SARG Letters

The Sussex Alliance for Responsible Growth- SARG is sharing two recent Commentaries regarding the controversary over the proposed Chappell Farm Development at the corner of Route 1 and Cave Neck Road in Milton.

Hi-Rise Apartments Are Coming to Rural Sussex - Rich Borrasso

Residential / Agricultural zoned acreage which limits development up to 2 dwellings per acre is being rapidly converted to high density of up to 12 dwellings per acre.

This alarming rate of conversion is being aided by a loose interpretation of the current County Code where the Planning & Zoning Commission is looking the other way. There is a current application before County Council that no doubt will lead to an onslaught of high density hi-rises throughout all of Sussex County.

The issue at hand here is where an application for rezoning consists of more than one land use designation. In the application before the County presently, the application requests a rezone for a 14.9-acre parcel currently zoned Agricultural /Residential or AR-1 to be rezoned to a 6.4 acre Medium Residential or MR portion and an 8.5-acre portion to be rezoned Commercial -3. The MR zone allows up to 8 dwellings per acre and is for residential multifamily use i.e., apartments or condos. The C-3 allows for a variety of retail concepts and allows for some residential. Additionally, the County land use code allows for Medium Residential zoned parcels to apply for additional up zoning allowing for up to 12 additional dwellings per acre through a process called Conditional Use.

The current applicant is asking for approval for 128 dwellings on the 6.4-acre portion of the parcel which actually equates to 20 dwellings per acre which far exceeds the allowable density. The applicant’s rationale for the 12 dwelling maximum allowable density is that they are basing the calculation on the combined 6.4 acreage of the MR rezone and the 8.5 acreage of the C- 3 rezone. This is despite the fact that their plan calls for 40,000 square feet of retail outlets and an additional 28 apartments to be built on the same C-3 portion of the parcel.

The current code 115.15.1 Calculating permitted density or the number of dwellings that could be built per acre states, “For purposes of calculating the permitted density or allowable density in all districts, the gross area, as defined herein, shall be divided by the applicable lot area stated in each district, unless otherwise specifically set forth therein. "Gross area" shall include the lot areas and the area of land set aside for common open space or recreational use….”

In County Code 115.4 Words and Definitions, the word “district” refers to Zone Districts and is defined as “Any section of Sussex County in which the zoning regulations are uniform. In the same aforementioned code, the word “lot’ is defined as “A fractional portion of a subdivision, measured, surveyed and platted and set apart, for separate use and occupancy, from contiguous parcels of land and having its principal frontage upon a street.”

Clearly the fact that the MR and C-3 zones or districts in the context of the definition do not have uniformity in regulations meaning each has distinct and separate regulations.

The two separate and disparate zones or districts in the context of the definition relating to” lot” have “separate use and occupancy”.

This application at issue here should be approved for MR rezoning with the maximum allowable density to be calculated based on 6.4 acres multiplied by 12 dwellings per acre for a total of up to 76.8 dwelling and approval should be granted for the C-3, but the Conditional Use must be denied.

The applicant is not entitled by right to this rezoning and conditional use approval. Sussex County Council has the authority to exercise its will to enforce the proper intent of Code 115-15.1 Calculating of permitted density and should enforce it accordingly. Allowing this misuse of the code on this application will lead to future abuse, loss of integrity in the land use map and the County Comprehensive Plan. The use of mixed zoning districts in the density calculation encourages the proliferation of such uses in the future. The methodology of calculating density and its enforcement need to be more fully defined and understood by all stakeholders for uniform future development.

Rich Borrasso

Milton, DE

------------------------------

DELDOT FAILS ON CHAPPELL FARMS TRAFFIC - Jeff Stone

Sussex County Must Delay Chappell Farms

In 2019 Route 1 carried 41,783 vehicles per day (non-summer) and Cave Neck Road carried 7,339 vehicles per day (non-summer). The intersection of Route 1 and Cave Neck Road is the second most dangerous intersection between Route 16 and Five Points. Now, a mixed use development called Chappell Farms is proposed there. It will have hundreds of apartments, thousands of square feet of commercial space and a convenience store/gas station. This intersection is scheduled to have a grade separated interchange completed in 2026. It is assumed that this interchange will relieve virtually all of the current as well as contemplated future traffic congestion and safety issues at this location.

At the recent public hearing, the developer presented a Traffic Impact Statement (TIS), blessed by DelDOT, that says the new development, when fully built out, will generate a minimum of 8,813 daily trips to Cave Neck Road more than doubling its current count, a large percentage of which will travel through the Cave Neck/Route 1 Intersection. The project phasing plan, again blessed by DelDOT, would permit the construction of 156 residential units and the convenience store as the initial phase, prior to interchange construction, generating over 5,600 new trips daily. The developer has agreed to delay the convenience store/gas station until the interchange is complete, thereby reducing traffic impacts. However, this is deceiving. According to the official TIS “The unsignalized Cave Neck Road intersection with Delaware Route 1 exhibits LOS (Level of Service) deficiencies during all peak hours under existing conditions and during the PM and Saturday peak hours under future conditions... with or without the construction of the 5,374 square-foot convenience store with gas pumps and apartment units.” What is DelDOT thinking in recommending a 76% traffic increase with no improvements for 5 years?

Except for lengthening the left turn stacking lane on northbound Route 1 at Cave Neck Road to 900 feet, DelDOT plans no improvements to relieve traffic or improve safety prior to construction of the interchange in 2026. Capacity and safety issues at that location will only get worse, much worse, until then. Anyone living on, near or using Cave Neck road, communities served by intersections north and south along Route 1, and area visitors will deal with significantly increased traffic congestion and deteriorating safety over the next five years, all on already congested roads and intersections even without development of Chappell Farms.

For example, according to the current TIS, at the Route 1 Cave Neck Road intersection, the northbound left turn to westbound Cave Neck Road currently has a LOS of F with an average delay per vehicle of 65 seconds, just over a minute. In 2023, without any further development, that delay will become 356 seconds, or 6 minutes. Even without the convenience store/gas station the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) increase for the first phase of the project is 1,139 new trips per day into an already failing intersection.

DelDOT has restricted eastbound Cave Neck Road left turns and southbound Delaware Route 1 U-turns but even “with these improvements, deficiencies would still occur along the northbound Delaware Route 1 left turn during the PM and Saturday peak hours under future conditions. Delays of up to 537.1 seconds per vehicle are expected along the northbound Delaware Route 1 left turn during the Saturday peak hour under future conditions with the proposed development.” according to the TIS. Do the math, that is 9 minutes waiting to make a turn!

Why would DelDOT approve imposing these awful conditions on Sussex residents? Why would County Council approve this project and its conditions now? The Applicant's own TIS shows that traffic congestion and safety are at failing levels currently and with no further development will be considerably worse in just 2 years. With the proposed development and construction on the new interchange starting, it will be intolerable. How much F service is too much?? How many accidents are 'acceptable'??

What is to be gained for the County and its residents safety and quality of life by allowing this project to move forward now when virtually all of the traffic safety and congestion issues will be resolved in five years, by a project already in the pipeline? For the County and its residents and visitors, there is significant upside to delay. If you live, work in or travel through this area, write or email the County Council and tell them to either defer approval of this project until improvements are made or impose conditions that require congestion and safety improvements be made immediately to allow it go forward.

Jeff Stone

Milton