By Benjamin Rothstein

DOVER — Residents of Representative Lane and Silver Lake Boulevard protested a potential development along the lake during Monday's City Council meeting, leading to a deferral on any further action.

Council members were scheduled to discuss two items regarding 1079 Silver Lake Blvd., which, if approved, would move the initiative forward.

The first would amend the 2019 comprehensive plan by changing the 5.04-acre parcel to a “mixed-use” designation from the current “office” classification.

The second, contingent on the first being passed, would alter the zoning from “commercial and professional office” to “limited central commercial.”

The plot lies at the very end of Silver Lake Boulevard, between a Dover Federal Credit Union site and Complete Care at Silver Lake, with the Representative Lane intersection adjacent to it. The boulevard serves as the only way in and out of the area.

“It’s 25 mph. There are school buses that pick up their kids and let them off right on the street. Kids are riding their bikes, playing. It’s a real neighborhood,” said resident Kathy Maslar. “I have great concern for whatever traffic and what the purpose would be of any building there and how it might disrupt the safety and the (lack of) noise.”

She, along with several other neighbors, also raised concerns regarding wildlife there, which she said has been increasing.

In addition, the residents noted, the absence of specific plans about the potential project — even its size — have led to their opposition of it.

“The truth is, while we would love to provide any details, we really haven’t had a real vision of what we want to do there because, until the rezoning is approved, there is really no thought process we can put into it,” said Nik Patel of Keller Williams’ The Rivera Group.

He did state that the property would include residential living and retail locations, plus walkways, and ensured that traffic unease would be addressed.

The possibility of crime was also brought up by the meeting attendees.

“We don’t have any major crime going on back in that area, and I know, when you start allowing more traffic flow, people start to be more inclined to figure out what’s going on back in this area,” said resident Eugene Davis. “Then, people start possibly coming in and committing crimes.”

In all, over 10 individuals spoke about their worries regarding the designation changes.

Because of the opposition, Councilman Roy Sudler offered to facilitate a meeting between the residents and the developers, along with a 30-day postponement of council’s consideration of the requests.

The other members agreed, and Councilman Fred Neil left the residents with an anecdote to chew on until the next discussion.

“In Baltimore County, there was an area near my parents’ home ... built right across from the city line, and there was a section that wanted to change the zoning to a little bit of a strip mall. Not big, but it was opposed,” he said. “Five years after it went through, they couldn’t live without that little area because it was so convenient.”

When and if the designation and zoning changes are sanctioned, the project in its entirety will then need to go through the approval process via the city’s Planning Commission and City Council.