Meeting in Waldoboro Monday night, Lincoln County Planner Bob Faunce engaged skeptical Constitutionalists of Maine members in a civil and good-natured discussion about economic development. The group invited Faunce to speak at their Feb. 7 meeting held in the basement of the First Baptist Church in Waldoboro.
Members applauded Faunce for his informative presentation. For some in attendance, the meeting, which started at 6:30 p.m. and had people slowly exiting the building engrossed in discussion, served as an introduction to what Faunce does as a county planner as well as a backdrop for the Gateway 1 plan.
As stated by more than one member, the Constitutionalists of Maine are concerned with private property rights. The discussion revealed the challenge of land use rights pitted against population growth and economic development.
Faunce used maps to show how the number of structures built along the Rt. 1 corridor and in Lincoln County has increased over the past 150 years. According to Faunce, the expectation is building construction will continue to grow in the same pattern as it has in the past 150 years, along roads.
The questions Faunce and many others have been pondering are: what will these areas look like 20 – 30 years in the future and will towns be able to preserve their own unique characteristics? The questions, Faunce pointed out, are aimed toward residents and town selectmen.
“This was not virgin territory 150 years ago,” Faunce said. “This territory was built by our forefathers. The roads are there, because that’s where they put them. The corners are there, because that’s where they put them.”
Audience members questioned some of the data itself, such as the kind of buildings represented by small, red dots on each historical map and if other factors had been considered. Members also noted the decline in industry and fluctuations in population growth. Many of the buildings represented households and as Faunce showed the maps of each town or region, the red dots increased dramatically along many of the roads.
After some years researching and sourcing this data, Faunce asked town selectmen and residents where would they want future growth to go. How would residents want their town to look like 30 years from now?
“That’s not pro or anti-development whatsoever,” Faunce said. “Regardless of what our political interests are we’re all interested in preserving Waldoboro. It’s a terrific town in many ways.”
As he showed maps of towns such as Bristol, Jefferson, Whitefield, Boothbay and Boothbay Harbor, and then Lincoln County, members could see the increase in the number of households over 30 year periods.
“But don’t you get to saturation at some point here, where it drops off?” Constitutionalist Wayne Leach asked.
In response, Faunce used the example of the Highlands housing project in Topsham. He said the Highlands consist of single family detached condominiums with no lots and are placed on common land. Lacking regulatory setbacks, the schematic allows for more homes on a fairly limited parcel.
Washington resident Cynthia Rosen, who hails from New York, said her first reaction to the Gateway 1 project was, “why are you creating New York?” She questioned the motivation behind encouraging growth in certain areas while discouraging growth in others.
“Forty or 60 years down the road of the Gateway 1 plan, you’re looking at New York,” she said.
The keyword is ‘encourage’, Faunce said in reply, adding that providing incentives is a lot different than requiring growth. Faunce said he has been working for the county for a number of years and hasn’t run into a situation where municipalities forced people to live in certain areas.
Faunce pointed out significant development in Woolwich along Rt. 1, recent development that makes it difficult to see what the town used to look like. He said the town could have brought the homes closer together with a little more foresight.
Development along the Rt. 1 corridor is one of the main issues. Faunce referred to a provision in Edgecomb that offered incentives for property owners along Rt. 27, where property owners could reduce lot size by doing joint curb cuts or adding buffers along the road.
Some Constitutionalists disagreed with the incentives Faunce mentioned in his example and agreed with the notion that the state is telling people what to do with their properties, such as how many curb cuts should be allowed on a particular stretch of road. In response, Faunce said there are a number of issues at play, including safety and sight distance.
Faunce also gave an introduction on open space subdivisions, where the discussion delved into the land use approval process and land use regulation administered by town planning boards and approved by way of citizen vote. Faunce said the design of open space subdivisions allows planning boards to approve smaller lot sizes.
Faunce said all towns have some kind of basic subdivision ordinance. He said the essential rule states that before a landowner can create their third lot on a parcel within a five-year period, the landowner has to have subdivision approval. Town planning boards have to review a number of criteria under the ordinance before a subdivision gets approved.
Jeanette Wheeler expressed her concern about the possibility of her property taxes increasing as a result of neighboring open space subdivisions.
“My concern is we won’t be able to continue to have our farm, because we won’t be able to pay the taxes,” she said. “What’s going to happen to our farm?”
Faunce said he couldn’t provide an answer to audience members about the tax issues, but posed a scenario. He said “the people next door” might want to exercise their property rights and want to build a 50 lot subdivision.
“You know there are no absolute answers in this game,” he said, adding that planning board issues can be difficult as they weigh one property owner’s rights against others. “It’s a tough situation.”
Regardless of where people are from or what plans they have for the property they purchased, land use rights impact surrounding communities. The question shifting between Faunce and Constitutionalists was: how to solve the problem of one’s land use influencing other town properties with respect to taxes, town aesthetics and the local economy.
“Which punctuates local control,” Rosen said. “Keep it local, in town, where you can affect things most directly.”
Members of the audience determined they would not want to see Wheeler’s property taxes to increase as a result of a new subdivision. The idea of placing a kind of moratorium was discussed and accepted, then replaced by other suggestions.
“If they want to make the development, then they need to pay the cost, the whole thing,” Dana Dyer said. “We need to have the safeguard that protects Jeanette.”
Dyer, speaking in agreement with others at the meeting, said one person shouldn’t be taxed higher for their property based upon the increased value of the neighboring parcel. Faunce confirmed from Dyer and others that they would want to apportion costs of the development on the developer. Faunce said that sounded fair.
“You’re not expressing a conservative value,” Faunce said. “You’re expressing a human value that is pretty common with the county. It doesn’t matter what group I go to, the same thing comes up.”
While Faunce showed some of the benefits towns could realize from open space subdivisions, he said the form is not so much the issue as is the amount of development.
As the meeting was drawing to a close, Faunce presented the idea of a “scenic byway” route between the towns of Wiscasset, Sheepscot, Whitefield, Jefferson, Damariscotta, and Waldoboro. The idea is to provide further opportunity for local businesses to market other more remote areas of the region. Asked what they thought about the idea, members of the audience expressed concern over the impact increased traffic would have on the roads, as well as safety issues. However, one person argued that such a plan would benefit towns and businesses.
The meeting closed with individuals asserting they want to discuss local control and property rights at a future date. Faunce agreed to return and speak specifically about Gateway 1 with the group.
Audience members said they came to the meeting specifically to hear what Faunce had to say and said the discussion has been very educational.
