The council deliberated on whether the fee should serve as a mitigation measure or an optional contribution. Opinions varied, with some members advocating for the fee as a support for public art, while others questioned its necessity. The discussion was tabled for further review, with a view to examine practices in other municipalities and to encourage members to bring additional ideas to subsequent sessions.

Another issue addressed in the meeting was the regulations surrounding accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The council engaged in a detailed debate over the restrictions and design requirements for ADUs, including size limits, the potential for rental use, and the impact of short-term rentals on the community. Discussions also covered architectural standards, with emphasis on enforceable metrics to maintain the residential character of neighborhoods while meeting evolving housing needs.

The session also tackled the controversial topic of the placement and design of accessory structures, such as detached garages, pools, and screen enclosures. Council members reviewed changes to the Land Development Code, which aimed to consolidate regulations and clarify language for homeowners. A consensus emerged that detached garages and ADUs should not be located in front of a house, with some flexibility considered for corner lots. Additionally, there was agreement on matching the design of detached structures with the main building.

Concerns about environmental preservation were at the forefront during the discussion on wetlands regulations. The council emphasized the importance of clear and simple language in the code to prevent development on wetlands and to educate residents about the restrictions when building near wetlands or water bodies.

The meeting also covered the debate on the location of swimming pools, with a consensus allowing pools on the side of the primary structure under increased setback conditions, while considering privacy and potential noise disturbances.

Regulations for fences, walls, and other boundary structures were scrutinized, focusing on height, setback requirements, and allowable materials. The council discussed the challenges of maintenance and enforcement, particularly concerning homeowner associations and private property rights.

Mechanical equipment regulations were another topic of discussion, with the council considering screening requirements for gas, plumbing, and rooftop equipment to minimize visibility from public spaces.

Finally, the council deliberated on innovative design measures, including a density bonus tied to contributions to the public art fund. While some members supported mandatory funding of public art by developers, others expressed reservations about imposing additional fees that might discourage development.