Laura Smead, principal planner at JM Goldson, told the Norwood Planning Board on Feb. 24 that the consulting team has finished an existing-conditions summary and is moving the town into phase 2 of its comprehensive-plan update, a community-driven effort to set a 10-year vision for the Town of Norwood.

Smead said the plan is meant to reflect resident priorities and that “this isn't our plan. This is your plan, and we're here to help you kind of discover what that is.” She asked the board and the public to help expand community engagement in the coming months.

The nut graf: Phase 1 codified current conditions. Phase 2 — now under way and running through June — will distill a community vision, core themes and draft goals that feed phase 3 (strategy development). The consultant team urged broad participation because the plan will guide land-use, infrastructure and service choices for the next decade.

Smead walked the board through six headline trends identified in the existing-conditions work: population growth, population aging, racial and ethnic diversification, shrinking household size, rising housing costs and climate-related flood/heat vulnerability. She summarized key data points the team said emerged from federal and local sources and public outreach: the town’s median household income of $98,653 (2024); a roughly 30% increase in median single-family home prices, a roughly 60% increase in condo prices and a 21% increase in rents since 2016; and projections showing residents 65 and older rising toward about 25% of the population in coming years. Smead warned that smaller household size combined with population growth will increase demand for housing units even if overall population gains are modest.

On transportation and economy, Smead noted Norwood functions as a regional employment hub. Using U.S. Census commuting data she said roughly 14,462 people live in Norwood but work elsewhere, while about 18,825 people are employed in Norwood and live elsewhere — an indicator that many jobs in town are filled by nonresidents. She also reported that about 43.4% of the town’s land, “as the crow flies,” falls within what the team considers a roughly 10–15 minute walk of commuter rail stations, but that actual walkability depends on sidewalks and safe crossings.

Smead highlighted safety and resilience issues: crash clusters on higher-speed corridors (Route 1 and I‑95) and increasing flood and extreme-weather risk, citing recent local flooding episodes. She said the municipal vulnerability preparedness (MVP) and hazard-mitigation work already done for Norwood will be carried forward into plan strategies.

On planning practice, Smead encouraged “smart growth” that concentrates new housing and mixed uses near transit and services while protecting open space and historic resources. She said much of Norwood’s higher-density housing already clusters near commuter-rail stations, which planners view as a strength.

Public engagement tools were detailed: a community survey, an interactive crowd map, a three-language “meeting in a box” for small-group discussions, and tabling at town locations. Smead said the project web page and a short web link (tinyURL.com/NorwoodCP) host all materials. She reported early participation figures: about 38 open-house sign-ins, 157 survey responses and 95 crowd-map suggestions to date and said the consultant team tracks participation as “points”; the current tally was roughly 358 points and the outreach goal is about 3,000.

Board members and other attendees raised questions on how the plan will treat schools, recreational assets, business needs, and the airport, and emphasized the plan must integrate prior subplans (housing, recreation, complete-streets, etc.) rather than duplicate them. Planning staff confirmed all statutory plan elements (demographics/housing, economy, transportation, natural resources, public facilities and land use) are being addressed in the update.

No formal vote or policy decision occurred. Smead said phase-2 engagement will continue through March (with analysis and visioning workshops April–June) and that the consultant expects to return to the board in the summer with draft vision and themes. The planning team asked the public to use the online tools and to host or attend “meeting in a box” sessions.

“This is really about everything all at once in a very broad way,” Smead said when describing the purpose of a comprehensive plan, and she closed by urging residents to contribute to phase-2 engagement.

Ending: The consultant posted the existing-conditions summary and engagement tools on the project web page; interested residents were directed to tinyURL.com/NorwoodCP for the survey, crowd map and printed “meeting in a box.” Planning staff said the consulting team will return to the board with proposed vision statements in the June timeframe.