MIDDLESEX TWP — It was standing room only at the municipal building Wednesday as residents raised concerns during a public hearing on conditional use approval for the proposed Grey Hawk development.

Dozens of residents spoke out at the hearing, voicing concerns about the potential impact on traffic, the environment, Glade Run Lake and the township's rural aesthetic.

The plan calls for 108 units, including 76 single-family homes and 32 attached homes, on 52 acres on Overbrook Road near the intersection with Bowser Road. The layout of the plan features two entrances and a loop road connecting them, with a connecting road in the middle loop and three cul-de-sacs.

The developer is asking for a modification to allow for 20 units on the cul-de-sac, although the township ordinance only allows for 16 units. If supervisors decline to grant the modification, the developer provided an alternative that sorts the attached and single-family homes differently to accommodate the ordinance.

Those in attendance were decidedly against the plan, with calls to deny the proposal met with applause and cheers from the audience.

Resident Dave Fowler argued that the development should be denied on the grounds that it violates the stated objectives of the township. He cited the township's zoning code and comprehensive plan, which he said seeks to preserve its rural characteristics and prevent “haphazard” development.

“These developers are putting in developments wherever they can buy land,” he said. “That's about as haphazard as it gets.”

Fowler also raised concerns about the impact on Glade Run Lake, saying he believed that pollution and water runoff from the plan would lead to irreparable damage to the lake's ecosystem.

“This is a gem we got,” he said. “There's plenty of places to build other PRDs.”

Others raised concerns that the development would further displace the deer population and contribute to an increase in Lyme disease and deforestation.

Resident Ed Sell, who works as a contractor, said he believed the developer would tell the township anything to get the plans passed and leave residents to deal with the consequences.

“We have to mop up what they leave here,” he said. “We can hire lawyers. We can fight it.”

He wasn't the only one to raise the possibility of litigation.

Planning commission member Greg Mason argued that the alternative plan presented at the hearing was never presented to the planning commission.

Steven Victor, the landscape architect who presented the plan, argued the alternative only featured aesthetic changes that were not substantive to the plan.

Mason disagreed. He also asked supervisors to reject the plan, even if it leads to a lawsuit.

“I'm imploring you guys to go against the planning commission one more time,” he said. “It's expensive, I get it. ... I have no confidence whatsoever that they're going to carry out what they say they're going to carry out.”

Others spoke about the need to preserve the township's rural aesthetic and the impact hundreds of new cars would have on infrastructure and road safety.

Around 8:45 p.m., supervisors closed the hearing. They are expected to vote on the plan at their next meeting on March 20.