The purpose of the Population and Housing Chapter is to understand the dynamics of population change, and its impact on the need for housing. In this chapter, a target rate of growth, based upon the growth conditions in nearby communities, is established. In addition, this chapter establishes policies so that housing is provided in a planned manner, and with the least possible impact on the environment, character and fiscal resources of the Town.

Most of the statistics cited in this chapter appear in more detailed form in Appendix A.

Population and Housing Goals

• To maintain an even rate of growth that is consistent with the community's ability to reasonably provide services.

• To maintain a rate of housing growth that is consistent with the "regional" annual growth rate of 2.0%.

• To maintain the supply of affordable housing in the community, and to fill a need for affordable housing opportunities for senior citizens in the Town.

• To maintain the small village and historic ambience of the traditional Town Center.

• To ensure that new subdivisions are designed in a manner that respects and reinforces Mont Vernon's rural character, natural resources, and scenic viewsheds.

• To ensure that new subdivision design accommodates the need for contiguous open spaces and trail connections.

Facts

Mont Vernon has historically been a very small town. In 1999 its population was estimated to be about 2,000. The Town is the second smallest community in terms of population in the entire Nashua region (1998 pop. 186,454). In fact, Mont Vernon constitutes just 1.1% of the region's population.

Mont Vernon's most significant period of population growth occurred between 1970 and 1980. The year 1980 was the first time that Mont Vernon's year-round population had ever exceeded 1,000. Throughout the 1980s significant growth was experienced with an average annual increase of 2.6%. Population growth has slowed since 1990 to an annual average of 1.2%, due largely to the recession of the early nineties.

Even though the population growth rate has slowed in the past decade, the Town is still experiencing significant growth. Between 1990 and 1998, Mont Vernon's (9.4%) population grew faster than the Nashua Region (8.6%), Hillsborough County (8.3%) and the State of New Hampshire (6.8%).

The New Hampshire Office of State Planning projects that by the year 2020, Mont Vernon's population will increase to about 3,000.

As with the rest of the country, Mont Vernon's population is aging. In 1990, the last year for which Census statistics are available, approximately 360 persons (19.9%) were between the ages of 45 and 65; those residents are now at or fast approaching retirement age.

Residents of Mont Vernon and its Planning Board have noted that development activity has increased substantially since the early 1990s. Even the smallest amount of residential growth can have detrimental impacts on community character in very small towns.

Since 1990, Mont Vernon has been averaging twelve building permits per year for new residential dwellings, with 22 issued in 1999. During this time, the average annual growth rate in housing was 1.7% per year.

Compared with the rest of the Nashua region, the degree of new residential development ranked 7th out of the 12 communities between 1990 and 1998. During the course of the decade, housing growth increased about 15.5%, well above the regional average of 10.2%, and the state average of 8.9% during this same period. Among Nashua region communities, percentage gain during this time ranged from a high of 49.4% (Brookline) to 4.2% (Nashua).

Subdivision is the division of a piece of land into two or more parcels. In order to subdivide property in New Hampshire, an application must be submitted by the owner or developer to the Planning Board for approval. Subdivision activity is an indicator of future growth, as it indicates the number of new parcels for which building permits may be issued at any time in the future. Since 1990, a total of 67 lots have been created in Mont Vernon.

Mont Vernon has traditionally been a rural community, and more recently a bedroom community for the rapidly expanding Nashua and Manchester metropolitan areas. The housing stock is primarily (84.5%) single family; the vast majority of the housing in the community (93.2%) is owner occupied.

Mont Vernon (8.1%), Hollis (6.8%) and Amherst (9.0%) are the only three communities within the region where fewer than ten percent of all units are renter-occupied. Region wide (36.3%) and statewide (31.5%), about a third of all units are renter occupied. Mont Vernon currently permits accessory apartments only by special exception, and none have been legally created since 1990.

Between 1990 and 1997, most residential construction in Mont Vernon was in the form of single family homes, 80.8% of all units created. It should be noted that manufactured housing, or mobile homes, are considered to be a different category of housing by the Office of State Planning.

Nevertheless, Mont Vernon does have a considerable supply of affordable housing for a community of its size, when compared with others in the Region. The 1994 Housing Needs Assessment by the Nashua Regional Planning Commission utilized census data to determine the extent to which communities are experiencing either a deficit or a surplus of "affordable housing". The results indicated that in 1990, Mont Vernon actually had a surplus of three units, largely due to the 87 mobile home units. Since that time, the Town has experienced an increase of 18 mobile homes, and 116 new dwelling units.

Housing value has disproportionately increased in Mont Vernon over the decade. Mont Vernon's average residential sales price of $214, 000 in 1998 was the second highest in the region. Mont Vernon's average sale price increased by 49% since 1994, the fastest increase in the region. Rapidly increasing average sales prices is an indicator that development pressure is increasing in the community, which could signal the beginning of a development boom. The data may also be an indicator that housing in the community is becoming less affordable.

Average (Mean) Residential Sales Prices

Source: Housing Needs Assessment, 1999; see Appendix A.

An analysis of building permits issued in the Town of Mont Vernon during the 1990s that indicates that, like the rest of the region and state, the building permits that were issued were primarily (84.4%) for single family units. The remaining 15.6% were for manufactured housing, or mobile homes.

Further analysis of building permits issued in Town during the year 1999 revealed the following facts:

• The average size of new residential dwelling units was 2,253 square feet.
• The average estimated value of the property was $159,325, with a median of $190,000.
• The average size lot was 4.9 acres.
• Most had a two or three car garage.

Pursuant to RSA 674:22, communities in New Hampshire may enact growth management controls, or limits on the number of building permits that can be issued during any given year. This tool may be used only if a community finds that it is experiencing disproportionate growth compared to its "region".

"Region" is defined as the total growth found in the community, "first tier" or abutting communities, and "second tier" communities, which are those that abut the first tier. If the rate of growth in the community is higher than the regional average, growth management controls may be enacted, provided that the target growth rates are reinforced in the Master Plan, and provided that the community has and follows a Capital Improvements Program.

A fair share analysis is technique used to measure the growth of a given town in comparison to others in its region. Proportional growth in building permit activity can be an indicator of the degree to which the community has experienced change and stress associated with growth. A ‘fair share’ is growth proportional and consistent to regional change. The basis of this technique stems from NH statute. NH RSA 674:22 "Growth Management; Timing of Development", which empowers communities (after preparation and adoption of a community master plan and capital improvement program) to "... regulate and control the timing of development ... (which) shall be based upon a growth management process intended to assess and balance community needs and consider regional development." According to the law, communities may protect themselves from disproportionate growth in the "region." In most cases, the region has been defined as the community, "first tier" communities (abutting) and "second tier" (abutters of first tier communities). A community within the region that is experiencing housing growth that is above the regional average would be justified in enacting a growth management ordinance, or other control on the timing of development.

The fair share analysis for Mont Vernon, which is fully described in Appendix A, indicates that between 1990 and 1998 the average annual housing growth rate in first and second tier communities was 2.0%. This is compared with Mont Vernon's annual housing growth rate of 1.7%. Therefore, Mont Vernon, as of 1998, had not experienced disproportionate growth. However, this could begin to change as housing values escalate, and adjacent communities approach build-out.

Policies and Action Steps

The following are policies based upon the facts presented earlier intended to implement the goals.

Target Growth Rate. This master plan should establish a target housing growth rate that is equal to the average found in first and second tier communities combined. For the purposes of this document, the target growth rate shall be 2.0%. All policies and projections in this plan should be based upon this target growth rate.

Growth Management. While Mont Vernon has not yet experienced disproportionate growth, significant increases in the sales prices of homes may indicate a significant increase in development pressure. The Planning Board should monitor the growth found in all first and second tier communities to determine periods of unsustainable development in the community.

A period of unsustainable development is anywhere the actual number of permits for new residential housing units exceeds the target growth rate. There is a good chance that Mont Vernon could begin to see growth rates in excess of the regional average in the near future. When this happens, the Planning Board should implement a growth management ordinance. The details of how such an ordinance is implemented should be determined through the ordinance development process.

The Planning Board, or a subcommittee of the Board, should be responsible for updating all of the figures and statistics as they become available. The monitoring of building permit activity for Mont Vernon and all first and second tier communities needs to occur on an annual basis.

While the Town has provided for its share of the region's affordable housing, recent increases in sales prices could reduce the supply of affordable housing in the Town in the future. A low-income household is one with annual incomes that are below 80% of the median household income for a specified geographic area. Very low-income households are those that earn less than 50% of the median income. In 1998, the median family income in the Nashua region was $59,600. This means that low income in this area is defined as being $47,680 per household, while very low is defined as $29,800. Median family income data is not available on the municipal level except in the decennial census. A household is living in affordable housing if it is spending less than 30% of its income on housing costs.

Mobile Home Preservation. The supply of mobile homes currently available in parks in Mont Vernon should be preserved, as it represents the most affordable housing in the community.

Accessory Apartments. Mont Vernon is one of only a few communities in the region that does not permit accessory apartments except by special exception. Accessory apartments, sometimes referred to as "in-law apartments", are separate dwelling units that are located within an existing single-family home. Accessory apartments create housing affordability for both the renter of the unit and the owner of the house by providing a source of revenue.

Such housing should continue to only be permitted by special exception, and should not count as a unit for the purposes of calculating density. All accessory apartments should be located within an owner-occupied house, should have no more than 20% of the gross livable floor area of the house, and the structure should not be altered in a manner that will result in the loss of its single family character.

Senior Housing Project. The Town should consider permitting a small-scale senior housing project within the village center. The facility could be located within an existing building or a new structure. If a new structure is proposed, that building should be of the same scale as nearby buildings and should resemble residences located near it.

Public Housing. Mont Vernon has very limited opportunities for public or special needs housing. There is no public transportation to the community, which is a significant barrier to effective service delivery. Regardless, if public housing is to be developed in Mont Vernon, the structure that it is housed in should be no larger in livable floor area than the average sizes of those structures around it. Attached dwelling units may be considered.

A survey of residents in the Town should be conducted in order to determine if there are additional housing issues that need to be addressed by the Town.

Issues surrounding subdivision and building design are to be addressed in the Natural Resources and Future Land Use Chapters. Nevertheless, this chapter shall reinforce some of those issues with regard to the type of housing desired in the Town.

All residential development in Mont Vernon needs to be respectful of the community's small town character.

The design controls of the Historic District should be maintained to preserve the Town's historic character under all circumstances related to housing in the village center area.

• Subdivisions should be designed so that pre-existing contours and natural features are preserved.
• Residential structures should never out-scale other structures around them.
• Stone walls and larger trees should be preserved through subdivision design.
• Design guidelines depicting appropriate residential design standards should be developed.

The infrastructure in the village center does not currently support in-fill development.

Summary of Action Items