2015-01-30 / Letters

Protecting wetlands is in town’s interesst

To the editor:

In the article written by Duke Harrington concerning a subdivision plan for the Lower Village for building a 15-lot housing development, the Post described how this would disturb about 11,000 square feet of Priority 1 wetlands. I am confused about the designation of areas called wetlands in Kennebunk.

Is it or is it not forbidden to disturb wetlands?

For instance, if I wanted to build a house on my property, which has a small area (a few square feet, to be exact) of wetlands, as I understand it, I would not be allowed to do that.

Fine, I agree with this. However, it seems that if a large property is found to have a significant wetlands area on it, developed over years perhaps, is that somehow allowed to be built on?

The rules need to be firmly established by the Kennebunk Planning Board; either wetlands can be built on or they cannot.

Destruction of wetland areas is a degradation of our environment. And, despite Selectman Al Searles’ cavalier assertion that in a democracy, “You don’t just get to say no,” saying no to destruction of wetlands would be in our interest.

Bevan Davies

Return to top