Rebecca Fisher and counsel push back on neighbor objections to 82-acre Tamarack subdivision

Paul Angster, representing applicant Rebecca Fisher, presented written responses to multiple neighbor letters opposing a proposal to subdivide an 82.17‑acre parcel at 842 Tamarack Road into three lots.

Angster told the board that two technical reports — a wetlands delineation by North Country Ecological Services and a stormwater pollution prevention plan by engineer Steven Dean — conclude there is no hydrologic connection between the two ponds neighbors cited. "Both of those documents prepared by engineers, qualified people, clearly state that there's no hydrologic connection between these two ponds," Angster said.

He also addressed an allegation in opponent letters that he had a disqualifying conflict of interest because of past representation of landowners; Angster said he previously represented a property owner in unrelated matters and that the prior work does not create a conflict in the current minor‑subdivision application.

Applicant Rebecca Fisher addressed the board and said the project — two new residences within the 82‑acre parcel — had followed procedural steps and that repeated objections had delayed approval. "We've been more than compliant with everything that's been asked," Fisher said, asking the board to move the matter forward rather than reopening the record for further rounds of submissions.

Board members and staff (Wayne, Danskin) said they would review the submitted materials; the planning staff recommended preparing a draft resolution that lays out the board's rationale and timetable for decision. The board agreed that staff would prepare a resolution for consideration at a future meeting, with a target of Oct. 1 for a public hearing and to finalize the record.

Why it matters: neighbors raised technical and procedural objections, including whether the access strip is a private driveway or rises to the level of a roadway requiring major‑subdivision review; the applicants say the evidence and engineering reports resolve those concerns.

What comes next: staff will review the technical documents and the draft resolution; the board will consider the resolution at a future meeting and may close the record prior to taking a formal vote.