Architects Gary, John, and Chuck presented their thoughts on the design guidelines, emphasizing the need to maintain the town’s charm and historical nature. They stressed the importance of architectural elements such as building massing, street setbacks, and forms in both preservation and new construction. The architects recommended forming a design review board to oversee the application of these guidelines to projects.

The guidelines, specifically tailored for the MBTA zoning overlay district, sparked debate over their architect-friendliness and potential reception by both residents and developers. Task force members expressed confidence in the reasonableness of the guidelines but were aware of the challenges they might pose. It was noted that developers dissatisfied with the guidelines could opt to follow existing zoning regulations instead. The guidelines’ scope, aiming to be clear and understandable for state authorities, was also discussed, as were strategies to support the guidelines with graphics and narratives.

Another topic was the task force’s strategy for increased housing density, crucial for meeting the state’s affordable housing goals. There was a dialogue on the mix of attached town homes and apartments, the sizing of units, and the implications of parking requirements on development attractiveness. The task force debated the most effective means to present their strategies to the planning board, with opinions varying from individual presentations to a collective approach. This discussion highlighted the task force’s dedication to balancing the state’s housing mandates with the town’s need to preserve its character.

When it came to the recommendation for the planning board, the task force members delved into the evolution of their decisions and the rationale behind selecting certain districts. The potential effects of new zoning on the town, including its services and fiscal impact, were examined. A detailed review of a table estimating unit numbers in various areas led to debates on the accuracy of the projections and the modeling process used. Clarification on the model’s workings and the ramifications of implementing unit caps were sought to finalize the task force’s recommendation.

Lastly, there was an extensive discussion about fine-tuning the model for lot sizes, which is critical for determining development density. The task force aimed to convince the planning board to allow adjustments to the model to reduce the total number of potential units. The total acreage needed for development and potential adjustments based on lot sizes in different areas were also debated.