Letter to the Editor: Coral Lakes is a defining decision for County Council

First, I want to acknowledge the work of County Council. Balancing the needs of county citizens, businesses and the environment is not a walk in the park. I also understand that landowners have the right to sell, and developers have the right to profit.

However, in my view, Coral Lakes is not balanced in anyone’s favor, except the developer’s.

The history:

During a Planning & Zoning Commission hearing, the public was prohibited from presenting the site’s history that evening. However, the history confirms that without clear-cutting the forest and grading over the wetlands, the project is not advantageous, even for a developer:

• 2009, application submitted for 209 homes, removing 35 acres of forest. Withdrawn.
• 2010, application submitted for 160 homes, removing 72 acres of forest. Expired.
• 2019, application submitted for 180 homes, removing 83 acres of forest (30 acres of delineated wetlands on-site). Withdrawn.
• 2020, application submitted for 304 homes, removing 95 acres of forest.
• 2021, application submitted for 315 homes, removing 110 acres of forest (application states 4.87 acres of delineated wetlands on-site).

In summary, the developer created profitability by adding 11 bonus units, clear-cutting the forest, shortchanging the wetland acreage and ignoring poor soils not suitable for building, plus demonstrated a lack of empathy for the environment, wildlife, neighbors and safety concerns on Robinsonville Road.

Expert testimony:

During the P&Z hearing, the public was asked if we were “experts,” even though we were quoting from statements made by state experts — the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control and the Department of Transportation — and federal experts, like the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. These are experts paid with our tax dollars. The public-paid experts were given less credibility than experts paid by the developer. We were lectured about this.

“Stewards of the land”:

During the P&Z hearing, representatives for the developer stated that the developers are “stewards of the land.” This developer is known for its public relations spending. Image matters greatly to them. Why then are they proposing to clear-cut and grade over a large environmentally sensitive area? Mature trees, and the benefit they provide, cannot be replaced. Groundwater on-site is 12-40 inches below the surface. When 110 acres of forest are removed and wetlands plowed over, that groundwater will rise, causing issues for Chapel Green. Stormwater ponds (13 proposed) and drains cannot perform all the functions of forested wetlands, especially regarding groundwater. This cluster subdivision will have a negative impact on Sarah Run and everything downstream. Sarah Run feeds Herring Creek and Rehoboth Bay. This type of environmental destruction cannot be reversed. Also, now that the weather is warm, the wetlands are teeming with frogs; we have recorded the endangered barking tree frog, located in one of the northeast wetlands on-site.

During the hearing, the developer’s representative stated that because the P&Z Commission has approved 43 subdivisions in State Investment Level 4, the developer is owed approval. However, not all applications in SIL 4 have been approved, e.g., Wil King Station and Lockhaven.

After due diligence, the P&Z Commission made the right decision. They denied Coral Lakes.

The developer appealed the decision based on a technicality. The developer — “the stewards of the land” — claims it is owed an approval because the decision took more than 45 days. I argue the hearing occurred during the pandemic. Everything, including government processes, was extended. The P&Z commissioner for that district was out sick with COVID-19 during the public hearing and requested a deferral for further consideration.

The County Council does not owe this developer. Their duty is to the county.

We ask that the County Council uphold the decision of the Planning & Zoning Commission.

Jill Hicks

The Sussex Preservation Group

Lewes