Laserfiche WebLink
Breadcrumb Navigation:
1 <br />1 <br />PLANNING BOARD MINUTES <br />MEETING OF JANUARY 31, 1983 <br />The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held <br />called to order at 7:17 p.m. by the Chairman, Mrs <br />Sandy, Sorensen, Uhrig and Planning Director Bowyer <br />COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING, POLICIES <br />in Room G-15, Town Offices, was <br />Smith, with members Nichols, <br />present. <br />17. Accessory Apartments, Draft of Article: Chairman Steven Clark, Cornelius <br />Cronin, Jean Gaudet, George McCormick and Margaret Rawls of the Accessory Apart- <br />ments Committee were present for a discussion, prior to the Board and the Committee <br />meeting with the Board of Selectmen later in the evening. <br />Chairman Smith explained that, in response to a request from the Board of Select- <br />men, an updated version of the Issues Analysis paper had been sent to them. This <br />version was a distillation of the questionnaire which each member of the Board had <br />completed. It was not a Planning Board position, but was a working paper for dis- <br />cussion purposes. She apologized to Mr. Sandy that his view on the "by right vs. <br />discretionary" issue was not identified in the working paper. <br />Mrs. Rawls and Mr. Bowyer explained that they had collaborated on a preliminary <br />draft of an article which essentially transposed the proposal of the Committee into <br />the format of the Zoning By -Law. In several places, there are alternative <br />approaches or language which are identified as Mr. Bowyer's suggestion. Both Mr. <br />Bowyer and Mrs. Rawls reported on discussions with Steve Anderson, of Palmer and <br />Dodge. Mr. Anderson's observation was that there should be consistency in the pro- <br />cedures for either the "matter of right"/Building Commissioner route or the special <br />permit/Board of Appeals route. He noted that there were some elements of each in <br />the alternative proposals and that the courts would be more likely to rule in favor <br />if a procedure was consistent. In other words, the Building Commissioner route <br />should not have some of the discretionary procedures or notification procedures <br />characteristic of a special permit. <br />Discussion continued, with clarification of some of the procedures proposed in the <br />latest draft. <br />In an informal poll of the Board, Mr. Sandy, Mr. Sorensen and Mrs. Uhrig favor the <br />"by right"/Building Commissioner approach and Mrs. Nichols and Mrs. Smith favor the <br />Board of Appeals route. <br />The meeting was adjourned at 8:09 p.m. <br />dith J. Uhr' Clerk <br />SET <br />