Subdivision ‘compatible’ in environmentally sensitive land
Sussex County Planning and Zoning commissioners voted unanimously on Jan. 11 to allow developers to begin work on a 227-lot single-family-home subdivision in the county’s AR-1 district, just north of Millville on environmentally sensitive land.
After two deferrals and some opposition citing impacts on traffic and neighboring properties, Bethany Ridge LLC won approval last Thursday to subdivide 104 acres off Old Mill and White’s Neck roads for the development. The land lies in the county’s Environmentally Sensitive Development Area, a popular county development overlay zone for local developers.
Bethany Ridge also lies in the Investment Level 3 area as laid out in the state planning strategies — where the state acknowledges there is development pressure in otherwise rural or environmentally sensitive areas and may provide money for new infrastructure — and its density falls short of the 2.178 units per acre allowed in the AR-1 district.
“The project is consistent with neighboring properties and will not have an adverse impact on neighboring properties,” said Rodney Smith, the Bethany Beach-area representation on the five-man commission, in his motion to approve the project last Thursday, refuting some complaints against it. “(Bethany Ridge) will be compatible with other area land uses.”
The development comes to an area already experiencing unprecedented growth. On Route 17 in neighboring Millville, nearly 4,000 homes are expected to be built in the next decade. Millville by the Sea alone – the roughly 300-resident town’s Master Planned Community along Route 17 which broke ground two weeks ago — will add 3,100 homes to the small town if built as proposed, over the next 10 to 12 years.
Some kind of residential development on the land approved for development by Bethany Ridge last Thursday has been in the works since at least early 2003. According to county records, the Sussex Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of a residential planned community on the same plot of land in January of 2004 but it was denied by county council.
Utilizing the cluster ordinance — where developers can exceed lot-size minimums to preserve more open space — the developers returned with the most recent plan in early 2005.
The state Historic Preservation Office opposed the project in a mandated May land-use review, stating that development there would destroy a historic farmstead, but it was the only state agency to stand in opposition. Without making it a binding condition of approval, Smith suggested before making his motion last Thursday that the developers allow the state office to further study the area before developing.
“The willingness to provide an opportunity for the state Historic Preservation Office to document specific sites is encouraged,” Smith said, adding, though, that his suggestion is “non-binding.”
The Bethany Ridge plan contains 34 acres of open space, walking, jogging and biking trails, and 24,000 linear feet of sidewalk. It was drafted in an environmentally sensitive manner, to include recreational uses and adequate buffers to protect onsite wetlands and nearby waterways from runoff nutrient pollution, Smith said. In the May review, state natural resources officials suggested that developers protect the sensitive land with existing natural, forested buffers or 100-foot setbacks.
Raymond Banks Jr., attorney Rachel Mershie and local resident Anna Volkman were present at Bethany Ridge’s Dec. 7 public hearing, in opposition to the plan. They cited both problems with a pending lawsuit over the property’s ownership and with runoff from the proposed project affecting nearby farm properties.
They also complained about negative environmental impacts — mentioning a bald eagle that nests nearby — and traffic concerns that some say already warrant state action.
Since the proposed project is in the state’s Level 3 investment area, some state money might be available for infrastructure improvements, but Delaware Department of Transportation budget deficits have already forced the delay of multi-million-dollar Sussex County road projects — including a much-anticipated Route 26 widening project. A project to widen local feeder roads to Route 26 might be indefinitely delayed because of funding problems.