Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Signage topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

ZBA grants sign variances for Optima Dermatology at 169 Daniel Webster Highway

Zoning Board of Adjustment · December 10, 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 Zoning Board approved three sign variances for Optima Dermatology at 169 Daniel Webster Hwy, allowing a second wall sign and increases to ground‑sign area and height after the attorney argued the property’s zoning and setback history make it effectively unique.

The Nashua Zoning Board on Dec. 9 approved three sign variances for the property at 169 Daniel Webster Highway to accommodate signage for Optima Dermatology.

Attorney Morgan Hollis, representing owner Joshua Naughton and applicant Optima Dermatology, explained the parcel’s unusual history of variances and its effective distance from the road, citing prior board approvals in 1999 and 2005 that created the existing signage allowances. Hollis said the property is effectively miszoned for its present commercial use and that reasonable signage is necessary for safe access and wayfinding at a busy intersection. He described the proposal to add a wall sign and alter the ground sign so tenants can be identified without creating sight‑line hazards.

Board members agreed the property had a history of variances and unique circumstances — including multiple prior approvals for larger signage — and found the applicant met the five criteria for a variance in this instance. The board’s recorded motion approved a second wall sign of 32 square feet where a wall sign is typically not permitted, and increases to ground sign area (to 93.25 square feet proposed) and height (to 15 feet 9 inches proposed). Board members said the large setback from the road and complex traffic patterns supported the findings.

The applicant was advised to proceed with standard permitting and to follow any conditions recorded in the variance.