Is this the right time, Enfield?
The town of Enfield is currently at a crossroads. The direction we take will have long lasting impact.
Enfield will go to the polls on Tuesday, March 10th. Arguably, the most impactful issue on the ballot is Article 2. This article will ask citizens to vote on a proposal by the Planning Board (PB) to change town zoning. My concerns and reasons I oppose Article 2 are the timing, the lack of understanding of the impact, and the potential magnitude of these changes.
We currently have about 1,200 residents living in our Enfield Village District (the district targeted with these changes). A proposed high-end apartment complex (Laramie Farms) is in late-stage review with the PB, and will bring in 600 additional people (a 50% increase in the Village population). In addition to this project, there are currently at least six other projects that have either been in front of the PB or in discussion with the Selectboard (SB). Collectively, these new developments could bring in another 370 – 440 people (for a combined 80% increase in the Village population). Wouldn’t it make sense to see how all of this goes before allowing additional zoning changes which would bring in additional development?
I have publicly requested a detailed buildout analysis from the PB which has not been provided. (Given the scope, it is a bit surprising that quantitative data is not being supplied.) Considering the recently completed Mascoma Watershed Management Plan (MWMP), I also respectfully request that the PB review this work and provide an analysis of the impact of the proposed zoning changes on our lakes. It appears ill-advised, and lacking coordination, that we would make zoning changes within the watershed without considering the findings of this important project. This analysis should also include the impact of the recently passed state law (RSA 674:72) in which the state mandates zoning for additional ADUs on our lakes.
Let the dust settle on the current round of significant development. Do the additional work to measure the impact of any further changes. Let’s take a time out and vote “no” on Article 2.