Public Presentation

Introduction

Good evening. Thank you for this opportunity to speak. My name is Jeanette Akhter; I live in the unincorporated area along route 54 between Fenwick Island and Selbyville. My home is in The Refuge development, containing 360 homes.

I am here with the Dirickson Creek Friends. We do not represent the Center for the Inland Bays. However, their report on the Creek is attached as an appendix.. For several years we have been learning about the Creek and acting as stewards, doing clean-ups of the Creek and surrounding roadways, doing plantings along the Creek, and monitoring its health and the surrounding wildlife. We also study the rich history of this area. We are deeply interested in what happens to the Creek and its watershed, and have demonstrated this by our work over several years.

We do not oppose the Old Mill Landing development proposal per se. We know that development will occur. And we believe that the developer currently proposing the development is one of the most environmentally sensitive in this area.

However, our message to you is that as currently proposed, The Old Mill Landing development project would have very significant deleterious effects on Dirickson Creek, its watershed, its wildlife, and the human beings who live near it. Members of our group will speak to briefly outline our concerns and to show why we are asking the Planning and Zoning Commissioners that if you decide to approve this development project, the following amendments be made:

(Slide 1)

1. Preservation of the area of forest and hydric soils that border the Creek;

2. Appropriate full evaluation and preservation of historic sites;

3. Requirement for a new Traffic Impact Study

For orientation please direct your attention to these Map Slides:

Slide 2. Google Earth Map

For orientation:

* here’s Dupont Highway, rte 113

*The state line

* Rte 26 between Bethany Beach and Dagsboro

*Rte 54 between Selbyville and Fenwick Island

*Dirickson Creek, its watershed, its course into Little Assawoman Bay; in relationship to the proposed development site

Please notice Assawoman Wildlife Refuge

Slide 3. As we continue to slide 3, notice the contiguity of green space from Assawoman Wildlife Refuge, through sparsely developed area with significant remaining wetland and forest, into the proposed development site along the Creek. This contiguity is extremely important for wildlife as you’ll be hearing more about soon.

Slide 4. From the southwest, here’s a short aerial video clearly demonstrating the wetland backed up by the critical evergreen and deciduous forest, all on hydric soil. It’s this area we seek to have preserved, for reasons which we’ll be talking about

Please keep this view in mind as we go to Slide 5.

Instead of this, we’ll have……

Slide 5. …………………………That.

Here’s the wetland; here’s where the forest was.

In the next few minutes we’ll tell you our concerns about the effects of the proposed building on this unique and critical ecological and historic cornerstone of our area. All presentations are in your packets which we have provided.

First we will address Environmental Concerns, with Anna vonLindenberg discussing Flooding.

Thank you.

Flooding

Good evening. My name is Anna vonLindenberg. I live in the Dirickson Creek watershed, in the Refuge, which has 360 homes.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak.

Sussex County has the lowest mean height above sea level in the US. The Old Mill Landing proposed development would be located in the county’s lowest elevation sector, the tidal coastal zone.

It would be along Dirickson Creek.

The watershed of this creek is unusally large and flat. It is historically prone to flooding. In addition, at this time its land is sinking and sea levels are rising. Especially as weather patterns change, flooding along Dirickson Creek will be more severe and more frequent. As a matter of fact, we don’t even have to have a drop of rain to have flooding. As an example, here’s what happened in the Swann Keys community, which is near the proposed development site, last October when subtropical storm Melissa stalled off the coast and caused high tides. {Slide 1 and 2}.

We did not experience any rainfall during that event.

Slide 1

Slide 2

Currently when heavy storms occur, especially when coupled with high tides, we see flooding in the wetlands and creekside forestland where part of the Old Mill Landing development would be built. That’s not surprising, since according to this FEMA map {Slide 3}, not only the wetlands of course, but also the forested area along the Creek is in the flood plain.

Slide 3

Here again is the currently proposed site plan. {Slide 4}

Slide 4

Our concern is that with the planned development’s interference with the natural processes of absorption of water and buffering of flooding effects, when future high water events occur and with the forest removed and the hydric soils buried, the flooding will then affect other properties directly across the creek from the development and all the way along the creek. That’s us. Those are our properties and homes. What about our property values?

So we are seeking amendments for this development proposal that would avoid the increased risks of flooding, namely by not interfering with the forest and hydric soils and wetland. We want the part of the proposed development along the Dirickson Creek to be omitted, and instead to keep that area as an ecological Preserve.

Thank you.

Next is Suzanne Buckler, to describe the current State of Dirickson Creek.

State of Dirickson Creek

Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening on this subject.

My name is Suzanne Buckler, my husband and I live on Dirickson Creek in the Magnolia Shores development. A small development of 23 homes that started in the 1970’s and sits directly across the Creek from the proposed development. Our neighborhood has major concerns regarding the impact this development will have on the water quality of the Creek. Specifically, this development’s impact on pollution levels in the Creek due to the removal of 30+ acres of trees from the forest and the raising of property site levels through the use of fill dirt.

Water Quality: The Creek’s current bacterial levels – exceed safe swimming standards over 80% of the time in the summer and the Creek is considered impaired under the Federal Clean Water Act. Water Samples taken from the Bridge on Old Mill Bridge Road & by the Wildlife Refuge monitoring sites show the Creek to be in trouble NOW. Water samples consistently fail to meet State water quality standards. Water quality results are worse upstream – right next to the proposed development. The lack of tidal flushing which naturally occurs by the Wild Life Refuge, along with its many acres of forests and wetlands result in fewer pollutants entering the Creek. Natural tidal flushing does not occur upstream which is surrounded by developments and agriculture which results in higher bacteria, nitrogen and phosphorus levels.

The armoring of the creek shorelines with rip-rap and bulkheads has led to the loss of wetlands and natural grasses that are necessary to help filter and absorb pollutants from the water. Dissolved oxygen levels in the upper portions of the creek remain a concern for the health of all wild life. DNREC Shellfish Program has closed all of Dirickson Creek to commercial & recreational harvesting of clams, mussels, oysters due to high bacteria concentrations and the potential for food borne illness.

Storm Water Retention Ponds – designed to capture rain water, bacteria & toxins off impervious surfaces result in excess water/toxins being expelled into the creek.

All of the facts that I’m referencing can be found in the “The State of Your Creek – Dirickson Creek on Little Assawoman Bay” report provided by the Delaware Center for the Inland Bays. Each of you has been provided with a copy. I strongly suggest that you review the report.

The proposed removal of 30+ acres of forests which represent 25% of the existing trees on this property will no longer be available to help filter toxins and improve water quality. A significant threat to an already impaired creek. Updates to FEMA risk rate maps reflect more properties are falling into the FEMA flood zone for the 1st time.

Closing: The Creek is in trouble NOW. What happens NEXT – No Swimming, Fishing or Boating on the creek? Posted signs warning that the creek is unsafe for swimming and other recreational activities? This development will sit on the last large undisturbed parcel on the Creek.

This Commission and developers need to make a commitment to a site design that eliminates the removal of existing trees and wetlands. Increases in wetland buffer setbacks would be a huge step forward in helping to ensure that these natural wetland buffers do their job. My Grandchildren live on the creek and I want to see them continue to enjoy all the amenities that the creek has to offer without the threat of bacterial infections. My hope is that this Commission will help to ensure that the Creek has a chance to recover and be a viable amenity for future generations. You, the Commissioners, can make this happen through MODIFICATIONS to the proposed development that will minimize water quality impacts on the Creek and protect existing forested buffers and wetlands.

I would now like to introduce Merrill Levesque who will be speaking about Forests.

Forests

Good Evening & thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.

My name is Merril Levesque and my husband and I live in Frankford on Old Mill Bridge Rd. When we learned earlier this year that the open fields and forests further along Old Mill Bridge Rd were likely to become another housing development, we were very concerned. The forest on one side of our property borders the proposed development where the woods are thick and full of wildlife making their way along the forest corridor that runs relatively unbroken from Little Assawoman Wildlife Refuge through the subject property and into our woods.

I’m here tonight to try and impress upon you the importance of leaving one of the last stands of natural forest along an inland waterway in Sussex County ALONE. I’m passionate about preserving existing forests because scientists are realizing that when decades or centuries-old forests are removed they cannot be replaced simply by planting more trees.

People worldwide are trying desperately to replant forests for so many important reasons - to prevent flooding, curb erosion, slow global warming AND keep oxygen flowing. But in fact, only nature can create a healthy forest, because a forest is a hierarchy of life that evolves at a specific location and entire community that cannot be artificially created. When we destroy a natural forest it is gone forever.

The trees that survive, the birds, insects & wildlife that live and feed there, the fungi that create the underground network transporting nutrients to tree roots in exchange for sugar – all contribute to the health and success of each tree. Communities have been replanting trees in bare areas only to find them struggle to survive without the right community of life to sustain them. It has been shown that in a natural forest, mother trees actually feed their offspring through their root systems to keep seedlings alive until they grow tall enough to reach sunlight and photosynthesize their own sugars. Trees in forests also alert nearby trees of insect and disease danger by sending warning chemicals through their fungal & root networks. Trees grow tall and strong when they are standing in a grove where the winds and weight of snow and ice are shared by the entire group. It is rare for a single tree to ever live its normal lifespan.

The Old Mill Landing property is of extraordinary environmental importance. It contains large areas of wetlands and swaths of forests that have been undisturbed for over 60 years. We need to keep this ecosystem intact and alive. Not only is the forest essential for its role as home to great biodiversity, but also for the health of Dirickson Creek. Trees are 50% water and act as water towers helping to alleviate potential flooding and erosion along the creek and on the land. Their massive intertwined root systems act as a dike to keep the soil in place and filter out pollutants from water flowing into the creek. A watershed expert used the analogy that “forests and wetlands are like the kidneys of our landscape, filtering out toxins.”

And trees are not incompatible with housing developments. In fact, mature trees add value to residential areas and provide benefits both physically and psychologically. I am well aware of a developer’s economic incentive to utilize every square foot of land purchased to maximize profit, but in the case of mature forests, there is just no way to justify their removal for financial gain. They are, in reality irreplacable and therefore priceless.

One of the goals stated in Sussex County’s 2018 Comprehensive Plan was to limit building in cluster developments to “the environmentally suitable portions of the tract, specifically those portions of the tract least encumbered by sensitive environmental features, including but not limited to wetlands, mature woodlands, waterways and other water bodies.” Additionally the plan calls for setting aside “lands of extraordinary environmental importance...” Old Mill Landing is just such a tract.

Sussex County already determined that wetlands were too important to disturb and buffer zones and building restrictions have been implemented near them. We need to realize that forests are equally important and create buffers and building restrictions to protect them NOW. So I humbly request that you draw the line with this development and prohibit this developer from removing the existing forests on Old Mill Landing. This is the time to implement this important Comprehensive Plan goal. It would be a bold and responsible move and one that current and future citizens and voters of Sussex County would applaud.

Thank you for your time.

Next will be Vic Lanciotti speaking about Wildlife.

Wildlife

Good Evening,

My name is Vic Lanciotti. First, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening. I live on Dirickson Creek in a community of 175 homes called Swann Cove West. I would like to spend a few minutes talking about what lives in the wetlands and forests along Dirickson Creek.

Stop a minute to consider all the lifeforms in coastal Sussex County and realize how interconnected they are. Wetlands and decaying vegetation support plants, fungi & insects. Forests provide food and shelter for mammals, birds and invertebrates. Both forests and wetlands harbor rich diversities of wildlife, but we are experiencing population decline across the board for local wildlife.

Retaining existing wetlands – and forests - is essential. They form the bedrock of our entire ecosystem and food web. We need to begin to assign a higher value to our natural habitats when making decisions, and we need to keep their importance in mind.

Slide on Ecosystem/Food Web

Back in 2014 state scientists noted “The forest on this property is part of a larger forest block...Larger, connected forest blocks are extremely important for species that require interior forested areas for breeding, such as neotropical migratory birds. This type of habitat also provides an important stopover for these birds as they undertake lengthy migrations.”

North America has, in fact, lost one in four birds since 1970. Scientists found that ​2.9​ ​Billion ​adult birds have been lost in the last 50 years. Tragically, 2.5 billion of those lost were migratory. A significant reason for the decline is habitat loss caused by human development. Coastal Sussex County, due to its geographic location, is one of the most vital stops for migrating birds on the Atlantic flyway. We must maintain the remaining wetlands and forests for these migrants.

I also want to specifically mention the many bald eagles living in this area. I often see them over the creek and in the trees on the proposed parcel. Their habitat must be spared so they can continue to thrive near Dirickson Creek.

Photos of Eagles

In the state’s response to the current development proposal, they stated “...the forest on the parcel … is likely of high quality and may support a variety of species such as state-rare reptiles and amphibians.”

Whether we really care about endangered species or not, it has become crystal clear that - with nature’s interconnected food webs - the loss of habitat has resulted in a steep decline of many lifeforms - including bees and bats. These species are the all important pollinators farmers rely on to service their fruit crops and orchards. Their decline is already of concern to many farmers.

For other species that rely on endangered species as their food source, their continued survival is a matter of life and death.

Chart of Endangered Species

This ​Chart​ from the Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife shows data from 2015 on the ​Species of Greatest Conservation Need in Delaware (SGCN)​.

The total number of species living in Delaware is shown in the second column and the total number of each species in conservation need is in third column.

Mammals - 23 out of 60 (38%) Birds – 184 out of 410 (45%) Snakes & Lizards - 14 out of 24 (58%) Fish – 105 out of 177 (59%) Turtles - 10 out of 16 (62%) Amphibians - 18 out of 28 (64%) Freshwater Mussels - 11 out of 14 (78%)

This data is disturbing and has probably gotten worse since 2015.

Bare in mind that there is land in Sussex County that has lost its natural ecosystem due to agriculture. However, if stands of forest still remain on farmland, we need to leave them alone wherever possible. Even small pockets of natural habitat are vitally important and should be left intact.

I therefore ask that you vote to try and preserve the natural areas we still have left in the County. In particular, a portion of the parcel being discussed at this hearing should be preserved as a bird sanctuary to ensure that they continue to thrive on Dirickson Creek. Economic forces have been at work for long enough. It’s now time to step back and re-calculate the importance of the remaining natural areas still left in Sussex County. Hopefully you will agree that they are, in fact, irreplaceable and therefore ​priceless.

Next will be Carl Nelson, who will speak on Hydric Soils and Wetlands. Thank you.

Wetlands and Hydric Soils

Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening on this subject.

My name is Carl Nelson and I live in Frankford, DE on a parcel that fronts Dirickson Creek. I am a homeowner in Dirickson Landing, a community of 28 lots off Old Mill Bridge Road.

My career has been in the development and construction industry, specifically commercial buildings, office parks and residential subdivisions. I am very familiar with the development process and recently retired as an SVP for Corporate Office Properties Trust working in the Baltimore/Washington area. My credentials include a Civil Engineering degree from Penn State, an MBA from the University of MD, a member of ASCE and a LEED Accredited Professional. I understand the development process and feel I have the experience to offer intelligent and substantial development and construction comments and concerns.

So, what am I asking for tonight? I am asking that Planning and Zoning and Sussex County relook at this project and consider the negative impacts to the environment, specifically Dirickson Creek, that this proposed development will cause. I ask P&Z to support the State of Delaware recommendations in the PLUS report review dated 8/6/18.

Specifically:

1. Preserve and maintain all the existing forested area upland buffers.

2. Establish a vegetated buffer of at least a minimum of 100 feet from all waterbodies and wetlands (both Federal and State).

3. Avoid any building on existing hydric soils as recommended by DNREC

4. Revise the project to remove any houses currently proposed in Investment Level 4 areas.

5. Employ green-technology storm water management practices (best practices)

I am very concerned about the proposed development planned for this 184-acre property along Dirickson Creek. Specifically, I am concerned with the potential loss of wetlands, trees and hydric soils which comprise most of the site. The wetlands located on this property are a vital part of the ecological system, that in conjunction with the hydric soils, act to filter natural runoff and control flooding, which we all know, has increased significantly over the last 20 plus years due to uncontrolled development.

Wetlands and hydric soils store and control flood waters, they control erosion, they protect water quality and they provide a habitat for fish, wildlife and plant species. Wetlands are important for education and recreational activities too. While the degree to which a wetland area serves these functions varies from location to location, wetland areas work in combination with others as part of a complex, integrated system. The project currently planned for this site will negatively affect the existing wetlands.

As mentioned previously, this site is also comprised of hydric soils. Hydric soils are soils that are permanently or seasonally saturated by water for extended periods of time. Why are hydric soils important? The environmental conditions that create hydric soils also favor the formation of many types of wetlands. Hydric soils absorb runoff (much like a sponge) and act as filters to clean surface water runoff and prevent flooding.

Can you effectively build on Hydric soil? The consensus answer is no. The only way to build over this soil is to import significant quantities of fill dirt which will change the site topography and create greater surface water runoff, all why destroying the current ecological wetlands system. In fact, DNREC’s review of this project in the latest PLUS report review dated 8/6/18 recommended that this site is not buildable due the presence of hydric soils.

Finally, this proposed development in inconsistent with the Strategies for State Policies and Spending with respect to development in Investment Level 4 areas. Investment Level 4 indicates where State investments will support agricultural preservation, natural resource protection and the continuation of the rural nature of these areas. New development activities are not supported in Investment Level 4 areas and prime agricultural lands, environmentally sensitive wetlands and wildlife habitats should be preserved.

Thank you for your time.

Carl Nelson

Next, Barbara Shamp will be speaking on Historic Sites.

Historical Sites

Good evening. I’m Barbara Shamp, and I live in Swann Keys. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight on this topic.

I invite you to walk the edge of Dirickson Creek and channel the spirit of Native Tribes. Spongy earth sinks under footsteps. Around trees, pools of water reflect the light of a full moon and cornrow stumps bisect farmland where rainwater takes days to absorb. A hoot owl calls in centuries old song. For 11 years I’ve been writing about the creek. I am wedded to it, its wildlife and environs. Lately, research for a book of narrative non-fiction before 1750 occupies my time. Surviving maps reveal it was once named Indian Town Creek.

First Contact settlement stories resonate in Plymouth, Jamestown and St. Mary’s City. Maryland Colony claimed lower Sussex where residents paid taxes in Old Somerset, then Worcester County. Over 30 years ending with the American Revolution, this swath of land was claimed by Maryland, Pennsylvania and ultimately, Delaware State. (Slavens, Indian Town Creeks; 2/16; peninsularoots.com). The border wasn’t settled until the Transpeninsular Line was surveyed. It’s a confusing tale. But there is another First Contact story near the disputed area of Indian Town Creek that often goes unheard.

Sharon Himes writes in A Cavalier’s Adventure that in January of 1650, Henry Norwood sailed on the Virginia Merchant, a storm tossed and de-masted ship bound for Jamestown and blown off-course. Norwood’s band of starving immigrants arrived on the barrier strip we call Fenwick Island or North Ocean City. The landing party of 16 men and three women were abandoned as the ship limped south in a rising wind. Days later, five of the band succumbed and in hunger the rest resorted to cannibalism. A cruel existence promised death for all when Algonquian Natives, probably Assateagues, saved them from starvation. This tribe compassionately nursed them back to health. Later, Norwood departed for Jamestown leaving eight of his comrades behind.

A Dutch sloop may have rescued some. The provincial government allowed others to stay if they traded with area natives. Over the decades, white settlers, using colonial Maryland land patents, staked their claims on this aboriginal land hunted and farmed by the Assateague and Nanticoke for over a thousand years. The Woodland II culture was disappearing and by 1705, Algonquian bands whose seasonal hunting grounds included Indian Town Creek were driven northward, carrying the bones of revered ancestors with them. Stressed and desperate, they stopped at these hunting grounds, a few hiding, assimilating into local colonial culture, and intermarrying. The Norwood name was passed on. Bones were buried in ossuaries along their way. Maryland broke every treaty and by 1743 most natives left for protection with the Iroquois, migrating to Canada or Oklahoma.

The Old Mill Bridge proposed development at Dirickson Creek is on this early Native land. The State PLUS report states there are ten archeological sites on the property. Two are prehistoric, they say probably Assateague. The developer revealed to the Dirickson Creek Friends, an advocacy group for creek and land conservation, that there is a colonial settlement on the property as well. The State Office of Historic and Cultural Affairs has responded to a request for information from Chief Quiet Bear Michael Maritoba with a three page heavily redacted letter that reveals little information about these archeological sites but clearly outlines their expectations of the tribe. When I asked why they didn’t share the information with him, the response was, “The Assateague are not a recognized tribe in Delaware.” Legal words, but missing the point that they were here first. The PLUS report information was shared with Sussex County Planning and Zoning but will not be shared with the public. We have to wonder what the big secret is? It seems a true lack of transparency exists at all levels of state and local government.

The developer is completing phase II of a required archeological study to be presented at the Planning and Zoning hearing for the Old Mill Bridge project on January 9^th at 6 p.m. Please attend or comment at https://sussexcountyde.gov/contact-planning-zoning-commission.

As proposed, the developer stated OML homes will line the water’s edge at 42 feet high and 20 feet apart, broken only by a recreational complex with an endless pool. It will bury any evidence of our collective heritage. There is no other community on the creek so congested. The north side of the creek is largely protected lands of the Little Assawoman Wildlife Refuge. A DelDOT archeological report from 1998 discovered seven projectile points and 656 prehistoric ceramic fragments along this area that “were first used during the Woodland I period, most likely no earlier than 800 B.C. Extensive occupation of the area was not realized until after 100 A.D and was not intensive until European contact.” (Clark and Scholl, 1994:55). Presumably, “intensive” means during their migration out of the area.

Whose voice is the State protecting? Is it the property owner and the developer? It’s not current creek residents and certainly not the Native Americans and their ancestors who are potentially buried on the property. I have to wonder if this land contains Delaware’s true origin story. When I approach the southeast shore of OML by water, there is clearly a mound at forest’s edge. What secrets does it hold? If the OML project is built as described, we will never know. Past voices, silenced.

Thank you.

Next will be Boe Daley speaking on Traffic.

Traffic

(italics are mine)

Items in quotes are from the following letters:

PLUS Response Letter - 9/20/18 DelDOT letter from Drew Boyce to Zachary Crouch - 11/29/18 DelDOT letter from Bill Brockenbrough to Boe Daley - 5/2/19

My name is Boe Daley and I live in Swann Cove off of Old Mill Bridge Road and adjacent to Swann Cove West for a total of 350 homes. I am here tonight to talk about the dramatic traffic impact that Old Mill Landing will have on the surrounding communities.

Before you inwardly roll your eyes at this, please understand that I am not here to say, “We don’t want more traffic.” Rather, what we are requesting, is an updated Traffic Impact Study, as was originally recommended by DelDOT in their PLUS review letter. DelDOT calculated that this development would generate 2,318 vehicle trips/day, which is 1,818 more than the 500 trips/day required for a Traffic Impact Study, according to their own Development Coordination Manual (section 2.2.2.1). I quote from their PLUS recommendation: “Therefore, a TIS is warranted and DelDOT will require that a TIS be done.” We residents of the surrounding area were completely in agreement with that. Subsequently, however, at the developer’s request, that decision was reversed and DelDOT agreed to rely on an outdated TIS that was performed in 2014 and never completed. You & I both know how much things have changed in our area in those 5 ensuing years, and will continue to change by the anticipated build out date of 2024. DelDOT clearly agreed with that, as they stated in their PLUS review letter, “Since then, DelDOT’s process for determining a TIS scope of work has changed and additional development has occurred in the area. Now, the scope of work for a TIS for this project would likely address a somewhat different set of intersections and a somewhat different set of lists of committed developments.”

Why did they reverse their decision? According to a letter from Mr. Bill Brockenbrough, County Coordinator, the developer was concerned about the additional expense and delay that a new TIS would entail. DelDOT

determined that they could rely on the 2014 study supplemented by a study from 2004 (yes, 2004!) to provide sufficient information as to what off-site improvements should be required of the proposed development. In his letter responding to the site engineer’s request, Drew Boyce, Director of Planning, details these improvements. We find fault with many of them for the following reasons: (see slide)

• When one looks at a Google Earth image, it’s easy to see that Dirickson Creek almost forms a natural boundary between heavy housing development to the south & more rural areas to the north, at least prior to The Estuary. Those who live on the north side of the creek have a different lifestyle with fewer homes on more land. This more rural area should be maintained until the road system can be suitably expanded further inland.

• There has been undeniably rapid development and increased population since 2014. The Estuary, with 631 homes and Bayside, with 1400 homes at build out, are two of the larger communities. Many smaller communities, too many to mention, add significantly to that number.

• Consider The Estuary: All residents have to exit via Camp Barns Rd. to Bayard or Millers Neck to Old Mill Bridge Rd. In typical rural fashion, not one of these roads is prepared to handle the crush: 2 lanes, no shoulders, gullies for storm water runoff close to the pavement on both sides & driveways exiting directly onto these roads. When this development is complete and the owners are home, it will be a disaster. Add storm conditions necessitating evacuation and it becomes unthinkable.

• How many approved but not yet built developments are on the horizon? The county must consider the cumulative effect of these developments and plan proactively, rather than try to fix a broken system at greater expense down the road to the taxpayers.

• Proposed striping changes to add a turn lane to Rt. 20 at the Rt. 54 intersection will ease the crunch for those heading east, but where will the traffic go? The cost to widen Rt. 54 and/or the bridge to Fenwick Island is prohibitive.

• There are many inaccurate conclusions concerning major off-site intersections: Bayard Rd. & Rt. 20, Bayard & Daisey Rd., Bayard Rd. & Old Mill Bridge Rd., Old Mill Bridge Rd. & Rt. 54 and Rt. 54 and Rt. 20.

• Old Mill Bridge Rd., which Old Mill Landing will front, already has too many extremely dangerous conditions: the bridge, the curve at the north end of bridge and another dangerous curve just beyond the north end of the development are all within ½ mile of one another on a rural road that is prone to speeding. Deep ditches line the sides and there is absolutely no place for pedestrians or bicyclists to go. This summer I personally saw three cars end up in the ditches. How many accidents occurred that I didn’t see?

• There are also serious safety concerns for evacuation and emergency routes. An aging population demands safe and easy access to hospitals and sea level rise is adding to the already frequent flooding issue.

• The intersection assessments are made by the Travel Demand Model which is based on criteria of population and employment and is used statewide. No consideration is given to the fact that this is a resort area primarily inhabited by retired persons and vacationers. They are heading south & east towards the grocery stores, drug stores, restaurants & beaches rather than north or west to work.

• One of the intersections not addressed in the 2014 study at all is Old Mill Bridge Rd. & Herring Way, which has led to major headaches for residents and DelDOT alike and is a prime example of a lack of consideration for future development.

• Old Mill Bridge Rd. connects to Bayard Rd. at a dangerous angle with a curve nearby. To correct that, a utility pole would have to be relocated, “therefore we will not require mitigation there.” This is an accident waiting to happen and they wouldn’t consider moving a pole?

• Suddenly DelDOT “now expects more of the site traffic to be oriented towards Bayard Rd. rather than Rt. 54, alleviating the need to make cost prohibitive but necessary changes to the Rt. 20 and Rt. 54

intersection.” (What precipitated that erroneous conclusion?)

• Another proposed change, “Shifting Bayard Rd. east and installing a roundabout appears to be the best mitigation measure but it would be an undue burden on this developer...” What about the undue burden on those of us who travel these roads daily? And the taxpayers who will likely fund these mitigations at a later date and at a greater expense long after the developer is gone?

• DelDOT’s solution to all of these problems? “DelDOT will require that the developer enter an agreement to participate in the funding of a future signal at this intersection.” “They will.... require only an equitable contribution toward a future improvement.” How much is an ‘equitable contribution’? And will this money be designated for this purpose or, as we understand it, go into a general fund and perhaps end up in an entirely different area?

We feel that the 2014 Traffic Impact Study is flawed in too many ways to still be useful, that too much has changed in the past 5 years and all indications are that they will continue to change well into the future.

For the above reasons we are strongly requesting that a new TIS be required as an indisputable condition of approval for this project.

Thank you for your time. I would like to introduce Lynn Wivell next to detail a specific example for you about a road that was not even in existence when the 2014 TIS was performed and has seriously affected our community.

Attachments:

PLUS Response Letter - 9/20/18 DelDOT letter from Drew Boyce to Zachary Crouch - 11/29/18 DelDOT letter from Bill Brockenbrough to Boe Daley - 5/2/19 Google Earth image of Old Mill Bridge Rd.

Community Traffic Effects

My name is Lynn Wivell. I am a Board Member of the Swann Cove Homeowner’s Association. I am representing the community of Swann Cove that has 350 existing homes. I am asking that you approve no more communities along Old Mill Bridge Road until a New Traffic Impact Study is completed.

Swann Cove is unlike other communities that are adjacent to Dirickson Creek. The community has an entrance on Old Mill Bridge Road and an entrance on Route 54 (Lighthouse Road). (see map) Due to this unique location the community has become a traffic cut through for people wanting to travel EAST on Route 54 from Old Mill Bridge Road. Unfortunately, there is no way for motorists to make a left hand turn from Old Mill Bridge Road to travel east on Rt. 54 without making a U Turn. Much of this traffic speeds through the community with little regard for speed limits or stop signs. The HOA of this community is concerned about ensuring the safety of children, people out walking, riding bikes and minimizing the amount of pass thru traffic. Residents would like to maintain the peaceful environment that they expect to enjoy in Swann Cove. In response to these concerns the community began working with representatives of Del Dot and Rep. Ron Gray to see what measures could be taken to address these concerns.

As a result of Swann Cove’s efforts, the HOA approved to add 5 more stop signs to the community and radar signs to alert motorists of their speed.

These should be up by next Spring. In addition, a community wide vote by Del Dot was taken to approve the placement of 5 speed humps in the community. This initiative was approved with a 73% affirmative vote. Del Dot has acknowledged the problem and has funded this project.

On weekends and holidays during the summer of 2019 traffic backed up on Fenwick Blvd. from Old Mill Bridge Road by the Swann Cove West clubhouse.

(see map) There are two clubhouses with pools located on Fenwick Blvd. This heavy traffic puts our children at risk. These backups also caused gridlocks

and residents were unable to leave their homes.

Until Del Dot does something about accessing Rt. 54 to travel EAST from Old Mill Bridge Road this problem will continue and get worse. Therefore, as

a homeowner and representative of the 350 homeowners in the Swann Cove community I ask that you add no more communities along Old Mill Bridge

Road that will add to this massive problem until a New Traffic Impact Study is completed. The community of Swann Cove would welcome a roundabout at

the intersection of Old Mill Bridge Road and Rt. 54 (Lighthouse Road) as a viable solution to this traffic cut through problem. (see map).

Thank you for your attention.

Missy West will now speak about bicycle and pedestrian traffic on Old Mill Bridge Road.

Traffic Safety

Good Evening. I’m Laura M. West and I live in the Waters Run community in Selbyville, Delaware. My community consists of 57 homes, 11 of which are on Dirickson Creek. We are located on Old Mill Bridge Road and are adjacent to the bridge which is next to the proposed new community. Like others in this room, I am concerned about the health of Dirickson Creek

I am a runner, bicyclist, triathlete, and outdoor enthusiast. Until recently, I used to run and cycle on the roads near my house. I would also walk on Old Mill Bridge Road from my house to the grocery store weekly. In July of 2019 around 11am, a car overturned in broad day light on Old Mill Bridge Road close to the intersection of Route 54. Fortunately I was not walking or running nor were any other pedestrians on the road that morning. This was particularly disturbing to me and since that accident I have not walked, run, or cycled on Old Mill Bridge Road. I no longer feel safe as a pedestrian on that road. Instead, I now drive to another community and walk/run from there. Because of the overloaded existing roads and increased traffic, I am now one more car on the road. Sussex County needs to figure out a way to prevent traffic from reaching the point where it lowers the quality of life or threatens public health and safety.

Our area has witnessed increase development over the past few years. Because of increased building in this area, rising traffic congestion is an inescapable condition. The current inadequate infrastructure cannot handle the existing traffic and it keeps getting worse. My concern with the proposed development is the increase of traffic on the already congested and dangerous road. As new neighborhoods are developed, the roads are not updated to meet the demands of the increased traffic. I am asking Sussex County to improve the existing infrastructure before approving any new developments in this specific area. Thank you.

Next, Mohammad Akhter will conclude our presentations.

Wrap-Up

Mr. Chairman and Members of the P&Z Commission:

My name is Mohammad Akhter. I’m a resident of Selbyville and live across the Creek from the proposed development.

I want to thank each and every one of you for listening to our concerns today. The people who presented are friends, neighbors, living in communities where the homeowners are all very concerned with the impact of this development on their home values.

I want you to look with me for a moment at the slide of Ellicott City, MD.

Every development around Ellicott City was built meeting the specifications laid out by the local Planning and Zoning Commission. However, no one looked at the cumulative effect of these developments. As a result, the city was destroyed twice within 3 years by “100-year floods”. It is usually the last straw that breaks the camel’s back.

The PLUS report states that building the proposed at this site will make water quality in the Creek worse and the USDA review states that these hydric soils are not suitable for building. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission, if you do decide to approve the development, we respectfully recommend that you attach these conditions as a part of the approval process:

1. Preservation of the forest and hydric soils that are essential for reducing floods, preventing further contamination of the creek, and continuing to provide habitat for the wildlife;

2. Full evaluation and preservation of Historic Sites;

3. The traffic in our area is already terrible, especially in the summer. It’s hard for the community residents to get to medical care, or for emergency services to respond in a timely manner. Adding an additional 800 Cars daily in the mix is unwise. We recommend a new Traffic Impact Study be completed prior to approval.

Finally, we had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Schell, the developer, and he is equally concerned about the environment.

By preserving the hydric soils, trees, and Native American sites, Mr. Schell will be able to market the property as a preserve where people will live in harmony with nature. This in our view will enhance the value of homes in this proposed development and also those in the surrounding communities.

This will surely be a win-win situation for all.

Thank you again.

Public Hearing room overflowed - 1/9/2020