HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-07-07 Planning Board Minutes Sean Kevlahan, Ch a i r
John Simons, Vice Chair
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER Peter Boynton
PLANNING BOARD Kate Kelly
Denevan O'Connell
Bral Spight,Associate
Tuesday July, 2026 (an, 7 p.m., 120 Main Street—Town Hall, North Andover, MA 01845
Present/Planning Board: J. Simons,P.Boynton(Remote), S.Kevlahan,K. Kelly,B. Spight,D. O'Connell
Absent:None
Staff Present: J.Enright
J. Simons,Vice Chair: The Planning Board meeting for July 7,2026,was called to order at 7 p.m.
Roll Call: B. Spight present,D. O'Connell present, S.Kevlahan present,J. Simons present,K.Kelly present,P.
Boynton present-remote
DISCUSSION ITEM
10 Planning Board: Election of Officers
11 Planning Board Representatives: Master Plan Implementation Committee
12 Community Preservation Committee
13 Merrimack Valley Planning Commission
14
15 Motion: P. Boynton made a motion to nominate Sean Kevlahan as Chairperson for the North Andover Planning
16 Board.D. O'Connell seconded the motion.
17 Roll Call Vote: P.Boynton voted yes,D. O'Connell voted yes, S.Kevlahan voted yes,K. Kelly voted to abstain,J.
18 Simons voted yes. The vote was 4-0-1,in favor.
19 Motion: P.Boynton made a motion to nominate John Simons as Vice Chairperson for the North Andover Planning
20 Board.D. O'Connell seconded the motion.
21 Roll Call Vote: P.Boynton voted yes,D. O'Connell voted yes, S.Kevlahan voted yes,J. Simons voted yes,K.
22 Kelly voted to abstain. The vote was 4-0-1,in favor.
23 Motion: D. O'Connell made a motion to nominate John Simons as the Planning Board representative on the
24 Community Preservation Committee.P.Boynton seconded the motion.
25 Roll Call Vote: P.Boynton voted yes,D. O'Connell voted yes, S.Kevlahan voted yes,J. Simons voted yes,K.
26 Kelly voted yes. The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor.
27 Motion: D. O'Connell made a motion to nominate Kate Kelly as the Planning Board representative on the
28 Merrimack Valley Planning Commission.P.Boynton seconded the motion.Roll Call Vote: P.Boynton voted yes,
29 D. O'Connell voted yes, S.Kevlahan voted yes,J. Simons voted yes,K.Kelly voted yes. The vote was 5-0,
30 unanimous in favor.
31 Motion: J. Simons made a motion to nominate Denevan O'Connell as the Planning Board representative on the
32 Master Plan Implementation Committee.K.Kelly seconded the motion.
33 Roll Call Vote: P.Boynton voted yes,D. O'Connell voted yes, S.Kevlahan voted yes,J. Simons voted yes,K.
34 Kelly voted yes. The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor.
35
36 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
37 520 Great Pond Road,North Andover Country Club: Request for continuance until August 11,2026.
38 Application for a Watershed Protection District Special Permit Article 4 Part 5 Watershed Protection District and
39 195-10.7 of the zoning bylaws to authorize tree removal within high water limits of Lake Cochichewick and parking
40 lot reclamation within Non-Disturbance Zone and the Non-Discharge Zone of the Watershed Protection District.
41 The property is located in the Residential 1 zoning district.
42 J. Enright: The applicant has requested a continuance to allow for time to re-evaluate the scope of work detailed in
43 the Watershed Special Permit application.
44
Sean Kevlahan, Ch a i r
John Simons, Vice Chair
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER Peter Boynton
PLANNING BOARD Kate Kelly
Denevan O'Connell
Bral Spight,Associate
Tuesday July, 2026 (an, 7 p.m., 120 Main Street—Town Hall, North Andover, MA 01845
45 NEW PUBLIC HEARING
46 11 Marbleridge Road and Map 037.0 Lot 56,Marble Ridge Farm,LLC: Application for Limited Site Plan
47 Review Modification under MGL Ch.40A Section 3,Article 8,Part 3 Site Plan Review and Article 10
48 Administration Section 195-10.7 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. Applicant proposes to modify the approved
49 parking plan by increasing the total number of parking spaces from 35 to 60. The site is located in the Residential 1
50 zoning district.
51 William DiAdamo(Attorney,Marble Ridge Farm LLC): Communicated that he only recently reviewed the files due
52 to this being a new case.Although the immediate focus of the hearing is on parking,there is an understanding that
53 the abutters wish to revisit broader issues.William mentioned there was outreach to the abutters'attorney to propose
54 a continuance.Though the abutters initially preferred to move forward,a request for a one-month continuance from
55 the Board to facilitate these discussions,noting it would not prejudice any party and could lead to a cooperative
56 resolution. If discussions failed,the matter could be addressed in a month.Therefore,formally requested a
57 one-month continuance before proceeding further.
58 K.Kelly: Questioned why the term"case"was used to describe Marble Ridge Winery by William DiAdamo.
59 William DiAdamo:Apologized for utilizing the term"case" and corrected the reference to "application".
60 K.Kelly: Cautioned that while meeting with the abutters to resolve issues outside the scope of the approved permit
61 is appropriate,it remains uncertain what type of agreement can be reached regarding the parking modifications
62 without the assistance of the Planning Board.
63 William DiAdamo:Agreed with Kate Kelly's statement.William contended that if they amended the application and
64 the abutters did not oppose it,the matter would be much simpler for the Board to address than a full discussion and
65 hearing.Acknowledgement was made that the Board would still address any changes,but expressed a desire to hear
66 from the abutters first to potentially resolve any issues they raise,which is believed would foster a better cooperative
67 spirit.
68 K.Kelly: Reminded William DiAdamo of the regulatory standards utilized by the Board during application reviews,
69 alongside the imperative to consider the welfare of the neighborhood and its residents.
70 William DiAdamo:Preferred not to make excuses,but this information was received only a few hours ago and there
71 has not yet been sufficient time to review it fully.Although the specific issue has been grasped,there is a broader
72 matter to consider,and it is believed it would be more prudent to address the problem as a whole rather than
73 handling it in a piecemeal manner.
74 S.Kevlahan: Inquired as to when the subsequent Planning Board meeting would take place if a one-month
75 continuance were approved.
76 J. Enright: The Planning Board meeting to which this application would be referred is scheduled for August 11,
77 approximately one month from now. Jean reminded the Board that the final decision on the application must be
78 rendered within 90 days of its receipt.
79 J. Simons:Pointed out that the application was submitted on June 4th,yet the applicant is now requesting a
80 one-month continuance on the night of the hearing.John stated that this is ineffective,given that a large number of
81 people attended this public hearing.A suggestion was made that an initial discussion should still take place tonight
82 to begin addressing the many outstanding issues, even if they cannot be resolved immediately.
83 William DiAdamo: The attorney previously handling this matter was unable to attend tonight,which is why a new
84 attorney is present.While William did not mean to use this as an excuse,the complaints,letter,and some of the
85 information from the abutters were only received yesterday.
86 J. Simons: Stated that's the purpose of the public hearing.
87 William DiAdamo: Explained that providing an opportunity for discussion with abutters and their attorney would
88 not cause any substantial prejudice to the Board or any other party.
89 S.Kevlahan: Questioned whether a waiver could be granted to avoid running into a shot clock issue,noting that
90 allowing a one-month continuance would reduce the Board's remaining review time. Sean emphasized the
91 importance of being considerate to the abutters who took time out of their day to attend.While it was acknowledged
2
Sean Kevlah an, Ch a i r
John Simons, Vice Chair
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER Peter Boynton
PLANNING BOARD Kate Kelly
Denevan O'Connell
Bral Spight,Associate
Tuesday July, 2026 (an, 7 p.m., 120 Main Street—Town Hall, North Andover, MA 01845
92 that the attorney was new to the application and needed time to digest all comments,including those from the
93 abutters'counsel, Sean highlighted that the Board is constrained by a strict deadline because the application was
94 filed under the Dover Amendment, and asked for guidance on how to rectify the situation.
95 William DiAdamo:Regarding the 90-day timeline from the date the application was filed,I believe that still extends
96 the period until the beginning of September.
97 Board: Expressed concern that the September deadline would leave them with only two meetings to deliberate and
98 render a decision on the application,which would be inadequate. The Board urged that a withdrawal of the
99 application would be the most appropriate course of action for this situation.
100 William DiAdamo: Stated that,as an alternative,if the timeline of a continuance poses difficulties,they would
101 instead request to withdraw the application without prejudice and refile it in the near future.
102 J. Enright:Regarding the Board's concerns about the shot clock,the timeline is 90 days from the date the application
103 was received,unless an extension is agreed upon in writing with the applicant and notice is filed with the clerk's
104 office.This offers a path to extend the deadline,but there is also an option to withdraw the application without
105 prejudice,which allows for a refiling within a two-year period.
106 William DiAdamo: Either option is acceptable.The applicant and their counsel are willing to proceed with
107 whichever direction the board prefers.
108 K.Kelly: Pointed out that the Conservation Department,along with some fellow Board members,raised concerns
109 regarding certain application attachments, specifically the parking site diagrams.Cautioned that it would be highly
110 beneficial to address and correct those issues.
ill William DiAdamo: Expressed a willingness to amend the application,noting that while there had not been an
112 opportunity to address the Conservation Department's concerns regarding the site diagrams and other issues,there is
113 intent to resolve them.Acknowledging that these concerns were entirely valid,it was stated that they could improve
114 how information is consolidated for the Board and reiterated the flexibility to proceed with whichever approach was
115 preferred.
116 P.Boynton: To Peter's understanding, some of the concerns mentioned involve potential current activities that might
117 not align with the stated use.If the Board moves forward with these actions tonight,could that create a situation
118 where unaligned activities are allowed to continue?Peter wanted to ensure that the Board understands if that is a
119 risk,they take by not addressing this further tonight,as they do not want to leave either the applicant or the abutters
120 with an unresolved or incorrect situation.
121 William DiAdamo:An understanding was expressed. Stated that tonight's focus is strictly on the parking issue,and
122 since the parking is not being expanded,nothing should change at this time. If there are any perceived violations in
123 the conduct of Marble Ridge,those would be addressed through other available methods,which we would be glad to
124 participate in. Suggested that if any immediate questions or problems arise,their attorney can call William directly,
125 and the matter will be addressed quickly.
126 S.Kevlahan: Stated that a zoning violation letter for Marble Ridge Winery is included in tonight's meeting packet
127 and will need to be addressed at some point. Sean offered any abutters and their counsel in attendance to speak their
128 concerns,acknowledging the time they took out of their day to attend tonight's meeting.
129 Nicholas Rosenberg(Abutter's Attorney): Introduced as the legal representative for the abutters,which includes
130 Matt and Julie Tyler of 235 Great Pond Road,Tom and Nicole Friel of 254 Great Pond Road,Nancy Leland of 270
131 Great Pond Road,and Julian and Carol Santos of 245 Great Pond Road.Nicholas noted that the application for
132 parking expansion is not an isolated issue,as any expansion must primarily serve as an accessory use to an
133 agricultural operation,thereby invoking Dover Amendment analysis. It was emphasized that despite parking not
134 being voted on tonight,there is a zoning violation and ongoing concerns that persist on the property. The document
135 submitted to the Board highlights an underlying concern that Marble Ridge Winery does not function as a legitimate
136 vineyard or engage in true viticulture.It was argued that maintaining a small number of grape vines does not grant a
137 right to unrestricted activity,adding that the operation does not constitute agriculture because the grown grapes are
138 not used in any meaningful quantity to produce wine. He stated that under the Dover Amendment,even if the
3
Sean Kevlah an, Ch a i r
John Simons, Vice Chair
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER Peter Boynton
PLANNING BOARD Kate Kelly
Denevan O'Connell
Bral Spight,Associate
Tuesday July, 2026 (an, 7 p.m., 120 Main Street—Town Hall, North Andover, MA 01845
139 primary operation qualifies as agriculture,any accessory uses must directly support that primary agricultural
140 purpose.While accessory uses themselves do not need to be agricultural,their main function must be to sustain the
141 primary operation similar to a stand selling farm products or a shed sheltering farming implement.We contend that
142 the weddings,rehearsals,concert series,and lodging operations hosted at the winery are commercial expansions that
143 extend far beyond supporting an agricultural use.Furthermore,the Board retains the authority to implement
144 reasonable regulations on uses protected by the Dover Amendment.Even if the parking matter is not being decided
145 today,the zoning violation requires attention,and we have requested that the Building Commissioner continue
146 monitoring the situation. Communicated that the requirement for this property to be used for agricultural purposes
147 remains constant.A single past confirmation of grape cultivation from the Building Commissioner does not grant
148 permanent,unrestricted approval for any activity. There is an ongoing obligation to maintain agricultural use.
149 Requested the Board,at a minimum,encourage the Building Commissioner to verify compliance with the original
150 permit of 35 parking spaces and the allowed uses from the initial Site Plan Review.Additionally,urged an
151 investigation into whether these operations constitute legitimate agricultural activities and actual wine-making. In
152 the meantime,will discuss these issues with the owner in hopes of reaching an amicable resolution. The neighbors
153 remain open to a reasonable use that respects the neighborhood's character. Expressed that thus far,there has been no
154 response to concerns regarding food trucks,weddings,concerts,loud music,and the resulting traffic on the private
155 way. Communicated that the primary concern is that the expansion of these events increases traffic on both the
156 private way and public roads,while a parking area full of vehicles disrupts the neighborhood. This disruption is
157 especially problematic when justified under the guise of operating a winery.When reviewing the proposed plans,
158 they call for removing the single remaining field capable of supporting new vines. This contradicts the applicant's
159 statement to this Board last Fall,where they claimed to have 198 vines and intended to plant more in the Spring. The
160 Spring season has passed,no new vines have been planted,and existing vines are instead being relocated to make
161 room to expand parking.Feels the operation functions as a wedding and concert venue,alongside an Airbnb rental
162 space it is not a genuine vineyard.Requested that the Board hear directly from the abutters. Confirmed that,
163 assuming the application is withdrawn this evening,they will engage with the owner and their counsel to seek a
164 resolution. If a resolution cannot be reached and a new application is filed,we will return.
165 K.Kelly: Inquired if information was available regarding Rosenberg's comments on the extent to which onsite vines
166 contribute to the wine produced and sold at the venue.
167 J. Enright: The applicant provided some sheet data this past October during the submission of the application. It
168 remains uncertain if the data was compiled by a CPA or someone employed by Brig,but they did present
169 information at that time.
170 Nicholas Rosenber;:Apologized if this information was missed when reviewing the documentation.Upon the
171 review of the materials,Nicholas only noted a letter from an individual identifying as an accountant,who stated they
172 had examined the documents and confirmed that more than 25%of the wine was produced from grapes grown on
173 the property.
174 Board: The Board expressed a desire to hear briefly from the abutters regarding their concerns,after which the
175 Board could discuss how to proceed.
176 William DiAdamo: Questioned whether allowing the abutters to speak at this point would officially open the
77 hearing,noting that it could alter the procedural requirements.
178 J. Enright: Explained that the hearing was opened at the reading on the new public hearing agenda item.
179 William DiAdamo:Raised concerns that moving forward could remove their ability to withdraw the application.
180 J. Simons: Stated the applicant can still withdraw the application after hearing from the abutters.
181 William DiAdamo: Inquired if they could withdraw the application now.
182 J. Simons: Confirmed that the Board could vote on accepting the request to withdraw the application,but only after
183 they hear from the abutters.
184 Nicole Friel(254 Great Pond Road): Communicated that she and her husband reside directly across from the winery
185 with a direct view.Expressed that when they purchased their property in 2015,they underwent an 18-month
4
Sean Kevlah an, Ch a i r
John Simons, Vice Chair
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER Peter Boynton
PLANNING BOARD Kate Kelly
Denevan O'Connell
Bral Spight,Associate
Tuesday July, 2026 (an, 7 p.m., 120 Main Street—Town Hall, North Andover, MA 01845
186 renovation that took a considerable amount of time,largely due to numerous town restrictions we had to satisfy
187 before obtaining our permits. Consequently, she is dismayed and confused by how easily Brig and Marble Ridge
188 have been able to bypass local zoning laws designed to protect both the land and the surrounding neighborhood
189 community. Communicated that about two and a half weeks ago,their neighbor,Matt Tyler, approached Brig to
190 discuss this very parking application and that this was not the first time they have attempted to engage in a
191 meaningful and mutually beneficial conversation with Marble Ridge.After no response,we sought legal counsel,
192 which is why they are here tonight. Stated that this step was not taken without first expressing concerns with Brig.
193 Provided context that initially,they were incredibly supportive of Brig and the Marble Ridge business venture.The
194 property and grapevines are beautiful and align well with the character of the neighborhood. Expressed that she was
195 excited about the idea of a quaint winery hosting wine tastings and small events across the street,preferring a field
196 of grapevines over a large mansion style dwelling.However,they did not realize at the time that his aspirations were
197 much larger,expanding to include food trucks, full-scale weddings,and outdoor music with speakers,which was
198 recently approved in his entertainment license by the Select Board. Even more surprised to learn that the town
199 allowed him to bypass local zoning laws under the special designation of a working farm through the Dover
200 Amendment. Having researched this amendment from a layman's perspective, stated she cannot reconcile his
201 property activities with the specific requirements outlined in the law.Disheartened that the town never verified the
202 information supplied by Brig's attorney and accountant. Expressed concern that their grapes are imported from
203 California,which is both advertised on the website and Brig shares this information with visitors.Parties that were
204 told that the grapes are grown,harvested,and crushed on-site are this Board,the Building Inspector,and Town
205 Counsel and that he was believed in good faith,allowing him to circumvent the local residential zoning laws meant
206 to protect the residents in this room. Believes that if Marble Ridge is permitted to increase its parking from 35 to 60
207 cars,it will transform a residential area into a commercial zone. Even with current limited parking,neighbors face
208 vehicle headlights shining through windows at night.Increasing parking capacity will bring more traffic,and the 60
209 existing cars will be driven by individuals who have been consuming alcohol on a road where children live.
210 Additionally,regarding the outdoor speakers and music,there is no clear plan for monitoring noise and decibel
211 levels. The Select Board suggested that neighbors simply complain if the music is too loud,but feels it is unfair that
212 they must police this.Neighbors have already had to notify the Town about unauthorized BYO alcohol activities that
213 reportedly violated his liquor license in this residential neighborhood. Requested the Board to vote no on expanding
214 Marble Ridge's parking request and that they review and enforce the requirements of the Dover Amendment,
215 particularly concerning the ancillary activities taking place there. Thanked the Board for their time.
216 Nancy Leland(270 Great Pond Road): Lives directly across the street from the vineyard entrance and observes the
217 daily operations continuously. Outlined some background regarding this property; for several years,the business
218 operated without a certificate of occupancy before the situation was rectified.More recently,a major parking
219 violation occurred on May 18th,following an incident on April 16th where roughly 37 cars were parked across the
220 grass areas,leading to a notice of zoning violation. Furthermore,multiple issues are pending before the Board of
221 Selectmen. On May 15th,the owner was ordered to stop advertising BYOB services for private events. On May
222 22nd,the Town Clerk issued another request to stop advertising fortified wines mixed with tequila,bourbon,or rum.
223 This matter was referred to Town Counsel on June 22nd.Expressed she has followed up regarding the status of the
224 liquor license but has not yet received feedback,and is uncertain if she can contact Town Counsel again. Stated a
225 primary matter to resolve is ongoing compliance with the Dover Amendment.After speaking with the agritourism
226 program official at the Massachusetts Department of Agriculture, she confirmed that municipal enforcement is
227 required to ensure that agricultural activity is sustained continuously. Communicated that the Town has a
228 responsibility to the general public and to the directly impacted abutters to establish enforcement protocols and clear
229 compliance criteria. These criteria must include growing grapes on-site for crushing,de-stemming,and
230 fermentation. Current advertising shows that the winery sources its grapes from California rather than utilizing
5
Sean Kevlah an, Ch a i r
John Simons, Vice Chair
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER Peter Boynton
PLANNING BOARD Kate Kelly
Denevan O'Connell
Bral Spight,Associate
Tuesday July, 2026 (an, 7 p.m., 120 Main Street—Town Hall, North Andover, MA 01845
231 property-grown grapes.Requested that the Town fully address and consider all the issues summarized in our
232 attorney's memorandum. Thanked the Board.
233 Board: With no further public comments presented,the Board advised the applicant to determine their next steps
234 regarding the application.
235 William DiAdamo:At the Board's discretion,I suggest that the most appropriate path forward is either to withdraw
236 the application or have my client sign a waiver to grant us additional time to respond.This approach makes the most
237 sense at this stage,particularly since many of the concerns raised tonight are not currently before the Board.
238 Initiating a conversation now would be beneficial to address these matters before they escalate further.
239 Board: There was a general consensus that withdrawing the application would serve as a more efficient approach.
240 William DiAdamo:We will proceed to withdraw without prejudice and refile a new application in the near future.In
241 the interim,he will consult with counsel to see where that leads us.
242
243 MOTION: D. O'Connell made a motion to accept the request to withdraw the application without prejudice for the
244 Limited Site Plan Review Modification for 11 Marbleridge Road. The motion was seconded by J. Simons.
245 Roll Call Vote: P.Boynton voted yes,D. O'Connell voted yes, S.Kevlahan voted yes,J. Simons voted yes,K.
246 Kelly voted yes. The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor.
247
248 DISCUSSION ITEM
249 Master Plan Implementation Committee: June 2026 Progress Report
250 J. Enright: Explained that the June 2026 Progress Report is included in the meeting packet. It includes a list of
251 initiatives that have been advanced since January 2026 that directly related to Master Plan goals.
252 J. Simons: There is a general perception that the current master plan has run its course,and the best approach now is
253 to move forward with the next master plan.
254 J. Enright: The master plan features 103 strategies and goals,which are accessible on the Town website.Residents
255 can click on a specific goal to view the progress made toward addressing it. The meeting packet contains a
256 seven-page memo outlining the various programs and initiatives implemented over the past six months to target
257 these goals.Furthermore,internal discussions have commenced regarding a potential update to the Master Plan.
258 Originally adopted in 2018,the plan is approaching the ten-year mark,which serves as a standard baseline for
259 updates.While the previous Master Plan remained in place for 20 years,it did not garner the same level of attention
260 and engagement as the current one.
261 K.Kelly: Questioned if Master Plans are required by state law.
262 J. Enright&J. Simons: Confirmed that Master Plans in municipalities are required by state law.
263 Board: Inquired regarding the frequency with which master plans must be updated and whether a specific timeline
264 exists for the implementation of a new Master Plan.
265 J. Simons: There is no specific deadline for implementing a new master plan.However,a comprehensive process
266 involving significant Town participation can take between a year and a year and a half,and typically requires hiring
267 a consultant.A major consideration is the level of involvement required from the Planning Board's leadership.
268 Ultimately,once initiated,managing the various components of this process is a substantial undertaking.
269 K.Kellam Questioned how involved the Planning Board was in the process of creating the 2018 Master Plan.
270 J. Simons:Highlighted that Jean Enright contributed significantly to the development of the 2018 Master Plan.
271 J. Enright:We engaged a consultant and subconsultants and held public meetings,which the Planning Board
272 members attended.Ultimately,the Board is responsible for adopting the final Plan. Consultant presentations to the
273 Planning Board were integrated throughout the entire process.While a 20-year timeframe is on the higher end,an
274 update interval of 10 to 20 years is typical for most communities.
275 Board: It was noted by the Board that the existing master plan successfully met all its objectives,indicating a
276 positive result.Discussed what could be handled differently in an update process.
277 J. Enright: Garnering public input is imperative. Sustaining a broad public interest throughout the process is can be
6
Sean Kevlahan, Ch a i r
John Simons, Vice Chair
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER Peter Boynton
PLANNING BOARD Kate Kelly
Denevan O'Connell
Bral Spight,Associate
Tuesday July, 2026 (an, 7 p.m., 120 Main Street—Town Hall, North Andover, MA 01845
278 challenging. Significant public input helps to create a tailored Master Plan specific to the Town's needs and wants.
279 K.Kellam Questioned who participates in the development and creation of the Master Plan.
280 D. O'Connell: The process involved business owners,staff,residents,and school representatives. Once the plan was
281 adopted,the Master Plan Implementation Committee was brought to fruition. The committee consists of
282 representatives assigned from certain Boards,such as the Planning Board,alongside public members appointed by
283 the Select Board. Their purpose is to oversee the implementation, echoing Jean's earlier point,and I will now serve
284 as the representative from our Board to that group.
285 J. Simons&S.Kevlahan: Expressed a desire to incorporate a strong focus on land use and economic development
286 within the new Master Plan. This would involve identifying potentially developable and re-developable parcels,
287 creating a more robust and economically compatible land use strategy,and prioritizing downtown redevelopment.
288
289 MEETING MINUTES: June 2,2026 meeting minutes.
290 MOTION: J. Simons made a motion to approve the meeting minutes for June 2,2026. The motion was seconded by
291 K.Kelly.
292 Roll Call Vote: P.Boynton voted yes,D. O'Connell voted yes, S.Kevlahan voted yes,J. Simons voted yes,K.
293 Kelly voted yes. The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor.
294
295 DISCUSSION ITEM
296 946 Osgood Street(China Blossom),0 Prescott Street, 1 &28 Royal Crest Drive:
297 Board: Requested that a status update and any further information regarding 0 Prescott,946 Osgood Street(China
298 Blossom),and 1 &28 Royal Crest Drive be provided at the next meeting.
299
300 MEETING ADJOURNMENT:
301 MOTION: D. O'Connell made a motion to adjourn the July 7,2026 Planning Board meeting. The motion was
302 seconded by J. Simons. The meeting adjourned at 7:47 p.m.
303 Roll Call Vote: P.Boynton voted yes,D. O'Connell voted yes, S.Kevlahan voted yes,J. Simons voted yes,K.
304 Kelly voted yes. The vote was 5-0,unanimous in favor.
305
306 MEETING MATERIALS: July 7,2026 Planning Board Agenda; 11 Marbleridge Road: 251007 Recorded
307 Decision,260705 Letter to Board-Attorney N.Rosenberg,Locus,LSPR Modification:Abutter Comment:
308 260506 Abutter Comment-Friel,260605 Abutter Comment-Tyler,260618 Abutter Comment-Leland,
309 Department Review: 260608 NAFD Comment,260608 NAPD Comment,260629 Conservation Comment,LSPR
Modification Application: 11 Marbleridge LSPR Application,Zoning Enforcement Letter: 260518 Building
311 Comm Zoning Violation-Parking; 520 Great Pond Road: Continuance Request to 8.11.2026;Meeting Minutes:
312 DRAFT-June 2,2026 Meeting Minute;MPIC Progress Report: MPIC Progress Report_06.26_rev; Staff Report:
313 260707 Staff Report
7