Neighbors oppose proposed Layton Avenue auto repair; council leaves record open and defers decision

Sussex County Council deferred action Thursday on Conditional Use 2510, a proposal to operate an auto repair shop at 28375–28377 Layton Avenue in Millsboro, and left the public record open until at least five days after the planning and zoning commission issues its recommendation.

The council’s action came after a lengthy public hearing in which several nearby residents described ongoing disturbances at the property they say are already occurring, including loud engine noise and power tools, bright exterior lighting that shines into adjacent homes, debris and vehicle parking on Layton Avenue, and periodic late‑night activity.

Thomas Wolf, who said he lives at 26615 Jersey Road, told council the proposed repair shop would be “incompatible with the intent of B‑1 zoning” because the property sits adjacent to residences and, he said, has been used for commercial repair operations and heavy equipment activity. Wolf presented video and photographic material, which he said documented evening noise and outdoor work. “This is a nuisance,” Wolf said, and he urged council to deny the application.

Other neighbors described frequent lights shining into their homes and commercial vehicles parked on both sides of the narrow dirt road, making two‑way travel difficult. Joan Balbeck, who said she has lived on Layton Avenue for 40 years, told council the area had been quiet when she moved there and that the current activity has created safety and quality‑of‑life concerns for long‑time residents.

The applicant told council that most repairs would be done indoors, that the property is fenced with an opaque white fence and that some vehicles occasionally park on site but would be moved off site when the business is operating. Councilors asked whether there was adequate parking, what hours the applicant would observe and whether the property had been subject to code enforcement. County counsel and staff confirmed a prior notice of violation had been issued in 2022 and that an open case remains for building without a permit.

Council members discussed enforcement options, including that a conditional use can be terminated for failure to comply with conditions, but noted the county does not have a general noise ordinance that would make it straightforward to adopt and enforce quiet hours. Because planning and zoning has not yet issued a recommendation, the council unanimously voted to defer the matter and keep the record open for the five‑day comment period that follows the commission’s recommendation.

The record includes six written comments noted by county staff and the applicant’s site materials. Council did not close the public record at the hearing and will consider the planning and zoning recommendation when it is issued.