts along both prepared by the State Planning office. As part of this sides of a river consistent (this will probably involve interlocal discussion, Plans should generally describe the types of WDUs cooperation)? (e.g. commercial fishing, recreational marina, boat building/repairs, etc.) that will be encouraged. - similarly, are existing shoreland performance standards or other land use controls adequate? Are more protective buffer areas and - Plans should include specific policy statements regarding WDUs. setba cks required? Are scenic views protected? Do subdivision Policies should indicate whether the Town wants to encourago. or ordinances encourage the development of "community" docks rather than discourage various types of WDUs and potential locations for sucn individual docks? uses. Plans should include appropriate policies and implementation - Plans should assess the adequacy of existing ordinances or other strategies that address the impacts of cumulative development. In mechanisms to protect water dependent uses. partirular, the future land use plan for each community should 3 4 enurayr, a pat tern of developme [It. th at wiI I mi ni. mi ze U10 i 111paut !; o I tive developmnt (e.g. dire(J c1rowth away from @;ensitlivn ass,,ss t-lic adeuacy of existin ecological areas, discouracle strip dovelopment., etc.) re@@ources; and LA)AREA DEN@11,EMENT identify thr, likely impact, of and critic;il natural areas. coastal Policy #4: Discourage growth and new development in coastal areas where, because of coastal storms, flooding, landslides or The Plan should contain policies, sea-level rise, it is hazardous to human health and safety. aimed at protecting these resourcer;. Typically, hazard areas are addressed as part of' the natural RECREATION AND TOURISM resources section of' a Plan. If a coastal community has "hazard arna@;" (includes floodplains, areas vulnerable to coastal storms and/or s ;.I coastal Policy #7: Expand the opportu level rise, high erosion areas, etc.) , the Plan should* encourage appropriate coastal tourist -describe and indicate the location of (preferably on a map) all if issues related to outdoor rec coastal hazard areas; and to the water) or tourism are identifi should: -assess the adeuacy of existing ordinances or other land use controls to reduce or eliminate the potenti.al danger to litiman -contain a basic description of life and property associated with floods, storms, and other including an assessment of the natural events (i.e. has the community adopted a floodplain needs; management ordinance?) . -identify potIential recreation Plans should contain policies and implementation strategies, aimed opportunities/attractions; and at restricting or eliminating development in hazard areas. -ba@ed on growth projections (f MA_ AND LOCAL COOP MINT projections (for tourism), ide site/facility needs. Coastal Policy #5: Encourage and support cooperative state and municipal management of coastal resources. The Plan should also contain cle strategies to address identified issu Each Plan should identify those resources and facilities reuiring W@rER_IIALITY regional. coordination and planning and include them in a REGIONAL COORDINATION PROGRAM. Coastal issues that seem to be important on the regional level include: watersheds, transportation corridors, public coastal Policy 418: Restore and mainta access, managing marine resources, and shoreline development (especially and estuarine waters to allow for'the along rivers). public and private uses. SCENJCAND NATURAL AREAS PROTECTION With respect to marine waters 4(i rivers), the Plan should: Coastal Policy #6: Protect and manage critical habitat and natural areas -include a basic description o of state and national significance and maintain the scenic beauty and watershed boundaries, DEP wat character of the coast even in areas where development occurs. For a coastal mtinicipality, the Plan should: -describe major sources of pol impacting coastal waters; and - identify the location and importance of scenic areas and critical -assess the adeuacy of existi natural. areas (maps showing ,the location of these areas is very of coastal. waters. helpful); I The Plan should contain policies - identify existing threats to these resources; aimed at protecting and.manaing coas 5 6 J No 8m2v o4m Coa9tal Policy #9: Restore and maintain coastal air quality to protect the health of citizens and visitors and to protect enjoyment of the natural beauty and maritime characteristics of the Maine coast. For most coastal. municipalities, air quality will not bp a major issue. If appropriate, however, local Plans should identify major sources of air pollution and contain policies and implementation strategies to address the problem. Towns are not eypected to address problems that are bryond their fiscal/management capacity or legal authority. 7 Subsection "c" provide!; the Platu opportunity to work with an ippli and minimize impocts of a marine PERFORMANCE STANDARDS environinent. The intent-. of this FOR Iength, and henur! the impact., to PIERS DOCKS, WHARVES, TICCC!S;iITY f01- thr,' Llr(?. AND OTHER MARINE STRUCTURES ,gubsection 'If" is the heart of t) To enhance local review- and decisions over the that new structures be consistnnt development of new piers, docks, wharves and other mirinr! structures through limitations oi structures, the office of Comprehensive Planning ha.,; footage. Standards for both pri\ developed model performance standards that can be and commercial I'Z'Cilities are pr( incorporated into local Shoreland Zoning ordinances. are consistent with DEP's standay Municipalities interested in using some or all of these under the Natural Resources Protc standards will need to replace the existing standards in 1;ection 15(c) of the Department of Environmental Protection Subsection IIgI- encourages subdivi (DEP) Guidelines for Municipal Shoreland Zoning Ordinancer community docks, instead of a ser (effective date: March 24, 1990) with the attached standards. Any assistance in reviewing these performance Subsections Ilh-I and "ill provide i standards and modifying them to meet local needs can be placement of the structure in sei obtained from your Regional Council or OCP staff. unctional necessity. The Office of Comprehensive Planning wishes to Subsection "j" concerns height rf acknowledge the assistance provided by David Klenk, Yarmouth Town Planner, Bill LaFlamme and Mark Cotter of the DEP, Pind App -1 c-AJ8Lol Produre - This sect Tom Ford who produced the initial draft of these standards- information about a proposed inari Much of the language included in the following standards are included with the Shoreland Zonir taken from Yarmouth's zoning reuirements and the proposed information listed below is neceE DEP performance standards. 13oard's review of the potential These standards are intended to encourage the Subsection "all calls for maps whi following: the design and construction of public and project. The Coastal Marine Geol community docks in lieu of private docks; the construction Significant Fish and Wildlife Hat of temporary or seasonal docks in lieu of permanent docks; Coastal Sand Dune Maps are sugget and minimize both the ecological and visual impacts along Board can receive a more completc the shoreline. impact on the-site. The following discussion summarizes the three major Subsection IIbII calls for the incl sections of the model standards for piers, docks, and the project, particularly includi wharves - Performance Standards, Application Procedures, and floats, with which the Planning Definitions. potential visual impacts of the I facilities are included since tln Performance Standards - The intent of these standards is to the entire, more permanent part c protect natural and visual resources in the siting, design, plan should indicate whether any and construction of marine structures. methods will be needed, such as t terracing. Subsection "all serves as a guide to the placement of a marine structure in appropriate soils, to avoid either Subsection IIcII calls for a,comple further damage to the shoreline, or later subsidence of the ensure that no additional harm is structure due to improper Anchoring to the soil. through the use of inapprot1riate instance, the DEP prohibits the t Subsections "b" - I'd" are designed to help minimize the materials containing pentachloroy impact the structure will have on the surrounding environment, from both a landward and seaward perspective. I lint Subsection I'd-' reuires that letters contain.in no objections to the proposed development be submitted for any project closer than twenty-five (25) feet to the propert-y lines. 1110s. serves to alert both neighbors and townsp(!op], SECTION 15: LAND USE STANDARDS to the addiLion of a marine structure. This languarjr c-in!; from the Army Corps of Engineers' "Guideline!; for the C-) LPIKRS_THO1ta, -,HARVE Placement of' Fixed and Floating Structures in the Navigahl,, EXTENDING OVER FOR BEY Waters of the United States." LIEOF -A_ WATE-R BOD-Y, Definitions - These serve to make sure that all those [NOTE: These standards apply t in this process are speaking the samp lanuage. t: invdv cT peimanent struc tires.) 1 -) Yg]FOR0MNg__T4NDARDE piers, docks, wharves and other reviewed by the Planning Board following standards listed in if the Board is unable to criteria below due to either in intormation, the Board will re an environmental. impact analysi impact on natural. areas, includ structure in conjunction with o structures. The Planning Board may als J be modified to ensure conforman forth below. Mitigation measur limited to, changes in the desi marine structure, or changes in location of activities carried The Board shall approve an finding that: a.) Access from the soils appropriate foi through consultation Water Conservation S( Extension. Whenever shore to the marine s bedrock. Measures st erosion both during a b.) The proposed loc shall not unreasonabl existing marine stru( access, nor shal.1 it existing developed oi c.) The marine stru( sited, and construct adverse impacts on s or uniue natural ar to: fin fish and shellfish fisheries., salt tiucture reuires dir narshes, eel gri!-.s heds, shorebird feedin,j and oporational nece;si nosting habitats, critical fish spawning ind nursery areas, ctc. No existing struc abutting a pier, dock,, d.) Unreasonable interfernnce with the natura1p extending beyond the n flow of any surface or subsurface waters, or water hody or within a impedance of the flow of the current of any rivet to residential dwel.lin or channel shall be minimized during the construction and subseuent use of the marine. j.) Except in the Gen structure. and Commercial Fishrri District, structures I e.) The marine structure shall be designed, pier, wharf, dock or sited, and constructed so as not to encroach upon heyond the normal hig Federally designated navigation channels or or within a wetland st mooring areas or otherwise obstruct by any meanF feet in height above whatsoever the free use of piers, docks, and other other structure. common landing places. [NOTE: Pernanent structures pr (NOTE: The Planning Board may reuest comments from the bodins are reuired to obtain a Harbor Master or the Harbor and Waterfront Committec.) of Environrcrital Protection (NA Section 480-C) f.) The marine structure shall be no larger than necessary to accomplish the purposes for which D is designed, notwithstanding the dimensional 2-) SUBMD!3S:0L limits listed below. Its size and construction applicationf shall. contain the shall not change the intensity of the adjoining land use, and by no means shall exceed a total, a.) A photocopy of r distance of more than 1/3 the width of the water the location of the p body, when proposed for coastal or inland example: waterways. The applicant may reuest a variance (i) USGS topogra from the dimensional reuirements due to the (ii) "Coastal Ma additional reuirement of handicap access or Maps" (1:24,000) unusual wind or wave conditions. Maps," (1:4800), Geological Surve Max. Width Max. Lengtjh (iii) "Significa PRIVATE PIERS six (6) ft. 100 ft.* Resource Maps," COMMERCIAL PIERS Twelve (12) ft. 100 ft.* of Inland Fisher RAMPS Four (4) ft. As appropriate vary). DOCKS, FLOATS Two hundred (200) s. ft. *landward of the mean low b.) Site plan, plan water line scale) of the propose indication on separat 9.) When proposed by the applicant, new shoreline stabilizati subdivisions shall provide a community dock in reuired by the proje lieu of the development of docks on individual lots. The applicant may reuest a variance for C.) A complete list additional community docks provided a demonstrated including a list,of a need can be shown for the additional facilities. (paint,etc.), for all h.) No new structure shall be built on, over or d.) If structure is abutting a pier, wharf, dock or other structure twenty-five (25) feet extending beyond the normal high-water line of a application most cont water body or within a wetland unless the from the adjoining pr i.) Upon a finding of objection by an abutter, the Planning Board shnil hold a public hearing within 30 days of such notice; ii.) After such hearing, the I'lanninq Board shall make a determination concerning the objections (to be entered into public record), finding either: 1.) no objection to the proposed project; 2.) objection, with revisions; 3.) or, rejection of the proposed project. 3.) DEFINITIONS Community Doc : A water accessed marine structure owned, maintained, and used by a common group of people, such as a subdivision or condominium association. Dock: Any structure, whether permanent or ON temporary, which acts as a landing place for VI watercraft. This includes any combination of piers, docks, and floats. Marine Structure: Any non-habitable structure, whether permanent or temporary, built on or over i water body, including but not limited to piers, docks, wharves, breakwaters, culverts, jetties, groins, bridges, soil erosion retaining walls, bait sheds, processing facilities, etc. Permanent Structure: A structure which is placed on or in the water or shore for a period seven (7) months or longer in any twelve (12) consecutive month period, and is fixed permanently in position, either by method of construction or anchorage. Private Dock: A water accessed marine structure owned, maintained, and exclusively used by a private entity such as an individual, trust, association, or corporation. significant wildlife Habitat: Habitats for animal species appearin@ on official State or Federal lists of endangered or threatened species. High and moderate value deer wintering and travel corridors, waterfowl and wading bird habitats (including nesting and feeding areas), shorebird habitats (including nesting, feeding and qtaqing MAINIE TOVvNSMAN Morch, 1991 EXHIBIT E-7 Comprehensive Planning A progress report on Maine's Growth Management Program By Charles Colgan ting ordinances. The Law and State Agency and Since passage of the Growth Management Revfiew and Assistance law Maine's economy has cooled and with The most common concern we heard Denns E. Gale it, the pressures for growth. With rising about the Growth Management law and it.s In May 1988 the Legislature enacted unemployment, increasing local taxes and administration was that it was (or might Maine's first statewide program to encourage staggering State budget shortfalls, Maine become) too inflexible. For example, the tier- town comprehensive land use planning. The citizens ate struggling with other priorities. Ing process was thought to force some law came at a time when rapid growth and Yet, no longer faced with a flood of develop- towns to plan before they are ready, and to development were occurring in many sec- ment applications, towns are in a better posi- prevent others who are ready from initiating tions of the state and concern was rising that tion to prepare themselves for a future that the planning process. Concern over the abili- too many municipalities were unprepared for will certainly continue to bring people and ty of very small towns with limited govern- the complex decisions that were necessary. businesses to Maine in pursuit of our highly mental capacity to meaningfully participate While few communities wanted to give up regarded quality of life. Seeking insights on in the Program was widespread. Some their independence in land use matters, how the Growth Management Program has observers said that deadlines for implemen- many realized that existing tools were not performed to date, the Edmund S. Muskie tation of plans are too short, given the enor- sufficient to balance the twin issues of Institute of Public Affairs at the University mous energy that must be expended in growth and preservation. of Southern Maine undertook a study last preparing the plan. The Growth Management law requires fall. Supported by grants from the Maine At the time of our meetings, OCP had just every community to prepare and adopt a Research Fund, the Department of begun to review town plans. We found a comprehensive land use plan and zoning or- Economic and Community Development, general anxiety about how OCP and other dinance in conformance with the adopted the University of Southern Maine and the agencies would carry out these Tespon- plan. A community facilities program must Muskie Institute's own resources, the study sibilities. Would the staff scrutinize town also be created and made consistent with the will offer recommendations on strengthen- submittals "to the letter of the law?" Or plan. An extensive inventory of existing con- ing and improving the Growth Management would they recognize the varying needs, ditions in the town must be completed. Ten Program. capacities, levels of planning experience and state-mandated goals must be incorporated During the first phase of the study, com- resources of individual towns and show into the plan and explicit growth andjyral pleted this past fall, six 'focus group" latitude and understanding? On the other districts must be designated on the plann- meetings were conducted with people in hand, not all participants worried about State ing map. Also necessary are policies ar- Maine holding a variety of interests in growth rigidity. Especially among planners, conser- T ticulating how the goals are to be met and management. Nearly 60 professional plan- vationists and some comprehensive plan how land use decisions in the growth and ners, conservationists, development in- committee members, we heard concerns that Tura] districts are to be made. terests, regional planning commission State review might be too lax or inconsis- Administered by the Office of Comprehen- members and directors, and members of tent from town to town. They were anxious sive Planning (OCP) of the Department of local comprehensive plan committees from to have standards applied evenhandedly and Economic and Community Development, towns in central and southern Maine par- fairly but with enough rigor to ensure that the Growth Management Program divided ticipated in these meetings. Hoping to gain the effectiveness of planning will not be Maine's communities into three groups or views. from citizens most experienced with compromised. "tiers". Tier One towns - the fastest grow- the functioning of the Growth Management State financial assistance was generally ing over the period 1980-87 - were given Program to date, we concentrated on those held to be adequate at a "bare minimum" until January or June of this year to submit familiar with the Tier One towns. The results level, although some participants felt that ad- their plans to OCP for review. Tier Two of our research have been communicated to ditional funding would be desirable. Some towns have until 1993 and Tier Three the Office of Comprehensive Planning and towns have found however, that the State's towns, until 1996, to submit their plans. to key legislators. We have been fortunate required paperwork for reimbursement of While OCP has the chief oversight respon- that so many public-spirited citizens of Maine planning expenses is too complicated. sibility, several other agencies are involved were willing to share their valuable time with Others felt that a State policy requiring in reviewing portions of town plans dealing, us in the six meetings and we have dedicated towns to complete the inventory phase of for example, with groundwater quality, our final report to them. their plan before receiving planning funds agricultural and forest lands, historic preser- We asked our focus groups for their was unduly restrictive. There was particular vation and affordable housing. Towns can thoughts on the overall performance of the concern that assistance to towns to imple- apply to OCP to receive financial assistance Growth Management Program to date and ment the plans would be inadequate and that in the preparation of plans and implemen- their recommendations for "mid-course cor- this would destroy the entire effectiveness rections" and improvements. Their com- of the Growth Management law. Some ments centered around four themes: The law towns will have to expand their existing plan- About The Authors and state agency review and assistance, the ning office to handle the new responsibilities, Charles Colgan and Dennis Gale are faculty local planning process, citizen involvement while towns with no planner will "start from members at the University of Southern Maine in and leadership and the role of the regional scratch". Support for the hiring of town plan- the Edmund S. Muskie Institute of Public Affairs. planning councils. ners, setting up of planning offices, purchase 11 66 MAFNE TOWNSMAN March, 1991 In some cases, unsuccessful leadership by dedicated own residents. Several observers Our participants made it clear that RPCs town planning committee chairpersons was were unclear about how the State would have had to devote most of their time and a factor in the attrition problem. Where react if a plan is defeated at town meeting. resources to assisting their member to%@ns chairs do not enjoy widespread citizen con- How much time will a town have to revise in the preparation of their plans. As a result, fidence or where they are lackluster in their its plan and hold subsequent town meetings, regional review of local plans has not been duties, the quality of the planning process they inquired? Similarly, the law requires as detailed as many would like. Moreover, suffers. Where chairs allow a few people on towns to hold a public hearing on the draft many nearby towns are not preparing plans the committee to dominate decision-making, plan. But if changes to the plan result from jointly - in some cases because the tiering other, grow discowagel, In some towns, the this meeting, it is not clear whether additional process puts different towns on different committees have not received the attention hearings would be necessary. planning schedules. Thus, issues of mutual and support they need from selectmen or concern are not often addressed through in- councilors. thereby increasing the perception Regional Roles terlocal partnerships. Furthermore, special hat he planning activity is not well regard, The Growth Management law specifies purpose districts with important effects on ed. Although almost everyone at our important roles for Maine's regional plann- regional growth such as school and water- meetings expressed deep appreciation for the ing councils to play in the preparation of local sewer authorities are not participating in the planning committees and their chairs, many plans. It provides that towns can contract plamng process because the Growth felt that there was room for impro%Ang leader- with the RPC, or with private consultants, Management law does not provide for their ship, representativeness and participation. for technical assistance in preparing their involvement. A final issue raised in our focus groups plans. In addition, it requires that each town RPC participants in our meetings was the reception the draft plans would in an RPC's region submit its plan to RPC lamented that these problems were related receive at town meeting and public hearings. staff for review and comment. The purpose in part to the well-documented dilemma of We were cautioned that a combination of of the latter requirement is not to add the ambiguous role Of regionalism in Maine. citizen ignorance about the Growth Manage- another layer of bureaucracy but instead, to But even more immediate were their con- ment law, hostility to planning and apathy ensure that towns in the area are not plann- cerns that the Growth Management Program heightened by a slow economy could erode ing at cross purposes with one another. has not funded the RPCs adequately, given support for adoption of the plans in some Legislators had well-founded fears that the other responsibilities, to fulfill their twin communities. Because town meetings bring actions of some upriver towns, for example, duties under the law. Providing technical large-scale citizen involvement only at the might endanger water quality for those assistance to these towns, along with the end of the planning process, rather than downriver. Inconsistent zoning designations RPC's other activities, has strained their along the way", they could become the vehi- on either side of town boundaries are resources to the limit, some told us. And cle for toppling thousands of hours and another example of the need for interlocal without state authority given to the RPCs. thousands of dollars worth of work by cooperation. they can do little more than encourage towns 67 Id MAIINt I UVVINNVIAIN March, IYYI of maps, equipment and the maintenance of and guidance on the liabditie's of non- along coastal areas. One goal, however, asks records will be necessary. compliance with the law. that towns try to ensure that ten percent of OCP technical assistance was generally The Local the average growth in housing be affordable found to be adequate, although a few par- units. While no one quibbled with the inten- ticipants complained that some state agen- Planning Process tions of this provision, some questione8 the cies had not been responsive to their needs At the heart of the Growth Management definition of "affordable" and others, the for information. Others, they said, had sup- Program is the preparation of local town reception some town residents would show plied unusable data, maps and information. plans. We inquired of our participants how for multi-family or low-income housing. Few A state official who participated in our study the various 'ingredients" of the planning pro- complaints were expressed about the other noted that his agency had not received ade- cess were viewed in their towns. They felt goals. quate funding to staff the added review pro- that the requirement to designate growth and Public Participation cedures necessary under the Growth rural areas was helpful in providing a struc- Management law. Also of concern to many ture to the planning process but some ques- and Leadership participants were the recent amendments to tioned whether this provision wouI6 be fully Almost everyone expressed concerns the Mobile Home and Shoreland Zoning accepted by the town at large. Fews about about the level of public involvement in their laws. These additional State-imposed loss of land value or property tax revenues town's planning committee and the represen- burdens on localities already struggling to in the rural districts were expressed. Some tativeness of participants. Participation is complete their plans were seen as detrimen- participants pointed out that there are towns often limited to a small number of people tal and disruptive to the success of the with a clearly defined center (i.e. growth who bring a high degree of energy, but are Growth Management Program. district), but others with two or more village frustrated by the amount of work involved. We asked our participants how effective centers in different parts of the town. In these The challenge of preparing plans to address they felt the law's sanctions for non- latter places, designating a growth district all aspects of a town's social, economic, and compliance were. The sanctions include loss can be complicated. In some adjacent towns, natural environments as well as the needs of local zoning authority and denial of one community has a commercial area and desires of town residents who rarely par- eligibility for state programs for community which serves as the "growth" center in both ticipate (even when surveys are conducted) development and open space acquisition. communities. Yet, under the Growth was frustrating. Some of our participants They also include ineligibility for town Management law, each town must designate cited regrets in their town that the town plan- assistance from the State legal defense fund a growth district. ning committees were not as representative in land use litigation cases and ineligibility The law also requires that plans cpntain of the town's population as they would like. to impose impact fees on land development an inventory of local land use and en- (Here again, tensions between long-term and projects. We found that relatively few com- vironmental conditions. Complaining of the short-term residents, farmers and subur- munities fully understand the sanctions or extensive time required to do the inventory banites, and other groups were mentioned). their potential impact. Even where residents and the widely varying availability of ap- Even where the makeup of the commit- we aware of the sanctions, some do not view propriate data, some felt that this require- ted was not an issue, with time, it was found, them as a serious disincentive. In fact, there ment should be deemphasized. Towns with attrition eroded attendance at meetings. are people for whom losing authority for zon- a planning office, previous plans and data Those most likely to persist in the planning ing would not be a liability, but rather, an bases, and an effective consultant appear to process, they said, were the habitual town asset. There were concerns that some be less troubled by this requirement than activists, often people "from away". Long- citizens may campaign to defeat @ny plans others. . term residents are more likely to lose interest and implementing actions, thinking that by Another provision in plans is that they or grow frustrated with the planning process noncompliance, a community can simply do adopt verbatim the ten goals specified by the and stop attending meetings. The perceiv- away with planning and zoning. It is ap- legislation. These address issues such as job ed problems with the representativeness of parent, then, that town officials and citizens, development, access to recreational lands, planning committees in some towns, it was not merely town planning committee protection of natural and historic resources felt, may be a problem when the plans are members, should receive better information and preservation of marine-related activities presented to town meeting for approval. 68 MAINE TOWNSMAN' March. 1991 to cooperate across town boundaries. following: mittees is needed in educating the general Recommendations Education and Training. Leader*ship public about the Growth Management law, training programs should be made available the planning process, the importance of par- Based on our findings the project team has to town planning committees to enhance ticipation and the benefits of planning. developed a number of recommendations for their ability to move agendas forward and Workshops on these matters for plan com- improvements in the Growth Management maintain citizen enthusiasm and involve- mittee members, booklets, a video cassette Program. Among the more critical are the ment. Furthermore, assistance to the com- instruction program and the use of the or Don 't Tell Me W" ha4-_'T'o'-,Do aW`is'thW'1o_ss'of` local land use. ment ed, they may leain more abd6f.the pro- By James Damicis authority.,ACC0TdJQ2.t0 the law, existing'. cess and participate positlygy.:-towards Local Government land use 6i,@fihan`ceisila4ndluit ift" '_'_"J-es`@':"i' reachin" g compirorium anc consensus. Resource Center Manager must be consistentUfth c@rnprehenslve 4) Have orie public...workshop .plans. Without a comprehernisive-plan,. specifically deivbifed to the cbhflic't bet- towns -risk having land use, ordinances ween comprehensive plaihning@and "Who are you to tell me what I can do with my landf" deemed invalid by the"courts. For exam-' private property rights. Ask citizens for ple, if a developer protests a local or-_ feedback on what private rights.they are The above statement represents a feel- dinance requiring a portion of a develop- willing or unwilling to compromise. ing held by many Mainers towards com- ment to be set aside for open space and Woolwich's comprehensive planning prehensive planning. Many citizens feel the town does not have a comprehensive committee had a workshop entitled "Who comprehensive plans, and the zoning and plan upon which that ordinance Is bas,-. are you to tell me what I can do with my land use ordinances which follow, ed, then the court could determine the or- land". 'Me f6cuswas specifically on the amount to nothing more than state and dinance invalid and the developer not be conflict between comprehensive I planning local government telling private property required to set aside open space. Another and private property rights. Attendance owners how to use and not to use their consequence of not having a comprehen- at this meeting exceeded 80 persons. own lands. They view this as an unfair sive plan includes the loss of eligibility to Members of the committee felt that one taking of private property and a violation collect state aid related to economic of the reasons for the meeting's success of their rights. This statement is being growth and development and natural was that it focused on a controversial heard over and over again as comprehen- resource protection. This includes com- issue which grabbed the public's atten- sive planning committees present their prehensive planning grants; money for tion. Thus, for Woolwich it paid to face plans to the public. It is a statement the acquisition of lands for conservation, the controversy surrounding comprehen- which the committees must anticipate recreation, and resource protection; and sive planning with open discussion and and prepare for or risk having their long money for public infrastructure. It ex- debate rather than seeking to avoid it. hard work brought to a quick end by cludes state aid for education and 5) Prepare and present case scenarios citizen disapproval of plans. - . municipal revenue sharing. A final con- which explain how unregulated use of Knowing that this type of statement sequence is that municipalities without private property would result in situations will be brought up by the public, there are comprehensive plans will be prohibited where one person's use of private proper- several actions town comprehensive plan- from imposing impact fees for ty would create a nuisance upon another ning committees can take in order to development. person's. An example would be a case make the process work. Both the consequences of not com- in which one property owner used his 1) Expect public opposition to com- pleting a comprehensive plan and the property for the storage of junk vehicles. prehensive planning. Prepare a list of benefits of a comprehensive plan must be This use created a nuisance to abutting reasons why comprehensive planning is made clear to the citizens of your town. property owners who viewed the storage important for the town and its citizens. The State Office of Comprel-iensive Plan- of junk vehicles as an eyesore. The com- Reasons include controlling growth, pro- ning and the Regional Planning Councils prehensive planning process can help tecting resources, creating economic can help your community with this task, citizens make tough choices and deter- development, preventing sprawl, creating .2) Use the cifim surve s.as a@. mine which uses-best serve.-dwdr,com- futur, I@ , "' " - -in' v: result ' 4@1 ty7 -tlri@ig individd@l n"ilits I too) I oi sUpport ana-f. - mu ' eri@ a town center, planning for the e g goW,%bje@cfi 6 "' ni' *. 6ft' wil financing of capital expenditures, Vx3vas- policies. You will most likely see eviderice have to comprornised so that the com- ing public access to recreation areas, that people are willing to compromise munity as a whole may benefit. preserving historic buildings, and creating some rights for the protection of valuable 6) Finally, don't assume that citizens affordable housing opportunities. These community resources. When possible in- are My aware of the comprehensive are just a few generic reasons. Make your clude specific survey findings within the planning process In your town.'Publicize ist specific to your town needs. plan. The March 1990 issue of the meetings and distribute newsletters. At Explain that tough decisions and trade. MADVE TOWNSMAN bontained ain"'ai- each meetin'surninari@ze %&ttias been 9 Iffs will have to be made. This includes ticle entitled "Citizen Surveys: Making accomplished thus far and'where the trade-offs between private property rights them Productive' Copies are available by committee is going next. By keeping the and the protection of public resources contacting MMA. process open, your committee may avoid such as air, water, shorelands, parks, 3) Identify those citizens who you unwanted surprises when the plan is wildlife, soil and- scenic areas. would expect to oppose the concept of brought up for town approval. Explain the consequences if the town comprehensive planning and actively The State Office of Comprehensive chooses not to complete a comprehen- seek their involvement in the process. Planning wiU soon have available a . q.-. - - - fq7, sive plan. One consequence for not com- Contactidi"- . ' 4kter or in per. manual on how to complete a com- plying with the State's Growth Manage- son if necessary. If they become involv- prehensive plan. 14 69 MAINE TOWNSMAN March, 1991 University Systerrfs interactive television net- encouraged, perhaps by a competition. planning committee members will be carried work should be examined as vehicles for Compliance. Either greater incentives out to probe more deeply issues and con- public education. to encourage compliance or tougher sanc- cems arising from the first phase of the Increased Flexibility. Consideration tions to discourage noncompliance - or research. A final report will be completed in should be given to exempting very small both - are needed. In addition, OCP should June. - towns from current planning reuirements, communicate through selectmen and town At this point however, it is clear that there or of allowing them greater flexibility in councils the full impact the sanctions could are opportunities for fine-tuning the Growth meeting these standards. Flexibility might be have on communities that fail to fulfill the Management law. 'We believe that the granted to small towns that band together terms of the law. original purposes of the law remain sound and prepare a joint plan with neighboring and that its intended effects continue to be communities. In scheduling deadlines, allow The Future important to the future uality of life in Tier Three towns to switch to Tier Two, if During the first half of 1991 Muskie In- Maine. The State should not lose sight of they choose. Allow Tier Two towns with stitute will continue its study of the Growth these facts as it struggles to adapt to the na- very small populations to switch to Tier Management program. A survey of town tion's new fiscal realities. Three. These actions would permit towns that want to accelerate planning to do so and IV those that do not feel ready to plan to have E dr W*g(J- u more time to prepare themselves. Finally, V, N allow an extra six months to one year for A0RIV- towns to adopt zoning and other plan im plementation tools. This would bring the total time allotment for implementing th -and-one-half yea. T"DI0S0at 'S-""-_ plan to from two to two after it is submitted to OCP. 0f0f of state Clarification. A number of points c o`.Add, arit the'li'sf of iio mi m''uniti0nthit,h0C on- "contrrana-TeJ d a I0JIY'_-Lde_'vdo' dffipf sive. I referen- pe _p an., ceming the Law are unclear or confusing and an dmvotd: ! should be clarified by the State. These in clude the precise conseuences of a failure Th'e opponents don't liki'the'staie telling ih 0i to',-even gh the state's by a town to accept a plan, a clear defini- mandit0e-thaf comrnuihitie -address. certain IiR `ve"ind'conservation is S*u was tion of "affordable housing" and approaches an act of the Legislature, elected to represent ifie inteie"sti.of towns like Lyman. For smaller towns can take to satisfy the hous- some, it appears to be a -threat-tC>.manhood issue 0 iri,Don't,kyou,try,:to tell me ing goal. what to do,'Misier,Man.'For thers,it seems ionin-as-socialism'fear, Implementation. Adeuate State thatif we let the state make any zoning and plahnihi 9' aemarids', the next thing they'll resources for implementation of plans are the do is march the militia in and take' over the town hall. For some, voting aginst-state key to the long term effectiveness of the -m"dated.com'rehensive,planning-isa-wayof--Aifin�--onAlfe, g s st of a p di tru state.government at is.very emandin ft-owin'T" le's ifid -ii,i viduals btitcan't Growth Management Program. In the face th d g 0 , s, 1i a of severe State budget constraints however, get out of dts: own way ihi reuired to do - things as' bask-as balanicing a budget we recommend that some of the funds or meeting peoples survival needs orproviding-meanir property tax relief. And allocated for Tier Two planning be shifred for many, it's just that they don't really understand what comprehensive planning to Tier One towns for implementation. To is all about or.what. state law reuires and what it doesn't,, but theyll vote against do this, a re-scheduling of some Tier Two it because it must be bad if otherpecple ari'so-Lipset about it., plans to Tier Three would be necessary. Clealy.it,'..tiinefr:&-meeting Its-firriefoi the-15tifte,olahning bureaucrats the Administrative Procedures. OCP regional planning commission types to. come- ou_i'f 'thk offices for ai.meeting in Lyman. Th e horTik'.r0btihw should simplify its reuest for payment y. should-leave the 0mflitla7a't :should bring-a,wiffir0Wess -to eXp ain, t tic, s, to isten: and tteason even wit t e unreasonable. I ;,ainswer'ue' n' I forms, and should place less emphasis on h completion of the inventory phase as a prere- Ao ,0Aisciiis. it'section lo:bompeiive uisite to funding assistance. Both measures 1-11 - . tl, - . I would speed funding assistance to com- -b- ile test munities. Also, as experience in reviewing plans is gained, OCP should provide as ch much guidance on plan review standards as 0 o_ possible. This effort will help to allay uncer 0ofiah, senatd,'! ep. tainties among town planning committees. d. f Regional Cooperation. Towns 'as a member.,,, ".presence giWd im vo 10ppc plan- j-- ning cle 0.s`e-ak',tfi;etr_ e`cdan'd hiteii 1Eair&0i1I0.-`tN should be encouraged to work together to air oppor0turi#0xt p co0m address regional and "town line issues. This 0n5itiei 0are j0Jciig'comi-;eh-e-nsive0p arejinughoAhe:0backIa0i0h - p s hoi can be done by shifting "tier" deadlines for a*1'---_"-p 'en Ifthel1wis on adjacent towns so that they can work p. together and by providing additional .balarice;f-lo0la0iid-diiiticil' ih0en la0ir.11rili11v guidance to towns on how they might tedby nor- cooperate. In addition. abutting towns e overa rinatioris b peop e should beallowed to make "growth/rural' mal distribution- of.individual, community and state power, the majority of people designation across town borders. need to know the'tihmbAished truth. SO comr0 tcan get on 0With-the business T Of- 01 the3A0du0rd, Public Participation. Standards for :: . _.jl 1.1,-., -r-. participation in planning committees should EDITOR'S NOTE: As.we were preparing this issue of the -Townsman, we spotted be made available so that towns can replace this eili0trial in th0ie 3Ma5 sui 0of 3"'Blddd0wd buff 0W 0T0A&Iri0: and 0f0f lought those who do not attend meetings. Innova- 'it warranted r0iiprinM- Mdtl0igders conterm0lation. tions in encouraging participation should be 15 70 The 11-10-ble Knuel Lujan, Jr. STAT V. 41 F 11 1% 1 N, F. X1, r i1 26, L991 Orr, Page 2 VC USITA. .11.1 C, E most promising acreage is far preferable to area-wide leasing. However, I have a continuing concern that there is little certainty in the proposed JOHN R ucKEAwm. 51 method for narrowing down the blocks to be offered for lease. What criteria will be used to determine which blocks to eliminate from further consideration for leasing during the Area Evaluation and Decision Process? I urge the Department to propose these criteria in consultation with affected parties. April 26, 1991 These criteria should address a broad range of factors including biological productivity and diversity, value to other uses. and hydrocarbon potential. I am not suggesting that a "cook book" approach is necessary; however, guidance in the decision-making process will provide industry, coastal states. and the The Honorable Manuel Lujan, Jr., Secretary public with a degree of certainty that is currently lacking in the draft Department of the Interior proposed program. 1849 C Street, NW Washington, DC 20240 Lack of certainty also concerns me with respect to the manner in which the Department will make decisions throughout the Area Evaluation and Decision Dear Secretary Lujan: Process. I appreciate your intent to keep the pre-sale process flexible enough so that it can be tailored to the needs of each region. However, I I am writing in response to your request for comments on the department's believe that it is important that the Department better define the framework Draft Proposed Comprehensive Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Oil for decision making to be used for all lease sales so that interested parties Resource Management Program for 1992-1997. know when and how MMS will be making decisions. The draft proposed program documents indicate that there are numerous "decision points" throughout the I am pleased to see that President Bush's statement on June 26, 1990 is new process. Specifically, at these decision points. how will the Department incorporated in full in the draft proposed program, that no leasing is planned determine bather or not to continue with a lease sale, delay for additional In the North Atlantic Planning Area, and that further studies will be studies, or terminate the process? What criteria will be used at each stage ,J undertaken to assist in future decision making. While no lease sales are of the decision process? Again, it is not clear how this process will work. proposed in the North Atlantic, I am concerned about the level of study effort that will be applied in this area. Leasing is prohibited by the President in I agree with the proposal to issue a "Request for Interest and Comments" the Worth Atlantic Planning Area until at least the year 2000, and will be prior to the "Call for Information and Nominations" so that both industry and allowed after that date only if sufficient resource potential is demonstrated affected party comments are included. Potential conflicts can be avoided by and if leasing can occur in an environmentally safe manner. Therefore, it is providing all parties a meaningful chance to participate in the decision imperative that MKS institute an aggressive environmental and geologic studies making process. However, I am concerned about how MMS will determine if there program. In reading the draft proposed program documents, it is not clear to is sufficient industry interest to warrant pursuing a lease sale. In our me what emphasis MKS will be placing on studies in the North Atlantic planning experience with lease sale 96, we found that MMS continued to go forward with area. I urge the Department to clarify the types and priority of studies that the lease sale despite indications of minimal industry interest and scant are contemplated in this region. evidence of hydrocarbon resources in this region. I remain concerned about the prospects for hydrocarbon development in the On the subject of the timing of the issuance of the proposed Notice of Georges Bank region in the future -- beyond the 2992-1997 five-year plan. I Sale and the draft environmental impact statement, I do not believe that these continue to believe that the Gulf of Maine should be permanently removed from documents should be issued conc-irrently. The decision on a proposed notice of consideration for future leasing because of its high ecological and fisheries sale would not have the benefit of the environmental analysj@ contained in a value and its low oil and gas resource potential. In addition, there is no draft EIS. Therefore the DEIS should precede the proposed nozice of sale. guarantee that future administrations will honor the existing agreement that consideration of leasing in the North Atlantic will not take place until after On the issue of consistency, it is imperative that coastal states be given the year 2000. As such, I urge the Department to push for legislative sufficient time and, more importantly, sufficient information on which to base codification of the President's statement of June 26, 1990. the review of a consistency determination. The EIS process plays an important the Department's now approach to the consideration of role in developing a leasing proposal and assuring that sufficient information I am encouraged by is available for review of the consistency determination. in order to tak areas for leasing. This new approach should limit areas to be leased and full advantage of the information contained in the EIS. the consistency W encourage more consultation among affected parties. Such efforts will go a determination and the proposed notice of sale should not be issued until after f_3 long way towards Incorporating t he concerns of all interested parties prior to the final EIS is released. leasing and development. I have always felt that an approach focusing on the I continue to believe that a cooperative arrangement between Canada and 01D the United States must be initiated to address joint study, planning, and -J.-A The Honorable Manuel Lujan, Jr. April 26, 1991 Page 3 management of Georges Bank. with jurisdiction over Georges Bank divided between the two countries, and with two different approaches for regulating offshore oil and gas activities, the management of this unique and valuable ecosystem is a great challenge. The Canadian federal government has taken action to prohibit exploration and drilling for oil and gas on Georges Bank on their side of the maritime boundary until January 1, 2000. The Canadian federal law calling for this prohibition also requires a public review panel to assess the environmental and socio-econamic impacts of exploration and drilling on Georges Bank and to Issue a report prior to the expiration of the moratorium. I recommend that the Department work jointly with the Canadians to exchange information and develop joint studies. In December, 1989 1 joined with my colleagues in the surrounding states and provinces in signing the "Gulf of Maine Agreement." This agreement established the Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment to foster cooperation among the states and provinces in jointly protecting and managing the Gulf of Maine. The Council is charged with preparing a Gulf of Maine Natural Resources Action Plan and Environmental Quality Monitoring Plan. These efforts have led to increased cooperation among the states, provinces, and the respective federal governments. I suggest that the Department begin to move towards the development of a joint management regime regarding OCS issues for the Gulf region. The Gulf council could assist the Department in such an effort. The Council could also be an appropriate &venue for future discussions on conflict resolution and consultation on OCS issues In the Gulf of Maine/Georges Book region. W In developing studios for the Worth Atlantic region I urge you to cooperate with the research board for the Gulf of Maine region that will be established pursuant to P.L. 101-593o signed into law last year. As you may know, this new law requires the development of regional marine research plans for 10 marine regions around the country to support efforts to safeguard the envirownental quality of each region. My colleagues from Massachusetts and Now Hampshire and I have appointed a task group to develop recommendations on how the three states could proceed with KOAA and EPA in establishing a Gulf of Maine Marine Research Board. Again, I urge you to consult with this new group as it develops research priorities in the Gulf region. I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Department's draft proposed program and look forward to working with you to develop an OCS oil and gas program that benefits the people of the state of Maine and the nation. if you have any questions please contact John Catena at the State Planning Office. (207) 289-3261. Sincerely, "441- McKernan, Jr. Or cc: Maine Congressional Delegation Richard Silkman, State Planning Office Bruce Weetran, MRS Regional Director ~0 THE E ~2qN~qrs Saturday ~A'p~rl: 27: T~hel~i~stuary Bank: A Gu~ld~e~lo~Pr~o~m~o~l~ln~g Water Quality Training ~Nt~w-~l. I hi~, ~~~~rm vital ~E~d~u~cat~l~on Exchange at Understanding and Regional Manage- ~-~1~r~n~a~s~lj~.~l~c.d~,d f~o,citi- -~1 ~w- h~,~, ~q7~8q@ At College ~~ ~h~e Indic in liar ~I~larb~or f~n- meat or M~a~lne~'~s Estuaries an~d - monitoring estuarine Waters i-~l.d- ~ A.M. ~~ 3:30 p.m. The Exchange, s~r~x~u~i~@ ~Embaym~ent~s. The4~8~-pag~egu~n~i~cpr~ovi~d~e~s -~c~li~a- ~in ~organi~xing a monitoring group; s~red by th~ Maine Environmental Edo~q- information - what cor~an~n~i~ni~f~i~c~s and con. field ~x~A~mp~li~ng and shoreline ~s~urv~cy~s; d~c~l~i, lion As, ~ ion. offers workshops for ~edu~- c~er~n~ed individuals can do to s~a~c~c~es~sfu~l~ly ~ni~ti~on~s of ~s~an~t~l~ifin~g v~a~ria~b~i~r~s~; ~s~t~up~. ~by~-~@~Icp ~A~P~R~I~I~-~I~ON~E 1~"I THE SHORE STEWARDS PROGRAM-SUPPORTING t~q(X~qA~qL I ~~~~i~l ~~: ~S ~15.T~o register. ~"JI Julie 1: ~0- manage ~and protect local estuarine resources. pr-dur~cs for analyzing ~l~e~mp~eral~i~n~c~. as ~~n, 549-1628. or write Ma~inely ~Ed~u~c.~- Chapters discuss the natural history ~[~if li~ni~ty, dissolved oxygen. p~i~t. and fecal ~c~.~ii- Shellfish Bed Closures and Lo ~~~~. ~~ Box 1264, Camden, ME 0~4~943. estuaries; water po~l~lu~t~Ion; the i~n~ipact of form bacteria; information o~n data sheets Friday May 10: development; ~a~nd estuarine planning ~and and data management; ~w~idd~e~t~a~il~s on equip~, ~"Closed Due ~to Pollution." Sig~m, cottages). Du~c to limited Pollution Solutions Conference: Reduc- m~an~s~i~~e~m~en~t. Free copies are available (in ~m~e~n~tand quality control. Th~e~m~a~nual~ihould bearing this mm~s~agc me being posted by a not able to evaluate and ~qcl Ing M~u~eh~o~ld Hazardous W~a~s~t ~h~e limited numbers) from Jenny R.~ff~it,~g ~a~t ~th~t ~b~e available by early June. F~., m~a~n~t i~.~(~.~,~- Inge number or coastal ~sh~e~ll~r~is~h beds. viable Shellfish beds ~qa~ql~q- 9 ~&err~qa~t~i~ql Maine Coastal Program, station ~3~8. A~n- ma~tio~n.~c~on~L~ac~t the K~nox~-Linc~a~r~n Offic~c~of Sonata ~~o~~el in Portland from .4 Why we these beds being clow~(~L ~a~nd how mile c~o~a~tsdine: they~qs~qa~qmp~qi p.m In the morning. a panel ~o~f~sp~ak~e~r~s will gusts~, Maim ~0~1333. (ph: 2~89-3261). Cooperative Extension at 375 Main Street. discuss "Dealing with ~I~l~w~ar~dous Waste." E~x~t~uary Profiles: A comp~anio~r~t public~a~- Rockland, MY' ~04~941 (ph: 594~-2104). c~a~n people help get them t~eopen~e~d? those that are, must often ~qU Shellfish beds me closed by staff from commercial shellfish h~qS,V Afternoon workshops will discuss consumer lion to the Estuary Book. the profiles offer Clean Water: We All Need It. A 30~ t~h~eMa~inc ~D~epar~t~m~e~n~torM~ar~in~el~te- beds that have not been ~qev strategies; waste~ oil collection pr~ogr~e~m~s~. detailed i~nl~e~n~ou~ni~o~n (on physical character- minute video documentary explores how sources (DMR)~. which is charged with the ISSC guidelines have and business m~"~I~n~c~li~ng strategies, ~F~e~e~: SYS i~tt~ic~s, water quality, wildlife. ~R~o~d ~m~a~r~m, three ~v~o~l~un~t~e~e~, groups at addressing ~l~a~ea~l ensuring ~t~hat Shellfish h~a~v~a~tcd in Maim Water samples arc sent (before 4/26~: ~S 1~9 thereafter). For ~a~qm in- resources~) on 19 major estuaries along the wa~t~er-~qu~Aity problems through ~citi~r~e~n formation, contact Nancy Toombs. 5~81. coast: York. We~l,har~a~t~t~i. M~o~us~am. Kcn- monitoring, community education. and a~rc safe for public consumption. DMR labs (in West Booth 2281. or write to Chemicals in ~t~he En~vimn- nebu~nk. Saw. Scarborough, Roy~a~l/C~ou~s- pollution ~s~ha~t~e~m~e~n~t strategies. This video. Bivalve Shellfish (i.e., clams. mussel%, aim) for analysis. The s ~~~~~~~~~m~a~li~o~n Center. 107 J~e~nness l~h~i~ll. Ins, Presump~s~c~o~l.Sh~mp~sc~o~i~. D~am~mi~sco~l~ta~. due out in late April, can ~b~e viewed free of and Oysters) ~m~e filter readers that get their for fecal colif~o~rm~. a ~qb~qac~qt~qe, University of Maine. Orono. ME 04469. M~cdo~m~ak~. St. George, Pa~s~s~ag~a~s~s~aw~a~k~e~ag~, charge or purchased for ~$~10 (plus S~3 s~h~i~r~@ food and oxygen by siphoning Inge ~fo~w~id in the digestive use, union, ~N ... ~f~l~u~s~i~tus. pleasant. Chandler. pingf~e~e~)~. ~F~or more information. contact ~th~e amounts of water (up to 3 quarts in an blooded animals. The f~qec ~~~~~, group is ~sp~e~a~m~o~i~n~g ~p~ab~li~c ~a~ve~.~t~s Mach~i~s~s~i~f~f~i~E. M~achi . and the D~er~mys Riv. Knox-Lineal n office, or C~o~opcr~a~li ~vc ~F x~t~en. how). In this p~to~c~a~s. the ~sh~e~l~f~f~is~h ~mn- group of bacteria indicates ~~~~~~~d~~ coastal wit, quality d~.~,ig~l~-~ly. ers. Profiles we available for individual ~sion (at [he ~add~r~e~ss/ph~on~e listed a~l~o~vc) or emirate taxies or pu~ticu~l~at~e matter found sewage ~a~nd pathogenic ~qa A~~~~~~ or September, let as know: we can estuaries or as a s~e~t. Available from the call your county Cooperative Extension in the water: the level of h~ar~infu~l bacteria ~~~~~~~~c~ that ~-.~i~s in the next ~i~s~s~e. Maine Coastal Program. Office. in a bivalve c~a~n be them to 20 times that round in the surrounding -~a~wr~. When ~The rareness or ~r~e~o~qp~qe~qn~qi b~iv~a~l~v~a rated in water c~on~d~arnin~st~ed with for~u~m~a~tely, a lengthy cm~qc~q@ sewage. they c~a~n - if co~nsu~rn~ed by guidelines specify that a 1I~N~'~d a. humans - cause illnesses such as gastr~o. be reopened only after a in Bulk ~R- ~e~n~te~,i~tis. hepatitis. typhoid, ~a~nd cholera. "clean" samples ~h~a~s been U.S. P~e~nu~ag~c Paid So that people aren't exposed to three yens. Local groups ~P~r~o~o~, N.~ 8 contaminated shellfish, DMR samples process of reopening, thou A~ugu~s~u~, Maim Shellfish beds ~a~nd closes those that in~g coastal waters a~nd~qsh~qo register high levels of bacteria. The reporting their findings to ~~~~~~~r~~~s~l~i~n~e standards they use For closing beds are officials. determined by the Interstate Shellfish Under ~the ISSC r~e~qqui Share S~e~~d~$ Program S~anitat~i~r~m Conference ~(~ISSC)~.which sets Shellfish certification, or~qi~ql Station 3~9 standards for sanitary h~qm~mti~n~& analyze water samples for A~~~~. ME 0~43~33 processing, and distribution of Shellfish. But agency staff have us By adhering to these strict guidelines groups that now gather we (established in conjunction with the send them in to D~MR ~qfo~qr federal Food a~nd Drug Acft~ni~ni~stra~dc~tn~@ V~o~lun~t~o~c~ir mon~d~o~qn~qs c~qa~qn Maine is able to ship its Shellfish across analyze their ~a~q" data to state lines. local s~c~u~r~c~e~s~o~rp~o~l~ql~qut~qi~qon In sampling beds, DMR assesses ~w~a~t~a straight pipe at ~m~a~ll~qr~qu~qn~qc~qt~qi quality Rod does s~ar~ti~L~m~y shoreline systems). T~I~ve G~oorg~qe~qs R ~s~t~"ey% (in which they look for actual and Association~. ~f~or example~q, potential mum" of pollution in a such Sources during their watershed). DMR staff take at least rive ~Ing program last year, and water Samples each year in each of 2.100 their local code e~n~f~e~qac~qem~qi ~samp~li~n~g~si~t~e~s~. Wh~e~re~n~ec~e~ss~my~,~t~he corrected all threat~ pr~qo~qb~qle~qr samples are taken under "adverse" Data gathered by a ~qvo conditions (i.e.. after a storm or when monitoring grow ~c~a~qn also R~1~X~V seasonal T~"iden~t~s; we using waterfront educate the community ~0 ........ .. ~6qR ~7. ....... Local Grants Local Profiles ReS~2qOUrce People Much or ~Hou~.~%to~n~,~s work involves c~a~n better help one moth Awarded Marine Resources Committee Alan Houston enforcement - to ensure that that the hands-on sampling farm Town of Brunswick Marine Warden, ~Brun,~%w~i~ck shellfish being harvested we of legal size and -slashed surveys; Five citizen groups along the most were ~a~n~d safe for consumption. In the ~B~at~h~l awarded a total of ~$3~,6~50 in ~th~e first Brunswick has been actively managing A~l Houston is one of 41 municipal Brunswick area. them ~me I 10 full-time ~ti~o~n and me of data ~q(e~q.g. round of grant., ~s~u~hni~ni~s~t~e~r~ed by the ~n~e. its Shellfish beds ~f~o~r newly three decades. marine w~u~d~cn~s working to manage shellfish harvesters. With 40 percent of data to the public ~a~qn~q,~q] Ioc Shore ~~~wa~s~i~l~s Trust Fund. The Trust Their first shellfish ordinance took ~e~f~r~o~at marine resources ~a~nd protect w~a~l~a- the local nets closed, h~ar~v~e~st~a~s at ur~ad~e~r 7~1~c Conference P~qla~qn~qu~qt Fund. at ~~~e Maine Community Founds- in 196~4, when the Maine Legislature first quality. Most towns have p~a~r~t~.tim~e war. which comprises repr~qese ~~~~ in Ellsworth~. is a ~p~u~b~l~i~c~-pr~i~v~at~e gave towns ~s~u~d~e~n~s~i~ty to enforce local dens. but Brunswick ~h~a~s kept H~OU3~10~o pressure to take shellfish illegally from Cooperative E~me~r~t~a~qi~q@~qn~q, ~qt partnership supporting local efforts to ~she~l~ifishordin~anc~es. F~n~iry~e~w~s. the busy full-time for 15 yews. He spends his restricted mew. One night last year, in the Environmental ~P~r~o~qt~qec~qt~qi~qo improve coastal water quality. Ova the town's Marine Resources Committee con. days enforcing the town's shellfish middle of the night, Houston received a of Marine Resources. ~qw~qr~qo~qd next rive years. to endowment of cen~tra~t~ed an management of shellfish ordinance; analyzing water quality; ~a~nd call about harvesters working in a closed Stewards Program, will ~qn ~~~.00~ will be built to fund the local populations, exploring harvesting and galvanizing the local community to mudn~i~a. When he arrived, Houston found decide the topic and ~qt~qim~qi grants pro~g~ra~mi~n perpetuity. Co~n~tri~bu~ seeding techniques. Over the last three protect its marine resources. the harvesters digging in front of sewer workshop. Keep an eye tio~s from r~oun~d~ati~or~t~s. corporations, ~i~t yews. though. ~a growing local interest in Houston serves as suff for d~o~m local pipes. H~e couldn't we them initially, but Future issues of The R individuals we being sought for the -at" quality has sp~o~w~n~ed two new committees that manage Brunswick's could locate than became or the stench or Videotapes or the con endowment. The first round or grants. ~m~a~r~i~n~e ~c~o~mmin~c~e~s~. Marine R~eso~w~c~a, (we ~L~o,.~a~l Profiles sewage. the ~of~i~c~o~n~o~n sessions on awarded in early April, w~as supported by In September 19~8~9. excess nutrients article). Worki~n~s with these committees In addition to enforcement. Houston ing end watershed survey the Davis Conservation Foundation in from sewage ~w~o~r ~r~e~t~t~i~li~z~e~r~s prompted ~t~h~e ~s~o~od a shellfish consultant. he recently stresses public education. He frequently available won: contact ~qt~qh Falmouth. growth of algal blooms in Brunswick~'s completed ~a full inventory of Brunswick's gives talks on, w~a~t~e~r~-~qua~li~ty protection ~a~nd Office ~o~f Cooperative ~qEx The grants program supports local ~M~o~r~lu~c~i~t Day. The to" formed an Ad hoc marine resources, the first such inventory marine resources to civic groups and details (ph: 594-2~1 ~D~q4~q)~q. projects that promote citizen participation Bays Committee to explore ways to done in Maine. While 40 p~ac~e~nt of schools. The. is a growing interest in in coastal stewardship. Projects must prevent Further, wale, pollution. ~The new Brunswick's shellfish beds at currently water quality. he says, ~a~nd Brunswick ~h~a~s News Fron include a strong component of community committee comprised members of the closed, Houston wants to know what made a strong commitment to protecting e~~~~~i~ on w~a~ter-~qua~lity issues such . town council. the comprehensive planning shellfish live along all 67 miles of and improving its writers. To support the Elsewhere ~t~~l~~~wa~er runoff. shellfish protection. ~co~rnmi~tt~'~M a~n~d ~Rowd~oi~n College, as well Brunswick~'s shoreline. That way. the ~$1 million shellfish industry in its region. ~~~~~m~di~s~ch~w~g~% end Maine debris. Is i~l~i~k~2~ut~ed citizens. Working with a town can Prioritize which beds we most the town spends ~S50.0D~0 a yew on marine The five groups to receive grants ~c~m~u~Wt~$~qK doe committee gathered data valuable~. and decide where to direct funds resources. GULF OF MAINE MARIN ~~ ~~~~'~~d~ two ~t~i~v~a associations ~o~r~ad three on the g~o~o~d~o~q"~. geography. tow water f- improving water quality ~e~nd reopen- ENVIRONMENTAL QUA~qL ~~~, ~~~ ~~mmi~t~t~e~a~. The Brunswick marine now~i~s~f~i~lr~o~ns~wick~'~s bays. ins flats: News From MONITORING P~R~O~qG~qR~qA~qo R~~~~~~~~ Committee will receive S~l,oo~o Using theme date, ~d~i~t~s Marine Resources With a Inge Faces t~a~rg~e of b~o~d~s, closed, ~I- three yews, Maine Its begin a ~~ol~lu~n~te~ar water-quality Muni. Comprehensive Planning Committee, ~i~s t~h~e remaining beds we often ove~rh~a~r~. Maine working cooperatively w Owing ~~~~~m~m along upland streams that now a~rr~ie~nd~in~g setback restrictions, vested. Restocking of beds with tram. states and ~pr~o~vi~r~ce~s to ~qe~qn food into Brunswick's boys. The D~am~mis~. ~scre~a~g~e requirements. and ~o~r~d~i~s~u~"~o, planted or hatchery seed ~i~t ~a~n impenitent FIRST WATER QUALITY MONITORING term protection of ~t~h~qe G~qu~ql colts River Association (DRA) will u~se i~ts governing the we of pesticides ~a~m other Put Of Houston's work. He, also works FAIR DRAWS 2~50 Gulf is a s~ani~-~en~c~l~o~qi~qs~qed ~qa ~~M Pont ~10 produce a traveling display ~I~*~X~k~X In the sl~a~s~tr~e~l~a~nd ~s~a~w. The Plan. with a Regional Sh~eti~r~i~sh Advisory Maine's first Water Quality Monitoring From Cape Cad to th~qe Bay on the ~~~~~s~s~i~g~oott~s estuary watershed for ~ni~n~g ~C~u~qm~i~m~m comprises r~epres~c~ot~ativ~e~s, C~o~w~o~d~u~ce~. comprising representatives Fair. held Much 9 ~at the university or includes the writers off M areas ~~ community events. I~qU ORA will of doe local INA trust ~w~a~r ~c~on~a~m~ati~c~ar~t from Brunswick. West Bath. ~a~nd Maine - Au~gu~su~s. was a great success. ~qN~e~w Hampshire~. Maim also Organize a poster contest in local ~c~or~a~t~imi~ss~i~o~n, ON Marine Resources C~o~r~s. Ha~rl~a~sw~e~l~l~. Their mission is to advise the More than 250 ~i~m~i~c~r~e~s~t~e~d citizens came to and Nova Scotia. The G~qo ~~~ ~~l~~oll~s. This Georges River million. and die local planning board. Marine Resources CoM~m~it~te~e~o~f each hear about what volunteers me doing. and de~gr~o~de~cl~, but warning ~qsi Tidewater Association will ~.i~,~. S7~50 Brunswick~'s bear marine warden. Al town about issues concerning shellfish can do. t~o protect ~or~o~d restore Maine ~.~5 it could begin to surfer Ind ~0 develop a ~sl~id~e~sh~o~w, that describes the Houston. ~serv~e~s~s as the staff person for an harvesting and conservation. writers. During the morning session. taken to protect it. river and die monitoring efforts underway three com~mitt~e~e~s~s, linking the different Houston conducts shoreline surveys. speakers discussed the need f~m groups to Part of that action i~qnvo to Moore its water quality. ~7~h~e Kittery p~ro~Ject~a~u~nd~e~rt~ak~e~n. Houston says sums sampling c~o~a~u~rt~al water under guidelines establish clear monitoring goals, get local i~ts writers to determine w~qh Conservation Commission will spend its citizen interest has allowed Brunswick ~to act by ~th~i~c Interstate Shellfish Sanitation monitoring groups organized, and ~o~n~s~o~r~re entering the Gulf and how ~~~~~~ Pont an training citizen volunteers t~a~k~e~pog~ Iva step to protect its coastal Conference. In an effort to keep local credible date. participants also learned m~ay affect the ~G~u~irs, ~qh~qi~qo~qk, ~~ ~~Mi~~ Spruce Creek, a coastal estuary resources. Brunswick w~a~s arms doe first shellfish beds open. Houston is starting to about which agencies ore involved in (Mad. in t~ur~m. threaten hum ~- it highly developed portion of ~s~o to ban overboard discharge systems trace pollution back to i~ts source in the monitoring ~w~id what State resources are Given the vast size of the ~~~t~~~Y~ Finally. the Woolwich Shellfish (before ~i~t~s- L~o~a~g~i~s~l~a~t~u~r~e d~i~d~@ ~a~n~d is ~o~w watershed. Working with the Cumberland available to local groups (more ~m this Ing is a daunting task. Ile CO~~~~tio~n Commission will receive Grit to conduct a comprehensive ~i~nv~e~n~. and ~S~aS~ed~e~f~o~rc county offices of Cooper&. topic will be covered in future issues of provinces have decided to S300 to prepare an activity guide r~or ~"~Ir~y of its ~s~h~e~l~i~fi~sh resources. Brunswick ti~ve Extension. Houston is setting up a The Ripple Effect). small-scale p~dot project, ~qI ~~~~l~~ 7-~ an shellfish harvesting mail h~a~s ~o~b~a~r used Its bear ~sh~o~re~l~and zoning citizen monitoring program in which The afternoon was spent in hands-on mussels will be studied to coastal pollution. o~nfi~n~ar~ic~e to p~r~ete~a~s Maine writers by volunteers will take water samples twice. workshops that allowed participants to see whether bottom-dwelling ~~~ next round of grants will be made specifying ~V~A~d ~s~ab~o~ck~s and regulating Monthly from streams that reed into AM test different methods ~w~id equipment. being affected by pollution in September 199 1. Group interested irk use of l~o~si~W~in~g ~r~u~at~eri~s~h in the ~s~h~o~r~i~c~r~i~a~w ~Bru~insw~ick'~s bays. Houston will analyze E~v~alu~a~t~ion~i~t from the Fair were filled these and other samples wi Applying ~~r fronts we encouraged to ~2~0~M. For e~x~w~n~0q* ~pr~e~s~s~ur~e~-~tr~e~s~n~o~d (he samples and go after problems such as with idea fo~r future workshops and build a ~Gulf~-w~ide database contact F~i~ ~Sch~au~f~f~l~er, the Shore lumber (which Contains arsenic) is not malfunctioning septic systems ~a~nd conferences. Some of the ~I~o~T~i~es ~su~g~. is being funded by the Not S~~~~~k~l~~ Coordinator, at 2~99-3~261. P~~c~i~nnit~ted in construction projects within Pesticide ~u~s~e~- ~g~e~s~t~ed include the interaction of govern. AM Atmospheric Adminis ~2~50 fee of the water. ~mc~n~it and citizen monitors (i.e., how they staff time being contribute, Nino low ~6qM ~6qM QUARTERLY REPORTS FROM COASTAL COORDINATORS THIRD QUARTER REPORT -- COASTAL SECTION comprehensive plan. SMRPC is not clear at this point as to Southern maine Regional Planning commission exactly what schedule 001' is on With respect We. plan to contact. the town ;shortly to This i,,1-inrt covers work performed from 2/l/l thrC)ugh 4/-11/1?)- plan moy sljll he a w,)ys !;h0Ul(l grt ;) altP(l Oil ShOr('lalld 7-011itltl A. SHORELAND ZONING the plan. At %y a.,;si s ta i i c e t- o COB w i I I at lp,isL t lie fourth u,ii tiet, and wi I I Sgittimari1pp Tw uarl rr vf next y,ar'--. cont ract. yeij counci I form of government The towns scheduled for assistance this uarter in SMRPC's work program were Arundel, Eliot, Old orchard Beach and South The staLus of most othor municipalit ie from last- cillarl-er. Notes oil a few PC)%, C drafted proposed revisions to Arundells shoreland zoning piogi-CsF are incl. I-ided hel ow: provisions last uarter, and assistance this uarter has focused on discussing thenf- changes with the Town Planner and the Planni n Wells, with SMRPC's assistance, has no Board. Several meetings with the Town Planner and one with th(I h0PefL)JlY final draft of its shoreland Planning Board occiii-red this uarter and another Planning Board Board ha,4 every intention of submittin workshop is scheduled for the second week in May (we only got to iL) for Town Meeting approval at on through the first half of the proposed changes at the first- special Town Meetingr expected to occ!C workshop). After t.his second workshop is completed, all agreed 3J, 1992. upon modifications will be incorporated into a second, more finnl draft. This version is expected to be voted on later this year at ogunuit has scheduled a final public a late summer or fall Town Meeting. shoreland revisions and appears to lie Assistance to the other three towns was scheduled for the third Town Meeting. n uarter because they all insisted on waiting for the completion of Saco has scheduled a series of Plannin their comprehensive plans before starting zoning revisions. They finalze shoreland zoning changes and anticipated being finished with their.plans around the first of to City Council for adoption by late s the year (1991) and hence thought they would work on shoreland zoning this uarter. Development of Demonstration Shoreland South Berwick, in fact, did complete its plan by the first of the This aspect of the work program has su year, but has only now gotten started on shoreland zoning, relegation to the back burner. Assist conseuently, SMRPC provided little assistance to South Berwic)-. with the development of standards for this uarter. The Town Planner has indicated the town will available to date, as these people are probably need significant assistance drifing the fourth uarter as have not yet benn able to get to it. he says the guidelines are currently very poorly understood by are now in a position to make this a p both the Planning Board and himself. As noted in previous date has been that OCP would come up w reports, South Berwick's Council form of government affords the recommendations and SMRPC would put th town considerable flexibility in scheduling the adoption of for incorporation into a commun3.t 4 s ordinance changes. It looks like this should be poss2K0le fourth uarter. SMRPC has been able t Eliot just finished its comprehensive plan at the end of this wats-r crossings: a draft version of t uarter, and therefore has postponed shoreland zoning work to tlie 0CP shortly. fourth uarter. SMRPC's assistance has been rescheduled accordingly. Eliot is planning 'to hold at least one Town meeting later in the year. old orchard Beach is a tier two town that is still. working on its B. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ON COASTAL POLICY IMPLEMENTATION and enthiisiasin Iis uartei in,etitvwjth the 16ver conunittcf, this Cott.Pns1x La f1J1 nA!,si,tange III(! crilnuttcedisrlssod the leg11 C'111C tais(d last year ttid developed a nc,w d T only town specifically schedliled for asSiStanc(' this uarLel into rolifnicleration these concerns arld was ennebUnkport. Assistance wa; provided to K'porl Lhis tasks Lhe committon if; inerested in: uarter, though noL in the form of a review of their work. As the as an Ippoalf; hoard for harbor mast cl: committee is still. working or beginning to work oil Policy river corninitl,c Inorc formal recogni.1io development, and tile inventory data is still not in report form manacment plans and regulations for, t (to our knowledge), their has been little to commellt. Oil. However, l il 1hat. shorter and simpler doctimen son ` SMRPC has maintained contact with the committee and i! currently shouIrl meet with approval from all thr providing assistance/ ideas for an upcoming local work!hop fOCUSili will )e presented to the three boards on marine resources policies. smcc,sfully adopted, the committee wi (it t)l agrf,ernerlt in Uhe future. The other town that assistance was scheduled for (due to being postponed from the second uarter) was Arundel. Arundel has still not gotten to the marine resources section of its poliCies, and hence there has been nothing to comment on. it is likely that Arundel will be ready for this assistance sometime during tile fourth uarter. Other assistance provided this uarter that fits roughly under this category includes the continued discussions with the Kittery Conservation Commission on a potential 205i project that SMRPC will probably submit a proposal for thisXL1`4rhis project would A ' implement many water uality recommendations in Kittery's comprehensive plan. Public Access Project SMRPC also began a public access project this uarter for the Town of York. SMRPC, at York's reuest, has begun researching several possible public access sites at Cape Nedick Harbor and along the Cape Nedick River. A report on this project is scheduled for completion during the fourth uarter. While this project, or projects of this magnitude, were not scheduled in our work program, we felt that as this is an area that SMRPC hassome expertise in and as public access is an important aspect of Maine's Coastal Program, we would try to sueeze this project in. Thus far the research has not been too promising in terms of finding public ownership or easements, but some interesting information has been uncovered, and it is hoped that the careful. documentation of this research will resolve at least some of the uestions that town officials have been raising for a number of years. Iterloal Project Update The Kennebunk River interlOCal agreement has attracted renewed r i i i Greater Portland Council of Governments Portla'nd, Maine 0411011.(200774-9891 3 nicino dctailing pmvisions that override I oJ 233 Oxford oldinances; and OCP's first Shoreland Zoning Technical A April 29, 1991 non-conforming use.,,. GPC *00 has now completed its reviews of local s Freeport, Yarmouth, Cumberland, Falmouth, Port TO: Marvin [Wscnblum, OCP Scarhorough. In addition, we have completed sim FROM: alcric Kazarian towns which drain directly into Casco Bay: Wind _0*V New Gloncesier. A sample of the woik accompli SUBJECT Third tmricr Report for FY 91: Coastal Contract The 'rown of Pownal, which is also in the direct v shorcland zoning ordinance to review. It is one of older versions of the Shorcland Zoning statute. This report is a summary of the Greater Portland Council of Governments' 1hud uarter Pownal's needs was provided at a March 28 work activities as specified in Rider A of the Coastal Program contract. Town has since asked for ftirther assistance in the COG has outlined a program for them and is iwai 1. Coastal Coordinalors awaiting a copy of a draft shorcland zoning ordina Coastal Coordinator: Rick Seeley soon as it is received. Growth Management Coordinator: Valerie Kazarian Shorcland Zoning Mips j 2. Coastal Program GPCOG has now completed maps of the new sho Cumberland, Portland, South Portland, Cape Eliza TASK A - Shoreland Zoning Gloucester, and Westbrook. Remaining maps wil Shorcland Zonin2 Ordinance Reviews next uarter, according to the order in which they For each community, we have reviewed the existing or first draft ordinances for minimum Technical Assistance Workshovs changes needed to comply with the Guidelines for Municipal Shoreland Zoning Ord i na nces. On March 28, 1991, in Pownal, GPCOG sponsore shorcland zoning reuirements. presented by Rich We have supplied each community with a package including: Coordinator; the Cousins River watershed and es who conducted the Cousins River Study produced a cover memo discussing the significance of the Guidelines, statutory options for grant; and shorcland zoning mapping reuirement deviating from them, and the purpose and limitations of COG's ordinance review; cartographer. Publicized through mailings region attended, including several Pownal Planning Boa a matrix summarizing the needed changes cross-referenced to local ordinance(s); target audience for basic shorelind zoning reuire Cousins River watershed towns, of which all but a computer-gencrated copy of the Guidelines, also cross-referenced to local workshop announcement is attached. ordinances, with needed sections underlined; On April 25, 1991, GPCOG sponsored a worksho a copy of the Constal Management Policies, or a Casco Bay Estuary Project fact GPCOG's coastal communities. Barbara Vestal o sheet; guest and addressed the topic of options for integ shorcland zoning. As most of our coastal commu R pre-publication copy of the DEP Shorcland Zoning News, due to be published in and community-wide zoning, and all have now rec April, including Rich Baker's section on commonly asked uestions and answers to initial map, this was a very timely session: The e them; Planners Association was invited to attend. A co attached. ;fier . N-1h Va-mob h,fl-d N-1 - R.-d - S-N,-Ch - S-dkh - W-1--t On May 16, 1991, GPCOG will hold another workshop on the same topic in the evening s4) that local board members may attend. Also scheduled to speak is Paul Lawrence, Chairperson of the Windham Water Resources Commission, a Town Council-appointed CAPITAL COASTAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS water resource planning and education group, who will address, among other lopics, shorcland zoning as part of watershed management, and plans for a citizens' w:itcr quality COASTAL CONTRACT monitoring program in tributaries to the Presunipscot River and its importance in Casco Bay. A copy of the workshop announcement is attached. THIRD QUARTERLY REPORT The Town Planners hive clearly indicated that the offering of DEP "office hours" at tile COG May 1, 1991 offices would be premature at this time. They may be interested in this service in tllc next fiscal year. TASK A. Local Adoption of Shoreland zoning ordinances TASK B - Coastal Policies The focus during this quarter was on individualized assistance to Waterfront Survev the towns as they continue work on their shoreland zoning ordinances. predictably, it is taking towns longer to prepare revised ordinances and maps than originally planned. COG has nearly completed its survey of waterfront businesses in non-urban communities. Based on a similar survey of Portland's waterfront businesses conducted last year, [Ile The attached Technical Assistance Log provides a town by town survey will assess it range of regional waterfront businesses' needs. All data received has update. j-,ollowing is a summary of the shorciand zoning activity: been entered into the computer model. Arrangements have been made for data entry of CCCOG surveys. Draft summary of results received so far have been developed. All data SHORELAND ZONING ORDINANCE STATUS SUMMARY will be received and analyzed by the end of April. The final summary report will be available Go shortly thereafter. During May, as soon as it is complete, we will distribute it to our region's 3 municipalities have passed ordinances. communities for use in their waterfront policy and shorcland zoning ordinance development. 5 municipalities plan to present ordinances at town TASK C - General Assistance meeting/council by fall '9). li. municipalities will not be presenting ordinances until after We have continued to distribute materials and information received at Coastal Coordinators' fall. 191. Reasons for delays: meetings to our region Is communities through mailings and at technical assistance workshops. 1 town's ordinance was rejected at town meeting. To date, materials distributed/announced have included: 4 towns are deliberately waiting to incorporate shoreland zoning into new implementation ordinances. MLI's Comprehensive Planning and Shoreland Zoning: How to Meet the Requirements of Both 3 towns are actively completing comprehensive plans. OCP Le".ons Learned memo on meeting coastal policies in comprehensive plans 3 towns have not articulated a specific reason for not SPO Public Access Maps for each town proceeding more quickly. Public Access Series volumes on Coastal ROW Rediscovery, and Liability Coastal Management Handbook ne Estuary Book and Estuary Profiles TASK B. Coastal Policies Implementation Conservation of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Habitats Model Shoreland Zoning Permit Forms CCCOG staff continue to work with the region's towns that are Others involved in comprehensive planning. Coastal policies have been discussed with each of the planning committees at the appropriate We will continue to distribute other materjals in the next quarter. point. The status of the coastal. towns has not changed since the last quarterly report. Phippsburg & West Bath: Both towns have completed their plans and submitted their plans to OCP for review. W1 111111 111110 4M FARMINGDALE The planning board will. not be addressing shoreland zoning dUrinq this contract year. GARDINER CCCOG TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LOG The city has completed its shoreland revisions and DEP has responded MAY 1, 1991 with objections. GEORGETOWN The planning board has decided to take a cautious approach to the shorrland zoning update because of the public outcry over the amount ARROWSIC of wetland area that is supposed to be protected by resource protection. CCCOG has offered to set up a meeting between town The planning board is drafting a zoning map to present to the IF&W officials, and DEP and IF&W staff to review alternative zoning for biologists which will propose buffers of less than 250 feet around some of these areas. At this point, the planning board is some of the. coastal wetland areas which have rated as "high" or reviewing property tax maps to determine the exact impact of the new "moderate". In some areas, property owners will loose all use of requirements. As soon as we are contacted, we will set up the joint their property if the full 250 feet of Resource Protection is meeting. imposed. These owners have been very vocally opposed to this designation feeling that it is unwarranted. CCCOG will meet with HALLOWELL Arrowsic officials and IF&W representatives when the draft map is CCCOG has reviewed the. current land use ordinance and provided the completed. Arrowsic is hoping to present its revised shoreland city with recommendat ions for bringing the ordinance into compliance zoning ordinance for approval at a June town meeting. with the shoreland requirements. AUGUSTA HARPSWELL Augusta's planning staff has drafted a new land use ordinance which The new shoreland zoning ordinance was rejected at town meeting. includes the shoreland zoning requirements. The ordinance will go k-J before the City Council for approval sometime this summer. PHIPPSBURG D Phi.ppsburg has a subcommittee working on the shoreland ordinance but BATH the town is now considering postponing development of an amended mat Eddy is currently drafting revisions to the City's land use ordinance because they will soon be starting on the implementation code to incorporate the necessary shoreland zoning provisions. ordinances for their new comprehensive plan. BOWDOINHAM PITTSTON ,rhe town is just getting started with a consultant on their CCCOG prepared the revised shoreland zoning ordinance and a new comprehensive plan and remains uncertain when they will complete shoreland zoning map both of which were passed at town meeting in the shoreland ordinance update. March. BRUNSWICK RANDOLPH Brunswick's planning staff is still working on a revised draft of The code enforcement officer is still working on a draft ordinance the proposed draft reviewed by CCCOG in December. but is hoping to have it completed for a special town meeting in June. CHELSEA CCCOG met with the planning board to review a set of topographic RICHMOND maps which were prepared to show the wetlands and streams which must The town has adopted a new ordinance which includes the necessary fie added to the current shoreland zoning areas. The board will shoreland provisions. be preparing a draft ordinance during the next couple of months. TOPSHAM DRESDEN There is a shoreland zoning subcommittee working on the ordinance The Town is working with its consultant to incorporate the utilizing the land use, wetlands, and natural resources naps that necessary shoreland requirements into their new town-wide the town has generated in its comprehensive planning process. ordinance which is being drafted to implement their new comprehensive plan- WFST BATH The planning board has not responded to offers of assistance primarily becau!;e of their involvement with the recently comple-ted comprehennive plan. HANCOCK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COASTAL CONTRACT WOOLWICH QUARTERLY REPORT: FEBRUARY APRIL 1991 The town has just completed its comprehensive plan. The implementation ordinance committees have been formed and will he developing ordinance drafts this summer. The tasks outlined below correspond to the tasks outlined in Rider A of the Hancock County Planning Commission's (HCPC) Coastal Contract. TASK A: SHORELAND ZONING A.1 Completed A.2 INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE WORKSHOPS The HCPC staff attended a workshop/meeting of the Friends Of Taunton Bay (FTB) on March 25th. The session was focused on the presentation of a resource guide/assessment by the FTB. The three towns in this group; Hancock, Franklin, and Sullivan are studying joint approaches to resource preservation. Further meetings are planned. On April 17th staff members also attended a meeting of the US/UK Countryside Institute Stewardship Exchange Steering Committee of the Penobscot Bay Land Trust Alliance. C) A.3 TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE The HCPC staff made personal and/or telephone contact with the planning boards or code enforcement officers of all 29 coastal communities. The purpose of this contact was to: 1. Check the progress of the towns that are actively revising their shoreland ordinances; Orland, Sedgwick, Brooksville, Verona, Bucksport, Surry, Hancock, Lamoine, Winter Harbor, Swans Island, Penobscot, Brooklin, Franklin, Trenton, and Cranberry Isle. 2. See if the towns that are just getting started or having trouble with their revisions need more help; Blue Hill, Ellsworth, Gouldeboro, Sorrento, and Sullivan. 3. Renew our offer of technical assistance to the towns that have declined help in the past or have been working on their own; Bar Harbor, Castine, Dear Isle, Frenchboro, Isle au Haut, Mount Desert, Southwest Harbor, Stonington, and Tremont. Special zoning is:ue 11 have surfaced in the town of S ... ento. TASK C: GENERAL ASSISTANCE The town is very mail ,n land area and population and occupies a narrow peninsula. it was estimated at a recent HCPC staff met with Fran Rudoff in Ellsworth to discuss the workshop that Sorrento has about ten miles of town road and future of the coastal program and the impact it is having on twenty miles of coastline (no lakes, ponds, or streams). The the coastal communities in Hancock County. impact of land use restrictions under the Mandatory Shoreland Zoning Act and the Growth Management Act is causing more than The staff has continued to assist towns in a variety of ways. the usual amount of concern here. None of the existing The majority of requests have continued to center around code models seem to fit the situation in Sorrento. Extra care enforcement issues and shoreland ordinance revisions and will need to be exercised to help this community to develop interpretations of ordinance language. standards that will allow a bland of development opportunities and yet keep to the spirit and intent of We have used every opportunity we've had to preach the need protective aspects of the legislative acts. A special report for planning for certain increases in the cost of code will be developed and included as an attachment to the next enforcement and the merits of the interlocal code enforcement quarterly report. concept. A presentation on interlocal code enforcement was The town of Orland has completed their revisions and are made at the HCPC's Annual Planning Day on April 27th. Copies scheduled for a public hearing on May 29th or 30th. of the booklet prepared by OCP were handed out. Depending on the outcome of the hearing, Orland would like to Attachment #3 includes: schedule a special town meeting in June to attempt adoption - Copies of technical assistance sheets. of the revised ordinance. - Copy of the HCPC Planning Day agenda. The town of Sedgwick has also completed revising their shoreland ordinance and will hold a public hearing on April 30th. A special town meeting to vote on the revisions is ()D scheduled for May 29th. Attachment 01 includes: � copies of shoreland ordinance reviews for 4 towns � program summary sheets. A.4 OCP MONTHLY TRAINING SESSIONS The Coastal Coordinator attended the regular meeting of the Coastal Coordinators in Augusta. TASK Bt COASTAL POLICIES The Coastal Coordinator has continued to review comprehensive plans for consistency with Maine's coastal policies. A workshop session on integrating coastal policies into comprehensive plans was prepared an a part of HCPC's annual planning day. Although this activity was not part of the original work program, we felt that the material would be a useful tool for round 3 and 4'towns. Attachment #2 includest � Copy of "Coastal Policies and the Comprehensive Plan". � HCPC review of Gouldeboro's inventory and analysis draft. -3- -2- CZM 1,00 Fell/Mar/AI)T: Penobscot Valley Council of Governments ME6 One Cumberland Place suite :3nn P Phone 1' 0 Rox 2579 Rangoi Wtine 0,1401 8520 (:107) 9,1P G389 C Hit i I /Correspondfnce M HevLin/Visit. DATE FORK TOWN CONTACT 2/1/91 C Franktoit Jeff Silver COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT OUARTERLY REPORT 3 2/1 M Wi n t P. r no I IIloc Brookn- 717 P Wi nternot L Joe Brooks February - March - April 1991 2/11 P WJ 11terpni t Joe Brooks 2/11 M Prankfoik Evelyn Adam 2/28 P/C Wi nterpot 1. Joe Brooks Task A: SI(ORELAND ZONING 3/4 C Winterpot t Joe Brooks horeland Zonin technical assistance log enclosed as part of complete technical assistance lo. The correspondence is also enclosed. 3/7 P Winterport Joe Brooks 3/7 P Frankfort Evelyn Adam! 2. The updated status of the Coastal Comunities shoreland zoning ordinances is 3/8 C Piankfort Jim Sanders enclosed. 3/8 P Pi osrect Diane Teney 3. Fddinton's Shoreland Zoning ordinance is enclosed. The other ordinances will 3/11 C Winterport Charles Bra be sent in the uarterly revor t of the uarter that they are received. Jne Brooks 3/12 P Frankfort Jim Sanders 4. No regional clinics were given during the third uarter, as most town meetings were occurring in March. However, meetings with individual communities 3/18 P Wintervort Joe Brooks and assistance continued as reuested an an on-going basis. 5. Summary of assistance and changes that occurred over year as a result of the 3/28 P/C EddinLon Audrey Fox- assistance, town-by-town, will accompany the final report. 4/2 P Fddington Arthur wash 4/2 P DEP/Land Bur. Mary Morgan Task 8 COASTAL POLICIES 4/2 P Eddington Arthur wash . The Coastal coordinator is currently working with Frankfort and Prospect on 4/2 P Hampden David Could their marine resources and water resources sections of their comprehensive Plans. regional coordination for watersheds and groundwater protection, and an addressing the coastal Policies into their comprehensive plans. other towns are 4/9 P Wintervort Ed Russell- assisted as reuested. Frankfort is the only Tier 1 community of the 11 coastal (Oversight towns. Prospect is a Tier 2 and is beginning their comprehensive plan process. 2. The products from the Frankfort comprehensive plan drafted by the Coastal 4123 M Brewer Tom Kurth a Coordinator will be included in the final report. Also, whatever products are PR Member completed of the Frank for t/Prospect shared groundwater protection plan regional 4/24 P Bangor Steven Neil project (a 604(b) contract directed by,the Coastal Coordinator) will be included Planning St in the final report. Task C: GENERAL ASSISTANCE The )ou is enClOSed. NOVI tPw(8go8w Penobscot Valley Council of Governments WAc;HINGTON On'! (,:) ... 1 P1,1c'! Still'! U)r" V 0 Box 2579 11.1n(lo, V%s 044ni fv:.,o ,o,,) m, G38! PLANNIN6C, 63 MAIN STRFET MACI41AS. MAINE 046!54 TE COASTAL COMMUNITIES: Status of shoieland zonitm Revisions COASTAL 1110(;RAM Glenn Avery e, J)eborah Dowl.inr C oa F; t;, I Coodinators I. BANGOR: To he Passed by Council as part of their Land Deveinpment Cod,.. probably durin the Fall of 1992p February 1., 1991 to May 1, 1991 Act . BREWER: The ordinance is drafted, maps are finished, planning board has approved it. The ordinance should go to Council in May, 1991 for ontinuation -- vote. meetinr, with Earnort Community for work on the Eastport WAG's 3. EDDINGTON: Shoreland Zoning ordinance revis)on - Passed Maych J9, 199) it werr? ?7 bidders in nil. Contacted Town Meeting. in dealing with Eastilort "City Hall' to news that WAGs/PAcc 4. FRANKFORT: Planning Board currently working on it. They will have a public s cut for this OD Executive Committee about Coastal. M hearin soon and hope to have a Special Town Meeting in may or June 199). imp] ied uses. Specified this CMG, a cie- Workshori, April 25th. (SEE Att HAMPDEN: The revision will be going to Council, probably Fall 1991. other sourres, for acuilition of ha Selectman 6. ORRINGTON: The Planning Board is workin on the revision and will have a SHORELAND ZONING - special Town Meeting in late Fall, 1991. Interestinr, but consuming meetin frontage in Lubec, Machiasport. and 7. PROSPECT: The revision was passed at Town Meetin on March 25 & 26, 1991, The ordinance was accepted by DEP on April 22, 1991. board member from Dennysville who 0i turned into a develoDer/pianner/tow . SERSPORT: The revision seas passed at Town Meeting on March 16, 1991. applications of the Shoreland Zonin vidinF additional examples for othe 9. STOCKTON SPRINGS: The revision will be voted on at a Special Town Meeting Provided Roue Bluffs planning boar within the next couple of months (May or June, 1991). barriers for upgrading ordinance. on protective measures for Englishm 10 VEAZIE: Currently working on the tevision. There will be a public hearing in Whitneyville. Future disussion in June or July and will be to council for vote as soon afterwards such measures. Solid waste an issu as Possible. when T/A was piven regarding the po 11. INTERPORT: The revision was passed as part of a Land Use Management the Down East Landfill in Marion (S 0 ordinance at Town Meetin on March 15, 1991. The ordinance was accepted by DEP on April 9. 1991. pv 2 WCH IIC C,,r4 'd Lr M; ky I , 1,) 9 1 water uality damape due to the fact that the leachate would Addressed the Washiniton County plume into Spirit Stream which feeds Harmon Stream wlhch drainf; into Gardner Lake (GPA). Various discussions at varlou; foriifn; concPrn!nfr the commj;sion':; im,nact (especially thp recent meetinps organizing the Washinton County T/A on techniues for towns to prot Refuse Disposal Disctrict) rejarding this water ual;.y concern. rounty funds are u,ijized to attrac Ample opportunity to discuss the Coastal Policies at .r)ei2pforkims (SEE attached Iettcr) A ttend ed with nine towns in Washiripton County. Met with Mach`F, Town Mt,r. workshop in August;i Anril. 5th. Att and Selectmen to discuss the Commission's role in asssting wj1p2p meetinfr in March. ordinances impactinr, the Machias River and junt how ,*.e Coastal Policies would bp addressed in the Comprehensive Plar. with emphas' on rhared resources nuch as the recently mapped arjuif?. Met wt". two members of the Pembroke Conservation Committee cncerned wil, udatina their state mandated shoreland zoning ordin.ce and how t town might "inull topether.' Have met with every coastal tov.,r. on the state imposed shoreland zoning list during .,is contrnct year at least once except for Centreville. COASTAL POLICIES WORKSH Nine towns were represented by 20 people who attended the workshop on April 25, 1991, at the University of Maine at Machias. (See attached announcements, news articles. attendance list, etc.) The workshop participants were carefully led through explanations on the application of each coastal policy in upcoming or ongoing comprehensive plan processess. Cutle representatives utilized their process to demostrate the unusual application of the policies in regards to marine resources and access. Cutler was given extensive T/A as followup to their accesa mapping (SEE attached letters from Cutler). The handouts were 'utilized as they applied in the di3aussions and were very helpful in bringing attention to how the Coastal Policies were inteprated with the goals stated for the comprehensive plans. Nuderous publications were referred to during the workshop as being 'holpful to towns in the planning process. A special work session was agreed to with Pembroke based upon the workshop. Materials previously provided to Addison (See the Norton letter attached) were discussed with member represenatives during break. EMCWC 3rd oarter Coa.%Lil TA Rrport: Feb. 1, 1990 - April 30, 1991 RMCKPC 31 d (biarter CoasWTA Report: Feb. 1, 1990 Ap COASTAL TA REPORT& Srd UARTER The Coastal Planner reviewed the Flanning Board attonicy is reviewing the ordinance, and a draft was also s Februiry 1, 1991 - April 30, 1991 for their review. A hearing was held in late April, arid app from the residents. The CFIO, Planning Board and FMCRI Bakcr about some of the proposed standards for Resource TASK A: SHORELAND ZONING hiFiLlniodcratc-rited wetlands. The CEO, Rick Ropm, ha process, but more importantly, in getting input and suppo Technical Assistance owner,, and other m-siftnts. The Town anticipates that it w Meeting on June 24th. EMCRPC continues to provide TA to all ofour towns as they work on their shorcland zoning ordinances and maps. The status ofthe non-coastal towns was reported in the 3rd uartet North I laven General FunclTA Report (April 1. 1991). In general, the coastal towns am making progress in revising SZOs; however. some towns have indicated that they do not expect to vote on S7.Os until The Coastal Planner met with the Planning Board late summer or in the fall. EMCRPC staff continues to urge communities to move forward with Island's shorcland zoning, which would be incorporated it revisions, regardless of the status ofcach town's comprehensive plan, arid regardless of what also discussed the importance of having a series of maps, ay happen with the DEP Shoreland Zoning Office. We arc aware of the potential stackup of continues to produce for other towns (e.g., St. George, V ordinances to be revicwc(t/approved by DEP if the communities wait until the last minute to Appleton, etc.). The Coastal Planner is reviewing their cu submit them. EMCRPC has been tracking the proposed revisions in each town, and has recommendations to meet the minimum regulations. Mein consistently been in touch with DEP Shoreland Zoning Office in order to work out any problems attended the Groondwater workshop we held in March, an early in the revision process, before the a town votes on or submits its SZO to DE'P. See tile resource protectionstandards, such as Vinalhaven is consi attached chart, "SZO Schedule by Town" for an updated summary of coastal towns' SZO Virrilhaven's proposed setbacks (e.g., wells from salt wat revisions and adoptions. Haven as well. In addition to SZO revisions, the Coastal Planner has provided other shorcland zoning- The Coastal Planner also provided information to t related TA. Below is a town -by-town summary of the shoreland assistance provided by the the Island'r Rural District. Coastal Planner and other EMCRPC staff during the 3rd uarter of 1991. tLo"h ort CID Belfast n The Planning Board has held several working nice The Comp. Plan Committee and the Waterfront Project Committee am both addressing members is using his home computer for the ordinance. S shorland and harbor area issues. The shoreland revisions are being addressed concurrently with but they am presently trying to verify non-fomsted and fo these other programs (see status ofCoastal Planning Grant Projects). knowledge of the areas in uestion. EMCRPC will review Cushing Owl's Head Continued to work with the CEO and Planning Board on SZO revisions. Although die EMCRPC is currently working with the Planning ordinance is progressing, it is unlikely that it will be brought to Town vote until the fall. producing the maps needed to do a shomland zoning map. EMCRPC staff discussed the procedures for mapping shoreland zones, since Cushing will need the same as the State model; however, the areas to be shon to revise its out-dated SZ map. Cushing has described the shorcland districts in the ordinance by reuirements. 1`he DEP reuires only Maine-mappcd well tax map and lot number. has a small area of such a wettand, but NWI identifed man EMCRPC is encouraging Owl's Head (and other towns) t ridship and National, and to distinguish between the two with a di The SZO was adopted at the Spring Town meeting, and the shorelland zoning map is being site visits when an area is in uestion.. adjusted accordingly. The Planning Board still wants to detineate, possibly by tax map lot EMCRPC staff followed up on the State Planning numbers, the extent of the CFMA and Resource Protection Districts. The Coastal Planner win be about the expansion project at Knox County Regional 8M meeting with the Planning Board in May to discuss this with thern. acuisition of land and navigation easements necessary to -lb"r There am several wetlands in the area to be acuired. The and project description for our review. Spoke to the Planning Board Chair about the status orthe SZO, which they expect to have R-ck Lmnd ready for a public hearing this spring. EMCRP(! has prepared a wetlands map and a shorcland zoning map via the Island Institute satellite imagery program. EMCRPC staff attended a Comprehensive Plan m Manager to discuss the details of the Plan process. incolnvil In July, a group from the 1991 US/LTK Countrysid Penobscot Bay region, sponsored by area land trusts, U. IMCPC 3rd Quarter Coitnl TA Report: Feb. 1, 1990 - April 30. 19A.1 ENCTIV. :3rd uarter Coastal TA Report: Feb. 1, 1990 - A anizations, including EIMCRPC. The group will be visiting the Rockland I larbor and revised shorcland zone. The Comp. Plan Conimitim also waterfront area looking at tho potential for improving public access. FMCRPC will Ir a alld Ovslcr River% to he zone(] Rcsouirc Protection. The participant in the program. members to a subcommittee to continue working on the are: 1) designating all undeveloped shorelands along the k"rt most of tile river frontage in Town) as Rc,;o, kZ Protecti Bog; 2) refining the allowed/prohibitrd uses in file Shorel 'Me Coastal Planner met with a Planning Board/Comp. Plan member about SZ revisions. improving the derinitions section. The Town is also inten Rockport SZ regulations are incorporated into various sections of the general Lind Use agricultural an(] tiniber harvesting BMPs into the shorcla Ordinance, making the revisions more complicated. A special SZ subcommittee, made tip of comMUnicafion between (he Planning Board and Comp P members of the Planning Board and Comp Plan Committee, will probably be appointed to work being considered as we work oil file shoreland regulation on tile ordinance in the coming weeks. The Coastal Planner will continue to provide assistance as needed. At our meeting, we also discussed water resources maps as part of the shorcland zoning, Virialhaven pc.is. We anticipate niecting with Rockport commiltees andlor boaros in the near futureabout using these maps to identify wetlands and streams to be shorrIand zoned. The Coastal Planner continued to work with the V on tile Lind Use Table for their Ordinance. Other issues The Coastal Planner provided information on phosphorus loading to the Rockport family to inulti-family dwellings, and die effect of afford CEO/Planner for die Chickawaukie Lake study. The Coastal Planner will probably assist the residents; building height limits close to the watec increas Comp Plan Committee as they develop water resource protection policies and strategies for weiland edge to 100 feet; and, Planning Board procedura Chickawaukie and other local lakes. Members of the VPC and tile Town Manager atte Sh-Thrn t9n Rockland in March. The inforination presented at this wo Ordinance revisions, since it focuses on water resource p Members of the South Thomaston Long-Range Planning Committee, assisted by EMCRPC staff, had worked on the SZO revisions for about six months. The ordinance was Wa"n brought to public hearings in December 1990 and Fcbruary'91.The atiendenceat these meetings was minimal, but no objections were raised over the proposed ordinance. However, Lhe Town EMCRPC staff continues to provide assistance to rejected die ordinance at the March Town Meeting. Them has been a turnover in the Boards they try to meet the Comp. Plan deadline on July I st (see (Planning and Selectmen), and the new Manning Board intends to rework the shoreland addition to the Comp Plan, die Town and EMCRPC staff ordinance. local mining regulations. The Coastal Planner contacted if Town of Jay for information that might be useful to Warr St. OM Board to discuss it. Their greatest concern is protection o wellm odier, far-reaching impacts on the groundwater sy The Town initially planned to have a shoreland ordinance ready for Town vote at the to see the Comp. Plan specifically address impacts front March Town Meeting. However, the shoreland mapping took longer than anticipated, due to the water resources. Metal mining was skimmed over on the process of idenfifying additional wetlands to be shoreland-zoncd, and areas that must be zoned as March, because (according to the Comp Plan Chairs) the Resource Protection. At this point, the Planning Board anticipates having one mom public hearing now realizes that this issue must be addressed in the Plan on the ordinance, and voting on it at a special Town Meeting in the summer. The Coastal Planner a metal mining Ordinance. EMCRPC staff will continue t has been helping the Planning Board revise and coordinate the definidon sections of the ShorrIand ordinance(s). and Subdivision Ordinances (the latter is also being revised). Tbe Coastal Planner assisted the CIRO with other shoreland-mlated uestions regarding the application for a "mobile hotdog stand" to be parked in a CFMA zone. The existing SZO does not address it, but the Town can refer to the Site Plan Ordinance. The greatest concern is about the impact on traffic circulation and parking in an already congested area. The Scraggle. Point Subdivision case (see 1990 3rd & 4th uarter Coastal TA Reports, and 1991 3rd uarter General Fund TA Report) was upheld in Superior Court in Match, but the developer intends to appeal the case to the Maine Supreme Court. The Superior Court judge ruled that te St. George Planning Board had sufficient eVidenot: when it determined that the I I -acre subdivision along Mill Cove was in the Resource Protection District, and is subject to the 250-fooi setback. The developer claims that it isn't in RPD, and the setback is only 75 feet. Thomaston The Coastal Planner rnet several times with the Comp. Plan Committee, Planning Board and CEO about SZ revision,.; and coastal policies. The maps that EMCRPC produced for tile Cmp. Plan provided information nejoessary to identify additional areas to be included in the MWRIV 3rd uart,.r C-AOTA Rxport: Feb. 1, t990 - April 30, 1991 5 NNVAC 3rd -wi- 0,wd.0TA llpwt. 110,. 1, )!)!)0 - A TASK A : 3rd Ouarfer Workshop section. ENICRI'Cstaffhas nict with the Boards and Con recent weeks, to discuss situation. 'llie Coastal Planner at Ldwater Re5imiTe Mining 01dinance - the other hig issue at present. Warre TheTown is waiting for DEP to adopt the State Mining R The second and thini of three Groundwater Workshops were field in February (Lifictly- Wairen's options for adopting local mining regulations. I Washington-Appleton) and in March (Islesboro-North Haven-Vinalliaven). Each workshop the inining moratorium, and possibly implement a develo addressed the problems arid issues specific to the participating towns. Both mectings were well- adopted. See Attachment N3, inerno to the Warren Planni attended by the key people from each community (see Attachment $13).The islands' workshop ordinance and Conip Plan situiiion. was uite successful. Participants commented that the information and materials presented were very useful to Comp Plan and S70 development. Participants welcomed the opportunity to discuss common island water issues with each other and with groundwater experts. 'rASK C: GFNE'RAL TE'CIINICAI. ASSISTAN Next Workshop - Wetlands Identification and Mapping: Shorcland Zoning and Conin hculsivc llie Coastal Planner coot inues to provide general Plannifig regaiding shorcfand and related coastal ai additio Scheduled for Wednesday, June 5th (tentatively in Lincoinville). There is a need to FMCRPC staff developed packets for new local o educate the local boards and committees who are charged widi dcveloping and enforcing state and containir;g handbooks, ncwslcuers, and other information local wetlands policies and regulations on wetlands values, identification, etc. EMCRPC has board nicnibcrs. Wearr wsseinbling these Board Packets received copies of DEP's letters of approval ofseveral SZOs (Appleton, Swanville, Union). It over the next several weeks (see Anachmew 45). appears that although the ordinances are genrally in line with the state Slicircland Zoning Guidelines, thc towns are overlooking areas that must be shoreland zoned. Our experience as we A result of our extensive contact with both coasta asst towns with shoreland zoning and comprehensive planning indicates that a set of natural zoning, EMCRPC developed an Illustrated Guide to the S resource maps am extremely important, ifnot necessary, in order to determine the shoreland zones Districts ("Shoreland Illustrated"!). A draft will be sent it (particularly wetlands and streams), and the areas which meet the reuirements for Resource sent to the DEP Shorcland Zoning Office for Rich Baker' Protection and must be zoned as such. should he a useful handout, since it is based on sonic of d on issues we encountered as we continue to work with lo h WetItuA Workshop will address: 1) How Maine and National wetlands are identifiedand mapped; 2) The state Shorcland Zoning Guidelines' criteria for shoreland zoned wetlands; 3) The D i criteria for zoning areas as RPDs; and 4) The roles of the Planning Board and Conip. Plan Committees in identifying, mapping, and revising shoteland ordinances. The workshop will also Status of 1990 Coastal Planning Grant Projects: cover the laws that apply to wetland regulations, enforcement and permitting authorities, etc. St. George TASK B: COASTAL POLICIFS The Harbor Project Committee has met several ti Technics. There were two informational public hearings i Tier 1: the purpose and direction of the project. The results of th Were discussed, as were the preliminary recommendation Northport - policies. Unfortuneatly, the survey returns were disappoi about 20-30 people each night. The CPG Project Commi" The Town is sending a draft of the Plan to EMCRPC for our review. additional members to the Comp Plan Committee to frivol (e.g., Recreation Committee) and other Town Boards, in Thomaston between the Comp Plan and Harbor Project. According to schedule". The Coastal Planner reviewed a rough draft of the Inventory & Analysis of the Land Use and Natural Resources sections for CoLsW Policies and shomland zoning, and met with the Comp Belfast Plan Committee (see Task A). The Georges River Tidewater also made some useful suggestions to th Committee as they work on the Goals & Policies secition.1be Comp Plan Committee is According to a member of the Waterfront Project taking a close look at the shoreland Commercial District, relative to uses and dimensional Chair), Belfast's CPG project is progressing slowly. The reuirements; and, is recommending additional snoreland areas to be zoned as Resource of waterfront land uses, and will do an economic feasibili Protection. The Coastal Planner is working with the Comp Plan Committee on improving the vacant industrial buildings). The Committee hopes to prin water resource policies and implementation suategies (e.g, considering BMPs). get Tnorc public input. Due to the very late start ofthe proj concern about meeting the project deadline. Warren The Town rejected the proposed Comp, Plan at the March Town Meeting. The Committee recently regrouped, with the same Co-Chairs, and has sought support from both the Planning Board and the Board of Selectmen. The major objections from the residents concern the Uand Use Municipal Resource and Planning Office of Lincoln County (207) 882-6358 Westport-- Westport is well on its way in the planning process. Ben and Bob met twice. Ben tells me that they are now developing THIRD QUARTER REPORT policies. I gave him a copy of the regional policies for their consideration. They as most of our coastal towns have addressed ROBERT PRATT the coastal issues. It must be remembered that they have very little contact with the sea even though they are an island. January 1991 So. Bristol-- Lucy Craib was elected to the chair of the South Bristol Comprehensive Planning committee. She has asked for I am continuing to review each towns' shoreland zoning ordinance. assistance at future meetings. She is doing the rewriting now and I spent 4.6 hrs on Boothbay Harbor, 4.0 hrs on Wiscasset, 2.5 hrs will have it done by the end of March. She requested information on Edgecomb, 1.5 hrs on Jefferson, during the abbreviated first about erosion control used in other parts of the State. We will be week of the year. helping review the plan for the coastal goals as well as the other comprehensive state goals. I made visits to selectmen meetings including, Jefferson and Bristol. I worked with Bristol on their revisions. They need to Waldoboro-- The code enforcement officer believes that the town get focused on what they want to regulate and then how. I can will rewrite the SLO but will not try to get it approved until provide the how, but not the what. We agreed to bring in Rich Dec.1991. lie says that the people want the present ordinance to Baker for the next meeting in February. function as the law as long as possible. Bob met with the selectmen to discuss the office activities. They are interested in I went on an extended vacation starting Jan. 11. joint purchases and clam management. February 1991 Southport-- Bob met with the selectmen. They discussed the office responsibilities during and after the comprehensive plan is Newcastle -- I was present at a meeting of the State and Newcastle completed. They were also interested in joint purchases, septage, over Newcastle's Comprehensive Plan. We addressed the concerns and getting representation on our board, and assistance with their DECD had over wording in the plan. Confusion was reduced when the ordinance rewrites. Their present ordinance is very close to the OD two parties got together. state minimum. Little work is needed to finish. The work may be OD done by Maine Tomorrow. I was on the planning committee for a major Statewide conference on Non-Point Source Pollution. The day long program consisted of Dresden-- Bob met with the selectmen and Chair of the planning workshops and discussion groups on the topic of source pollution. board of Dresden. He discussed the role of the office and answered Many residents from Lincoln Country were among the 300+ attenders. questions. They would like MRPOLC to get into group purchases. This should save each town thousands of dollars. Dresden saves The state is considering changing the funding formula that they use over $1000 on salt alone. Bob has made additional contacts with to allocate funds to the RPCs. They are considering using the the Planning Board chair. She was sick at the end of March but county boundaries as a possible funding district. I have spent will call when she feels better. time with MARC directors and Frank O'Hara (consultant) discussing the options. At this time I can't project the outcome nor the Wiscasset-- Bob met with the selectmen to discuss the activities of effect on our office. the office now that their plan.is completed. They were interested in joint purchases. Bob has spoken with Dan Thompson who feels Bremen -- Bremen was not funded on either proposal that we assisted that the office can be helpful on a review of SLo, Greenbelt and them with. They expect the Marina to purchase the 12 acres of other ordinances. land, we were hoping to acquire as public lands. I have called the Dept. of Conservation to express our interest of some public access March 1991 at the site. They agree and will consider making that a part of the lease of public lands. Bob met with the selectmen. They Boothbay Harbor. I spoke with Rollins Hale concerning an easement expressed an interest in the clam ordinance project, joint to property now bounded by a new large subdivision. We discussed purchases and salt sheds. Bob has contacted the State concerning a variety of options and he aggeed to talk with the land owners. salt sheds. It appears that coastal towns may be able to build no Bob reviewed the latest draft of the SID. Ile wrote a letter to salt shed if they store theii salt close to the ocean. I have Dabney. 6 hrs. followed this up as it may provide more public access. It appears now that it is feasible. Newcastle has build their salt storage area for less than 10,000. Edgecomb Kimball-Chase called to discuss watersheds. I suggested did not write the ordinance, it appears that we may get involved in that as a part of their study that they show on a map what land is the interpretation. Bob has reviewed the State comments, contacted in each watershed. I suggested that they could get watershed the corp and reviewed the harbor ordinance. He also gave the new information from the Soil and Water Conservation Service. members of the harbor committee the handbook. 8 hrs. Damariscotta. Joan and I met with Francine Rudoff and the Bob attended a 2-day workshop on GIS. This should give him a good comprehensive planning committee to discuss their plan. It was background for future coastal planning. felt that the plan is good, but lacks a development district (residential). The state is happy with their coastal issues. We are following this plan and helping on SLO. Alna- I spent over 8 hours reviewing the Alna plan. It contains lots Of policies and implementation strategies. More so than are likely to be approved. They are not a coastal town so issues of a c?astal nature are not addressed to a great extent, but water and river issues are. Bristol. I met with Marty Moses to go over his maps. They now know the zones but do not know what to put in them. I agreed to collect up some data and go to their meeting on March 26. At that meeting I took them through the possible options with which they could develop districts. They defined the districts and started placing them on a map. April 1991 Had the sixth meeting with Bristol. They have developed the criteria for districts and have started to place them on a map. OD %D Boothbay - Bob spoke with Fred Farnham. The town is attempting to get their land use ordinances done for the May 6 meeting. After that they will start the review of their shoreland. Fred is interested in our help. Newcastle- Bob spoke with the new Chair of the planning board, Dan Schick. He is interested in our help but at this point needs to get new members and deal with some leftovers from the comp plan. They will be working on SLO this spring. I spoke with a representative of the Damariscotta Lake Association. They want to continue to have regional planning on their waterbody. I suggested that they gather town policies from tier one towns and make them available to the tier two towns. She agreed. Joan attended a meeting held in Jefferson. 4 hrs Bob has met with Pat Jennings to discuss similar regional policies. They have agreed to compare two groups, transportation and water issues. Their boards have met together to finalize the process. Bob spent a Friday night talking with citizens of Bremen. They are very concerned with the new Marina that has been approved. it happens that they have just passed a harbor ordinance which may become the focal point of litigation on this issue. Although we EXHIBIT E-11 LIST OF PRODUCTS, r.2521 AWARD (1290-91) Task 1 Core Law Enforcement Ad3ninistration Model Shoreland Zoning Permit Forms, DECD, Office of Comprehensive Planning, January 1991-- Task 2 -- Municipal Grant Program Guidelines & ARplication for the ImRlementation Grant Coastal Management Grant Programs, DECD/OCP, October 1990 Task 3 Coastal Policy Development: Allocating Mainels Marine Waters Task 4 Program Management & Public Education Report on Coastweek/Cleanup 1990, Griffin & VanDusen, SPO, February 1991. Transmitted with this progress report. Transmitted with a previous progress report. prog5-91.rpt 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11811111MIN 3 6668 14102 3376 1 1