GREENVILLE – Residents of this gateway community jammed the town hall Wednesday night to air their concerns, excitement and lingering questions about Plum Creek Timber Co.’s plan to develop thousands of forest acres around Moosehead Lake.

Plum Creek’s proposal for two resorts, several campgrounds and nearly 1,000 house lots has been greeted with an array of reactions from local residents, and it appeared most of those opinions were represented during the public hearing.

Some of the 80 to 90 residents and town taxpayers attending the hearing wholeheartedly welcomed the proposal, viewing the development as the “shot in the arm” Greenville needs to revive the town.

“I say let Plum Creek do their job. Let free enterprise work,” Duane Lander, a longtime local business owner, told the town’s Board of Selectmen.

Many more said they accepted that change was inevitable around the lake but want to make sure the development is done responsibly.

About 20 people urged the board members to work with Plum Creek to ensure the project does not overburden the town’s infrastructure or harm Greenville’s character and the natural beauty.

Nineteen-year-old and lifelong Greenville resident Elizabeth Connelly urged the board to proceed cautiously to safeguard the area’s treasures. “I think it would be really tragic to look back 50 years from now and say, ‘If only…'” she said.

Seattle-based Plum Creek has asked the Land Use Regulation Commission to rezone 426,000 acres of timberland around Moosehead. The company has pledged to keep more than 400,000 acres forested.

The scope of the development makes it the largest subdivision ever requested in Maine history.

After enormous interest and quite a bit of backlash, Plum Creek has agreed to revise some of its plan. Possible revisions include clustering more houses near Greenville or other communities to reduce sprawl, relocating at least one resort, and longer guarantees the 400,000 acres will go undeveloped.

Tom McCormick, a retiree who heads Moosehead Riders Snowmobile Club, said residents should be pleased with Plum Creek’s willingness to listen as well as its pledge to leave more than 97 percent of the land undeveloped.

But other speakers expressed concern about shoreline or ridgeline houses ruining the views that draw anglers and nature lovers, affects wildlife as well as limits on land access for snowmobiling, hunting and hiking.

Several residents urged the board to address traffic concerns, especially speeding, and infrastructure improvements needed in advance of the development.

Loren Ritchie, a resident, questioned Plum Creek’s prediction that the development would bring hundreds of new jobs and flood additional money into the economy.

“When you get right down to it, how are we as a town and the people who live in it going to benefit?” he asked.

Board chairwoman Bonnie DuBien said the board would likely discuss the comments before submitting a report of recommendations and requests to Plum Creek. She said town officials told Plum Creek it did not need to send a representative to the hearing.