Central to the board’s deliberations was the decision to limit the overlay district proposal to the PGA lot. This decision followed discussions on the feasibility and ramifications of split zoning and other zoning configurations. The board expressed a preference for simplifying the proposal to avoid complexities associated with split zoning. The motion to focus solely on the PGA lot was passed with a vote of three in favor and one against, and the proposal was set to be presented at the upcoming fall town meeting. This approach was seen as a compromise that could potentially align with state requirements for MBTA communities while minimizing disruption to existing land use in Norton.

Concerns were raised about the number of housing units and the strain they might place on local schools, fire services, and police funding. The board discussed a reduction in the proposed housing units from 1,750 to 1,220, with further reductions possible pending negotiations on specific parcels. The need for transparency and careful communication with the public was emphasized, with board members acknowledging the importance of ensuring that the proposed number of units is grounded in reality.

Another topic was the potential impact of development on the town’s commercial and residential balance. Some participants advocated for retaining commercial land to alleviate financial pressures on homeowners. They argued against increasing the multifamily housing footprint, citing concerns about becoming overly residential at the expense of commercial viability.

The board also explored various development options, including the potential for assembling smaller, non-contiguous parcels to create viable development opportunities. The flexibility of land configurations was a point of interest, with discussions touching on specific properties such as the Glen property and East Main Street apartments. The board recognized the complexities involved in planning and zoning, particularly concerning compliance with state regulations and the timing of potential changes.

Public engagement featured prominently in the meeting, with participants expressing frustration over the selection of parcels for development and the perceived lack of responsiveness to community concerns. However, the sentiment from some attendees was that the board needed to more thoroughly consider alternative development sites and community input.

Environmental considerations also emerged as a concern, with participants urging the board to prioritize ecological preservation in its zoning decisions. The potential ecological impact of developments near sensitive areas, such as the reservoir, was a point of discussion.