Thanks to the 2006 Brookings Report, the subject of quality of place and its influence on Maine’s economic prospects and quality of life is a part of the conversation about the state’s future. As the report points out, “In the modern world, ‘one of a kind’ is an economic asset.” The Maine North Woods and the availability of great outdoor recreational opportunities and stunning scenery are, they say, part of Maine’s “brand image” – as are our charming New England historic villages, bold coast and rolling farmland.

Our brand or reputation, once tarnished, is hard to recover. Perhaps the greatest threat to Maine’s brand is haphazard development patterns. And we know that sprawl generates environmental, economic and social costs. Forest and farmland in southern and coastal Maine surrendering to subdivisions remind us of the risks to our heritage – the brand upon which our future economy will be built. And private and public infrastructure investments made in established cities and villages are devalued as residents spread out beyond the reach of this infrastructure.

This session, the Legislature passed LD 262, An Act to Amend the Credit for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties. The bill provides an incentive to developers willing to restore historic downtown mills and other properties that can be adapted for housing, commercial space and light industry. We also passed a bill establishing a uniform building and energy code for Maine, enforceable in communities larger than 2,000 residents. These and other proactive measures aim to promote investments in our cities and towns and to revitalize Maine’s established downtown commercial areas and traditional neighborhoods.

Just as we must continue improving already developed areas, Maine people and their Legislature recognize the value of rural economies and communities and the natural resources, scenic beauty and abounding recreational opportunities they offer.

The mission of the Land for Maine’s Future program – to conserve quality of place – continues to receive widespread public support, as do successful private conservation efforts to secure access to spectacular rural places for public recreation in perpetuity. The Forest Practices Act, tree growth tax benefits, forest certification programs and liquidation harvesting rules were put in place to support a well-managed, sustainable forest products industry and the jobs it provides.

On June 3, 1969, the 103rd House of Representatives passed LD 1566, An Act to Create the Maine Land Use Regulation Commission and to Regulate Realty Subdivisions. Its purpose includes preventing the further spread of unplanned residential, industrial, commercial and recreational development detrimental to the area; to prevent the intermixing of incompatible activities; and to prevent overcrowding, preserve natural conditions, protect forest resources and timber reserves for industrial use, and encourage tree farms and a policy of multiple uses of forest and timber resources. Multiple use was defined to mean care of all the various renewable resources of the natural forests so that they can be utilized in the combinations that will best meet the needs of the public and shall include the management of forestland for timber harvests, watershed protection, wildlife protection and recreation.

Commenting on the bill in the Portland Press Herald, an International Paper spokesperson said his firm was “not against the principles of zoning, but we feel the bill is unnecessary. Wildlands are the very last areas that need zoning at this time.” Today’s Plum Creek development proposal for the Moosehead region, undoubtedly the first of many proposals to come, shows how much things can change.

Maine has much to learn from the mistakes of counties and states to the south, where rural landscapes, farms, and forests have melted into subdivisions, where lakes are crowded with camps and where shopping malls smother downtowns. Here in Maine we are learning to use a variety of good land use and community design principles and techniques, including comprehensive plans and land use ordinances. While vast changes are taking place in Maine, the state retains much of its attractive character, connecting people to place.

Having read the LURC draft plan, I’m optimistic that it can direct and guide land use decisions and development design in the jurisdiction for the decade ahead and chart a course that will define and shape the unorganized territories and the state as a whole in this century. The plan is grounded on the reality of changing types of landowners, with different ownership objectives, including shorefront and ridgeline development. Trees grow back, rivers can recover from abuse and roads can be retired. But poorly sited buildings are another matter.

The die is cast elsewhere. But it’s not too late for Maine.

Ted Koffman of Bar Harbor is the House chairman of the Legislature’s Natural Resources Committee.