The map shown below is a slightly revised version of a map appearing in the 2000 Hackett Hill Master Plan. In 2003, the City posted this map (without the labels added here) on its official Web site. The addition of the labels provides a better understanding of the location of the proposed development, especially its close proximity to the 600+ highly protected acres that comprise the Manchester Cedar Swamp Preserve.

 

 

 

Certain archived information on the Manchester Urban Open Space Web Site further clarifies the proximity of the planned development and the Preserve borders. It provides a criticism of the various parts of the development and explains the environmental damage it may cause.

To view this information, click on the following link. (Use back button to return to this point.)

A CRITIQUE OF THE STAGE-WISE DEVELOPMENT OF THE HACKETT HILL INDUSTRIAL PARK

It should also be noted that the planned development will occur in an area that is currently at least 95% forested and contains vernal pools, identified territories of numerous mammals, and the habitat of a threatened plant species.

The archived section that shows this area by AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY can be viewed to better appreciate this situation. (Use back button to return to this point.)

 

 

THE RESURFACED HACKETT HILL MASTER PLAN HAS FEW CHANGES

FIRST AND SECOND MEETINGS OF THE ALDERMANIC LANDS AND BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

 

After its rejection by the public at a public meeting in November, 2000, the Hackett Hill Master plan went "off the radar screen" and the City focused its development efforts on the downtown area and millyard - an undertaking suggested by many members of the public who spoke at the meeting. However on July 14, 2003, construction plans began to resurface as the Manchester Board of Mayor and Aldermen voted to sell French Hall, the former UNH building on the Hackett Hill property to a health club. It was also announced at the meeting that profits from the sale would be used to begin the development of a Hackett Hill industrial park.

On December 16, 2003, Gordon Leedy of VHB gave a brief presentation to the BMA. It concerned a revised master plan for the Hackett Hill development.

After a brief discussion of the plan by the aldermen, a question by Alderman Shea (Ward 7) revealed that a planned sale of French Hall to a health club had fallen though and the building was back on the market. Alderman Armand Forest, who represents Ward 12, where Hackett Hill is located, then made a motion to send the revised master plan to the Aldermanic Lands and Building Committee and the motion was approved by a voice vote.

Alderman Forest, was not in office at the time. the master plan was first proposed. Actually only 6 of the 14 current aldermen were on the board when the original master plan had been presented - Aldermen Gatsas, Shea, Sysyn, Thibeault and Aldermen-at-large Lopez and O'Neil. Therefore, of the members of the Lands and Buildings Committee who must make a recommendation on the project, only Alderman Thibeault, Chair of the Committee, and Alderman Gatsas were aldermen in 2000. The other members of the committee are Mark Roy (Ward 1), Paul Porter (Ward 6) and Ed Osborne (Ward 5).

The revised plan, like the original plan, poses definite threats to the environment and ignores the opinion of taxpayers who oppose the development and favor using the land for other purposes. At the initial meeting of the Lands and Buildings Committee on Jan, 20, 2004, Planning Director Robert MacKenzie, Assistant Economic Development Director Jane Hills, and Ken Edwards, Assistant Economic Development Director for the Manchester Housing and Urban Renewal, as well as VHB consultant Gordon Leedy, met with members of the committee to explain the master plan in more detail and to answer questions about it. Also present at the meeting were Alderman Forest, Ward 12 and Mike Lopez, Alderman-at-Large.

A more detailed copy of the master plan was distributed. A perusal of this plan indicates that it had very few differences from the plan presented in the late fall of 2000 by VHB to the BMA and at the November, 2000 Public Meeting. In fact, most of the original text, which contained considerable inaccuracies, was retained. Moreover the caveats provided by the master planners were still very obvious.

THE 2003 VERSION OF THE MASTER PLAN SHOWS FEW CHANGES, DOES NOT MEET ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS EXPRESSED IN 2000, AND CAVEATS PROVIDED BY THE MASTER PLANNERS REMAIN.

 

At the end of the presentation and its discussion, the Merrimack Valley Sierra Club requested that several of its members be permitted to make a presentation in favor of "zero development" of the Hackett Hill property to the Lands and Buildingd Committee. The committee voted unanimously to permit the presentation at its next meeting and the master plan propsal was tabled until that time.

At the next meeting, on February 17, 2004 three Sierra Club members (Kym Hall, Pat Mattson and Peter Flood) furnished reasons for a "zero development" approach. They pointed out that the environmental and financial concerns expressed in 2000 still lingered and recommended that the land planned for development instead be placed under a conservation easement and used for passive recreation and environmental education. They used specific data to back up their environmental and financial concerns.

THE PRESENTORS POINTED OUT THAT ENVIRONMENTAL AND FINANCIAL FLAWS OF THE MASTER PLAN ARE SERIOUS

 

The City's Planning Director, Bob MacKenzie, belittled the Sierra Club presentation. He attempted to defuse the argument that no conservation studies had been done by the City by citing arrangements made between the City and The Nature Conservancy for the establishment of the Preserve. (These arrangements had absolutely nothing to do with the land proposed for development of an industrial park.) He said that he had not yet examined the data provided by Peter Flood, and argued for a continuation of the development plans. Chairman Henry Thibeault then made a motion that the committee recommend to the full aldermanic board that the development plans be approved. However the other three committee members present - Aldermen Gatsas, Roy and Osborne - voted to table the issue for further consideration.

The meeting and controversy were described in an article in HippoPress (Manchester's alternative newspaper). Subsequently several "Letters to the Editor" that referred to the article were published by Hippo.