Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sussex County officials outline working group to study land-use reform, timeline and membership still open
Summary
County Administrator Lawson presented a proposed land‑use reform working group that would recommend incentives for infill, zoning and funding options. Council discussed scope, membership and a phased timeline; members asked staff to return in two weeks with a short list of nominees.
County Administrator Lawson asked the Sussex County Council on Feb. 11 to approve forming a stakeholder working group to review land‑use practices and recommend changes to promote infill development, protect farmland and support affordable and workforce housing.
The working group would develop deliverables that include incentives for residential development in state investment levels 1–3, transportation improvements phased with land use, zoning and bulk‑standard reforms to promote affordable housing, and proposals for funding roads, schools and public safety tied to growth.
Lawson said staff intends to present a membership slate to the council after soliciting volunteers and that the group would be treated as a public body under the attorney general’s guidance (notices, agendas, minutes, livestream and public comment). He proposed a tentative multi‑quarter timeline, with the most substantive work expected in the third and fourth quarters of 2025, but said the council could direct the group to address deliverables one at a time to speed results.
Council members pressed staff on several details. Councilman Riley and others favored a phased approach that would allow the group to return with recommendations on a single deliverable sooner than a year; several members suggested starting with an inventory of undeveloped land in state investment levels 1–3 to ground any incentive program. Lawson said DelDOT and the Office of State Planning had agreed to participate and that staff recommended a relatively compact stakeholder list to keep the group manageable.
Members also discussed public access: a council member asked that working‑group meetings be recorded and available for later viewing; Lawson said meetings will follow public‑meeting rules and the county’s livestream practices. Several members suggested coordinating with ongoing state efforts on affordable housing to avoid duplicative work and to “park” topics the state is already addressing.
Next steps: staff will solicit nominations, return to council within two weeks with a short list of stakeholders and a recommendation on whether to have the working group tackle deliverables sequentially or concurrently. The council indicated support for a smaller, focused membership and for starting with the first deliverable (where new growth is appropriate) if council gives that direction at the next meeting.
Why this matters: the working group would advise on development patterns, housing supply and infrastructure funding that shape long‑term growth and public‑service costs in Sussex County.
Requests for more information or membership suggestions should be directed to the county administrator’s office when staff publishes the membership nomination timeline.
