attidudes toward flood management in northamptonATTITUDES TOWARD FLOOD MANAGEMENT
IN NORTHAMPTON, MASSACHUSETTS
A Case Study
Prepared by:
Carlozzi, Sinton and Vilkitis, Inc.
Amherst, Massachusetts
Written by:
Alice A. Carlozzi
James F. Palmer
Carl A. Carlozzi
Arthur Elkins
Craig L. Moore
Kim Luckenbach
Statistical Consultant:
G. 8. Oakland
For:
New England Division
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Waltham, Massachusetts
November, 1978
*The River's Reach, p. xii.
INTRODUCTION
A. Background and Authority for the Study
The purpose of this study is to examine the attitudes of citizens
and government officials toward various means for reducing flood
damage in Northampton, Massachusetts. It is part of a much larger,
ongoing series of investigations into flooding in the Connecticut
River Basin and approaches to reducing flood damage that are simul-
taneously effective, economically reasonable, environmentally sound,
and politically acceptable. A basic premise of the effort is that
flood control and mitigation of flood damage can best be realized
within the context of a comprehensive management plan for the basin's
entire flood plain. It is also recognized that the conception and
effective implementation of such a plan depend on the active coopera-
tion of the various states and localities whose well -being is directly
affected and whose actions are necessary to the successful application
of the plan.
Two documents stand out as being particularly interesting be-
cause of the wealth of information they contain and their evaluations
of alternative means to reduce flood damage. One is the 1970 Com-
prehensive Investigation Report of a federal interstate Coordinating
Committee chaired by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The
report covers investigations carried on during the 1960's. The other
is The River's Reach, published in 1976 by the New England River Basins
Commission after three years of further study. Both reports recognize
that, despite existing flood control structures on the Connecticut
River and its tributaries, flood damage in the area continues at an
unacceptably high level. The monetary cost is estimated to be over
$15,000,000 annually and still rising.* There is, of course, no way
to adequately state the human consequences for individuals and for
communities.
This particular study is part of a Connecticut River Basin Flood
Plain Management Study now in progress. Its draft Plan of Study, pre-
pared by the New England Division of the Corps of Engineers (NEDCE),
clearly indicates recognition that good technical information and
public acceptance of planned actions are both essential. This study
focuses on the latter. It is an examination of the attitudes toward
various flood management alternatives of citizens and government
officials of Northampton, Massachusetts, and of several state and
federal officials whose agency mandates include or are affected by
flood plain management activities.
1
2
Principal authority for comprehensive study of the Connecticut
River basin is found in a 1962 Resolution of the United States
Senate Committee on Public Works which states:
That the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors,
created under Section 3 of the Rivers and Harbors Act,
approved 12 June 1920 be, and is hereby, requested to
review the reports on the Connecticut River, Massachu
setts., New Hampshire, Vermont, and Connecticut, published
as House Document 455, 75th Congress, Second Session,
and other reports, with a view to determining the
advisability of modifying the existing project at the
present time, with particular reference to developing
a comprehensive plan of improvement for the basin in
the interests of flood control, navigation, hydro-
electric power development, water supply, and other
purposes, coordinated with related land resources.
Further direction is given in Section 73 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1974.
Sec. 73. (a) In the survey, planning, or design by
any Federal agency of any project involving flood protec-
tion, consideration shall be given to nonstructural
alternatives to' prevent .or reduce flood damages including,
but not limited to, floodproofing of structures; flood
plain regulation; acquisition of flood plain lands for
recreational, fish and wildlife, and other public pur-
poses; and relocation with a view toward formulating the
most economically, socially, and environmentally
acceptable means of reducing or preventing flood damages.
(b) Where a nonstructural alternative is recommended,
non- Federal participation shall be comparable to the
value of lands, easements, and rights -of -way which would
have been required of non Federal interests under
Section 3 of the Act of June 27, 1936 (Public Law
Numbered 738, Seventy- fourth Congress), for structural
protection measures, but in no event shall exceed 20 per
centum of the project costs.
The present report was prepared for the NEDCE pursuant to
Contract DACW33 -7&.C.
This summary outlines the major research findings, discussed
in detail in Chapter III, on attitudes toward flood hazard manage
ment in Northampton. (For a synopsis of chapter contents of the
entire report, see pages 14 and 15.) Information was obtained
through interviews with seven categories of people. The purpose of
the interviews was to determine the acceptability and political
feasibility of the use of two structural and seven non structural
approaches to mitigating future flood damage.
1 Structural approaches are major physical projects- -dams and
such local protection works as dikes. Non- structural approaches
are services, programs, and regulations that are required or made
available in flood hazard areas through legislation. These include
flood plain zoning, flood insurance, flood proofing, public purchase
in fee simple, public purchase of limited rights (i.e., conservation
II easements or development rights), flood warning and evacuation, and
disaster relief assistance.
B. Summary of Research Findings
General Conclusions
There appears to be a background of neutrality toward flood
hazard management policies among the general population. There is
fairly widespread approval of non- structural approaches, with
primary opposition expressed by people who expect they might be
negatively affected by regulations. There is very little support
for building major new flood control structures, in part because
they are not seen as politically feasible or fair to people whose
land would be taken, and in part for environmental reasons.
Interviews
The seven categories of people interviewed and the major gen-
eralizations applicable to each category are discussed below. It
should be noted that the substantial diversity of opinions expressed
by people within each group is not reflected in this summary.
1. Random Sample of Northampton Residents
A questionnaire was administered to a random sample of North-
ampton's population, with responses recorded in predetermined
4
categories.* Participants in the survey were asked to rate each of
the nine flood management alternatives both in terms of its effec-
tiveness and in terms of the desirability of using it. There were
marked differences of opinion among individuals, but as a whole,
the Northampton sample responded favorably toward all of the alter-
natives. The approaches rated highest for effectiveness were
disaster relief and flood warning, followed very closely by a
cluster of four alternatives dikes, flood plain zoning, flood
insurance, and dams. Fee simple purchase and partial purchase were
rated as less effective; flood proofing ranked last. None of the
alternatives was considered to be ineffective by the sample as a
whole.
The ratings for approval of the use of the various alternatives
were more variable. Disaster relief and flood warning were most
strongly approved of Flood plain zoning was the next most favored
approach, with dikes and flood insurance also receiving moderately
strong approval. Flood proofing, purchase of partial rights, and
dams received mildly favorable ratings. Fee simple purchase was the
only alternative viewed negatively; there was mild opposition to 'it.
In general, the Northampton sample tended to give higher ratings
for effectiveness and favorability to the alternatives that are
familiar to them structural /physical and non structural /legislative
approaches that are in place and in use. The relatively low approval
of dams appears to apply to possible new structures rather than to
existing ones New dams and the other less favored alternatives-
flood proofing, partial purchase, and fee simple purchase -all
entail relatively strong government control over the use of private
property by individual owners.
A summarizing question asked respondents to select the best
among five general approaches to flood hazard management (see pages
96 -97). The approaches and the per cent of respondents choosing each
are as follows:
1) Keep things as they are 33
2) Build more dams and dikes 5
3) Restrict property rights (i.e., zoning, purchase of
easements) 44
4) Offer owners financial incentives 14
5) Public purchase of property 4
*Details concerning the random sample and the questionnaire
appear on pages70 -79. The survey data is analyzed on pages 79-113.
See especially the attitude data summarized in Figures 8 and 9,
pages 90, 92.
5
2. Flood Plain Residents
A questionnaire almost identical to the one used for the North-
ampton random sample survey was also used for interviews with resi-
dents of the 100 -year flood plain area.* Attempts were made to
contact all flood plain households; 53 interviews, representing 70%
of all households, were conducted. When flood plain residents were
asked to rate the effectiveness and desirability of using each of
nine flood hazard management alternatives, their responses on the
whole were similar in pattern but somewhat more negative than those
of the random sample. The alternatives thought to be most effec-
tive were, in descending order, flood warning, dams, disaster relief,
and dikes. Flood plain zoning and flood insurance were considered
somewhat effective, but less so than the first four alternatives.
Fee simple purchase, partial purchase, and flood proofing were all
rated slightly negatively with respect to effectiveness.
In terms of approval of the use of each alternative, disaster
relief and flood warning were most strongly favored. Approval of
dikes was moderately strong. Flood insurance and dams were somewhat
favored. Flood plain zoning was weakly approved of. Flood proofing
and partial purchase were slightly opposed. Moderate opposition to
fee simple purchase was expressed; this was the most negatively
rated alternative.
In general, flood plain residents tended to rate most highly
those alternatives which were familiar and had apparently worked
well in the past, and which would provide benefits at little or no
immediate cost to themselves. The lower rated alternatives were
less familiar to the flood plain residents and would seem to restrict
their free use of their property.
Responses to the summarizing question (pages 96 -97) are as
follows:
1) Keep things as they are 25
2) Build more dams and dikes 29
3) Restrict property rights (i.e., zoning, purchase of
easements) 27
4) Offer owners financial incentives 6
5) Public purchase of property 4
Although a substantial number favored more structural works, the
majority chose no action or non structural /legislative approaches of
a moderately restrictive nature.
*Details concerning interviews with flood plain residents and the
questionnaire appear on pages 68 -70, 71 -79. Interview data is analyzed
on pages 79 -114. Attitudes toward flood management alternatives are
summarized in Figures 8 and 9, pages 90, 92.
3. State and Federal Officials
Informal interviews were held with state and federal officials
whose agencies are involved with and affected by flood plain manage-
ment policies (see pages 115 -118). In each interview, the struc-
tural versus non structural issue was addressed, as were individual
alternative approaches to flood hazard management. There was
general approval of discouraging flood plain development through
flood plain zoning as a basic approach to mitigating future flood
damage. Reservations concerning the mixture of zoning, flood
proofing, and flood insurance embodied in the federal flood insurance
program centered on (1) the possibility that the availability of
insurance would encourage rather than discourage flood plain devel-
opment, (2) failure of the insurance program to be administered so
as to prevent rebuilding in severely flood damaged areas, (3) the
possibility that local zoning could result in unconstitutional
"taking" of flood plain property, and (4) the negative effects that
additional regulations may have on future commercial /industrial
development. A positive aspect of public acquisition of high flood
hazard area property expressed was that, if done carefully in con-
junction with the Massachusetts outdoor recreation plan, public
access to streams and riparian lands could be increased. The bene-
fit of retaining agricultural lands in their present use through
purchase of development rights was noted. Building large new flood
protection works was not considered to be a politically viable
alternative.
4. Local Officials
6
Local officials, both elected and appointed, were also inter-
viewed informally. There was general approval of the level of pro-
tection provided by existing flood control structures; no support
was expressed for additional major structures. Northampton's flood
plain zoning received favorable comment, with the major reservation
about it centering on the possibility that it might not be enforced
strongly enough in the future. It was noted that future growth,
new sewer lines in flood plain areas, and different attitudes on
the part of future officials could lead to erosion of the effective-
ness of zoning regulations. Flood plain zoning was seen as con-
tributing to preservation of the river system's natural functioning
and as helping to preserve agricultural land.
Pressure to locate new industries in the flood plain was not
expected to be great, largely because other suitable sites are
available and because flood risks are known. General satisfaction
with the existing flood emergency preparations was expressed.
Elected officials (City Council members) reported little or no con-
cern among their constituents about flood management policies
except as they related to tangential issues such as increased
traffic and parking problems related to expansion of flood plain
recreational facilities.
5. Flood Plain Businesses
Representatives of the seven large businesses located in the
flood plain were interviewed (see pages 125 -129). They did not
anticipate any significant threat of flood damage, in some cases
because of long histories of operation at their present locations
without experiencing serious difficulties. For the most part, the
representatives were not very familiar with flood plain regulations
except fora very few instances when negative experiences had
occurred. Most did not object to Northampton's flood plain regula-
tions primarily because their plans for the future did not include
actions that would result in regulations being applied to them.
Some firms had taken such precautions against flooding as placing
structures higher than anticipated flood levels or providing pumps.
It was commonly felt that government regulation per se was not
desirable; businesses should be permitted to assess and take risks
as they see fit.
6. Institutional Flood Plain Occupants
The six major institutional landholders in the flood plain are
a country club, a city park, a state mental hospital, a private
college, a county fair association, and a wildlife sanctuary (see
pages 130 -134). The representatives interviewed generally expressed
no objection to flood plain regulation and had no plans which would
result in regulations being applied to them. Some enthusiastically
supported the purposes and application of flood plain regulation be-
cause of its tendency to preserve the river system.
7. Local Organization Representatives
Representatives of seven local civic organizations reported
that in recent years their groups had not held meetings or studied
flood plain management issues, nor had any of the groups taken
official organization positions on the question (see pages 134-135).
The personal opinions of the representatives toward flood hazard
management alternatives were mixed, much as among other categories
of persons interviewed.
8
C. Floods and Flood Control Structures in Northampton*
1. Flood History
Floods, whether large or small, are natural events in the life of
a river. They are instrumental in shaping the landscape, in maintain-
ing the fertility of flood plain soils, and in replenishing ground-
water supplies. Floods become harmful from the human perspective
when they damage or destroy communities that people have built in
flood prone areas.
Floods in the Connecticut Valley normally occur in the spring
or fall in association with heavy rain, melting snow, or both. The
earliest recorded major flood of the Connecticut River occurred in
March, 1639. A major flood in 1692 maintained a reputation for over
a century as the "greatest flood of the Connecticut River." Table 1
lists the five largest floods of the nineteenth and twentieth cen-
turies as recorded in Thompsonville, Connecticut.
Date
March 20, 1936
September 22 -23, 1938
May 1, 1854
November 6, 1927
August 19, 1955
Table 1
Five Largest Floods, Connecticut River
at Thompsonville, Connecticut
Peak Discharge Peak Stage
(cfs) (gage ht., ft.)
282,000
236,000
192,000
188,000
174,000
16.60
14.40
10:93
Source: 1970 Comprehensive Investigation Report, Appendix M.
A few details about these and other floods are interesting be-
cause of their particular relevance to Northampton. A flood in 1840
was notable because it was during this flood that a channel was cut
across the narrow .neck .of a large bend in the Connecticut River,
forming the present Ox -Bow. The 1854 flood was thought at the time
to be the "highest the water could possibly rise." It prompted con-
struction of the first Conz Street dike, which was overtopped and
broken through in 1862.
*The principal sources of information for this section were Chapter
41, by Lucy Benson, of The Northampton Book, a tercentenary publication
of the City of Northampton (1954); and The River's Reach, pp. 8 -15.
There were two large floods in 1869. The one in April broke the
Conz Street dike again and flooded the lower part of Main Street. The
other, in October, was called the "Pumpkin Flood" because it happened
before all the late crops had been harvested and the. Connecticut
River south of Deerfield was "jammed full of pumpkins."
The Great Flood of 1874 was a man -made disaster. The Williams-
burg dam on the Mill River had been built in 1865,.a few miles north
of the village, by valley industrialists seeking to stimulate manufac-
turing. People worried about the dam's safety from the beginning,
especially when it leaked. It gave way early on a May morning and
in almost no time the torrents of water destroyed 15 factories and
over 100 homes, killing 145 people. The water spread out over the
flood plain meadows of Florence, a natural storage area for flood
water, thus sparing the town center of Northampton. (At the time,
the Mill River flowed through Northampton center on its way to the
Connecticut.)
The November 1927 flood was caused by a long, intense rain storm
centered outside the Connecticut basin. It was notable for the sud-
denness of the water's rise. Three people were killed in Northampton
and 101 homes had to be abandoned.
The floods of March.1936 and September 1938 were both associated
with intense storms, and both affected the entire basin fairly uni-
formly. The.1936 flood reached record breaking levels up and down
the Connecticut records which stand today. It was caused by unusually
heavy snow cover melting during a period of warm weather just before
heavy rainfall began. In Northampton, this was a terribly long, drawn
out disaster that began on March 13. An ice jam at Mount Tom, where
the Connecticut cuts through the Holyoke Range, backed up the already
flooding.river. In the area, trains were wrecked, roads washed out,
and schools and factories had to shut down. Enormous chunks of ice
were deposited on the Northampton Holyoke road. After five days, the
jam started breaking up and the water began to go down, but then water
from rain to the north came. The Mill River began. rising fast -a
foot an hour at first. The flood finally crested two days later, on
the 20th of March. The Conz Street dike was again overtopped, and at
one point on. Conz Street the flood water was measured at six feet
higher than in 1927. The railroad underpass .at Main Street was more
than half full of water. Towns' in the nearby lowlands.were completely
evacuated;' hundreds of people were rescued by boat. Most people from
the flooded areas.could not go back to their homes.until the 23rd.
Not until the 31st was general traffic permitted on Mt. Tom Highway
where water had been 13 -1/2 feet deep.
Only two and a half years later, in September 1938, the Great New
England Hurricane struck, dumping rain when flood conditions were
already bad. Along the Connecticut itself, flood stages were somewhat
lower than in 1936; but new records were set on many of the tributaries
in Massachusetts and southern New Hampshire and Vermont. This.time,
1 0
the Conz Street dike held, but only because of the diligent labor of
Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) men and townspeople, some 225
workers in all. Winds of 90 miles per hour felled over 1,000 trees
in Northampton and raised 8 -foot waves on the Connecticut.
2. Flood Control Structures
Clearly, it was time and then some to provide major structural
protection against flooding. The Corps of Engineers became involved
in January 1927 when it was directed to study and make recommendations
for controlling flood hazards along several major rivers of the United
States, one being the Connecticut. Congressional approval of a flood
control plan for the Connecticut Basin calling for 20 dams and 7 local
protection works was included in the Flood Control Act of 1938 (P.L.
75 -761). Since then, 16 dams and 7 local protection works consisting
of dikes and flood -walls have been built in the basin. Three dams
and four protection works were completed by the end of 1941, and
three more protection works by 1944. The remaining 13 dams were
finished at various times ending in 1970.
Nine dams are upstream of Northampton, thereby protecting the
city. Its local protection works -6,500 feet of dike, 500 feet of
flood -wall, and a pumping station -were complete in 1941. At the same
time, the lower Mill River was diverted from its natural passage through
the city to a more westerly channel, bypassing the most heavily built
up area and emptying into the Ox -Bow. The Corps of Engineers esti-
mates that the combined effect of these structures is to reduce the
likelihood of flooding in the diked areas of the city from a flood
comparable to 1936 to about one -half of one per cent in any given
year. Or, to state the risk another way, it would require a flood
likely to occur only once in 200 years to overtop the dikes.
Other floods have occurred since these protection works were in-
stalled, but in Northampton none has approached the magnitude of the
1936 and 1938 disasters. Most notable was the 1955 flood associated
with Hurricane Diane, centered just north of Hartford. It affected
only the lower third of the Connecticut watershed causing very high
(third ranking) flood stages in Hartford but proportionately lesser
ones upstream.
D. The "Non- Structural" Issue
Dams, levees and dikes along with channel straightening, diver-
sion and deepening have been common means for people to regulate the
flows of rivers to achieve various social and economic purposes. Water
supply, hydropower and navigation were historically the values sought.
The use of these engineered works particularly as means to partially
prevent flood flows from occupying natural flood plains is a practice
that has grown over the past two centuries.
Reliance on structures for flood risk reduction is an issue sur-
rounded by controversy. Without regard to other values gained or lost,
just the hydrologic principles of how best to reduce flood probabili-
ties at any flooding level have been argued for many decades. There
are those who adhere to the belief that flood potentials should be
reduced by managing the capacity of the land through agricultural and
forestry practices to absorb and retard the discharge of water from
storms and snow melt. If structures have to be built, they should be
placed on small headwater streams. In short, manage water where it
falls on the land.
Against this argument is the knowledge that floods at 'various levels
occur even in pristine environments. Thus, if there is to be a reduc-
tion in the probable frequency or extent of flood damage, it is necessary
to structurally regulate high flows by impounding flows on main stem
channels or major tributaries. Further, it may be necessary to engineer
artificial channels by building dikes and levees or changing the shape
of natural channels.
The controversy over whether flood management policy should empha-
size upstream or downstream works is today almost moot. The ration, and
the Connecticut Basin is no exception, has elected to use eampinations
of both approaches.
Sitting counter to the classic •upstream downstream issue is the
view that the only reason we need to control floods is because` there are
human lives and capital investments on the natural flood plain that can
be damaged by floods. Remove or reduce the number of human occupants
and their capital works and there will be no real need to control floods
or to require society to recompense or reinstate those who suffer flood
damage.
Regardless of the logic of any of the arguments over flood and
flood damage regulation, application of that logic has been ;substan
tially pre empted by the character of human use of flood plains and
rivers over hundreds of years.
In the. Connecticut River Valley we now experience the results of
earlier choices about flood problems. The flood plains are occupied by
cities and farms, and dams and dikes are .built. The number of people
and the amount of investment are increasing in flood hazard areas; risks
to life and economic well -being are enlarged thereby. Yet, i,n the
periods between floods, efficiencies in private and public enterprise
are gained lowered development costs; location advantage relative to
existing and supporting economies and public works; and enjoyment of
waterside recreation and aesthetic views. Complicating this °picture
is the understanding born of amore accurate knowledge of hydrology and
ecology that the values enjoyed through .flood plain occupancy may be
deceptive and not economically real when measured against the costs of
higher future damages from inevitable floods; the present impairment of
ground water recharge; removal of high quality agricultural areas from
production; loss of natural flood regulation through wetlands destruc-
tion; and the reduction of physical and visual access for the public to
riparian lands.
12
Response to the growing dilemma has occurred at all levels of gov-
ernment. Federal actions such as the Water Resources Planning Act of
1965 and the Water Resources Development Act of 1974 authorize plan-
ning activities that should consider non structural means for reducing
flood damage. The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 provided for
flood insurance subsidies and encouraged better land use on the flood
plain through a unified national program for flood plain management.
The Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 offered opportunity for
occupants of flood plains to buy increased amounts of subsidized in-
surance, and provided further requirements of insurance holders for
improved building features to physically reduce risks from flood
damage. Furthermore, the insurance is only available in places where
the local government has adopted land use regulations limiting flood
plain development. Depending on one's view, these acts encourage
use of the flood plain or they offer an alternative to demands for
more dams and dikes by allowing those who suffer damage to recoup some
of their capital losses through insurance. Federal programs to provide
help in pre -flood evacuation of people and property, and to offer
financial relief for flood stricken areas are other efforts, to reduce
the costs of flood damage to individuals and public agencies`;
At the state level, Massachusetts has adopted policies that dis-
courage flood plain use. Laws protecting inland wetlands and laws to
encourage continuing agricultural use of land are often most "strenu
ously applied in flood plain areas.
Northampton has followed this trend by enacting a zoning ordinance
in 1975 that created a "special conservancy" district in the flood
plain.
Despite these and other public actions to discourage flood plain
occupancy and alteration of flood plain hydrologic functions, there
seems to be no convincing consensus in the Connecticut Valley that
the area should rely on non- structural approaches to flood damage
control. The issue of the abridgment of private property rights
through restrictive zoning or use of eminent domain powers underlies
arguments in all cases. This problem is unlikely to be treated simply
or immediately anywhere in the Valley or the nation. Persons already
on the flood plain express concerns for the well -being of themselves
and their property and often want the assumed security of flood protec-
tion structures.
The pure arguments for vacating the flood plain remain, but they
do not strike the balance between present social economic heeds and
flood damage control issues. Non structural approaches seem destined
to become increasingly a part of the flood management repertoire, but
the larger questions of how soon, how much, where, and who will sup-
port those approaches at what'direct and opportunity costs are not
as yet answerable.
13
E. Purpose and Methods of the Study
The basic goal of this study was to find out what the attitudes
are of a broad spectrum of people who are involved in various ways in
deciding what should be done with respect to floods and flood management
in Northampton, Massachusetts. It was assumed that their attitudes
have an important bearing on what government does or does not do about
floods and on the effectiveness with which programs are carried out."
The kinds of information sought are suggested by these questions: Do
people think there is a significant flood hazard in Northampton?
What, if anything, should government do about it? Is it better to
rely on structures such as dams 'and dikes or are there other, effective
ways to help prevent the personal., social and economic distress that
accompanies floods? What will work, and what is equitable? The'
answers to such questions should provide useful guidance to responsible
government officials with respect to both the political feasibility of
implementing alternative flood management strategies and the possible
need for fostering greater understanding of the facts and issues'in-
volved.`
A broad range of publics was interviewed- -the general citizenry,
flood plain occupants directly affected by management and regulatory
activities, government officials responsible for devising and adminis-
tering flood management programs, and representatives of selected local
organizations. In a very general sense, these populations, or.cate-
gories of people, were expected to differ one from another with': respect
to their knowledge of the subject, their interest in it, and /or their
attitudes toward specific flood management alternatives. It was also
expected that a diversity of opinion would be found within each
population.
A random sample of Northampton residents was interviewed in order
to obtain a representation of the'thinking of the general public. As
many as possible of all flood plain occupants--residents, business
people and other institutional landholders- -were interviewed, since
these are the people most directly affected by floods and by government
programs concerned with the flood plain. Representatives of some local
organizations with a general interest in public affairs were contacted
in order to find out whether or not the organizations had undertaken
studies or adopted positions on flood related issues. The personal
opinions of these individuals, as distinct from their organizational
roles, were also sought because their active participation in such
groups was assumed to indicate a relatively high level of interest in
public affairs. Interviews with local government people included both
elected and appointed officials. It is at this level where knowledge
of particular local circumstances is most intimate, where the detailed
application of many flood programs takes place, and where public re-
sponse`is perhaps most acutely felt. State and federal officials of
agencies concerned with flooding and flood plain use were interviewed
'14
to obtain their perspectives on policy choices and administrative
functions.
Interviews with flood plain residents and the random sample of
Northampton residents were structured, in that a questionnaire was
used and answers to each question were recorded in predetermined cate-
gories suitable for computer use. All other interviews were less
structured. Specific kinds of information were sought, but not neces-
sarily through an established sequence of questions. No attempt was
made to fit responses into predetermined categories.
It should be noted that the information presented here, as for
any study of attitudes, does not describe community behavior. Rather,
it describes what people perceive to be true, within the limits of
their ability and willingness to express their perceptions. The impor-
tance of this distinction and the consequences that result from it
obviously depend on the degree to which people make decisions and act
according to their expressed attitudes. Furthermore, all of the
opinions gathered, assembled, and interpreted in this study were
necessarily filtered through the complex sets of perceptive capaci-
ties and biases of the individuals who did the work.
Chapter Contents
Chapter I contains a brief description of the study area, the City
of Northampton, that is meant to serve as a framework for understanding
the issues and attitudes discussed in more detail in later chapters.
First, the city is placed within its regional context. Then the devel-
opment of the city and some general characteristics of its people are
outlined. Land use patterns and trends, especially during the latter
part of this century, are described. Special attention is given to
land uses within the flood plain. An analysis of the city's economy
is presented which includes comparisons with larger geographic areas
and prognoses for various segments of Northampton's economy. The chap-
ter concludes with brief summaries of laws and regulations which are
especially pertinent to the management of floods and flood plain uses
in the study area.
Chapter II describes the collection and statistical analysis of
survey data obtained from the census of flood plain households and
small businesses and the random sample of the city's population. The
kinds of questions used in the questionnaire and reasons for asking
them are given. The methods used for identifying the two groups to
be surveyed are stated, and an accounting is given of the numbers of
survey interviews completed, persons who refused to be interviewed, and
households that were not contacted. In the final section, data for each
15
of the two groups are presented and analyzed, and comparisons between
groups drawn.
The remainder of the interviews are described in anecdotal format
in Chapter III. For each category of persons, the substance of the
interviews is summarized and generalizations are drawn about the think-
ing of people in each category as a whole. In order of presentation,
the groups are government officials (further subdivided into federal/
state and local office holders), flood plain businesses, institutional
flood plain occupants, and local organization representatives.
Chapter IV summarizes and evaluates the research findings. Impli-
cations of the findings are suggested, and finally comments on the
effectiveness of the study itself are offered.
The Appendixes contain supplementary information which may be of
interest to some readers but was thought unnecessary to be included in
the body of the report.
I. NORTHAMPTON
A. Regional Setting
1. Physical Setting
Northampton lies about midway in the Massachusetts section of the
Connecticut River Valley. Like the west bank towns to the north of the
city, it shares the characteristic of encompassing the flood plain of
the Connecticut River along its western boundary and the foothills of
the Berkshire mountains in its eastern portion. Historically, it was
this combination of river flats and steep hills that produced the de-
velopment of agriculture and industry. Farms were built upon the allu-
vial soils of the valley that are composed of the reworked glacial
materials that overlie the lake bottom deposits of pre Pleistocene Lake
Hitchcock. Streams tumbling from the Berkshires provided sites for
water powered industry which historically developed at much the same
time as agriculture. Northampton shares these characteristics with
the mid valley towns of Hatfield, Whately and Deerfield more so than
towns farther to the north. There the flood plains of the Connecticut
River are narrowed considerably by the intervention of the hills of the
Pocumtuck range. Still farther north where the river flows through
the towns of Northfield, Gill and Greenfield, it is entrenched between
bluffs which are sufficiently high to contain its flood flows.
South of Northampton the Connecticut River Valley is intersected
by the Holyoke Range on the eastern side of the river and Mt. Tom on
the western side. This low range of steep hills, oriented roughly
east to west across the valley floor, has provided a significant
barrier that has effectively impeded the coalescing of development
taking place in Northampton with that of the Springfield metropolitan
area south of the hills. South of the Holyoke range the flood plain
area is mostly on the eastern side of the Connecticut River. There,
agriculture in the towns of South Hadley, Holyoke and Chicopee was
historically and to a certain extent still is important in the land use
and economics of the region.
This physical setting has greatly influenced the character of land
use and development throughout the region. North -south transportation
routes became the dominant means of transport and communication. The
Berkshire mountains to the west were a land barrier to westward travel.
Rail transportation from Northampton on an east -west orientation had
to move to the valleys of the Chicopee and Westfield Rivers south of
Northampton connecting Pittsfield, Springfield and Boston, or to the
Deerfield and Millers Rivers north of Northampton connecting Albany,
N.Y., and Boston. This is as true today as it was historically. The
16
n
CO NNECTI CUT
17
Fter.1. Corime RNER. VALL5Y aMMUNI-M5 tN 14A5SAC-1405S-115.
18
major east -west highway routes also lie north (Route 2) and south (the
Massachusetts Turnpike) of Northampton. The hill complex of Mt. Tom
and the Holyoke Range is still effective in preventing a joining of
development in the Springfield portion of the valley with that to the
north of the hills.
2. Social- Economic Setting
Over the years Northampton has developed into a commercial and
governmental center for the mid valley region. The city is the seat
of Hampshire county government and has the only substantial industrial
base within the mid valley. Not until traveling to Greenfield and
Turners Falls does one encounter another analogous center serving
Franklin County in the northern portion of the Connecticut River Valley
region.
Over the past several decades Northampton's links with the town of
Amherst have grown as transportation and commercial strips have devel-
oped east from Northampton through Hadley to Amherst. Also there is
a strong affinity between Amherst, South Hadley and Northampton because
of the presence of Smith, Amherst, Hampshire and Mt. Holyoke Colleges
and the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. These institutions
play a key role in the economy and society of the communities.
Northampton continues to have a place as an agricultural producer
along with the enclave of towns on both sides of the river which share
the broadest section of the Connecticut River flood plain. Throughout
this mid valley region, communities have thus become linked through
common agricultural enterprise, common cultural and educational empha-
ses, and, to an increasing extent, a common population which commutes
freely within the central valley to the colleges and university and to
a lesser extent to commerce and industry. Waves of immigrants from
Europe and Canada have contributed to the richness and variety of
experience for the several towns. As an outgrowth of this mixture of
social elements, the attitudes and life patterns of the residents often
exhibit the differences between the life style of those who reflect the
intellectual and open experiences of the education community and those
who are influenced by the rural and ethnic traditions, particularly as
they are reflected in recent immigrants and their first generation
offspring.
The social heterogeneity of the central valley thus produces
sometimes a sharp political distinction between towns and sub sections
of towns concerning critical matters such as land use and social welfare
programs. Yet, despite these often strong points of contention, there
is a general consciousness of regional identity. With the geographic
intermixing of populations from all backgrounds as it has occurred in
the past two decades, there is a growing common awareness of the special
20
qualities of life in the valley and a beginning of a sense of purpose
toward preserving the character and diversity of the physical and
social environments.
B. Development and General Characteristics*
1. The River's Influence
Settlement of Northampton began in 1654 in the area of what are
now Pleasant, King, Market, Bridge and Hawley Streets. Permanent
settlement of Florence and Leeds, Northampton's two other town centers,
began after the Revolutionary War. The significance of the Connecticut
River and its tributary Mill River for the successful establishment
and development of these communities was great indeed. Northampton
began, as was common for pioneering centers, with its livelihood
heavily dependent on subsistence agriculture. Very soon the export
to coastal areas of agricultural products principally wheat at first-
began to supply income needed to buy products not locally available and
for the accumulation of investment capital. All of this was based on
the rich soils of the Connecticut Valley, product of the river's work
on the land surface.
Fish from the rivers was an important part of the diet of the
settlers and was also exported, as far away as the West Indies and
Europe.
Power derived from the flow of Mill River was a necessary element
in the development of Leeds and Florence into manufacturing centers.
The Connecticut River was the major route for transporting goods to and
from Northampton until railroads largely took over this role in the
latter half of the nineteenth century.
2. Agriculture
Agriculture flourished on the flats of the Connecticut Valley in
Massachusetts and Connecticut. The quality of the soil, the level
terrain, and the moderate valley climate make the area eminently suit-
able for farming. Diversification of crops allowing for local self
sufficiency was the rule at the beginning. Specialization and cash
crops developed later. In Northampton and other parts of Hampshire
*The major source for historical.information in this section was
The Northampton Book.
21
County, sheep were raised to produce wool for the mills in Leeds and
Florence. Vegetables and fruit became important, along with tobacco.
These crops were sold regionally and beyond. In the early part of
this century, "Hadley asparagus" was offered on the menus of fine
restaurants in New York and Europe. Local tobacco became a highly
specialized crop with the introduction in 1901 of cheesecloth netting
over the plants, resulting in shade -grown tobacco used to wrap cigars.
In Northampton itself, the importance of agriculture relative to
the total economy declined sharply during the 19th century, partly
because of the increasing emphasis on industry, education, and other
services.
The Three County Fair
Agricultural fairs developed as an ancillary activity. They pro
vided not only a showcase for the display of farm- related products, they
were also entertainment and social occasions of the first rank. The
Hampshire, Franklin and Hampden Agricultural Society sponsored its
first fair in 1819 at Main Street in Northampton. Over the next forty
years or so, the fair was held a few times in West Springfield (Hampden
County) or Greenfield (Franklin County), but it was essentially a North-
ampton event. It is the oldest continuous fair in the United States.
When the fair outgrew its Main Street location it was moved for a
time to North Street, a somewhat unsatisfactory place because it was not
central enough. For a few years the events and displays were divided
between the two locations, but this was not a popular solution. Fi-
nally, just before the turn of the century, a race track and grandstand
at Fair Street were bought by the Fair Association. Considerably
expanded and improved, this is the site of the present Three County
Fairgrounds.
A wide variety of entertaining events has been offered, including
plowing contests, balloon ascensions, horse -auto races, and once even
a wedding. However, horse races have been a mainstay from the begin-
ning. Pari mutuel betting was first permitted on the fair's horse races
in 1943. This has proved to be very beneficial to the fair financially,
providing a much needed source of funds that has, among other things,
allowed for improvements and additions to the facilities used for
agriculturally- oriented activities.
3. Industry
Leeds and Florence started out with economies based on agriculture
and home industries. An early trend toward industry was apparent by
1800. Soon a lumber mill opened in Leeds, then a woolen mill, then a
22
cotton mill. Beginning about 1820, the number of mills in Leeds and
Florence increased more rapidly and the variety of products prolifer-
ated. By 1855 there were 74 water powered mills which employed 10% of
all labor in the Massachusetts section of the. Connecticut Valley and
produced 10% of all value in that area. The market area for some of
the goods was at least nationwide. Products included wool, cotton,
and silk fabrics; buttons; furniture; caskets; paper; ink; sewing
machines; farm tools; baskets; cutlery; brushes of all kinds; oil and
gas cooking and heating stoves; wagons; clocks; and cardboard con-
tainers, primarily for use by the fabric manufacturers. Several
mechanical and other innovations were introduced in Northampton, per-
mitting some "firsts" in American manufacturing- -first broadcloth,
first silk twist thread acceptable for use with sewing machines, and
first mechanically produced cloth- covered buttons.
Water was virtually the only source of power used until the
introduction of steam power in 1857. Conversion was fairly rapid and
was accentuated by the 1874 flood of the Mill River.
Concurrent with Northampton's heyday as a manufacturing center was
the existence of an active railroad system which provided the city with
a regional transportation network and with east -west lines capable of
handling freight traffic. Also, the change from privately held busi-
nesses to corporate structures experienced throughout the nation per-
mitted a new ease and flexibility of capital formation. However, the
latter proved to be a mixed blessing for the city. In some instances
the availability of outside capital and the spread of financial risk
brought about by corporate mergers has helped maintain businesses in
Northampton. Despite name changes and alterations of product lines to
suit contemporary markets, a few are located still at the original
mill sites. One example is the Pro -Brush Division of Vistron Corpora-
tion. A manufacturer of plastic products and of brushes, it is a
direct descendant of the Florence Manufacturing Company, founded in
1866 and maker of a variety of products including their famous hair-
brushes of superior quality and reputed to be "completely waterproof."
In other cases, local plants became in effect branch facilities of
larger entities and were readily expendable during periods of adverse
economic conditions. The silk industry is a case in point. It had
been the dominant industry in Northampton from after the Civil War
through World War I. Following the latter war, the silk industry as
a whole underwent a period of substantial retrenchment. The Northampton
"branches," whose corporate base was in Connecticut, were closed.
4. Other Institutions
Education has become one of the more important elements of the
life of Northampton. The town's first school was opened in 1664 when
there were about sixty families. Other public schools were soon added
in various parts of the town, and shortly after 1800 even girls were
23
provided with public schooling. Over the years, a number of innovative
or specialized schools were founded, most of them closing after a time.
One that lasted is Clarke School for the Deaf, chartered in 1867.
Here, the emphasis was on oral speech and lip reading, rather than
communication by hand signs. It was also here that Alexander Graham
Bell made his contributions to education of children with impaired
hearing. He was particularly instrumental in developing training for
their teachers. In addition to teaching children and their teachers,
Clarke School also conducts related research.
Smith College was chartered in 1871 and received its first stu-
dents in 1875. It was the first full- fledged women's college in New
England. Initial funding and inspiration came from Sophia Smith, a
resident of Hatfield. In her view, quality education for women would
contribute to their eventual equality with men in terms of wages, intel-
lectual achievement, and influence. In addition to the personal en-
richment of the students, society as a whole would benefit. The
college grew in size, breadth of curriculum, prestige and endowment
so that it has for many years been a highly respected institution.
Its downtown location is symbolic of the college's longstanding tra-
dition of participation in public affairs by administrators, faculty,
and students.
Northampton has three medical institutions of regional signifi-
cance. Northampton State Hospital opened in 1858 in response to press-
ing need for a mental hospital in western Massachusetts. It was
intended to be one of the more advanced institutions for its time,
including outdoor exercise, attempts at occupational therapy, and
weekly religious services. The physical plant has grown considerably
and approaches to treatment have changed over the years. The rela-
tively recent de- emphasis on treatment in large institutional settings
has effectively curtailed the hospital's growth, although it remains
a needed facility and, incidentally, a place of employment for many
Northampton residents.
The two other medical institutions are Cooley Dickinson Hospital,
offering general patient care and other services to the area, and the
Veterans Administration Hospital in Leeds.
5. Government
Northampton was originally governed by a Town Meeting to which
were delegated all local governing powers authorized by colonial law.
It soon became apparent that a more orderly procedure at Town Meetings
was needed, so a Moderator and Townsmen (later Selectmen) were chosen
to act as chairman and present subjects for discussion to the meeting.
In addition, a number of public offices were established, forming the
beginnings of a Town Administration.
24
In 1883 a change was made in governmental structure that went
into effect the following year. Northampton was incorporated as a
city governed by an elected mayor, board of aldermen and common council.
One alderman and three councilmen were chosen from each of the seven
wards. Other elected officials included the city's clerk, treasurer,
school committee, and library trustees. Various other officials and
boards were appointed by the mayor and council police and fire
chiefs, tax collector, water commissioner, superintendent of streets,
boards of public works and health, and others.
The city charter was revised, after much agitation for reform, in
1955. The Board of Aldermen was eliminated, having become somewhat of
an anachronism. Northampton was at the time one of only a handful of
cities in the country retaining a two chamber council. The present
city council has nine members, one from each ward and two elected at
large. Also, some changes in the administrative structure were made.
Nearly all of the departments are now headed by a board or commission
(i.e., city planning, public works, recreation, conservation) or chief
administrator (police and fire departments) appointed by the mayor and
city council. The school committee is still elected separately, as in
all Massachusetts cities and towns.
The city council is final determinor of departmental expenditures,
except that it cannot reduce the amount set by the school committee
for education.
County Seat
From 1662 to 1812, the Hampshire County courts and shire meetings
met one year in Northampton and the next in Springfield. Hampden
County was organized in 1812, with Springfield designated seat of the
county government. In the same year, Northampton became the permanent
Hampshire County seat. Its courts and other county offices are housed
almost entirely in Northampton's central business district, with most
of them located in the court house.
6. Population
From first settlement until about 1830, the number of people in
Northampton increased at a more or less steady rate. During that
entire period, the enumerated population consisted almost exclusively
of Yankee stock. Tables 2 and 3 show that there was a period of very
rapid population increase between the 1840's and about 1900.* The
*The data in the two tables are not entirely comparable for this
period because the years of enumeration are different and because the
Foreign Born
Year Population N
1800 2,190
1810 2,631
1820 2,854 13 .5
1830 3,613 43 1.2
1855 5,801 1,376 23.7
1875 11,108 2,817 25.4
1885 12,896 3,354 26.0
1895 16,746 4,180 25.0
1905 19,957 4,942 24.8
Source: Derived from The Northampton Book, pp. 332 -336. Figures for
1800 -1830 are from the U.S. Census. Figures for 1855 -1905 are from the
Massachusetts Decennial census. 1865 was omitted because of transitory
shifts attributable to the Civil War.
Year
1840
1850
1860
1870
1880
1890
1900
1910
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
*Not available.
Source: U.S. Census.
25
Table 2
Population of Northampton, 1800 -1905, with
Number and Percent Foreign Born
Table 3
Population and Percent Change
for Northampton, 1840 -1970
Population Percent Change
3,750
5,278
6,788
10,160
12,172
14,990
18,643
19,431
21,956
24,381
24,794
29,063
30,058
29,664
+40.7
+28.6
+49.7
+19.8
+23.2
+24.4
4.2
+13.0
+11.0
1.7
+17.2
3.4
1.3
26
proportion of foreign born persons rose to almost 24% of the city's
population by. 1855, a level that was maintained beyond the end of the
century. These were immigrants from Europe and Canada. The single
most numerous group consistently came from Ireland: 913 persons born
in Ireland were counted in 1855, 1,745 in 1885, and 1,623 in 1905.*
The ratio of females to males was about 3 to 2, probably caused in
part by the Irish dowry system which made it nearly impossible for many
poor Irish women to ever marry at home. Also, there was a market for
their services in America as household servants and factory workers.
Women and girls were cheaper to hire than men. Substantial but much
smaller numbers of immigrants also came from Germany, Great Britain,
and Canada, with French speaking people predominating among the
Canadians throughout the period.
In 1885, the number of Polish people was listed as three. The
count increased to 122 in 1895, 586 in 1905, and 1,107 in 1915. Among
Polish people, men outnumbered women by about 3 to 2 in 1905 and about
6 to 5 in 1915. The explanation for this disparity appears to lie
in the fact that men often came from New York to work as contract
laborers, and many were too poor to bring their families with them.
First the men saved money to bring the women from Poland. Then, with
the men continuing to work as farm hands, the women and children worked
a tenant share. The goal was to buy farmland of their own, and in this
many succeeded. By the time of World War II, about four fifths of all
Northampton farms were owned by Polish immigrants or their descendants.
The swift change in the ethnic character of Northampton seems
remarkable enough when one realizes that for several decades about a
quarter of the people came from foreign countries. However, the mag-
nitude of social change is even better understood when the nationality
of the parents of Northampton residents is considered, for it is
generally accepted that children of immigrants tend to absorb some
of the home country traditions and, to some extent, the language of
their parents. In 1885, 54% of Northampton residents were native
born with at least one foreign -born parent. The proportion in 1895
was 58 With the slowing down of immigration early in the twentieth
century, these proportions fell, of course. The 1970 U.S. Census
indicates that in that year only 5.9% were foreign born, and only
amount of error in the sources used (U.S. Census and Massachusetts
Decennial) may not be the same. The Massachusetts figures are gen-
erally considered the more accurate for that time. The numbers of
foreign -born persons may have been undercounted. Most were people of
the lower social stratum which it is suspected were commonly less
accurately counted.
*Note that these figures are cumulative to an unknown extent. That
is, a person counted among the 1,623 in 1905 may also have been counted
in earlier censuses.
ri
1
j
30.0% were native with at least one foreign -born parent. Among the
latter group, people of Polish heritage were most numerous, comprising
8.2% of the total population. Canadians were the second largest group
(7.1 followed by the Irish (3.6 People designated in the 1970
census as being of Spanish heritage made up 1.6% of the population.
They are a relatively new addition to the city's ethnic composition,
most having come from Puerto Rico, often after stopovers in larger
cities, within the last twenty -five years. Negroes and other races
account for only 1% of the population, following a long- standing
pattern of very low representation.
Along with the decrease in immigration and the end of the manu-
facturing boom came a substantial decrease in population growth (see
Table 3). The figures for the twentieth century indicate a rather
stable community growing at a modest pace. The fluctuations in percent
of population change appear to be consistent with historical events
such as the depression of the 1930's and the rural -to -urban internal
migration associated with World War II. National trends in birth rate
are also reflected- -for example, the "baby boom" following World War II
and the tendency beginning in the 1960's toward fewer children per
woman. However, comparison with growth rates for Massachusetts and the
United States suggest that local circumstances are largely responsible
for the trend in Northampton since 1950 (see Table 4).
Population Characteristics: Northampton,
Massachusetts, and the United States
Characteristic Northampton Massachusetts U.S.
Percent population change:
1940 to 1950
1950 to 1960
1960 to 1970
Median family income, 1969
Percent of families with income
below poverty level, 1970
Median age in years
Percent Negro and other races, 1970
Percent foreign born, 1970
Percent native with foreign
parent(s) 1970
Source: U.S. Census
27
Table 4
17.2 8.7 14.5
3.4 9.8 18.5
-1.3 10.5 13.2
$10,180 $10,835 $9,590
4.4
30.6
1.0
5.9
30.0
6.2 10.7
29.0 28.1
3.7 12.5
8.7 4.7
24.6 11.8
28
Median income in Northampton is below that of the state but above
the national figure, while the city's percent of families with income
below the officially defined poverty level is well below the state
and national rates. Taken together, these figures suggest a modestly
prosperous city unburdened with large -scale poverty problems. The
median age is relatively high. A major influence here is the presence
of two large health care institutions the Veterans Administration
Hospital and Northampton State Hospital.
C. Land Use
This section of the report provides a brief profile of the charac-
teristics of land use and land use change in the City of Northampton
over the past approximately two and a half decades. A general descrip-
tion of land use in the city is presented, followed by a more detailed
analysis of land use on the flood plains of the Connecticut and Mill
Rivers. The principal purposes of this section are to identify signifi-
cant factors in Northampton which have tended to influence land use con-
version (especially on the flood plain) and to interpret those factors
so as to identify land use trends that may affect the future management
of flood plain and flood prone lands within the City.
1. General Land Use Features of Northampton
The terrain of Northampton ranges from the moderately steep
Berkshire hills of the west to the flat flood plains of the Mill and
Connecticut Rivers in the central and eastern portion of the city.
Major development to date has occurred in the middle section of the
community below the steepest part of the Berkshires and, for the most
part, above the flood plain of the Connecticut River. The pattern of
development, historically and at the present time, seems to reflect
the strong influence of topography and hydrologic conditions. To the
west, slopes are steep enough and soils thin enough that development
does not occur. Difficulty of the terrain coupled with the uncertain-
ties of onsite waste water disposal through septic systems has effec-
tively restricted most forms of urban land uses; extension of sewer
lines into this area in the future can be expected to stimulate sig-
nificant amounts of new development. Thus the dominant characteristic
of the western portion of the city is one of forested slopes inter-
spersed with small streams and pockets of wetlands.
The Connecticut River flood plain has historically been relatively
undeveloped, being used primarily for agriculture. During the last two
or three decades the agricultural economy of Massachusetts has declined,
resulting in abandonment of some of the less economically viable farms
from production, both on and off the flood plain. Overall, about 16,000
acres of the almost 23,000 acres of Northampton lands are undeveloped.
L.
29
Of that 16,000 acres, 3,700 are within flood plain or flood prone
areas.
Over the past 20 -plus years, there has been urban land use develop-
ment within the city, mostly in open and unused areas that were contained
in the historically developed midsection of the city. Today there is
little remaining land available for future development in the midst of
the urbanized areas or immediately adjacent to them. Large tracts of
public and quasi public land, including the Northampton State Hospital,
Smith College, Arcadia Wildlife Sanctuary, Smith Agricultural School,
Look Park, Northampton Reservoir watershed lands and the Veterans Admin-
istration Hospital have also contributed to the confinement of the urban
development pattern.
A comparison of land use types and their respective acreages is
shown in Table 5, which indicates land use changes between 1952 and 1972
as interpreted from aerial photographs by William P. MacConnell of the
University of Massachusetts, Department of Forestry and Wildlife Manage-
ment. One of the major factors which has produced relative stability
in Northampton's land use situation over the past two and a half decades
has been its slow population growth (see Table 3 above, p. 20). This
slow growth trend for Northampton is expected to continue. Table 6
shows population projections from 1975 to 2000 provided by the Lower
Pioneer Valley Regional Planning Commission. Total population is ex-
pected to increase to approximately 36,000 by the year 2000. For com-
parison purposes, the table also indicates the projected increases for
some neighboring towns in Hampshire County. The City of Northampton
Planning Department identifies four future demands that could influence
the land use effects of the city's growth. These are (1) the demand
for further decentralization of commercial activity from downtown
Northampton to shopping centers on the periphery of the city; (2) the
demand for increased suburban residential development; (3) the demand
for multi family residential development in response to changing living
patterns at the several colleges and the University of Massachusetts,
all of which are within commuting distance of Northampton; and (4) the
demand for sand and gravel from extensive deposits within the city.
Projections of potential land use changes based on existing
zoning appear in Table 7. Since the flood plain is protected by the
"special conservancy" provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, most of the
conversion of open space land will occur in the western hilly parts of
the city, assuming the extension of water and sewer services.
Land Use
30
Table 5
Land Use Changes in Northampton,
1952 -1972
Acres
1952 1972
Forest Land 12,552 12,271
Agriculture or open land 6,595 4,742
Wet land 1,121 990
Mining, waste disposal* 226
Urban land 2,381 4,044
Outdoor recreation* 376
Grand Total 22,649 22,649
*Differences in tabulation are due to the fact that these types
were classed as open land in the 1952 aerial photo interpretation.
Source: MacConnell (1973).
2. Land Use Changes on the Flood Plain
and Flood Prone Areas
The principal land use within the flood plain of Northampton re-
mains agricultural. Of the approximately 4,700 acres of agricultural
land in the town in 1972, slightly over 3,000 acres was in the flood
plains of the Connecticut and Mill Rivers. Future projections of land
use conversions on the flood plain areas of the city must take into
consideration the 1975 changes in the Zoning Ordinance which established
a special conservancy in flood plain areas. This law restricts the
building of new homes and other structures.
Since 1952 the use of land on the flood plain of the Connecticut
River has remained relatively stable. The notable major exception to
this was the construction in the early 1960's of Interstate 91 that
occupies about 550 acres of flood plain land, most of which was con-
verted from agriculture to highway rights of way. Figures 3 and 4
offer a comparison of land uses on the flood plain in 1952 and in 1972.
jl
N
0
I
v)
.r-
S-
0
.0
0)
S
b
rS
0
E
tc5
.o S
o
F- S
S.
O
V)
O
r
U
a)
•n
0
S-
0
r-
CZ
r
C3.
0
C1.
LC)
C31
r
LC)
O
C31
O
C
O1
LO
rs
Cs)
N
W
0.
0
d
O
M
M
co
CT
co
N
O
LO
N
CO
Cr)
L�
O
m
N
Ch
r
N
co
ct
t0
lO
01
N
a) aJ
C.T 0)
a) a) r0
.n s .O .0
U N 0
Z o CG Z
L.L1
Q
31
O O O O
n M l O
CO
CO 1- ct GI
Cr) r--
r— Lt) 01 1•
N r'•' N r
O O O O
CT 0 01
CS
A
1` 1••. Ct Cr)
Cr) r
r 0 LC) Cr)
N N Cr) CO
0 O 0 0
0 CO L) LO
N fV M CO
n n w
1` t\ d' CO
M r--
Ct 01 r 00
O M O N O M O
CO LO N LC)
Cr P. N W
A q A I1
Lt) l0 c4' CO
CO LO CO N. LO
0 O M O (0 0 00
LO CO n <ID
r O C
w
'Cr 1 .0 Cr CO
Cr) r
h. l0 N. l0
M 1.0 Ch CO
O C O OOi
Lt) N 01 O
n a el
M L0 00 M
M r
LO 07 'Gr' LO Lf)
N r
r N O LL)
LM r u) N
CO O N. CO
L0 M CO N
N 4-
w a) 0)
S- C S. C S. C
EV E EU
7- LiJ
G o W Z o M Z
_.1 LL.
C] I-
cC KC
S
a)
U
S-.
0
N
Use
32
Table 7
Potential Future Land Use
Based on Existing Zoning
Estimated Acres Used
1990 At Full Development
Residential
Urban 900 2,000
Suburban 1,200 2,300
Rural 300 4,600
Commercial
General Business 150 250
Neighborhood Business 20 150
Industrial 350 1,000
Institutional 550 1,200
Roads 1,300 2,800
Open Space* 18,064 8,534
Total 22,834 22,834
*Includes agriculture, water area, and undeveloped land.
Source: Northampton Comprehensive Plan (1972) as revised by the 1975
Zoning Ordinance.
ri
H
ri
ri
33
p
1
34
r1
35
Location of major utilities is important to flood plain issues in
two ways. First, provision of sewer and water services classically en-
courages higher density of development. Second, the capital value of
the services plus the value of development which they stimulate raises
the potential dollar value of flood damage. Another important considera-
tion is the risk of damage to utilities from flood waters and resultant
land shifts that could produce leaks in gas, water and sewer lines and
electrical short -outs. All of these may cause post -flood fire or
health problems. With the exception of sewers, all areas of the flood
plain are adequately served by major utilities. Where sewers do not
exist the Northampton Planning Department reports that persons living
in unserviced areas have petitioned the town to extend sewer service.
High ground water tables in the flood plain area have interfered with
effective working of septic systems in those areas.
Some Specific Future Possible Land Use
Changes on the Flood Plain Area
Despite the recent zoning ordinance provisions protecting the
flood plain and flood prone areas of Northampton, there are several
potential situations that might produce development growth in those
areas.
The city, in cooperation with the state of Massachusetts, is con-
sidering the construction of a regional ice skating rink on the prop-
erty of the Three County Fairgrounds that lies within the flood plain
of the Connecticut.
The recently constructed Ox-Sow Marina is considering an expansion
of its facilities and is currently engaged in enlarging the area of its
paved parking lot.
In the flood plain of the Mill River there are two possibilities
that may influence flood plain development. The first of these is the
anticipated construction of an interceptor sewer line down the Mill
River Valley from Williamsburg through Northampton to its treatment
plant. This would offer opportunity for lateral connectors to areas
of the flood plain not presently served by central wastewater manage-
ment facilities. Second, The Pyramid Company of Hadley, Massachusetts
(.a subsidiary of The Pyramid Companies of DeWitt, New York) recently
purchased 97,3 acres of land in the meadows section of Florence:. This
land, entirely located on the flood plain of the Mill River; is cur
rently used for agriculture.. It is presently zoned for residential
use. A wetlands permit and a zoning change would be required for any
substantial other development by the Pyramid Companies, a corporation
that,has specialized in the building of shopping malls.
36
D. Economic Base
1. Introduction
For many statistical purposes, Northampton is included in the
Springfield Chicopee- Holyoke Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area
(SMSA) and Labor Market Area; geographically, however, the City is
identified with and more similar in character to towns in Hampshire
County. Despite the existence of the I -91 north -south transportation
corridor along Northampton's eastern border, which offers commutability
and access to the highly urbanized area to the south, the City's
predominantly small -town character, both economic and social, dictates
that Hampshire County is the most appropriate economic boundary for
the region.
Wherever it has been possible, data collected for this study are
specific to Northampton; the data were then juxtaposed with either
Hampshire County or SMSA data, or a combination. When specific North-
ampton figures were unavailable, Hampshire County figures were used,
since the characteristics of the county closely resemble those of
Northampton.
The key to understanding and interpreting the Northampton economic
base, as will be shown, is the city's high reliance on service -based
enterprises, including education.
2. Historic Trends
Early settlement in Northampton, as in other Connecticut Valley
communities, was the result of its proximity to the river and its
tributaries. The soils were especially suitable for agriculture and the
rivers provided for the transportation of locally grown goods to other
parts of the region.
The first manufacturing activities, again spurred by the presence
of the rivers, were sawmills and gristmills. Other industries devel-
oped to support the increasing settlement in the area. The Mill River,
in particular, attracted many factories which produced a broad mix of
goods.
When railroads replaced river transportation c. 1865, the area
rapidly became more industrialized. Many of the early industries such
as the manufacture of cutlery, caskets and coffins, and paper, still
exist in Northampton. By the end of World War I, small -scale manufac-
turing had replaced agriculture as the predominant source of employment.
In the 1930's, when low -cost labor induced the migration of industry to
the South from the Northeast, Northampton experienced a decline in its
manufacturing base.
The growth of Northampton as an educational center, however, had
begun as early as 1832, and by the mid- 1940's the number and size of
its educational institutions had a significant impact on the City's
economy. At present, Smith College, the Clarke School for the Deaf,
l Williston- Northampton School, and several others are responsible for
much of the economic character of Northampton.
fi
1
37
3. Economic Base Analysis
An analysis of Northampton's economy requires the examination of
a variety of economic and demographic factors at several different time
periods. The dynamics of the economic mix are especially important if
the analysis is to have any usefulness in identifying future trends. It
is also important to identify those economic trends which occur outside
the city's boundaries but have an impact on the local economy.
Location Quotient Analysis
One type of examination of the city's economy can be made through
the use of location- quotient analysis, which identifies the relative
concentration of a particular good or service within the area under
study. Location quotient analysis begins with the assumption that if
a given region produces goods in proportion, in terms of employment, to
the amount of that good produced at the national, or larger regional,
level, then the region under study is producing just enough of the
commodity to be self sufficient. However, if employment in a particular
industry is, for example, three times the proportion of employment in
that industry at the national or larger regional level, then it can be
assumed that the region is specializing in that industry and will export
about two thirds of its output. Or a community may show a proportion
of employment less than the proportion of national or larger regional
employment in a particular industry; in that case it can be assumed
that the region is importing the particular product or service from
.other regions to satisfy local demand.
To calculate a location quotient (LQ) for a particular industry,
the national employment figure for each industry in the region is
divided by total national industrial employment. Multiplying the re-
sulting proportion by the size of the regional labor market yields a
bench mark figure which would indicate that the region is self
sufficient in terms of the product in question. The actual proportion
of the local labor force employed in the production of that good, com-
pared with the bench mark figure, indicates the degree to which the
region either exports or imports the product.
38
There are a number of criticisms of this technique, but LQ analy-
sis remains a fast and reasonably accurate way of looking at the
structure of a local economy, for indicating the concentration in a
particular industry, and for estimating exports and imports of a good
or service.
Table 8 presents location quotients based on employment concentra-
tions for Northampton and Hampshire County, 1970 and 1975; Hampshire
County and the United States, 1965 and 1970; and for Northampton and
the United States, 1970. The unavailability of data precluded the
application of the technique to all three area relationships for all
three time periods. In addition, because employment figures used were
obtained from different sources, comparability may be open to question.
However, the analysis does yield a relatively good first appraisal of
the city's economy.
A comparison of the proportion of Northampton's employment in a
particular industry'to the proportion in Hampshire County provides an
indication of the relationship of Northampton to the surrounding county
towns. Agriculture, mining, services and transportation, communications,
and utilities industries make up Northampton's export base; that is, the
city provides goods and services in these industries to other towns
within the county. Wholesale and retail trade and manufacturing activi-
ties must be imported. The proximity of the construction and finance
and insurance and real estate industries to an LQ of 1.0 indicates that
the city is self sufficient in these goods and services relative to
the county.
Several trends are apparent from Table 8. In agriculture, 1970,
Northampton appeared to have a relatively higher proportion of employ-
ment than the United States, while Hampshire County showed self
sufficiency. The LQ of 1.25 in 1970 and 1.5 in 1975 for Northampton
relative to Hampshire County indicates that the city serves as an agri-
cultural market for the region, and that the trend increased in the five
year period. A great deal of the mining and quarrying activity within
the county is concentrated in Northampton, as shown in the table.
In addition, while Hampshire County apparently imports its con-
struction needs, Northampton essentially provides for its own needs
within the county, although this self- sufficiency declined somewhat,
since most of the major construction projects of the time period were
completed by 1975.
Both Northampton and Hampshire County show relative self-
sufficiency in manufacturing when compared with the United States in
1970; but declines in the county as a whole from 1965 -1970, and in
Northampton relative to Hampshire County, 1970 -1975, support the
indication that manufacturing in general within the regional economy
has declined.
Agriculture 1.5 1.25 1.33 .97 1.16
Mining 1.8 .88 .077 .086 .15
Construction .96 1.3 .95 .73 .70
Manufacturing .82 .96 1.02 1.06 1.13
L. I
Wholesale
i Retail Trade .73 1.35 1.31 .97 .77
J Finance, Insurance,
n
Real Estate 1.14 1.2 .59 .49 .48
L Services 1.57 .48 .69 1.45 1.65
ri Transportation,
Communications
Utilities 1.6 2.3 1.12 .49 .49
t I
Industry
39
Table 8
Location Quotients, 1965, 1970, 1975*
Northampton- Northampton- Hampshire County
Hampshire County U.S. U.S.
1975 1970 1970 1970 1965
*The formula for location quotients is: local employment in industry x
regional employment in industry x total local employment
divided by total regional employment
Note: An. LQ greater than one (1) indicates the degree to which the local
economy (relative to the larger area) specializes in that industry or is
producing more than it consumes locally. An LQ less than one (1) sug-
gests that the area does not meet its own consumption requirements and,
therefore, must import that good or service from the outside area. An
LQ of one (1) means that the area produces just enough to meet its own
consumption requirements.
Source:. U.S. Census of Wholesale Trade, 1973 Survey of County Business
Patterns.
40
Wholesale and retail trade has declined significantly in Northampton,
down from 1.35 to .726, while the county is more nearly approaching
self sufficiency. This only indicates, however, that the relative con-
centration of wholesale and retail trade has been increasing in other
parts of the county at a faster rate than increases in the city, showing
up as an apparent decline in Northampton.
Both the city and the county exhibit importation of finance, insur-
ance, and real estate activities when compared with the U.S., but the
high LQ for Northampton relative to the county shows that county finance,
insurance and real estate activities are concentrated in Northampton.
Service industry results were as expected. While the comparison
with the national bench mark indicates that Northampton is an importer
of services, Hampshire County as a whole exports services and the extent
to which Northampton contributes to that export activity has been grow-
ing.
The high Northampton LQs for the transportation, communications,
and utilities industries can be explained by the location of New England
Telephone, Western Massachusetts Bus Lines, and Massachusetts Electric
in the city. All of these industries service the Hampshire County area.
This preliminary analysis of the relative industrial mix in
Northampton provides a general summary of the city's economic base and
supports the choice of Hampshire County as the region for comparison.
In five out of the eight industries exhibited on Table 8, the City of
Northampton is a significant supplier to the county as a whole. With
the general findings in hand, each of the industries can be examined in
detail, in order to determine the contribution each makes to the city's
economic base.
Shift -Share Analysis
Shift -share analysis is a technique used to identify any change in
the mix of employment in a region (shift) and compare that pattern of
change with that of the national economy (share). The technique is
often an effective way of examining the relative changes in the economic
base of a community. Shift -share analysis can identify those industries
within the region which are growing or declining at the same rate as the
national economy and those industries which are moving counter to
national trends. By comparing trends of industries in the region with
other regions and with the national economy, it may be possible to
identify sources of future problems in employment and stability and to
promote the expansion of a particular industry that seems to be stable
or experiencing high growth.
Shift -share computations commonly use employment as the base
parameter, although the same technique can be applied using other data.
P
41
A shift -share analysis begins with the construction of a four
quadrant graph (see Figure 5). On the vertical axis, changes in
regional employment are recorded, and on the horizontal axis, employ-
ment changes for either the nation, the state, or other regional bench
mark economy are recorded. The point at which the two axes intersect
represents no change in employment in either area. The upper right
quadrant contains observations of industries which are growing in the
region and in the nation or other bench mark economy. If, for example,
iron and steel manufacturing increased in the region under study by
3 percent, and increased in the nation. by 10 percent, a point would
be plotted to indicate 3 percent on the Y axis and 10 percent on the
X axis.
The 45- degree angle line which runs through the origin of the
figure indicates a series of points along which the change in the region
is equal to the change in the bench mark economy. If a particular
industry increased 10 percent in the region and 10 percent in the na-
tion, it would fall on the dotted line. Any industry to the left of
the dotted line is growing at a faster rate in the region than it is
in the nation; any industry to the right of the line is growing at a
slower rate in the region than in the nation.
In the lower right quadrant, there is a decline in employment in
the region, but a positive increase in national employment. Industries
in this quadrant may be responding to certain locational disadvantages
or are being attracted to a different region.
The lower left quadrant contains those industries which are de-
clining nationally and regionally and the upper left quadrant exhibits
industries which are increasing in the region while decreasing in the
national economy. Any industry in this quadrant is running counter
to national patterns of employment and demand and may not be stable in
the future.
In a recently completed study,. Housing and Community Deve ho'ment
Plan and Program City of Northampton, by Nicholas and Wasdyke 977),
a shift -share analysis was done for Hampshire County, using the Spring-
field Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA), the state, and the
United States for comparisons. The analysis indicates that agricul-
tural employment has declined in the county in the 1964 -1973 period.
Although Hadley and Hatfield are the largest and most important agri-
cultural towns in the area, the LQ of 1.5 for Northampton suggested
that the city's agricultural employment is remaining fairly stable, or
is not decreasing as fast as it is in other parts of the county. The
fact that farmers in the area are remaining in business suggests that
agricultural production in Northampton concentrates on a relatively
specialized market and is, therefore, less susceptible to competition
from large -scale producers who are responsible for edging marginal pro
ducers out of the market. Because agriculture represents such a small
proportion of the city's total employment (less than 1 and total
payroll (less than .5 the future of Northampton's agricultural pro-
duction will have little impact on these important aspects of the
economic base.
N
0
1
O
0
42
41.1
F—
ti
v)
W
-1- Z W
C C4
O
E ..5
O U rs
r- W
LL ..E o2S Z _I
CL�
b3;9733
CJ3 c
0 r Z ZF r V) C:1 Lt9 W C)r-4F— W
ON
C{-- L)1- .-...I n M 02$
O
(LS =L)O CD LU
.0 CG <0_— IV)ZC.) Zt—
V r--t (j� Z d ...i J C
CCDQ W y r„�W W Ca
v<C•) 3mv) =W
1— N (Y) d• 1.0 t0 r--. co 01 C5
V)
V)
r
c1
O
0
C)
d
aJ
O O
r C�
0 W ots
d
C O 0' C C9 0 M
ON W o I -a Z V) L
Z W
to .p N 1:4 ce d 1--
CI-- C)1- ce n 06(:)
tt7_.J =C.)0 <CDW rt
=C' 'C LL 1NZUS!—
CJC.JI— Ls- tnr -t W 1--4 P F
1--1 V) Zc3:- -!5C=• J C)
-I-) O_ Z Z 01C 1-- 0
CcDo w dw n
a) E W?' Of) (1)= W
0
CU r- CJ CO cY LC) LC) r-- Lb C71 O
43
O
I
W
J
0
V
CU
rcl
_C C
r a)
C
Cr) •r- .0
..0 U
t0
LL N
LO E N
4- 0
W 0
0
O
0
0 43
O
O
in mr
44
N
to
Z V C N
C C 4 C=1 CU C
N .1--
W CI r t l W U 5-
o c4 Q
L)1- J CD V) b
.0 =eG <CL V)= L)=1-- =n'
U CJ I- la. N r-r W t--r l— cC N
t rtn =ZcCJY�JC,.,) N
CU C�
NCZ =Zd h- CD =C4cC=
C W =QW W CD
CU
CU L) M I- c m N W 0
s to
d r- CV MCl•tol4h CO 01 C: NC
2
0
r-
CZ.
W
0
U
0
•r Cu
N
tt
Q CU
N
s a
-C c V
1 0 4-
4- 4-
•r- Q) N
N .0 CU
y 4-t
E C
Y
4-- c
U_ 0 4
0
In
The construction industry is known for its inherent instability.
The substantial decline in this activity, evidenced in both the LQ
analysis and the shift -share analysis, between 1970 and 1975, illus-
trates this fact. Most of the major construction projects in the
Northampton area were completed during the last five years; any future
prospects in the industry will probably be tied to the demand for, and
subsequent availability of funds for public works projects. When a
great deal of construction activity is taking place, wages are high and
labor is used extensively, but the "boom or bust" nature of the industry
suggests that it should not be relied on too heavily as a component of
the economic base. In 1977, for example, only six new buildings were
constructed in Northampton; another eighty -nine were repaired or reno-
vated to some degree. The lack of construction activity in 1977 is
significantly different from the level of activity in 1974 when con-
struction employment represented 23.7% of the labor force and 29.3% of
total payroll. The credit crunch and recession of 1975 -1976 resulted
in almost no new housing or capital investment.
Manufacturing data at the municipal level are highly aggregated
into major industrial classes, usually at the two •digit Standard Indus
trial Classification (SIC) level, and are also limited to establishment,
employee, and total payroll figures. The county level, however, pro-
vides a better source and variety of information, from which Northampton's
J share within the overall patterns can be estimated.
According to the Department of Employment Security (DES) figures,
r manufacturing employment has been declining in Northampton since 1974.
J Shift -share analysis indicates that manufacturing has been declining,
in terms of employment, in the general economy. Table 9 provides an
illustration of county, state, and national trends in manufacturing for
u 1963 -1972. While absolute employment numbers have decreased since 1967,
Table 10 shows that productivity has been increasing. Manufacturing
r-k productivity actually exceeded the SMSA, state, and national output
per employee in 1972. Rises in productivity can in part be attributed
to increasing automation of the production process, an increase in
capital intensity which allows fewer workers to generate the same or
greater levels of output.
Specific Northampton data are somewhat outdated, but can provide
r] some insight into the nature of manufacturing within the city. In 1974,
manufacturing accounted for 23.7% of total employment. (See Appendix A,
Table 1.) The extent of change since 1974 is not readily discernible;
indications are that the proportion has remained stable or increased
slightly.
Sixty and one -half percent of total manufacturing employment was
involved in miscellaneous manufacturing, which was aggregated to in-
clude one firm in chemicals and allied products; two in stone, clay,
and glass products; and one in photographic and optical products.
45
Hampshire County Manufacturers:
Massachusetts Manufacturers:
Number of establishments
Establishments with 20 or
more employees
Total employees
Payroll in millions of dollars
Value added in millions of
dollars
Springfield- Chicopee Holyoke
SMSA Manufacturers:
46
Table 9
Manufacturing Trends
1963
11,311
4,351
674,000
3,737
65,224
Source: Bureau of Census, U.S. Department of Commerce.
1967 1972
Number of establishments 151 156 158
Establishments with 20 or
more employees 53 57 59
Total employees 8,146 10,100 8,700
Payroll in millions of dollars 43.1 59.0 72.0
Value added in millions of
dollars 83.0 122.0 171.6
10,963
4,471
713,600
8,715
46,463
10,780
4,161
625,100
10,592
55,672
Number of establishments 979 1,003 1,002
Establishments with 20 or
more employees 379 426 392
Total employees 67,400 73,300 62,100
Payroll in millions of dollars 370 463 526
Value added in millions of
dollars 690.6 947.7 1,157.0
United States Manufacturers:
Number of establishments 306,617 305,680 312,671
Establishments with 20 or
more employees 99,352 107,138 109,950
Total employees 16,231,900 18,492,000 18,034,400
Payroll in millions of dollars 98,283 123,480 160,433
Value added in millions of
dollars 192,082 261,983 353,994
L
Lj
L
47
Table 10
Manufacturing Value Added Less Payroll Per Employee
1963 1967 1972
Hampshire County 4,898 6,237 11,448
SMSA 4,757 6,613 10,161
Massachusetts 4,132 5,706 8,038
USA 5,779 7,490 10,730
Source: Bureau of Census, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Table 11
Eleven Largest Manufacturing Employers in Northampton, 1975
Employment
Name of Firm SIC 1975 1977
VISTRON CORP., PRO DIV. 3079 700 800
(brushes, plastic bottles)
KOLLMORGEN CORP. 3831 225 430
(optical instruments)
CHARTPAK 2644 185
(chart and graphic paper)
COCA -COLA BOTTLING CO. 2086 150
(soft drinks)
PACKAGING CORP. OF AMERICA 2653 115
(shipping containers)
NORTHAMPTON MFG. CORP. 3357 100
(non ferrous ferrous wire)
BERKSHIRE ELECTRIC CABLE CO. 3694 100
(electric cables)
COMMONWEALTH FELT CO. 2291 80
(shoe felt)
GERE, H. S. SONS, INC. 2711 80
(publishers of newspaper)
NORTHAMPTON CUTLERY 3421 75
(cutlery hand tools)
FLORENCE CASKET CO., INC. 3994 70
(casket and burial supplies)
10 firms employ less than 10 employees; 7 firms employ 10 -19 employees;
4 firms employ 20 -39 employees; 1 firm employs 40-59 employees; 11 firms
employ 70 -700 employees 33 firms total 1975 (down from 41 in 1974)
Source: Massachusetts Industrial Directory, 1975.
Only 2 of the 7 firms reported in this category were among the 12
largest employers in Northampton: Kollmorgen Corp. and Florence Casket
Co., Inc. In terms of other proportionate shares of employment, in-
volved in miscellaneous manufacturing; food and related products, paper
and allied products, and primary metals had employment shares of 8.0
7.9 and 7.7% respectively. (See Appendix A, Table 2.)
The 11 largest manufacturing employers (1975) are listed in Table
11. Only the paper and allied products industry has two firms on this
list, ranking second and fourth in size. An indication that manufac-
turing activity has increased in the last few years is the apparent
increase in employment at Kollmorgen and Vistron. Kollmorgen and Vistron
had employment numbers of 225 and 700 respectively in 1975, according
to the Massachusetts Industrial Directory, but were reported to have
1977 employment of 430 and 800 respectively, according to a recent
article in the Daily Hampshire Gazette. These figures would indicate
that both firms have expanded substantially in the past three years.
In a study on Regional Economic Activity in the Lower Pioneer
Valley, the strongest net exporting and net importing industries were
ranked in descending order:
Strongest Net Exporters
SIC Industry
264 Paper Converting
28 Chemicals and. Related Prod.
394 Games, Toys, Sporting Goods
30 Rubber and Plastic Products
27 Printing and Publishing
35 Non Electrical Machinery
36 Electrical Equipment
48
SIC
Strongest Net Importers
Industry
331 Basic Steel (all primary metals)
233 Women's, Misses' outerwear
345 Screw Machine Products
244 Structural Fabrications
20 Food Processing
Five of Northampton's eleven largest firms are strong net exporters,
while only three fall into the net importing category. Many of the net
export industries are said to be in "high growth" markets, although
there are no discernible barriers to expansion of regional capacity
among net importers. Kollmorgen, Chartpak, and Vistron all either en-
larged their facilities or added to their staffs in 1977 and these
three firms represent high net exports for Northampton. Representatives
for these firms expressed optimism that recent increases in sales and
profits would continue. It appears that these firms are in "high
growth" markets and, therefore, will enhance Northampton's manufacturing
sector in the future, and increase the flow of dollars into the region.
As indicated in the earlier LQ analysis, Northampton serves as a
regional supplier of transportation, communication, and utility ser-
vices. This sector has been enjoying stable growth in the recent past,
49
not only in the local economy, but also at the national level. The
growth is expected to continue.
Wholesale and retail trade in Northampton accounted for 41.5% of
total establishments, 23.7% of total payroll and 30.5% of total employ-
ment in 1974. Wholesale trade is a significant part of the region's
economy. Hampshire County's share, however, is considerably smaller
than Hampden County's (Table 12). Wholesale activity increased 39% in
Hampshire County over the 1967 -1973 period, but Northampton's contribu-
tion to this increase was minimal. Retail activity accounts for the
majority of employment in the wholesale- retail trade composite.
The retail sector of Northampton has been characterized as "con-
centrating in the expansion of activity by developing a broad mix of
small, specialized products and handcrafts, all catering to the young
adult market." (Regional Economic Activity, p. 24.) Vitality in the
Northampton Central Business District (CBD) has been renewed, evidenced
by many new store fronts and interior renovations. The CBD appears
to concentrate on clothing and shoe shops, with a variety of specialty
shops. Increased utilization of second floor Main Street spaces has
also been noted; another indication of increasing interest in the CBD.'
In Northampton, Route 5 and King Street are,main retailing thorough-
fares. These areas support four shopping centers containing four chain
food stores, three chain department stores, and 15 to 20 small businesses.
A number of service stations, automobile dealerships, and fast food out-
lets also contribute to the commercialization of this area of Northamp-
ton. In 1974, general merchandise, food stores, automobile dealers,
and miscellaneous retail stores comprised over 70% of Northampton's
retail activity. Table 13 illustrates the city's retail trade outlet
and sales activities from 1963 -1972. While the number of establishments
remained unchanged, total dollar amount of sales increased 67% over the
decade. This may seem impressive, but when compared with the growth
rates of surrounding Hampshire County communities, Northampton's re-
tail growth has been only half as fast as that of Amherst, Easthampton,
and South Hadley. The significantly higher growth rates in surrounding
towns explain the dramatic decline in the relative concentration of
Northampton's wholesale and retail trade from 1.35 in 1970 to .73 in
1975. (See LQ Table 8.)
Vacancies in the four shopping centers along Route 5 average about
10% of total available square footage. The turnover rate within the
CBD is also fairly low. Recent occupancy of a gallery of shops called
Main Street Center, in a former department store building which had
been vacant for four years, is a positive indication that retail activity
in Northampton's CBD will continue to be a vital part of the retail
base.
Employment
Hampshire County
Hampden County
Massachusetts
Hartford County
Number of Firms
Hampshire County
Hampden County
Massachusetts
Hartford County
Dollar Sales (current dollars)
Hampshire County
Hampden County
Massachusetts
Hartford County
50
Table 12
Whole sale Trade, Hampshire County
and Other Places, 1967 -1973
1967 1973
611
7,864
106,089
16,514
50
629
8,730
1,193
853
9,052
119,300
19,076
1963 1967 1972
56 76
642 729
8,715 9,227
1,239 1,345
Change
+39%
+15%
+12%
+15%
Changge
1963 -72
+32%
+16%
6%
+13%
18.3 MM 21 MM 50 MM +173%
551.8 642 1,008 83%
10,392 13,157 19,315 86%
1,229 1,646 2,682 +118%
Source: U.S. Census of Wholesale Trade; 1973 Survey of County Business
Patterns.
Recently, construction of a new 70 to 80 store shopping mall has
begun in Hadley, a town which abuts Northampton to the east. Its im-
pact on Northampton's share of retail trade will depend on the kinds
of businesses which locate in the new mall. The presence of a major
department store should not seriously impact Northampton's retail sector
because of the City's tendency toward specialized retail activities
and because of the location of Smith College, which abuts the CBD.
Finance, insurance, and real estate activities appear relatively
stable in the Northampton area. These activities have tended to cluster
in Northampton, which, as the county seat, supported the surrounding
area in this field. The concentration of activities has declined, pri-
marily because of an increase in branch- banking throughout the area
during the past four years. It can be suggested, then, that the in-
creases in retail trade noted above account for comparable growth in
finance, insurance, and real estate. It is not likely that this sector
will undergo more expansion, however, as the retail market in Northamp-
ton approaches saturation.
Li
L
ar-
Ca)
lY
N
r-
01
r
M
I`
lO
0•'
r
M 00 1 LC) h• r 1 •Zr
r r r C\J
M CO r- N O Is M 00
LC) at d` r at N. r--
O N 1.0 r O CJ ct d
in n w w n n n n
CO r- cf• LO LC) N N. h.
r- CO N CO r-- r- M
N
Ql r 4.0 l0 N- 00 r
CO
O LC) 3D O LC) O Cal
r. in i w n A n
Cr) LO 1.0 LO CO LO O
Cl" r C r L0 r N
Ct d' Cr) r Is CT CO
LO Is O CO CO I\ to
co r h. 0 O ct- N.
w n ((f in its n n n
O Cr) r- O 1.C1 M r-
0 r C r 10 r r
r
n N al Is, O N h.
Ol 0 co N. N co co
to O. cti? r Cr r M l0
A n A A n n
i` O C r 00 LC) O r
C)O r r M r r
r Ol co to to co co n
00 to ct• co Ol O co n
co r r N r r- N
N O r l0 co ch 3D
Liz 0 CCI N Ol C)O r M
pl r r N r N
C
l0 r 3D LC) M l0 Cr)
Ol
CS; (t3 r Ol n N O
CO r N r-
04 cF ct• O O 01 L0
O 0 (O •fi M N N N
O r r M r
51
0)
5-
CT
N
52
Smith College, The Veterans Administration Hospital, Northampton
State Hospital, and Cooley Dickinson Hospital account for almost half
of the service employment in Hampshire County. Smith College is rela-
tively labor intensive and attracts large sums of money from outside
the region. Both the V,A, Hospital and the State Hospital, while pro-
viding local employment, are government supported and funded; the
facilities offer a secure base, but an indefinite future for increased
employment opportunities. In 1977, Smith College and the V.A.
Hospital increased their staffs by 30; Smith now employs 1,290
people and the U.A. Hospital employs 927. Their joint payroll
exceeds $28 million, almost one and one -half times total manufacturing
payrolls.
City and county government service employment accounts for no more
than 5% of Northampton's total employment.
Although the predominance of a service -based economy in Northamp-
ton might provide some stabilization in an economic downturn, that
sector, particularly as in Northampton, soon reaches capacity and offers
no inherent potential for employment increases.
4. Labor Force Analysis
Finally, a look at the aggregate labor force will complete the
survey of Northampton's economy. Total employment in the city in-
creased steadily through 1974, but showed some signs of decline in
1975. It should be noted, however, that unemployment peaked at 11.3%
in 1975 and was reported to be down 7 at 4.6 by 1977, indicating
that employment is on the rise. The total population of the city has
increased only 1.7% in the last seven years.
The distribution of the population by industry and occupation is
based on 1970 Census data. It is not known to what extent these pat-
terns still apply. For the most part, the results support the trends
identified within the industries.
A comparison of Northampton with the state and SMSA populations
(Appendix A, Table 3) shows that Northampton's employed residents are
principally engaged in nondurable goods manufacture, communications,
other personal services, hospital services, private and public educa-
tional and related services, legal and engineering services, and
miscellaneous industries. These comprise a greater proportion of the
city's employment than the proportion in either the SMSA or the State.
In the aggregate, 33% of Northampton's population are employed in
services, followed by manufacturing in which 20.8% of Northampton's
population were employed in 1970.
Another way of characterizing the labor force is by occupation
(see Appendix A, Table 4). At the general level, 19.4% of the city's
11 labor force were professional, technical and kindred workers; 18.2%
I were clerical and kindred workers. Both of these are understandably
significant proportions of the labor force as the former category in-
cludes health and educational employment and the latter is a necessary
component in a service- and retail- dominated economic base. Service
workers those employed in cleaning, food, health, personal and protec-
tive services constitute the largest occupational group at 19.7
Craftsmen, foremen and kindred occupations accounted for 11.1% and
operatives, excluding transport operations, 11.9 The 1970 industry
and occupational characteristics of the city's population reflect
C-3 equivalent proportions in industry mix, as previously noted.
l' The income distribution of the population further reflects the
existing industry structure. The Marketing Economic Institute of New
FT York has estimated the following distribution in income:
Income Range of Population
Less than 3000
3000- 5000
5000- 8000
8000 -10000
10000 -15000
15000 -25000
25000 or more
53
10.5
7.5
13.4
10.8
23.0
21 .7
13.0
Source: Daily Hampshire Gazette,
February 10, 1977).
Over 65% of the populatio�eea���nl�mthampton less
does
not
per annum. It has been suggested Q
very attractive opportunity for persons interested in advancement or
a diversity of economic opportunities. Service industries employ tech-
nically highly skilled people and the retail sector is dominated by
many small single proprietorships and partnerships, which represent a
low demand for personnel. The concentration of incomes in the lower
ranges reflects the predominance of these service and retail sectors in
the local economy.
5. Public Services and Taxation
Of importance to both the business and residential communities
J are the quantity and quality of public services. An examination of
-i city budgets for the last ten years reveals that, like most municipali-
ties in the country, Northampton has steadily increased its expenditures,
at an average rate of 20.6% per annum. The property tax rate has been
u I
increasing steadily, but not dramatically, with comparable increases
in the City's tax base (Table 14).
Year
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975*
1976*
1977*
1978*
54
Table 14
Tax Rates and Assessed Valuation, 1966 -1976
Tax Rate Assessed Value
$87.00
87.00
42.00
44.00
54.00
50.00
53.00
54.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
61.00
62.00
*Figures obtained from Mass. Taxpayers Foundation, Municipal Finan-
cial Data, 1976.
Source: The City of Northampton Annual. Reports, 1966 -1974.
44,235,000
45,417,172
134,826,975
137,025,490
140,887,010
143,706,295
147,459,050
150,805,045
157,602,490
157,602,490
162,000,000
164,000,000
183,188,000
Northampton revalued property in 1968, accounting for the substan-
tial increase in assessed valuation that year, as indicated in
Table 14. The rise in the property tax rate indicates not only the
fact that expenditures have been increasing, but also the decrease in
the assessment ratio since the 100% base of 1968. In 1976, for example,
the assessment ratio was reported to be 71% of market value.
In order to minimize pressures on the tax rate as expenditures in-
crease, Northampton will undoubtedly be concerned with maintaining its
non residential tax base. The presence of so many land uses which have
tax exempt status, most notably Smith College, Cooley Dickinson Hospital,
the V.A. Hospital and the court houses (Table 15), places an increasing
burden on residential taxpayers to absorb the increases in government
service provision. To what extent complete occupancy of an already
developed industrial park and the commercial projects in the downtown
area will offset the residential tax burden and for how long, will be
a prime concern for the city in future years.
55
Table 15
Property Exempt from Taxation
(Non- Taxable Real Estate Only)
American National Red Cross
Betty Allen Chapter D.A.R.
Children's Aid and Family Services of Hampshire County, Inc.
Childs Park Foundation, Inc.
Clarke School for the Deaf, The
Connecticut Watershed Council, The
Cooley Dickinson Hospital
Florence Civic and Business Association, Inc.,. The
Hampshire, Hampden Franklin Agricultural Society
Hampshire Regional Y.M.C.A.
Hill Institute
Jerusalem Lodge Building Association, Inc,
Lathrop Home for Aged Women in Northampton
Massachusetts Audubon Society
Michael F. Curtin Post #8006 V.F.W. Home Association
New England Deaconess Association
Northampton Grange #138, Patrons of Husbandry, Inc.
People's Institute of Northampton, Inc.
Smith's Agricultural School
Trustees of Smith College, The
World War II Veterans of Hampshire Co., The
Western Massachusetts Girl Scout Council, Inc.
Churches and Chapels
Parish Houses or Parsonages
Cemeteries
Property of the United States
Property of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Property of Hampshire County
Federal Public Housing Authority Florence Heights and
Old South Street
Northampton Housing Authority Chapter 200-
State Aid Housing Projects: Hampshire Heights, Fruit
Street High Street, Florence
St. Michael's School Association
Annunciation School
St. John Cantius Parish Hall
56
6. Summary and Conclusions
In summary, Northampton can be characterized as a regional market
place for the surrounding rural towns and agricultural areas. The pre-
dominance of service related activities and small retailing firms as
sources of employment has helped to maintain a semi rural, small town
character. The existing manufacturing is concentrated in several large
firms, with the balance distributed among many firms employing 15 people
or less. The newly developed industrial park will help to preserve the
city's small town atmosphere by providing a location alternative for
manufacturers who wish to expand their operations and by providing an
opportunity for new enterprises to locate in Northampton. The park
will also preserve the export advantages of the city's manufacturing
base. The growth of general merchandising activity in Hadley and sur-
rounding towns may lead to the saturation of retail activity within
Northampton, given the tendency of the city toward small, personal
businesses specializing in hand crafted and other novelty items. The
service sector, similarly, will probably not expand in the near future
because the several facilities are currently used at capacity and have
not indicated any plans or need to expand.
While the city's economic mix seems to have stabilized for the
short run, the extent that property taxes continue to rise, applying
an increasing burden on the residential tax base,will determine, if
anything will, what development pressures will ensue in the future to
enhance the non residential tax base. Although Northampton is north of
and therefore removed from major east -west transportation routes, the
access to I -91 on its eastern boundary may be a primary influence in
the encouragement of manufacturing and other non residential activities
necessary to offset growing pressures on the tax rate.
Future Industrial and Commercial
Development in the Flood Plain
It seems very unlikely that any substantial industrial or commer-
cial development will be undertaken in the Northampton flood plain area,
for the following reasons:
1) New industrial activity would probably find the industrial
park a more attractive and viable site than the flood plain. The park
has been prepared, utilities are in place, and site planning and build-
ing assistance are available. For the type of small -scale manufacturing
that Northampton seems to attract, the park would seem to be the more
attractive alternative.
2) Commercial or retailing development seems to have reached a
saturation point in Northampton proper with the major expansion taking
place to the east in Hadley and to the south in Holyoke.
57
3) Existing industries within the flood plain, with one excep-
tion (Vistron), show little inclination to expand their Northampton
operations. (See the discussion of flood plain business interviews below,
pp. 125-129).
4) The restrictions currently applicable to development in the
flood plain; along with the attendant appeals processes, discourage
business expansion. Vistron's tentative plans for expansion have been
slowed. LaFleur's experience in replacing an aircraft hangar and the
inability of the Colonial Hilton to use or dispose of additional acreage
for commercial use also illustrate the difficulty faced by existing
flood plain businesses.
E. Flood Hazard Management
Three types of programs designed to reduce flood hazards have been
implemented. They are structural works, flood plain use regulations,
and the organizational capacity to provide various emergency services.
This section summarizes the most immediately salient programs as they
apply particularly to Northampton.
1. Structural Works
Major Structures on the Connecticut
River and Its Main Tributaries
As mentioned above, there are nine existing dams and reservoirs
and a dike and flood wall system which afford protection against flood-
ing in Northampton. According to Corps of Engineers estimates, these
structures are sufficient to prevent flooding of diked areas of the city
in the event of another flood similar to the one in 1936. However,
they would not protect against what is called a "standard project
flood" or SPF. This term, as defined by the Corps, means:
The flood that may be expected from the most severe com-
bination of meteorological and hydrological conditions
that are considered reasonably characteristic of the
geographical area in which the drainage basin is located,
excluding extremely rare combinations. Peak discharges
for these floods are generally about 40 percent to 60
percent of the Probable Maximum Floods for the same basins.
[SPF's], as used by the Corps of Engineers, are intended
as practicable expressions of the degree of protection
that should be sought in the design of flood control works,
the failure of which might be disastrous.
58
If a flood similar to 1936 were to occur now, with the existing
structures in place, the water would rise in Northampton to about 126.3
feet above mean sea level (msl), well below the top of the dikes which
are at 132 feet msl. But the SPF would rise to about 132.6 feet msl,
overtopping the dikes and damaging the city. The probability of such
a flood occurring is not known because of the extreme difficulty in-
volved in predicting rare events.
For those reasons, an additional 7 dams had been recommended for
the Connecticut Basin; they were part of the plan adopted by Congress
in 1938. The Corps continued until 1970 to advocate construction of
the dams and implementation of other measures to complete the plan and
provide protection against overtopping the dikes. In the case of
Northampton, completion of the proposed dams would reduce the 1936
flood level to 121.8 feet msl and the SPF level to 129.6 feet msl or 2.4
feet below the top of the city's dikes. Another proposal is to raise the
elevation of the dikes to 135.6 feet msl. This, without the additional
dams, would also provide sufficient protection against the SPF for
diked areas. By 1970, non structural measures were receiving increas-
ing attention; the basin states had withdrawn their support for the
dams; and the National Environmental Protection Act of 1969 was in
effect. This act requires consideration of a wide range of social,
economic, and environmental factors before major federal actions are
taken. The issues related to further construction are too numerous
and complex to cover here; however, it can be stated that state govern-
ments of the basin and the NERBC are definitely inclined toward
reliance on non structural measures along with perhaps raising dikes
at appropriate locations, including Northampton.
Headwater Structures
The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 1954 (P.L.
83 -566) authorized the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) to con-
struct small watershed projects in the small streams of headwater
areas. Known as the P.L. 566 program, these projects may include dams
and flood storage reservoirs and stream channel work. The scale of
these projects is much smaller than the main stem works discussed
above. Existing small watershed projects account for about 6 percent
of the total flood storage capacity provided by all structures. As of
1976, there were ten small projects in the Connecticut Basin- -six
completed and four nearing completion.
The Northampton Conservation District, the local cooperating
agency with SCS, requested the SCS to provide a watershed management
plan of Mill River headwater areas which would include flood control
storage. Preliminary studies were done, but because agreement on
various elements of the plan was not reached, the Conservation District
withdrew its request. The SCS no longer has an active file for the
project.
59
2. Flood Plain Regulations
Flood plain regulations are intended to limit further development
in flood hazard areas and to reduce potential structural damage by
flood proofing buildings. Limiting development accomplishes two pur-
poses with respect to flood hazard control: 1) it keeps people and
their buildings out of the way of floods so that personal and economic
risks do not continually increase, and 2) it allows flood plain areas to
function as natural, temporary storage areas for flood water. The
Northampton section of the Connecticut. River flood plain is part of
an area extending from Montague to Holyoke that has been identified
as significant in terms of its natural storage capacity. It is one of
seven such areas in the Connecticut Basin -four along the main stem
and three along major tributaries. The downstream benefits of natural
flood water retention areas are sharply illustrated by the 1874 Mill
River disaster when the Florence meadows effectively prevented damage
to Northampton center.
Impetus for controlling flood plain development comes from the
fact that the human and dollar costs of flood damage keep on going
up despite the presence of flood control structures. The rate of
increase in dollar losses from 1952 to 1968 was more than 20 percent
annually. Every new building simply adds to potential future losses.
Flood plain controls are embodied in a mass of laws and regulations
at the federal, state, and local levels of government. Since the fed-
eral flood insurance program is now, in effect, the centerpiece of the
legal structure, the discussion will begin with it.
The National Flood Insurance Program
The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (P.L. 90 -448) was passed
in response to growing amounts of flood damage and human suffering,
the severe problems people experienced in trying to buy flood insurance
at a price they could afford, and the rising costs of disaster relief
aid. The act was a limited experiment in making subsidized insurance
available primarily for residences and small businesses. In recog-
nition of the fact that new flood plain development increases potential
flood damages, the act also required eventual adoption of flood plain
land use regulations by localities if they wished to participate in
the program.
The Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD), in cooperation with insurance industry representatives, is
authorized to establish two premium rate schedules for insurance for
property in flood prone areas. One, the actuarial rate, was based on
anticipated flood risks plus reasonable costs of providing and ser-
vicing the insurance. The other is a subsidized rate set low enough
60
to attract buyers. The subsidized rate is available to owners of
existing property, while the actuarial rate has to be paid
by owners of newly built structures. The insurance is provided by a
pool of private insurers, with the federal government making up the
difference between the two rates through.a National Insurance Fund.
The HUD agency responsible for administering the program is the Federal
Insurance Administration.
The Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93 -234) was a
response to the ineffectiveness of the 1968 act. Flood plain develop-
ment was continuing, disaster aid costs were still rising, and the
essentially voluntary program was not attracting much participation.
Part of the problem was the low amount of insurance coverage allowed
in the original program -only $17,500 for a single family home plus
$5,000 for its contents. To make the program more appealing, these
limits were raised in 1973 to $30,000 and $10,000, and subsequently
to $70,000 and $20,000. The more significant problem in a long -term
sense was handled by making it almost imperative for communities with
flood prone areas to join the program. This was accomplished by forbid-
ding federal loan guarantees for the purchase or construction of
property in identified flood hazard areas unless the properties are
insured with flood coverage. Included are bank loans guaranteed by the
Veterans Administration, the Farmers Home Administration (FHA), and the
Small Business Administration (SBA). If an owner of a house or business
wanted to sell or get a loan for improvements, he would probably have
to buy flood insurance first. But for him to do that, his community
would first have to institute acceptable (to HUD) flood plain regulations
so the community could join the insurance program. The attractiveness
of the higher insurance levels, and especially the potential conse-
quences of non participation to local economic well- being, may be
producing the desired results.
Precise information concerning the boundaries of flood hazard areas is
necessary before actuarial premium rates can be established accurately
for individual properties and before local governments can map land use
control zones. Therefore, participation in the program has been
divided into two phases. Enrollment in the "emergency" phase begins
with preparation of a flood hazard area boundary map that indicates
the approximate extent of the 100 year (1 percent) flood based on
existing information. The locality makes an initial commitment to
flood plain regulation, perhaps only requiring flood proofing for new
structures within the hazard area at first. Regulations are expanded
incrementally as more detailed information becomes available. When a
flood insurance rate map is available, actuarial premium rates are
set and the community completes its system of regulations. It then
joins the "regular" phase of the program. Rate maps are far more de-
tailed than hazard area maps and often require the collection of a
substantial amount of new information before they can be completed.
Both kinds of maps are produced for HUD by other government agencies
or private firms. The Corps of Engineers, SCS, U.S. Geological Survey
and other federal agencies are particularly important contributors to
the information gathering and mapping processes.
Briefly, HUD requires localities to prohibit new development or
substantial expansion of existing structures in the floodway if an in-
crease in flood levels would result, and to prohibit any filling or
other encroachment in the floodway unless it is offset by stream
channel modifications to compensate for the lost flood carrying capacity.
The floodway is defined by the Corps of Engineers as:
The channel of a watercourse and adjacent land areas required
to carry and discharge a flood of a given frequency specified
as the one percent for the administration of the National Flood
Insurance Program within a regulated flood hazard area without
substantially increasing flood heights. Minimum standards of
the Federal Insurance Administration (FIA), Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD), limit such increases in flood height
to 1.0 foot, provided that hazardous velocities are not produced.
On the remainder of the 100 year flood plain, all new or substantially
improved residences must be built with the lowest floor above the level
of the 100 year flood. Other types of structures must be raised or
flood proofed to the same level.
L
61
In addition, the flood insurance legislation gives discretionary
authority to the federal government to buy insured properties that have
been destroyed or severely damaged by floods and turn them over to
local governments for suitable uses such as recreation or nature pres-
ervation areas. The purchase may be in full or in part (perhaps only
development rights or a conservation easement). This is expected to
be done only infrequently, but it does provide a means to prevent
recurring losses in particularly hazardous locations or areas of unusual
importance for natural flood storage.
State Authority for Local Zoning Ordinances
The authority Northampton has to impose zoning and building code
regulations is granted to the city by. The Zoning Act, Chapter 40A of
the Massachusetts General Laws. Chapter 40A establishes the basic
administrative structure and procedures for local application of zoning
controls. As it applies in Northampton, Chapter 40A makes the City
Council responsible for adopting and amending the zoning ordinance
after a public hearing and receipt of a report with recommendations
from the Planning Board. Zoning districts for different kinds of land
use may be established so long as the regulations are uniform for each
type of structure or use within a district. The districts must be
shown on an official zoning map. Special permits for uses not ordi-
narily allowed in a particular district may be granted by the Board of
Appeals or other appropriate authority. In Northampton, special per-
mits are granted in most cases by the Board of Appeals. The Planning
Board or City Council is the authority for exceptional uses such as
cluster housing or subdivisions.
Three other parts of Chapter 40A have a specific bearing on
Northampton's flood plain use and regulation. First, agricultural use
of land may not be prohibited, unreasonably regulated or subjected to
a special permit process in any zoning district on parcels of land more
62
than five acres in size. Existing buildings used primarily for agri-
cultural purposes may be expanded or reconstructed under the same
exemption. Second, a local ordinance may not exempt land or structures
from wetland or flood plain regulations established under the state's
general laws. And third, a local ordinance may not alter provisions
of the State Building Code.
State Building Code Flood Proofing Requirements
Article 7, Section 748.0, of the Massachusetts Building Code
outlines the general design requirements for flood plain and coastal
high hazard areas. These requirements, along with the specific details
that accompany them, satisfy HUD criteria for flood proofing which
must be met for qualification for the flood insurance program. Struc-
tures must be anchored to prevent movement or collapse during antici-
pated flood conditions; approved flood resistant materials and equip-
ment must be used; and the elevation relative to mean sea level must
be shown on plans for new or substantially improved buildings proposed
for flood hazard areas.
Permits to Fill in Wetlands
In Massachusetts, a total of four permits is required before
filling is allowed to be done in an inland wetland or watercourse,
including the areas next to waterways that are subject to flooding.
This system of permits is an important element in flood plain manage-
ment in its own right, and particularly when viewed in relationship to
the flood proofing requirements of the flood insurance program which,
in practice, can most often be partially satisfied by filling under the
foundation area.
Required are a permit and order of conditions from the local Con-
servation Commission, a license from the Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE), a water quality certificate
from the State Waterways Division, and a permit from the Corps of
Engineers. The latter two permits were originally intended to protect,
the navigability of rivers. The Corps' permitting authority began as
long ago as 1899 and applied only to watercourses. Based on Section
404 of the 1972 Water Quality Act Amendments and the 1977 Clean Water
Act, the "Section 404" permit program now applies to inland wetlands
including areas contiguous to rivers and subject to flooding. The
Waterways permit is required under the Massachusetts Dredge and Fill
Act.
r
II
63
Although the areas of jurisdiction and criteria for review of
fill applications of these four agencies are not identical, in general
the filling action must be in the public interest and with no practi-
cal alternative to it. Various other considerations are taken into
account, such as the effects on wildlife habitat, fisheries, and
endangered species; the consequences to navigation where applicable;
and the quality of the fill itself. Only clean fill (that is,
naturally occurring inorganic materials of suitable engineering
characteristics) is allowed, in order to avoid polluting the wetland
or watercourse.
For all of these permits the definition of an inland wetland is
similar. Essentially, it is an area where seasonal or permanent
inundation results in wetland plant communities which can be identi-
fied by the presence of particular species of plants. In practice,
determination of the precise boundary of a wetland is based on the
judgment of appropriate experts.
Massachusetts' Inland Wetlands Protection Act of 1968 as amended
in 1972 and 1974 is the basis for state wetlands regulation. Its
origin was independent of the flood insurance program; the act is re-
garded as a pioneering effort in this area of state legislation. The
act, Chapter 131 of the General Laws, prohibits dredging, filling,
polluting, or other alteration of protected areas without a permit,
except for a very few minimal activities related to access roads,
utilities, and agriculture. The area of protection includes wetlands
plus an additional 100 feet next to them. The Conservation Commission
is the local permitting authority. Acting in this capacity, the Com-
mission reviews applications and establishes any special conditions
that must be met in carrying out the proposed activity.
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Northampton
Northampton's Zoning Ordinance of 1975 and amendments of 1978
contain provisions which were specifically intended to comply with
federal insurance program criteria and be consistent with inland wet-
lands regulations. Northampton enrolled in the emergency phase of
the insurance program in 1972 and has proceeded to augment and refine
its flood plain zoning in order to achieve eligibility for the regular
phase. In 1975, Articles XIII and XIV were added to the Zoning Ordi-
nance. They state use and permit conditions which must be met for
new development or substantial improvement of existing structures in
the 100 year flood plain and other areas. The city's Flood Insurance
Rate Map became available in 1977 so that refinements to the zoning map
could be drawn. Map adjustments and changes in wording of the ordinance
were approved on April 28, 1978, completing requirements for eligibility
64
of the city to enroll in the regular phase.
The areas subject to special flood plain regulation are included
in a Special Conservancy (SC) District and shown on a watershed protec-
tion overlay to the zoning map. Areas covered by the overlay are
currently zoned for various types of residential and business uses,
but the watershed protection regulations are in addition to and take
precedence over all other rules that normally apply to such zones.
Northampton has no agricultural zone as such, although it is city
policy to encourage retention of agriculture and, of course, Chapter
40A's provision against restricting agriculture in any zone applies.
In the SC District covered by Article 13 of the Zoning Ordinance,
agriculture and noncommercial forestry and vegetable growing are
allowed by right. Only a limited number of other uses are allowed at
all, and these by special permit. These uses include residences on
lots of 50,000 square feet or more, municipal and utilities facilities,
commercial outdoor recreation, greenhouses or stands for the sale of
agricultural products, removal and processing of sand and gravel, fill-
ing of water or wet areas, historical association uses, and a few other
specialized functions. The special permit (with conditions) can be
granted only after a hearing and a thirty -day period for review of the
application by the Conservation Commission, the Board of Health, and
the Planning Board. Applications must include detailed plans showing,
among other things, the locations of buildings, watercourses, means of
access, and sewage disposal facilities; and the elevations of the first
floor and basement. Permit conditions are that the lowest floor of
residences is above the 100 year flood level; the lowest floor of
other structures is at the same level or flood proofed according to
State Building Code requirements; and that there is no danger of
pollution to any public or on -site water supply.
The Watershed Protection District, established in Article XIV
and shown on the map overlay, permits municipal uses such as water-
works, pumping stations, and parks. Other uses allowed in the under-
lying zoning districts require a special permit from the Zoning Board
of Appeals. Any dumping, filling, excavating, or earth moving also
requires a permit. The interagency review and plan submittal of the
SC permitting process applies. The permit requirements are more exten-
sive and are designed to fit wetlands, circumstances that are found
outside the, 100 year flood plain as well as within it. Public water
supply is mandated. Both it and any public sewerage system must be
designed to prevent infiltration of flood water. Percolation tests
for septic systems have to be conducted at least twice, and leaching
fields must be at least four feet above the maximum groundwater
elevation. The floor level of living or working areas is to be at
least four feet above the seasonal high water level. First floor
elevations and flood proofing are otherwise the same as for the SC
District. Safety to utilities must be demonstrated as well as protec-
tion against storm water runoff that might raise water levels on other
r
65
property or increase danger from floods. Roads and driveways may not
cause unwarranted diking. Finally, the landfill or use may not in-
crease the 100 year flood level at any point.
Clearly, these articles meet or exceed flood insurance program
criteria and support the intent of state wetlands law. The city's
zoning ordinance reflects not only the requirements imposed by other
authorities but also a local commitment to long -range flood plain and
wetlands protection.
3. Emergency Programs
Government programs directly concerned with flood emergencies
include actions taken before, during and after a flood and the respon-
sibilities involved are shared among federal, state, and local agencies.
Flood warning and evacuation and disaster relief are of prime impor-
tance.
Flood Warning and Evacuation
Flood warning and evacuation programs obviously do nothing to
control flooding itself, but they do make it possible to reduce sig-
nificantly the resulting damage, particularly with respect to human
suffering and loss of life. Compared to the total property loss from
a large flood, the value of property saved by timely removal and insti-
tuting emergency procedures may not be great, but it is nevertheless
worthwhile.
The National Weather Service collects and evaluates weather and
stream flow information so that it can forecast floods and issue warn-
ings as necessary. In the Connecticut Basin, these functions are the
responsibility of the River Forecast Center in Hartford, Connecticut.
Weather and flow information is collected through direct physical
observation (i.e., river gauges) and telemetering devices. The raw
information is processed with the assistance of computers. The amount
of time between a flood warning and an actual flood varies with the
extent of information available, the sophistication of available
evaluation techniques, and the characteristics of streams in a given
location. Twelve hours is normal for the Connecticut River in
Northampton, with much shorter times for streams normally subject to
flash flooding. In the event that a flood seems probable, monitoring
and dissemination of information are carried out as fully and continu-
ously as possible.
Local agencies are most immediately involved in warning and
evacuating endangered people, with state and federal assistance avail-
able according to the seriousness of the situation. In Northampton,
implementation of the warning and evacuation system is keyed to rising
66
levels of the rivers. For example, if the Connecticut reaches 105 feet,
a flood watch begins, appropriate agencies are notified, and police
road patrols are sent out. At 107 feet, two streets are closed. At
112 feet measures are taken to preserve the integrity of the sewage
treatment facility. As the water rises, further precautions are taken,
an emergency headquarters is activated, and the Director of Civil
Defense assumes control of coordination. At 127 feet, the mayor
declares a state of emergency. In the meantime, coordination with state
officials has been maintained so that a variety of coordination,
communication, and technical assistance is available as well as help
from the State Police and National Guard. The state acts as liaison
with federal agencies. Federal disaster relief becomes available if
the President, at the request of the Governor, declares a state of
emergency. The entire system is intended to assure that the necessary
personnel, equipment, and supplies are all in the right place at the
right time. Thus, the key elements of an effective warning and evacua-
tion system are a workable plan, weather and stream flow information
and forecasts, a functioning communication and coordination system,
trained personnel, and availability of equipment and supplies.
Disaster Relief
Disaster relief also involves a highly complex set of actions at
all levels of government. Federal assistance is available for
catastrophes such as major storms, earthquakes, droughts, or fires.
Since disastrous floods affect virtually all programs and services
provided by government, the number of agencies that are affected in
one way or another is very large. Furthermore, federal assistance in-
volves both short -term efforts to cope with immediate problems and
long -term help in restoring the social and economic well -being of the
stricken area.
The federal government's role is defined primarily by the Disaster
Relief Act of 1970 as amended by the Disaster Relief Amendments of 1974
(P.L. 93 -288). The full range of federal actions is triggered by a
Presidential designation of a major disaster area; the assistance
supplements the efforts and resources of local and state governments
and relief organizations and it is under the direction of a coordinat-
ing officer of the Office of Emergency Preparedness.
Federal short -term assistance includes providing emergency support
teams composed of "borrowed" agency personnel; lending equipment and
providing emergency shelter, food, clothing, and medicines; and
helping to remove debris and wreckage and restore public services.
Much of the longer -term assistance is in the form of financial
aid supported by technical advice; it supplements rather than replaces
whatever other resources, such as insurance, there are. The govern-
ment makes available to individuals or corporations loans at less than
commercial interest rates for repair or replacement of homes, farms,
67
and businesses. Loans may be made to industrial, commercial, or
agricultural enterprises that constituted major sources of employment
in the local economy without regard to normal limitations on loan size
in order to help restore the economic viability of the locality. The
loan programs are administered by the Farmers Home Administration and
the Small Business Administration. Temporary rent or mortgage payments,
food stamps, legal assistance, and unemployment compensation are
offered to individuals. Local governments may be given grants to off-
set property tax losses for a period of up to three years, and contri-
butions may also be made to states and localities for restoring or
replacing public facilities. The law also provides for special handling
after a disaster of program regulations and outstanding loans related
to projects for rural electrification, low- income housing, and many
others.
There is a stipulation in the law which has implications for
flood plain management and future flood risks. Financial assistance
is available for buildings in identified flood hazard areas only if they
are covered by flood insurance. If the community was not enrolled in
the flood insurance program, a grace period of six months following the
date of the Federal Damage Survey Report is provided, during which
the community must qualify and enroll. Assistance for a specific structure
is allowed only if the owner insures it. By this mechanism the control
over flood plain development required by the insurance program is almost
certain to be put into effect. Incidentally, this condition for re-
ceiving aid in flood hazard areas applies regardless of the type of
disaster (i.e., earthquake or fire) that occasioned the need for assist-
ance. Since Northampton is already in the program, only uninsured
properties are affected by the condition.
II. SURVEY INTERVIEWS
This chapter begins the discussion of attitudes toward flood
management with a description of the two groups of respondents whose
interviews were conducted on the basis of a formal questionnaire, and
a description of the questionnaire itself. This is followed by a
summary and analysis of the data gathered.
In the text and accompanying tables, the flood plain respondents
are referred to as flood plain residents(N); the respondents who make up
the random sample are referred to as Northampton residents(n).
A. Flood Plain Residents
The attitudes of flood plain residents were considered to be a
very important part of this study because these people all have an
immediate, personal stake in what government does or does not do about
flood protection and flood plain regulation. Also, over time they
develop an expertise about flooding in their particular location which
is of a rather different kind than that of non resident observers. For
good or ill or both, the river is part of their milieu.
Five of the cases in this category are not residences but small
businesses. They are referred to in the discussion and included in
the statistical analysis as though they are residences. Reasons for
combining the two groups are that these small businesses are all local
in character. They are run by people who spend a substantial amount
of their time in the flood plain and whose interest in flood plain
issues appears to be closely analogous to that of residents. Identical
questionnaires were used for both groups except for the few minor ad-
justments described below in section C of this chapter.
Addresses, and in most cases names, of flood plain landholders
were supplied to the consultants by the New England Division of the
Corps of Engineers. The information had been obtained in a 1976 sur-
vey of the area. All of the properties involved are located wholly or
in part in the 100 year flood zone (as shown on the 1977 Flood Insurance
Rate Map prepared by the Corps for the Department of Housing and Urban
Development).
Attempts were made to interview an adult representative from all
residences and small businesses in the 100 year flood zone -a total
of 76 addresses. Of these addresses, four were separate apartments in
two family dwellings. Thus, 72 properties were involved. Interviews were
completed at 53 addresses, 69.7% of the total number. Forty -nine were
residences and 4 were small businesses. No contact was made at 5
addresses (6.6 One of the 5 was a vacant apartment; another was an
unused gasoline station which, from its appearance, had not been in
68
69
operation for a considerable length of time. Persons from an additional
18 addresses (23.7 all residences) declined to participate in the
survey. Reasons for refusing are shown in Table 16.
Table 16
Flood Plain Resident Interview Refusals by Type
Number Reason
5 Not interested in participating
4 Too busy
2 I11 or illness in family
2 Survey is pointless, will not change
anything
1 Suspicious of survey
1 Self- professed lack of knowledge and
interest in flood plain matters
1 Too upset about issues
1 Already participated
1 Irrational or incompetent response to
interviewer
18 TOTAL.
Because of the importance attributed to this group of interviews,
efforts to contact people and persuade them to participate went beyond
what one would normally expect in a survey situation. Many telephone
calls and personal visits were made. Because a substantial proportion
of people in the area were known to be of Polish heritage, interviewers
fluent in Polish as well as English were available whenever their
language skill was useful. Firm promises of anonymity were made and
kept. (The last applies to all persons who answered the questionnaire.)
One interviewer handled more than two- thirds of the contacts with
this group and, in the process, became quite familiar with the area and
many of its people. In her opinion, some residents were reluctant to
be interviewed because they had recently and repeatedly been involved
with flood plain issues and were unhappy with the way decisions seemed
70
to be going. A few people seemed to be too tired of the subject and
too discouraged to want to talk about it. This response was noticed
particularly in neighborhoods where expansion of nearby recreational
facilities was thought likely. In these people's view, the result of
expansion would be neighborhood degradation in the form of more noise,
traffic, dust from unpaved roads, inconsiderate parking, littering and
vandalism. The interviewer also noted resentment that better -off or
more influential flood plain occupants might be allowed to further
develop their property while they, the neighborhood people, would not.
Whether or not these feelings were entirely justified, they did exist.
Consequently, the number of interviews obtained may be slightly reduced
by unfortunate timing of the interviewing process, a result that was
not anticipated or intended.
The interviewing was done in 1978, from the last week in March
through early July. The average time per interview was about 53 minutes.
B. The Random Sample
The attitudes of the general public of Northampton are important
in this study because the public, to some extent at least, sets the
boundaries of permissible government action at the local level. It is
true that local governments are constrained sometimes severely -by
state and federal requirements. It is also true that many people of a
community may not care much or even pay much attention to the performance
of their local government, so long as necessary functions are carried
out reasonably smoothly. However, what is known as "public opinion"
appears to embody some outside parameters for what is acceptable in
government behavior and to provide some guidance for officials who wish
to help bring to fruition the desires, however amorphous and contradic-
tory, of the public. A study of public opinion may also show a lack of
understanding of some problems and issues which could suggest a need
for educational and leadership efforts.
The ideal way to find out what people think about flood related
issues would be to ask each person. This would be extremely costly and
time consuming. Possible alternatives include "man -in- the street"
interviews or a mail or newspaper questionnaire to be filled out and
returned. However, these techniques offer no assurance that an unbiased
representation of public opinion will be obtained. Another method that
is moderate in cost yet reasonably accurate is to interview a random
sample of the total population, contacting only enough people to pro-
duce results which are statistically significant. An opinion survey,
properly done, should result in a selection of persons to interview
that closely resembles the total population in demographic character-
istics, including age, occupation, income, and ethnicity, and also in
the range of their opinions and strengths of their beliefs. Random
sampling is the standard, accepted technique used not only in the social
sciences but in many other research contexts as well.
71
For this study, a random sample of households was drawn from
Northampton's 1977 street list (the 1978 list not being in print yet).
This publication names all -or as many as could be found- -adult residents
of the city and lists them alphabetically by street name and house
number within each of the 14 precincts. A number was drawn at random,
and the address and name appearing on the corresponding line of print
on each page of the street list was used for the sample. Since this
procedure did not produce a large enough sample, a second random number
was drawn and names were taken in the same manner from every other page.
The interviewers attempted to interview the specific person named. If
an appointment could not be arranged or the person no longer lived at
the specified address, another adult from the same address was inter-
viewed.
The total sample consisted of individuals from 394 households. Of
these, 215 or 54.6% of the total were actually interviewed. In 48 cases
(12.2 no contact was made with the household although at least three
attempts were made. Of these 48 addresses, 5 appeared to be vacant. In
131 cases (33.2 the person declined to be interviewed. Reasons for
these refusals are categorized in Table 17. Interviewers tried to per-
suade these people to participate by saying that they would not be
bothered again, they did not have to have any special knowledge, their
opinions were important, nothing was being sold, their names would not
be revealed, or whatever was appropriate (and true) in the particular
circumstances. While a higher percentage of completed interviews would
have been preferred, the actual percentage is within the range normally
considered acceptable for surveys of this type.
Most interviews were arranged for by appointments made over the tele-
phone. However, a substantial number resulted from visits to homes.
The interviewing period extended from the last week in March, 1978,
through the first week of July, 1978, with the bulk of the work done in
April and May. The average time per interview was about 40 minutes.
C. The Questionnaire
1. General Comments
A single questionnaire* was used for interviews with the random
sample of Northampton's population and with flood plain residents, in-
cluding the businesses mentioned previously. Some questions were asked of
flood plain residents only, and a few minor adjustments in language were
necessary to make the questionnaire applicable to businesses as opposed
to households. These modifications are explained below as they occur in
the questionnaire.
*A copy of the questionnaire appears in Appendix B, pp. 153 -168.
72
Table 17
Random Sample Interview Refusals by Type
Number .Reason.
40 Not interested
27 Too busy
20 Illness (self or family) or old
age
11 Do not want to participate
9 Do not want to be bothered
(hostile)
7 Appointment(s) made but respond-
ent was not there
5 Hostile or upset about government,
taxes
4 Mistrustful, suspect sales pitch
3 Language barrier (French, German,
one unknown)
3 Irrational or incompetent re-
sponse to interviewer
2 Self professed ignorance of sub
ject matter
131 TOTAL
The five groups of questions relate to personal experience with
floods, perception of flood hazard, attitudes toward flood management
alternatives, participation in public affairs, and personal history.
Responses were recorded in predetermined answer categories in a form
permitting statistical analysis to be performed. Nearly all questions
could be answered "yes" or no or within a format permitting scaling
from 1 to 4. For example, an answer indicating strong agreement with
an idea was given the value 1; an answer indicating strong disagreement
was given the value 4; and weaker levels of agreement or disagreement
were given the values 2 or 3 respectively. The values obtained from
all respondents or from specific groups of them could be averaged,
73.
producing an indication of direction and strength of opinion of the
population or group as a whole. Thus, an average (mean) of 1.2 would
signify very strong agreement, while an average of 3.1 would signify
moderate disagreement. The advantages of an even number scale are that
respondents are forced to choose an opinion since a neutral response
is not available, and the opinions of different groups of people can
be compared.
A "don't know" answer was available for occasions when a respond-
ent did not know the answer to a question, did not understand it, or
could not make up his /her mind which answer to choose. Interviewers
were instructed to encourage (without being pushy) responses which
conform to the scale, since "don't know," multiple, and highly qualified
responses cannot be used in computing mean values and associated
statistics. In fact, the scaled answers were read to the respondents
but "don't know" was not; it had to be offered by the respondent.
The questionnaire was printed with ample clear space so that inter-
viewers could write down supplementary comments as they were made.
2. Personal Experience with Floods
The first eight questions dealt with the kinds of experiences that
people have had with floods, particularly in the Northampton area.
The purpose was to find out if this personal history had a significant
relationship to attitudes toward flood management alternatives. Also,
it was hoped that starting the interview with a personal but not really
confidential topic would help establish interest and a good rapport
between interviewer and respondent.
People were first asked if they had ever lived in a place where
there was a flood and, if so, if this was in the Northampton area. If
either answer was "no," the interviewer skipped directly to the next
group of questions. If the answers to both questions were "yes,"
respondents were asked to name the years (or an estimate) in which
they had experienced floods, and to state the year of the worst flood.
The year of the most recent flood mentioned was also noted. Since the
flood history of the major rivers in Northampton is known, it is
possible to get some idea of the magnitude of event that people meant
when they talked about floods. Respondents were then asked whether or
not they or their family had suffered any property losses (i.e., home
or car), personal injury, or financial losses (lost income, commercial
crop damage, etc.). This information was taken as an indicator of the
intensity of flood experiences.
74
3. Perception of Flood Hazard
Six questions concerned respondents' opinions about past flood damage
in Northampton and future flood hazard for the city. Respondents were
asked to evaluate the seriousness of previous floods. The scaled answer
categories were "very serious," "somewhat serious," "not too serious,"
and "not serious at all." The next question called for identifying
which one of four named classes of flood victims had been most severely
affected by past floods: flood plain residents, flood plain businesses,
local merchants, or public services and utilities. Another question
asked for an evaluation of the seriousness of potential flood damage,
using the same answers as for past floods. Each respondent then named
the single area of Northampton he thought would be most threatened by
floods. The response was recorded and then classified as being in the
flood plain of either the Connecticut River or Mill River.
The next two questions examined the respondent's understanding of
the probability of serious floods occurring. First, he was asked to
place on a scale of 0% to 100% the chance that Northampton would experi-
ence a serious flood within the next ten years. Then he was asked, based
on the supposition that a serious flood took place in the city this year,
how soon he would expect the next flood to occur. The choice of answers
provided was:
SOON since floods seem to happen in groups.
NOT FOR A WHILE since floods occur according to a regular cycle.
CAN'T TELL since floods can happen in any year.
THERE WON'T BE ANOTHER flood because this area is already well
protected.
Capitalized phrases were used as reminders of the available answers.
All of the questions in this section asked for opinions, but the
answers also depended partly on knowledge of local flood history and a
theoretical perspective on the predictability of floods. Thus, some
insight is gained as to how realistically people are thinking about
flood risks.
4. Attitudes toward Flood Management Alternatives
This series of thirty -eight questions was of prime importance in
the survey portion of the study. Answers to the other questions may be
interesting in themselves, but their most important purpose is to pro-
vide a foundation for interpreting the data from this section. These
questions deal with attitudes toward nine approaches to flood control
and /or mitigation of the undesired consequences of flooding. Two of
the approaches are structural and seven are non structural.
75
For most of the nine alternatives, respondents were first asked
simply if they knew about it or had heard about it "yes" or "no
Then a very brief description of the alternative was given (in some
cases with the assistance of simple graphics and the respondents were
asked again if they knew about it. These two questions permitted a
gross measure of knowledgeableness which was used to evaluate responses
to the ensuing questions related to the alternative. The respondent
was asked whether he was strongly in favor, somewhat in favor, somewhat
opposed, or strongly opposed to use of the alternative. He was also
asked to evaluate the effectiveness of the alternative in terms of
preventing or alleviating flood damage (very effective, somewhat effec-
tive, not too effective or very ineffective). The distinction between
favorableness and effectiveness was made because it is logically
possible not to favor something even though it would be effective, and
it is also possible to favor something even though it would be ineffec-
tive. Thus, the single question "Should this alternative be used
would not necessarily result in an answer that clearly expressed an
attitude toward the alternative.
The nine alternatives are listed below along with the brief ex-
planations given to respondents. Exceptions to the pattern of question-
ing just described are also noted.
1) Dams. First it was explained that one approach to controlling
floods is through the construction of large structures such as dams and
dikes, and that dams are used to hold flood waters upstream so that
downstream areas are protected. A graphic representation of a dam was
shown. The respondent was then asked if he knew if dams are used to
control floods in the Northampton area.
2) Dikes. Explanation: "Dikes are another kind of structure used
to control floods. They are built along the river banks and allow
flood waters to flow downstream, but confine them in the main river
channel." Graphic representations of a dike, river channel and flood
plain were shown. Then the respondent was asked if he knew whether
dikes are used to control flooding in Northampton.
3) Flood plain zoning. Explanation: "Flood plain zoning laws
are enacted by some towns for the purpose of regulating the use of
land and structures in order to reduce flood damage potential. These
regulations may be used to restrict construction on the flood plain
which is likely to be damaged by floods." The explanation was accom-
panied by graphics.
4) Flood proofing. Explanation: "Buildings are flood proofed
through structural modifications such as raising foundations above the
flood plain, fitting watertight doors, or installing special window
shields." Drawings of examples were shown.
*The graphics are reproduced in Appendix B, pp. 169 -172.
76
5) Flood insurance. Explanation: "The idea behind the [flood
insurance] program is that the federal government will subsidize flood
insurance for property owners in flood areas if, in return, local com-
munities agree to establish policies which place restrictions on fur-
ther construction or development in those areas. Also, new construction
in flood -prone areas has to include certain flood proofing measures.
The purpose of the program is to reduce future flood damage."
6) Outright purchase (including the possibility of relocating
homes or businesses). Explanation: "The idea is very simple. If the
government purchased at a fair price property which might be severely
damaged by a flood, people could then afford to move off the flood
plain. Once the government had helped people move, the buildings could
be taken down and the land put to some use which would not be so suscep-
tible to expensive flood damage -maybe a park or for agriculture." An
extra question not included in the series for other alternatives was
then asked: "If the government is willing to pay a fair market price
for property on the flood plain, and to pay the expenses for moving the
people who live there, do you think it is right for people to be re-
quired to sell their property and move Flood plain residents were
also asked this question: "If the government offered you a fair market
price for what you own on the flood plain, and paid your moving expenses,
would you be willing to sell In addition to "yes," "no," and "don't
know," the questionnaire form included the category "depends (specify)."
This was used for strongly conditional answers, and the interviewer
noted the particular condition.
7) Partial purchase. The respondent was asked in separate ques-
tions whether he had heard of transferring development rights and
whether he had heard of conservation easements. Then this explanation
was given: "For land which is not highly developed, the owner can sell
just the right to develop the land. In this way, restrictions may be
placed on the types of future development or uses of the land which
might affect flood levels, but the owner of the land still retains all
the other rights associated with ownership. For example, he could go
right on living or farming there just as he had been."
8) Flood warning and evacuation. Explanation: "The government
monitors rain intensity and river flow in order to provide warning when
potential flood conditions might occur. If a flood seems imminent,
state and local organizations can issue warnings and provide assistance
so that residents can move themselves and some of their belongings away
from flood danger. Emergency centers are also provided for people who
have been flooded out."
9) Flood disaster relief. Explanation: "After a very serious
flood which damages a lot of property and may injure many people, the
government may declare the area to be a 'disaster.' This official
declaration qualifies the area for special disaster relief such as emer-
gency food, medical aid, temporary shelter and additional manpower to
help get things back to normal again. In addition, people who have lost
77
property may be eligible for special financial assistance such as low
interest loans."
The final question in this section confronted the respondent with
five generalized approaches to flood management. The question was pre-
sented as follows:
We have talked about a lot of different ways to reduce flood
damage. All of these ways potentially affect people's
property rights in one way or another. On the whole, if
you had to decide, which of these five approaches would you
choose for the Northampton area?
1. Keep things as they are and not provide any additional
protection measures or controls except for providing
flood warnings, evacuation assistance, and disaster
relief.
2. Build more dams and dikes even though it may mean re-
quiring owners in communities other than forthampton
to sell their property or affect them in other ways.
3. Use measures such as flood plain zoning and flood insurance
or transfer of development rights which restrict the owners'
use of property on the flood plain but do not require them
to sell and move away.
4. Provide programs which offer financial incentives or
assistance to flood plain landowners to voluntarily
flood proof buildings, maintain open space areas, or
give up some rights to develop their land.
5. Purchase property in the Northampton area which is on
the flood plain, even if owners must be required to sell
and relocate their residences or businesses (with govern-
ment assistance, of course).
The first answer is essentially a status quo choice. The second
implies reliance solely on flood control structures. The last three
involve non structural measures, with each choice involving a different
magnitude of government control over private use of private land.
Answer 3 calls for medium government control, answer 4 is least re-
strictive, and answer 5 is the most authoritarian choice given. It was
desired that respondents make their choice in light of a broad range of
consequences. Therefore, some of these were mentioned in the answers.
Interviewers were instructed to encourage a substantive answer rather
than "don't know" for this question especially.
It should be noted that, to the extent they were able to, inter-
viewers freely answered any questions that came up about the alterna-
tives.
78
5. Participation in Public Affairs
Five questions were used to find out whether respondents seemed to
have an interest in public affairs and were active participants. The
purpose was to get some indication of the likelihood that their atti-
tudes toward flood management might be expressed in behavior. Respond-
ents were asked how frequently they voted in national elections and in
local elections. The scale for frequency was every election, most elec-
tions, some elections, or none or hardly any. A separate answer category
for people not eligible to, vote was available.
The next question was: "In addition to voting, some people express
their concerns for how the community should be run by actively partici-
pating in civic clubs (such as Rotary or League of Women Voters),
special interest groups (such as labor unions, PTA or Audubon) or
other public spirited organizations. Do you try to influence the way
things are done around here by participating in such organizations by
being a member, officer or giving financial support -very often, some-
times, occasionally or hardly ever
Another question asked whether the respondent was aware of a public
meeting held to discuss some issue important to the area during the past
year or so. If the answer was "yes," the kind(s) of meeting(s) mentioned
was recorded. Frequency of attendance at such meetings was recorded as
almost always, often, occasionally, or rarely.
6. Personal Characteristics
The final group of questions related to the person's own character-
istics and living circumstances. The number of people in the household
was asked. (Operators of small flood plain businesses were asked the
number of employees usually working at the site.) Respondents were then
asked if they owned land or buildings on a river's flood plain and, if
so, what kind of property it is (house, business, farm buildings, or
land). They were also asked if they had flood insurance on the property.
Further questions covered schooling completed, occupation, year of birth,
years lived around Northampton, and years lived in the present house
(or years the person had his flood plain business at that location).
Flood plain residents were asked if they owned the building where
they were interviewed (home or business), if the building used city
water and was on a city sewer line, if they knew of any flood proofing
that had been done for the building, if they had spent any of their own
money to protect their property from future flood damage, and if they
had been aware of possible flood problems when they first moved there.
For flood plain interviews only, the interviewer noted whether the
respondent was primarily a resident, farmer, or business person.
79
Answers to the questions in this group provided data which it was
thought might be valuable in interpreting the attitudinal information.
D. Data Analysis*
1. Flood Experience
The survey results in Table 18 show that residents of the flood
plain are much more likely than residents of Northampton as a whole to
have experienced a flood. However, it seems fairly remarkable that a
full third of Northampton's adult population has experienced a flood
at some time or place during their lives, Table 18 also shows that
nearly all flood plain residents who have experienced a flood had the
experience in Northampton, while this is true for only half of the
Northampton sample who have experienced a flood. Therefore, almost
every person living on the flood plain has had some direct experience
with flooding in Northampton. On the other hand, personal experience
with flooding seems fairly extensive among the general population, but
it is just as likely to have been gained away from as in the Northampton
area.
Among respondents who have experienced a flood, Table 19 indicates
that there is general agreement that the floods of 1936 and 1938 were
the worst. However, the flood plain resident's last experience with
flooding is apt to be more recent than for the population as a whole.
Although experience may increase the public's sensitivity to an event,
one would expect that it would fade with time. This may be the case for
the residents of Northampton where less than 2% of the total population
has experienced a flood since the 1950's.
Another approach to assessing the comparative experiences of flood
victims is to investigate the losses which they have suffered. As
shown in Table 20, flood plain residents who have experienced a flood
are much more likely than Northampton residents to have lost property
(or to remember having lost property) due to flooding. Flood plain
residents are also more likely than Northampton residents to have
suffered financial loss from a flood. However, personal injury or
injuries to one's family are equally rare for both groups.
*Levels of significance of the statistics have been standardized
throughout the report. They are indicated by the following symbols:
Probability .001 Very highly significant
Probability .01 Highly significant
Probability .05 Significant
n.s. Probability .05 Not significant
In the tables, percents do not always total 100 because of rounding.
The number of cases reported does not include responses recorded in the
"don't know" category, resulting in differing N's and n's in the tables.
A. HAVE YOU EVER LIVED IN A PLACE WHERE THERE WAS A FLOOD?
Response
Table 18
Comparison of the Flood Experience of Flood Plain
and Northampton Residents
Yes 42 79.2 69 32.1
No 11 20.8 146 67.9
Total 53 100.0 215 100.0
Note: Chi squared 37.04202 Degrees of freedom 1
Contingency coefficient .35627
B. WAS THIS IN THE NORTHAMPTON AREA?
80
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
N /0 n
a
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
Response N n
Yes 40 93.0 41 59.4
No 3 7.0 28 40.6
Total 43 100.0 69 100.0
Note: Chi squared 13.31168 Degrees of freedom 1
Contingency coefficient .34310
A. YEAR IN DECADES OF WORST FLOOD MENTIONED
Decade
1920's 1 2.5 0 0.0
1930's 26 .65.0 22 55.0
1950's 7 17.5 16 40.0
1960's 3 7.5 1 2.5
1970's 3 7:5 1 2.5
Total 40 100.0 40 100.0
Note: Chi squared 6.85507n' Degrees of freedom 4
Contingency coefficient .28094
B. YEAR IN DECADES OF MOST RECENTLY EXPERIENCED FLOOD
Decade
81
Table 19
Comparison of the Worst and Most Recently
Experienced Floods for Flood Plain
and Northampton Residents
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
N n
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
1930's 5 12.5 12 29.3
1950's 16 40.0 23 56.1
1960's 9 22.5 2 4.9
1970's 10 25.0 4 9.8
Total 40 100.0 41 100.1
Note: Chi squared 11.15409* Degrees of freedom 3
Contingency coefficient .34790
A. LOSS OF PROPERTY, SELF OR FAMILY
Response
Response
C. FINANCIAL LOSS, SELF OR FAMILY
Response
82
Table 20
Comparison of Flood Damages Suffered by Flood Plain
and Northampton Residents Who Have
Lived Through a Flood
Yes 26 60.5 21 30.9
No 17 39.5 47 69.1
Total 43 100.0 68 100.0
B. PERSONAL INJURY TO SELF OR FAMILY
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
N n
Note: Chi squared 8.26992 Degrees of freedom 1
Contingency coefficient .28000
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
N n
Yes 1 2.3 1 1.5
No 42 97.7 67 98.5
Total 43 100.0 68 100.0
Note: Chi squared .16199 Degrees of freedom 1
Contingency coefficient .03130
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
N n
Yes 21 48.8 14 21.5
No 22 51.2 51 78.5
Total 43 100.0 65 100.0
Note: Chi squared 7.60227 Degrees of freedom 1
Contingency coefficient .27455
Respondents were asked to evaluate how serious a problem flooding
has been for the Northampton area in the past. A rating of 1 was
assigned for "very serious," 4 for "not serious at all," and 2 and 3
for intermediate responses. The results for the two respondent groups
are given in Table 21. Both the flood plain and Northampton sample
groups perceive flooding as a somewhat serious problem and there seems
to be little difference between their evaluations. However, the flood
plain residents perceive a significantly greater present flood hazard
than do the Northampton residents. This conclusion is corroborated by
two measures, one using a four -point rating scale and the other asking
for the percent probability of a flood occurring in the Northampton
area during the next ten years. The correlations between these two
measures are relatively strong (.663 for flood plain residents and .443
for Northampton residents) and they are statistically significant.
It is interesting to note that all the ratings of present flood hazard
are on the serious side of moderate, yet the average judged probability
of a flood occurring during the next ten years is less than 50% for
both groups. While the precise implication of this contrast is not
clear, it may indicate that floods are perceived as such serious
events that even one or two incidents of flooding during a lifetime
are perceived as serious.
Subject
Past danger
Present dangera
Probability of
flood during next
10 years
n.s.
83
2. Perception of Flood Hazard
Table 21
Comparison of Perceptions of Flood Risks of
Flood Plain and Northampton Residents
Level of Flood Northampton
Signifi- Plain Standard 95% Confidence
cance Mean Mean Deviation Interval
2.08 2.09b .07 1.96- 2.22
2.16 2.60b .05 2.51- 2.69
44.79 32.28 1.71 28.93 -35.64
a The correlation (Pearsonian r) between present danger and proba-
bility of flooding is .663 for the flood plain residents and .443 for
the Northampton residents.
b The means for past and present flood danger are significantly dif-
ferent for the Northampton sample (t 3.13 degrees of freedom 200).
Response
84
Another comparison shows that present flood danger is perceived
as less serious than past flood danger by both groups. This separation
is not so distinct for the flood plain residents (2.16 versus 2.08
respectively) as for the Northampton sample (2.60 versus 2.09 respec-
tively). Since the Northampton means are from a sample, they are
amenable to a t test which indicates a significant difference between
the two means (t 3.13 degrees of freedom 200).
Whereas respondents generally accept the inevitability of a serious
flood occurring in the Northampton area, they make no pretense of being
able to predict when it might occur. When asked when the next serious
flood would occur if one had occurred this year, the majority of flood
plain (69.2 and Northampton (75.5 respondents answered that they
could not tell, since floods can happen in any year. In this regard,
there, seems to be no significant difference between the two groups
(chi 5.00, degrees of freedom 3). Respondents overwhelmingly agreed
that the Connecticut River flood plain is the most threatened area in
Northampton; 88.5% for the flood plain and 94.8% for the Northampton
respondents as shown in Table 23. A similarly strong pattern of agree-
ment exists in Table 24 as to who suffers most during floods; two thirds
of both groups responded that flood plain residents suffer most; one
fourth of both groups responded that flood plain businesses suffered
most.
Table 22
Comparison of Flood Plain and Northampton
Residents' Judgments as to When to
Expect the Next Flood
IF THERE HAD BEEN A SERIOUS FLOOD THIS YEAR, WHEN WOULD YOU EXPECT THE
NEXT ONE TO OCCUR?
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
Soon 5 9.6 6 2.8
Not for a while 6 11.5 22 10.4
Can't tell 36 69.2 160 75.5
Won't be another 5 9.6 24 11.3
Total 52 99.9 212 100.0
Note: Chi squared 4.99664 Degrees of freedom 3
Contingency coefficient .13629
Connecticut River 46 88.5 199 94.6
Mill River 6 11.5 11 5.2
Total 53 100.0 210 99.8
Note: Chi squared 1.78720 Degrees of freedom 1
Contingency coefficient .10149
Area
Type of Victims
85
Table 23
Comparison of Flood Plain and Northampton
Residents' Judgments as to the Most
Threatened Area of Northampton
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
N n
Table 24
Comparison of Flood Plain and Northampton
Residents' Judgments as to Who Suffers
Most from Floods
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
.N
Flood Plain Residents 34 69.4 138 67.6
Flood Plain Businesses 13 26.5 49 24.0
Local Merchants 1 2.0 2 1.0
Public Services 1 2.0 15 7.4
Total 49 99.9 204 100.0
Note: Chi squared 2.25691 Degrees of freedom 3
Contingency coefficient .09403
86
Each respondent was asked two times whether he /she was aware of
each of nine flood hazard control measures. First, respondents were
asked directly whether or not they knew about a particular measure.
For example: "Some people have protected their buildings by flood
proofing them. Have you ever heard of this The follow -up question
was asked after the respondent had been given an explanation of the
method's use or effects. For example: "Buildings are flood proofed
through structural modifications such as raising foundations above the
flood plain, fitting watertight doors, or installing special window
shields. Have you ever heard discussions of any measures like these
The response patterns to these questions are shown in Table 25 for flood
plain residents and in Table 26 for Northampton residents. These tables
report the cell frequencies in 2 x 2 contingency matrices. The first
cell contains the number of persons who answered yes to both the
'direct' and 'illustrated' versions of a knowledge question; these
people were obviously aware of the method in question. The second cell
contains the number of persons who thought they were aware of the method
when answering the 'direct' question but changed their minds when
'illustrations' were used in the second form of the question. High
numbers are disturbing in this cell, because the numbers indicate per-
sons who claim knowledge at the general level but are unaware of even
common examples. The third cell contains the number of people who
thought they were unaware of the method until provided with the explana-
tion before the second question was asked. The last cell contains the
number of persons who were completely unaware of the method. The
strengths of the relationship between these two forms of question are
measured using phi, a correlation -type measure which has a value between
0 and 1. The more perfectly related responses to the two questions are
(that is, the larger the proportion of people answering both questions
the same way), the closer the value approaches 1. The level of signifi-
cance for phi is shared with the chi squared from which it is calculated.
Only the illustrated form of the question was asked for the two
structural alternatives- -dams and dikes. The flood plain population is
very aware that dikes are used to control flooding in the Northampton
area. However, a surprisingly large percentage (20 do not think of
dams being used to protect the same area. An explanation suggested
by one of the Polish speaking interviewers was that dams are too
remote to be perceived as offering protection. Her opinion, based
on knowledge of the local culture, is that flood protection, to be
perceived as existing, would have to be visible and nearby. A similar
incognizance exists among the Northampton sample where 47% of the
respondents were not aware that dams contributed to flood control in
the Northampton area.
Among the answers to questions regarding non structural alterna-
tives, the most disturbing responses appear in the second column "yes"
to a direct question but "no" when given illustrations. Among flood
plain respondents, only the availability of flood insurance seems to be
r
rcs
a)
U
CU
Ca.
'C7
rt3
a)
•r-
u
a)
CU
L
W
CU
V)
0
C2
a)
CL'
O
0
N
a)
1
O.
O
CU
N
a)
a)
a)
S-
O
a)
z
87
9< +s 4s 4< i 4<
9 -k is 4< is 4<
1 1 r Cr r LO L0 r LO N
1 1 LO ham• <+7 LO 11 N N 'd'
CO h. <h LO LO 1.0 t.0 LC,
LO r-- C r-• N N r N N N
CP' 10 LO 1.0 117 10 LO 117 L0 I.0
O 01 LO O to N O CO 1O L0
O M CV C r
LO r LO r-- r
N N Cr r Cr to I.0 r r
01 N N I.0 10 C! LCD 01 lD LO
r-- N N N N
h. co 0 LS) CO N 1O CV
1 1 1.0 01 Lc) M n 0 r-• 01
1 1 r•• r r-- r-
1 1 CO 1.0 CO h- O LO O
1 1 r r-•
O 00 CO 00 O
1 O N CO M C O
N
1 O r r CV Ct N CV O
r•••
O r- h. N t<) 10 CO l0 r
O LD r- CT r LID M r CO 01
CO 01 h CO 10 CO CO N ham. L0
L0 01 O O CV a N. r- 00 LD
C+) ed- Cr) CV CO r r r CO Cr)
CI)
N C
V) a) •r-
E C
0 0 0
O
a)
a) a)
C e O N
5- U O N 4-.0
5.- •r- 4-) 0 CJ)
C 0- (0 a) L
1-1 E <U
U S 0) 4-
'C7
•r- a) N N
O -0 CW t0 E
l 0-
0
N
Vl
0
0-
N
CU
"GI
O
U
a)
N
N
O
0•
a)
4
O
S-
O
4-
v E
S-
O O
D_ 4--
N
L e a)
4- 4-
L L
•r •N
4- N
CU r
-C r
•r
(0
0)
O
to
CU
N
0)
o
88
3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4
1 1 r l0 O
1 01 CO to CF t71 M r h
UO 10 1O 10 d d 10 1-0
10 CO N O CO CO 'd N
t` 0 r r r r O O r r
r N N N N N N N N
tT N CO d C) CO 00 r 10 P•.
10 O CO O 01 N d'
•d• r CO l0 M 10 10 r
cv O N CO N L0 cP' 1'�. O
00 N N. N OD 10 r CO N r
r r r
r CO CO Gt N CO r r
1 1 10 O d C OO 10 CO 1`-.
1 I r r r
1 1 M M O co r Ct 03 10
I 1 r N r N r M N r
al N M CO
1 CO 10 CO N ct 10
I r r
i 1 Ql r CO i0 r N N
1 1 r r N CO r
r N tO 01 O r 01 d n
CO 01 r CO N LO N CO CO h
L0 fb I.L) N Ct r N r n CO
O1 O ix
Dl
r r
O) V
C C
•r-
4- 5..
O
O t/)
S- C
Q r
11) C "O '0
0 CU •r- 0 0
E Y c O O
[CI •r O r r
G] N U. ti
fZ
tv
CU
C) 0
C 4-
O 0 4-.
•r-
4-) O 0)
C •r
rts 0 S.. LAC
N 4 4-
O 0 0
0 ttS C tU
C W rt5 E
O S-
U
LC) CO
r r
0
N
•I
0
0)
S-
t])
s
0
to
•1 0)
4
0
r
E
C S.-
O O
0. 4-
0
S. CU
-P 4-
N c0
5.- S_
•r- 4.)
4- 0
0) r
.S= r
F
CO
C)
(I
89
confused in this manner. One would expect this confusion to stem from
unfamiliarity with a complex federal program in contrast to the more
familiar idea of ordinary commercial insurance. This same pattern of
unawareness occurred among Northampton's residents, suggesting a poten-
tial need for better and broader public education concerning flood in-
surance and government subsidies. The Northampton sample also had a
fairly high rate of confusion about easements used for conservation
measures. Among both groups the possibility of using public purchase
of full or partial rights seems to be an unfamiliar concept. The
non structural flood hazard control methods which seem to be best known
among both groups are flood plain zoning, disaster relief, and advance
flood warning.
These data may be summarized by means of an index which measures
the proportion of flood hazard control measures about which each
respondent has knowledge. (The general form of the flood insurance
question was not used, since it seemed to refer to a form of common
insurance which does not normally exist.) On the average, respond-
ents in the Northampton sample are aware of 5.1 out of a possible
9.0 methods, while the flood plain residents are aware of an average
of 6.4 methods. The index shows that flood plain residents are more
aware of these methods than are Northampton residents, and that the
difference is very highly significant. (Flood plain mean .712;
Northampton mean .577; 99.9% confidence interval is .548 .606;.
probability .001.)
3. Attitudes Toward Flood Management Alternatives
Both groups of respondents were asked their opinions as to whether
or not each of the methods to control flood hazard is effective and if
it should be used. The results for effectiveness are summarized for
both groups in Figure 8 and Table 27. Results concerning approval
appear in Figure 9 and Table 28. Overall, the opinions are positive toward
the alternatives. However, the flood plain residents' responses were sig-
nificantly different from the general sample of Northampton on most points.
1) Dams. There is no significant difference between the groups'
estimations about how well dams work in reducing flood hazard. The
choice is the second most preferred by flood plain respondents', falling
behind only flood warning and evacuation. It fared less well among the
Northampton sample which gave dams a moderate mean rating when ranked
with other methods. The two groups disagree on whether dams should
actually be used to protect the Northampton area. Flood plain respond-
ents are more positively disposed toward the idea, although it is ranked
moderately among their judgments. However, among the general public,
only the use public purchase fares worse;' the ratings for flood
0
O
90
H C-3 (!3 W
C..D d H d F- CC LL.
LL. 1-1 W W
0 W F- H
V) W 0 0 OZ 0 CC J= W 0 Q Q W
Q OIV 0 1--4 0 C. COOL VI V) 0 3
0 0 LL. LL LL CL W LL. O
a)
CU 4- rts
>•4-
a) N
C
11 ttS
a)
E
.(CS N
.0 C
4-) 0
cn
.I..) .1*
C C 0.
a)•r 0
CU "t) co
O C 4
O •r O S- N
CO 0 i C) C
O a) a)
O4- S..\
4- ion •r
W C. 01 V/
0 W
4-) N S_
O-•r
5 C
5-.0 5
O (ti
Z .0
n 4-)
i a) S.
0 4- r
r-■
N
t7f'� C V)
C ces Rf a)
V) (n•r
I -N S_ C •r
C C cc) N •r S
4- •t 0 r C
4-) O O ttti f2 CD
N N CU V O
O 4- S S 4- a) O rtS
V) W O'p 4-
0 0 0
ft; 0
(CS O 4-)
0. E a). O O U
•Ut oo' (1)
O C ix) •r 'CI
O S- •r p- S_ S.
4- a) :a) 0 N RS
U_0 E (CS
AAC Os
.0 n a) 0
'TO O •L7
Cr) Cr)-r 't3 >1 O
C C 4 •r S O
•r •r C N fti r•
4-f O 4) 8 4_
(CS U O Sr S.. O 4, O 4-
0
C C LC) N a V) O
.r a) a) CT •r a) N
r— s- 0 E E 4- CO CU
(4 O I i T1 o
1.)..1
U- f-)
C)
0) 4-
O 4-
a)
a)
4-)
O .0
4-)
r
(I
L
91
a,
c o, in to ct r- 03 c N.
(1) r 07 n ti CO O
W 'O r N N CV r-
tY r 1 1 r 1 i I i I
1- C N 01 1.n t(? N r r- d d" •r
O 4- LO Lr)
!t. V 1 r r r r N N N r r--
r
Lk./
C..) i7 ..4.
O Cr)
O 177
W C
O 0
C N C 0
0 O S.-
•r- Q S- .r O t0 CO r 01 I N l0 a
C •r 3 C p N. Cl O co o rt:S N. r 4) Q O
10 .r r
1C C (S N
co N O U) a) C
-F) N O Iv
C c:L W tO 'o
N Q V)
•L3 r• N
•r- O S- N In
cn s z o x co Ln r r` r- a)
.7 C O Z. 01 t0 t'0 co N N 1.0 I.0 I- cCS
C co F r- N N N r
r r r •r
Q, 'I`
71 z 0
S
L1.. S-
4
s NJ z CU
O
N. a-) z C
W C
N 0 O a S •r In •r
a) 0 F-- b
r 0 V l0 CD M C r 01 03 4
C
a U r Z i f1 ti r� r. CO r N LO r l0 d N. d)
rci O U.; •r
1 Y 0 r r N N C'J N N r r O
4 [Y_ Oa .II
r 0 O W c
rt 3
d O 0
1 0 N O 4-)
O O v)
O •r 3
C.1 a)
r .0 O 0)
11 0) r9 C
W fC4
4 4 3 to 3 3 K is k cn 3 U cn
H
W d •r- C 3 3 3 3 3 3 C K 0 S=
O •r N
L C7)
O 4 W
•r r •r
S- J
a 4 N C N
44-
C.) (rS 0C
Z SO
r
H
y Q. C
1 cL •r
O O U C)l in Q) IL)
O •r 4-
c`• N r C N
W r
CD CO •r O O S.. S= Q' r
_..I O t� CL H n- U N el
L.LI C r -O cn C tr) C) r- N O
0) 0 C
O O
3 0 E O O O O (0 r r O�
O Z d O 0 L WZ to
U-1
V)
V)
LU
uJ
LU
0
cL
0
92
0
0
1
CI) (1)
•1•• C
00
S- 0.
-P
ci
E
V) CD trt
4-' S.-
tr5 0
-c
ITS
CU LL.
0
5-
1— 0
en
L.I..i r..-- C CO
1;.-I
C
L) D
U.;
V) V) CD 0 LL.
S-
..-1 CD
4-)
g )--1 1 2. Cr LL.
Ca- LL. 1--a LU LL.I V) •r-
1-1 0 C.) C.) W 1— I-I
V) 0 0 (1) 0 CD .-i0 M 0 GC (1) --I
(1) LL1 CD CD 0 m CD r= --I W CD c<
0 h.) 0:. o a- o a. -1 14 0 v) cc
.....1 __I 0 -.I 1.-.1
0 0 U. Lt- u_ a. LLI LL. 0
a)
_a
0
0... a CU
tn E w
a) a)
•L)
s- S.. 4-
0 ay
•r- 0
r Sg. s g
.C
MS a) 0 0
8 -C 4E) to
S-
r.. LC) •s--
0
S-.
r•-..
4- Ca.
o CU
c _C 0:
-0 .0 W 4-) c.)
"t5 a)
cr) a)..r- -0 >i
4- 5- v)
r• .r. 0 c o w
4- 4- 0 4-)
5-5.- o 4- D4-)
czi ttS 01 •r- 5- Z.
CD CU W a)
E E 0 4-
(714..)
1
rO
4-
00 i l'" 0
I CM
-1-1--
(2,_ 0
CU 4--3
4-
0 0
ll
V1 •r
-O p L
a)
to 4-a
r
Q
C r
O 0
s-
0_ 4-)
E
o
.0
CO S- 0
O S-
W Z n:S
r
0 rt3
ttt CS
I- E13
C O
•r 0
rt) r
r LL.
0
4-
0 0
O
O a)
r N
LL
4- a)
0
04-'
u) O
•r
S-
0-
E
0
U
O N
0. C
E Q)
t1U
•r
S a)
Ce
o
0)
C N D LL) tl:) '.O CO O N
a) r CO h. to 00 N al N d' N
r CV r-- r- r N N N r- r-
4- CL) 1 1 L!) r O t71 P- d c'
0 N C) CO
O 4 O LC) •d' LO O tD 01 N r
P (V r r r N N r r r
In
o
93
N LC) CO CO d' CO ct r
CI) L0 N. CO tT t7) Ol t U LC)
1 '.0 L.() r CO O M 0J CD
N
(V r r r N N N r r
O n co O t0 O 1.0 N N
N r N N N CO N r r
V) 3 3 K 3 t/) N
N
N a)
E
0
0 0
v)
a)
E
a)
a)
94
proofing and easements are not significantly different from those for
dams. This contrast between the ratings of a method that is apparently
quite workable and still judged less appropriate than most other
methods for actual use must be explained by some other criteria.
2) Dikes. The Northampton respondents have a significantly
more positive expectation of how well dikes work to protect the area
from flood hazards than do flood plain residents. Among the flood plain
respondents, there seems to be less confidence in dikes than in dams.
However, there is no significant difference between the groups about
whether dikes should be used. It is fairly clear from these data that
dikes are the preferred structural method.
3) Flood plain zoning. Flood plain respondents are significantly
more critical of flood plain zoning than the Northampton respondents.
Among the Northampton sample, the method received a high ranking for
both effectiveness and desirability, being surpassed only by those
methods which involve the least governmental control- -flood warning
and disaster relief. It is suggested that this highly positive ranking
could be more related to the general acceptability of zoning as a
land use control method than to flood plain zoning as a specific method
to lessen flood hazards. While flood plain residents are generally not
very impressed with how well flood plain zoning works, they are even less
inclined to approve using zoning as a method to control flood hazards.
A possible factor in this low approval rate may be awareness by flood
plain respondents that their use of their own property could be affected.
4) Flood insurance. Flood plain residents are also significantly
more critical of the federal flood insurance program than are the
general Northampton respondents. The Northampton sample views flood
insurance as a less favorable alternative for flood hazard abatement
than zoning. It was clear in the question that participation in the
federal flood insurance program is only possible when a community
controls flood plain development through some means such as zoning.
Therefore, it may be assumed that Northampton respondents probably do
not see any additional benefit from a federal contribution to land use
control. On the other hand, flood plain respondents are more favorably
disposed to the insurance program than to zoning per se. This may be
because the federal program can offer flood plain residents something
in return for regulating the use of their property.
5) Flood proofing. The Northampton respondents were significantly
more positive in their evaluation of flood proofing than the flood
plain respondents. However, flood proofing is still the least effec-
tive method in the opinion of the Northampton sample. Both groups are
more favorably disposed to using flood proofing than the method's
ratings of effectiveness would suggest.
6) Public purchase. Public purchase of flood plain lands re-
ceived highly negative evaluations from both groups; the flood plain
respondents were significantly more critical of the prospect than
95
Northampton residents. In general, public purchase was an unaccept-
able alternative to both groups. When asked if they thought land-
owners should be required to sell their property to the government if
the price was fair, 68% of the Northampton sample answered "no,"
while only 28% responded "yes." The flood plain respondents found
this alternative even less tolerable; 77% said "no." In addition,
flood plain respondents were asked whether they would sell their
property to the government if offered a fair price. Only 16% responded
negatively, while 40% said "yes" and 44% said that "it would depend."
Both groups were unfavorably disposed to the possibility of being re-
r quired to sell their property to the government, but most of the
11 flood plain respondents would sell if offered a fair price and other
conditions were met. A frequently mentioned reservation was that the
;1 price might not be fair from the property owner's point of view.
7) Easements. The response pattern regarding the purchase of
partial property rights through easements or transfer of development
rights (TDR) is similar to, though more favorable than, the response
pattern concerning the outright purchase of all property rights.
Flood plain respondents were more critical of easements than were re-
j spondents in the Northampton sample. While the flood plain respondents
rate effectiveness and desirability of easement purchase or TDR about
the same, the Northampton sample rates desirability higher than
r- effectiveness.
8) Flood warning and evacuation. There are no significant
r differences among the twa groups' evaluation of flood warning. Both
groups rank it as a most effective method in preventing flood damages.
Both also have a higher regard for its use than they have for its
effectiveness.
9) Disaster relief. The response pattern for disaster relief is
similar to flood warning; however, flood plain respondents are sig-
nificantly more skeptical of how well the method works.
In summary, the flood plain respondents were more critical in
their evaluations of the various methods for controlling flood hazard.
They not only have more experience with flooding but also live in the
area where potential flooding would occur. Therefore, one would
expect more discriminating evaluations from them. For the same
reasons, flood plain respondents generally rated the desirability of
using a method lower than they rated its effectiveness. Their experi-
ence may suggest to them that floods will occur, and cause damage
no matter which efforts toward protection are made. If this is indeed
the case, their general reluctance to accept limitations on the use of
their property without corresponding improvements in protection is
understandable.
Another general conclusion can be made from the pattern of
agreement regarding the most favorable methods of flood hazard control.
96
Those measures which are used to react to an emergency situation
without any long lasting governmental control are viewed most favorably.
It is probable that respondents perceive flood warning and disaster
relief as methods which have potential benefits with little (or at
least distant) attendant cost.
The structural methods received the second place rankings. Exist-
ing structures have been in place for some time, which may explain
their general acceptance, in part. In addition, the burden of
accommodating new structures may be seen as falling on others. For
instance, when a dam is built, those who own land upstream must sell
their property, not those who benefit from the protection. All of
the third- ranked methods involve some degree of governmental control.
In general, the more the control, the less favorably these methods were
viewed by respondents.
A final question to respondents posed several possible alternative
approaches to flood hazard control: (1) keep things as they are,
(2) build more dams and dikes, (3) use measures restricting property
rights, (4) offer owners incentives, and (5) public purchase of en-
dangered, areas. Each respondent was asked which approach seemed best
on the whole for Northampton. Table 29 shows that neither group was
particularly in favor of offering incentives or purchasing property as
the best approach. The Northampton sample particularly supported
restricting rights through zoning, the purchase of easements, or other
methods. They also supported leaving things as they are now except
for improving flood warning and disaster relief. They were not in
favor of increasing reliance on dams and dikes.
The flood plain respondents, on the other hand, were supportive
of increasing reliance on dams and dikes. However, they were equally
supportive of restricting property rights and leaving things as they
are now. While such simplistic alternatives do not genuinely reflect
the respondents' possible support of multi- faceted approaches which
may actually be proposed, the data does present information about the
public's reactions when offered relatively distinct alternatives.
4. Flood Plain Residents' Property
Several questions were asked of flood plain respondents to better
understand their particular living circumstances as these relate to
flood hazard. The results are summarized in Table 30. Most of these
flood plain structures are owner occupied (86.5 While nearly all
have public water (92.3 less than half (44.2 benefit from public
sewerage. Most (83.3 were aware of the flood hazard which they
faced when they moved to the location, yet few (34.6 have done any-
thing to lessen potential flood damages to their buildings. The
relation between home ownership and preparing for a future flood is
r Comparison of Flood Plain and Northampton
Residents' Most Favored Approach to
Controlling Flood Hazard
97
Table 29
WHICH ONE APPROACH IS BEST FOR NORTHAMPTON?
Approach
Flood Plain Residents Northampton Residents
N
n o
Keep things as they are 13 25.0 69 32.5
Build more dams and dikes 15 28.8 11 5.2
Restrict property rights 14 26.9 93 43.9
Offer owners incentives 6 11.5 30 14.2
Public purchase of property 4 7.7 9 4.2
Total 52 99.9 212 100.0
Note: Chi squared 28.67084 Degrees of freedom 4
Contingency coefficient .31299
shown in Table 31: There seems.to be a tendency for owners to be more
willing than non owners to spend their resources on protection. How-
ever, the number of non -owner respondents is rather small, making the
comparison somewhat weak.
5. Participation in Public Affairs
A series of questions was asked of both respondent groups in
order to determine the extent to which they participate in public
affairs. The questions were asked in the context of an interview con-
cerning flood hazards, but it was made clear that the intent was to
gauge participation in public affairs of any kind. The responses to
these questions are summarized in Table 32.
In general, the results indicate that respondents have a highly
favorable evaluation of their voting record -an evaluation which far
exceeds normal voter participation rates in elections. Sixty -five
percent of the Northampton respondents and 80% of the flood plain
Question
98
Table 30
Characteristics of Flood Plain Residents' Property
Table 31
Investment by. Flood Plain Residents in
Flood Protection Measures
Note: Chi squared .62l48 Degrees of freedom 1
Responses of Flood Plain
Residents in Percents
Yes No N
Do you own this building? 86.5 13.5 52
Is the building served with city water? 92.3 7.7 52
Is the building on a city sewer line? 44.2 55.8 52
Has any flood proofing been done? 32.0 68.0 50
Have you spent any of your own
resources to protect against floods? 34.6 65.4 52
Were you'aware of flood hazards when
you moved here? 83.3 16.7 48
HAVE YOU SPENT ANY OF YOUR OWN MONEY OR DONE ANYTHING TO PROTECT YOUR
PROPERTY FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE?
Owners Non- owners
Response N N
Yes 17 37.8 1 14.3
No 28 62.2 6 85.7
Total 45 100.0 7 100.0
N
L
•r-
(t)
4-
4-
U
•r
CL
r-
0
a
5-
10
a
N
N •r M V)
a)
a) CG
.0 C
H 4
0.
L
4-)
L
0
0
C
•r
ra
r
O..
0
0
r
LL
4-
0
0
N
•r
S—
et
C).
E
0
E v
rls 'C3
.a •r
o o
•r-
4.
r S=
CL a)
"0
T1 r
0 a)
r- !Y
LL
a)
U
C S` N d' Cr)
CL) r N CO CO d
't3
r N r- CO CO
4- S. 1 1 i 1
C a) lD Cr) Cr) Cr
0+J a) u) O r
U C
r r CO CO
Lc)
cn
•'a 0
•N
T) rts
C •r
4- CU
V) C)
C
a)
T3
0
4-)
a)
99
CO CO CO Ch
O O O O
CO CO r
r- C0 r M
N r M CO
CSl LC) M LC)
LC) co N.
r- N N
K
•k •k 4C k
ra
0 .0
0 C
rtS •r 0
C 4- •r 0 U 4-
•r a) (0.
4-3 r- a
0 4) C
O 0 O
r r .r..
(1) rts +p 0)
C Z. C U
r 0 (0 •r a)
RS •r 0. 4- O
0 RS a 0) V)
r- C E
C C 0 b U
•r •r 0) a) •r-
17 r 0 17 U -C
0) a) •r a)
4- 4-) a
0 O r 4-
V Q
0
4r
a
4-
0
0
5-
cts
ns
a)
a)
1
r rts
0 V)
(0 0
1
5-
5C
0)
0
0) •r V1
U 0)
L
r. a
0)
CL) v
•1) 0
4- 0
0
4-
r (0
r0
C
O C
U •r
4-
a)
a)
E
100
respondents say that they vote in every national election. Such forms
of selective memory and positive self- evaluation are common phenomena
in opinion surveys; however, one might assume that these survey results
accurately _reflect the relative relationships of voting behavior. Under
these conditions, one finds that flood plain respondents are much more
likely to vote than Northampton respondents. When comparing the re-
sponses of Northampton respondents one finds that they are significantly
less likely to vote in a local election (t -8.24, degrees of freedom 205,
p .001). For the same comparison, the magnitude of difference between the
means is much less for flood plain respondents, indicating that they may
have more similar voting patterns for national and local elections.
When asked if they participate in local civic minded organizations,
respondents indicated that they generally do not take this avenue of
public expression. On the average, flood plain respondents were much
more likely to attempt to influence public policy through participa-
tion in organizations. Of the Northampton sample, 62% indicated that
they never or hardly ever participate, while 41% of the flood plain
respondents gave the same indication.
Another question asked whether or not respondents had been aware
of a public meeting being held in the past year or so to discuss some
important public issue. Of the Northampton sample, 54% indicated that
they had, while 81% of the flood plain respondents gave the same indica-
tion. Of those who knew about a public meeting, flood plain respondents
were much more likely to actually attend it. This result may have re-
sulted`partly because of the relative prominence of local flood plain
related issues around the time this survey was conducted. However,
this record, as well as the record for participating in civic organi-
zations, is not very impressive when compared to the optimistic evalua-
tions their voting record.
Possibly the most important conclusion which can be drawn from these
results is that a public meeting may not be a very effective method
for collecting information about public opinion. While a majority of
those sampled do not attend public meetings, they were willing to
cooperate in providing public planners with their opinions via the
medium of an opinion survey.
6. Demographic Characteristics
Table 33 shows that in most of their demographic characteristics,
the flood plain residents differed significantly from the sample of
Northampton residents. In reviewing this table, one keep in
mind that households, and not individuals, were the actual unit of
interest. Therefore, these data refer to that individual who is
representing the household. Interviewers were instructed to accept only
persons 18 years of age or older as household representatives.
4-)
N
al
a
C•
4-)
0
S
0
n3
tC3
Cl
0
O
14.
co O
.0 U
i
N.
•r
S-
a)
4-)
cci
S-
nY
4
U
•r-
0.
(CS
0
E
a)
4-
0
0
N
0.
0
C
D_ CU
O •r-
O 0)
X
a) l0 co
U Lc)
N r U)
d
Ti 1 1
4.. S., N r
O a) d' r-
0
V —a d'
zsee
L. r)
01
(13
a)
a)
101
N
M
d
Cr) r r
N
N
r 01 N M
co N co
CY) r 01' M
'.0 N"
N d" l0 M CO
CY), 1 .0 O 1 .0 C'7 M
01 N 1� l0 M
d- r l0
3 33 4 3
'O
4-)
a)
a)
0
U
N
•r (1) v- C O
5- •r- N
•N (13 4-) a) S-
C C N a) a)
a) C a) O N CL
0. 0 0. O r
N •I- V) '-C
a 0
E 4 4 C rr S-
•r- 4 a) o a)
r r N -C -0
S_ N a)
0 0 0• O C
0
102
There were significantly more male respondents among the flood
plain respondents (68 than in the Northampton sample (51 How-
ever, both sexes were well represented in both groups. The flood plain
respondents were also significantly older (49.6 years) than the North-
ampton respondents (43.4 years). In addition, the flood plain respond-
ents have spent a significantly greater portion of their lives in the
Northampton area (67.6 and in the house in which they are presently
living (46.3 than the Northampton sample's respondents (61.3% and
27.2 respectively). Flood plain residents also have less formal edu-
cation (12.1 years) than Northampton respondents (13.8 years). The
pattern of occupation for both groups of respondents, as shown in
Table 34, is also significantly different (chi squared 35.4 degrees
of freedom 13) with the Northampton respondents tending toward pro-
fessional-service-student occupations while flood plain respondents
tended toward crafts labor- retired activities. The only characteris-
tic for which there is no statistically significant difference is
the size of household, One might note parenthetically that this is
the only characteristic relevant to the sampling unit, per se, The
reasons for these differences are not known. A strict interpretation
would be that interviews were conducted with flood plain household
representatives who tended more to be males, were older.and had less
formal education than the representatives of the Northampton households,
It is possible that these characteristics also reflect real differences
between the populations of individuals living on the flood plain and
in Northampton. However, some of the difference in age and the pro-
portion of men may be only an artifact of the interviewing process.
Interviewers deliberately sought out persons who were substantially
responsible for the household to represent flood plain households.
This was not true for the Northampton sample, where persons whose
names had been selected at random were sought,
7. Principal Components
The consultants' experience with regional and resource planning
has led them to conclude that such rigid alternatives as those pre-
sented in the questionnaire are not compatible with real world situa-
tions and decision making processes, The comments and evaluations
provided by the interviewing staff lead to the belief that the public
does not see the possible alternative approaches as being so cut -and-
dried either. However, the oversimplifications of the questionnaire
format were considered an adequate and necessary starting point for
the investigation. The collected data make it possible to proceed
to a statistical technique that makes it possible to obtain a clearer
sense of which general flood management approaches the respondents
tend to perceive as belonging together.
The statistical method employed is termed "principal component
analysis.!! The procedure involves a quantitative comparison of the
variation in evaluation among the alternatives to determine which
103
fi
Table 34
Comparison of Occupations of Flood Plain
[1 and Northampton Residents
n Flood Plain Residents, Northampton Residents
Occupation
Professional 3 6.0 51 24.2
Managerial 7 14.0 20 9.5
Clerical 0 0 10 4.7
Sales 1 2.0 4 1.9
(1 Craftsperson 5 10.0 10 4.7
Operative 4 8.0 11 5.2
Laborer 4 8.0 5 2.4
Household Worker 3 6.0 2 .9
Service Worker 2 4.0 17 8.1
Farmer 3 6.0 1 .5
Li
Homemaker 6 12.0 25 11.8
Ll Student 2 4.0 22 10.4
Retired 10 20.0 26 12.3
Unemployed 0 0 7 3.3
Total 50 100.0 211 99.9
Note: Chi squared 35.3861*** Degrees of freedom 13
Contingency coefficient .34553
alternatives respondents seem to rate in a similar fashion. These pat-
terns are extracted as principal components; the first principal
component describes the most consistent theme which underlies the
respondents' ratings. The second principal component describes the
most consistent theme in the variations which remain among the ratings.
It is a characteristic of the analysis that these two principal com-
ponents are totally uncorrelated to each other. Similarly, other
uncorrelated principal components can be extracted which describe
themes in the public's evaluation of alternative flood hazard control
methods.
104
The most easily understood form in which to present each prin-
cipal component is to list its correlations (termed "loadings with
the various ratings from which they are formed.
The four most important themes which seem to underlie the
Northampton respondents' evaluations of control measures were extrapo-
lated from the loadings shown in Tables 35 through 38. The first
theme describes 19.2% of the variation among the Northampton respond-
ents. In essence it seems to describe an approach which relies
primarily on land use control measures such as zoning, public ease-
ments and a federal flood insurance program. The second most impor-
tant theme which underlies the general public's ratings involves the
structural approaches, such as dams and dikes, supplemented by flood
warning and disaster relief. A total of 13.3% of the variation among
respondents is described by the second theme. The third theme de-
scribes an additional 11.1% of the total variation and it is less
coherent than the first two. Yet it seems to be focusing on large
public expenditures, such as dikes and the public purchase of threat-
ened land, and against private expenditures such as flood proofing.
In contrast, the fourth theme focuses on an individual's responsi-
bilities and opportunities, namely flood proofing, and shuns depend-
ence on public aid. This is also a less coherent approach, although
it accounts for 9.0% of the variation in responses.
Among the flood plain respondents, the first two principal com-
ponents are clearly similar to those for the Northampton respondents,
as seen from Tables 39 and 40. The first, describing 24.1% of the
variance, is clearly oriented towards public programs controlling
land use. The second theme is just as clearly a structural alterna-
tive. It describes 15.8% of the variation among the respondents.
The last two components seem to be formulated from the flood plain
resident's particular point of view. In one instance, 10.1% of the
variation in responses seems to focus on preserving the individual's
independence of action (see Table 41). While dams are seen to work
and flood proofing is approved, there is a weakly negative series
of correlations to public programs in general. The exceptions are
strong loadings on flood warning, evacuation and relief, all of
which are methods which assist the individual in maintaining independ-
ence of action. The last theme, which describes 9.1% of the varia-
tion, seems to center around general public assistance (see Table
42). Flood proofing one's own home is looked on negatively while
relief receives positive loadings. The general trend among the weak
loadings is toward public programs.
The similarities among the two groups' orientation are striking.
Both share strong land use control and structural protection themes
in describing their evaluations of measures to control flood hazards.
In addition, they both share weaker themes of public and individualistic
responsibilities. However, both view these latter themes from their
own distinct orientation. The flood plain respondents seem inter-
ested in what benefits they receive and the Northampton respondents
Question
105
Table 35
Northampton Residents' First Principal Component:
Land Use Control Methods
High
Do dams work? .039
Should dams be used? .041
Do dikes work? -.Q75
Should dikes be used? .0 82
Does flood plain zoning work? .622
Should flood plain zoning be
used? .525
Does flood insurance work? .676
Should flood insurance be used? .620
Does flood proofing work? .132
Should flood proofing be used? .117
Does public purchase work? .596
Should public purchase be used? .481
Do easements work? 524
Should easements be used? .580
Does flood warning work? .267
Should'flood warning be used? .464
Does disaster relief work? .366
Should disaster relief be used? .537
Note: The sample size for the Northampton survey is 215. Missing data
are deleted in a pairwise fashion, therefore the effective sample size
ranges between 215 and 179.
This component has an eigen value of 3.456 which accounts for 19.2% of
the total variance.
Loadings
Moderate Low
Question
106
Table 36
Northampton Residents' Second Principal Component:
Structural Methods
Do dams work? .542
Should dams be used? .617
Do dikes work? .601
Should dikes be used? .666
Does flood plain zoning work?
Should flood plain zoning be
used?
Does flood insurance work?
Should flood insurance be used?
Does flood proofing work?
Should flood proofing be used?
Does public purchase work?
Should public purchase be used?
Do easements work?
Should easements be used?
Does flood warning work? .530
Should flood warning be used?
Does disaster relief work?
Should disaster relief be used?
Loadings
High Moderate
.331
.465
Low
-.177
-.095
-.018
-.035
.235
.058
-.013
-.217
-.208
-.255
.212
Note: The sample size for the Northampton survey is 215. Missing data
are deleted in a pairwise fashion, therefore the effective sample size
ranges between 215 and 179.
This component has an eigen value of 2.386 which accounts for 13.3% of
the total variation.
Question
107
Table 37
Northampton Residents' Third Principal Component:
Public's Responsibility
High
Loadings
Moderate Low
Do dams work? .306
.230
Should dams be used?
Do dikes work? .351
Should dikes be used? .343
Does flood plain zoning work? .155
Should flood plain zoning be .174
used?
Does flood insurance work? -.262
Should flood insurance be used? -.380
Does flood proofing work? -.584
Should flood proofing be used? -.571
Does public purchase work? .369
Should public purchase be used? .340
Do easements work? .396
Should easements be used? .280
Does flood warning work? -.158
Should flood warning be used? -.267
Does disaster relief work? -.226
Should disaster relief be used? -.191
Note: The sample size for the Northampton survey is 215. Missing data
are deleted in a pairwise fashion, therefore the effective sample size
ranges between 215 and 179.
This component has an eigen value of 1.993 which accounts for 11.1% of
the total variance.
108
Table 38
Northampton Residents' Fourth Principal Component:
Individual's Responsibility
Question High Moderate Low
Do dams work? .367
Should dams be used? .0347
Do dikes work? .239
Should dikes be used? .047
Does flood plain zoning work? .107
Should flood plain zoning be
used? -.057
Does flood insurance work? -.101
Should flood insurance be used? -.068
Does flood proofing work? .639
Should flood proofing be used? .704
Does public purchase work? .170
Should public purchase be used? .134
Do easements work? .253
Should easements be used? .124
Does flood warning work? -.225
Should flood warning be used? -.359
Does disaster relief work? -.414
Should disaster relief be used? -.148
Note: The sample size for the Northampton survey is 215. Missing data
are deleted in a pairwise fashion, therefore the effective sample size
ranges between 215 and 179.
This component has an eigen value of 1.628 which accounts for 9.0% of
the total variance.
Loadings
109
Table 39
Flood Plain Residents' First Principal Component:
Land Use Control Methods
Loadings
Question High Moderate Low
Do dams work? -.306
Should dams, be used? -.154
Do dikes work? -.244
Should dikes be used? -.229
Does flood plain zoning work? .845
Should flood plain zoning be
used? .789
Does flood insurance work? .664
Should flood insurance be used? .707
Does flood proofing work? .203
Should flood proofing be used? .424
Does public purchase work? .464
Should public purchase be used? .448
Do easements work? .679
Should easements be used? .749
Does flood warning work? -.297
Should flood warning be used? -.140
Does disaster relief work? -.074
Should disaster relief be used? .250
Note: The flood plain census included 53 interviews. Missing data are
deleted in a pairwise fashion, therefore the effective population size
ranges between 52 and 47.
This component has an eigen value of 4.341 which accounts for 24.1% of
the total variance.
110
Table 40
Flood Plain Residents' Second Principal Component:
Structural Methods
Question High Moderate Low
Do dams work? .549
Should dams be used? .672
Do dikes work? .588
Should dikes be used? .598
Does flood plain zoning work? .276
Should flood plain zoning be
used -.064
Does flood insurance work? -.061
Should flood insurance be used? -.264
Does flood proofing work? -.336
Should flood proofing be used? .231
Does public purchase work? .486
Should public purchase be used? .299
Do easements work? .458
Should easements be used? .196
Does flood warning work? .528
Should flood warning be used? .306
Does disaster relief work? -.237
Should disaster relief be used? -.275
Note: The flood plain census included 53 interviews. Missing data are
deleted in a pairwise fashion, therefore the effective population size
ranges between 52 and 47.
This component has an eigen value of 2.852 which accounts for 15.8% of
the total variance.
Loadings
Question
111
Table 41
Flood Plain Residents' Third Principal Component:
Individual Independence
High
Loadings
Moderate Low
Do dams work? .374
Should dams be used? -.208
Do dikes work? -.059
Should dikes be used? -.270
Does flood plain zoning work? .052
Should flood plain zoning be
used? .154
Does flood insurance work? .123
Should flood insurance be used? .078
Does flood proofing work? -.008
Should flood proofing be used? .317
Does public purchase work? -.237
Should public purchase be used? -.146
Do easements work? -.051
Should easements be used? -.002
Does flood warning work? .596
Should flood warning be used? .660
Does disaster relief work? .620
Should disaster relief be used? .393
Note: The flood plain census included '53 interviews. Missing data are
deleted in a pairwise fashion, therefore the effective population size
ranges between 52 and 47.
This component has an eigen value of 1.817 which accounts for 10.1% of
the total variance.
112
Table 42
Flood Plain Residents' Fourth Principal Component:
Public Assistance.
Loadings
Question High Moderate Low
Do dams work?
Should dams be used? -.153
Do dikes work? .231
Should dikes be used? .298
Does flood plain zoning work? -.060
Should flood plain zoning be
used? -.110
Does flood insurance work? .086
Should flood insurance be used? .034
Does flood proofing work? -.609
Should flood proofing be used? -.583
Does public purchase work? .208
Should public purchase be used? .052
Do easements work? .018
Should easements be used? .279
Does flood warning work? .040
Should flood warning be used? -.196
Does disaster relief work? .488
Should disaster relief be used? .520
Note: The flood plain census included 53 interviews. Missing data are
deleted in a pairwise fashion, therefore the effective population size
ranges between 52 and 47.
This component has an eigen value of 1.637 which accounts for 9.1% of
the total variance.
r
J
appear to have a more remote interest. In either case, it is useful
to note that these themes are unrelated to one another by the nature
of their extraction. Therefore, the land use control and structural
components should not be viewed as opposite poles for a single theme.
Rather they are judged independently of each other. The same is
true for public and private roles. There is no correlation between
ratings based on one theme and those from another. This interpreta-
tion may provide useful insight when presenting future alternatives.
This section summarizes impressions gathered from contacts with
flood plain residents during the survey interviewing process. The
observations apply to residents of the Ox -Bow and Three County Fair-
grounds areas where most flood plain, residences are located. These
comments provide insight into the data discussed above.
The effects of the timing of the survey were noted. People had
been repeatedly contacted about flood plain issues and importuned to
attend meetings and seminars. For some, the reaction was a desire to
be left alone and be done with the subject.
For several people, the most important flood issue was the condi-
tion of local roads. Access to substantial parts of each of the two
areas is confined to a single road, generally in poor condition or
unpaved in part. During periods of very wet weather, Island Road in
the Ox -Bow is submerged, and unpaved road sections near the Fair
grounds become very muddy. Emergency traffic is thus seriously ham-
pered. Roads are, in fact, a sore subject in both locations but espe-
cially in the Ox -Bow. On summer weekends, parked cars and boat
trailers belonging to people using the marina at the end of Island Road
crowd the roadway and sometimes damage lawns. In some instances farmers
have been effectively prevented from moving heavy farm equipment to
their fields. (The new parking area under construction at the marina
should alleviate the condition.) Near the Fairgrounds, serious road
congestion is usually limited to several days around Labor Day during
the annual fair and ten -day horse racing period. The large number of
vehicles offers one advantage for property holders near the Fairgrounds.
They can augment their income a little by renting parking space.
Most people preferred the traditional dam and dike approach to
flood control, even though the Ox -Bow people live on the river side
of the dike and several Fairground people believe their dike system
is not worth a damn."
Opposition to more recently initiated non structural flood manage-
ment methods appears to stem partly from the innovative nature of the
113
8. An Impressionistic View of Flood
Plain Residents' Attitudes
114
methods which goes against the grain of the close -knit, traditional
neighborhood people. Flood plain zoning and wetlands regulations
have apparently been widely misunderstood by residents of the two
areas, despite efforts on the part of public officials to explain what
is really involved. Flood plain zoning is also under suspicion be-
cause it is involved in Northampton's "zoning politics." There seems
to be a fairly widespread sense of unequal treatment and powerlessness
concerning the application of zoning in general. Apropos of the pro-
posed skating rink at the Fairgrounds, "Anyone with enough money can
come in here and get the city to let them build whatever they want."
Despite the mistrust, many people think flood plain zoning is a
wise policy and are not against it so long as they are allowed to make
improvements to their property such as building a new garage or fixing
up an old barn. A very few flood plain residents strongly favor land
use controls on environmental grounds.
The conception of what constitutes a flood is an important element
in the thinking of flood plain residents who remember the floods of
1955, 1938, and 1936. To them, water on the lawn and eight inches or
so in the basement is not a flood. Long -term experience.has made some
people feel more expert about the river than the "experts." This has
consequences for the flood warning and evacuation system; there are
people who trust their own judgment more than that of officialdom when
it comes to deciding if evacuation is advisable. Furthermore, flood
proofing is regarded as ineffective by the people who remember big
floods. Waterproof doors and window shields would surely leak and "it's
better to let the water come through your cellar and lose a few card-
board boxes than to have the whole house come down because of the
pressure on the [shielded building]."
III. INFORMAL INTERVIEWS
A. Government Officials
1. State and Federal Officials
The following state and federal officials were interviewed.
Massachusetts:
Department of Environmental Management
Matthew Connolly, Director, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife
Robert Yaro, Director of Planning
Department of Environmental. Quality Engineering
Charles Kennedy, Director, Division of Water Resources
James Coleman, Wetlands Control Officer
Department of Food and Agriculture
Fred Winthrop, Commissioner
Department of Public Works
Jack Hurley, Director, Environmental Section
Department of Commerce
Claude Lanscome, Assistant Commissioner
Department of Community Affairs
David Dronsick, Senior Planner
Lower Pioneer Valley Regional Planning Commission
Susan Cole, Director, Section 208 Program
United States:
Fish and Wildlife Service
Roger Reed, Leader, Cooperative Fisheries Research Unit
Soil Conservation Service
Benjamin State Conservationist
115
116
The purpose of these interviews was to discuss the issues and
policies involved in'the use of non structural versus structural means
for controlling flood damage. The discussions centered on the consis-
tency with which any alternatives among structural or non structural
approaches were viewed in terms of existing state or federal policies
or programs. The interviews were done informally, that is, without
a questionnaire. In each instance the discussion was directed toward
the area of responsibility of the respondent and not toward general
aspects of executive office policy. Thus, there were questions
addressed in each interview that were exclusive to that interview in
substance or in context. However, in all interviews, the non-
structural alternatives presented in the Northampton survey question-
naire were offered for response and discussion.
Agency officials in the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs
(EOEA)* were all consistent in their agreement with the need"to in-
crease non structural approaches to flood damage control, though each
agency had its own reasons why this was important. Each of the agency
heads identified potential benefits to their respective programs from
the implementation of various non structural alternatives.
Robert Yaro felt that there was an opportunity to increase the
amount of public recreation access to streams and riparian lands if
the exercise of eminent domain was used carefully in accordance with
the Commonwealth's outdoor recreation plan. Therefore he was the
strongest in his approval of public acquisition of flood plain lands.
He thought that the most effective way to do this was to support
policies that would lead to attrition of flood plain development
through land acquisition where there were flood damaged buildings. Mr.
Yaro, as well as James Coleman, Matthew Connolly and Charles Kennedy,
expressed some concern about the effects of flood insurance. They felt
that the insurance program may encourage more construction on the flood
plain. Despite these doubts, Mr. Kennedy indicated that the Division
of Water Resources actively supported the participation of local govern-
ments in the insurance program. He recognized the need to offer pro-
tection to owners of existing property through subsidized insurance.
He also felt that a weakness in the program was the failure to implement
the provision to permanently remove flood damaged structures.. He
commented with reference to the winter coastal flooding in 1978 where
the federal disaster relief program provided funds to restore buildings
on the coastal flood plains. This action was contradictory to the
Division of Water Resources outlook and Mr. Kennedy was concerned that
disaster relief would be applied in the same way in cases of riverine
flooding.
Commissioner Winthrop saw an opportunity to divert funds for
structural alternatives to use for purchasing development rights from
flood plain owners. He felt this would be an effective means to reduce
*EOEA includes the Departments of Environmental Management, Environ-
mental Quality Engineering, and Food and Agriculture.
L_l
r
117
future construction on the flood plain, and, if this kind of effort were
directed at agricultural lands, it would provide protection and new
capital for agricultural production.
All of the EOEA officials expressed sharp concern about the prob-
lems of reducing flood storage capacity by allowing continued building'
on the flood plain. Thus, none was sanguine about flood proofing
measures. Flood proofing was viewed as an encouragement to continued
flood plain occupancy which may, through the elevation of new structures
on fill, cause even further loss of flood water storage in the future.
Coleman, Connolly. and Kennedy were especially concerned about this
point. Even the potential for elevating structures on pilings was
viewed by Mr. Coleman and Mr. Connolly as undesirable because there
would be a change in ecology and a loss of wildlife habitat.
All EOEA officials were very positive toward the use of local
zoning as a means for preventing future use of flood plains for
building sites. Only Commissioner Winthrop expressed some doubts,
suggesting that in some cases exclusionary zoning could result in an
unconstitutional "taking." Therefore, he felt that some compensation
should be offered where those circumstances arose. Mr. Yaro suggested
that zoning would be effective, but it does not in itself offer any new
public access to the riverfront.
Two agency officials were doubtful about the policy of restricting
or limiting use of the flood plain. Assistant Commissioner Lanscome of
the Department of Commerce responded most negatively. He was concerned
that further restrictions, regulations, or permit processes would
simply add to what his Department saw as an already overburdening
regulatory policy in the Commonwealth. He noted that a potential
major industrial or commercial investor already has to face some 47
permit requirements from initial conception to final completion of
a project. He stated that this was inhibiting the Department's program
to encourage new capital investment. Mr. Lanscome was also concerned
that sites having high location value to industry would -be lost if
flood plains were excluded from. use.. For this reason he was also
doubtful about relocating industry because there might not be sites
available of equivalent location value out of the flood plain areas.
David Dronsick of the Department of Community Affairs (DCA)
suggested there was an ambivalent response in DCA toward federal or
Commonwealth policies that might restrict flood plain use. He said
that there was a strong policy in DCA to support the "home rule"
concept and that the agency's assistance to towns often consisted of
helping them cope with state requirements at the least loss to local
initiatives. There was also some concern that restrictions on flood
plain use might result in forcing low cost housing to locate on sites
that cost more to develop. There was a positive outlook toward the
flood insurance program and its flood proofing requirement because
that program would allow some use of flood plain lands.
118
Jack Hurley, discussing the location of state highways on flood
plain lands, stated that the federal and state impact assessment process
was effective in discouraging such uses. It was his view that the
future for highway construction would be to locate off the flood plain
unless there was a compelling cost factor in locating on it.
Susan Cole said that non structural approaches would be generally
consistent with the Lower Pioneer Valley "208" program* goals. She
felt it would be advisable to avoid all residential uses where. on -site
septic systems were needed. She also felt that the flood insurance
program might encourage increased use of flood plain lands unless
there are strong controls through zoning.
Benjamin Isgur of the Soil Conservation Service indicated that he
supported the increasing use of non structural means in flood damage
management. He said that his agency had shifted its policy in flood
management from structural approaches (dams and channelization) to
encouraging restrictions on flood plain uses. He cited the case of the
proposed Mill River flood control project that had been abandoned at
the agency's request. He said that a major reason for making the
request to the project sponsors in Northampton was the belief that
proper land and soil management plus strong zoning would be more effec-
tive in reducing flood damage.
Roger Reed was unequivocal in his support for non structural
approaches. He felt that any structural means would be counter to the
program he participates in to restore an anadromous fishery in the
Connecticut River. Dr. Reed was strong in his view that the river
should be allowed to go through as natural a flow regime as possible.
He felt the long history of power and flood control dams had already
seriously impacted the river's ecology and he was against any further
structural alterations of its flow or channel.
2. Local Officials
The Northampton officials interviewed included elected and
appointed persons whose positions indicated they would have some inter-
est and responsibility in flood management issues. Elected officials
interviewed were the Mayor, Harry S. Chapman, and four City Council
members whose electoral districts abut the Connecticut or Mill River:
Leonard Budgar, Ward 3; Harold Craig, Ward 4; Charles Baranowski,
Ward 6; and Carol Parsons, Ward 7. Appointed officials included board
or commission members and administrative professionals:
*The program is authorized by Section 208 of the 1972 Water
Quality Act Amendments. It calls for wide -scale regional planning
directed particularly toward improving water quality.
7
r
J
119
Robert LaSalle, Chairman, City Planning Board
Rutherford Platt, Member, City Planning Board
York Phillips, Director, Planning Department
Nancy Stack, Senior Planner
Charles Dragon, Chairman, Board of Appeals
Timothy Washburn, Chairman, Conservation Commission
Robie Hubley, Member, Conservation Commission
Richard B. Covell, Chairman, Northampton Industrial Development
Financing Authority
Bernard O'Connell, Chairman, Board of Assessors
Daniel L. Labato, Acting Chief, Police Department
James Murray, Chief Engineer, Fire Department
Paul Knight, Director of Civil Defense
Francis Sheehan, Assistant City Engineer, Department of Public
Works
Cecil Clark, Building Inspector
Peter McErlain, Agent, Board of Health
Ray Ellerbrook, Director, Recreation Department
Planning officials from other jurisdictions were:
Robert Kalish, Town Planner, Hadley
Richard Gaffney, Hampshire County Planner
Arthur Pichette, Hampshire County Assistant Planner
All officials were asked to comment on the effectiveness and
desirability of the several approaches to flood hazard control, par-
ticularly with respect to their own responsibilities and, where applic-
able, the operations of their departments. Opinions on public support
for or opposition to alternatives such as flood plain zoning and the
flood insurance program were also sought.
Structures
There was no support mentioned for the idea of increasing struc-
tural protection against flooding. Most officials expressed satisfac-
tion with existing levels of protection, although a few were concerned
that people may feel too secure. Mr. Gaffney, County Planner, noted
that people's sense of security may be a false one based on an insuffi-
cient regard for the unpredictable nature of weather conditions. Mr.
Kalish expressed a similar concern, noting that the people of his town
(Hadley) seemed convinced that there is no real risk of potentially
disastrous floods. Mr. Hubley of the Conservation Commission stated
that people,who do not think there will be another flood are simply
wrong.
Opposition to construction of new dams was based on considerations
of fairness to other communities and fundamental objections to tamper-
ing with the river system. Mayor Chapman 'remarked on upstream social
120
economic dislocations that result from building dams and lakes and
the downstream problems that can result from restricting flood water
flow with dikes. He recognized a "city- wide" commitment not to develop
the flood plain and favors the continuing acquisition of flood plain
and other tracts for open space and conservation areas oriented toward
passive recreational use. Mr. Platt of the Planning Board and Mr.
Hubley emphasized the value of retaining the natural flood storage and
ground water recharge functions of flood plains.
Few of the officials had given much serious thought to the possi-
bility of raising the height of existing dikes.
There is some interest in exploring the possibility of restoring
existing small dams along the Mill River for use as power sources.
Mayor Chapman suggested this as a city -run enterprise, selling power
to industrial and municipal users. He saw the idea as an interesting
pilot project through which the people of the city could demonstrate
their ability to work together and achieve a worthwhile end. A
feasibility study now under way should give indications as to the
practicality of the idea. Mr. LaSalle, Chairman of the Planning Board,
is skeptical about the economic feasibility of such a plan, whether
done as network or as individual power sources operated by private
industries, partly because of the probable high cost of maintenance
resulting from siltation of the impoundments. He would prefer to see
any available money invested in production of electricity from wastes.
Flood Plain Land Use Controls
Comments of the four City Council members interviewed indicate
that flood plain issues are not, in general, a major political,concern.
Harold Craig (Ward 4), Charles Baranowski (Ward 6) and Carol Parsons
(Ward 7) all reported little or no concern expressed to them about river
related subjects. Ms. Parsons, whose district is in Leeds, said that
the condition of the dams on the Mill River has been and continues to
be a matter of interest. All three of these districts have only a
small portion of their geographic area in a flood risk area.
In Ward 3, the situation is somewhat different because it encom-
passes substantial flood plain areas, including the Ox -Bow and Fair-
grounds sections. Leonard Budgar, Councilman, reports that support
and opposition to flood plain zoning appears to be about equally
divided, but that flood plain issues were not discussed in his recent
campaign. His constituents had expressed concern about the flood
insurance program, especially about losing their mortgages if they did
not buy insurance and having to pay high premiums if they did. Clearly,
there was widespread misunderstanding of the real nature of the program.
Perhaps the most sharply focused issues in Mr. Budgar's ward
were the new marina and the proposed skating rink. The major concern
n
L_)
121
was with traffic congestion on local streets, not with flood plain
zoning as such.
Nancy Stack of the Planning Department also commented on the mis-
understandings about the zoning and insurance programs. She has been
the person in her department who has dealt with both matters in detail
and she has had considerable contact with the public. In her opinion,
farmers did not seem to object to the regulations as long as they did
not interfere with farming activities. Not everyone understood that
relatively minor building repairs were exempt from the permitting
process. Most flood plain residents have opposed the insurance program
because of its compulsory nature (i.e., that it will be required for
new mortgages). However, some people who have looked into it were
surprised when they found out what the insurance program is really like
and have bought insurance. After a very slow start, participation has
increased so that by the end of May 1978 a total of 17 properties
were insured.
York Phillips, City Planner, feels that the suspicions that
"money talks" in the application of flood plain zoning are based on
incomplete understanding on the part of the public of the various
situations that arise. He expressed the wish that more complete news-
paper coverage was offered.
On the whole, it appears that inadequate information and concerns
that are tangential to zoning as such have been root causes of a sub
stantial proportion of opposition to the insurance /zoning set of regu-
lations expressed by flood plain residents, and that more generally
there is currently a background of neutrality toward the issue.
In general, Northampton's flood plain zoning was considered by
administrative officials and board members to be wise policy in terms
of preserving the riverine hydrologic and biologic functions, preventing
increases in flood damage, and retaining agricultural use of valuable
farm lands. There seemed to be confidence that the zoning and wetlands
regulations would be well enforced at least for the present because
of the commitment of Zoning Board of Appeals and Conservation Commission
members.
Mr. LaSalle has confidence in ,enforcement at present but he foresaw
that problems might arise because of increased development pressure
and different attitudes of future board and commission members. He
thinks that in terms of acceptability to the public, flood plain
zoning came at a fortuitous time when the city's economy was in a
period of slow growth, as it still is. He expects that demands for
additional development might result, perhaps within twenty years,
from the planned sewer line along the Mill River, sewer pump stations
that might be installed to make it possible to serve flood plain occu-
pants, increasing demand for recreational facilities along the Connecti-
cut River as the quality of its water improves and a salmon sport
122
fishery perhaps becomes possible, and desire on the part of existing
flood plain industries to expand. He expects, though, that with the
passage of time flood plain controls will be an increasingly accepted
aspect of the way things are--something that just exists the way
other forms of control over people's activities do.
Charles Dragon, Chairman of the Zoning,Board of Appeals, regards
flood plain zoning as a necessity. So far, there have been only two
applications for special flood plain permits to come before the board-
one for the new Ox -Bow Marina and the other for a residence. This low
level of activity supports the view that development pressure at this
time is not great.
Mr. Platt commented that Northampton enjoyed a considerable
advantage over most New England local governments in adopting flood
plain zoning because of its form of government. The fact that it is
a city with a mayor and council, rather than a town governed by town
meeting, means that there is an executive position and a legislature
of manageable size to provide a focus of leadership and action. Also,
the leadership of Sean Dunphy, Mayor at the time flood plain zoning
was adopted, was a significant factor.. Mr. Platt is concerned about
the strength and equity of enforcement in the future. He pointed out
that structures such as dams and dikes become politically "neutral"
once they are in place. However, lines on a flood plain rate map
are subject to controversy and cannot always be followed precisely in
establishing and maintaining zoning districts because of special local
or individual circumstances. He suggested the need for some outside
supervisory authority, perhaps from the Regional Planning Agency, a
state administrative department, or perhaps even the State Attorney
General's office. However, he believes the state does not presently
have sufficient staff to handle this responsibility.
Mr. Hubley thinks the city's regulations are satisfactory but
finds the city to be inadequate level of government to deal with
issues which by their nature are of the scale of the watershed. The
comment was not intended as a criticism of Northampton at all, but
rather of the unfairness of placing responsibility Where it cannot
fully be handled. Northampton's efforts are meaningful and good, but
inherently inadequate to the task without similar controls being
instituted throughout the region.
Timothy Washburn, Chairman of the Conservation Commission,
expects that flood plain zoning will be applied effectively. He notes
that people are quite aware of flooding conditions and the consequent
unsuitability of some flood plain areas for development. In his view,
agriculture is the best use for much of the flood plain and should be
maintained there.
Several officials stated that they did not expect pressure for
new industrial development in the flood plain because .other suitable
L
_J
123
locations, especially the industrial park, are available. Richard
Covell concurs in this opinion. He is Chairman of the Industrial
Development Financing Authority, a group that helps arrange financing
for new industrial purchasers and developers. He is not aware of any
plans for new businesses in the Ox -Bow or Fairgrounds areas. Members
of the Authority are conscious of flooding as something to be considered
in terms of the location choices of new developers. However, this has
not been a particularly significant issue since the authority has so
far been satisfied with the structural precautions taken in the very
few instances where possible flooding has been a factor. As a matter
of general principle, Mr. Covell would prefer to see development occur
in the industrial park or within already urbanized areas, perhaps
contributing to the renewal of parts of the city in the vicinity of
the Mill River.
Cecil Clark, Building Inspector, is the official responsible for
zoning enforcement. He feels that flood plain land use controls are
a benefit to buyers who might not otherwise be aware of flood risks.
He thinks that the zoning is in some ways overly restrictive and needs
reconsideration. For example, the need to demonstrate effects on
flood levels caused by filling requires measurements that in a practical
sense can hardly be made. Remembering the devastation of the 1930's
floods, he is skeptical of the effectiveness of flood proofing; the
flood proofing that has been done has yet to be tested by a major flood.
From the point of view of Bernard O'Connell, the City Assessor,
there would be little impact on property taxes from either flood in-
surance or flood plain zoning. He noted that people have always been
aware of the flood potential and that most of the flood plain is farm
land and has been assessed as such.
With respect to flooding and public health, the main concerns
expressed by Peter McErlain (Agent,. Board of Health) were contamination
from septic systems and possible disruption of water supply. Although
temporary flooding in low areas results in septic pollution of the
rivers, it is not a public health concern because of rapid and thorough
dilution. He favors sewering in the Mill River flood plain area be-
cause of septic system problems. The Fairgrounds is another problem
area, and the addition of a skating rink would make municipal sewering
(with a pump station) a necessity.
The Recreation Department, directed by Ray Ellerbrook, is respon-
sible for programming and scheduling of city recreation on city
facilities, but maintenance is the responsibility of the Department
of Public Works. He reported occasional damage to facilities that
required relatively minor repairs. Other than this, flood management
issues are of no direct concern to his department.
124
Relocation
Government purchase of property and relocation of persons to
areas outside the flood plain are questions that officials felt re-
quired very thoughtful consideration. In general, they expected no
action to be taken except perhaps in a post -flood situation. Their
feeling was that preventing new flood plain encroachment was
a more equitable and economically feasible approach. York Phillips
thought that farmers especially needed to live in flood prone areas
where their fields are.
Flood Warning and Evacuation
Among the officials directly responsible for flood warning and
evacuation services, there is confidence that the system has been well
thought out and is, on the whole, workable. The Department of Public
Works is responsible for monitoring river levels. Francis Sheehan,
Assistant City Engineer, reports that the responsibility applies at
any time on any day. It is very important because the emergency opera-
tions manual is keyed to flood levels.
Civil Defense Director Paul Knight feels that the flood watch,
warning and evacuation system is a good one based on a model plan. He
finds cooperation good in emergency situations among the other Hampshire
County towns both in terms of mutual assistance with personnel and
equipment and in accepting his authority as the person in charge.
There is also good coordination with state officials. Emergency shelter
and feeding of 800 persons up to five days are planned for, with extra
capacity also available. From spring through fall some 30 to 50 private
boats are available for emergency work since this is the local boating
season. His major fear is that people will refuse to be evacuated,
thus creating hazards for themselves and rescue workers.
The Police Department, under Acting Chief Labato, is responsible
for alerting and evacuating people in an emergency. The department
keeps watch during periods of high water and closes some roads occa-
sionally. They maintain a list of all families to be warned. How-
ever, some people have lived in flood areas for a long time and will
not leave on the basis of a police warning. The department does not
have the authority to require evacuation except during a declared
state of emergency.
Fire Chief Murray also thinks the plan works smoothly and does
not suggest any changes. The fire department is responsible for assist-
ing with evacuation and rescue and the use of boats for rescue.
All departments keep themselves familiar with emergency plans and
procedures..
L
i.J
J
Summary
Satisfaction with existing structural protection, flood plain
zoning and emergency preparations is widespread among the officials
interviewed. The most important reservations about flood plain zoning
relate to concerns about the effectiveness of enforcement in the future.
There is an obvious commitment to the policy of controlling flood
hazards through regulation of flood plain use. From their
contacts with the general public, they sense support for or at least
lack of opposition to the policy except among the relatively small
number of people who may be directly affected. Some opposition is
based on lack of understanding.
B. Flood Plain Businesses
There are seven relatively large businesses-located in Northampton's
flood plain. Personnel from these seven businesses were interviewed'to
gain insight into their attitudes toward flood hazard and flood plain
regulations. The businesses are as follows:
Berkshire Electric Cable Co,
Vistron Corp. (Pro -Brush Division)
Northampton Manufacturing Corp.
LaFleur Airport
Ox -Bow Marina
Packaging Corporation of America (Tri -City Container Plant)
Colonial Hilton Inn
Managers and owners were asked a series of questions covering the
following topics:
1) Flood experience at the plant or facility, including the nature
of any damage suffered (property damage, personal injury, loss of
income, having to close the facility), helpfulness of existing flood
warning and /or evacuation programs, and assistance received under
disaster relief programs.
2) Precautions taken to mitigate possible future flood losses
(i.e., flood proofing of structures or acquiring flood insurance).
3) Effects of flood plain zoning, building code regulations,
or other flood insurance requirements on the business and its long -run
i
well- being.
4) Consequences of future serious flood damage with respect to
Lj the possibility of relocating elsewhere within or beyond the Northampton
L; area.
125
126
FAQ
f
I 1
(`1
L1
Li
The substance of these interviews is summarized below.
Berkshire Electric Cable Co.
The person interviewed at Berkshire Electric Cable was Mr. Garson
Fields, Finance Chairman of the firm. He pointed out that there had
not been any flood damage at that location in the past 100 years. The
firm does not anticipate a flood hazard and, therefore, no preventa-
tive measures have been taken or are planned. Mr. Fields was not con-
cerned about flood danger, and expressed the belief that government
should not be involved in any forced regulation of businesses in flood
hazard areas.
Vistron Corp.
The person interviewed at Vistron was Mr. Charles Gaudry, Manager
of Services and Personnel. He mentioned that there had been some minor
damage to inventory in 1958; however, the inventory had then been
placed on higher pallets, eliminating the problem. He indicated that
problems did not arise from flooding of the river, but from surface
water runoff. To prevent any such problems, the firm has installed
large pumps in the basement. He characterized the situation as a
"minor inconvenience."
The firm does not carry flood insurance and does not believe that
there is any real threat of flood damage from the river.
Vistron's most recent building was built on the property in 1969
and the firm has considered expanding its facilities by constructing
four 90,000- square -foot buildings which would be important to the local
economy._ Mr. Gaudry pointed out, however, that the possibility of
being prohibited from building after undertaking the expense of study
and design work has led to uncertainty on the part of the owners.
Mr. Gaudry felt that this situation might cause Vistron to relocate;
given other considerations of taxes, etc., the firm could possibly con-
sider a move out of Massachusetts. He was not supportive of any
government restrictions.
Northampton Manufacturing Corp.
Mr. John Wilder, the Vice President of Engineering, was inter-
viewed at Northampton Manufacturing Corp. He indicated that the firm
had never experienced any real flooding damage and only some minor in-
conveniences in 1958. He does not foresee any real hazard; conse-
quently, there have been no preventative measures taken at the company.
Mr. Wilder's attitude toward regulation is negative. He believes
that the government should make information available to businesses
and be of assistance, but that firms should have the right to assess
their own risks and act accordingly without'restriction.
127
128
LaFleur Airport
Mr. Laurent LaFleur, until recently the owner and manager of the
airport, told interviewers that since it began operations in 1938, the
airport has been closed for one day due to flooding. He believes
that there is sufficient flood protection from the dams that have been
constructed and sees no real threat from floods. He carries no flood
insurance.
Mr. LaFleur wanted to rebuild an airplane hangar which collapsed
last winter due to snow buildup and he was disturbed that the City had
been making this difficult. He does not favor governmental restric-
tions on activities in the flood plain.
The Daily Hampshire Gazette in its June 8, 1978, edition reported
the sale of the airport, including its five hangars, office and utility
buildings, to a group of four Connecticut businessmen who are also
aviation enthusiasts. Mr. Welton Maynard, who is to be responsible for
day -to -day operation of the facility, was reported to have stated that
the group does not plan any immediate changes. They are considering
installing a restaurant, increasing aircraft sales, and perhaps trying
to reactivate the airport's seaplane license. Expansion of the field
to accommodate larger aircraft is not anticipated. (At present some
60 small planes are based there.) Any "changes and improvements"
would be done gradually.
Ox -Bow •Marina
The people contacted at the Marina indicated that this new
facility had been constructed at its present location due to heavy
flooding at the,old location across the Ox -Bow. Flooding at the old
site was an annual event which caused a great deal of inconvenience.
The new structure is elevated above the level of Route 5 and the
level of much of Northampton. The owners believe that it is very safe
from flood hazard. There are a few days each spring when Island Road,
the only access road, becomes impassable, but this is not seen as a
significant problem.
The owners are aware of the regulations and restrictions in the
flood plain, but believe that they are a minor factor for the firm.
Packaging Corporation of America (Tri -City Container Plant)
During the interview with Mr. Eli Kwartler, the Plant Manager,
he indicated that there had never been any damage due to flooding in
the 15 -year history of operations of the plant. Although the plant
has no special construction or flood hazard protection, the owners do
carry $100,000 in flood insurance. This amount, however, is small
relative to the value of the inventory of paper products which could
129
be lost, and would not begin to cover the value of machinery in the
plant.
Mr. Kwartler was uninformed about flood plain restrictions and
regulations. He was not concerned about future construction restric-
tions due to the recent expansion of the plant to what is considered
an optimal production size.
Colonial Hilton Inn
The manager of the Colonial Hilton, Mr. George Paige, said that
the Inn had never experienced any damage or loss of business due to
flooding since its opening in 1969. The facility was constructed on
an elevated site which is not subject to flooding. In addition, the
Inn was built on a slab and, therefore, has no problem with water in
basement areas. The owners do not expect flood damage and do not
carry flood insurance.
Mr. Paige was concerned about the zoning of the area and the re-
strictions placed on new construction. The. Inn owns another 90 acres
adjacent to the I -91 interchange and has had a number of firms inter-
ested in purchasing it for commercial development. The existing zoning,
however, would prevent commercial development, resulting in a lower
value on the land and preventing the firm from realizing a good return
on the investment. He objects to the restrictions.
General Conclusions
First, most firms did not foresee any real threat from a flood.
Many managers or owners pointed to a long history of doing business
at their present locations without any loss of property or days of
operation. As a result, most of the firms interviewed do not carry
flood insurance; if they do, it is a small amount relative to the value
of the property.
Second, most business representatives were not very familiar with
regulations concerning the flood plain. If they were aware of regula-
tions, it was as a result of a negative experience. In general, busi-
ness people interviewed were against government regulation per se and
restrictions on their activities in the flood plain in particular.
They expressed opposition to government interference with their right
to assess and take risks, believing that the government's assessment
of risks is overly pessimistic.
Finally, some of the businesses had taken precautions during con-
struction of their facilities to protect against water damage from a
flood. The precautions usually took the form of filling land to a
higher elevation than the surrounding area. and highways. In some cases
equipment such as pumps is available to minimize damage.
130
C. Institutional Flood Plain Occupants
Representatives of six institutional owners of land bordering
the Mill or Connecticut Rivers were interviewed. (Locations are
indicated on Figure 10, p.121.) Each was asked to comment on the mag-
nitude of existing flood problems, the adequacy of protection provided
by flood control structures, experience (if any) with flood plain regu-
lations, plans for future land use which might result in involvement
with regulatory procedures and restrictions on construction, and gen-
eral attitude toward river and flood plain issues. The following para-
graphs summarize their comments.
Northampton Country Club
The Northampton Country Club provides golf and swimming facilities
for its members at a site adjacent to the Mill River. Mr. Donald J.
O'Brien, President, stated that normal flooding causes relatively minor
damage to club property. A portion of the golf course is subject to
inundation in the spring and, therefore, requires some extra repair and
maintenance after the water has receded. A•small wooden bridge leading
to an island used as a tee area has to be replaced almost every year
because of damage from floating chunks of ice. However, Mr. O'Brien
expressed satisfaction with protection afforded by existing flood
control structures. He was uncertain about the exact boundary of the
regulated area but thought that only a few small buildings were located
within the boundary. These include a snack shed, a maintenance shed,
and possibly one or two other minor structures. The club has no signifi-
cant construction plans for the future and does not expect to come into
conflict with flood plain controls.
Speaking as an individual, not as a club officer, Mr. O'Brien
expressed approval of the idea of flood plain zoning. He thinks
development should be kept out of the flood plain, especially when con
version of agricultural land to other uses would occur. He also feels
that people who choose to build houses and live on the flood plain
may not be aware of the risk they are taking. He is concerned that a
planned sewer line in the Mill River valley will stimulate more con-
struction and conversion of agricultural land. He is also concerned
about the rundown condition of the several small dams along the Mill
River. One, at Arch Street in Leeds, is located only a short distance
upstream from the clubhouse. If this dam gave way, the clubhouse might
be damaged. Mr. O'Brien thinks that repairs and proper maintenance
of the dams, if done at all, are most likely to be undertaken by private
industries that might use them to generate electricity.
Look Memorial Park
Look Park, created in 1930, offers to the public a variety of
outdoor recreation facilities including ball fields, tennis courts, a
swimming pool, paddle boats, a miniature train ride, and picnic areas.
According to Mr. Brian Elliott, Park Superintendent, the park is now
fully designed and built. The only anticipated changes of any signifi-
cance are rebuilding tennis courts and possibly adding another comfort
station. Otherwise, construction activity will be limited to normal
maintenance. The park carries no flood insurance because the major
buildings are not located in flood hazard areas. (One building got
wet during the 1938 flood, but no real damage was done.) He con
siders.the picnic facilities and other small recreational structures
to be compatible.flood plain uses and too minor to insure. Flood
damage to them is taken care of as normal operation and maintenance
work. Since there are no plans for building in the flood plain, he
does not expect the park to be troubled by flood plain regulations.
Mr. Elliott regrets the occasional loss of riverside trees which
results from flooding, but accepts this as a normal part of flood
plain dynamics. Because he values the natural regimen of the river
system, he is dubious about Soil Conservation Service proposals to
build small upstream dams to permit augmentation of water flow during
periods of low flow.
The park trust that controls the park is also responsible for
Cook's Dam at Arch Street in Leeds. The trustees are not anxious to
keep the dam because of a possible serious drain on park funds for
maintenance. (The park's only sources of revenue are income from the
trust, gifts, and user fees.) The trustees would probably be willing
to turn the dam over to the City of Northampton for use as part of a
power generating system or series of facilities.
Northampton State Hospital
Northampton State Hospital consists of a complex of patient care
and support structures owned and operated by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. Mr. Richard Gold, State Hospital Steward, does not
anticipate any conflicts with flood plain zoning restrictions because
the existing major buildings are at elevations well above the 100 year
flood area and because no additions to the facilities are planned. The
buildings are also beyond the 500 year flood zone as advocated in
Executive Order 11988 (1977). There is a small group of hospital -owned
employee houses just north of West Street and west of the Mill River.
Five of these are within the 500 year flood zone; one is inside the
100 year flood zone. None of the hospital's buildings is insured by
an outside agent because this function is handled under the state's
own self- insurance plan.
Mr. Gold expressed general satisfaction with the protection pro-
vided by existinc flood control structures. He is aware of discussions
with Smith College (located just across the river from the hospital)
concerning the.possihility of undertaking,a,joint project to generate
electricity using a dam in the immediate vicinity. However, this is
only under consideration and the hospital has not submitted any pro-
posals for capital expenditures.
131
132
It is Mr. Gold's personal opinion that flood plain zoning regula-
tions could be applied too harshly. For example, in some places
industry might be prevented from expansion which could benefit the
city's economy.
Smith College
Smith College owns extensive frontage along the Mill River.
Mr. Philip Reid, Assistant to the President, indicated that the only
college buildings in the flood plain are boat houses, a field house,
and possibly a physical plant building which supplies heat for the
college buildings. The boat houses have to be close to the river in
order to be functional. This high risk location is accepted as necessary.
(A boat house was damaged by large chunks of river ice in 1978.) Mr.
Reid was not certain whether the physical plant building is
in a regulated area. In any case, the only substantial changes to it
would result from possible conversion from fuel oil to coal, or from
the electricity generating project under discussion with Northampton
State Hospital, mentioned above. Any future requirement for structural
treatment for flood proofing of the building would almost certainly
entail a great deal of expense. With these potential exceptions, he
anticipates no problems with flood plain regulations and none have been
experienced in the past. Smith College has no plans for locating
other buildings in the flood plain.
Mr. Reid believes that present dam and dike works provide adequate
flood °protection. He believes that a great deal of thought and plan-
ning have gone into these structures and other flood preparations and
that they are adequate to handle anything but a massive catastrophe
which would be beyond human control in any event.
Other uses of flood plain areas are for recreation, especially
athletic fields and ice skating at Paradise Pond, and for natural
history field studies. He regrets, but is resigned to, disruption of
a study area which will result from installation of the new sewer line.
Three County Fair Association
The Fair Association has been active: at its location near the
Connecticut River since the turn of this century. Its primary purpose
is to organize and provide facilities for agriculture- related events.
Its property is also used in the summer for horse racing (ten permitted
racing days per year around Labor Day) and a variety of weekend
exhibits and events. According to Mr. Almer Huntley, Association
Vice President, the annual agricultural fair held on Labor Day weekend
is the largest single event, drawing some 35,000 to 40,000 people
per day. Other activities attract a few hundred to a few thousand
people.
Serious flooding experienced at the fairgrounds happened
in 1936 and especially in 1938. Some flooding also occurred in 1955.
133
The fairgrounds are in a natural backwater area where
strong flood currents are not experienced. Construction of 1 -91 has
accentuated this condition since the roadway acts as a barrier between
the normal river channel and the fairgrounds. Mr. Huntley said that
flood water simply rises and falls without doing any real damage to
the buildings. As long as the barns, grandstand, and other structures
remain attached to the ground (and they always have) no harm is done.
The Association does not carry flood insurance because they do not care
if the structures get wet and their machinery can easily be driven away
from the site i f ,necessary.
The fairgrounds are within the regulated flood zone. The 100 year
flood elevation at that location is approximately 125 feet and the
grounds are at 118 to 121 feet. Recently proposed regulations would
have required that new buildings be flood proofed. However, a de-
cision to treat the structures as accessory agricultural buildings
makes flood proofing unnecessary.
The Association would like to add a covered arena to be able to
attract events such as horse and antique automobile shows. This would,
Mr. Huntley feels, benefit the community as a whole. Plans for the
building recently became entangled with a proposal to build a state
financed skating rink on fairground land, with use for a few specified
Fair Association events guaranteed. The rink is generally considered
a desirable recreational facility for the area, but there are doubts
about whether the fairground location is appropriate. In terms of
proximity to major roads and.the availability of existing parking space,
it is a good site. However, some people think it would be poor policy
for the state to pay for a building in a flood hazard area while at
the same time trying to discourage flood plain development. Perhaps
the most vociferous local objections come from neighboring residents
who already resent traffic, streets clogged with parked cars, littering,
noise, and other problems incidental to fairground activities. Mr.
Huntley claims that the parking situation is often caused by people
using the adjacent ballfield, and that additional land recently acquired
by the Association is now available for use by those people. Further,
the Association, assisted by the Police Department, does its best to
control traffic and parking. If the Association decides to go ahead
independently with its own arena plans, Mr. Huntley does not foresee any
serious difficulty in obtaining the necessary city permits despite
anticipated objections from some environmentalists.
Arcadia Wildlife Sanctuary
Arcadia Wildlife Sanctuary is a 475 -acre tract of land located
along the Connecticut River. About 80% of the area is in Northampton
and the remainder, including the buildings, is in neighboring Easthamp-
ton. The sanctuary is owned by the Massachusetts Audubon Society.
The director.of the sanctuary, Mrs. Judith Hubley, reports that about
10,000 visitors per year use the facility. Users include pupils at a
134
nursery school conducted there; school groups, senior citizens and
other organization members who are taken on guided tours; and people
who make informal use of the property for a variety of leisure time
activities.
The function and ecological value of the flood plain are impor-
tant components in the educational program, In addition to on -site
explanations, films are used to show the value of the flood plain.
Mrs. Hubley states that even the nursery school children acquire a
basic understanding of what the flood plain is and does. She heartily
approves of Northampton's efforts to regulate flood plain use.
The sanctuary's buildings include a house built c. 1840 and a
nature center built five years ago. Both are close to, but not actually
in, the 100 year flood zone. (The house was not flooded in or
1938.) There are no plans to locate any future buildings in the flood
plain because this would be contrary to the organization's philosophy
of preserving flood plain land to serve as an integral part of the
natural water /land regime.
General Conclusions
For the most part, flood plain occupants in this category have no
objection to flood plain zoning regulations, if only because they do not
expect to be hindered by them. The Fair Association is an exception
and also presents exceptional circumstances with respect to the types
of structures and activities under its control. Some institutional
occupants definitely favor the purposes and application of flood plain
zoning restrictions and support the city's efforts in this regard.
D. Local Organization Representatives
Persons in leadership positions in seven local organizations were
contacted to find out if their organizations had shown any interest
in recent years in flooding and related issues, particularly in re-
spect to flood plain use and control. Such interest might have been
expressed in ways such as inviting a speaker to appear at a meeting,
having a study committee, or perhaps adopting a policy position for
the organization. In addition, each person contacted was asked his /her
own opinions about flood damage control measures opinions which were
not connected in any way with their roles as organization members.
The purposes of the interviews were to learn whether the subject
seemed significant enough to have attracted the attention of the
organizations and, if so, what was thought of the subject; and to
learn the opinions of a few people whose positions were evidence of
willingness to participate in group activities to a greater degree than
135
most. The selection of groups to be contacted was not in any way
scientific. Organization names were simply chosen from a list of
general membership groups in Northampton whose interests might be
broad enough to include flood management issues. The organizations and
individuals are as follows:
Business and Professional Women's Club: Irene David, President
Chamber of Commerce: James Foley, President; Paul Walker,
Executive Director
Florence Civic and Business Association: Alvah Brown, President
(1977 -1978)
League of Women Voters of Northampton: Lisa Ferre, Natural
Resources Chairman (1977- 1978); Eleanor Lincoln, former
Natural Resources Chairman
Lions Club: Kenneth Parent, President (1978 -1979)
Northampton Woman's Club: Margaret O'Donnell, President
Rotary Club: Robert Borawski, President (1977 -1978)
None of these organizations had been involved recently with flood
management issues. The Business and Professional Women's Club did
have a meeting concerning the Metropolitan District Commission's pro-
posal to divert Connecticut River water through pumped storage facili-
ties at Northfield to the Quabbin Reservoir.
Mr. Foley and Mr. Walker reported that the Chamber of Commerce
has no policy on flood control. Mr. Foley noted that in the years
he had been associated with the Chamber, the subject of flood plain
management had not come up formally or informally with the group as a
whole or in any committee or study group.
Ms. Ferre reported that the Northampton League of Women Voters
had been studying the Northfield diversion project but had not con-
sidered flood plain issues per se. Since League rules do not permit
the organization to adopt a formal policy without first studying the
issues involved, she was unable to state any opinion for the
organization. She did mention that some members had been active in
flood plain matters as individuals.
All of these organizations have at least occasional speakers on
topics of general interest. Two representatives suggested that flood
management issues might be a good subject for a future meeting.
136
Personal Opinions
The following summary of individuals' opinions shows a wide array
of personal beliefs and marked differences in the interest they
happened to have in flooding.
Two persons were not familiar with the issues of flood management
and therefore had unformed attitudes. One of these was aware of
Pyramid's purchase of flood plain land and would not be surprised to
see another shopping mall which Northampton does not need and which
should not be placed in the flood plain in any event.
One person was opposed to flood plain regulation on the grounds
that there are already too many rules and regulations restricting
people's freedom of action, consuming too much time and.effort, and
slowing down economic progress.
In contrast, another person strongly favored flood plain zoning,
expressing these opinions: We should learn to live with floods,
allowing rivers to carry on their natural functions. No more dams,
large or small, should be built. Flood plain zoning is definitely a
step in the right direction, but flood proofing requirements do not
seem useful. Filling will result in undesirable erosion of the fill,
and raising buildings on stilts could be unsafe because of erosion
around the pilings. Relocation of flood plain occupants would be the
best solution except for the expense and personal hardships involved.
Ruined or heavily damaged buildings should not be rebuilt as happened
after the 1978 winter storm north of Boston. The proposed skating rink
at the Fairgrounds seems an appropriate use for that area since it is
in no sense a "natural" area and the building could probably be de-
signed to withstand flooding there just as the existing Fair buildings
do.
A person who opposed construction of more dams or raising the
Northampton dikes compared his feeling that protection against a
100 year flood is sufficient to buying insurance protection. That
is, it is not possible to buy protection against every eventuality.
It is better to have a reasonable amount of protection and go on to
other things. Further. the Corps of Engineers is too intent on per-
petuating itself and is consequently always "dreaming up new projects."
Flood plain zoning is less expensive and a better long -term solution.
The flood insurance program is good because people need the protec-
tion. Relocation is a desirable goal, but it should be accomplished
through attrition. Existing structures could be purchased as they
deteriorate or suffer flood damage, using money that would otherwise
be spent on dams to buy the properties. Then suitable lands could
be returned to agricultural use.
Another individual, who thinks existing structural protection is
adequate,..remembers the floods of the 1930's and has noticed a big
137
improvement in flooding conditions since then. Flood plain zoning is
an acceptable flood management approach, and the insurance program is
good because people need the protection it offers. Further development
in areas such as along Route 5 is acceptable so long as adequate flood
proofing is done. Relocation of flood plain occupants should not be
undertaken by the government because people are there by choice, and
they know what the risks are.
One other person also thought existing structural protection is
sufficient, but with the caveat that the structures must be properly
maintained. Having spent many years near the Mill River, this person
is aware that people develop a sense of when to move away from the
river and understands why they do not necessarily leave just because
of a flood warning. The effects of the 1936 flood on Northampton
would probably be much different today because the ice jam would be
dynamited so as to eliminate the backup of water. Flood plain zoning
is sometimes carried to extremes, as is the case in the Spring Street
area of Florence. The land there only floods every twenty years or
so; people should be allowed to live there and make use of their
property. Land use restrictions are a hardship for people who cannot
fully use their property but have to pay high taxes anyway. With
respect to'a program of relocation, taxpayers will have to pay for the
properties purchased by government. A similar objection applies to
the insurance program; taxpayers are charged with the cost of the
subsidy.
Conclusions
This group of contacts with organization leaders provides evidence
in support of the hypothesis that there is to a considerable extent a
politically neutral attitude toward flood management issues. The
subject does not seem to be in the public consciousness enough or to
be sufficiently important at this time and in relation to other
priorities to prompt some form of group response. Most of the officers
had fairly strong opinions about flood management, but these are
separate from their organizational associations.
IV. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
In this chapter, some general conclusions based on the research
findings are drawn and then related to theories concerning reactions
to remote hazards. The political acceptability of structural and non-
structural approaches to flood hazard management is evaluated. And
finally, comments on the study itself are made.
A. General Conclusions
1. Survey Data
Results of the survey of flood plain and Northampton residents
indicate both groups perceive flooding as hazardous. While there are
differences in opinion about how much water constitutes a flood, there
is general agreement that there have been no really bad floods since
the late 1930's or 1950's. This implies that flooding is a remote
hazard.; that respondents tended to see past flooding as worse than
present risks supports this notion. In addition, memory of dangers
encountered in past floods may have faded with the years. Northampton
was in a state of disaster during the floods of the 1950's and 1930's,
yet few respondents admitted having suffered any financial loss or
personal injury to themselves or their families. In other words, it is
very possible that the big floods have become romanticized and people
have forgotten some of the seriousness of flood hazard.
In general, the flood plain residents are significantly more
critical of non- structural flood hazard mitigation measures, although
the pattern of their attitudes toward individual alternatives is similar
to that of the general population. Also, the knowledge of flood plain
residents about flood hazard control measures is greater than that of
the Northampton sample. In both cases, the difference is probably
due at least partly to the greater immediacy of flood danger to the
flood plain residents.
The division of flood hazard mitigation measures into structural and
non structural categories (with the possible addition of a "do nothing"
or no action category) seems to have intuitive meaning to the respondents.
This suggests a capacity on the part of the public to evaluate policies
within the frame of reference of the structural versus non structural
dichotomy.
The fact that people seemed to distinguish intuitively between
structural -sand non structural measures does not support any conclusion
as to whether one or the other type is more preferred, It is more
meaningful to say that people support and have confidence in the methods
133
t
139
with which they are most familiar and, by inference, those which have
been adopted in Northampton. Among the non- structural alternatives,
knowledge and confidence were relatively high for flood plain zoning
and insurance, relatively low for flood proofing and types of public
purchase. Among all alternatives, knowledge and confidence were high
for dams,. dikes and flood warning and evacuation methods of long
standing use.
2. Informal. Interviews
Support among state and federal officials for non structural manage-
ment was very strong, and especially so for restricting flood plain
development and reducing existing hazard potential through attrition.
Other possible benefits from flood plain use restrictions were noted,
such as preservation of agriculture, public access to the river banks
for recreation and protection of wetlands and wildlife habitat. Although
officially supported, the insurance program was suspected of attracting
people to flood plain areas because of the financial security it affords.
The main objection to flood plain zoning centered on the additional
burden its regulations and permit processes place on potential indus-
tries that might be discouraged from locating in the state. However,
the generally agreed on goal was clearance of hazard areas and restoration
of flood storage capacity in the long run.
Local officials were overwhelmingly committed to non structural
approaches, again emphasizing zoning and with a tentative acceptance of
clearance by attrition. There was also notable confidence in existing
emergency plans. These are recognized as essential in humanitarian
terms but not effective in terms of the basic problem of preventing
damage by keeping development out of the way of future harm. Experi-
ences of council members indicated a general lack of concern about
flood management among their constituents except as it related to
other issues.
It is interesting to note that acceptance of continuing long range
planning responsibilities was high among policy making government
officials who, by the nature of their work, must deal regularly with
future events.
Flood plain businesses and other institutions tended to be neutral
or favorable toward the zoning so long as they perceived no threat to
plans for their individual futures. Awareness of the regulations and
issues seemed to be related to the immediacy of effects on plans or on
general knowledge and concern with flood plain issues inherent in the
nature of the institution (as for example with Arcadia Sanctuary).
For the local organizations, flood plain issues seemed to be dormant.
140
All of the above generalizations lend credence to the idea that
familiarity and salience (in the sense of importance and strikingness)
are related.
B. Remote Hazards
Given that floods are remote hazards, it is instructive to consider
how and why people react to such hazards the way they seem to do.
Kunreuther (1978) recently reviewed the results of several studies
investigating individuals° reactions to a variety of extremely hazardous
but unlikely events. His analysis suggests that the decisions people
make about such events are not based on simple, rational models of
decision making. For example, it is well known that use.of automobile
seat belts reduces the risk of motor vehicle related fatalities,
yet for most trips people do not use seat belts. Another extremely
well publicized hazard is smoking, yet people continue to smoke. Also,
flight insurance has a very high premium -to -risk ratio compared to life
insurance, yet flight insurance, though a "poor buy," continues to be
extremely popular.
Kunreuther offers several explanations for these apparently
anomalous behavior patterns. First, people seem to equate greater
hazard with extended exposure. Thus, seat belts are used more on
long drives at high speeds. Second, people tend to discount future
consequences very heavily in comparison to present benefits. They are
more likely to insure against a hazard if the investment is low,.as
with flight insurance. Third, people are more likely to insure against a
hazard which has recently struck.a close friend or relative. All of
these factors point to the conclusion that people do not deal with
dangerous but unlikely events according to a rational model of decision
making based on evaluation of available information. Instead, decisions
are heavily influenced by the perceived immediacy of the hazard in
relation to current or short -term costs.
These observations concerning remote hazards fit generally very
well with the information gained in the research for this study.
People in Northampton are seldom exposed to floods. The immediacy of
risk is not enforced by experiences of friends and neighbors because
they too are seldom exposed to floods. And the likelihood of a serious
flood occurring may be seen as so far in the future that the discounting
of future costs leaves little to balance against current benefits.
(When most people speak of the risk of a 100 year flood, do they seri-
ously think of it happening this week or this year Consequently, it
should not seem surprising that so many people are unconcerned with
flood control issues and that they do not feel moved to inform them-
selves about the issues.
P
I
141
C. Political Acceptability
The political acceptability of non structural flood management
approaches may also be evaluated in terms of reactions to remote
hazards. The apparent background of neutrality is explainable in terms
of remoteness of hazard. The acceptance by policy makers of planned
actions taking place over an extended period of time results from their
familiarity with dealing in future events -a familiarity which lends
immediacy to the planning process for them. The opposition to regula-
tion, particularly by some flood plain businesses and residents, re-
lates in part to conflict with their immediately perceived short -term
interests. Furthermore, the fact that flood plain zoning becomes part
of the complex sets of issues relating to street congestion and neighbor-
hood quality, as in the Ox -Bow and Fairgrounds areas, has more to do
with the immediacy of the other issues than with flood plain zoning
itself. The projected caution in approaching relocation may also serve
to decrease opposition to the application of the policy if and when it
occurs.
It seems eminently reasonable to conclude that flood plain zoning
and the insurance program will continue to be acceptable to, or at
least not actively opposed by, substantial majorities of all groups of
people interviewed for this study, and the approaches will remain un-
controversial except under the following circumstances.
1) If the controls are not enforced vigorously so as to gradually
produce the desired results, active proponents can be expected to object
strenuously, bringing the issue of enforcement to public attention.
2) If zoning controls are drawn into debate over another impor-
tant issue, the equity and reasonableness of flood plain zoning will
probably be challenged. The most likely source of such controversy
is competition for land for developed uses in the event of an unexpected
large surge in economic activity and population.
3) In the aftermath of a flood disaster, the principle of relying
on land use controls to deter flood risk will almost certainly be
severely questioned. The argument would be carried back to the funda-
mental issue of structural versus non structural controls.
D. This Study
In survey research, it is regrettable but not uncommon to discover
too late that topics for questions have not been included that might
have produced interesting and useful results. In this study, it was
felt that questions concerning respondents•'.•knowledge of what exists
in the Northampton flood plain would have provided interesting insights
142
into people's background of understanding of flood plain conditions and
issues. Respondents might have been asked to name or choose from al-
ternatives the most important present use of flood plain land, with
other questions dealing with the suitability and desirability of types
of uses.
With respect to future government actions in flood plain management,
the study findings suggest that more effective ways of communicating
information about proposed or newly implemented programs should be found.
If this is possible, it could reduce misunderstandings and unnecessary
anxieties on the part of affected citizens. Furthermore, such a change
in knowledge would represent a change in the conditions in which zoning,
insurance, or other programs take place. The functioning of the programs
and processes might be made smoother and more effective.
Finally, the consultants believe that the interviewing process has
been educational for some respondents and has served to increase the
awareness of some people toward flood management issues. These are
considered to be beneficial side effects.