The Edgecomb Planning Board once again took up the cause of developing performance standards Monday night that will dramatically affect the appearance of this quaint coastal town for years to come.

Chairman Erin Cooperrider opened the workshop style portion of the meeting with a brief overview of the process to date. County Planner Bob Faunce has presented three sessions that explained the choices residents can make about the size of buildings, their appearance, what type of retail establishments should be allowed and where they can be built.

Using information received from planning board members and residents who attended the meetings, Faunce put together a draft of the standards that were under consideration. Planning board members looked at what impact inclusion of specific standards in land use ordinances might have.

Most of those present agreed that they do not want to encourage "big box" stores.

"The standards would make it significantly more expensive for those businesses to build here and therefore act as a deterrent," said Board Member Katherine Braid.

The discussion expanded into considerations about how these standards might affect businesses that the town may want to encourage. Braid continued to express concerns that the town not just acquire the reputation of being a nice place for people to retire.

"We don't just want to have older people who have earned money in other areas settle here. We do not want to discourage families and young people from finding jobs and staying here," said Braid.

Braid previously mentioned her interest in hearing from younger residents. Some of the choices that may be made could affect the appearance, location and possibly act as roadblocks that might discourage development that some residents might enjoy.

"I am concerned that we may not understand the needs of younger residents," she said. She followed with a general request that residents ask others to attend and be heard.

Because some performance standards could make it more difficult for certain businesses to locate in town, Cooperrider raised concerns that residents consider what they want to continue to be a part of the fabric of the town.

"What is a rural community?" she asked. She suggested it might include agricultural and marine industries as well as other businesses such as gravel pits, and hospitals. "Without businesses, then we may become a suburb."

Braid noted that it would be important to match the suggested performance standards, once they are formalized, with the existing land use ordinances. Cooperrider explained that Attorney John Shumadine would do an independent review and index the two.

Gretchen Burleigh-Smith commented that she hoped that the standards would not be "whittled away until, by putting in so many options, we will take out the stuffings of the work."

The board agreed that there would be two public meetings on February 24 and March 8, with a public hearing on March 24. Changes and additions must be completed prior to the hearing date, by which time the language is fixed, and the issues are only open for explanation prior to a town vote. Board Member Lisa McSwain again urged those present to try to encourage others to join the board to share their thoughts and plans.

In other business, the board announced that a new application form for a building permit has been developed and will be on the website. They also noted that the Department of Environmental Protection has new updated shoreland ordinances based on new standards that speak to "moderate and high value freshwater wetlands;" significant wildlife habitats; and shoreland tidal and waterfront habitats.

Also, Cooperrider read correspondence that had occurred between Attorney Eliot Field, counsel for MidCoast Cohousing and the board. regarding their opinion that they should not be required to cooperate with a site plan review prior to obtaining building permits to transform four existing structures on their property into individual living units. At the last meeting of the board, it was agreed that the matter would be referred to Attorney John Shumadine to answer questions the board had.

Cooperrider informed Field that the board would need approval from his client that they would agree to pay for the legal work to be done by Attorney John Shumadine as agreed, and the board would not proceed without their approval.

Field wrote a lengthy letter that agreed to pay for the cost, but he asked for an estimate of the fee as soon as possible. He again raised his belief that wording chosen by the planning board had unnecessarily broadened the original question. However, the board continued to support their position.

Further, Braid said that he should be advised that because of the large amount of the board's legal budget that has already been spent on issues related to their subdivision that all further legal costs would have to be absorbed by his client.