Little River Watershed Project Update L. R. Neville Ph. D.

Little River Watershed Project Update

L. R. Neville Ph. D.

Results from Public Meetings One through Four

(Updated 2/14/99)

The objective of the Little River Watershed project is to develop a citizen-driven, plan for sustainable development of the Little River Watershed that can be used as a model to guide the future growth of southern New Hampshire communities. To this end a planning process has been developed to assist the citizens of North Hampton with their deliberations. At this point four public meetings have been held with the objective of identifying the key issues and opportunities facing the town that are associated with growth and development, as well as for creating a vision statement of the desired future.

Public Meeting One - November 7, 1998 

The first public meeting served to introduce the Little River Watershed project to the community. Town Administrator Russ McAllister prepared a poster announcing the meeting and distributed it at various public and commercial venues throughout town in order to attract public interest. Other groups, including the New Century Committee also contacted various individuals and groups representing disparate interests and invited them to attend the first public meeting. 

Following an introduction by Russ McAllister, meeting one was facilitated by Brooks Mullahy, Associate Director of Urban Forestry at the Morris Arboretum in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. She was joined by Dr. Bob Neville, Urban and Community Forestry Program Manager for the twenty-state Northeastern Area of the USDA Forest Service. Brooks and Bob described the project, its ecological context and the essential public role. As many as forty-three people at various times during the three-hour meeting listened to the presentation and participated in the discussion that followed. After the discussion teams were set up among those who wanted to participate further. Each team was provided with a disposable camera and given instructions to photograph images they liked and disliked in the community and elsewhere. The film was to be returned to the town office for processing in time for public meeting two when the groups would present their observations to the rest of the participants as the basis for discussion about issues and opportunities.

Public Meeting Two – November 21, 1998

Town Administrator Russ McAllister opened the second public meeting with a review of the project and its objectives. Brooks Mullahy took charge of the facilitation and reviewed the planning process to put the work of the day in context. Teams were then instructed to assemble their photos into issue and opportunity areas on large sheets of paper and write three statements on each i.e., put three issues and three opportunities into words for presentation to the other participants. Six teams presented.

After the presentations the participants had the opportunity to study the materials prepared by the other teams in preparation for a group discussion lead by Brooks. The purpose of the discussion was to identify common issues and opportunities and areas of disagreement. No disagreements were forth coming. The issues and opportunities as discussed and recorded on the presentation sheets were later used by Bob Neville to summarize key issues and craft a preliminary vision statement for the long-term future of North Hampton. This preliminary statement of issues and the vision will be the focus of the next public meeting scheduled for Saturday December 12, 1998 from 9:00am till noon at the elementary school.

Public Meeting Three – December 12, 1998

Brooks Mullahy opened the third meeting with a brief overview of what had transpired at meeting number two. There were several citizens present that had not attended prior meetings who brought up several questions that could have been answered if we had provided an overview of the process. As a result we kept going back to issues that the continuing participants were fully apprised of. Eventually we moved on to the presentation of the Issues, Vision and Goals that were formulated by Bob Neville and Brooks based upon the discussion during meeting two. 

Several additions were made by the citizens in attendance to the list of issues as presented, including: 

• Preserving the uniqueness of N. Hampton
• Affordable housing
• Effects on the tax base
• Ongoing planning efforts
• Impacts on existing wildlife and their habitat
• Appearance of entryways into the town
• Economics of open space
• Waste disposal
• The salt marsh as an ecological issue

The vision statement as presented met with considerable enthusiasm but required a few modifications as well. Specific areas mentioned were the need to diversify the economic base rather than “expand” it, i.e., not to provide a “regional shopping magnet” but to provide a variety of retail and small business opportunities. The goals were also well received but with two additions i.e., to add the intersection of Routes 1 and 111 to the goal of establishing a pedestrian oriented village center, and an additional goal of establishing zoning that will achieve the community’s vision. The revised Issues, Vision and Goals are stated below. 

The final topic for the meeting focused on the need for greater citizen participation to ensure that the Vision and Goals have broad community support. A special effort was to be initiated by the town to promote greater and more diverse citizen involvement. To this end a special public meeting was set for February 12, 1999, to followed by a review of technical information on February 27.

Preliminary Summary of Issues (no order of priority)

The existing and potential impact of growth and development on the quality and availability of surface and ground water as well as on existing wildlife and the areas that support them.

The need to capitalize on Route 1 to increase the tax base, and address the existing inappropriate development along Route 1, and the related social, economic and environmental impacts which detract from the desired town image and quality of life.

Potential loss of open space and the unique ecological (e. g., salt marshes, wetlands riparian areas, forests, wildlife), social (e. g., income levels, housing types, age groups) and cultural (e. g., scenic and historic) diversity that defines North Hampton and makes it unique.

Lack of pedestrian/bicycle friendly opportunities to improve personal health in a safe manner, link key nodes (e. g., school, beach, shopping, and parks) and reinforce a sense of community.

Appropriateness of existing zoning as it relates to sprawl and its associated social, ecological and economic impacts, including the economics of open space.

The need for affordable housing

Enforcement of ordinances, rules and regulations

Adequacy of community services including waste disposal to support anticipated future growth, and related impacts on the tax base 

Adequacy of town services to accommodate the needs of visitors and their potential impacts.

There is a need to consider all current efforts to direct future growth in the town, e.g., marsh restoration, Rte. 1 and Rte. 1A studies, Master Plan, Capital Improvements Plan.

Gateways to the community and how to address the existing eyesores that detract from the town image.

Preliminary Vision Statement (statement of desired future conditions)

North Hampton in the 21^st Century retains the pleasant atmosphere of a socially diverse (income, demographics, housing), small New England coastal community while diversifying its economic base. Protection and restoration of critical ecological (wetlands, forests, riparian and recharge areas) and cultural (scenic and historic) resources has allowed the community to conserve critical wildlife habitats, preserve its inherent character and maintain an adequate supply of clean water while permitting the creation of an expansive open space network. Community vitality has been enhanced by the creation of a bicycle/pedestrian system within the open space network. This system links key nodes within the community (e. g., schools, housing, shopping, rail station, town center, and beach) with existing and ecologically planned new residential areas and provides access to the regional bikeway.

In keeping with North Hampton’s New England character, the Route 1 corridor has been transformed into a diverse retail and small business area with characteristic architectural design in a pedestrian environment. This area has been connected to the rest of the community via the open space network. Extensive native plantings associated with bioengineering techniques (engineering based on natural systems and processes as opposed to structural solutions), minimize the impacts of development on the adjacent aquifer and reinforce the connection with the community.

Preliminary Goals (not in priority order)

Establish conservation easements with willing landowners and restore riparian buffers along all free flowing streams and wetland areas in the watershed.

Establish a network of bicycle/pedestrian trails to serve key nodes in the community with residential areas and link to the regional system.

Reduce the loss of forest cover by minimizing road widths and allowable clearing for all future development.

Establish a cultural/scenic designation along appropriate roadway corridors.

Maintain existing recharge rates and water quality within the aquifer recharge areas through bioengineering techniques (relying on natural systems and processes instead of structural improvements).

Establish a pedestrian oriented village center atmosphere in the vicinity of Route 1 at Route 111.

Establish zoning that conforms to the vision and tax structure.

Use existing regional and local wildlife studies by UNH and others to identify and maintain biodiversity in North Hampton.

Follow-up to December 12, 1998 meeting

Although the final draft of the Issues, Vision and Goals is not yet complete, in the interest of time, the technical team used the available information to clarify some of the data and analysis requirements. This process can be modified as needed once the Issues, Vision and Goals are finalized.

The process begins with a series of questions relating to the desired future as stated in the Vision and Goals and identifies the specific data and analysis requirements needed to answer the question. Questions and required information driving the analysis at this time are as follows:

Data and Analysis Requirements

Question 1

How much developable land remains in the watershed?

DATA NEEDS

1. Complete closure on all land parcels (eliminate dangling parcels)
2. Develop a map of all parcels that include some or all of their land area in the L R watershed

3. Combine blue line streams with classified wetlands and create a 100 foot buffer

1. Map lands in public rights of way, ownership or in conservation easements
2. Map all areas that have hydric soils.
3. Isolate all land parcels with house value = 0 and all parcels with a house and land >4ac.
4. From the map of all parcels in the watershed subtract:

• Buffered areas
• Land in public rights of way, ownership or conservation easement
• Hydric soils

Question 2

What are the critical ecological values that sustain current quality of life in North Hampton and how will they change over time as a result of existing zoning.

DATA NEEDS:

1. Land Use/Land Cover (including wetlands)

-spatial distribution of various LU/LC polygons in the watershed

existing

at buildout

1. Hydrology/water quality

-length of perennial streams in the watershed

-acreage of forest cover in 100’ buffer on each side of the perennial streams

existing

at buildout

-acreage of forest cover over the aquifer

existing

at buildout

-stream channel geometry

-record of precipitation

-record of runoff

-water budget: ground water recharge, surface water runoff (streamflow)

existing

at buildout

-water quality (HSPF Modeling): surface water runoff (streamflow)

existing

at buildout

-wildlife habitat

-habitat, linkages and connectivity for key indicator species

existing

at buildout

Question 3

What is the cost of community services vs. revenue generated, per capita

Existing

At buildout

DATA NEEDS

1. population

2. budget (town)

3. assessed value

4. developable land by zoning category

Question 3

How do we protect and conserve the scenic and cultural values in town?

DATA NEEDS

1. Existing surveys of historic and cultural features in town

2. orthophoto analysis of Rte 1, Atlantic avenue, Boars Head, bandstand area (Post Rd) identifying location of historic structures and critical viewsheds

existing

at buildout

Question 4

Where are the opportunities to develop bicycle/pedestrian facilities?

existing

at buildout

DATA NEEDS

1. inventory existing opportunities along creeks, roads and trails, railroad rights of way in town

2. identify and map activity nodes throughout town, e.g. –schools, parks, beaches, conservation lands, town facilities, shopping, churches

Question 5

What is the current distribution of housing stock (value) and income and how will they change over time as a result of existing zoning

Existing

At buildout

DATA NEEDS

1. Spatial distribution and quantity of housing by valuation

< 100k

100-200k

200-300k

300-500k

>500k

2. spatial distribution by average income

Public Meeting Four – February 13, 1999

This meeting was established as a catch-up opportunity for community members that had not been involved in the process to date. Efforts by the town leadership to engage more citizens were only marginally successful for this event with approximately six new faces in attendance. There were also approximately thirty-five continuing community members present.

Russ McAllister introduced the project once again and emphasized the importance of citizen participation in determining the future of the community. Brooks Mullahy then led the group through the who, what, when and why of the planning process with emphasis on the importance of full community participation in establishing the desired future as a guide for decision making. There were several questions that surfaced during the presentation and much discussion ensued particularly with regard to the diversity of the participants with respect to the diversity of the community. 

One of the major outcomes was agreement to conduct a multi-media outreach effort that combines the resources of the Selectmen, the School District, the Library and the Newspaper. A combined letter from the Board of Selectmen and the School District with accompaning information on the planning process is to be sent to each town resident in the next two weeks. This package is to provide a phone number or some other convenient method for responding to the Issues, Vision and Goals as developed to date. Similar information will be sent out in the next edition of the library’s periodic newsletter and an attempt will be made to obtain considerable space in the local newspaper to illustrate the project and encourage public response. 

When the issue of cost for the mailings came up one of the citizens in attendance produced fifty dollars in cash and announced he would match any other donation up to two hundred and fifty dollars. This act of generosity stimulated others to contribute resulting in a total of one hundred ninety dollars in cash and promises of more from both citizens and businesses alike. 

The next meeting was postponed until Wednesday, April 21, from 7:00 to 10 pm for review of the information on existing conditions and the buildout analysis. It was suggested that a special meeting be held from 6:00 to 7:00 in order to review the planning process for the newcomers.