The board addressed a request to modify the special permit for a property on Mansfield Avenue, a marijuana retail facility, seeking to extend its operating hours from 10 p.m. to 11 p.m. to accommodate concert-goers. The board confirmed that no other town departments had raised concerns regarding this request. A member highlighted the proximity of the retail facility to other businesses and expressed concerns about potential loitering. However, it was noted that the facility had coordinated with the police department to mitigate any issues. The operation was described as professional and beneficial to the town, emphasizing the positive relationship between the business and community organizations. Following the public comment, the board discussed procedural matters, including the necessity of closing the public hearing before proceeding with the vote on the modification. A motion to close the public hearing was made and passed unanimously, allowing the board to move forward with a vote on the special permit modification. The motion to approve the modification received unanimous support from all members. The board chair mentioned the need for a formal decision to be issued and committed to having it ready by Thursday.

The meeting then transitioned to the multifamily housing overlay district proposal. The board discussed Article 23, which pertains to applying the Greatwoods Overlay District to the town’s zoning map, covering specific addresses including 195 to 235 Manville Avenue, 222 Manville Avenue, and one Arnold Palmer Boulevard. This initiative, which dates back to 2021, aims to comply with the Commonwealth’s new zoning requirements for MBTA communities. The overlay district must allow multifamily housing as of right, permitting at least 15 units per acre, and encompassing a minimum of 50 acres without any age restrictions. Norton has set a target of 750 units, focusing on providing opportunities for development rather than mandating construction.

Concerns about the implications of the multifamily housing overlay district were shared by board members and attendees. One participant emphasized the financial burden on Norton’s services without generating sufficient tax revenue to offset the costs. The overlay district seeks to allow multifamily housing in an area currently zoned for commercial use, promoting smaller housing types to meet the demands of young families, seniors, and first-time buyers. The site selection process considered factors such as sensitive land, climate resilience, water resources, and infrastructure. Visual aids illustrated the most and least suitable areas for development, highlighting locations such as Taunton Avenue, Main Street, and Mansfield Avenue. There was a debate about the rationale behind exceeding the state’s requirements and the potential consequences of doing so.

A notable point of contention was the potential loss of commercially zoned land. James Breer, a participant, expressed concerns about converting commercially zoned areas to residential use, arguing that the tax revenues from commercial properties are higher than from residential ones. He warned that such a decision could lead to a future shortfall in commercial land availability, impacting town services. The ongoing efforts to refine the uses table related to multifamily development were discussed, with suggestions to include alternative uses that could coexist with multifamily developments, such as bed and breakfasts and recreational camps for children. The board also discussed the technical aspects of the zoning bylaws, including dimensional standards and requirements for lot sizes, setbacks, and building heights.

Public engagement was a recurring theme, with several participants stressing the importance of community input before the town meeting. There was frustration expressed over the perceived rush to approve the plan, with a call for further examination of the proposed numbers and the overall strategy for housing in Norton. One speaker encouraged constructive criticism of the proposed bylaw language rather than a blanket rejection of the plan, emphasizing the goal of creating regulations that would facilitate suitable multifamily housing while still adhering to state requirements.

The meeting also addressed a proposed 15-foot setback requirement for occupied roof decks, with members questioning whether this setback was excessive. Concerns were raised about the potential loss of usable rooftop space, and a suggestion was made to revisit this requirement to determine if it was mandated by building codes. The importance of public engagement was reiterated, with a plea for community members to engage in future discussions to ensure that the topics presented do not catch them by surprise.