A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

ZBA allows homeowner to remove up to 21 trees in wetland buffer citing safety

September 23, 2026 | Nashua Boards & Commissions, Nashua, Hillsborough County, New Hampshire


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

ZBA allows homeowner to remove up to 21 trees in wetland buffer citing safety
The Nashua Zoning Board of Adjustment on Sept. 22 approved a special exception allowing Clint and Mary Licorice to remove up to 21 trees from a 40-foot critical wetland buffer at 19 Vista Way, after hearing testimony that the trees pose a safety risk to the house.

Clint Licorice told the board the request was “from my perspective all about managing risk,” explaining that a licensed arborist had identified trees he considered hazardous and that a neighboring conservation area totals roughly 318 contiguous acres. Licorice said he contacted New Hampshire Fish & Game, which recommended that any approved removals occur between Nov. 1 and Apr. 1, leave stumps and some downwood in place, and avoid vehicle operation in deed-restricted areas.

Kevin Fet of Gate City Tree Service, who said he is a certified New Hampshire arborist with 45 years’ experience, told the board he inspected the property and selected 21 trees that he believed posed clear hazards to the house. “This is about safety,” Fet said, describing cases where neighbors and homeowners took emergency action after storm-related tree failures.

Opposition came from Sheri Dudsy, chair of the Nashua Conservation Commission, who acknowledged trees can fall but questioned the likelihood and noted that the ordinance’s replacement standard is based on tree diameter at breast height (DBH) — inches of DBH require like-for-like inches of replacement, not tree-for-tree — which can make replacement on this lot impractical. The commission did not recommend approval.

Board members weighed the arborist’s hazard testimony against conservation concerns. Several members said they were troubled by the number of trees but persuaded by safety testimony that a subset posed a clear risk; the board voted to approve the special exception. The chair noted there is a 30-day appeal window on the board’s action.

The approval included the procedures the applicant had agreed to: work between Nov. 1 and Apr. 1 unless a tree is an immediate hazard; leave stumps in place and retain downwood; and avoid vehicle operation within the deed-restricted area.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee