Nashua Planning Board Denies 14 Mulberry Street Purchase for Homeless Resource Center - April 15, 2026

The Nashua Planning Board met on April 15, 2026, to consider a Board of Aldermen referral (R-26-019) authorizing the purchase of 14 Mulberry Street for $730,000. The intended use is a combined winter warming station, daytime resource center, and transitional housing for unhoused individuals. After discussion, the board voted 2-2 on a motion to recommend approval, resulting in a failure to provide a favorable recommendation. No formal motion for an unfavorable recommendation was made. The board expressed concerns about cost, timeline, ADA compliance, and lack of abutter outreach, though members acknowledged the community need for such services.

Board of Aldermen Referral: R-26-019 – Purchase of 14 Mulberry Street

Community Development Director Matt Sullivan presented the proposal. He stated the city has been seeking a location for two years, previously issuing two RFPs for a warming station that received zero inquiries. The property came on the market in late March 2026. The purchase price of $730,000 is above the assessed value of $540,000, which Sullivan described as "not uncommon in current market conditions." Renovation costs are estimated between $3 million and $4.5 million. The timeline from acquisition to operational use is estimated at six to nine months. Sullivan noted that three existing residential units will be lost, but the city is committed to rehousing current tenants before any work begins.

Board member Larry Hirsch expressed strong opposition, calling the costs "totally insane" – approximately $1,000 per square foot for 3,000 square feet of space. He questioned the lack of an RFP that specifically sought properties for this combined use, the loss of three housing units, lost tax revenue, and the tight site constraints. Hirsch suggested exploring cheaper interim options like modular trailers or purchasing a garage building, and asked why the city did not seek an option to purchase. Sullivan replied that an option was discussed with the seller but was not offered.

Board member Benjamin Zoller raised concerns about ADA compliance and potential liability. Sullivan confirmed the building is not ADA-compliant and that installing an elevator (to serve second-floor transitional housing) is a major cost driver. He stated that one transitional unit could be placed on the first floor to avoid an elevator. Sullivan also confirmed the city intends to contract with a nonprofit to manage the transitional housing units, not operate them directly.

Chairperson noted the board is not being asked to approve or disapprove the use but to provide a recommendation on the purchase. Board member Dan Hudson viewed the purchase as enabling legislation to allow further exploration, emphasizing that the city must act quickly on property opportunities. Alderman Morgan made a motion to approve the purchase as recommended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hudson. The vote was 2-2 (two ayes, with one abstention earlier in the meeting on the minutes). The motion did not pass. No formal motion for an unfavorable recommendation was made.

Several board members provided explanatory remarks. The chairperson cited concerns about speed, unsure costs and timeline, and that the property currently has tenants. Hirsch reiterated the cost being disproportionate to the value. Zoller emphasized ADA compliance and liability for an old building. The board acknowledged the community's need for services for unhoused individuals but could not support the acquisition without more detailed information.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of minutes from the April 2, 2026 meeting: Motion passed with one abstention.

Key Outcomes

• Vote on 14 Mulberry Street Purchase: A motion to recommend approval failed 2-2. The Planning Board thus provides no favorable recommendation to the Board of Aldermen.
• The Board of Aldermen will consider the purchase at their meeting later that evening (7:00 PM on April 15, 2026).
• No formal motion for an unfavorable recommendation was made, but board members articulated reasons including: high cost ($730,000 purchase plus up to $4.5 million in renovations), lack of due diligence on zoning and ADA compliance, no abutter outreach, and a rushed timeline.
• Meeting adjourned at 6:46 PM.

Public Comments & Testimony

• No public comments were made; there was no Zoom audience.