BRUNSWICK
The Brunswick Town Council voted unanimously to set a hearing on June 6 at 7 p.m. over proposed changes to the shoreland zoning requirements. Since residents near Miller Point attempted to stop a shore stabilization project on the property of Robert King this spring, the council has set a moratorium on shoreland development until the planning board can address state requirements not addressed locally.
Following two workshops, the planning board approved the amendments proposed to the council. If the council approves of the changes at the June 6 meeting, the moratorium on development could end within the natur- al resources protection zone and the town could immediately enact those changes.
Planner Jared Woolston presented the council with a detailed account of what changes would be made. Woolston specified that local ordinances cannot be less restrictive than state standards but can exceed the state.
Specifically, Woolston said code enforcement officer approval would be needed for filling or earth moving in the NRPZ with no restrictions until reaching 75 feet of a stream or other areas specified by the state.
Within 75 feet, the code enforcement officer can only authorize up to 10 cubic yards of filling and earth moving. Woolston clarified 10 cubic yards as being about the size of a small dump truck bed.
Those areas include moderate to high-value wetlands, unstable bluffs, 100- year floodplains adjacent to river and tidal areas, two acres of land with greater than a 20 percent slope, areas greater than two acres of wetlands, and river and coastal land subject to severe erosion.
For development exceeding 10 cubic yards in those areas, a development review would be necessary.
Staff review committee approval would be necessary for up to 100 cubic yards and the planning board will have to review any earth moving or filling involving more than 100 cubic yards.
dmcintire@timesrecord.com
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less