<html><head></head><body><div class="yahoo-style-wrap" style="font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:16px;"><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><br></div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><span style="letter-spacing: -0.02em;"> </span></div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><span style="letter-spacing: -0.02em;">Say your town requires 20K sq ft lots and 100 feet of frontage.</span><span style="letter-spacing: -0.02em;"> </span><span style="letter-spacing: -0.02em;">There is currently a home on a 70K lot.</span><span style="letter-spacing: -0.02em;"> </span><span style="letter-spacing: -0.02em;">To make it easy, lets picture a rectangular lot
and the house is all the way on the left side of the lot and currently meets all zoning
regulations, all the land to the right side is wooded and buildable.</span></div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><span style="letter-spacing: -0.02em;"><br></span></div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><div>
<div>The owner brings forth an ANR splitting the one lot into 4.<span> </span>The 3 new lots (to the right) meet current zoning,
20k lot size and 100 feet of frontage.<span>
</span>The original lot with the house is now only 10k.<span> but meets the 100 ft frontage requirement. </span>The engineer just
stamps "unbuildable lot" on the lot with the original house. <span> </span>This lot already has a house so they don\u2019t care.<span> </span>Is this allowed?</div></div><div><br></div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">What if it was reduced to 10K and the frontage also fell under the required 100 ft, would this be allowed if stamped "unbuildable"?</div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><br></div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">Thanks for your input.</div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><br></div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">Amy Poretsky</div><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">Northborough PB Chair</div><br></div></div></body></html>