The New Shoreham Planning Board voted to send a positive recommendation to the Town Council on an application by Blansfield Realty Holdings LLC to alter freshwater wetlands at Assessors Plat 3, Lot 136, on the condition that the project include year-round attainable housing and measures to limit disturbance to adjacent wetlands.

The board’s recommendation follows discussion of alternate access routes, deeded rights of way and potential impacts to neighboring lots. The board also attached conditions including maintenance of culverts and runoff control, use of a crushed-stone driveway, upkeep of a proposed rain garden feature, and encouragement that neighbors share the existing deeded right of way where feasible.

Why it matters: The application, filed with the Office of Water Resources as notice of application number 22-0343 and dated Oct. 1, 2025, seeks authorization to alter freshwater wetlands. The Department of Environmental Management (DEM) has a 45-day public comment period on the notice that, according to material presented at the meeting, ends Nov. 17 at 4 p.m. The planning board’s recommendation will be transmitted to the Town Council for consideration as the DEM review proceeds.

Board discussion focused on the relative impacts of allowing access over an existing deeded right of way that crosses Lot 138 versus routing new access across other small lots (identified in the meeting as Lots 130, 133–136 and 138). Several members said the deeded right of way across Lot 138 would cause the least direct wetland disturbance compared with alternatives that would require new crossings near septic fields, drive over encroachments and compress fire department access. One board member summarized the trade-off by saying the inconvenience and expense of rerouting access over other lots appeared greater than the wetland impacts of the existing deeded route.

Board members repeatedly noted there are unresolved legal questions about private easements and whether alternative legal access exists; the board said disputes over legal access would be for state superior court to decide rather than the municipal permitting process. The board also noted instances where the lot owner signatures were not on the wetland alteration application: meeting materials show the owners of Lot 138 had not signed the application, and a board member noted Lot 127 is town-owned while Lot 136 is owned by Blansfield Realty Holdings LLC.

Joseph Freasley, representing the owners of Lot 131, told the board his clients are not applicants in the matter because “none of the project goes over our property,” and said they have no current development proposal for their lot but want to retain access. The board discussed the Vandersleesen/Vander Leesen property’s reliance on an existing right of way and the practical effects that has for other lots’ access needs.

After discussion the board’s motion recommended approval to the Town Council with conditions meant to limit wetland disturbance and promote neighbor cooperation. The motion was seconded and carried by voice vote with no roll-call tally provided.

The application remains subject to DEM review and the town council’s consideration of the planning board’s recommendation. The DEM notice cited at the meeting (application number 22-0343) provides the administrative avenue for technical review and public comment on the proposed wetland alterations.