Your area Not set — showing everywhere
Meeting report · Zoning Board of Adjustment
Creating this report cost real money. Help fund coverage →

Zoning Board of Adjustment — May 19, 2026

The meeting was procedural in nature, focused on administrative updates and standard variance requests with no significant public opposition recorded.

Date Tuesday, May 19, 2026 Duration 1.3h Speakers 12 Public comments 2 Decisions 6 Routine

Questions about this meeting? ⁠Just ask.

Ask MeetingWatch answers from this meeting’s report, transcript, and records — with linked sources.

Summary AI-generated to surface controversy & community impact without bias — always verify against the actual meeting before relying on it.

The Town of Amherst Zoning Board of Adjustment is implementing a significant change to how land-use applications are evaluated in our community.

During the May 19 meeting, the board voted unanimously to combine the first two criteria of the variance testing process—'public interest' and 'the spirit of the ordinance'—into a single question. The Chair stated this move was intended to streamline deliberations and avoid contradictory findings, noting that judicial precedents suggest the two criteria are similar. However, this is a fundamental shift in the procedural framework used to judge whether a property owner deserves relief from existing zoning laws.

This change is scheduled to take effect on July 20, 2026. Because this alters the standard for all future variance requests, residents should be aware of how the 'bar' for approvals might change moving forward.

Additionally, the board is currently operating with a vacancy, leading to the postponement of several significant cases, including the BRAF and Tanna Properties applications, until the next meeting on June 16th.

May 19, 2026 1.3h long 12 speakers 2 public comments 6 decisions Routine
Notable statements Drag to browse

“The courts have already said they're basically almost the same [regarding criteria one and two].”

— Unidentified speaker · Justifying the decision to combine the first two variance criteria to simplify the process. ▶ 1:17:29
This meeting — choose a section

Public ⁠impact

Issues from this meeting with documented community impact.
What was discussed

Procedural change to how all future variance requests are judged

What happened

The motion to combine the rules was approved unanimously.

Topics ⁠discussed

Each topic expands to quotes and full context.
Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

The Chair announced a board vacancy and informed the board that several cases were continued to June.

What happened

The agenda was reordered to address the three remaining applications.

Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

Deliberation on a variance request from Zero Rosemary Lane, LLC regarding reduced lot frontage and area.

What happened

The board voted to grant the variances, contingent upon receiving all required Planning Board approvals.

Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

A hearing regarding a request for relief from front and side building setbacks for a single-family home on Baboosic Lake.

What happened

The board voted to approve the variance as presented.

Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

A request to place a 10x16 foot storage shed closer than 100 feet from the street.

What happened

The board approved the variance with a condition that the shed does not extend closer to the street than the back line of the existing garage.

Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

The board reviewed and voted on the minutes from previous meetings.

What happened

The April 21st and February 17th minutes were approved.

Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

A motion to combine the first two criteria of the variance testing process.

What happened

The motion to combine the rules was approved, to take effect in 60 days.

Controversy & ⁠dissent

Where the board, the community, or the agenda diverged.

Potentially controversial issues

01

Rosemary Lane Variance Request

The request involves significant deviations from lot frontage and area requirements, which can impact neighborhood density and the integrity of subdivision rules.
Board position: The board granted the variances, noting the property's history under a 2007 subdivision plan.
low concern
02

Proposed Change to Variance Criteria

Changing the fundamental testing process for variances is a significant procedural shift that alters how future land-use applications are evaluated.
Board position: The board voted to combine the first two criteria to streamline deliberations and prevent contradictory findings.
low concern

Public ⁠comment

What residents said — verbatim, with timestamps.
2
Total speakers
2
Addressed
0
Partial
0
Not addressed
Earl Sanford
Addressed
Representing the owner of 33 Greenwood Road, he presented a request for setback relief to build a single-family home. He noted that the project has already received various approvals from DES, the Wetland Board, and the Merrimack town authorities. Key concern
Request for relief from front and side setbacks for a new home construction.
Board response
The board questioned the speaker regarding septic placement and the specific distances of the setbacks. They ultimately deliberated on the five criteria and granted the variance.
The board engaged in a detailed Q&A regarding the technical aspects of the proposal and ultimately voted to approve the variance.
Christopher Goodrich
Addressed
As the owner of 91 Christian Hill Road, he requested a variance to place a 10x16 storage shed 50 feet from the street instead of the required 100 feet. He explained that his historic home is already situated very close to the road, making the standard setback impractical. Key concern
Request for relief from the 100-foot scenic road setback for a storage shed.
Board response
The board asked questions about the shed's location, visibility, and proximity to the septic system. They ultimately granted the variance with a specific condition regarding its placement relative to the garage.
The board thoroughly questioned the applicant and granted the request with a specific condition to ensure the setback intent was met.

Decisions ⁠logged

Every recorded vote, with timestamps and dissents.
Approval of Rosemary Lane variance request.
Granted with the condition of receiving all required Planning Board approvals.
3-0
Approval of Robert Hovner variance request.
Approved as presented.
3-0
Approval of Christopher Goodrich variance request.
Approved with the condition that the shed does not extend closer to the street than the back line of the garage.
3-0
Approval of April 21, 2026 minutes.
Approved.
3-0
Approval of February 17, 2026 minutes.
Approved.
3-0
Motion to combine variance criteria one and two.
To be implemented 60 days from the meeting date.
3-0

Share ⁠this report

Drafts ready to post — click any block to copy.

X / Twitter — by angle

Procedural change to variance criteria
At the May 19 Zoning Board meeting, the Town of Amherst approved a motion to change how variance requests are judged. By combining 'public interest' and 'spirit of the ordinance' criteria, the board is fundamentally altering... https://meetingwatch.org/nh/amherst/zoning-board-of-adjustment/2026-05-19/ #MeetingWatch #AmherstNH
327/280 chars
Rosemary Lane variance decision
Amherst Zoning Board update: The board voted 3-0 to grant a variance for Zero Rosemary Lane, LLC, despite the request significantly reducing lot frontage and area requirements. This decision impacts neighborhood density and... https://meetingwatch.org/nh/amherst/zoning-board-of-adjustment/2026-05-19/ #MeetingWatch #AmherstNH
326/280 chars
Board vacancy affecting case timelines
The Town of Amherst Zoning Board is currently operating with a vacancy. Several high-interest cases, including the BRAF case and Tanna Properties, were pushed to June 16th because the board lacks a full membership. #LocalGov... https://meetingwatch.org/nh/amherst/zoning-board-of-adjustment/2026-05-19/ #MeetingWatch #AmherstNH
327/280 chars

X thread

1
The Town of Amherst Zoning Board is changing the rules of the game. At the May 19 meeting, the board voted to merge the fundamental criteria used to evaluate variance requests. Here is what you need to know. 🧵 #MeetingWatch #AmherstNH
234/280
2
The board approved a motion to combine 'public interest' and 'spirit of the ordinance' into a single question. While the Chair argued this would 'streamline' deliberations, it is a significant procedural shift in how all future land-use applications will be judged.
265/280
3
This change takes effect July 20, 2026. By merging these criteria, the board is altering the legal testing process that property owners and neighbors rely on to ensure development follows town standards. #Amherst #ZoningAccountability https://meetingwatch.org/nh/amherst/zoning-board-of-adjustment/2026-05-19/
258/280

Facebook — long form

The Town of Amherst Zoning Board of Adjustment is implementing a significant change to how land-use applications are evaluated in our community.

During the May 19 meeting, the board voted unanimously to combine the first two criteria of the variance testing process—'public interest' and 'the spirit of the ordinance'—into a single question. The Chair stated this move was intended to streamline deliberations and avoid contradictory findings, noting that judicial precedents suggest the two criteria are similar. However, this is a fundamental shift in the procedural framework used to judge whether a property owner deserves relief from existing zoning laws.

This change is scheduled to take effect on July 20, 2026. Because this alters the standard for all future variance requests, residents should be aware of how the 'bar' for approvals might change moving forward.

Additionally, the board is currently operating with a vacancy, leading to the postponement of several significant cases, including the BRAF and Tanna Properties applications, until the next meeting on June 16th. https://meetingwatch.org/nh/amherst/zoning-board-of-adjustment/2026-05-19/ #MeetingWatch #AmherstNH

Action ⁠items

Who owes what, by when.
Monitor for board member volunteer applications.
Assigned: Community Development Office
Update application packages to reflect combined variance criteria.
Assigned: Community Development Office · Due: 2026-07-20

Member ⁠positions

6 issues · 0 explicit · 18 inferred
Present
Rosemary Lane Variance Request YES ~
Robert Hovner Variance Request YES ~
Christopher Goodrich Variance Request YES ~
Approval of April 21, 2026 minutes YES ~
Approval of February 17, 2026 minutes YES ~
Motion to combine variance criteria one and two YES ~
Present
Rosemary Lane Variance Request YES ~
Robert Hovner Variance Request YES ~
Christopher Goodrich Variance Request YES ~
Approval of April 21, 2026 minutes YES ~
Approval of February 17, 2026 minutes YES ~
Motion to combine variance criteria one and two YES ~
Present
Rosemary Lane Variance Request YES ~
Robert Hovner Variance Request YES ~
Christopher Goodrich Variance Request YES ~
Approval of April 21, 2026 minutes YES ~
Approval of February 17, 2026 minutes YES ~
Motion to combine variance criteria one and two YES ~

Positions marked ~ are inferred from context and may not reflect the member's explicitly stated position. UNCLEAR means the vote was split but the record did not name how this member voted — it is not a “yes.”

Support coverage

Creating this report cost ⁠real money.

MeetingWatch attended, transcribed, and analyzed this meeting on its own dime. If this work is valuable to you, chip in to keep covering Amherst.

Report composed by grok-4.3, gemma-4-26b, grok-4.20-0309-reasoning · analyzed 2026-06-07.