Nashua Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting - February 11, 2026
Nashua Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting - February 11, 2026
The Zoning Board of Adjustment held a meeting on February 11, 2026 (the transcript references February 10, 2026, but the provided timestamp indicates February 11, 2026) to consider three applications: a special exception for a waterline crossing a wetland to serve a proposed fire training facility, a variance for a detached garage, and a special exception for a parking lot expansion. The board also approved minutes from previous meetings. The meeting lasted approximately one hour and seven minutes, concluding at 8:37 PM.
Case 1: City of Nashua Fire Rescue – Special Exception for Waterline (25 Teak Drive and 840 West Hollow Street)
Applicant: City of Nashua (represented by Attorney Andy Prolman, wetland scientist Brendan Quigley, and City Engineer Dan Hudson).
Proposal: A special exception under LUC §190-112 to work in a 40-foot other wetland and wetland buffer to construct a waterline from Teak Drive to the Four Hills Landfill property for a proposed fire training facility. This was tabled from the January 13, 2026 meeting.
Revised Plan: The new plan (referred to as the "Robert Shaw waterline plan") uses a zigzag alignment to reduce visual impact. Temporary wetland impact decreased from 400 sq ft to 195 sq ft; temporary buffer impact increased from 2,075 sq ft to 4,727 sq ft. The trench is approximately 20 feet wide, 5–6 feet deep, and will be backfilled with native seeding. The applicant stated no road is proposed—only a buried waterline.
Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) Consideration: The city evaluated HDD as an alternative but deemed it impractical due to high cost (estimated $150,000–$550,000), risk from unknown subsurface conditions, and the need for geotechnical investigation that would itself cause disturbance. The city can self-perform trenching at lower cost.
Public Comments: Several residents and Ward 5 Alderman Paula Johnson spoke in opposition. Concerns included: tree removal, visual impact, disruption to the neighborhood, potential harm to vernal pools and endangered species (Eastern Box Turtle, Eastern Hognose Snake), air quality from future fire training, property value decline, and fear that the waterline would later be converted to a road. One resident proposed a hybrid HDD approach near the wetland. The applicant rebutted that the Conservation Commission had given three favorable recommendations, the impacts are temporary, and a future road is barred by the Fisher v. Dover doctrine.
Board Deliberation: Members noted the proposal is for a waterline only, not a road, and that the impact is temporary and minimal. The revised plan reduces visual impact. The board found the special exception criteria met, including necessity, least damaging route, and mitigation measures per Conservation Commission conditions.
Vote: Motion to approve with Conservation Commission stipulations (February 6, 2026 letter) passed unanimously (5-0).
Case 2: Perault Revocable Trust – Variance for Detached Garage (56 Lynn Street)
Applicant: Dave Brawl (owner).
Proposal: A variance from LUC §190-264 to allow an accessory use area of 48% (40% allowed) to construct a 30×40 ft detached garage in an R9 zone. The lot is large and irregularly shaped; the garage will be placed in the rear, 14 ft from the fence line, and will not encroach on side setbacks. The applicant’s current garage and pool count toward the accessory use calculation.
Public Comments: None. The applicant noted neighbors expressed no objections.
Board Deliberation: Members supported the variance, noting the lot is one of the largest in the neighborhood, the garage is consistent with other large accessory structures, the building will be stick-built to match the house, and there is no impact on adjacent properties (rear abuts conservation land).
Vote: Motion to approve passed unanimously (5-0).
Case 3: Ross Common Investments LLC – Special Exception for Parking Lot Expansion (147 Daniel Webster Highway)
Applicant: Paul Chisholm (engineer, Keach Nordstrom Associates) representing owner Ross Common Investments and operator Tully Automotive Group.
Proposal: A special exception under LUC §190-112 to work in a 40-foot wetland and wetland buffer to allow a 140-space parking lot expansion (38,546 sq ft of new impervious surface) in a GB zone. The wetland in question is a low-function, isolated area fed by four highway drainage pipes; it is overgrown with invasive species. The project will redirect the highway drainage directly to an existing DOT stormwater treatment system across the street and treat on-site runoff via an underground oil/water separator. Direct wetland impact: 22,450 sq ft; mitigation fee of approximately $171,000 will be paid to DES. The Conservation Commission gave a favorable recommendation with no stipulations.
Public Comments: None.
Board Deliberation: Members initially hesitated due to the size of wetland impact but after review found the wetland has minimal ecological value and that the project improves stormwater treatment. The board determined the special exception criteria were satisfied.
Vote: Motion to approve passed unanimously (5-0).
Minutes Approval and Adjournment
The board approved the minutes of January 13, 2026, with a correction (adding the second and vote for the slate of officers). The minutes of January 27, 2026, were approved as drafted.
Key Outcomes:
- Case 1 (Waterline): Approved with Conservation Commission conditions.
- Case 2 (Garage): Approved.
- Case 3 (Parking Lot): Approved.
- Minutes approved; meeting adjourned at 8:37 PM.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening, everybody, and welcome to the February 10th meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. My name is Jay Mankara, ZBA Chair. To my right is Josh Neely, ZBA Vice Chair. And then across the stage, we have Robert Shaw, member, Steve Lionel, member, and Joseph Potri Alternate. We are down one full member, so if Mr. Potri is willing, we'd ask that you participate this evening as a voting member. I can do that. So just by way of an overall introduction, the Zoning Board of Adjustment is empowered to do a couple a few different things, but this evening we have applications for special exceptions and for variance. A special exception is a use that is allowed under the zoning ordinance so long as certain criteria is met. A variance is a request to deviate from the terms of the ordinance. And the zoning board can only grant variance if it finds that five criteria are met. That granting the variance would not be contrary to the public interest, that granting the variance would be within the spirit of the ordinance, that granting the variance would do substantial justice to the applicant seeking it, that there be no diminution of surrounding property values, and that owing to a special condition of the property, uh denying the variance would be uh an undue hardship on the applicant. Um, just in terms of order of business, um we will start off by giving each applicant up to 15 minutes to present their case. Uh, and of course, we'll ask that the applicant step forward, uh, speak into the microphone and uh give your name and address. Following that, we will open the floor up to anybody in the audience who wishes to speak in favor of the application. Once again, uh each person would be asked to come forward to the podium, speak into the mic and give your name and address, and then address the board, and you would have up to five minutes to do so. Of course, you don't have to use your five minutes, but you can. Following that, we'll ask if there's anybody in the audience with any questions, concerns, or opposition. And once again, you uh have the opportunity to come forward, uh, give your name and address, and address the board, and you would have up to five minutes. Following that, we give the applicant an opportunity for rebuttal if they wish. Uh applicants would have five minutes to provide any rebuttal or additional comments if they wish to address to the board. Following that, uh we'll provide an opportunity for one person uh who spoke with uh questions, concerns, or opposition to the project, to come forward and have the last say. And that individual would also have up to five minutes. Given that it's only one person, if there are multiple people who spoke, we'd give you the opportunity to discuss amongst yourselves who that person might be. Um following that, we will close the public hearing and open the deliberations of the board. The board may choose to uh act on the applications this evening, or if necessary, we may choose to continue it to a future date, uh, typically because there's additional information that's needed. Um with that, I'm going to read the first case into the record, but I am going to note that the first case, which is the application of the city of Nashua, the chief uh Steve Buxton, Nashua Fire Rescue. I'm sorry. I am sorry, I forgot roll call. Um I will call roll call. Uh Mr. Neely. Present. Mr. Shaw. Present. Mr. Lionell. Present. Mr. Potri. President. And Jay McCara, I am present. And I should have also noted that to my left is Deputy Planning Manager Carter Falk. Um, with that, uh again, I'll start with reading the first case into the record. This is the City of Nashua, uh, the owner of the property, uh, through Chief Steve Buxton, Nashua Fire Rescue, the applicant for 25 Teak Drive and 840 West Hollow Street. And um actually I'm going to skip on down because we have already made a determination, uh, the Dover v. Fisher determination. So this is requesting a special exception from land use code section 190-112 to work in a 40-foot other wetland and wetland buffer to construct a waterline service from Teak Drive to the Four Hills Landfill property for the proposed training uh for the proposed fire training facility. Uh this is in the R9 and R30 zones in Ward 5.
openpublica.com