A New Hampshire Supreme Court ruling upholding the Planning Board’s decision denying a proposal for a kennel last summer has local officials relieved, though the couple behind the project are crying foul.

The decision was handed down more than a year and a half after Thomas and Donna Richard first approached the town with plans to convert a residential duplex on the rural-zoned Galway Lane into kennel. According to Planning Director Ross Moldoff, the Richards had gone through a series of hurdles to gain town approval for the project before ultimately being denied in August of last year because the planning board felt the 28-dog kennel did not meet site-plan regulations.

The proposal also drew criticism from abutters, who voiced concerns over increased traffic, the possible contamination of well water and issues of drainage, runaway dogs and noise, according to Moldoff.

Though the Richards filed an appeal with Rockingham Superior Court, the court sided in favor of the town last January. According to court documents provided by town officials, the Superior Court ruled that the couple had failed to address “the big picture” despite their alterations to the original proposal and described the presence of a kennel in the residential neighborhood as a “recipe for disaster.”

Now, nearly a year after the proposal was last denied by the Planning Board, the state Supreme Court has rejected the Richards’ appeal of the lower court’s ruling on the grounds that the Planning Board adequately articulated the basis of denial and did not act on bad faith while considering the project plan.

“The board was just in its position,” Planning Board Chairman Jim Keller said yesterday.

“The principal issue was the impact of that type of operation and business in the neighborhood. They were putting the kennel in a residential home and it was within a home that was within a residential neighborhood. We had concerns about that with respect to the neighborhood ... We just felt that it just wasn’t the right project in the right place.”

While Keller said he was relieved the issue had been settled, Thomas Richard said the decision had left his family and his lawyer upset.

“The Planning Board, the Superior Court and the Supreme Court ignored everything we submitted as facts. Obviously, it was political,” Richard said. “You put your life savings into something and you meet the requirements and you get turned down by the politics. We were trying to do something, and we figured this was our future.”

Richard pointed to the board’s approval of a second proposed kennel project on Brady Avenue, a rural-zoned residential neighborhood, by the Salem Animal Rescue League at roughly the same time.

“They didn’t meet all the requirements, but they got approved. Every department signed off on us and we got denied. How can they not meet all the requirements and still be approved?” he asked. “We were treated so different from them.”

According to Keller, the circumstances surrounding both projects – the first proposed kennels in Salem in over two decades – differed greatly. The SARL kennel was designed specifically by an architect with experience working on similar projects to house animals and the group had a defined protocol for their operation, Keller said.

The zoning ordinance has since changed to prevent kennels from operating in rural residential neighborhoods as a direct result of both projects, according to Keller.

Though pleased by the outcome, Moldoff said he felt bad for the Richards, who are currently renting the property.

“It’s been a long battle ... (The Richards) had spent a lot of money and a lot of time on it. I had worked with them to help them understand the issues and the town’s regulations. It’s not a pleasant experience to go to court. You feel bad for the other side,” he said. “Ultimately, I’m glad we prevailed.”