Sussex County Council defers conditional‑use decision on church electronic message sign after neighbor concerns

Sussex County Council voted on a motion to defer consideration of an ordinance (CU 2568) that would grant a conditional use for an on‑premise electronic message center sign at the Unitarian Universalist Society of Southern Delaware, a 5.91‑acre parcel at 30486 Lewis Georgetown Highway (US Route 9) in Lewes.

County staff opened the 1:30 p.m. zoning hearing, described the application materials in the record (applicant conceptual plan, DelDOT service‑level evaluation, Sussex County engineering reviews, staff analysis and applicant presentation slides) and noted that the Planning & Zoning Commission had recommended approval at its meetings. Mark Davidson, a principal land planner with Pennoni Associates, presented on behalf of the applicant and described the proposal as a 32‑square‑foot electronic message panel sited below a 16‑square‑foot illuminated on‑premise sign, placed to meet AR‑1 setback requirements and to comply with the county’s sign code and state statutes cited by counsel (Delaware Title 2 and Title 17 provisions were discussed during the presentation).

Nearby homeowners raised objections during the public‑comment period. Lisonbee White, speaking for The Villages at Red Mill Pond, said homes in the Red Mill Pond South neighborhood would have direct line‑of‑sight to the proposed sign and that the closest dwellings are “less than 200 feet” from the proposed location; she requested a condition that the electronic message board be turned off overnight (for example, between 10 p.m. or 11 p.m. and 5 a.m.). Allison Schneller, another adjacent resident, said, “It’s gonna shine light into our windows,” and asked whether additional landscaping could be required to mitigate nighttime glare.

County counsel asked whether the applicant would accept a Planning & Zoning recommendation amendment making approval subject to any required permits and electronic‑messaging regulations; Davidson replied that the applicant agreed to be subject to the relevant permitting and electronic‑message regulations. The council closed the public hearing and, on a motion by Miss Cornervau (seconded by Mister Riley), voted to defer the decision. Members recorded their votes on the record in favor of deferral.

Next steps: the record on CU 2568 was closed before the motion; the council deferred taking final action and will return to the item at a future meeting. Any future approval would be subject to conditions and to permits from the appropriate agencies for electronic messaging and associated sign permits.

Notes: the article reports what speakers stated in the hearing and does not infer later administrative or judicial outcomes.