Site design donated by
Riley communications,
Old Saybrook

"De l’audace, encore de l’audace, et toujours de l’audace."
Sometimes matters can be worked out to everyone's benefit.

Here's an example of how a specific development issue worked out well, despite the acrimony that was pitched about prior to the final outcome. We're leaving out specific names to respect people's privacy.
A resident of Chester wanted to to build a 97-foot-long dock with (if we remember right) two boat lifts at the end of it.
There was no reason for him to think that he shouldn't, because the State DEP told him to go right ahead; they didn't feel that it was important enough to hold a public hearing before granting their permit. Like most people would, he probably figured that if the DEP said the dock design was OK, that it wouldn't bother anyone else. It is, after all, the DEP's job to look out for the best interests of the general public, and we all trust them to do their job diligently.

Word got out, though, and a ruckus was raised by a lot of different people, especially local kayakers. These people felt that this dock design would be an impediment to small-craft navigation, and was too large for other reasons as well.
Hearing that there was public opposition to the design, this Chester resident scaled the dock length back considerably, and changed the design to have only one boat lift, which would not protrude beyond the end of the dock.
Also in reaction to the public outcry, the Chester Inland Wetlands Commission took the position that the resident would have to get a permit from them before he could build even the shorter dock.
The resident agreed to do so, even though the DEP had sent a vaguely threatening letter to the local commission, telling them to mind their own business and stay out of dock regulation.
A public hearing was held, and the resident made his case before the commission. Comments were given by some of those in attendance, and the commission approved the dock design.
Everybody won this time. The resident received a permit to build his dock, and the public's interest was well-served by the Chester commission's courage in asserting authority, along with the resident's concern for other people exhibited by shortening the dock (and his willingness to cooperate with the local government, which he didn't really have to do).
We truly appreciate the resident's sensitivity to community concerns. But he never would have been aware of those concerns if nobody had spoken up.
We may not be so lucky next time. Instead of a riverfront property owner who cares about his community, like this one, we may run up against someone who doesn't care about other people. Let's hope this doesn't happen, but it easily could. That's why it is important to keep speaking up for what we believe in.
We've also heard that a recent dock application in Deep River was approved by that town's Wetlands Commission, and that this applicant as well made significant changes to his design in order to satisfy the concerns of the commission and other local residents. It this the beginning of a trend? With the help of public opinion, freely expressed, and continued responsible reaction such as these two property owners have exhibited, it might be.