Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mixed Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA grants mixed‑use variance for Gilbert Crossing parcel but density relief is withdrawn after contested votes
Summary
The Zoning Board granted John J. Flatley Company's variance to allow mixed residential and commercial uses at Gilbert Crossing (645 Daniel Webster Highway) subject to site-plan approval and conditions emphasizing environmental review; a companion density variance that would have allowed 304 units was later withdrawn after board action and public opposition focused on PFAS contamination and traffic.
The Merrimack Zoning Board of Adjustment voted to permit a mixed-use residential and commercial development concept for a vacant parcel in Gilbert Crossing but left unresolved a separate density variance after contested deliberations and public opposition.
Attorney Morgan Hollis and Kevin Walker, representing John J. Flatley Company, asked the board to treat the application as a new use petition because a recent zoning change removed conditional-use flexibility that previously allowed mixed-use changes by the planning board. The applicant described a plan that would include roughly 304 residential units, about 41,000 square feet of commercial/restaurant space, a hotel and clubhouse, and a cluster of multi-family and townhouse buildings contiguous with existing Gilbert Crossing development.
Hollis framed the request as relief from an industrial (I-1) underlying district that has become a “hole in the donut” surrounded by residential and mixed uses. He argued the parcel is unique and that the proposed mix would be less impactful than the previously approved large retail boxes. “We think this is a good proposal,” Kevin Walker said, adding the applicant has been meeting with DES and Saint‑Gobain engineers on environmental controls and drainage.
Concerns dominated public comment and board discussion. Neighbors and business owners, including Ashley Tenhave and Alex Bridal, urged caution and said the public previously supported the ordinance change that removed CUP flexibility to limit repeated plan changes. Testimony and board questions focused on PFAS/PFOA contamination tied to former Saint‑Gobain activities, drainage and infiltration controls, and traffic impacts from adding residential units and a hotel.
During deliberation the board attached conditions to any approval that require site-plan approval by the planning board and coordination with DES; members discussed asking the planning board to conduct or require an independent environmental review. Following a board motion, the ZBA approved the mixed‑use variance under section 2.02.4(b) with conditions tying further approvals to receipt of a subsequent variance and planning-board site-plan approval.
A separate motion on the related density variance produced divided votes; the applicant later withdrew that second variance application, effectively ending the evening’s consideration of allowable unit count until the applicant chooses how to proceed. The ZBA also noted statutory time frames and that planning-board review and DES permitting would be required before any ground‑disturbing work.
The mixed-use conditional approval preserves multiple review steps: the applicant must secure any additional variances required, obtain planning-board site-plan approval and satisfy DES permitting (including any required remediation or infiltration controls) before building.
