Enfield zoning board reaffirms approval of wetland crossing for 300-unit development

An artist's rendering of townhouses proposed at the Laramie Farms development in Enfield, N.H. (Courtesy D.C. Development) Courtesy D.C. Development
Published: 01-16-2025 5:01 PM |
ENFIELD — The Zoning Board of Adjustment in a vote Wednesday evening stuck by its November decision to approve an access road that will cross wetlands to serve a proposed 300-unit housing project.
The Enfield board denied a “request for rehearing” made by Gwyn and Trae Dessert, abutters of the project who live on C-More Farm Drive off Route 4.
The vote was 4-1. Dan Regan was the sole board member who favored a rehearing.
The Desserts had appealed the ZBA’s decision to grant the developers of Laramie Farms a “special exception” to fill in wetlands to build an access road to the proposed development, which is situated between Maple Street and Route 4. Plans call for building a main road for future residents off Route 4 near the town’s water tower and an emergency access road that would connect the development to Maple Street.
“I don’t see that we could have done anything differently, and I’ll go as far to say I don’t think we could have done it better because we’ve listened to everybody and made reasoned, thoughtful decisions about how this should go,” Susan Brown, the board’s vice chairwoman, said.
The move marks the latest win for developers of what could be the largest housing development in Enfield. The project still needs the approval of the town’s Planning Board as well the New Hampshire Department of Transportation, among other agencies.
Current plans — proposed by John Dibitteto, of Maple Street-Enfield Acquisition LLC, based in Bradford, Mass., and Stephen Doherty, of DC Development and Construction, based in Sandown, N.H. — call for a mix of about 80 townhouses and more than 200 one- and two-bedroom apartments.
The project has proven contentious among residents since it was proposed a few years ago. Discussions between the public and board members — and board members themselves — have often become heated. That continued at Wednesday night’s meeting. About half a dozen Enfield residents attended the meeting in-person or remotely.
Article continues after...
Yesterday's Most Read Articles
In their appeal, the Desserts asserted that the wetland crossings would impact their property, as well as create instability in the land surrounding the town’s water tower.
The question of how the ZBA considered the project’s effect on abutters’ property values prompted some discussion among board members.
The Desserts asserted that the developer’s appraiser, Mark McKeon, president of M.H. McKeon Appraisal Services in Bedford, N.H., focused solely on Maple Street and not Route 4. They cited an Oct. 7 letter from McKeon in which he stated that the houses on Maple Street are more than 600 feet from where the wetlands would be filled in.
Regan, who frequently has been the lone “no” vote on the zoning board for decisions about the Laramie Farms project, argued that the Desserts had grounds for a rehearing because the letter from McKeon only mentioned Maple Street abutters and not abutters who live on other roads, including C-More Farm Drive Road, off Route 4, where the Desserts live.
“If I lived on an abutting property other than one on Maple Street I would be a little bit upset that their properties were not considered as part of this special exception and the impact on their property values,” he said during the meeting.
Other members, including Chairman Mike Diehn and member Madeleine Johnson, disagreed with Regan’s interpretation.
“They may not have been considered” in the appraiser’s letter, Diehn said, “but they were considered by the board. So to say that they were not considered in the special exception process is wrong.”
The developer’s lawyer, John G. Cronin, of the Manchester-based firm Cronin, Bisson & Zalinsky, dismissed the Desserts’ concerns about the water tower in a written statement provided to the board ahead of its meeting.
“The Desserts do not have any authority over the water tower and do not have standing to argue on behalf of the water tower,” he wrote.
The Desserts also faulted the board for considering the developers’ request while still awaiting the ruling in a lawsuit filed this summer by Route 4 abutters Linda Jones and Alv Elvestad. The couple sued the town after it approved a variance to allow the developers to exceed the town’s 35-foot building height limit and construct buildings of up to 75-feet tall. That case is still pending under the Hillsborough County Superior Court, Northern District Land Use Review Docket.
“The prior variance approval has no bearing on the special exception approval (...),” Cronin wrote. “Additionally, any concerns regarding the number of units to be built is a matter that can be determined by the Enfield Planning Board.”
The next step in town for the developers would be to appear before the Planning Board for a major site plan review, Enfield Land Use & Community Development Administrator Rob Taylor said in a phone interview. Among the things the Planning Board will consider in a site plan review are traffic, parking, lighting, landscaping and drainage.
“That one will be extensive,” Taylor said. The developers currently do not have any active applications before that board.
It’s also uncertain what the Desserts’ next step may be. They have 30 days to appeal the zoning board’s decision to New Hampshire Superior Court or the Housing Appeals Board.
“I am disappointed with the ZBA’s decision,” Gwyn Dessert wrote in an email. She declined to say whether she would take the appeal further.
Liz Sauchelli can be reached at esauchelli@vnews.com or 603-727-3221.