Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Wetland Exception topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA continues city’s wetland special‑exception for fire‑training water line to Jan. 13 after resident pushback
Summary
The ZBA allowed the city to move forward with consideration of a 10‑inch water line to the proposed fire training facility but continued the wetland special‑exception hearing to Jan. 13 to allow engineering review of alternate routings and horizontal directional drilling (HDD) feasibility after sustained neighborhood opposition over tree clearing and potential road development.
The Nashua Zoning Board of Adjustment on Nov. 25 agreed to continue the city’s request to install a 10‑inch water line to a proposed fire training facility, sending the application to the Jan. 13 meeting for additional engineering analysis.
Attorney Andy Prollman, representing Nashua Fire Rescue and Public Works, asked the board to treat the application as materially different from a previous, denied access‑road plan because this filing seeks only to install a water line rather than construct a road. He said the city expects approximately 400 square feet of wetland impact and 2,075 square feet of buffer impact and that the disturbed areas would be backfilled and revegetated. “We expect that will grow back over time,” Prollman said, and he provided a Globe Environmental wetland report and an engineer’s note on water pressure.
Supporters — including Fire Commission member Tom Kelly — said an in‑city, dedicated training facility preserves local response capacity, reduces training travel and supports ISO ratings. “We respectfully ask for the board’s support so Nashua Fire Rescue can continue to provide the highest level of service to the residents of the city,” Kelly said.
Neighbors and area residents offered sustained opposition, saying the plan still follows the footprint of the previously denied road, would require a 20‑foot swath through trees, and could leave a permanent visual opening to the landfill. Speakers urged the board to require the city to pursue horizontal directional drilling (HDD) or alternative routings to avoid cutting mature trees. Several residents also raised concerns about hazmat training emissions and long‑term neighborhood character.
Board members debated whether the new filing was materially different from the prior denial and whether alternative routings (for example, entering between two wetlands to reduce crossings) or HDD had been sufficiently considered. Several members asked the applicant to return with engineering analysis of (1) an angled routing between wetlands A and B to minimize buffer crossings and (2) HDD feasibility and cost. The board voted to continue the public hearing to Jan. 13 and instructed the applicant to consult engineering and wetlands staff before return; the motion passed with one member opposed to the continuance.
What’s next: The hearing is continued to Jan. 13, when the city will present further engineering analysis, alternative routings and additional information on mitigation, plantings and HDD feasibility; the city warned the revised schedule may delay related DPW garage plans that depend on the training facility.
