There will be 14 Warrant Articles that are sponsored by the Town. They are numbered 7 through 20.
Our “Savvy Soup” page contains background information relevant to decision-making for local issues. Data presented on this page provide context to assist the savvy voter in understanding the larger picture related to Hampton finances and the way the town is organized and run.
SAU 90 Warrant Articles
Here is a listing of the SAU 90 Candidates for open positions, and detail on the five SAU Articles.
SAU 21 Candidates
The Winnacunnet School District has one uncontested open position for School Board Member, and one uncontested open position for School Budget Committee. You also have the option to write-in a candidate for any position.
Candidates for Open Town Positions 2019
The following candidates will be on your ballot for Article 1. The positions for which there are more candidates than openings (contested races) are outlined in yellow.
Information on These Zoning Articles Still Being “Tweaked” Post-Deliberative Session (2/2/19). Stay tuned for more….
Article 2: Zoning – New Demolition Requirements for Structures 100+ Years Old
Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 1 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Hampton Zoning Ordinance as follows?
Amend Article I – General Section 1.6 Definitions to add a definition for “Demolition”.
Amend Article I – Districts. New Section 1.8 to establish a demolition review procedure which includes the following: a purpose statement; review thresholds that are triggered where a building was constructed more than one hundred (100) years before the date of application for was constructed more than one hundred (100) years before the date of application for a demolition permit (per Assessor records), or is listed in the National or State Register of Historic Places, with an exemption provided for manufactured homes; a review process which involves the applicant meeting with the Building Inspector and the Town Planner to review the proposed demolition and discuss potential alternatives to demolition prior to the issuance of a demolition permit; the opportunity for the Hampton Historical Society or its designee to photographically document a subject building prior to demolition, encouraging the applicant to salvage significant architectural features, and to state that nothing in the Article shall be construed to prevent immediate demolition where public safety is at stake. A statement of authority relating to a Historic District Com mission and/or a Heritage Commission, if established, is also included.
What it means: This warrant article amends the definition of Demolition and establishes a new demolition review procedure. The new procedure applies only to requests for demolition of structures that are more than 100 years old before the date of the demolition application, and/or are listed in the National or State Register of Historic Places. The new procedure adds a meeting with the Building Inspector and Town Planner to ensure that alternatives to demolition are discussed and considered. It also provides for the Hampton Historical Society (or its designee) to be able to photographically document the structure prior to demolition to ensure that a record of that structure will exist. The applicant will also be encouraged to salvage significant architectural features. If there is a public safety concern, the structure may be demolished immediately.
Those in favor say:
Those against say:
Fiscal Impact: No tax impact.
Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 2 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Hampton Zoning Ordinance as follows?
Amend Article I – General, Section 1.6 to add definitions of “Lot Area” and “Percentage of Impervious Coverage”.
Amend Article IV – Dimensional Requirements, Sections 4.8, 4.8a, and 4.8b to replace references to “sealed surface” with “Percentage of Impervious Coverage” for consistency purposes.
What It Means: This warrant article amends Wetland Conservation District ordinance section 2.3.4. It requires that newly constructed structures or those that are substantially improved in the Tidal Wetlands Conservation District conform to FEMA’s guidelines that the Town previously adopted for the VE Special Flood Hazard zone. Those guidelines provide for the first floor of the structure to be at least 1 foot above Base Flood Elevation, and that the space below the first floor be open and covered only with lattice work, open fencing, or break-away walls such that water in storm events can flow freely beneath the structure. If this Article were to be defeated, no additional guidelines would be put in place.
Those in favor say:
Those against say: Those against feel that NO additional building should occur in the Wetlands District. While this Article provides guidelines to assure more flood-appropriate construction, the other side of the argument is that no new construction should be occur at all.
Fiscal Impact: No tax impact.
Article 4: Zoning – Calculation of Minimum Lot Area in Wetland Conservation District
AreyouinfavoroftheadoptionofAmendmentNo.3asproposed bythePlanningBoardfortheHamptonZoningOrdinanceasfollows?
Amend Article II-Districts. Wetland ConservationDistrict Ordinance Section 2.3.7 Special ProvisionsC, C-1and C-2such that the calculation of the minimum lot area and lot area per dwelling unit for newly created lots and lots increasing the number of dwelling units, is based on 100% of the required minimum lot area and minimum lot area per dwelling unit in the underlying zoning district is located outside the Wetlands Conservation District.
This Amendment also includes adding a footnote to ArticleIV-Dimensional Requirements,Section4.1-“Minimum Lot Area”and Setion 4.1.1-“Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit” referencing Section 2.3.7C, and adding a reference to Section 2.3.7C under ArticleI – General,Section 1.6. Definition of “LotArea” to reflect said change.
What It Means: This warrant article amends Wetland Conservation District ordinance section 2.3.7 to reflect that when the minimum lot area and lot area per dwelling unit for newly created lots and lots increasing the number of dwelling units are calculated, 100% of the required minimum lot area and minimum lot area per dwelling unit in the appropriate zoning district is used, and that those minimum lot areas are outside of the Wetlands Conservation District. Area within the buffer may not be used in the calculation.
Those In Favor Say:
Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at the Deliberative Session.
Fiscal Impact: No tax impact.
Article 5: Zoning – Allowances for Maximum Height to Raise Structures in the Floodplain
Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 4 as proposed by the Planning Board for the
Hampton Zoning Ordinance as follows?
Amend Article II – Districts. Floodpla in Management Ordinance Section 2.4.9 Structure Requirements- #1 Elevation Requirements to allow a property owner to elevate their structure an additional 1 or 2 feet beyond the required 1 foot above base flood elevation. Also, to ad just the maximum height requirement provided in Article IV – Dimensional Requirements (Section 4.4) to less than or equal to the selected amount above base flood elevation. The maximum height shall
not exceed a total of 3 feet.
What it means:This warrant article amends Article II – Districts, Floodplain Management Ordinance Section 2.4.9, Structural Requirements – #1 Elevation Requirements. It allows a property owner raising a structure an additional 1 or 2 feet above the required 1 foot above base flood elevation to adjust the maximum height requirement to less than or equal to the added amount above base flood elevation without seeking a variance for that height difference. A height variance would not be required if the added height of the structure is no more than 3 feet.
Those in favor say:Homes in the Floodplain area need the additional height to be able to protect their properties and reduce the cost of flood insurance. This Article will allow them to raise their homes up to 2 additional feet without getting a variance.
Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at the Deliberative Session.
Article 6: Zoning – Delete Unnecessary Requirement in the Aquifer Protection District Ordinance
Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 5 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Hampton Zoning Ordinance as follows?
Amend Article II – Districts. Section 2.5.4 – Use Regulations (Aquifer Protection District Ordinance) as follows: To delete the requirement for a written statement prepared by a qualified Professional Engineer from Subsection F – Conditional Uses, whereas applicants are already required to submit written findings of fact verifying all 7 protective measures listed in the Ordinance prior to the Planning Board granting a Conditional Use Permit in this District.
What it means:This warrant article Amends Article II – Districts, Section 2.5.4 – Use Regulations (Aquifer Protection District Ordinance) to simply the process of seeking a Conditional Use Permit by eliminating a duplicate submission requirement. A written statement prepared by a qualified Professional Engineer is being eliminated because written findings of fact verifying all 7 protective measures listed in the Ordinance is already required and should cover that Engineer’s statement.
Those in favor say: This is a “housekeeping” Article.
Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at the Deliberative Session.
Fiscal Impact: No tax impact.
Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No.6 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Hampton Zoning Ordinance as follows?
Amend Article III-A – Accessory Dwelling Units to Single-Family Dwellings. Section 3-A11. Removal of an Accessory Dwelling Unit as follows: To specify the existing requirement for the recording of a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions at the Rockingham County Registry of Deeds only applies to lots located in the RA or RAA zoning district.
What it means:This warrant article specifies the recording requirements at the Rockingham County Registry of Deeds for the removal of an Accessory Dwelling Unit to a Single-Family Dwelling in the RA and RAA zoning districts.
Those in favor say: This is a “housekeeping” Article, as we get more comfortable with the things people wish to do with regard to ADU’s.
Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at the Deliberative Session.
Fiscal Impact: No tax impact.
Article 8: Zoning – Prohibit Air Dancer Signs and Set Requirements for Other Signs
Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 7 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Hampton Zoning Ordinance as follows?
Amend Article V – Signs as follows: Section 5.2 to add definitions for “Air Dancer” and for “Feather, Sail, or Teardrop Sign”; Section 5.4.1 to state (within new Su bsection “h”) that air dancers are expressly prohibited in all zones; Section 5.4.2 to provide requirements for feather, sail, or teardrop signs (within new Subsection “j”); Table I to identify the zoning districts where air dancers and feather, sail, or teardrop signs are permitted or not permitted; and Table II to specify that feather, sail, or teardrop signs shall not exceed 32 square feet in zoning districts where permitted.
What it means:This warrant article amends Article V – Signs, to add (Section 5.2) definitions for “Air Dancer” and “Feather, Sail or Teardrop” signs; (Section 5.4.1) to state that air dancers are prohibited in all zones; (Section 5.4.2) to provide requirements for feather, sail and teardrop signs; (Table 1) to identify zoning districts in which air dancer, feather, sail or teardrop signs are permitted or not permitted; and (Table II) to specify that feather, sail and teardrop signs shall not exceed 32 square feet in zoning districts where permitted.
Those in favor say:
Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at the Deliberative Session.
Fiscal Impact: No tax impact.
Article 9: Zoning – Stacked Parking Constitutes One Parking Space Regardless of the Number in the Stack.
Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 8 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Hampton Zoning Ordinance as follows?
Amend Article VI – Parking. Section 6.3.10 as follows: To delete the stacked parking language pertaining only to Condominium Conversions of Pre-existing Non-conforming Uses, replacing it with a new Section 6.3.11 which states that on any lot containing one (1) or more dwelling units, stacked parking shall constitute one parking space regardless of the number of parking spaces in the stack.
What it means:This warrant article amends Article VI – Parking, Section 6.3.10 to delete stacked parking language pertaining to Condominium Conversions of Pre-Existing Non-Conforming Uses, and adding Section 6.3.11, defining stacked parking on a lot containing one or more dwelling units. The new definition is that stacked parking shall constitute one parking space, regardless of the number of vehicles that can be parked end-to-end in that space.Stacked parking refers to vehicles parked in front of one another, rather than next to each other.
Those in favor say:
Those against say: No one spoke against this Article at the Deliberative Session.
Fiscal Impact: No tax impact.
Article 9: $1,500,000 from Reserve Fund for Street Repairs and Reconstruction
Shall the Town of Hampton vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $1,500,000 for the purpose of reconstructing a portion of Lafayette Road from High Street to Winnacunnet Road and then from Winnacunnet Road to Towle Avenue to include street repairs and reconstruction and associated materials and labor necessary to do the work, and also to include associated drainage system maintenance and replacement, replacement of sidewalks, the installation of ornamental street lighting, granite curbing and other roadway infrastructure needed to complete the work; and
To fund such appropriation through the withdrawal of $1,500,000 from the Road Improvement Capital Reserve Fund created under Article 16 of the 1998 Annual Town Meeting for the purpose and no amount to be raised from taxation. This will be a non-lapsing appropriation per RSA 32:7, VI and shall not lapse until the work is completed or by March 31, 2020, whichever is sooner?
Those in favor say: This is part of the maintenance that the Town should be performing for the citizens, and the fund being used is one that taxpayers have contributed to over the years for just such purposes.
Those against say: There does not seem to be an objection to the work, only questions about the prioritization of streets to be addressed.
Fiscal Impact: There is no tax impact because the money was appropriated in prior tax years. This Article is allowing the withdrawal of the money from the fund for the specified purpose.
Article 14 – Sidewalk Repairs and Paving Overlays $316,231
Shall the Town of Hampton vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $316,231 for improvements to streets consisting of paving overlays, adjustments to structures to permit paving, repairs and replacements to drainage, repairs to sidewalks and driveway openings, crack sealing and curbing installation in accordance with the pavement management program or as required due to damage to roadways and improvements and repairs to Town Parking Lots and parking areas. Upon completion of the work scheduled in this warrant article, if funds remain unused the DPW may proceed to the next street(s) on their priority repair list until said unused portion is spent. Said appropriation to be offset by the State Highway Block Grant estimated to be $316,231. This shall be a non-lapsing appropriation per RSA 32:7, VI and shall not lapse until the projects are completed or by March 31, 2020, whichever occurs sooner?
What it means: The Town of Hampton has been successful in receiving NH DOT Highway Grant Block aid that help to maintain Class IV and Class V “highways” (basically compact sections of town roads). Funds are applied to specific projects as identified by DPW and approved by the Board of Selectmen. The streets affected this year will be Ann’s Lane (Ann’s Terrace to Mill Road), Ann’s Terrace (Ann’s Lane south to the dead end), Ash Street (From Thorwald to Emerald) and Ashbrook Drive (from Morrill Street west in the circle).
Those in favor say: This will help Hampton to improve streets in need of repair, and the cost will be offset by a block grant from NH DOT.
Those against say: No one spoke in opposition to this Article at the Deliberative Session.
Fiscal Impact: Due to the NH DOT grant, there will be no tax impact.
Article 15: Road Improvement Capital Reserve Fund – $300,000
Shall the Town of Hampton vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $300,000 to be added to the Road Improvement Capital Reserve Fund created under Article 16 of the 1998 Annual Town Meeting in accordance with the provisions of RSA 35 for the purpose of maintenance and/or reconstruction of streets?
What it means: This is essentially a savings plan so road work does not all need to be paid for in one year’s tax bill.
Those in favor say: This is the fund that is paying for the work described in Article 9 (if that Article is approved.)
Those against say: No one spoke in opposition to this Article at the Deliberative Session.
Fiscal Impact: The average Hampton home valued at $408,000 would bear an increased tax cost of $36.71 if this article is approved. (Your property value divided by 1000 and multiply by .09 to get your specific tax impact.)
Article 16: Human Services $172,624
Shall the Town of Hampton vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $172,624 for the cost of Hampton’s contribution to 20 human service agencies in the Seacoast in the amounts corresponding to the agency’s requests in the right hand columns as follows:
2017 Funding 2018 Funding Request
Aids Response Seacoast $2,700 $2,700
American Red Cross 2,000 2,000
Area Home Care & Family Services 12,000 12,000
Big Brothers Big Sisters 8,000 8,000
Child Advocacy Center 1,250 1,250
Child and Family Services 6,000 6,000
Crossroads House 15,000 15,000
Families First Health & Support Center 10,000 10,000
Haven Violence Protection & Support Svcs 7,500 7,500
Lamprey Health Sr. Trans. Program 4,200 4,200
New Generation Shelter 2,000 2,000
Retired & Senior Volunteer Program 1,800 1,800
Richie McFarland Children’s Center 7,800 7,800
Rockingham Community Action 25,000 25,000
Rockingham Meals on Wheels 6,625 7,174
Seacoast Family Promise 2,500 2,500
Seacoast Mental Health Center 8,000 8,000
Seacoast Visiting Nurse 40,000 40,000
Seacoast Youth Services 2,500 2,500
Transportation Assistance for Seniors (TASC) 9,600 9,600
Total $ 174,475 $ 172,624
These twenty (20) human service agencies shall each be required to give a written report at the end of the calendar year or fiscal year 2018 to the Board of Selectmen highlighting what the funds were used for and what impact the funds had in assisting to achieve their goals and objectives.
What it means: Each of the listed agencies will receive a donation from the town in the noted amount. The funds raised and donated last year are provided for comparison. This is an “all or none” Warrant Article. If the Article passes, all the listed agencies receive the specified donations. If it fails, none do.
Those in favor say: This is something our town does every year. These agencies handle social issues that the town would be dealing with if the agencies were not, so it saves the town money. Most of the agencies have some kind of formula that takes into account the number of people from Hampton who are served.
Those against say: This sort of funding should be voluntary, not mandated via property taxes. A person should not be required to support all of these agencies if he or she has a philosophical disagreement with any of them.
Fiscal Impact: The average Hampton home valued at $408,000 would bear an increased tax cost of $21.22 if this Article passes. (Take your property value divided by 1000 and multiply by .052 to get your specific tax impact.)