Huge Commercial Project in West Alton

[lagoon]

Originally Posted by Little Bear

The "Flex Zoning" Warrant Article in Alton failed 495 to 403. This is a small but sweet victory, and the residents of Alton have made their voices heard. Thank you to all that voted against this zoning change!

So does this vote end the viability of the Cherry Valley project? I am sure the owners will continue to push this forward somehow.

I found some of the other warrants in the ballot of interest as well but the majority of the votes involved the zoning and that tells you something right there.

[Slickcraft]

Originally Posted by lagoon

So does this vote end the viability of the Cherry Valley project? I am sure the owners will continue to push this forward somehow.

I found some of the other warrants in the ballot of interest as well but the majority of the votes involved the zoning and that tells you something right there.

The flexible zoning probably had no relation to this project. Flex zoning houses would have been limited to 1,200 sq ft with a garage no larger than 576 sq ft. More like "workforce housing" than luxury housing. The flex zoning was like cluster development by another name.

Alan

[Weekend Pundit]

I see that Stone Brook Hills will be before the Gilford Planning Board this Monday (meeting starts at 7pm) dealing with a subdivision off of Cherry Valley Road, said subdivision consisting of a 27.9 acre lot being subdivided into 4 lots - one lot of 5 acres, the second of 6 acres, the third of 8.2 acres, and the fourth lot 8.7 acres in size.

Stone Brook Hills also owns a lot of property on Glidden Road, with one subdivision on either side of Glidden Road, of which some of those lots have a lot line along the Gilford/Alton line.

The new subdivision butts up against the Gilford/Alton line as well, located just north of the existing Glidden Road subdivision.

Might this be the the parcel mentioned above?

I also know that there is another parcel south of the Glidden Road subdivision that might also meet the description. It is also owned by Stone Brook Hills.

[John Mercier]

The Glidden Rd parcel that I posted of is one of them.
But the Cherry Valley parcel is another.

The division of the lot into those smaller parcels will actually make them too small to gather the interest of wealthy homeowners.

High end compounds can be made reasonably on two acres... so the desire for 10 or more is actually a focus on the current use taxing principle. The larger lot provides for more privacy, while allowing all land that is not put toward added development into a reduced taxation state.

I am guessing they will market these to buyers of a more modest means.

[Weekend Pundit]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

The Glidden Rd parcel that I posted of is one of them.
But the Cherry Valley parcel is another.

The division of the lot into those smaller parcels will actually make them too small to gather the interest of wealthy homeowners.

High end compounds can be made reasonably on two acres... so the desire for 10 or more is actually a focus on the current use taxing principle. The larger lot provides for more privacy, while allowing all land that is not put toward added development into a reduced taxation state.

I am guessing they will market these to buyers of a more modest means.

The two existing Glidden Road subdivisions have lot sizes running from 5 acres to 12 acres. Because those lots include a considerable amount of wetlands, there is between 1 and 2 acres of buildable area on those lots.

[John Mercier]

The ones that I have spoken to that want these large lots are not thinking of developing the land more than a rather small footprint.
It is more about the privacy of not having neighbors right next to them, and not being on the lake were the public and come right up near the house.

The appeal of lower taxes once your holding is large enough to meet the passive current use requirement is a major draw over the 5-10 acre parcel that when built on will not.

[TiltonBB]

The four variances are on the agenda for the June 6 ZBA meeting; should the developer achieve those variances, she will then submit her site plan for review by the Planning Board.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...ec697c2c5.html

[Little Bear]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

The four variances are on the agenda for the June 6 ZBA meeting; should the developer achieve those variances, she will then submit her site plan for review by the Planning Board.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...ec697c2c5.html

This looks like a public relations, damage control puff piece by the Daily Sun, written for the benefit of the owner and developer. They failed to mention that there is an application for a Special Exception for the Commercial Event Facility, which is much different and has a higher approval threshold than just a simple variance. Why didn't the reporter take the time to visit the surrounding neighborhoods of Alton and Gilford to get input from abutters, taxpayers and others that will be negatively impacted by this development?

Time to write letters to the editor of the Daily Sun.

[Slickcraft]

Originally Posted by Little Bear

This looks like a public relations, damage control puff piece by the Daily Sun, written for the benefit of the owner and developer. They failed to mention that there is an application for a Special Exception for the Commercial Event Facility, which is much different and has a higher approval threshold than just a simple variance. Why didn't the reporter take the time to visit the surrounding neighborhoods of Alton and Gilford to get input from abutters, taxpayers and others that will be negatively impacted by this development?

Time to write letters to the editor of the Daily Sun.

The Sun made no mention of the active opposition. The Facebook group that was created to counter this development now has over 1,000 members.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/700026178785409

Alan

[Descant]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

The four variances are on the agenda for the June 6 ZBA meeting; should the developer achieve those variances, she will then submit her site plan for review by the Planning Board.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...ec697c2c5.html

Headquartered in Boston, Toast Inc (NASDAQ symbol TOST) was founded in 2011 and is capitalized at $14B+. NASADAQ is down a little today, but TOST was up 11.4% when I looked a few minutes ago.. Toast has a variety of software products for restaurant and hospitality management, so it appears they have expertise and funding to do a "fun" project in Alton. I would rather they rebuild Kimball's Castle than develop a rural zoned mountain top in Alton. Or buy the Laconia State School.

[John Mercier]

The problem with LSS, is that the State wants the full boat to cover the risks associated with the mix of historical and environmental negatives on the property. They also want some format of workforce housing in the proposal (not that easy to do with what Toast wants to do) and have encumbered the property with a permanent public access trail even beyond the road to the State park.

The property being proposed hasn't got all those issue with it.

[Little Bear]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

The problem with LSS, is that the State wants the full boat to cover the risks associated with the mix of historical and environmental negatives on the property. They also want some format of workforce housing in the proposal (not that easy to do with what Toast wants to do) and have encumbered the property with a permanent public access trail even beyond the road to the State park.

The property being proposed hasn't got all those issue with it.

But it does have a lot of fired-up abutters, neighbors and taxpayers in Alton and Gilford that are not going to roll over and play dead.

[Slickcraft]

Today I sent an email to Adam Drapcho who wrote the article in today's sun. He was not aware of the opposition. Adam would like to hear from any "opposition leader" and he would consider a follow up article. Adam is a balanced reporter and he was not aware of the opposition. So thoughtful replies are suggested.

His email: [email protected]

Alan

[John Mercier]

I'm quite certain, but moving from one to the other doesn't really make sense.

And Laconia is going to need to find some land to satisfy HB1361

[Descant]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

I'm quite certain, but moving from one to the other doesn't really make sense.

And Laconia is going to need to find some land to satisfy HB1361

What am I missing? How is this discussion about rural zoning vs. commercial zoning on a mountain top related to developing trailer parks in Laconia? Plenty of places in Belmont.

[John Mercier]

Each municipality must now have some format of access.
Laconia has limited properties that could be considered ''reasonable and realistic'', and has been one of the most vocal municipalities in the Lakes Region on ''workforce housing''.

Since the Mutual Aid doesn't want to move... rezoning for that use would suffice for a while for Laconia.

Since Belmont has a lot of areas that could be, and are, available to manufactured housing or expansion... really not a lot that we have to do.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

I'm quite certain, but moving from one to the other doesn't really make sense.

And Laconia is going to need to find some land to satisfy HB1361

And Gilford. More and more large landowners are deeding their land to the Belknap Conservatory.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Descant

Headquartered in Boston, Toast Inc (NASDAQ symbol TOST) was founded in 2011 and is capitalized at $14B+. NASADAQ is down a little today, but TOST was up 11.4% when I looked a few minutes ago.. Toast has a variety of software products for restaurant and hospitality management, so it appears they have expertise and funding to do a "fun" project in Alton. I would rather they rebuild Kimball's Castle than develop a rural zoned mountain top in Alton. Or buy the Laconia State School.

Toast is a terrific company, but it is a software company. They write apps that you might use to order delivery or to pay your bill on one of those electronic hand-helds at a restaurant. As a company, they know nothing about running a hospitality business.

[Descant]

Perhaps I misread the info on products. I understand some Toast products also do "instant inventory control" among other things. Managing finances in a restaurant/hospitality business seems to be a common weakness. Too many think you have to be a good cook, not a good manger, which is why so many restaurants fail. Of course, being under capitalized is an issue too.
In any event, there is some skilled management and some money in the mix here.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Descant

Perhaps I misread the info on products. I understand some Toast products also do "instant inventory control" among other things. Managing finances in a restaurant/hospitality business seems to be a common weakness. Too many think you have to be a good cook, not a good manger, which is why so many restaurants fail. Of course, being under capitalized is an issue too.
In any event, there is some skilled management and some money in the mix here.

Agreed that both are essential. Let's hope they do not get a chance to test themselves here

[John Mercier]

This doesn't in what I have read equate to a restaurant or hotel.
It has an odd feeling like trying to turn an estate into an STR.

Even the glamping operation in the Weirs seems to be discussing something about wedding events.

[retired]

After reading the article in the Sun about the new owners and their plans, I come away with some skepticism. She was a nurse and now that she and her husband have struck it rich, she is now a self proclaimed "developer" looking for a project. She talks about the charm of the Lakes Region and NH. That charm is related to family owned and operated businesses dotting the state. There is no charm in a Walmart or Target. The article didn't say that they are planning to both operate the site and/or live there. It has the feel that they want to build it as a money making scheme and possibly sell it after it is done. Just another out of stater throwing their money around. Maybe it will go the way of Surfcoaster.

[John Mercier]

I don't think sell it.
It seems more like they want a compound that they can lease out.

Its like purchasing a yacht or a jet and then commercializing it as part of a rental fleet.

STR are the same concept. People purchase a vacation home and then rent it out to pay for the property and ongoing costs with the intent to get their week or two free.

It is a different concept than the historical vacation cottage/camp that is shutdown and ''winterized'' while the owners are away.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

I don't think sell it.
It seems more like they want a compound that they can lease out.

Its like purchasing a yacht or a jet and then commercializing it as part of a rental fleet.

STR are the same concept. People purchase a vacation home and then rent it out to pay for the property and ongoing costs with the intent to get their week or two free.

It is a different concept than the historical vacation cottage/camp that is shutdown and ''winterized'' while the owners are away.

Except that if the purchaser is rich enough to buy this, they do not need the cash from the renters. This is very different than the working man who has dreamed of a lake house and stayed up late in his kitchen devising the perfect formula to swing it. So I'm with the folks looking for an ulterior motive

[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...

[John Mercier]

Because it is a private compound that they want to rent out when they are not using it. The focus in not the return on investment from a dollar value.

[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?

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Except that if the purchaser is rich enough to buy this, they do not need the cash from the renters. This is very different than the working man who has dreamed of a lake house and stayed up late in his kitchen devising the perfect formula to swing it. So I'm with the folks looking for an ulterior motive

Lots of people rich enough to buy yachts, but they still put them in the rental fleet.
Lots of people rich enough to buy private jets, but they still put them in the rental fleet.

It has tax advantages and lowers the capital opportunity costs.

Example: The capital opportunity cost could be as much as $5.2 million per year.

So building and only living there part time... that is $5.2 million gone, property tax and upkeep gone, and due to income tax policy... they probably could not deduct the full amounts for that either... so more loss.

Leasing it: some recovery of the $5.2 million, and full deductibility of the property taxes and upkeep as a commercial operation.

The dollar amounts are different, but the concept not.
Does it really matter that someone not born here decides to move or build here and spend $100,000 or $100,000,000? Not to us born here.

[sky's]

Originally Posted by retired

After reading the article in the Sun about the new owners and their plans, I come away with some skepticism. She was a nurse and now that she and her husband have struck it rich, she is now a self proclaimed "developer" looking for a project. She talks about the charm of the Lakes Region and NH. That charm is related to family owned and operated businesses dotting the state. There is no charm in a Walmart or Target. The article didn't say that they are planning to both operate the site and/or live there. It has the feel that they want to build it as a money making scheme and possibly sell it after it is done. Just another out of stater throwing their money around. Maybe it will go the way of Surfcoaster.

i couldnt agree more on your reply. my wife just recently moved to sandwhich on cold river and cant be more thankful that we did this. its beautiful out here. Moultonborough use to be like this 20 years ago still a great town but listening to the birds every morning is priceless.

[TomC]

Originally Posted by sky's

i couldnt agree more on your reply. my wife just recently moved to sandwhich on cold river and cant be more thankful that we did this. its beautiful out here. Moultonborough use to be like this 20 years ago still a great town but listening to the birds every morning is priceless.

I agree - I just moved to Sandwich from M'boro as well, primarily to get away from development. I am sure in 30-35 years it will come to Sandwich also, but I'll be in my 'final' piece of real estate by then...

[TiltonBB]

The Alton ZBA will hold a special meeting at 9 a.m. on Thursday, June 20, at which the only item on the agenda is a motion to reconsider the Lakes Hospitality Group’s case.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...ca0770cec.html

[Slickcraft]

The ZBA voted to allow reconsideration, rescinding their last decision. A subsequent fully noticed public hearing will be scheduled.

Alan

[Descant]

It will be interesting to see what the applicant will come up with as "new" reasons to sell their proposal. I just don't see how they can overcome the "hardship" requirement, demonstrating that the site is unsuitable for anything else.

[TiltonBB]

Alton Zoning Board reversed the decision.

From the Laconia Sun:

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...f3284f1f1.html

[Little Bear]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

Alton Zoning Board reversed the decision.

From the Laconia Sun:

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...f3284f1f1.html

The applicant voluntarily withdrew everything from the planning department. Therefore, in spite of the Town reversing their decision made at the June 6th meeting, the applicants must reapply, with notice, should they choose to proceed.

[TomC]

"the project continued to attract hostility from townspeople"...?

Interesting how citizen opposition to a commercial development in a rural area, which is not permitted by zoning ordinance to the extent it requires a special exemption (and is also completely inconsistent with the town's Master Plan)- is categorized as HOSTILE!!

[WinnisquamZ]

Originally Posted by TomC

"the project continued to attract hostility from townspeople"...?

Interesting how citizen opposition to a commercial development in a rural area, which is not permitted by zoning ordinance to the extent it requires a special exemption (and is also completely inconsistent with the town's Master Plan)- is categorized as HOSTILE!!

We all hear ya. Citizens must keep speaking up and do your homework when voting for local candidates. Many have hidden agendas


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[Slickcraft]

Originally Posted by Little Bear

The applicant voluntarily withdrew everything from the planning department. Therefore, in spite of the Town reversing their decision made at the June 6th meeting, the applicants must reapply, with notice, should they choose to proceed.

I knew that they had withdrawn the application to the PB however at Thursday's meeting I missed hearing that they had also withdrawn the application to the ZBA.

Alan

[Mr. V]

Ah, but does the decision to withdraw the denial (likely based on a fear of getting sued by the applicant) then automatically negate the withdrawal by applicant which was in response to the now moot decision to deny?

In other words: "Back to square one?"

[Little Bear]

Originally Posted by Slickcraft

I knew that they had withdrawn the application to the PB however at Thursday's meeting I missed hearing that they had also withdrawn the application to the ZBA.

Alan

I was told that they withdrew all applications, which I assumed included the application for Special Exception with the ZBA. This thing is so fluid it’s difficult to determine what is actually happening.