The Claremont Zoning Board of Adjustment held a regular meeting on August 3, 2026, at 4:00 PM. Board members present: Richard Collins, Michael Hurd, Wayne Hemingway, Mike Lemieu, and John Dean (appointed to sit for James Petran). The meeting addressed three agenda items: a continued density variance application, a new side/rear setback variance, and a new variance to allow street-level dwelling units. Key actions included denial of the density variance, continuation of the setback variance with a site visit, and approval of the mixed-use variance with conditions. No public comments were made on any item.
ZO 2026 00007 – Variance for Rear/Side Setbacks at 67 West Pleasant Street (Mark Lamoges): The applicant proposed constructing a lean-to on the north side and a deck on the rear of an existing commercial building (former Haynes Real Estate) to convert it to residential use. The lot (0.11 acre, R1 district) has existing nonconforming setbacks; the original 1983 variance required a 13-ft side yard and 25-ft rear yard. Conflicting survey maps showed different distances from the building to the property line (approximately 3–5 ft on the north side). The applicant requested a five-foot side setback variance. No abutters appeared to comment. The board expressed concern about the uncertainty of exact lot lines and suggested a site visit. A motion to continue the hearing to September 8, 2026, with a site visit at 6:00 PM was made, seconded, and approved unanimously.
ZO 2026 00008 – Variance to Allow Street-Level Dwelling Units at 65 Pleasant Street (65 Pleasant Street LLC): The applicant sought a variance from Section 22-387-1 to allow residential units on the first floor for the portion of the building fronting School Street (a corner lot with Pleasant Street). The ordinance prohibits street-level dwellings on Pleasant Street between Opera House Square and Glidden Street. The applicant proposed preserving commercial space on the Pleasant Street frontage (approx. 460–469 sq ft) and converting the School Street frontage to four new residential studios. The existing building has 11 units on upper floors and a vacant commercial ground floor. Board discussion covered parking (municipal and agreement with adjacent lot), the size of the commercial space, and the unique nature of the corner lot. Deliberation on the five criteria: members concluded the variance would not increase congestion, would not change the character of the district negatively, would not diminish property values, and the property’s corner location made it unique (criterion five). A motion to grant the variance was made with conditions: (1) the development shall substantially comply with the application and testimony, (2) the planning board shall review and determine final commercial/residential ratio, (3) commercial space shall be a minimum of 469 sq ft (as presented) or larger, and (4) four residential units shall be provided on the first floor. Standard validity and permitting conditions were included. Vote: Unanimous in favor (one board member stated “opposed” but the chair recorded all in favor; motion carried). The variance was granted.
I call the August 3rd meeting of the Clan Zoning Board of Adjustment to order and open. Can I have a roll call? Richard Collins. Here. Michael Hurd. Here. James Petran. Wayne Hemingway. Here. Mike Lemieu. Are you fontaine? John Dean. Here. I have an appointment John to sit for Jim. And have you anybody had a chance to review the minutes of July 6th? Yes. I have any comment on that. Second. Vote. All in favor? All right. All right. Sorry. Opposed. I wasn't here, I saw. Alrighty. Old business. ZO 2026 00006. IASA. Ice Isaiah Higgins and Doris Higgins Brookline Mass. Application for a density variance for Middle 6 unit at 236 Washington Street. Tech. I mean North Street. Tax Map 95 Watt 5, zoning distance, CR2, continue from 7626. So the applicant has let us know that uh they will not be attending tonight. So the zoning board can choose to continue with public hearing without the applicant present, or you can continue the meeting, uh continue it to a future meeting. Is there what's their reasoning for not coming again? Um they are out of state. So we can either continue this to next month's meeting or correct. Or and if if you do continue it to next month's meeting, I would request that the applicant withdraw the application or request a specific. I mean, if I'd rather I guess it my point is I'd rather hear it. They've had they've had two chances to come. Unfortunately, um, if whether you're out of town or not, I mean obviously they live in was it Brockt. You know, it's a couple hours away. We have people that drive that. We've got an applicant here tonight that's driven away to be here. How long do we how long is it? They notice you that we weren't gonna make it. Was it today or last week? Check with them today and heard today.