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 21, 2026

The meeting was routine, characterized by unanimous votes and constructive technical discussions regarding zoning definitions and property setbacks.

Date Thursday, May 21, 2026 Duration 0.9h Speakers 14 Public comments 1 Decisions 3 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.

At the May 21 Newport Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting, a recurring issue with our town’s zoning ordinance was brought to the forefront.

During the discussion of Case 2016 (a variance request for a manufactured home on Alexander Ave), Board members highlighted a significant gap in our current rules: the language fails to clearly distinguish between 'manufactured homes' and 'mobile homes' or 'trailers.' This ambiguity forces the Board into technical, repetitive debates over whether certain modern dwellings qualify for variances, creating uncertainty for residents and the town alike.

The Board ultimately granted the variance, but they have recommended that the zoning ordinance be updated during future annual meetings to provide much-needed clarity.

In addition to the manufactured home debate, the Board also approved a special exception for Case 2017 (Mitchell Feeney) to expand a non-conforming historic structure on Reed's Mill Road. This approval was granted with specific conditions to ensure the expansion respects road setbacks and utilizes the existing foundation to maintain its 'grandfathered' status.

May 21, 2026 0.9h long 14 speakers 1 public comments 3 decisions Routine
Notable statements Drag to browse

“The language needs to change so that we don't have to hear these cases like this again because it is a manufactured home built as good as anything else.”

— Unidentified speaker · Discussing the outdated terminology in the zoning ordinance regarding mobile versus manufactured homes. ▶ 15:58

“If it's gone, it's not an existing non-conforming use.”

— Unidentified speaker · Debating whether tearing down the old structure would allow the owner to maintain the grandfathered status of the property. ▶ 44:12
This meeting — choose a section

Public ⁠impact

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

Potential long-term impact on how manufactured homes are permitted and classified.

What happened

The board recommended that the zoning ordinance language be updated to provide better clarity.

Topics ⁠discussed

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

The board reviewed and moved to approve the minutes from the previous meeting on the 15th.

What happened

The motion to approve the minutes was made and seconded.

Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

A request for a variance to place a manufactured home on Alexander Ave was debated regarding whether it qualifies as a 'mobile home' under zoning definitions.

What happened

The board voted to grant the variance by evaluating the five standard criteria individually.

Speakers: Unidentified speaker
What was discussed

An application for a special exception to expand a non-conforming residential building on Reed's Mill Road.

What happened

The special exception was granted with conditions regarding road setbacks and foundation use.

Controversy & ⁠dissent

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

Potentially controversial issues

01

Case 2016: Variance for Manufactured Home (Juby/Duby)

The case raised questions regarding the technical distinction between 'manufactured homes' and 'mobile homes' under existing zoning definitions and the validity of previous variances.
Board position: The board decided to grant the variance after evaluating the specific criteria.
low concern
02

Case 2017: Special Exception for Non-conforming Building (Feeney)

The proposal involved expanding a historic, non-conforming structure, leading to legal debates over 'grandfathered' status and the requirement to use existing foundations.
Board position: The board granted the special exception subject to specific conditions regarding setbacks and foundation use.
low concern

Public ⁠comment

What residents said — verbatim, with timestamps.
1
Speaker
1
Comments
1
Addressed
0
Partial
0
Not addressed
Mitchell Feeney
Addressed
The speaker is requesting a special exception to allow for the reasonable expansion of a non-conforming building (an old cider mill) at 279 Reed's Mill Road. He explains the property's history and expresses a desire to continue its use as a residential location by rebuilding a slightly modified version of the structure. Key concern
Request for a special exception to expand a non-conforming building footprint while maintaining its residential character.
Board response
The board engaged in a lengthy discussion regarding the legality of the 'grandfather clause,' whether the foundation must be reused, and the impact of the septic system. Ultimately, they granted the special exception with conditions regarding the road setback and the use of the existing foundation.
The board deliberated on the specific constraints of the request and voted to grant the special exception with specific conditions to address the non-conforming nature of the building.

Decisions ⁠logged

Every recorded vote, with timestamps and dissents.
Approval of meeting minutes from the 15th.
Motion moved by a speaker and seconded by a speaker.
Approved
Granting of variance for Case 2016 (Juby/Duby) to allow a manufactured home.
The board voted on each of the five criteria individually. The variance was granted as presented.
Unanimous Approval
Granting of special exception for Case 2017 (Feeney) to expand a non-conforming building.
Approved with the condition that the dwelling be no closer to the road than the existing property and that the owner utilizes the existing foundation to the best of their ability.
Unanimous Approval

Share ⁠this report

Drafts ready to post — click any block to copy.

X / Twitter — by angle

identifying systemic issues in the zoning ordinance
Newport ZBA Update (May 21): During Case 2016, the Board admitted our current zoning language is too vague to distinguish between manufactured homes and mobile homes. This ambiguity is forcing repetitive, unnecessary variance hearings... https://meetingwatch.org/nh/newport/zoning-board/2026-05-21/ #MeetingWatch
312/280 chars
reporting on a specific decision and its underlying cause
At the 05/21 ZBA meeting, the Board granted a variance for a manufactured home on Alexander Ave (Case 2016) after debating whether current definitions even apply to modern builds. The Board has recommended an ordinance update... https://meetingwatch.org/nh/newport/zoning-board/2026-05-21/ #MeetingWatch #NewportNH
314/280 chars
reporting on a specific case decision and its conditions
The Newport ZBA approved an expansion for a historic non-conforming building on Reed's Mill Road (Case 2017) on 05/21. The approval comes with strict conditions to protect road setbacks and existing foundations. #NewportNH #ZoningBoard https://meetingwatch.org/nh/newport/zoning-board/2026-05-21/ #MeetingWatch
310/280 chars

X thread

1
Newport’s zoning definitions are causing confusion at the Zoning Board of Adjustment. During the May 21 meeting, Case 2016 revealed that our current ordinance fails to clearly distinguish between manufactured homes and mobile homes/trailers. 🧵 #MeetingWatch #NewportNH
268/280
2
This lack of clarity means residents and the Board are stuck in repetitive legal debates over whether modern manufactured homes qualify for variances. The Board noted that these technical definitions need urgent updates to prevent future confusion.
248/280
3
The ZBA has recommended that the zoning ordinance language be updated at future annual meetings to provide clarity. For now, these 'gray area' definitions continue to impact how property owners in Newport can develop their land. https://meetingwatch.org/nh/newport/zoning-board/2026-05-21/
252/280

Facebook — long form

At the May 21 Newport Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting, a recurring issue with our town’s zoning ordinance was brought to the forefront. 

During the discussion of Case 2016 (a variance request for a manufactured home on Alexander Ave), Board members highlighted a significant gap in our current rules: the language fails to clearly distinguish between 'manufactured homes' and 'mobile homes' or 'trailers.' This ambiguity forces the Board into technical, repetitive debates over whether certain modern dwellings qualify for variances, creating uncertainty for residents and the town alike.

The Board ultimately granted the variance, but they have recommended that the zoning ordinance be updated during future annual meetings to provide much-needed clarity. 

In addition to the manufactured home debate, the Board also approved a special exception for Case 2017 (Mitchell Feeney) to expand a non-conforming historic structure on Reed's Mill Road. This approval was granted with specific conditions to ensure the expansion respects road setbacks and utilizes the existing foundation to maintain its 'grandfathered' status. https://meetingwatch.org/nh/newport/zoning-board/2026-05-21/ #MeetingWatch #NewportNH

Action ⁠items

Who owes what, by when.
Review and discuss updating zoning ordinance language to clarify the distinction between manufactured homes and mobile homes/trailers.
Assigned: Board/Planning · Due: Next annual meeting

Member ⁠positions

3 issues · 0 explicit · 15 inferred · 3 unclear
A split vote in this meeting was recorded without naming the dissenter (e.g. a voice vote). Members whose individual vote could not be confirmed are marked UNCLEAR below — this is not the same as a “yes.” Named votes will be filled in if official minutes record them.
Ben Nelson
Chair
Present
Approval of Minutes UNCLEAR
Case 2016: Variance for Manufactured Home (Steven Juby Jr. and Ashley Duby) YES ~
Case 2017: Special Exception for Non-conforming Building (Mitchell Feeney) YES ~
Jeffrey F. Kessler
Selectmen Representative
Present
Approval of Minutes UNCLEAR
Case 2016: Variance for Manufactured Home (Steven Juby Jr. and Ashley Duby) YES ~
Case 2017: Special Exception for Non-conforming Building (Mitchell Feeney) YES ~
Present
Approval of Minutes UNCLEAR
Case 2016: Variance for Manufactured Home (Steven Juby Jr. and Ashley Duby) YES ~
Case 2017: Special Exception for Non-conforming Building (Mitchell Feeney) YES ~
Present
Approval of Minutes UNCLEAR
Case 2016: Variance for Manufactured Home (Steven Juby Jr. and Ashley Duby) YES ~
Case 2017: Special Exception for Non-conforming Building (Mitchell Feeney) YES ~
Scott Stanton
Member
Present
Approval of Minutes UNCLEAR
Case 2016: Variance for Manufactured Home (Steven Juby Jr. and Ashley Duby) YES ~
Case 2017: Special Exception for Non-conforming Building (Mitchell Feeney) YES ~
Scott Myers
Member
Present
Approval of Minutes UNCLEAR
Case 2016: Variance for Manufactured Home (Steven Juby Jr. and Ashley Duby) YES ~
Case 2017: Special Exception for Non-conforming Building (Mitchell Feeney) 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 Newport.

Report composed by grok-4.3, gemma-4-26b, grok-4.20-0309-reasoning, grok-4-fast · analyzed 2026-07-13.