Milton council upholds Verizon preliminary site-plan approval

Milton Town Council unanimously upheld the planning and zoning commission’s decision to grant preliminary site-plan approval to Verizon to erect a 140-foot cell tower on town-owned land on Front Street.

At its March 23 meeting, council agreed that the planners conducted a thorough, orderly and logical review of Verizon’s application and made their decision based on the evidence presented. Councilwoman Lee Revis-Plank said the commission attached 17 conditions to their approval that must be met before Verizon can start moving forward toward final site-plan review. 

“This is not something where one or two of them can be checked off. I think the planning and zoning commission has taken the time to look at all of the evidence and to document for the written record everything that they were concerned about and needed to be addressed. It indicates the process itself was pretty comprehensive,” she said.

Councilman Larry Savage said when Verizon was seeking a special-use permit – required because the tower is in a residential zoning district – the commission imposed nine conditions on approval. During the preliminary site-plan process, the commission added eight more, Savage said, indicating a thorough process. 

Council had gathered March 23 in order to rule on an appeal of the preliminary site-plan approval brought by Milton resident Allen Benson. 

At a March 9 public hearing, Benson made two arguments in favor of overturning the commission’s decision. First, planning and zoning did not consider adverse impacts to neighboring properties in granting approval. Second, town code states that no new public utility could be constructed in a flood zone area, which that portion of Front Street is.

The Verizon tower has been a source of controversy from the start, primarily because of its location, which would be at the town’s current public works yard at 210 Front St. The location backs up to residential homes on Walnut and Collins streets. 

Verizon has said that the location and height of the tower will give the best cellphone coverage for Verizon customers in Milton. Opponents, however, say the tower would be an eyesore in a part of town that frequently floods and is proposed as a potential town gateway in Milton’s comprehensive development plan, especially after the current wastewater treatment plant is demolished and removed when Artesian’s new plant on Route 30 is up and running.

At the March 9 hearing, Town Solicitor Seth Thompson, representing planning and zoning, said the commission considered the health, safety and welfare of the community in making its decision. He said the series of conditions put on the approval were meant to address the flooding issue, and that Verizon has indicated the platform where the tower would be placed is above the floodplain. Thompson said the commission extensively questioned Verizon representative John Tracey on the flooding issue around Front Street, demonstrating that those concerns were addressed prior to the commission granting preliminary site-plan approval. Finally, he said Verizon still needs approval from state agencies before final site-plan approval.

Benson’s appeal was only heard by four of the seven council members. Councilwoman Randi Merdith and councilmen John Collier and Sam Garde recused themselves from the proceedings. Supporters of Benson’s appeal also wanted Mayor Ted Kanakos to recuse himself because of a land-lease agreement he had signed with Verizon in 2019. Kanakos chose not to recuse himself, leaving Kanakos, Savage, Revis-Plank and Councilman Rich Baty as judges on the appeal.

Revis-Plank addressed the audience, “The process that this board is going through to address the appeal is narrowly focused on whether the decision is based on the evidence. It’s very challenging and difficult in order to make this decision. We have heard your concerns – I see head-shaking – but, honestly, we have heard you. We are your neighbors, and we’re trying to do the very best that we can in order to make this decision.”

Following the vote, Benson said, “It was obvious to me that, contrary to comments by two of the council members, they did not listen to my appeal statement or to my final statement at the appeal hearing. The point that seems to have been ignored is that I never denied that planning and zoning discussed flooding risk during the site plan hearing, but the point of the appeal was that, contrary to town code, they never discussed the impact of possible increased flooding on Front Street would have on the adjacent neighborhood.”

He said while he did not have the resources to appeal the council’s decision to Delaware Superior Court, supporters have discussed possibly funding one because the matter is of such concern to the community, which turned out in large numbers to March 9 and March 23 meetings on Benson’s appeal.