PARIS – Town officials expressed several concerns Tuesday with a proposed ordinance that would replace the subdivision ordinance if it is approved at a June referendum.

Robert Kirchherr, vice chairman of the Planning Board, and Raymond Glover, chairman of the Board of Selectmen, reviewed comments on the ordinance made by a senior planner at the Androscoggin Valley Council of Governments, town attorney Geoffrey Hole, and the Planning Board.

“There are enough ambiguities in this that it would be very difficult for the town to enforce,” Kirchherr said.

Kirchherr said that while the existing ordinance needs to be amended, the proposed revisions would increase difficulties for the town. He cited one revised section that states that all lots and dwellings must comply with other ordinances and rules of the town and state. The revised ordinance adds the language “unless specified by the board.”

“It seems to make the ordinance useless,” Kirchherr said. “The wording of this is so broad that it invites problems further on.”

In another example, Kirchherr cited the proposed elimination of language declaring that areas designated as open space in the town plan remain open space in subdivisions. He said that with the change, the “definition of open space no longer carries any weight in subdivision development.”

Kirchherr said other proposed revisions could compromise public safety. Now, fire protection requirements call for a connection to a public water hydrant system, a water storage area, or sprinkler systems within the subdivision. Under the revision, subdivisions would only need to connect with a hydrant system and have a road approved by the fire chief for the use of emergency vehicles.

Kirchherr read a comment by Hole, who asked, “Is it in the best interest of the town not to have a provision for adequate water, as distinguished from an adequate area for emergency vehicles?”

Other proposed revisions considered public safety issues were the elimination of language prohibiting dug wells on lots one acre or less; elimination of streetlight requirements at intersections and the end of dead-end streets; and an allowance for more street frontage along certain roads.

Resident Ron Fitts said that certain areas of the petitioned ordinance were incorrectly transcribed to the documents that have been presented at public hearings. He noted how the original document included a definition of “dwelling unit” that cites a state law, while the transcribed version says that the petitioners are proposing eliminating the law citation.

“What people are being given at these public hearings are not a true copy of what was presented by the petitioners,” Fitts said.

The existing subdivision ordinance passed by a 487-468 vote in June 2007. The ordinance was presented to the town by petitioners in December. A representative for the petitioners was not present Tuesday.

Resident Barbara Payne characterized the document as an “orphaned ordinance,” saying neither the petitioners nor their legal counsel, Dana Hanley, have explained the proposals at the last two public hearings.

At the hearing last month, Hanley presented selectmen with a list of amendments based on comments made by AVCOG senior planner John Maloney at the first meeting in February. Glover said the amendments couldn’t be accepted unless they were petitioned in.

Glover has also proposed a meeting between representatives from the selectmen, Planning Board, petitioners and Town Manager Sharon Jackson to discuss a process for creating an amended subdivision ordinance.

The final hearing on the revised ordinance will be held May 5.