![]() |
|---|

|
March 18, 2007 - I'd like to thank everyone that spent the time to fully understand what
the issues were concering Article 9 and that voted in favor of the wording change. As you
can clearly see from the images above, there would be no difference in the maximum size
of a building that can be built in Warner. The only difference was how the interior of
the building was finished.
It's a good thing that the current zoning wording was not in place when Warner Power (previously known as Walker Power), Mesa International, Milton CAT, or Market Basket wanted to bring their companies to Warner. Under the current zoning, these businesses would not have been allowed to construct their buildings here in Warner.
Signed by your neighbors,
PS: Definitions of Big box store on the Web:
This definition does not match the usage that was portrayed by Citizens for Smart Growth. I've heard people speaking on behalf of Citizens for Smart Growth refer to the rejection of Article 9 as insuring "appropriate scale" of buildings. Voting against Article 9 has done nothing to change the scale of any new buildings. Buildings can still have a footprint of 20,000 sqft and a height of 35'. Had Article 9 passed, the scale of new buildings would not have changed. |

Last updated:
05 Jan 2010
Copyright ©
2010 Dimentech.
All Rights Reserved.
Page design by Dimentech
Home |
Contact Us |
Privacy Policy