Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 5.12.22



Minutes of Meeting – Thursday May 12, 2022

Members Present: Charles Moore, John Williams, Garret Siegel, Elliott Nachwalter, Sebastian Massey, Michael Murno, and Nick Zaiac (TA).

Attendance Formats: Town Hall, Zoom Video Conferencing or Phone

Other Attendees:  Cat Bryars (BCRC)

A special meeting was called by Chairman Charles Moore to further discuss the details of a Development Review Board (DRB) model versus Arlington’s present model of a Planning Commission/Zoning Board of Adjustment (PC/ZBA) model

  1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Chairman Charles Moore.
  • In response to the question of whether the Select Board would be involved in going to a DRB model, Cat explained that if we decide to change to a DRB, the legislative body (APC) must approve the change by resolution, which is then sent to the Select Board. Cat will check on the process and get back to us. The next Select Board meeting is June 2.
  • Charles Moore asked the slides presented at the last meeting outlining the model differences be reviewed for discussion. Under the DRB model, the Planning Commission acts as the legislative/quasi-judicial body responsible for the Bylaws and the approval of site plans in compliance with the Bylaws. The Zoning Board of Adjustment reviews the plans and determines their validity for permitting. Under the DRB model, the Planning Commission would continue to be responsible for the Bylaws as the legislative body, but would give up its quasi-judicial role. The (ZBA) would be dissolved and the DRB would assume all previous ZBA responsibilities, including compliance reviews with the Bylaws and land use permitting. The Land Use Administrator (LUA) would have the same administrative role under both models.
  • Regarding sitting on both the PC and the DRB, at least one member of the PC can sit on the DRB. The DRB would consist of between 5 and 9 members, 9 being the maximum.
  • With regard as to which model is better, neither is better than the other, however the DRB model may be more beneficial to the applicant, as it provides a more streamlined process and may eliminate conflicts between two land use review boards. Under the DRB model, the PC would be able to focus on the Town Plan and Bylaws revisions and other long term planning functions.
  • There was much discussion over the two models and the roles of the legislative, and judicial boards under each. Many of those present said they were accustom and very familiar with our current model and stated that it has worked well for us over the years. Elliott Nachwalter made a motion that we stay with the current model, that is a Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Adjustment model; seconded by Garret Siegel. Motion carried.

As there was no further business, Charles Moore made a motion to adjourn; seconded by Elliott Nachwalter. Motion carried.

Meeting was adjourned at 7:44 pm.  Our next regular meeting will be on Thursday May 26, 2022 at 7:00 pm.

Respectfully submitted Michael J. Murno

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *