Questions and answers regarding Articles 8, 9 and 10 on the Hanover Town Meeting warrant

Posted 05/09/03

Hanover Town Meeting 2003

Q: Which of the ten zoning amendments on the warrant for the May 13 Hanover Town Meeting does Dartmouth oppose?

A: The amendments Dartmouth opposes are listed on the Town Meeting warrant as Articles 8, 9 and 10.

Q: What do these amendments propose?

A: The amendments would institute new height and setback requirements in Hanover's Institutional Zone (the "I-Zone") that would affect any proposed institutional construction (by Dartmouth, the Hanover public schools, churches in the I-Zone, etc.) that is within 300 feet of any part of the Residential Zone. The specific wording of the proposed amendments can be found in the town meeting warrant, which is available through the Town of Hanover offices and online at http://www.hanovernh.org/.

Q: How did the amendments get on the ballot?

A: The amendments were added to the warrant by a petition process that requires a minimum of 25 signatures. Before the proposed amendments were submitted, they were not reviewed with Town staff or with institutions that would be affected.

Q: What is the Town of Hanover's position on the proposals?

A: The Hanover Planning Board, in an April meeting, voted unanimously to recommend that voters defeat the proposed amendments. The board noted that the proponents did not review their proposals with town staff, I-Zone property owners such as the school district and the College, and the greater community, and concluded that the proposals' potential impacts are too uncertain to merit support.

Q: Why is Dartmouth opposed to these three amendments?

A: There is a variety of reasons why Dartmouth opposes Articles 8, 9 and 10, grounded in concerns both for their potential impact on the overall community and their impact on all institutions in the I-Zone and on Dartmouth specifically.

Inadequate process: The process by which the proposed amendments were developed and placed on the warrant represents a major departure from a decades-long tradition of joint efforts between the College, the town government and town residents to find mutually acceptable approaches to facilities planning. The proposals represent a hastily conceived approach to zoning. The petitioned proposals were presented just before the submission deadline on Feb. 12, 2003. As petitioned articles that cannot be changed and that have not had the benefit of comprehensive staff, board and community review, these articles fall short of representing a well-developed, well-considered approach to municipal planning. This was recognized in the Hanover Planning Board's recommendation that voters defeat these three amendments. Dartmouth believes that this non-consultative approach represents a bad precedent.

Creating a new zoning category without discussion: These proposed amendments represent significant substantive changes that would affect a total of more than 170 acres in the Institutional Zone. They would create, in effect, an entirely new category of zoning on the edges of the Institutional Zone. Such a new category deserves much more discussion.

"One-size-fits-all" approach: The petitioned amendments represent an overly broad-brush approach to planning and ignore existing patterns of use. They would also have real aesthetic and practical consequences for the College, and, therefore, for the community. The adoption of these amendments would make it more difficult for Dartmouth and other Institutional District owners to work collaboratively with the Town to address common problems such as housing, parking, and preservation of green space.

Curtailment of interior open spaces, lanes and views: The proposed amendments would have the unintended - and undesirable - consequence of requiring the College to build more densely and leave less open space on campus. Over time, this will curtail the College's ability to create and maintain the interior open spaces, lanes, and views that serve to make the campus so attractive. The Life Sciences building the College hopes to propose near the medical school provides an example of this problem. Buildings lower in height will require larger footprints, so the proposed amendments would mean that Dartmouth would need to expand the footprint of the building to get the same gross square footage, resulting in less open area around the building.

Number of existing facilities that would become "non-conforming": A number of existing facilities at Dartmouth would be made "non-conforming" by the proposed height and setback amendments. Non-conforming means these facilities could not have been built had the amendments been in effect at the time of their construction. It also means that if the amendments are passed these facilities could not be expanded without special exceptions to the zoning ordinance; and that no similar facilities could be built in the areas they now occupy. Facilities that would suddenly become non-conforming include: Memorial Stadium, Berry Gymnasium, McCullough Residence Hall off the intersection of Wheelock and Park Streets; Byrne Hall and Whittemore Hall at the Tuck School; Choate House, the Latin American, Latino and Caribbean Studies House, the Native American House and Sherman House on North Main Street; and parking lots around the Hanover Country Club, near Thayer Dining Hall, at Thompson Arena and Leverone Field House, at Berry Gymnasium and along Maynard Street.

Q: Does Dartmouth plan to offer some alternative to these proposals, now or later? Or does it simply want to see these proposals defeated?

A: Dartmouth would very much like to work with Hanover residents and the Town of Hanover to develop proposals that might address the goals of all those parties in a more considered way, one that benefits from available expertise. This kind of analysis could be accomplished through the town's existing zoning amendment review process and the upcoming master plan implementation process. These processes provide a more appropriate starting point to develop a set of height and setback requirements that are tailored to the characteristics of particular areas along the Institutional/Residential boundaries.

Back to Hanover Town Meeting 2003