Annexation for apartment complex in Millsboro denied

By Glenn Rolfe
Posted 5/3/22

MILLSBORO — Because Town Council has denied an annexation request, high-density development will not be coming to a 5-plus acre parcel on the town’s western outskirts.

You must be a member to read this story.

Join our family of readers for as little as $5.99 per month and support local, unbiased journalism.


Already a member? Log in to continue.   Otherwise, follow the link below to join.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Annexation for apartment complex in Millsboro denied

Posted

MILLSBORO — Because Town Council has denied an annexation request, high-density development will not be coming to a 5-plus acre parcel on the town’s western outskirts.

On Monday, council members rejected a developer’s request for annexation with a high-density residential zoning designation. The 4-0 vote by Bradley Cordrey, Larry Gum, John Thoroughgood and Faye Lingo — two were absent — followed discussion of the proposal at an April meeting and several hours after the town received a letter on behalf of the applicant.

Read by Tim Hodges, acting mayor, the letter stated, in part, “Medium density residential does not work for the applicant.”

So, Mayor Hodges said, “I am assuming that they would not want it annexed if the Town Council is not willing to bring it in as high-density residential.”

The requested annexation of the unincorporated land was earmarked for Betts Commons, a proposed Ingerman Family Community.

Presented to Millsboro officials by attorney David Hutt last month, the request would have resulted in 46 apartments along Del. 24, an area not far from Plantation Lakes and its planned south expansion, as well as the Retreat at Millstone and Moores Crossing.

Medium density, which would total 30 single-family homes, was acceptable to council. However, some council members voiced opposition to several two-story apartment buildings — which would be allowed through high-density zoning — being sandwiched along that section of Millsboro Highway, currently dominated by single-family residences.

“That was the feeling,” said Councilman Gum. “I don’t think I could assign annexing as they requested.”

Council’s options were to annex the land with the requested high-density zoning, to annex with medium-density residential zoning or to deny the request altogether. It chose the latter, after Councilwoman Lingo motioned for denial.

“I do object to the HR. I would be fine with the MR,” she said.