On Monday, September 22, Milford City Council approved two ordinances relating to Cypress Hall, a development that has been approved since 2009. Because the development, like many in the city, was constructed in phases, the developer was required to return to city council due to changes in code that occurred in 2022. There were two ordinances discussed at the meeting.
“The first is a revised Planned Unit Development (PUD) just south of the Redner’s Cypress Hall Shopping Center. The applicant is seeking a revised planned unit development for the construction of 96 townhomes, 288 apartments, 119 single family dwellings, for a total of 549 units,” City Planner Rob Pierce said. “Phase I, which contains 96 townhouses, has been fully constructed. Phase II which contains the 288 apartments is partially constructed. Phase III, IV and V have not received final approval.”
According to Pierce, council approved the apartments, single-family dwelling units and 46 duplexes in 2022. The PUD was recorded with Sussex County and the applicant was before council asking to add one additional single family detached dwelling to future phases that have not been constructed. In addition, the developer was asking that Phase III, which had received preliminary approval in 2022, to reduce the pavement width from 38 feet to 28 feet as well as to retain approvals from 2022 for yard setbacks, parking space requirements and block lengths.
“As Mr. Pierce explained, this project has been around for quite some time,” Tim Metzner, an engineer with Davis, Bowen & Friedel said. “The purpose for coming back with a design phase was that we determined a pump station would be necessary. We would place the pump station at the southern end and then turn it over to the city. That provides further extension to the west and adds infrastructure for the future.”
Metzner continued, explaining adding the pump station shifted some of the lots and roads within the development. DelDOT has already approved the entrance to the development under Phase I which is completely constructed. The development will have access to the light at Redner’s which will make entering and exiting safer, Metzner said. According to Metzner, the changes requested had already been approved by council, but due to changes to city code between 2022 and 2025, a conditional use was necessary.
“The elements pertaining to the design and PUD have not changed except for what Mr. Metzner mentioned as far as the pump station and adding on single family home,” Pierce said. “The other changes related to pavement and right-of-way are only deviations now because of changes to the code. We have widened our road requirements in developments and right-of-way requirements, but those were changed after this PUD received approval.”
During the public hearing, several people spoke in opposition to the project, although it was clear some of those commenting were unaware the first request would only add one additional residence and add a safer intersection for entering and exiting the development.
“I do not understand why we are approving cases with prior code recommendations. If I go to build something new on my house, I have to build it to the codes that are now. My house is 1949 house. I do not want my electric done like it was in 1949, there are reasons we change things. The fire trucks have to get through. The transportation trucks have to get through. They have not gotten smaller vehicles,” Kim Wills, who lives on Sunset Lane, said. “It takes 50 feet to turn a fire truck if a car is parked in the road on both sides. How’s that fire truck getting through? Looking at adding 100 more houses, there are children that come with these houses. Our school busses are getting full to the point that the parents are required to take their children to the school. If you look at the Milford school district website says, if your bus is at capacity, parents will be required to take children to school. I would suggest that you guys ask the school board, there’s a place in there you can have a recommendation from the school board, from the fire department, if this would be a good fit for a town. We have no letters from anyone.”
Trish Marvel, who lives near the Cypress Hall development on Shawnee Road, also felt approving the changes was a mistake.
“The traffic is probably going to be a concern, entering and exiting. I don’t know if the people that are going to be living in that development are going to use the Redner’s parking lot, go through it and use that exit. The other concern is, right now, on Shawnee Road, which is where I live, the traffic without this development is pretty substantial, and I’ve already raised some concerns about people running stop signs there, ignoring traffic, doing high rates of speed there, bus stops and things like that take place. So you got now all this added, what, maybe 1000 cars, I don’t know. I mean, if you have 500 units, you’re talking substantial traffic,” Marvel said. “So from a traffic pattern, from a fire department, from a just logistically in and out of it, I’m hoping that this is Council will ask for more detail, if you can and not approve it or decline it tonight, but continue to get information because it seems like there’s still a lot of unanswered questions. And considering this took place, I think he said 20 years ago, initially, things have changed in 20 years.”
Although the initial development was approved in 2009, the last phase approved was in 2022. Marvel continued her comment.
“Code has changed. This town has developed tremendously in 20 years, so now you just add this added development onto it. I think that we need to really make sure, as a council that this is the right decision for Milford, and the exceptions should be looked at very closely, because it seems a pattern that we continue to make exceptions,” Marvel said. “So I think we should base it on what our current requirements are for developments, road, sidewalk sizes, etc. And this is like a tough one. I would not want to be in your shoes, because this is a big, big decision tonight, and I think you guys need to really make sure that you have all the answers you need before you make this decision.”
Julie Morris, who gave an address on East Street, also opposed approving the changes requested. When her comment began, Morris stated that she had toured a three-bedroom apartment in Cypress Hall and found that someone in a wheelchair would be unable to live in the unit, stating that the units were not ADA compliant.
“What concerns me is that to make this density possible, the applicant is asking for waivers and the staff recommends it, and I’m just going to say it, because of fear of retaliation. I feel like the staff do not speak up. The applicant is asking for waivers that are not trivial, reducing the pavement thickness, which was said at the last meeting, it was done in Phase I and I in other developments,” Morris said. “So why not those minimal pavement thicknesses that becomes the city’s problem like then the city has to maintain it and go out and repair it because the pavement is thicker and the trash trucks have damaged it, or the snow removal, you know, has nicked it, and now it’s a problem that city. It’s not their problem. It’s a city’s problem to maintain their lack of desire to spend money on the pavement”
A review of the staff report finds no reference to a reduction in thickness of the pavement. The request was for a width of 28 feet rather than 38 feet; one front yard setback as opposed to two for corner lots; a reduction in parking in the multi-family area from 2.5 per unit to 2; extension of the length of a dead end street to be up to 500 feet due to cul-de-sacs; block lengths increased to 1,400 feet from 1,200; block widths reduced to 240 feet; side yard setbacks for townhouses reduced from 10 to 8 feet; side yard setbacks reduced from 20 to 8 feet for garden apartments; rear yard setbacks reduced from 30 to 15 feet; no on-street parking permitted on roads that are less than 60 feet as the developer would add three off-street parking spaces on those roads; and shade trees every 150 feet on alternating sides of the road rather than 150 feet on both sides of the road.
Of those 12 requests, nine of them had been approved by previous councils. Only three were changes before the present council and they included the tree waiver, on-street parking and the width, not thickness, of roads. Morris’ comments included other accusations against the city.
“Now I want to go back to the retaliation, because there’s real examples of the fear that staff have, not just city staff, but the Carlisle Fire Company, our own fire department leaders, have privately said they hesitate to speak up about safety concerns because they fear retaliation. I reached out to the person who spoke against this project in 2022 who works in Lewes. I won’t mention the name, he was a previous Carlisle firefighter now working in Lewes,” Morris said. “He said this is not a good idea. Our previous Public Works director said, these this is not a good idea. The streets are too narrow. The buildings are going to be close together.”
According to Morris, she asked the Lewes firefighter if he would speak out against the development, and he told her he would have to ask his president if he was allowed. Since she did not hear back from him, Morris believes the president told him he could not.
“We’ve already seen other department heads stay silent for their staff or avoid asking for raises while raises were granted to the city clerk and the police department only because the city manager and the police chief personally requested those raises,” Morris said. “The City of Milford is even facing a lawsuit right now alleging retaliation against a former employee who refused to carry out a task he believed was unethical. Until these issues are addressed and resolved under the new city manager, it’s yet another reason to place a moratorium on major developments.”
Morris also stated that between 11 PM and 7 AM, Carlisle Fire Company were no longer responding to calls due to staffing issues and that all calls during those hours now went to Houston and Frederica.
Councilwoman Madula Kalesis questioned whether Phase III was approved when the original development was approved in 2009, and Pierce stated that Phase III did not receive final approval as the developer chose to hold off on the single-family portion. The first two phases were on the books for eight years before construction began. Kalesis asked if there had been code changes between 2009 and 2025, to which Pierce explained there were changes between 2022 and 2025. Councilman Dan Marabello asked if council was locked into the previous approvals and Pierce stated they were.
“Other than the additional lot and pumping station, nothing has changed,” Marabello said. “We are just voting to put those additions there and add one lot.”
Councilwoman Katrina Wilson reminded the public that there were guidelines the city followed that required approvals from DelDOT, the school district, Sussex Conservation District, the fire marshal and the fire department. Councilwoman Nadia Zychal asked what prompted the change in the width of roads between 2022 and 2025.
“I believe the original code allowed for 25-foot-wide residential streets, maybe 26 wide. That’s why some of these waivers were not required under the PUD that were approved before 2022,” Pierce said “We had 38 feet established just to have a wider area also to allow for parking on that street. We also wanted to set up an opportunity where council had the ability to review these plans, and planning commission had the opportunity to review these plans, and if there was a need to widen the roads, those roads could be designed at the width desired by the Commission and Council. I think we tried to make the code a little bit more restrictive and then allow still an opportunity through the PUD for design deviations.”
Kalesis commented that she had spoken to members of the school district who told her there was no communication between the city and the district. She reminded council that Milford School District also included Ellendale, Lincoln, Houston and other towns. She felt that the city should open up lines of communication with the district.
“As far as the police station is concerned, it was probably two weeks ago and I ran into a police officer and asked him how he was,” Kalesis said. “And his words were to the effect that it was “me and one other person working for the whole city” at that specific moment in time. With the growth, I think we need to be aware of these situations.”
Culotta asked the chief to respond to Kalesis’ statement.
“So, in reference to the police officer, and we’ll absolutely examine that and review if that was accurate, and if so, why? I just want to remind everybody that we did a staffing analysis this year. I presented that before Council, saying that over the course of the next probably two to three years, we need to add approximately six officers. Three was my request for this year, so that we don’t max out. We can’t handle more than three at one time. But council approved that, and I will be coming back next year and asking for the next three,” Chief Cecilia Ashe said. “And it is how council wants to divvy that up, whether it’s for financial purposes, one for the next three years, or whether, we look at it and give all three again next year. So, my personal feeling and professional assessment is we are on track with the growth of the city the amount of police officers that we are projected to have. And I think just to remind everybody that council did approve three this fiscal year, we are in that hiring process. We have over 100 applicants for this position.”
Councilwoman Katrina Wilson pointed out that the city has a focus to collaborate with the school district. Councilman Michael Stewart questioned whether a compaction test had been conducted in the development. The lack of a compaction test in Hearthstone Manor led to the city having to resurface roadways with the developer reimbursing the city for the cost, something Stewart likely wanted to avoid in Cypress Hall.
“Phase I is completed, except for portions of the topcoat that we were leaving off until Phase III was completed to avoid damage,” Pierce said. “Compaction tests would be a question for the city engineer but typically you grant conditional acceptance of the roadway and before building permits are issued, other testing is done.”
Pierce explained that compaction testing is done after the topcoat is added and that will not be done until construction was complete. There are testing for the basecoat and that had been performed as required. James asked for clarification on fire code street widths and Pierce stated that fire code required a minimum of 20 feet.
“I know that the former city manager and the former mayor, and I believe the current mayor are in regular conversations with the Milford School District about growth and density and that would hold true with the Carlisle Fire Department,” James said. “Also, I speak to not just the members, but Chief, Deputy Chief and president, about growth and density and what’s going on in city, their apparatus, their membership, their ability to respond. And I do know also that, because the chief is very communicative, that she watches the growth plans and tries to be proactive. She has actually spoken in public audiences, at different public meetings on this to make sure that we’re not going to fall behind in the city’s ability to respond to the citizens, not just in emergencies, but for the normal protect and serve duties of our sworn officers.”
Culotta commented that it would be easy to just stop building houses, but that could be devastating to the town.
“That sounds good on paper, but what you do when you do that, when the taxes need to increase for municipalities or for the school system, for whatever it is, you’re putting that tax burden on your existing tax base. When you have organic growth, you can add better school infrastructure, better police and fire infrastructure, by adding houses, adding a tax revenue and those impact fees and things like that, help the city budget,” Culotta said. “So, it’s quick to say, well, let’s stop growth, but you’re either growing or you’re going die. So, we put all these rules and regulations in place and checks and balances to ensure that it’s not absolute sprawl. But in this case, I think this is good for Milford, it’s good for the tax base and it’s good for the growth. And to speak to our schools, I speak to the school board all the time. And you know, we just did a ribbon cutting last weekend on the new middle school, which has capacity for additional 200 some students.”
City Manager Chris Coleman explained that one of the things he had been working on since coming to Milford was infrastructure and growth.
“We’ve been working with the team, talking about our infrastructure capability and our capacity, but I’ve also started asking questions to department heads regarding our staff and our capacity for growth,” Coleman said. “And one of the things that I mentioned at the last meeting is we’re fortunate to have the individuals that we do have working and work especially hard for the city, but they all have capacity, so that’s something I will be bringing back to this council in future areas that capacity is nearing its limit.”
Culotta also pointed out that this project offered affordable homeownership with some of their units priced in the low $200,000 range.
“Affordable is different for everybody. So, you know, we can debate that definition all night long. But you know these town houses when they first went up for sale? I mean, even last year, I saw one that was in the low $200,000 range,” Culotta said. “So that’s what we want to see. We want to have that affordable housing for a lot of people that are priced out of the housing market.”
Council approved the first ordinance for Cypress Hall with a vote of four to two. Since it was not an override of a Planning Commission decision, the majority was enough.
“I believe the PUD does need to be updated,” Kalesis said as her reason for the no vote. “That way it will be current code.”
Zychal voted yes, stating her decision was after careful consideration.
“I did have concerns along the lines of Councilwoman Kalesis, but I also had concerns considering completing this project in a consistent manner,” Zychal said. “And also, in accommodating affordable and mixed usage housing. It’s a need. It is a need. And with the input of our other staff and agencies, I feel that this is going to move a pace in an orderly fashion.”
Stewart also voted no on the request.
“I see the existing PUD and do not approve of what was some of the variances that were already given, but I can’t do anything about that,” Stewart said. “So going forward, I say no, they can use the existing PUD that’s already in place.”
Marabello and James also voted to approve the request.
“I vote yes based on what they’re asking for the pumping station and the new pond. I think it’s smart to do that and to make sure it’s very responsible of them to prepare for the future growth of those surrounding areas,” Wilson said. “I would also like to see this project completed in my lifetime. It’s been a long time on the books, and I would really like to see it completed, and I think it’s good for the city of Milford to have that next level of growth for some of our residents, our first time home buyers.”
The second request from Cypress Hall was approval of the preliminary subdivision for Phase III with no waiver requests. During public comment, Morris again spoke against the request.
“It’s funny to me that the people in Ward 4 wouldn’t be against something like this when it’s not in your backyard. Phase III is not an isolated step. It’s a gateway to finishing the remaining phases of this 549-unit development. The original preliminary approval for Phase III expired, and the applicant is required to start over,” Morris said. “The expiration occurred for a reason. The project has not kept pace with the commitments that it made three years ago. The engineering review shows continuing comment remain issues from outstanding agency approvals, and I know that Milford municipality doesn’t require them, but it’s been how many years, and you don’t have any information. You can say that you’ve talked to the school district. I’ve talked to the school district too. The Milford High School is over capacity by 250 children. So where are they going to go if any of these kids need to go to the high school? And you know why the third floor isn’t open in the Milford Middle school because they don’t have teachers to fill them. The whole floor isn’t filled because there’s no teachers, there’s none.”
According to Milford School District, the Milford Middle School has the capacity for 1,000 students and there are only 702 enrolled. During a tour last month, the school principal stated that the third floor was being used for offices until the floor was needed due to student capacity. The new middle school has reduced capacity at both Milford Central Academy and Milford High School as well as the elementary schools.
“These are not minor punch list items. They’re fundamental to public safety and infrastructure reliability. Milford, every time we get a heavy rain, the sewer goes into the Murderkill River, and we’re fined, along with other municipalities in Kent County. You guys don’t have any concern, and you just want to keep adding to it,” Morris continued. “I already talked about the previous public works director, and I’ve already talked about the previous president of the Carlisle Fire Company. I mean, I don’t understand how you don’t see the clear fear to staff. I mean, I the police officer that was on duty, the chief said, ‘Well, I’m going to talk to him and find out if that’s the case’. Now he’s going to get in trouble because he expressed concern about being only two on duty, and that’s a clear issue, The school classrooms are exceeding the 22 student classrooms. It’s over students. I already mentioned 11pm to 7am the Carlisle is sending their calls to house in Frederica and Ellendale due to staffing.”
All speakers during public hearings are permitted three minutes and, when Culotta told Morris her time was up, she stated that another audience member had agreed to yield his three minutes to her. Culotta stated that was not how it worked, and Morris replied she was “pretty sure it was.’ James told her that yielding time was at the discretion of the mayor and the mayor did not approve it.
“So, since I am not Dan Bond, I don’t get additional time?” Morris replied. “So, you are refusing to let me speak? That says something about your integrity and ethics which is why you have a public ethics concern right now.”
Marabello asked whether the road widths could be adjusted, and Pierce stated that because council voted to approve those conditions, the remaining phases would have to adhere to those conditions. Even if the PUD were denied, the developer would construct roads at the 28-feet that was previously approved. Kalesis asked if a motion could be rescinded, and the solicitor stated it could not in this case.
When a roll call vote was taken the result was a tie. Stewart voted no, stating that even though he felt his hands were tied, he was not in favor of the project. Kalesis also voted no.
“I’m not sure they can improve it on their own, make the roads wider, even though it was approved before,” Marabello said with his no vote. “I think we should go with the new guidelines. It doesn’t have to be consistent with the old projects.”
Wilson voted yes stating that it was already approved, and it makes sense that the developer broke it down into phases. Zychal also voted yes based on comments by Wilson.
“I vote yes because this is Phase III and it conforms to our standards,” James said. “I agree with all the other comments made regarding conformity.”
This required to Culotta to break the tie.
“I vote yes. I think this is important to Milford,” Culotta said. “I think it’s important to the growth of Milford. It’s important to affordable housing.”
The request passed with a vote of four to three with Connor and Perez absent.
