Two years after a developer dropped an unpopular plan to build a live-in facility for teens with substance abuse and other issues on the Westport/Little Compton town line, another plan for the property — nine new homes — is drawing similar wariness along Old Harbor Road.

Long Built Homes and Charles Merrow, owner of 435 Old Harbor Road, are seeking Westport Planning Board approval for the development at 435, 461 and 0 Old Harbor Road, three contiguous lots that run north to south directly on the border.

As drawn the plan needs special permits for a common driveway and seven “flexible frontage” lots along the mostly quiet, heavily wooded road. It would also require complex engineering, berms and other retention features to deal with runoff, the clear cutting of 300,000 square feet of forest, the loss of some stone walls and — residents also fear — a change in sight lines that some believe would change the neighborhood forever.

A steady stream of residents spoke of their concerns during a 90-minute public hearing before the board Tuesday evening. And while several said they support the development of needed housing and would welcome new neighbors if the job is done right, most said the project just feels wrong to them.

“I’m totally against the project,” 460 Old Harbor Road resident Josie Woollam, who has lived in her home since 1978, said.

“In the 47 years I’ve lived there I’ve never had a drainage problem. My issue is (with) nine new wells and nine new septic systems (and) how impactful that would be. I worry about erosion too from all this drainage (and) I also think nine houses is just not in keeping with the neighborhood. I don’t mind some houses but I think nine new houses on that plot of land is just too many.”

It could have been 13

It could have been more, ZCE Consulting engineer Tom Morris told board members.

Long Built Homes and Merrow could have sought to develop as many as 13 house lots on the land, he said, but went with nine to reduce the overall impact. But in doing so, the flexible frontage lots and berm and other runoff retention features were necessary, and he said didn’t see an alternative:

“There’s no alternative if you want to build nine houses, you mean,” board member John Bullard offered.

“Correct,” Morris replied. The alternative is building 13.”

Though he clarified later that noting the 13-home option wasn’t a threat, some residents took it that way.

Tim Reny, of 303 Old Harbor Road, told board members that he came close to acquiring the land from Merrow many years ago. He said he was surprised to hear that the current development group, which would be allowed to build six lots on the property without any special approvals, would “almost threaten” 13 lots instead.

“Six lots,” he said. “They know they can do it. They chose not to do it” and instead “threaten a 13-lot subdivision that would tear apart the whole area. I don’t think that’s a very effective way to treat your neighbors. I hope Charlie (Merrow) in particular wises up and considers being a good neighbor.”

‘Assault’ on stewardship

Chris Spicer had similar things to say.

His family has owned 357 Old Harbor Road for more than a century and he said he is proud to be the third generation of his family there since his grandparents bought 32 acres in 1924. Over the course of his life he’s tried to be a good steward of the land and surrounding area, as have both the towns of Westport and Little Compton, he said. He worries that its special quality will be lost if the development goes through and that long line of careful stewardship is lost.

“Part of the benefit is not just our section of the town, but it’s our partnership with Little Compton,” he said. “That whole ridge (behind the properties) is a fabulous collaboration between a lot of agencies — the Little Compton Agricultural Conservancy Trust, the Westport Land Trust, Audubon, the Nature Conservancy, Trustees of Reservations — it’s protected so much of that hill.”

“This (project) is just an assault on that philosophy and the stewardship of the land that we prize in our area. I don’t expect that we will all follow this particular (conservation) path. But this is such a rude counterpoint to what’s been a generous stewardship of the land.”

Hearing continued

Board members listened to Morris and the neighbors for nearly an hour and a half until agreeing to continue the hearing until Tuesday, Oct. 20, at 4:15 p.m. By then, a third party engineer will have reviewed the plan and, Morris said, changes could be made to the design.

That would be wise, some members suggested:

“I think this plan is working the site very hard,” board member Bob Daylor said. “If we grant you the special permits, we have to find that it’s more beneficial to the town — I’m not there. I don’t see the benefit to the town right at the moment.”

“Almost everyone said they would welcome new neighbors,” Bullard added. “Neighbors is about a relationship (and) as one of the commenters said, what you can do with 13 lots is perceived as a threat, and it’s rude. You don’t get off to a good start if you threaten and you’re rude — maybe some trust could be built, and listening could occur.”

“The idea is that whether it’s six homes or nine or 13, these are going to be people in a neighborhood. And they, I assure you, are going to want to be a part of the neighborhood. How you develop this is going to make it easier for them, or harder for them.”