Waterville Valley, NH – The Waterville Valley Conservation Commission convened on January 23, 2026, for a meeting that included a guest presentation on green burial practices, a town update on upcoming warrant articles, a Planning Board report, and a detailed discussion on the status of the Snow’s Brook Remediation Project.
Meeting Minutes Approved
The Commission began by reviewing and approving the minutes from its December 18 meeting. No significant comments were raised, and the minutes were approved unanimously. (link)
Exploring Green Burial Initiatives
A guest speaker — a former cemetery commissioner with approximately nine years of experience — presented an in-depth overview of natural burial, highlighting its environmental benefits and potential as a land conservation strategy. The speaker clarified that natural burial is distinct from processes such as human composting or alkaline hydrolysis, which are sometimes incorrectly labeled “green burial” in media coverage. (link)
Key topics covered included:
Process and Safety: Bodies are buried at a depth of three and a half to four feet, with an 18–24 inch “smell barrier” above to deter animal disturbance. No vaults or chemical preservation methods such as embalming are used, substantially reducing carbon emissions. The speaker noted that concerns about pharmaceuticals, pathogens, and groundwater contamination are well-studied and addressed through established setback requirements. Research has found that a family of four flushes roughly 100 times more nitrates over time than a single natural burial. (link)
Land Use: More than 500 green burial cemeteries operate across the United States and Canada, many managed by municipalities and their conservation bodies. These sites can make productive use of marginal land unsuitable for other purposes, with a carrying capacity of approximately 300–400 burials per acre — far less dense than conventional cemeteries. Decomposing bodies can contribute nutrients to land restoration efforts if managed carefully. (link)
Regulations and Logistics: Cemetery trustees set local rules, and templates are available to integrate natural burial bylaws into existing frameworks. Markers are typically flat native stone or documented via digital GPS records to minimize environmental impact. Winter burials are feasible through techniques such as grave warmers or pre-digging grave spaces in the fall. The speaker noted that New Hampshire has clear and stringent setback requirements that address water protection concerns.
Financial Considerations: The average burial right at New Hampshire green burial sites surveyed was approximately $360 — significantly less than cremation costs in the state, which range from roughly $1,500 to $2,500. Conservation-managed properties can charge more because donors are often willing to contribute above the minimum to support a conservation mission. This could represent a modest but meaningful revenue stream for the town. Families may handle body preparation and paperwork themselves, further reducing costs. The speaker also cautioned that cremated remains are not suitable for natural burial sites, as they are 200 to 2,000 times too alkaline for plant growth and can cause phosphorus runoff problems if scattered on the surface. (link)
Religious and Family Considerations: The speaker noted that natural burial predates modern embalming and vault requirements, and is consistent with the practices of many religious and faith traditions, including Jewish and Quaker burial customs. No known religious traditions prohibit it. Family burial plots can be accommodated, though stacking or companion burials are not practiced in order to maintain soil integrity. (link)
The Commission expressed interest in the concept and the speaker indicated a willingness to return in the spring for a public-facing presentation.
Town Update on Upcoming Warrant Articles
A town official provided an update on warrant articles being prepared for the March Town Meeting, noting there would be a substantial number. Approximately 14 articles address zoning ordinance housekeeping items, with additional articles covering capital reserve fund contributions, the operating budget, and special warrant articles. (link)
Wastewater Treatment Plant: A pre-meeting informational session is planned with the town’s legal counsel, engineering firm (Black & Veatch), and financial analysis firm (PFM) in advance of the bond hearing at Town Meeting. The session will include legal updates, an engineering update, and rate modeling projected out 10 years. Funding sources under discussion include the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (Clean Water SRF), WIFIA federal loans administered by the EPA, and potentially USDA loans, as well as a State Aid Grant (SAG) whose amount remains uncertain. The rate model is expected to show that the project’s net impact on the tax rate will turn downward beginning in 2031 upon project completion. One scenario under consideration involves a ramp-up period over the next five years of moderately increased tax contributions to build cash reserves, which would reduce principal and interest costs in later years. The town official also noted that the existing plant will require significant maintenance expenditures in the coming years and that staff are doing an excellent job keeping it operational. (link)
Road and Infrastructure Projects: Bonded warrant articles are anticipated for road work on Snow’s Mountain Road, Cascade Ridge, and Beanbender Road. The name “Noon Peak” was raised but immediately corrected to Lost Pass during the discussion. A separate warrant article will address a sewer line along Snow’s Mountain Road. The Boulder Path Road drainage project — funded by authorization approved last year — is advancing toward finalized designs, with a bid process expected this year. A question under consideration is whether Boulder Path Road work should be combined with the Snow’s Mountain Road reconstruction, given shared underground infrastructure and water line work. (link)
Hazard Mitigation Plan: The Commission asked about the status of the Hazard Mitigation Plan. The town official indicated no recent feedback had been received from the state but promised a follow-up within a few days. (link)
The town official also mentioned that the commission members would be invited to an informational session at which all project partners — legal, engineering, and financial — would present together. Concern was raised that if this session runs long, voters may lose focus on important items discussed toward the end; the town official expressed confidence the presentation could be kept to approximately one hour.
Planning Board Update
The Commission’s ex officio Planning Board representative shared updates from recent Planning Board activity. (link)
Outdoor Adventure Zone — Tyrell Application: A public hearing extension on the Outdoor Adventure Zone parking application was scheduled for that evening. The representative noted that the 65-day review clock had been running since Tyrell initiated the process, with an approximately two-week extension granted. The hearing that evening was expected to be the final public hearing before the board deliberates on the application.
Forest Service Parking Lot Expansion: The representative reported that the U.S. Forest Service plans to pave, stripe, and potentially expand the dirt parking area in the vicinity of the Waterville Valley ski area access road. Some tree clearing on Forest Service property is also expected in that area.
Gondola Permitting: The Forest Service indicated it would be producing a map showing proposed gondola tower locations. While a permit to pursue approvals has been issued — after approximately 18 months of effort — additional permitting steps remain before construction can proceed. The Planning Board continues to monitor this process.
CIP Process Concerns: A Commission member raised concerns about the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) review process and how projects are ranked. The Commission expressed frustration that the Snow’s Brook Remediation Project received a low priority score from the CIP subcommittee, and that the Conservation Commission was not given an opportunity to provide input before that ranking was assigned. The Planning Board representative acknowledged the issue, noting that this was the first year the CIP rankings came back to the subcommittee for a final pass rather than going directly from the town manager’s office to the Select Board. He expressed his own disappointment with how the process was handled and offered to bring the matter to the attention of the appropriate parties.
Snow’s Brook Remediation Project Update
The bulk of the meeting’s final discussion focused on the current status of the Snow’s Brook Remediation Project. Two Commission members who had presented to the Select Board the previous day relayed the outcome of that meeting. (link)
The Select Board had effectively paused the project pending further review, and a classical engineering alternative — excavating sedimentation basins on the east side of Valley Road on Conservation land — had been raised by a town engineer as a possible substitute approach. Commission members argued strongly that this concept is not a replacement for the bioengineering solution already under development, but could at best be complementary to it. They noted that the sedimentation basin concept involves no feasibility study, would require ongoing dredging maintenance, and faces significant access and permitting obstacles — including the need for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers approval for any work affecting waterways and wetlands.
Commission members presented detailed maps and modified LiDAR imagery of the Snow’s Brook corridor, showing the greenbelt parcel boundaries, culvert locations, and the areas under consideration for both the bioengineering work and the alternative basin concept. They noted that the town’s property boundary does not follow the brook channel in all areas, which constrains where any basin work could feasibly be placed.
The Commission emphasized that the project team — including the project’s lead bioengineering consultant — is assembled and ready to proceed, that wetland permitting appears to be substantially in place, and that losing momentum now would be costly to re-establish. A key complication is that detailed knowledge of the project’s history resided largely with a former town employee who has since passed away, leaving some questions about prior decisions unanswered. The project consultant is expected to present directly to the Select Board on February 4th to address outstanding questions.
The original project was approved by town voters in 2023. Of the original $50,000 appropriation, approximately $9,000 has been spent and $41,000 remains. A warrant article deadline of February 23rd was noted, with the Commission discussing contingency plans to submit a citizen petition warrant article if Select Board support is not secured in time.
Recycling Update
A Commission member provided a brief update from the town’s municipal solid waste committee. A recycling reference list has been posted at the post office detailing where residents can drop off various materials. Highlights include paper recycling bins at Hannaford, soft plastic film recycling bins at Walmart, and metal cans at the town transfer station. The Commission discussed posting the list on the town conservation website and potentially including it as an insert in a future water/sewer bill mailing, subject to Select Board approval.
Next Meeting
The Commission voted to hold its next meeting on February 12, 2026 — moved up from the usual third Thursday of the month to allow for a timely update following the Snow’s Brook consultant’s presentation to the Select Board on February 4th.