Residents urge council to delay Harmony Manor over density, well and access concerns

Janelle Petrilli, a resident at 9760 McCutcheon Ave., opened public comment on the Harmony Manor proposal asking council to "please table or reject the proposed development as it's currently submitted." She said the plan’s density and lot pattern "would materially change the character, the privacy, and the safety of our area," and described how from a single kitchen window she currently sees zero houses and under the proposal would see eight.

Several neighbors described common concerns about legal access for a sewer main, stormwater design, and private wells. Mike Hanoi (375 Belcrest Place) pressed the council and developer for a formal agreement to protect well owners "if our well waters [were] contaminated," saying "that should not be on us." Libby Blackburn and others noted missing engineering documents in the developer’s submission and asked that the town seek a Commonwealth Court ruling on Belcrest Place access before deciding.

Residents also called for stricter application of lot‑width rules. Julie Greenberg (1000 Woodland Road) said the lot‑width ratio requirement "exists for good reasons" and that she found "no good reasons to justify" modifying it for this plan. Samuel Caneroy and others argued the modification request allows the developer to fit more lots into the parcel, which they said harms property values and the neighborhood’s character.

Council members and staff emphasized that preliminary approval is procedural and that final approval requires addressing all engineering comments, developer agreements and stormwater maintenance plans. The town’s planner and engineer explained the lot‑width standard was adopted to prevent narrow, flag‑lot configurations and that the modification request was presented to avoid creating unowned parcels that an HOA would have to maintain.