Dover official urges Hampton to use Master Plan, outlines RSA 79‑E and TIF options

Chris Parker, Dover’s deputy city manager for development and strategic initiatives, told the Hampton Planning Board on June 17 that the town should tailor economic development and zoning work to local capacity and use the Master Plan as the foundational guide. “The Master Plan should be the bedrock foundation of anything you do,” Parker said.

Parker advised planners to test ordinance changes against the Master Plan, to discuss proposed rules with developers and business owners, and to include building and fire departments in ordinance drafting so technical requirements line up with local permitting and safety reviews. He cautioned that models from other communities must be adapted rather than adopted wholesale because Hampton’s Town Meeting form of government and staffing differ from Dover’s.

On RSA 79‑E, Parker described the Community Revitalization Tax Relief Incentive as a locally adopted state program that lets property owners receive temporary tax relief for rehabilitating or replacing buildings in village or downtown areas when they provide a documented public benefit. He summarized typical terms: an initial delay in increased valuation taxation of up to five years, with possible additional years (two more for projects that include housing, four more for projects that include affordable housing, and up to four additional years for properties on the National Register of Historic Places or within locally designated historic districts). Parker noted that eligible projects must record a covenant specifying the public benefit.

Parker also explained tax‑increment financing (TIF) as a tool to finance public improvements—such as infrastructure or parking—that make private redevelopment feasible. Under a TIF, the town issues debt to pay for improvements in a defined district; increased property tax revenue from development in that district is then used to retire the debt until the TIF expires and revenue flows back to the general fund. He described Dover’s use of a TIF to build a parking garage after conducting utilization and paid‑parking feasibility studies.

Parker emphasized the role of a financial review before approving incentives. He said Dover runs three scenarios—the property as‑is, proceeding with an RSA 79‑E request, and demolition—to estimate fiscal impact and ensure any tax relief aligns with the public benefit. He added that much of the staff work on RSA 79‑E occurs up front and that Dover issues a “close‑out” letter at the end of the tax‑relief period to inform owners of valuation changes.

Board members asked clarifying questions. Mr. Tirrell requested examples of Dover projects; Parker cited a courthouse rehabilitation that included attainable housing units. Mr. Lessard asked for a plain‑language description of RSA 79‑E for viewers at home, which Parker provided.

Planning staff and board members agreed on next steps: Ms. Andrea Novotney said she is working on a draft RSA 79‑E:4‑d application and the board will participate in a joint Select Board/Planning Board meeting on July 13 to discuss RSA 79‑E and the possible creation of an Economic Development Committee. The board also scheduled a Rockingham Planning Commission presentation about Housing Opportunity Planning (HOP) grant items for a special meeting on July 29.

The presentation offered procedural guidance rather than formal proposals; any incentives or TIF proposals would require additional financial analysis, local adoption steps, and, where applicable, recorded covenants or debt authorization.