PLUM CREEK REVIEW

Now that Plum Creek Timber Co. has filed a revised version of its development and conservation plans for the Moosehead Lake region, the hard work of evaluating the proposal begins. This review, by the Land Use Regulation Commission, shouldn’t be swayed by a public relations campaign to promote the plan or vociferous opposition to it.

The company, its fans and detractors must now let LURC do its job, which is to determine whether the massive development is needed and fits with the region’s development pattern.

Last year, Plum Creek applied to LURC to rezone about 10,000 acres around Moosehead Lake to allow for a major development plan. In a series of LURC sessions to gather public sentiment about the plan, common themes were that the proposed development was too spread out and that the required conservation was too weak.

Earlier this month the company released details of its revised plan, which still contains 975 house lots, but eliminated development on remote ponds, moves one of the proposed resorts next to an existing downhill ski area and includes permanent conservation easements – all positive changes and all requested by the public.

If LURC determines the new application, which is received Thursday, is complete, it will begin evaluating it against the agency’s criteria for zone changes. It must decide whether the plan meets its criteria, which include a demonstrated need for the development and that the change will have no adverse impacts on existing uses and resources. Conservation must also offset development.

Details of the conservation easements are so far vague and some of the lands are far from the lake, so LURC must be careful to ensure that the proposed conservation truly offsets the proposed development. It is also worth asking if Plum Creek receives millions of dollars for the easements and land sales whether this counts as compensatory conservation.

Despite concerns from a southern Maine newspaper about LURC’s ability to handle such a massive plan, the agency has access to the resources it needs, says its director, Catherine Carroll. It has already hired two outside consultants to work on the plan and LURC routinely works with other agencies to evaluate applications.

Further, the Legislature, which for years considered bills to eliminate the agency, has become more supportive. One example is allowing LURC to collect an extraordinary project processing fee from applicants on large filings. This has allowed the agency to hire the help it needs to evaluate the Plum Creek plan.

Reviewing the proposal, which is reported to run more than 1,000 pages, will be slow and tedious. But there is no reason to believe it won’t be thorough and fair.