Letter: Scott-Farrar expansion good for Peterborough
To the editor:
Scott-Farrar needs to update and expand their facility in order to be economically viable. The plan is state of the art, with lavish landscaping/design elements that go way beyond what is required in the town’s ordinance. Most neighbors are vocally supportive of the expansion as this is a First Class establishment. The appeal by three abutters and the dissenting ZBA member is an example of how difficult the miniscule minority can push away a viable business opportunity for local Peterborough residents to work at.
This stopping of economic growth and activity in Peterborough is clearly against Peterborough’s master plan. This expansion is good for improving our local economy, preserving water and sewer resources, providing a walkable community, and preventing sprawl on the outskirts of town.
If Scott-Farrar is forced to sell their properties on Elm Street and build outside the downtown in the rural district, further harm will come to Elm Street and its neighbors. The River parcel is a lot of record, and will be sold as a house lot, the retirement home will remain as it stands as its highest and best use, as a hotel, the existing houses will remain and expanded upon for full occupancy as multi-unit rentals, and the open space on Evan Street will be sold as house lots.
Abutter’s will have no chance at resistance at ZBA or Planning Board meetings as these uses are already approved in this district. So, there will be no lavish landscaping, or additional interesting architectural design elements that enhance the neighborhood.
And there will be no new jobs to improve our local economy. The master plan calls for increased density in the downtown. Why is it so difficult to accomplish?