Appeal over Route 16 project withdrawn
A trio of Milton residents withdrew an appeal over preliminary site-plan approval for a mixed commercial/residential development on Route 16 after a nearly two-hour hearing in front of Milton Town Council Sept. 8.
The appeal was filed by Charles Schwinabart, Michael Guerreri and Wallace Goff, residents who live near a 26-acre site at the intersection of Route 16 and Country Road that has been annexed into Milton and is planned to be developed as Cypress Grove, a development with 240 residential units and 5 acres of commercial space.
Cypress Grove and its owner, Milton Attainable Housing LLC, were given preliminary site-plan approval in May, allowing the developer to further refine plans for final site-plan approval. Preston Schell, one of the principal developers of Cypress Grove, has said the timetable to begin construction would be either later this year or in early 2022.
Schwinabart presented the case on behalf of the appellants. He said while he did not want to change the development or stop it from happening, he and his co-appellants did not receive adequate public notice of hearings on Cypress Grove.
Schwinabart said it was not his intention to stop or try to downsize the project, but he did not think he and his co-appellants had been given adequate opportunity to participate in public hearings. He said when he heard about the Cypress Grove project, he went to the town to request information and asked to be given notice in writing via certified mail every time there was a hearing, which he was entitled to because he lives within 200 feet of the development. Schwinabart said that did not happen, and he did not receive certified mail with his notices. He said he only began to speak about the project when he learned about a planning and zoning meeting, and attended that to give his objections.
“We feel we have been wronged, and we want to know what the town and the council is going to do about it,” Schwinabart said.
He said he would love to work with the developer to provide his and his neighbors’ input on the project. Schwinabart argued that one of the reasons not getting notice was so important was the fear that headlights from vehicle traffic going into the development would shine into his home and those of his neighbors.
Councilman Sam Garde questioned how Schwinabart could not have had any notice the project was happening, since it has been subject to numerous meetings of town board and committees, and has been the subject of multiple local media reports. Mayor Ted Kanakos said the town received a long list of certified mail receipts showing that Schwinabart’s neighbors got notice, and wondered how Schwinabart did not. Kanakos said he believed Schwinabart, but did not think public notice from the town was inadequate since other residents in the area got their notices.
Seth Thompson, the town’s solicitor representing planning and zoning in the appeal, and Jon Horner, attorney for Milton Attainable Housing, said the planning and zoning commission followed an orderly and logical process that conformed with town code. Thompson said the issue of lights shining into Schwinabart’s home would be resolved once Delaware Department of Transportation conducted traffic studies of the development. Both attorneys asked the council to deny the appeal.
At that point, Glenn Mandalas, the attorney representing Milton Town Council in the appeal, asked for a 10-minute recess. During that time, he talked with Thompson, Horner and Schwinabart, and after that discussion, announced that Schwinabart agreed to withdraw his appeal in exchange for ensuring Schwinabart and his neighbors be allowed to provide input on the development moving forward.
