Planning board reviews concept for 3‑lot Bogomarsh Road subdivision; access and wetlands cited as key issues

A by‑right concept plan to create three lots with primary dwellings and accessory dwelling units at 751 Bogomarsh Road drew board attention to access, wetlands and emergency access requirements.

The applicant team (counsel Dylan Conley and Millstone Engineering principal Jeffrey Hansen) described the proposal as a straightforward three‑lot subdivision designed to avoid the need for relief. Jeffrey Hansen said the roadway alignment and cul‑de‑sac were carried forward from earlier approvals on neighboring parcels and that the proposal was intended to meet by‑right standards.

Board members and staff raised two substantive concerns. First, several members noted historical ambiguity in recorded plans: an apparent road or reserved area at the cul‑de‑sac appears to be located on a neighboring parcel (identified in the town record as owned by Jessica Tolan), and board counsel and staff said the legal entitlement for access must be clarified. One member asked the applicant to provide the recorded plan sheets and easement documentation as part of a preliminary plan package, and the applicant agreed to include those materials in the formal submission.

Second, the fire marshal (Captain Murphy) advised that because the length of the proposed street from Mary Lane to the cul‑de‑sac is roughly 200 feet, the roadway and turnaround must meet the department’s turning‑radius requirements for the ladder truck, and additional hydrants or hydrant extensions may be required to assure adequate fire protection. The applicant noted hydrants exist on Mary Lane and said they will coordinate water and hydrant requirements if moving to preliminary plan.

Board members also asked the applicant to reconsider a building located closest to Bogomarsh Road and its curb cut: while a prior curb cut appears to exist there, members expressed concern about sight distance on Bogomarsh Road and the intensity of traffic and suggested moving that lot’s access into the new cul‑de‑sac if wetlands permit. Staff reminded the applicant the property is in the mapped watershed/shoreline overlay (proximity to perennial tributaries and wetlands must be checked) and that wetland setbacks and conservation standards will control disturbance.

The board did not vote on the concept; the applicant was told to supply recorded subdivision plans, deed/easement records for the shown access, more precise setback and wetland mapping and confirmation from the water authority and fire department on hydrants and turning radii if the project proceeds to preliminary plan.