Nashua ZBA approves water line through wetland buffer to serve planned fire training site

The Nashua Zoning Board of Adjustment on Feb. 10 approved a special exception for the City of Nashua to install an 8-inch water service line from Teague Drive to the Four Hills landfill to serve a proposed fire training facility.

The board’s action lets the city temporarily trench through a 40-foot wetland buffer under Land Use Code §190-112, subject to the Conservation Commission’s February 6 stipulations. Chair Jaiman Cara read the motion and, after a second from Josh Neely, the board approved the application by voice vote; Chair Cara then stated, "Your application is granted."

City counsel Andy Pearlman (Pernier & Pearlman) presented a revised alignment he called the "Robert Shaw Waterline Plan," saying the new route reduced the temporary wetland impact from roughly 400 square feet to about 195 square feet but increased the temporary buffer impact (from about 2,075 to 4,727 square feet). Pearlman told the board New Hampshire DES had approved the proposed temporary wetland impact and that the Conservation Commission had recommended approval with conditions.

Wetland scientist Bridal Quigley (GOVE Environmental Services) said the tradeoff reflected a compromise: the revised plan avoids direct wetland loss and uses a trench that would be backfilled and revegetated. "These are areas that will be, essentially, after the work is completed, be returned to a natural condition," she said, arguing the disturbed buffer near Teague Drive is lower‑quality, already‑disturbed habitat.

City Engineer Dan Hudson addressed whether horizontal directional drilling (HDD) was a practical alternative. Hudson said the city had obtained planning-level quotes and that HDD costs "will be anywhere from a 150,000 to 550,000" depending on subsurface conditions and noted HDD contracts shift significant risk to the contracting party. Hudson summarized the city’s position: trench installation is predictable, lower cost and maintainable in‑house.

Neighbors and Alderman Paula Johnson urged the board to require HDD or a hybrid approach to avoid tree loss and protect vernal pools, raising worries about smoke from training burns, PFAS contamination, and long-term neighborhood impacts. Resident Roe De Arantes submitted an HDD quote and argued the city’s estimates were inflated; De Arantes also warned the temporary cut could become a future road. The city’s counsel and several board members replied that Fisher v. Dover precedent would bar a future road without a substantially different application and that Conservation Commission and DES reviews had found no evidence of impacts to rare or endangered species.

Board members weighing the criteria emphasized the temporary nature of the disturbance, the Conservation Commission’s unanimous recent recommendation, DES approval for the temporary impacts, and the applicant’s stated mitigation. Multiple members characterized the affected area as a lower‑value, drainage‑formed wetland and concluded the revised routing and mitigation met the special-exception standards.

The board approved the special exception with the Conservation Commission’s conditions; the transcript records a voice vote and does not include a roll-call tally or individual yes/no votes.