The Boothbay Comprehensive Planning Committee is taking a different approach than its predecessors did a quarter century ago. In 1989, the comprehensive planning committee wanted to curb hotel growth and overcrowding during the summer. The committee crafted a comprehensive plan that reined in uncontrolled growth to appease residents’ concern.

The new Comprehensive Planning Committee is taking a different tact. It began work in 2013. It’s focused on attracting more people through economic growth and affordable housing. The committee held a public workshop on March 23 to discuss the committee’s work on chapters 4-6. These sections are the crux of the new comprehensive plan. Chapter Four discusses the community’s vision. Chapter Five describes the community’s goals and policies. And Chapter Six outlines land use goals and policies.

Despite the committee’s intention to propose a dramatic change in the town’s future direction, no residents attended the public workshop.

The committee sandwiched the public workshop in between two meetings with the planning board. On March 16, the first workshop was held to discuss planning board questions and comments regarding the comprehensive plan’s first draft. The second meeting is scheduled for March 30.

The March 23 workshop was the public’s chance to ask questions and voice concerns, but it only drew three non-comprehensive planning committee members: Daniel Bryer, town code enforcement officer; and Alan Bellows and Fran McBrearty, who serve on the planning board.

Comprehensive Planning Committee member Nicholas Barth said the lack of public participation concerned him.

“I’m really disappointed that not a single member of the public came out tonight,” Barth said. “We need to do some hard thinking about how to get a few people to turn out.”

The committee spent 75 minutes responding to questions and comments posed by Bellows and McBrearty. The planning board members asked about the proposed ground water survey requirements, why municipal land use regulations were more stringent that the state’s, and requested inclusion of a support statement regarding a new cell tower ordinance.

McBrearty was concerned about the language regarding the proposed ground water study. The committee has posed enacting more stringent guidelines regarding water quality while the town awaits the study’s results. He recommended a change in language to make the proposal more acceptable to the general public. He proposed language to either mandate that the ground water study would happen or remove the short-term fix requirements.

“I’m concerned we’re going to be struck with the short-term fixes because it will either take a long time or the ground water study won’t happen” McBrearty said. “The plan doesn’t have a real mandate for a ground water study, but there is one for the short-term fixes. I’m not comfortable with that.”

Committee chairman and selectman Charles Cunningham believed the plan has plenty of specificity regarding the study. He said the plan requires the selectmen or town manager to develop a detailed ground water study plan within two years after the comprehensive plan’s adoption.

“That sounds pretty directive to me,” Cunningham said.

Bellows questioned why many of the town’s land use ordinance were more restrictive than the state’s. He recalled how the planning board had to deny a building permit that met state requirements. The applicant exceeded the local ordinance’s build-able area allotment by 134 square feet.

Committee member Joseph Paolillo agreed that the comprehensive plan should allow for greater planning board flexibility.

“I like the idea of giving them more flexibility in using the state standards,” Paolillo said. “It should be a case by case basis. They should be allowed to develop a code that makes sense because every square peg doesn’t fit every shape coming through the door.”

Barth urged the committee to use caution in creating a less restrictive requirement. He said the committee shouldn’t rush into relaxing any requirements protecting water quality.

“The state of Maine doesn’t have a comprehensive ground water study. It’s a false conclusion to think we can simply fall back on the state’s standards,” Barth said.

Bellows asked the committee to add language supporting a cell tower ordinance. He described the current ordinance as “leaving the town exposed.” The current policy prohibits cell towers in 75 percent of the town.

“This provision violates the 1996 Telecommunications Act. So we are writing a new ordinance,” Bellows said. “We’d like a strong policy statement in the comprehensive plan to back up the new ordinance.”

The committee requested the planning board write a statement for inclusion into the comprehensive plan.

The comprehensive planning committee will meet next at 6 p.m. on Monday, March 30 in the fire station. This will be second workshop held in conjunction with the planning board.