Mon, Oct 20, 2014 ●
BathHarpswellTopshamBrunswickCumberlandNorth YarmouthFalmouthFreeportPortlandCape ElizabethScarboroughSouth PortlandChebeague IslandYarmouth

Letter: Falmouth conservation plan goes too far

Opinion

Letter: Falmouth conservation plan goes too far

Congratulation to the Falmouth Town Council for listening to residents and removing the 750-foot dimensional standard around vernal pools. Yet, a landowner with an insignificant vernal pool 10 feet across will have 4.69 acres of her land affected by this new regulation. Why? The state only regulates significant vernal pools, but the Falmouth Long-Range Planning Advisory Committee wants to affect development around all vernal pools, the shallow holes that collect water (and mosquito larvae) in the spring and then dry up. Falmouth has many and someone feels that they should all be protected. Why? Is it to protect those tree frogs and blue salamanders that might be breeding in those insignificant vernal pools, or is there an ulterior motive, like keeping Falmouth land owners from developing their land?

But wait: commercial development will be exempt. Why? Why has the CDC fully exempted all lots in non-residential districts? The state regulates only significant vernal pools. Why does Falmouth need to be more stringent than the state?

LPAC worked long and hard and I thank and respect them for their service, but if their proposals are too restrictive for Falmouth then they should be revised or rejected, not accepted just because “we … respect the work of LPAC.”

Councilors, please continue to listen to the Falmouth residents. Do not over-regulate our town.

Faith Varney
Falmouth