After a four-hour meeting, the Nashua Planning Board rejected Newport Construction Corporation’s proposal to build an asphalt plant Thursday night.
The proposed site is one mile from downtown Nashua on Temple Street, in the heart of a residential area with low-income communities, communities of color, churches, and schools. The city’s zoning allows this kind of industrial development in this neighborhood. Nearby, there is a recycling center, as well as a granite and gravel company.
The planning board has discussed the proposed asphalt plant for about a year. Both the company and environmental activists presented traffic, pollution, and sound studies in previous meetings. Those studies were a matter of discussion on the night of the board's final vote.
John Naso, who lives in Nashua, said he strongly opposed the asphalt plant, fearing it would disrupt a peaceful neighborhood and potentially release hazardous pollutants.
“A man has the right to do what he wants with this property, but he can't take our air," he said. "They can't take our air."
Some people also expressed serious doubts about the company's commitment to environmental responsibility.
“[Newport’s] study shows the effects of only a few potential pollutants,” said Robert Feder, who lives in nearby Hollis. “But multiple other pollutants were not addressed; many of these cause cancer.”
During Thursday’s meeting, Amy Manzelli, an attorney with BCM Environmental and Land Law, said the company's study failed to explain the negative impact of an asphalt plant in that location. She also said this could make it more challenging for planning board members.
“The applicant's data seems designed to be hard to interpret,” Manzelli said. “The applicant had sufficient time to build a record supporting an approval, but he hasn’t."
According to Census Reporter, about 30% of the people who live in the neighborhood where the plant would have been located are Hispanic. The local median household income is $48,813, significantly lower than the median for Nashua as a whole. Activists have expressed concerns that it might be challenging for people who live in the affected area to learn about the proposal due to language barriers, limiting their capacity to advocate for themselves.
After around a dozen residents testified in opposition, urging the board to reject the proposal, Newport’s attorney, Andrew Prolman, responded that the company was committed to complying with New Hampshire’s environmental laws. But he also said they disagreed with the level of detail of some of the chemical monitoring required by the city.
Prolman said the plant would not have a significant negative impact on neighborhood businesses or property values. He said other Newport plants in Londonderry and in Massachusetts had helped those local economies.
“[The asphalt plants] have not impacted the actual values of the homes, single family and condos,” Prolman said.
Prolman also noted that Newport already has developments in the area, dating back to before the city launched its master plan for zone revitalization. The company's main argument in all public meetings has been that zoning rules permit this plant.
After both parties presented their cases, Adam Varley, who sits on the planning board, said they carefully considered the company's arguments, and they were considering four criteria in their decision: consistency with the master plan, environmental impacts, traffic and coexistence with the surroundings.
Alderman Dereck Thibeault said the plant proposal highlighted power imbalances within the community. He said officials voting on the project should also consider people from low-income communities, communities of color and those who might not speak English, or others who might have faced obstacles getting direct information about the proposal.
Eventually, the board voted unanimously not to allow the construction.
After the vote, people hugged and celebrated the community coming together.
“The collective efforts and activism of the Temple Street citizens have proven that their voices can be heard and their concerns taken seriously,” said Jessica Hägg, director of the Arlington Community Center, which is located a few blocks from the site.
Tim Sennott, who also lives near the proposed site, said he was grateful to people who came from outside the community to defend his neighborhood — including some people he said he rarely agreed with otherwise.
“I think that illustrates how unified Nashua was in general against this, Sennott said.
State Rep. Alicia Gregg, a Democrat who represents Nashua's Ward 7, said this is a win for communities of color.
“We have to understand that even the quietest voices are very important,” said Gregg.
But Heidi Trimarco, a staff attorney from the Conservation Law Foundation, said more needs to be done. While she viewed Thursday’s vote as a significant victory, she said New Hampshire needs a comprehensive environmental justice law — and it needs to be enforced.
Without that, she said, some communities will remain vulnerable to disproportionate environmental harm.
