In August, the state Planning Office (SPO) notified Edgecomb in August it considers the town’s proposed comprehensive plan “not complete” and gave the town a 90-day deadline to fix it.
Since then the local comprehensive plan task force has been looking at areas the state finds lacking. On Oct. 19, task force members appeared before selectmen to discuss the requirements Edgecomb has to meet to fix the plan.
The SPO notified the task force the town has 90 business days from the date of an Aug. 21 letter to address concerns it itemized in it, and the task force plans to meet with the SPO and local planning board soon to go over the complaints.
Together with board member Kitty Norton, task force chairperson Suzanne Carlson told selectmen the Planning Office determined the problem lies with the section of the plan dealing with its implementation and the plan’s frequent use of the word “ongoing.”
“Without more specificity regarding the timeframe for implementation, it will be difficult to determine priorities and develop a process for accomplishing the tasks,” wrote SPO senior planner MacGregor Stocco, in the Aug. 21 letter to the task force.
Stocco informed the task force the SPO review process consists of two phases. He said the first phase, called a review for completeness, concerns a review of all elements of the plan except the future land use plan.
Once considered complete, the SPO enters the second phase of focusing its review on the future land use plan, according to Stocco.
“This process was created to encourage collaboration with municipalities and if necessary, giving opportunities to modify the comprehensive plan prior to official notification of whether a plan is ‘consistent’ with the Growth Management Act,” he said.
A second problem area, according to the SPO, concerns the regional coordination program in the plan, which Kitty Norton said the task force is uncertain about. “Are they looking for a laundry list? We need clarification,” she said.
The letter states the plan mentions Edgecomb’s involvement with the Gateway One project but lacks a discussion of what that means, what recommendations the project has made, what changes may occur in the town due to the process or what analyses have demonstrated about the conditions of Rt. 1 Edgecomb during each season.
The section of the plan dealing with evaluation measures also concerns the SPO. Stocco said evaluation measures ought to be considered the same way as the implementation schedule because of its lack of specifics.
The task force members also mentioned the SPO kind of favors the formation of a conservation commission, which they said they did not feel necessary because of the private conservation groups in Edgecomb.
“I don’t have any objections to a conservation commission,” said Selectmen Chairman John Johnson. Expressing a desire to see local control maintained, Johnson added he does not want to allow the state to tell the town how to think.
“I would not want to become subservient to them,” he said. “I don’t want to be forced to do something in 90 days.”
Speaking about a meeting the SPO offered to have, Norton told selectmen, “We’ve all put a lot of work into this. We’re close enough so we should give it good shot.”
Aside from the problem areas, the SPO complimented the task on the vision statement calling it a “strong and succinct vision statement” and on the public participation summary identifying numerous opportunities for local participation throughout the creation of the plan.