The most notable topic during the meeting was the proposal for a multifamily housing project at zero Mansfield Avenue, which sparked debate about zoning regulations, density, and infrastructure. The project, initially intended to consist of three lots with 72 units, was revised to feature two 30-unit buildings after withdrawing one lot. This revision followed a remand from the Bristol County Superior Court for further consideration after an initial proposal failed to secure enough votes for a special permit. The revised plan involves significant infrastructure work, including the installation of a sewer line from the town center to the project site. This aspect of the proposal was discussed in depth, with the developers agreeing to cover the estimated $900,000 cost, after which the sewer line would be owned by the sewer commissioners.

The proposed development encountered concerns from both the board and the public regarding its compliance with zoning regulations. The board deliberated over whether merging non-conforming lots could be a beneficial step toward addressing existing zoning issues, though this sparked differing opinions on the board. Some members were uncomfortable with the proposal, highlighting the atypical nature of merging lots with insufficient frontage for the village commercial zone. Despite these concerns, the board moved forward with a motion to endorse the plan, which passed with one opposition.

The public expressed apprehension about the potential requirement for property owners to connect to the new sewer line. It was clarified that under current bylaws, homeowners would not be obligated to connect unless their septic systems failed, and even then, they could apply for a waiver if connecting posed an economic hardship. The developers also proposed modifications to address environmental and economic considerations, such as reducing parking on Lot E, a wetland site, and offering part of it to the town for preservation. However, the conservation agent advised a deed restriction to maintain tax responsibilities and liability for fallen trees.

The board also explored an alternative proposal for a senior housing development, which prompted discussion about zoning and density allowances in the R80 residential zone. The project aimed to address the growing demand for affordable senior living spaces, given the demographic trend of an increasing senior population. The proposed development would include six buildings with approximately 36 units each, featuring amenities and rental prices below $3,000 for two-bedroom units. However, concerns arose about the feasibility of such density under current zoning laws, which typically do not permit multifamily housing in the R80 zone. This prompted a discussion on the need for possibly revising zoning bylaws or seeking variances to accommodate the project.

The planning board’s dialogue also touched on the broader implications of these developments, particularly their impact on community character and resources. Residents voiced concerns about maintaining Norton’s village feel amidst these expansive projects, with particular attention to traffic, environmental impact, and the potential strain on local infrastructure. The board acknowledged these concerns and emphasized the importance of gathering further information and community input before proceeding.

In addition to these primary discussions, the board considered amendments to existing projects, such as a modification request for a site plan on Old West Main Street. The applicant sought approval for a reduction in building height and footprint, which was viewed positively by some residents but raised concerns from the historic district commission regarding its alignment with the area’s character.