Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Lot Reconfiguration topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

ZBA approves lot‑line reconfiguration to create a buildable parcel at 21 Spring Ave / 10 Sawtell Place

5772050 · August 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board granted variances to reconfigure two abutting lots so the owner can balance lot sizes and enable sale of a now‑vacant parcel; relief covered a small shortfall in minimum lot area and preexisting front/rear yard nonconformities.

The Zoning Board of Appeals voted Aug. 11 to permit a reconfiguration of two abutting parcels — 21 Spring Ave and 10 Sawtell Place — that lets the owner transfer land from one lot to the other so a now‑vacant parcel can be sold and developed.

Attorney Joseph Claremont said owner John Fortin occupies the house on Sawtell Place and owns the larger rear lot on Spring Avenue. The proposal would redivide the parcels so the smaller lot gains land and the vacant lot is reduced to about 6,875 square feet — short of the standard 7,000 square feet required by the ordinance — and the project therefore requests relief for that minimum lot‑area requirement. Claremont also asked relief for preexisting nonconforming setbacks on the occupied lot (front and rear yard dimensions that do not meet current standards).

Claremont described the reconfiguration as balancing the lots and consistent with neighborhood character. Board members noted that granting the lot‑line relief does not itself approve any particular house plan for the vacant parcel; a future buyer or developer would still need to show a building meets setback and other zoning requirements and may need additional relief if it does not.

The board voted to grant the requested variances for lot‑area and the preexisting front/rear yard nonconformities, with members noting the city has previously allowed similar lot adjustments and that departments had no objections recorded in the hearing. Member McCarthy moved for approval; Member Brier seconded. A roll‑call vote in the transcript shows members present approved the variances.