Industrial Zoning Change Proposals

Tax base and the Master Plan 2005
Home
Protest Petitions Filed
Read Petition #6 and Amendment #1
Deficiencies with the Petition & Amendment
Limited Industrial Zoning Allowable Uses
Proposed Zoning Change Area
Lamson Road Intersection
Searles Road Impact
Tax base and the Master Plan 2005
Range Road neighborhood changes
Why we made this site
Bottom line:  business development increases our tax base, residential development can be a drain (on services, schools, etc).  However, it is the RIGHT development that can MAXIMIZE the increase to our tax base.
 
The Master Plan 2005 was created before the rerouting of 111.  The new 111 corridor between Route 28 and 93 features enhanced visibility, easier access from both 93 and points east and a streamlined traffic flow.  This diamond in the rough is starting to shine - let's capitalize on that!

Read on to see how the Amendment could be better aligned with the intent of the Master Plan.  Scroll to the bottom of the page to see how the amendment misquotes the Master Plan.  The lots in question are not included in area targeted by the Master Plan goals and objectives.

From the Town Website (underlining is ours):

What is the Master Plan?

As defined by the state:

“The purpose of the master plan is to set down as clearly and practically as possible the best and most appropriate future development of the [town], to aid the [planning] board in designing ordinances that result in preserving and enhancing the unique quality of life and culture of New Hampshire, and to guide the board in the performance of its other duties in a manner that achieves the principles of smart growth, sound planning, and wise resource protection.”

According to the Master Plan, Windham is top-heavy with residential development, leaving relatively little business tax-base for balance.  Homes create a tax "need" for services, while businesses generate income and therefore taxes/improved tax base.
 
So, the Master Plan calls for commercial and industrial development, with a goal of 15% non-residential valuation.
 
Page 68 of the Master Plan summarizes the tax role played by the current industrial park.  While this is a definite benefit to the town, significant increases in industrial development did not seem likely:  "Given the projections for stable or declining manufacturing employment, this is not a particularly likely scenario."
 
In contrast, "Windham appears to be well positioned for future office development as a restult of projected regional growth in the services sector and the enhanced accessibility of the town due to the widening of Interstate 93." (p 69)
 
The Estimated valuations per square foot were $65 for manufacturing and warehouse, but $120 for office space. (p 70)
 
Can you have office space in Limited Industrial Zoning?  Yes.  If you were a developer, looking to build high-end office space, would you want to do so next to some of the other uses allowed in Limited Industrial Zoning?  No.
 
Does this mean rezoning the current Industrial Park?  Possibly.  But if it is in the best interest of the town, why not at least consider it?  There are (historic) HOMES on Maple Street whose back yards were rezoned to Limited Industrial, presumably in the best interest of the town.  Why not consider "zoning up" the current Industrial park, in the best interests of the town?  One of those buildings is currently for sale - what a great time for change!  In fact, it and one of the other buildings has FANTASTIC views - "executive corner-office" views.
 
View the Master Plan at the town website here:

Misquote of Master Plan:
 
The amendment finishes with:
 

The rezoning supports the Windham Master Plan 2005 by promoting office,

industrial and retail development south of Flat Rock Brook and the southerly portion of Route 28.
 
The Master Plan reads:

Goal ED-4

Promote office, industrial and retail development on Route 28 south of Flat Rock Brook.

Objectives

Promote office and industrial development in the PBT districts off Roulston Road and Governor Dinsmore Road.

Promote redevelopment and infill along the Route 28 frontage to generate a mix of office and retail uses.
 
  • These lots are not on Route 28
  • They are not in the Professional/Business/Technology district off Roulston Road and Governor Dinsmore Road.  The PBT district is north of Roulston Road, these lots are south and approximately 1/2 mile down the road.
  • The Master Plan does not specify the type of zoning required to meet the goal and objectives.  In fact, the only types it mentions there are Professional/Business/Technology and Commercial A.

Also, please check out the "Discrepancies" page on this site to see many other issues with these proposals.