Huge Commercial Project in West Alton

[Descant]

Originally Posted by TomC

I saw that this development is going to be $50-$60M. Lets make the math easy and say its $52M. Any decent private wealth manager should get an annual return of 10% for his/her client (and maybe more). So the opportunity cost for this 'project' is $5.2M a year in investment earnings... Who really believes this 'wedding venue" is able to bill out $100,000 per week minimum every single week of the year? It doesn't add up...

My understanding is that weddings at Church Landing often run $30-$50K. The first year they opened, my daughter got married there, (prices were lower then) they were doing five weddings every weekend. More on holiday weekends. As people get married at older ages now, lavish, destination weddings are common. When you do a destination wedding, the "destination" gets all the $$, photography, rooms, cake, flowers, bar, band, etc. $100K / week doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me.

That being said, I hope the ZBA denies the variance. Wasn't it Alton that wouldn't let Bob Bahre (sp?) show off his car collection as a commercial operation in a residential zone?

[TomC]

Originally Posted by Descant

My understanding is that weddings at Church Landing often run $30-$50K. The first year they opened, my daughter got married there, (prices were lower then) they were doing five weddings every weekend. More on holiday weekends. As people get married at older ages now, lavish, destination weddings are common. When you do a destination wedding, the "destination" gets all the $$, photography, rooms, cake, flowers, bar, band, etc. $100K / week doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me.

That being said, I hope the ZBA denies the variance. Wasn't it Alton that wouldn't let Bob Bahre (sp?) show off his car collection as a commercial operation in a residential zone?

I'll take your word for it on the wedding prices - but your figure is gross revenue I assume. They would have to clear $100K and put it in their pockets - after paying all their expenses - to equal that amount in passive earnings... I still don't see this endeavor making much fiscal sense.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by TomC

I'll take your word for it on the wedding prices - but your figure is gross revenue I assume. They would have to clear $100K and put it in their pockets - after paying all their expenses - to equal that amount in passive earnings... I still don't see this endeavor making much fiscal sense.

Turning expenditures into tax deductions... that doesn't make fiscal sense?

[Billy Bob]

I followed the post and looked up the TOST stock , I found it in use in a few local restaurants, all love this software! Took a small position, sorry I didn’t go in heavier . Please take a look at their recent results.
If nothing else they have a great business going

[retired]

Did anyone see this sign fly by Alton on Saturday?

[gravy boat]

Originally Posted by retired

Did anyone see this sign fly by Alton on Saturday?

Yup. We cheered on shore. We are in W Alton and that rich man’s playground would be directly behind us.

Look at the abutting properties. Let’s say this is approved, built as asked or with few changes…and abutters looking for a pay day approach and/or accept a large sum for their properties. Everybody has a price.

From the original development moving down the mountain and over into Gilford and you may see Ames Farm sold. Riley Road surely being eyed as access road… guessing but that’s what I would consider.
I have heard that a few abutters have discussed selling and/or their business guaranteed work during construction if they are pro-project on social media and every day.

But that’s politics and “progress”, right?

[8gv]

Was this the response to the aerial banner?

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by gravy boat

Yup. We cheered on shore. We are in W Alton and that rich man’s playground would be directly behind us.

Look at the abutting properties. Let’s say this is approved, built as asked or with few changes…and abutters looking for a pay day approach and/or accept a large sum for their properties. Everybody has a price.

From the original development moving down the mountain and over into Gilford and you may see Ames Farm sold. Riley Road surely being eyed as access road… guessing but that’s what I would consider.
I have heard that a few abutters have discussed selling and/or their business guaranteed work during construction if they are pro-project on social media and every day.

But that’s politics and “progress”, right?

Why not wait and see the outcome to the requested changes?

The angst over what ''might'' happen should be less... for something is going to happen. It may not be the current proposal, but it will be some format of development.

[smith point boater]

Yes we have the same picture!! Not sure who paid for this but good for them and a big THANK YOU. Is there a site to contribute to this? Cost shouldn't be borne by one person.

This project will be right above us. I foresee nothing but traffic issues - single lane roads, problems at intersection of 11 and CV Rd and more. Never mind the potential sound and echoing issues

Nip this in the bud at the June 6 meeting

[FlyingScot]

I'm not familiar with the geography here, but you might consider asking Lake Winnipesaukee Association their thoughts on this, or maybe to do an analysis of potential environmental impact to the lake

[John Mercier]

It isn't on the lake.

[Little Bear]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

It isn't on the lake.

It’s not directly on the lake, but it is in the Winnipesaukee watershed, which is extremely important to protect and preserve.

https://winnipesaukeegateway.org/the.../introduction/

[John Mercier]

There are many more properties closer to the lake than this one, that when they were being developed had a cumulative impact much large than this one would be.

We have problems getting the support of people - even those opposed to this project - when it is directly on the lake; and directly affects public property even without restricting private property

The question on this property's development is more about the zoning rather than the environmental impact. It will be developed... probably just not with a Special Exception for a Commercial Event Facility.

The Legislature passed some housing bills this year... but next session will see a whole slue of bills that went to study being remitted for another go around.
So she will build something up there. What? I have no real idea. I guess as the laws change her plans may change.

It could make a decent farm... which is a business with special tax advantages... and not have to go through all this.

[Little Bear]

Please try to attend the Alton Zoning Board meeting on Thursday night June 6 at 6:00pm at the Alton Town Hall. This project will have a major impact on Lake Winnipesaukee and surrounding communities, so it’s important to have a strong presence at this meeting.

[Weekend Pundit]

Last night's ZBA meeting went nowhere for the applicants...other than the meeting being moved to the high school auditorium because there were too many people in the hearing room at town hall.

The first of their four applications were rejected by the ZBA as incomplete and the applicants withdrew the other three as they were incomplete, too.

I expect they will refile their applications for the Special Exception and the three Variances they were requesting. When I spoke with their counsel he stated that they were going to make changes to their initial plans that might eliminate one or two of their ZBA applications, but that's all he was willing to say about the matter.

[Little Bear]

Originally Posted by Weekend Pundit

Last night's ZBA meeting went nowhere for the applicants...other than the meeting being moved to the high school auditorium because there were too many people in the hearing room at town hall.

The first of their four applications were rejected by the ZBA as incomplete and the applicants withdrew the other three as they were incomplete, too.

I expect they will refile their applications for the Special Exception and the three Variances they were requesting. When I spoke with their counsel he stated that they were going to make changes to their initial plans that might eliminate one or two of their ZBA applications, but that's all he was willing to say about the matter.

Thanks for your report. In addition to what you described, this was the 4th time that their plans were rejected by the Alton ZBA. The Zoning Board stated that Alton’s limit is 2 rejections before reapplication is required, so the applicant got 2 free passes. Thank you to everyone who took the time to attend the meeting!

[Weekend Pundit]

Originally Posted by Little Bear

Thanks for your report. In addition to what you described, this was the 4th time that their plans were rejected by the Alton ZBA. The Zoning Board stated that Alton’s limit is 2 rejections before reapplication is required, so the applicant got 2 free passes. Thank you to everyone who took the time to attend the meeting!

Their applications weren't rejected four times, they were continued at the applicant's request. The applications weren't found incomplete until the ZBA meeting with the admonition about 2 continuances being the norm and the applicants having gotten 4 of them.

The real power for dealing with the project is with the Planning Board. The ZBA is not required to allow public input as all they're interested in is processing the Special Exception and Variances for the project according to the zoning ordinances and/or state laws.

However, the Planning Board is required to allow public input. Both proponents and opponents can address the Planning Board after the applicants make their presentation and PB members ask their questions. Then the Board will open the hearing to the public so they can express their opinions and concerns, and asking questions of both the Board and the applicants if they so desire. Once the public has had their say the PB will close the public hearing and move on to other applicants. Once all of them have been heard, the PB will discuss and vote on each application in turn. The Board can approve the application as is, approve it but with conditions that must be met before the Chairman signs off, rejected with suggested changes to be made before reapplication, or outright rejection.

[Slickcraft]

Article in today's Sun:
https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...12cf1832e.html

The Planning Board has no authority to move ahead on the commercial function facility portion of the application unless and until the ZBA approves a special exception allowing such in the rural zone.

The applicants must now start over with a new application to the ZBA. We live on Cherry Valley Road and have submitted written comments to both the ZBA and PB. If necessary we will resubmit our comments. Written comments are part of the official record for both boards.

They will be back. So the opposition needs to be back as well.

Alan

[Little Bear]

Originally Posted by Weekend Pundit

Their applications weren't rejected four times, they were continued at the applicant's request. The applications weren't found incomplete until the ZBA meeting with the admonition about 2 continuances being the norm and the applicants having gotten 4 of them.

The real power for dealing with the project is with the Planning Board. The ZBA is not required to allow public input as all they're interested in is processing the Special Exception and Variances for the project according to the zoning ordinances and/or state laws.

However, the Planning Board is required to allow public input. Both proponents and opponents can address the Planning Board after the applicants make their presentation and PB members ask their questions. Then the Board will open the hearing to the public so they can express their opinions and concerns, and asking questions of both the Board and the applicants if they so desire. Once the public has had their say the PB will close the public hearing and move on to other applicants. Once all of them have been heard, the PB will discuss and vote on each application in turn. The Board can approve the application as is, approve it but with conditions that must be met before the Chairman signs off, rejected with suggested changes to be made before reapplication, or outright rejection.

Thanks - I should have used the word "continued" instead of "rejected". However, I would argue that the ZBA continued the application at the February 1 meeting (not the applicant) due to incomplete plans. See minutes attached. The applicant agreed, but it was not a voluntary continuance by the applicant. And the applicant certainly didn't ask for a voluntary continuance at Thursday's meeting.

Although the Zoning board may not be required to allow public input (I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know if this is true or not), a cursory review of recent Alton Zoning Board Minutes shows that the Zoning Board typically opens the meetings to public input. Anyone can review minutes from prior ZBA meetings here: https://www.alton.nh.gov/node/74 I've also attached the minutes from the December 2023 meeting showing the ZBA opening the meeting to public input on an unrelated case. The opposition was fully prepared to speak at Thursday's meeting, and I have no doubt that the ZBA would have allowed public input. We will be ready to speak in opposition to the Special Exception for a Commercial Function Facility in a RURAL Zone when they come back.

[Riviera]

Originally Posted by Weekend Pundit

The real power for dealing with the project is with the Planning Board. The ZBA is not required to allow public input as all they're interested in is processing the Special Exception and Variances for the project according to the zoning ordinances and/or state laws.

I disagree.

There is a fairly big legal hurdle to obtain a variance. Essentially (and overly simplistically) there must be a hardship inherent in the land for the ZBA to grant a variance. (Amongst other criteria) This is a tough burden to overcome, because the applicant needs to show a reason why the land can’t reasonably be used under the criteria as currently zoned. If the ZBA did grant a variance, an appeal of the variance through the court system often stands a good chance of getting overturned.

A special exception has a lower legal burden, because the zoning ordinance specifically allows the use, provided the applicant can demonstrate that the use is appropriate for the specific parcel of land.

Also, both the ZBA and the Planning Board are legally obligated to take testimony from any abutter, and any member of the public that can demonstrate a direct impact attributable to the proposed development. Nearly every community in NH takes a very liberal view of this provision, and they generally allow testimony from any member of the public. If they didn’t take that testimony, they would have no way of determining whether or not a party is directly impacted.

Lastly, the Planning Board is probably the least likely approval that can be successfully appealed. If the ZBA grants approval, and there is no appeal to that approval, the variance runs with the land, and gives the applicant the right to build the use contemplated under the variance, subject to good engineering practice, suitable aesthetics, and a host of other criteria that the Planning Board can oversee. However, the Planning Board will have no right to deny the use itself, if the ZBA grants the variances/exceptions, and there is no successful appeal.

If the parties aggrieved by this development want to stop the development, they would be well served to hire a top notch land use attorney NOW, so that the attorney can review the application, and provide sound testimony during the ZBA proceedings, that will support a future appeal. Trust me, the applicant is represented by legal counsel, and they know full well that if they can get to the Planning Board without a ZBA appeal, they are likely to prevail in the long run. The last thing those in opposition want to do is wait until the Planning Board proceedings.

[gravy boat]

Originally Posted by Billy Bob

I followed the post and looked up the TOST stock , I found it in use in a few local restaurants, all love this software! Took a small position, sorry I didn’t go in heavier . Please take a look at their recent results.
If nothing else they have a great business going

Good for them. That doesn’t mean we want their development here.

[Riviera]

Originally Posted by Descant

I hope the ZBA denies the variance.

I don’t know what the ZBA might do, but a variance comes with a fairly extensive set of legal criteria that the ZBA must consider. One criteria is that the must be a “hardship” inherent in the land itself. My cursory understanding of the application requests tells me that this will be a tough criteria to meet. Even if the local ZBA sees fit to approve the application, I suspect this would be ripe for an appeal, with a strong probability of the courts overturning the ZBA decision.

Quote frankly, this entire application seems to highlight the applicants limited development experience. Clearly, the personal wealth is there to make it happen, but it’s not going to be much fun getting there, if they get there at all.

[retired]

Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got till it's gone,
They paved paradise, and put up a
Wedding venue / corporate retreat.