The board’s deliberations on the master plan consistency review of ordinance 53122, which aimed to prohibit the use of artificial turf, concluded with a vote where most members were in favor, one member abstained, and another voted against the resolution.

However, the debate intensified when the topic shifted to the proposed changes to the historic district map. The Historic Preservation Commission had recommended alterations, but the board encountered issues with the maps provided, leading to a suggestion for a color map to enhance clarity. A member of the public voiced objections to including their property within the local historic district. The discord extended within the boardroom, where concerns were raised about the lack of notification to homeowners whose properties would be affected by the changes. Ultimately, the board motioned to defer the adoption of the ordinance related to the historic district until a future meeting to allow for further examination and proper notification to be addressed.

Further, there was a pointed debate over whether properties newly included in the historical district should receive formal letters from the city informing them of their inclusion. The timing and responsibility for such notifications were questioned, with some suggesting that this task might be more appropriately handled at the Historic Preservation Commission level. One property’s inclusion in the historical district was particularly contentious, prompting discussions on whether the matter should be tabled for further dialogue.

Amidst these discussions, the board also voted on several motions, including the approval of a new designated engineer for the planning board and the payment of bills. Furthermore, the board acknowledged the subcommittee’s efforts in reviewing pending legislation related to affordable housing, highlighting the city’s responsibilities in adhering to specific timelines and obligations.

As the meeting advanced, procedural matters such as the approval of the minutes from a previous meeting, including a correction to the voting record, were addressed without much contention. However, they were overshadowed by the more topics of the artificial turf ordinance and historic district map changes.