Trustees and members of the New Shoreham Town Council spent the bulk of the meeting examining completed studies and early design concepts for a roughly 1.75-acre development area reserved when the town purchased property near the Great Salt Pond. The goal is to identify where a harbor-master facility, dock, boat ramp, access road and limited housing could fit while preserving wetlands and archaeological resources.

Barbara, who the council identified as the keeper of the management agreement for the property, told trustees the committee had corrected a management-agreement drafting error that previously referred to an Exhibit A that was not attached; the amendment now refers directly to the deed and clarifies how the Hodge Committee is composed and how voting would be handled. "We fixed that," Barbara said during the consent meeting discussion.

Trustees referenced work done this summer by Kevin McBride’s firm and said that archaeologists have not identified any gravesites that would prevent development. "He's verbally told us that there's nothing that would hold us up from starting to develop the property," a trustee said, and another added: "No gravesites." Officials said formal written reports are still forthcoming.

Consultants have completed a hydrologic survey, a wetlands delineation and a submerged aquatic vegetation feasibility study, and the trustees said Newport Collaborative Associates supplied concept drawings showing possible dock and road configurations. Staff noted water surveys and the wetlands identification are generally considered valid for five years, meaning the town should act within that window to use the studies for grant applications.

Trustees proposed a short-term approach: convene a subcommittee after Thanksgiving to list the outstanding decisions (massing, road alignment, parking and where utilities would run), pick a likely development area within the 1.75 acres (which need not be contiguous) and then present a recommended outline back to the full council. The subcommittee would work with town staff and hired consultants to examine zoning, planning and easement constraints, and to prepare the level of detail that strengthens future grant applications for boating infrastructure.

Trustees emphasized doing infrastructure in phases — for example installing a road, parking and a boat ramp first, and reserving a location for a future building — and highlighted grant constraints: boating-infrastructure grants are competitive and require detailed applications. Trustee commentary also raised access and life-safety concerns and recommended that fire-department lane-width and emergency access questions be included in the subcommittee’s checklist.

The trustees did not take a final binding vote on a project scope but agreed to meet after Thanksgiving to develop the site-outline and decision list and to compile all study documents on the town website so grant-ready materials are available if funding opportunities appear.