Winchester City Council approved changes to the Neighborhood Design District (NDD) ordinance and a city-initiated rezoning of roughly 97 parcels (about 131 acres) into the Cider Hill NDD, and adopted a related comprehensive-plan amendment to expand the district’s illustrative vision.

The package of actions included a text amendment to the NDD rules (TA/O2025-27) that defines permitted uses, signage, and other development standards for the district; a second‑reading ordinance that applied the NDD zoning to approximately 97 parcels (O2025-17); and a comprehensive-plan amendment (R‑2025‑37) to adjust the NDD illustrative map. The text-amendment motion (the council’s preferred option) limited by‑right expansions of existing M‑1 industrial uses to 10% in gross floor area, with the possibility of up to 25% expansion through a conditional‑use permit; that approach passed on a 6–3 vote.

City staff and several council members framed the NDDs as a proactive planning tool intended to guide future redevelopment and encourage a predictable path for infill over decades. Staff emphasized that existing M‑1 industrial uses are grandfathered as by‑right and would not be forced to close or convert simply because the area’s zoning is changed; the ordinance contains no time‑limited ‘sunset’ on existing operations.

Several long‑standing industrial employers and their leaders — including David Gumbel, CEO of White House Foods (National Fruit Product Company) and other company representatives — urged council to delay or reject the rezoning, arguing that it could curtail investment and expansion on properties they now use for manufacturing and distribution. “Rezoning this property from industrial to residential while we are still operating threatens the livelihoods of our employees,” said Aubrey Martin, who described her family’s multi‑generation ties to the business. Speakers representing National Fruit and White House Foods asked for either no expansion caps or additional time to negotiate protections; the record shows the companies cited growth, jobs and long local histories as reasons to avoid restrictive limits.

Council discussion focused on balancing two objectives: protecting the city’s industrial tax base and employment while providing a predictable regulatory framework to support long‑term, incremental reinvestment and future redevelopment. Supporters of the NDD said it gives property owners a clearer roadmap for future projects and prevents ad hoc disputes over land-use expectations. Opponents argued the percent limits (10% by right; up to 25% with CUP) could be arbitrary and would effectively limit some owners’ ability to expand.

The council approved the NDD text amendment and then the rezoning and comprehensive‑plan amendment. Council also approved several related administrative ordinance items (minor zoning text updates and utility easement items) on second readings.

Votes and outcomes: The NDD text amendment (O2025-27) passed on a 6–3 roll-call vote. The city‑initiated rezoning of 97 parcels to the NDD (O2025-17) and the comprehensive‑plan amendment (R‑2025-37) were approved on second readings. Staff reiterated that existing industrial uses are grandfathered and not required to cease operations under the changes.