The Boothbay Planning Board believes the first draft of the new comprehensive plan’s language is too specific. The planning board made the observation during its first of two workshops on March 16 with the Comprehensive Planning Committee.

The planning board reviewed the first draft last week and three members submitted emailed questions and comments for review. A common refrain from the three planning board members who submitted responses was the language was too specific.

In the first draft, the committee wrote it believed the 1989 Comprehensive Plan was “too specific” in its wording. So when planning board chairman Alan Bellows read the first draft he didn’t expect the updated version to include a lot of specific language.

“After reading that, I was surprised how much specificity was in the first draft,” Bellows said.

The committee is working on the first comprehensive plan update in 26 years. The committee’s goal is to present a plan for adoption which describes a vision how the community should look in the next decade. The 78-page document is filled with the committee’s recommendations for economic growth, preserving the community’s rural character, attracting young families and protecting natural resources.

The committee’s use of specific language was based on state guidelines. The state wants wants the comprehensive plan compatible with municipal ordinances. When the committee started in May 2012, it used general terms. The committee later changed its approach to make the document comply with the state’s Growth Management law.

“It changed on the advice of a former town manager (James Chaousis),” said committee consultant Mark Eyerman, of Planning Decisions, a Portland planning firm. “He said the goal should produce a plan that meets the state goal’s. The town can do what it wants with the plan, but if it doesn’t meet certain requirements, then it won’t receive bonus points for state grants.”

The planning board also believed the draft needed better wording to address the lack of affordable housing. Committee member Nathaniel Wing said “I agree we need to go back and look at it.”

For years municipal leaders have found attracting young families to Boothbay difficult due to the lack of affordable housing and good paying jobs. The committee and planning board believes the comprehensive plan needs to refine its focus on economic development.

“The hope is that in 10 years we have a diverse range of housing and pricing options,” said committee chairman and selectman Charles Cunningham. “At the moment, we don’t have this but the goal is to get there over time.”

Planning board vice chairman Fran McBrearty criticized the plan for stifling economic development by creating regulations for new businesses on Route 27. McBrearty didn’t like a requirement for new  businesses to provide a landscaping buffer.

“I think it’s wrong,” McBrearty said. “I see nothing wrong with Route 27 businesses being visible from the road. It shows we have a healthy business district. And I don’t think its fair and hampers potential growth.”

The committee believed the landscaping would make Boothbay more attractive for new residents. The committee feared too many businesses visible from Route 27 would make it look like Wiscasset’s northern section.

The committee will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. on Monday, March 23 in the municipal building. This will be the public’s first opportunity to discuss the first draft.

The planning board and committee will hold their second workshop at 6 p.m. on Monday, March 30. The municipal building is being used that night so interim Town Manager Dan Bryer is searching for an alternative location.