To the editor:
Our town is a growing – with employers like SoClean, Millipore and NHBB adding hundreds of jobs in our area and an expanding retiree community. There is a threat to this trend, however – we have a housing shortage. Demand is going to necessitate more housing being built, somewhere. The reason the current zoning debate is important is that we are deciding where that will be.
There was a zoning regime prior to 2014 that was outdated – it made it hard to build new housing anywhere except undeveloped land. This was fine in the 70s, but it is not viable for young people moving into our community, or older people who are downsizing. They are looking for smaller houses or apartments, in a walkable neighborhood, close to downtown.
Zoning rules changes since 2014 have facilitated construction of smaller homes on smaller lots close to downtown. The housing built and proposed since then has borne that out – taking parking lots and abandoned buildings and turning them into housing. It has increased the overall housing stock in a way that efficiently uses land that is already developed and has created the type of houses people want to live in.
Some people are fighting to revert back to the previous era’s zoning rules. They want a one acre per house policy that would make new homes in their neighborhoods impossible. That’s understandable but shortsighted. We have to consider the alternative – the potential of suburban-style development that doesn’t match market demand. This could lead to younger families moving, followed by employers who cannot find employees.
To me, that is not sensible zoning. We would be back to laws created for the realities of yesterday without a viable plan for tomorrow. I urge voters to make the right choice and vote NO on Article 15.
Roy Schlieben
Peterborough