Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owls Nest owner proposes $50M ‘White Mountain Casino’ resort in Ashland; zoning changes would be required
Summary
Owls Nest owner Brian Lash pitched a 100-room, destination resort casino and conference center (estimated $50 million) that he says could create 300–400 permanent jobs and generate roughly $1 million a year for Ashland; town counsel noted the property’s rural-residential zoning would need amendment and the plan requires planning-board review.
Brian Lash, owner of the Owls Nest/Vineyard Course, presented a concept for a destination resort casino he calls the White Mountain Casino and asked the town for initial feedback. Lash said the project would include a 100-room hotel, a 500-seat theater, a conference center, restaurants and public spaces, and that the build cost would be roughly $50 million. He projected 300–400 full‑time jobs and about 500 construction jobs during a two-year build.
Lash said the state’s charitable-gaming rules require 35% of gaming revenue to be distributed to charities and suggested local organizations would benefit; he projected the resort could add about $1 million annually to the town’s tax base and significant charitable donations. “If we build this casino, destination hotel here in Ashland, people now that wanna go skiing in the White Mountains or wanna come visit the Lakes region will have a 5-star alternative to stay right here in Ashland,” he said.
Town counsel Phil Hastings, representing Owls Nest, cautioned that the proposed site lies in a rural residential zone and that the current zoning ordinance does not allow this type of use. Hastings said the developer would likely ask the Board of Selectmen and Planning Board to support a zoning amendment or a special permit as part of the process. Selectmen and staff advised Lash to appear at the planning board as an informational item; the planning board meets on alternating first and third Thursdays and can accept informational presentations prior to any formal application.
Officials asked about infrastructure: traffic impact studies, water and septic capacity, electrical supply and road improvements would be required in any zoning or site‑plan review. A town attorney and selectmen noted that any changes the town must make to accommodate a casino (zoning amendments or warrant articles) would need to follow the warrant and public‑hearing schedule that leads to an election vote.
Next steps: Lash was invited to present to the planning board for an informational session; formal approvals would require zoning amendments, planning-board review and possible warrant articles to place changes before voters.
