Documents

This is a proposed development along the east side of Old Mill Bridge Road and the south side of Millers Neck Road. It fronts on Dirickson Creek from the bridge to the tip of the forested land west of the duck blind. (The eventual plan is also to develop Old Mill Landing North, an 83 unit project on the east side of Old Mill Bridge Road and north side of Millers Neck Road.)

It is a Cluster Subdivision consisting of 156 single family residential lots in an AR-1 zone in State Investment Levels 3 and 4. The total acreage is noted as 145.4 acres, and contains the following:

39.08 acres of tidal wetlands
27.35 acres of non-tidal wetlands
66.44 acres total wetlands

103 acres of “forest and wetlands” are noted. Presumably therefore, there are 103 - 66.44 = 36.56 acres of forests, of which 26.4 acres will be removed (72%)

Open Space” is noted to be 97.83 (Stormwater management, buffers, community center clubhouse with pool, community areas, and wetlands.) However, tidal wetlands should not be counted as “Open Space” because they cannot be counted in the buildable acreage.

97.83 –39.08 = 58.75 acres of “Open Space” (Even this contains significant structures as outlined above).

Development Impacts

Traffic

There will be 1565 estimated vehicle trips on an average weekday.

When the development was proposed at the September 2018 Preliminary Land Use Service (PLUS) meeting, DelDot responded with the following:

Per Section 2.2.2.1 of the DelDot Development Coordination Manual, a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) will be required. The previous 2014 TIS would not be adequate because since then “DelDot’s process for determining a TIS scope of work has changed and additional development has occurred in the area”. (The purpose of a TIS is to identify needed off-site improvements).

The 2014 TIS is five years old, and does not account for the increased development and traffic in this area or for the already approved and not yet built developments. Also, since 2014 DelDOT’s process for determining a TIS scope of work has changed.

Thereafter, the Project Engineer for the development, Zachary Crouch, requested that DelDot revisit its decision and rely instead on the 2014 TIS.

On November 29, 2018 the DelDot Director of Planning, Drew Boyce, responded to Mr. Crouch that after all, “we can rely on the 2014 TIS”. He based this on analysis of Level of Service (LOS) of nearby intersections based on estimates of PM Peak Hour Trips added because of this development and its “north” counterpart. (This combination of south and north components had been used in the 2014 TIS for that proposed 2 part development also).

The estimated trips came from a computer generated “Travel Demand Model”, which is based on population and employment. It does not reflect the much more likely patterns of traffic based on the fact that this is a resort and retirement area. Evaluation of the directions of estimated trips based on actual locations of nearby grocery stores, pharmacies, gas stations, restaurants, convenience stores, banks, gym facilities, salons, as well as the Atlantic Ocean and the Inland Bays and their beaches shows that the computer-generated estimates are not realistic. We believe that a new TIS is essential.

The letter identifies the intersection of Old Mill Bridge Road and Herring Way, which is the entrance into Swan Cove West, but dismisses it as being unimportant. On the contrary, this entranceway and its connection to West Fenwick Boulevard has become a major short cut between Old Mill Bridge Road and Route 54. It is readily identifiable on GPS, cuts through not only Swan Cove West but also Swan Cove, passes 2 swim clubs, and is regularly a route on which drivers speed and disregard stop signs. This poses a dangerous safety issue for these communities. We believe that this must be evaluated and mitigated in a new TIS.

The intersection of Routes 20 and 54 functions poorly, particularly in summer. The letter’s suggestion of adding a second southbound left turn lane on Route 20 by changing the striping will not alleviate the problem, since traffic will immediately pile up on Route 54 eastbound. Moreover, the optimistic Model’s prediction of development traffic being more oriented toward Bayard Road is unrealistic, as noted before. Finally, the U-turn on Route 54 at that intersection that is required of eastbound traffic which has been forced westward by the Old Mill Bridge Road- Route 54 intersection is dangerous, and actually impossible for larger vehicles. Overall, we believe that a new TIS must evaluate and mitigate the problems at this intersection, especially in light of the added burden of this proposed new development.

The letter addresses the intersection of Old Mill Bridge Road and Bayard Road as acceptable despite its significant skew, which makes it unsafe in reality. This needs to be re-evaluated by a new TIS.

The letter (and presumably the Model) does not even mention the impact of this development on the intersection of Bayard Road and Route 20. This is already a dangerous location with frequent accidents.

Any additional development traffic that does in fact follow that route would add to the problems there. That intersection is in dire need of evaluation and mitigation; a new TIS should definitely address it.

The letter makes reference to the dangerous reverse curve of Old Mill Bridge Road as it approaches and crosses the bridge across Dirickson Creek. This is directly adjacent to the proposed new development, and will be significantly impacted. This also applies to the sharp curve located at the north limit of the development site frontage. We believe a new TIS must evaluate and mitigate these problems.

Finally, reference is repeatedly made in the letter to “equitable contributions toward future road improvements” that will be necessitated partly by the building of this development. What assurance is there that those funds will be sequestered by DelDot and actually eventually used in this area, as opposed to being added to the general DelDot funds to be used anywhere? This needs to be stipulated and enforced.

Since 2014 there has been rapid building of developments proximal to the proposed development. These include the Estuary with more than 600 units, numerous developments on Double Bridges Road, continued expansion of Bayside, and numerous developments on Route 54 both west and east of the intersection with Route 20. More are being continually approved in this area. Each one is considered individually, without adequate planning for their cumulative effects or the required infrastructure to support them. The level of public safety continues to deteriorate related to traffic and to dysfunctional evacuation routes. We believe that this development proposal highlights these realities and shines a bright light on the dire need at the very least for a new TIS here. In reality, a Transportation Improvement District (TID) and Master Planning are what are sorely needed.

Accessibility to public safety services such as the fire company, police, emergency medical service is also degraded by the ever increasing traffic burden.

Environment

Fish and Wildlife:

This parcel features unique wetland conditions where ground water flows from the base of steep slopes into the wetlands.

Forested upland buffers which are critical to maintaining the integrity of the unique wetlands and serve as habitat for many species should not have lot lines, roadways or infrastructure placed in them.

TMDLs (Total Maximum Daily Load of pollutants)

“Development of this parcel as currently proposed will contribute to the decline of water quality in the greater Inland Bays”

“DNREC strongly discourages the removal of the existing forestland to accommodate this development” There should be a vegetated buffer of at least 100 feet from the adjoining wetlands and waterbodies (based on review of existing buffer research).

Use green technology storm water management and a rain garden in lieu of open storm water ponds to reduce nutrient and bacterial pollutant runoff and to reduce attraction of nuisance geese and algae which also contribute to water quality degradation in the Inland Bays watershed.

Use pervious paving materials.

Soils

According to USDA Natural Resources Conservation Services soil mapping, shows that poorly to very poorly drained wetland associated hydric soils predominate over the proposed development parcel. They are considered unsuitable for development due to the presence of high-seasonal-high-water table.

Hydric soils are important in water storage; their loss through excavation, filling, or grading increases the probability of more frequent and destructive flooding impacts/events.

Hydric soils sequester and detoxify pollutants; their disturbance leads to worsening pollution of water bodies.

Conclusions

A new Traffic Impact Study is essential for this area.
Existing problems need to be fixed before additional development occurs.
Master planning and Transportation Improvement Districts need to be instituted here.
This site is not suitable for development. At the very least, the forested areas and wetlands should not be disturbed.

MAPS

Old Mill Landing North and South Overview

Green lined area is where P&A designated at the time of approval on 2/13/2020 as a forest buffer to be preserved, but the developer on 2/20/2020 asked for permission to build, which was on 4/16/2020 withdrawn.

Wetlands

Old Mill Landing North Maps

Old Mill Landing North

DIRICKSON CREEK REPORT by Delaware Center for The Inland Bays - May 2017

https://www.inlandbays.org/wp-content/uploads/Final-Dirickson-Creek-Report-WebVersion.pdf

Cover Page of CIB Report