In this second of a series of articles detailing elements of Sussex County’s current draft of this 2007 County Comprehensive Plan Update, released Sept. 25, the Coastal Point will look at sections of the plan dealing with water and wastewater, housing and economic development.
The plan devotes 17 of its 120 pages to its water and wastewater elements, perhaps indicative of how much focus those issues receive from the county’s residents, officials and environmentalists.
Sussex County depends completely on groundwater supplies and wells for its water supplies, the plan emphasizes from the start. “Therefore, it is critical to protect the quality of groundwater and to promote the recharge of water into the underground table.” The state’s Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) serves as the as regulatory agency for water.
Central water is provided to most areas of concentrated population in Sussex County, while most homes and businesses in rural areas obtain their water from individual on-site wells.
Tidewater Utilities has the largest service area of all water providers, with Artesian second and Public Water Supply Co. providing water in Millville and south of the Indian River Bay. Community systems serve Sea Colony and Sussex Shores, while private systems serve a number of smaller developments.
Dewey Beach is the only area of the county served by a water system owned and operated by Sussex County, while municipal water systems serve residents of Bethany Beach, Dagsboro, Frankford, Georgetown and Selbyville, and often extend outside their boundaries.
According to the plan, municipal water systems these days are seeking new well sites to provide additional capacity to keep up with such growth, while Millsboro has had to deal with wells that became contaminated.
The comprehensive plan update addresses water supply protection through several strategies, including the designation of central well protection areas and “excellent” groundwater recharge areas by DNREC, as well as an ordinance being developed by the county that would regulate groundwater protection areas. That ordinance being developed to meet a requirement of State Source Water Protection Law of 2001, and is designed to minimize threats to major water supply wells from pollution.
The plan states that the ideal land use around water supply wells is preserved open space or low-density residential development. Coverage of such areas by impervious materials is to be minimized to allow recharge. Agricultural uses, the plan notes, promote recharge but may result in high nitrate levels in the water, which is a health hazard to pregnant women and young children.
Future strategies for water supply protection include:
• More effective ordinances to be adopted and enforced by Sussex County and the incorporated municipalities, to minimize hazards to public water supply wells;
• Water supply planning more closely coordinated with sewage treatment and land-use planning;
• Great care to be used in allowing intensive development in areas that are likely to be needed in the future for additional groundwater supplies;
• Water systems should have a backup source, such as an additional well or emergency interconnection with another water supplier, which the plan identifies as particularly important in case of contamination;
• Quality of groundwater monitored to identify contaminants before they reach public water supply wells and to measure movement of known contaminants.
Wastewater push costly as expansion needs grow
Sussex County has put heavy focus on wastewater in recent years, with a public push to remove individual, on-site septic systems in favor of central sewer service.
Public wastewater planning is overseen by the county’s engineering department, which has divided the county into planning areas. Detailed sewage treatment plans have been developed for several parts of the county where county provides sewage treatment now or may do so in the future.
Most cities and towns, the plan notes, operate their own sewage treatment systems, and private companies such as Artesian and Tidewater also provide such service to municipalities and communities.
In the county’s Inland Bays area, the comprehensive plan update notes an expanding and increased need for sewer service. An Inland Bays wastewater study projected that $175 million of improvements are needed to serve several areas. With five existing sewage lines and 14 existing pump stations already at capacity, and additional capacity needed by 2015, $35 million in improvements are needed to address priorities in collection and conveyance.
There are 117,308 total EDUs allowed in the Inland Bays Planning Area under current zoning, including 25,000 EDUs already connected to the system. The build-out design there is for 99,210 EDUs, considering that not every unit is occupied at all times and assuming 20 percent of the area remains open space.
Half of the Inland Bays area’s sewage treatment capacity is located in the Wolf Neck Treatment Facility service area, where planning calls for a field expansion and eventually a proposed ocean outfall. The plan says the intent of the outfall project is to complete a joint SC/Rehoboth outfall more than a mile out into the ocean, as part of a $36 million project. But, it says, timing and final approvals for that outfall are uncertain. And the study foresees substantial shortfalls in disposal capacity in the near future, even with proposed expansions.
The Inland Bays facility needs a treatment plant expansion, according to the plan. A study suggested diverting some flows from West Rehoboth to the Inland Bays facility as part of the expansion, due to fewer constraints in land. In 2004, the county purchased 2,000 acres near the existing facility for spray expansion, which could provide capacity consistent with the build-out design flow.
The plan also suggests that disposal capacity could be increased by converting spray irrigation sites to rapid infiltration basins, if DNREC approves of such conversions.
In the South Coastal region that includes most of the Coastal Point’s readership area, the 2005 South Coastal Planning Area Study for Wastewater is the basis for much of the plan’s content.
Service here is scheduled for several new districts, including the Millville Expansion of the Bethany Beach district, Miller’s Creek, South Ocean View, Beaver Dam, and Johnson’s Corner, with improvements expected to be completed by 2011. Future service is anticipated for proposed Bayard, West Fenwick and Vines Creek districts.
Total build-out for the South Coastal area under current zoning is 87,180 EDUs, including existing development.
In 2007, service was extended to parts of Miller’s Creek District at a cost of $11 million. Current sewage improvements to serve Millville and to the north are projected to cost $35 million. And the current county project to extend sewage service to areas south of Ocean View is projected to cost $8 million, while the Johnson’s Corner district is looking at $14 million in proposed improvements.
According to the plan, $163 million in conveyance and collection expenses is needed to serve proposed sewer districts, not including treatment costs. Existing districts and conveyance improvements are projected to cost $9.2 million.
The South Coastal facility on Beaver Dam Road recently had its treatment capacity expanded, at a cost of $15 million. But the plan further recommends eventually expanding its capacity to nearly triple that level, with flows also being affected by the ongoing replacement of smaller homes with larger ones.
A December 2006 draft of the Dagsboro/Frankford Sewage Planning Area Study — including Dagsboro and Frankford and areas surrounding them, as well as east of Millsboro and south of Indian River — found that the system only had capacity for 200,000 gallons per day. That clearly indicates a need for an expansion to handle significant growth. Currently, 987 EDUs are connected. Build-out would be 25,761 EDUs. And it is projected that 6,136 EDUs will be connected by 2025.
The comprehensive plan notes that municipal sewer service is offered in some areas, with a large portion of expansion costs being funded these days by new developments, as well as low-interest loans and grants.
On-lot septic systems, though less common as the county encourages or requires developers to connect to central sewer when available, are regulated by DNREC, which the plan notes has been requiring that a tested area be provided for a second drain field in case it is needed. Still, some properties are being serviced by holding tanks, which are intended to be temporary and require regular pumping.
The draft of the comprehensive plan update acknowledges controversy that has occurred between public and private sewer service providers seeking to serve the same areas.
“The primary concern for the county is to ensure that its own county-operated sewage treatment services can be efficiently provided to existing development suffering from inadequate existing community sewage facilities and/or failing on-site septic systems,” the plan emphasizes. “The county has taken on tens of millions of dollars of debt to extend county-operated service to these areas.”
The plan says that, in order to protect water quality, it is often necessary to serve new development with the same system in use nearby, for cost effectiveness, and that developers often provide initial capital for such projects. Meanwhile, it says, private service can make it difficult to serve individual lots located between subdivisions.
The draft plan calls for the following strategies to deal with these wastewater concerns:
• The county may control whether private or public providers will service areas planned for new service — a power that could be limited to primary service areas (planned for the immediate future), though the intent is to have that authority apply only within county’s officially designed sewer service areas. Most of the county is not in those areas. And the county would like to retain the authority to comment on proposed private service outside county service areas.
• Sewage service to be coordinated with land-use planning and zoning, directing growth to areas adjacent to or within towns;
• Emphasizing providing service to areas of existing development where there are public health concerns or where needed to protect the water quality of the inland bays; and to avoid large public sewage extensions in undeveloped areas that promote dense new developments in areas with important natural features;
• The county should consider using a portion of proceeds from a suggested transfer of development rights (TDR) program to help fund water, sewage and other infrastructure improvements in the area that receives the additional density;
• Investigation of rapid infiltration basin (RIB) systems, as the cost of land for spray irrigation has increased and the same amount of sewage can be treated on a tenth of the space with RIB. However, the plan notes a need to address nutrient loads and care required to meet TMDL nutrient limits. “If not property operated and maintained, RIB systems have a greater threat of groundwater pollution than spray irrigation,” it says.
Initial steps taken toward affordable housing goal
The housing element of the comprehensive plan update leads with the statement, “Both full-time and seasonal residents continue flocking to Sussex County to take advantage of the area’s outdoor attractions, low real estate taxes and high quality of life.”
The plan notes that that influx of people has fueled prosperity in the real estate market, hospitality industry and related economic sectors, but, on the down side, has tightened the county’s housing market and driven up home prices and apartment rentals to new highs.
According to the plan, low/moderate-income working households are hit hardest by these cost increases, because their incomes typically do not keep pace with the cost of living — especially the cost of housing.
The median home price in the county in 2005 was $284,600, an increase of 117 percent over the 2000 median price — the largest increase among Delaware’s three counties.
Between 2003 and 2005, the plan notes, the two fastest growing job providers in the county were the leisure and hospitality industry (average annual wage, just $15,000) and the wholesale and retail trade ($25,000).
To avoid spending more than 30 percent of their income on the current average priced two-bedroom apartment in Sussex County, a full-time worker needs to make $12.71 per hour ($24,660 per year) — nearly twice Delaware’s minimum wage. Living in the county requires 1.9 minimum wage jobs to afford the average-priced apartment.
The plan delivers more concerning news about the county’s working poor, noting that the 2000 Census showed 7.7 percent of the county population living in households with annual incomes below the federal poverty level. Statewide that number was 6.5 percent.
A 2005 Delaware Department of Labor study classified 52 percent of the jobs in Sussex County as “low paying” (less than $11 per hour), compared to 29 percent in Kent and 18 percent in New Castle counties.
The plan also acknowledges that the housing market cooled in 2006 and 2007 but says that a shortage of affordable housing remains a very real problem to low/moderate-income households in the county, including many with full-time, year-round jobs.
The county also faces challenges regarding the quality and condition of housing stock, with a backlog of housing units needing rehabilitation. In 1996, there were 3,504 substandard units in county (3.8 percent) requiring $30,000 or more to bring them up to code. Another 2,121 households were at risk due to their inability to pay average rents or afford repairs needed to rehabilitate a typical substandard home. There is also a waiting list of 750 persons for housing rehabilitation funding available from the county. See the chart on page A6.
The county has been working on a number of housing initiatives. “In cooperation with the state, federal agencies, housing industry representatives and non-profit housing advocacy groups, Sussex County Council has been very active in trying to address low/moderate income housing needs,” the plan emphasizes.
The county’s 2008 budget calls for $1.8 million in housing assistance through community development block grants and other federal programs; the Delaware State Home Loan Program; $324,549 in county contributions; county grants for housing rehab and public works projects; and emergency relocation assistance.
The county earmarked funding for local housing rehab in Selbyville’s Polly Branch neighborhood and in rural Millsboro/Dagsboro, among other communities around the county.
The county’s Moderately Priced Housing Unit program, introduced in January 2006, is pointed to in the plan as “a tangible step toward creating more moderately priced housing by providing incentives for developers to build these types of units.” The program also envisions deed restrictions to guarantee the resale prices of these homes remain affordable for a 20-year period.
The MPHU program offers expedited review and density bonuses to developers who build homes affordable for people within 80 percent and 125 percent of the area’s median income, allowing 20 to 30 percent more units. Qualified developments are those where there is owner-occupied housing located in a designated developing area, with a minimum of 35 units and connected to public water and sewer. Buyers must live and work in Sussex for at least one year and be income-eligible.
The MPHU program is voluntary and subject to county approval. Thus far in the program, three development applications have been received for 546 affordable units. Those applications are now under review.
The plan says the MPHU program has also been praised for creating housing closer to work, thus reducing commuter costs, traffic and pollution. The pilot program is to be evaluated for possible refinements after two years.
The county’s work on affordable housing has also included support of non-profits. In November 2006, the Sussex County Council approved a $50,000 grant to Diamond State Community Land Trust, which aims to expand home-ownership opportunities for low/moderate income households. Under the DSCLT program, buyers own their home but lease the land underneath it for a nominal fee from the land trust. Upon resale, they sellers keep only a portion of the appreciated value, with the remainder staying with home, to keep it affordable for next buyer.
The county has also given grants to Habitat for Humanity, which aims to provide housing opportunities for those with low or moderate incomes.
As noted in the plan summary provided by planning consultants on Sept. 25, the update also addresses the use of manufactured housing as an affordability tool.
“Despite sometimes disparaging stereotypes, properly built and well-managed manufactured home communities grow in value and can be community assets,” the plan states, noting that there is a strong market for such units in Sussex County, considering the problems many local workforce members have affording local home prices.
In 2000, there were 23,817 manufactured homes in the county — 25.6 percent of all homes — compared to 18.6 percent in Kent, 11.2 percent in New Castle counties. Some 23 percent of county’s population lived in manufactured homes in 2000.
Planners recommended that the county examine the constraints of zoning and regulations on manufactured housing, such as outright prohibitions (in violation of federal laws); regulations not allowing single-wides; excessive minimum lot size requirements; stipulations that manufactured home communities can only be established by conditional approval or variance (both of which are generally lengthy processes); and insufficient requirements for advance notice when a park owner sells the property and all occupants must relocate.
Another effort to increase affordable housing is through private workforce housing initiatives. The comp plan points out the example of Capstone Homes, which worked with the council in establishing a workforce housing project the plan says the county hopes will be a model.
In that program, discounts were offered to workers on a first-come-first-served basis. Through those discounts, they were entitled to get a basement and two-car garage at the normal base price of homes in a development between Lewes and Milton. There are plans to introduce the program elsewhere.
The plan acknowledges that the Capstone program was not aimed at low/moderate-income buyers, but offers it as an example of what can be done. The company is also working with area employers to offer discounts to their employees in exchange for the employer offering marketing assistance to Capstone. The county identifies such programs as not only useful for providing more affordable housing but also as a promotional tool to attract skilled workers.
Strategies for increasing affordable housing included in the plan update include:
• Monitor the MPHU program and evaluate it for changes in January 2009, with suggestions already made to make it mandatory and to modify the rules to make sure MPHU homes are permanently priced at affordable housing levels;
• Continue housing assistance activities;
• Build on non-profit coordination with financial support;
• Encourage limited home-equity projects, where the buyer owns the home and a non-profit owns the land;
• Encourage more workforce housing programs;
• Perform a comprehensive review of zoning ordinances and subdivision code to identify and revise provisions that unduly restrain development of well-designed manufactured housing communities, and encourage municipalities to do the same.
Agriculture, business outreach key in county plan
Another aspect of the housing issue is played out in the economic development element of the comprehensive plan update.
First, the plan notes that, historically, farming is the dominant force in the county’s economy. It was ranked 27th in the U.S. in the market value of its farm products in 2002 and is noted as famous for its poultry farming. More broiler chickens (more than 200 million per year) are produced in Sussex County than any other county in the U.S., and nearly twice as many as in the second leading county.
The county is the largest soybean-producing county east of the Appalachian Mountains. In 2002, 70 percent of farms in the county were poultry or soybean/grain farms, with vegetable and melon farms third most numerous.
The county is also the foremost agricultural area in Delaware, with 75 percent of the state’s farm product value coming from Sussex in 2002.
However, the plan notes with concern that county farmland acres continue to decrease, with 30,147 acres lost to other uses between 1997 and 2002 — down 10 percent. In the same period, the number of farms dropped by 11 percent, from 1,481 to 1,312. These changes have been attributed to development and consolidation of small family farms to larger, corporate ones.
The comp plan notes rapid growth of the area’s economy overall. The July 2007 unemployment rate was 2.9 percent, compared to 3.4 percent in Delaware and 4.6 percent nationally. Jobs grew at faster rate between 1995 and 2005 in Sussex County than in the state or the nation.
Tourism is cited as the strongest factor in job growth, but the tourism economy provides more lower-paying jobs than most other areas of business. The average annual wage of non-farm workers in 2005 was $30,100, which was just two-thirds of the state average ($44,600).
In charge of much of the county’s economy is the Sussex County Economic Development Office, which has as its duties to: promote the location and development of business; diversify and expand local job base; and to recruit new businesses to industrial/business parks; coordinate with other entities on education, training, job seekers, retiree businesses and tourism.
Another aspect of the county’s economy is the Sussex County Industrial Park, 350 acres located near Georgetown that are used as an airport and industrial park with 17 businesses employing 1,100 people. Improvements to the airport and park are in progress, and the county is cooperating with PATS Aircraft and Delaware Technical & Community College to create an FAA-approved training program for airline mechanics at the facility.
Meanwhile, the Selbyville Industrial Park, consisting of 35 acres, has proven successful as well. The town just sold the last of the lots it owned and 16 businesses are located there. The town is now looking for land for a business park. In Seaford, the town operates the Seaford and Ross industrial/business parks.
County planners outlined a number of economic strategies in the comprehensive plan update, including to:
• Maintain land-use, zoning and conservation policies that keep agriculture economically viable;
• Ensure zoning regulations accommodate environmentally safe agribusiness uses;
• Complete long-term capital improvements planned for airport;
• Consider different ways to access airport site from the west, south and north;
• Intensify efforts to diversity the local economy by recruiting employers with year-round, higher-paying jobs to balance ongoing growth of seasonal, lower-paying jobs;
• Make more job training and professional development partnerships;
• Coordinate water and sewer facilities planning to bring utilities to areas zoned for business uses;
• Continue coordinating with DelDOT to provide safe and convenience road access to areas zone for business, focus on ways to relieve traffic congestion to and from the beaches and Route 1 beach towns; and
• Fund a professional target market analysis by a specialized economic development consulting firm, to identify types of businesses that are the best match for county and how county and partner entities can better implement a coordinated business recruitment strategy.
Next week: The Coastal Point will provide a detailed look at the historic preservation, intergovernmental coordination and community design elements of the 2007 Sussex County Comprehensive Plan Update.