Letter: Higgins Beach is public (Printed Feb. 5, 2010)
Posted by Leader Editor at 2/5/2010 10:05 AM 
Categories: Letters
Tags: Sports Transportation Letters Waterfront
Categories: Letters
Tags: Sports Transportation Letters Waterfront
To the editor:
This letter is in response to the article in The Leader about parking at Higgins Beach (“Not stoked about surfers, Jan. 29). As a Scarborough resident and also a recent convert to the sport of surfing, I can relate to the frustration of the surfers. But resentment among non-surfer residents is also growing (more than even before).
We all enjoy the beaches and the beautiful place in which we live, hence many of us find this such a great place be. It is, however, discouraging to see one our beaches with such heavy access restrictions.
It is a public beach and not a state park and supposedly open to the public. I can understand congestion problems in the height of summer, but the remainder of the year the beach is often underused. There are many vacant homes between September and May.
Why not let those of us who live in the area have better access when the beach is barely being used?
After speaking with many residents who live near Higgins Beach, but not at the beach, there is growing resentment toward restrictive access.
We all pay tax dollars and more recently our tax dollars funded very upscale upgrades to roads and sidewalks of the Higgins Beach area. New pavement, granite curbs, new breakwater, and sidewalks were all added at taxpayer expense. However, many of us in surrounding areas are limited from using these or the beach due to heavy restrictions on parking. I think surfers and non-surfers alike would welcome lighter parking restrictions. It is a shame we all can’t more freely enjoy this beautiful place in which we all live.
Scott Furr
Scarborough
This letter is in response to the article in The Leader about parking at Higgins Beach (“Not stoked about surfers, Jan. 29). As a Scarborough resident and also a recent convert to the sport of surfing, I can relate to the frustration of the surfers. But resentment among non-surfer residents is also growing (more than even before).
We all enjoy the beaches and the beautiful place in which we live, hence many of us find this such a great place be. It is, however, discouraging to see one our beaches with such heavy access restrictions.
It is a public beach and not a state park and supposedly open to the public. I can understand congestion problems in the height of summer, but the remainder of the year the beach is often underused. There are many vacant homes between September and May.
Why not let those of us who live in the area have better access when the beach is barely being used?
After speaking with many residents who live near Higgins Beach, but not at the beach, there is growing resentment toward restrictive access.
We all pay tax dollars and more recently our tax dollars funded very upscale upgrades to roads and sidewalks of the Higgins Beach area. New pavement, granite curbs, new breakwater, and sidewalks were all added at taxpayer expense. However, many of us in surrounding areas are limited from using these or the beach due to heavy restrictions on parking. I think surfers and non-surfers alike would welcome lighter parking restrictions. It is a shame we all can’t more freely enjoy this beautiful place in which we all live.
Scott Furr
Scarborough
It is important to note that the ‘electronic’ petition used to table the proposed ordinance change was emailed out with an accompanying letter that noted the following concerns:
Congestion
Pedestrian safety
Emergency vehicle access
Traffic safety
The petition or accompanying email does NOT mention Surfer Behavior as a concern AT ALL. However, when the petition was presented to the town council at Jan 20th town meeting Surfer Behavior was the only concern discussed. This is a very important distinction because it means that the ‘60' signees were actually misrepresented inside the Town's chamber. The petition was by and large used to manipulate the Council into believing surfer behavior is a much bigger concern than it really is. As a result just a few property owners under-handedly impacted a policy related decision and slandered this long standing environmentally conscious, reputable surf community.
Reply to this