Howard County neighbors urge denial of 26‑unit age‑restricted development over well, traffic and character concerns

A group of Western Howard County residents told the hearing examiner on July 16 that a proposed 26‑unit age‑restricted housing development on the Twig property would threaten private wells, increase dangerous road use and destroy the area’s rural character.

Neighbors who live along Lakeway Drive, Triadelphia Road and Blackberry Lane said they rely exclusively on private wells and warned that clustered foundations and shared community wells or septic could reduce well yields, cause contamination, or leave houses uninhabitable. "Our well is 300 feet deep," said Donald Hibbard of Lakeway Drive, testifying he had run out of water at times and that nearby properties have experienced water issues. "We're very concerned about what might happen with a prospect such as they proposed."

Bob Marcagiano, who said he measured about 3.2 gallons per minute from his laundry sink, told the examiner that a new shared system and any holding tanks would increase the total draw on the aquifer and proposed that the county assume responsibility for remedying any well failures or provide public water if problems occur after turnover to an HOA.

Multiple speakers urged independent, third‑party well and environmental testing before any approval. "We rely entirely on private wells — without water, we cannot live in our homes," said Becky Merrill of Lakeway Drive, who asked for binding developer commitments to restore or compensate homeowners for demonstrable well impacts and for a 10‑year security to cover failures after occupancy.

Several residents said the proposal would change neighborhood character by packing 26 units onto a small build footprint. Jennifer Sunenlater of Blackberry Lane said she calculated the project spreads the units across about 7.16 build acres — roughly 0.27 acres per unit within the clustered area — and that the layout is out of step with surrounding lot sizes. Neighbors also pressed landscaping and tree‑protection concerns, noting that mature trees would take decades to be replaced.

Traffic and emergency‑response concerns were repeated. Witnesses described limited shoulder space on Philadelphia/Tridelphia Road, frequent school bus stops at the Lakeway‑Tridelphia intersection and situations in which fire apparatus could be constrained. Several speakers worried that a dense cluster of homes supplied by wells and without nearby hydrants could present fire‑safety and response limitations.

Opposition counsel moved to dismiss or deny the petition on the ground that the petitioner has not met the burden of proof required for the conditional use, arguing petitioners failed to present material hydrogeologic evidence showing the project "will not" have atypical adverse effects on neighboring wells and properties. The hearing examiner took the motion and the record under advisement and said a decision and order will be issued.

If the examiner approves the conditional use, neighbors asked for binding conditions — including independent hydrogeologic testing with developer‑funded remediation, a full environmental concept plan addressing groundwater recharge and runoff, transparent reporting of well tests and tree protections, and a traffic study capturing peak and non‑peak patterns — before any grading or building permits are issued.

The hearing record remains open to the examiner’s forthcoming decision and order, which will address the motion to deny and any proposed conditions.