On Thursday, May 8, Milford Board of Adjustments voted against a height variance requested by 111 North Walnut LLC that would have allowed them to build a multi-use structure on a vacant lot on Walnut Street that would contain 16 micro apartments. The apartments would rent for less than $1,000 per month.
“The applicant proposes to construct a 38×70 foot four story building containing up to six commercial spaces and 16 apartments” City Planner Rob Pierce said. “The applicant seeks three variances for the project. The first is to increase the density from 16 units to 278 units per acre to allow for the 16 apartments. The second would allow them to increase the building height from the 35 feet allowable to 52 feet. The last variance would waive the 50-foot lot size to 48.2 feet.”
Zach King, who has refurbished several historic buildings in Milford, explained that he and his wife, Marissa already have several apartments in the downtown area that they rent for less than the market rate. King stated that he has had tenants with financial hardships and he works with them so that they are not displaced and that they have never evicted anyone.
“Our plan complies really well with the Milford Comprehensive Plan which addresses vacant lots in the Downtown Development District (DDD),” King said. “It addresses affordable housing. It promotes bringing hourly wage employees into the community and providing houses for them. This project would bring additional commercial. The entire plan is nine pages and addresses all of those, affordability, diversity, inventory, resiliency. The main goal is to create affordable housing.”
King continued, stating that he wanted to see Milford become more of a walkable community. One of the reasons for the additional height is to keep the cost of the apartments low. The lot is small and building an additional story would allow more units, keeping the costs low. King also pointed out that the basement and rooftop could be viable commercial businesses. If the height variance were not approved, King stated that he may have to rely on drastic additional subsidies from the government and most of those are reserved for large projects.
“I also wanted to address parking, and I was very shocked when I ran the numbers,” King said. “I spend every day in Milford and there have only been two days this year when I could not find parking and that was during festivals<” There are 434 spaces in 13 parking lots and 327 spaces in addition to that in the DDD zone. There are over 750 spaces on the street and 125 of them are within a quarter block of our project”
King stated that at 7:45 PM the night before, there were only 23 of those 125 spaces used and this morning at 9 AM, there were 18 used. The project proposed would be a mix of one and two bedrooms plus commercial space, estimating up to 30 cars for that. King also felt that the more walkable Milford became, the less likely it was a tenant would even have or need a car. He pointed out that some of their employees live downtown and walk to Gigante for groceries, to work, to restaurants and bars. The building would have an elevator, and it was the structure on the roof housing the elevator functions that made it appear tall. King did talk about a rooftop restaurant or bar as well as a private club in the basement. King also pointed out that a nearby building was over 43 feet while the former M&T Bank, Jesus Love Temple and Windsor Hotel were all significantly higher than 35 feet.
During public comment for the application, Dan Bond pointed out that the lot was in the North Milford Historic District which came with substantial tax credits, something that Bond used heavily for projects he completed in Milford. Bond restored the former Tharp Jewell Building and was part of the group that restored the Windsor Hotel. He also spearheaded a project that demolished an historic home on Northwest Front Street to build affordable townhomes.
“You get no subsidy from the federal government or historic tax credits for a new building, in particular in this location where you have two very important historic 19th century structures that are quite beautiful,” Bond said. “I think it would be good to have the city request a preservation architect to determine what type of building would be appropriate. They would determine what is an appropriate size, height and appearance. I know the people who live on that block are very concerned about maintain the historic nature of the block.”
Joan Rand spoke about her experience living in tiny apartments in the New York and Chicago, stating that there was a lot of turnover in that type of living space. She suggested that a boarding house with a large communal space and units all around was a better solution.
“People could get together, have meals once in a while, have an entertainment space, but the rooms are still appointed with basic living quarters,” Rand said. “They can get $2,000 a month for something like that in Brooklyn and that could bring down construction costs. Another issue is that the high turnover can be aggravating, so landlords turn to Air BnB to fill the units, making them a hotel. Finally, the façade of this building would be totally out of context at the street level with glass, modern doors.”
Cameron Llwelyn, who helped develop the Splash Laundromat with apartments above it recently, stated that there were 10 apartments added and only one is still vacant. Those apartments rent in excess of $1500 per month. Lwelyn stated that the first apartments to rent were the studio, one-bedroom options. In addition, of the nine apartments rented, only four tenants had cars.
“As for the graphic, it is very difficult to spend tens of thousands on architectural renderings until you know you are going to be allowed to build,” Llwelyn said. “There should be a little levity here because until you say “yes, you can,” there is no need to hire an architect for official drawings. I can also tell you that my daughter and son-in-law are living with his father because they cannot afford rent in this area. We need good, affordable housing. Finally, the lot variance. They are asking for a waiver of 22 inches. That is less than an inch and a half per apartment.”
Ryan Longenvach, who lives near the property, expressed concerns about the loudness of the elevator for tenants, asking the board if they had ever stayed in a hotel next to an elevator. He also stated that all the historic houses near this property were only three stories.
“My husband and I, we move a lot because he is in the Army, but we moved to Milford because we love it here,” Brittne Jimenez said. “There are a lot of other cities that are bigger and more established, but we saw the potential here. We just came from Quincy, Massachusetts and lived in an apartment with businesses below. We frequented those businesses and spent a lot of money there. We made friends there. We had trivia nights and got together as a community. This is what this building would be like. We are young and we love noise, but I get the concerns. I just think it could be well managed.”
John Murray was concerned that digging a basement could damage the two historic properties adjacent to the vacant lot. He also pointed out that there was precedent for denying the density variance as in 2019, the Board of Adjustments denied a request form the owners of 117 North Walnut Street to increase the density to 33 units per acre.
“I am going to keep this quick because I am not a public speaker, but I want to say it would be a lot easier on my life if you denied this request because we have two children at home that adore their father, but he is always working because he has so much pride in this town,” Marissa King said. “It’s one building after another and we’re like “we’re done” and then he says “but we can do this. I just want to make it clear that if you deny this, my life might be easier.”
Mrs. King continued.
“I will also tell you our tenants are struggling. They are struggling to get people in their doors and we are the ones that are trying to help them,” Mrs. King said. “We are cutting back on their rent. Every other day, Zack is getting a text and making ways for people to try to catch up on rent. There is just not enough foot traffic downtown and this project would definitely increase that. We can bring the businesses in all day, but unless everyone is supporting them, they can’t afford to stay open.”
Earlier in the meeting, Pierce pointed out that the King’s could build any type of building on the lot as long as it met code, so a shorter building that did not need the density or lot size adjustment could be built without any approvals from the city.
“Everyone that knows me knows that I have a designer’s eye. I really am into that modern style, so I could just go ahead and build a modern building on that lot without approval,” Mrs. King said. “It would have to be way smaller obviously, but as long as it complies with code and zoning, there are no requirements to keep it historic. So, you can deny this request but know that we will build on that lot and it may not fit the historic look when we do.”
Alan Wagamon also spoke against the project, although he did like the way the building looked. He felt the height would be out of character with the other buildings.
“I am speaking in support of the application for 16 residential units,” Sara Bluhm said. “Kent and Sussex County are facing a serious affordable housing shortage and Milford is no exception. This project represents exactly the development we need, housing that is walkable, connected and built within our DDD. As the former president of Downtown Milford Inc., I can tell you that this is the type of project we always hoped to see downtown.
Bluhm, who also served as the Economic Development and Community Engagement Director for the City of Milford, continued
“We want more residents within walking distance of shops, restaurants and services. That means more foot traffic, stronger businesses and more vibrant city core. We must consider our region’s growing healthcare needs with the continued expansion of the Bayhealth Sussex campus and other local providers, there is a real demand for healthcare workers, many of whom must have local affordable housing,” Bluhm said. “This project seems to meet that need. Regarding the mentioned safety concerns, there is a simple and effective solution and that is key card access for residents allowing them the only access to residences and the elevator only goes to the top floor for the restaurant without keycard access. This promotes economic vitality and helps address our affordable housing crisis. I am asking you to approve this request.”
After the public comment section ended, Chairman Brendan Warfel told the board they could “deny one, two or all three requests, approve one, two, three requests or defer to a later date. After much discussion, the decision was made to vote on each variance separately. Variance one, which was to allow a higher density on the property, The motion passed with a vote of four to one with Warfel the only no vote.
Variance two was to allow a height of 52 feet rather than the 35 feet permitted by code. The motion was to deny this variance and it passed with a unanimous vote. The final motion was to approve the variance three to allow a lot size of 48.3 feet rather than the required 50. The motion passed unanimously.
The two approved variances will now go before the Planning Commission for approval. King commented that he was unsure he could move forward with the project without the height variance.
