Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Billboard topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hampton Falls officials, residents push back on Seabrookelectronic sign project near town line
Summary
Hampton Falls officials and neighboring Seabrook residents urged legal review and possible injunction after Seabrook approved an "electronic communications sign facility" near the border; abutters say the project was framed as "government use" to avoid review and that materials are scheduled to arrive Aug. 17.
Chairman Edward B. Beattie said the proposed electronic sign on Stard Road "is not in character of Hampton Falls" and urged the town to seek legal counsel and consider an injunction to protect Hampton Falls residents from visual and lighting impacts.
Scott Blood, a direct abutter at 21 Stard Road, told the board the Seabrook warrant article was described as a "government use" and that the town's action allowed the project to bypass normal planning review. Blood said the LED billboard would be visible about a mile in each direction and that "By stating the billboard would be used for government use there is no need for zoning or building permissions." He told the board some trees already had been removed and said abutters learned of the plan only after the vote.
Jill Gordon, a Seabrook Planning Board member who said she had not been informed of the project prior to the vote, warned the board the decision could "willfully and purposefully" harm Seabrook property values. Todd Santora, chairman of the Hampton Falls Planning Board, confirmed local attorneys discussed the importance of the "government use" characterization and noted the Seabrook process differs from the typical planning review.
Town Administrator Andria Hansen told the board there is "a construction schedule with delivery of materials on or about August 17th." Vice-Chair Lou Gargiulo suggested that if Hampton Falls lacks standing, abutters or affected Seabrook residents could intervene; Beattie asked staff to evaluate legal options and next steps.
The discussion included the prospect of an injunction and the possibility of coordinated feedback from nearby towns and state review of the site's approval. No formal legal action had been taken by Hampton Falls at the meeting.
