Earlier this week, the city of South Portland conducted a design charrette over a hypothetical development plan for a portion of Ferry Village nestled between the crude oil tanks of Portland Pipeline and the Coast Guard station.
The purpose of the charrette was, ostensibly, to gauge public opinion about types of development that might be attractive (i.e., profitable) for private developers there. It seemed apparent to many who attended that this was directly related to Yard South, a controversial proposal for development between tanks and Bug Light Park that, in its current form, envisions seven-story luxury apartments as its core moneymaker.
Hypothetical development scenarios for this parcel just to the south of Yard South were presented surrounding a theme of growth that reflects language of the 2012 Comprehensive Plan, with higher-density mixed-use development of mid- to upper-level pricing being favored by the consultant’s analysis.
About 50 South Portlanders showed up, along with the Yard South representatives, and broke out into groups of five to reallocate little flags on toothpicks indicating single-family homes, multifamily homes, and commercial and light industrial buildings, etc., arranged on foam board maps of the site. After 40 minutes of deliberation, each breakout group shared their arrangement, and – perhaps to the surprise of the city planners there – several tables simply plucked the toothpicks from the map, leaving custom flags saying “trees” and “open space.”
The major concern is that this parcel is within the 100-year floodplain – an increasingly hollow designation, since the history of flooding there is no longer a guide to its more flood-prone future. Several in attendance witnessed firsthand the picturesque 100-year-old fishing shacks at Willard Beach break off from their stilts and dash to pieces against the playground equipment at the head of the beach during the Jan. 13 storm. The past met the future in that very graphic way that day. The folly of contemplating new development in flood-prone areas in the face of rapidly rising seas seemed obvious to us toothpick pluckers. The word “retreat” arose several times in the meeting without opposition.
Timing of this charrette coincides with revision of South Portland’s Comprehensive Plan and seemed to want to preserve the 2012 version’s rosy growth scenario absent the most prominent language emerging from the 2024 revision: to plan for 8.7 feet of sea level rise by 2100. The potential zoning changes for Yard South are allowable under the 2012 Plan but seem incompatible with this 2024 language.
The hypothetical plan included raising Front Street by 4 feet as a sort of levee to break the waves – a stopgap measure that does not countenance the rise in groundwater and flooding through storm drains that bypasses levees. We cannot stop the tide, and projections of sea level rise that paint a dire enough picture of, say, 3 feet by 2100, also envision meaningful reduction in CO2 emissions by 2100 – not a stabilization or “flattening the curve,” but a real cut that is nowhere in sight. The final language of the new Comprehensive Plan must acknowledge this new reality and retreat from emissions-intensive business as usual. This charrette scenario was very much business-as-usual.
Developers may garnish their projects with green technology and engineering, attempting to safeguard their own high-end constructions. Meanwhile, the world burns and floods as the flow of capital that motivates development mostly translates to consumptive lifestyles at the very top that are themselves the drivers of climate change.
A 2020 article in the preeminent science journal Nature, provocatively titled “Scientists’ warning on affluence,” articulates how labor and land are used to service the insatiable consumptive appetites of the very wealthy rather than to create a truly sustainable low-consumptive economy for everyone, and that this trend has outpaced any technological advancements that ameliorate the impact of consumption over the last 50 years.
I encourage wealthy landowners to give back more and consider development of what the world truly needs, not development for maximizing their personal wealth.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Modify your screen name
Join the Conversation
Please sign into your Press Herald account to participate in conversations below. If you do not have an account, you can register or subscribe. Questions? Please see our FAQs.