Nashua ZBA OKs larger DPW sign at 848 West Hollis after board finds material change in prior denial

The Zoning Board of Adjustment granted the City of Nashua a special exception on Sept. 9 to install a larger monument sign for the Department of Public Works at 848 West Hollis Street, after the board first found a material change in circumstances from a previous application that had been denied. The board approved a 33.8-square-foot sign, 9 feet tall, in a R-30 zone where 10 square feet and 6 feet height are normally permitted, with a condition limiting summertime illumination.

The finding that the Dover v. Fisher criteria had been met came at the start of the hearing. Vice Chair Josh Neely moved that the board conclude a material change had occurred and the board should hear the case; the motion was seconded and carried, enabling the city’s new application to proceed. Attorney Andrew Prolman, representing the Division of Public Works, told the board the key difference from the earlier proposal was that the new sign contains "no EMC" (electronic messaging center), a factor he said was central to the prior denial: "There's no EMC in the sign," Prolman said. "...I really think that there is a material difference due to the EMC going away, which was the crux of our conversation."

Why it matters: the DPW building sits well back from West Hollis Street, and city officials and several aldermen told the board the setback and the speed of traffic on Route 111 make a larger, visible sign a public-safety feature. "This is a reasonable sign so that people can see it from a distance, and people can see where to turn," Prolman said. Director of Public Works Lisa Foto described a range of services at the site and said many residents and contractors "drive right by and they don't see" the existing small sign; she added the proposed sign features downward-facing, minimal lighting and is needed for safety during snow operations and night meetings. Alderman Richard Dowd and Alderman Michael O’Brien also urged approval, citing civic pride and driver safety.

Opponents, several of whom live in the immediate neighborhood, said the sign is out of character with the residential district and raised concerns about scale and light. "The requested sign is not in keeping with the residential area and will take away from the ambiance of the neighborhood," one resident wrote to the board; another speaker said, "We're taking West Hollis Street, which is a residential area, which is becoming more commercial," and urged the board to reduce the sign's size.

What was requested and what the board decided: the application sought special exceptions from land use code section 190-101 Table 101-7.1 to exceed the maximum ground-sign area (10 sq ft permitted; 33.8 sq ft proposed) and height (6 ft permitted; 9 ft proposed). Prolman described the sign as masonry to match the DPW building and said it had been designed to minimize light spill: "The sign is intended to be downward lit, and it is proposed to be on 24/7," he said, but added the city was "flexible on the summertime hours." The board approved the special exception with a condition governing illumination: lighting may be 24/7 outside the summer window; from May 1 through September 30 the lighting is to be turned off by 10 p.m.

Board discussion emphasized safety, visibility at higher travel speeds on the highway, and the mixed commercial/residential character of the corridor. Several members said they were persuaded the sign would not be out of character with other large signs along West Hollis and that the absence of an EMC addressed the principal objection from the earlier denial. The board recorded the special-exception approval and noted the standard appeal period applies.

Background and next steps: attorney Prolman and Director Foto said the sign has been part of the site's planning process and that masons saved original block from the building to face the monument sign. The board read numerous emailed comments into the record, including support from Paul Shea (vice chair, Board of Public Works) and opposition from multiple Ward 5 residents and an alderman. The board's approval does not automatically change any other site conditions; construction and permitting must proceed through the usual building-permit process and are subject to the 30-day appeal period.