Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Solar Setback topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Zoning board denies front‑setback variance for ground‑mounted solar at 14 Ferry Road

Zoning Board of Adjustment · October 29, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board denied a request to install a ground‑mounted solar array in the front setback at 14 Ferry Rd, finding applicants did not demonstrate a special hardship that would require locating the array in the front yard instead of roof or rear yard alternatives.

The Nashua Zoning Board of Adjustment voted 5–0 Oct. 28 to deny a variance that would have allowed a ground‑mounted solar photovoltaic array to encroach about 6 feet 4 inches into the required 20‑foot front yard setback at 14 Ferry Road.

Kenneth Barton spoke for the applicant, saying the array was placed for optimal tilt (about 30 degrees) and to avoid shading from trees in the backyard. He said some customers prefer not to mount panels on roofs to avoid roof penetrations and to obtain a steeper tilt for production.

Board members questioned why roof mounting, moving the array back 6 feet or trimming trees were not accepted solutions. Several members said the lot offered alternatives: moving the array back into the yard, increasing height where allowed, or installing panels on the roof would avoid the need for a front‑setback variance.

"I just don't see any compelling reason why there's any special conditions of the property," Rob Shaw said when moving to deny the request. Shaw argued the applicant had not shown a hardship forcing the array into the setback and that approval could negatively affect nearby property values. JP Boucher seconded the motion. The board voted 5–0 to deny the variance and noted the applicant has a 30‑day appeal period.

Neely reminded the applicant that solar arrays are treated as accessory structures under the code and require building permits if constructed in conformance. The denial leaves the applicant the option to pursue alternative placements that do not require a variance.