Why Wilmington continues to oppose warehouse project as it divides Southbridge residents

When it comes to development in and around Wilmington’s historic Southbridge community, the disconnect between the community and city leaders continues to grow deeper.

During a recent Wilmington Planning Commission meeting, city planners told commission members to ignore a community benefits agreement developers have struck with over a dozen Southbridge organizations in support of a proposal to build a warehouse and affordable housing along the Christina River.

The remarks did not sit well with Planning Commission Chairman Desmond Baker, who expressed concern that the city’s stance leaves him and other residents with the impression that developments could be pushed onto neighborhoods that don’t want them.

“I hear tonight that we should look at this (project) totally absent from what the community wants,” he said. “I have a problem with that because you’re telling me that if I live in Southbridge, then anybody can come build something. Even if I don't want it, it can be dumped on me.”

City planners say they weren’t instructing the commission to disregard the community benefits agreement, but instead reminding them it’s “not a component of the technical waterfront review.” The developers seek zoning variances to allow for wholesale storage facility operations on a once-industrial site located along the Christina River in Southbridge.

The Southbridge community for years has called on city leaders to include neighbors in redevelopment efforts along the Wilmington Riverfront, expressing frustration with being a dumping ground for pollutants and constantly being left out of the equation for economic development.

RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT: Hundreds of millions in tax dollars built Wilmington's Riverfront, was it worth it?

COMMUNITY INPUT: Southbridge residents call for equal investment in $100M Riverfront East plan

The neighborhood is one of Wilmington’s oldest and most historic communities, made up of largely lower-income, majority-Black residents who have long been afflicted with economic, environmental and social issues. The economic hardships of Southbridge have often been used by developers to get additional public dollars for redevelopment efforts.

Now, even a community-supported development proposal by Diamond Port Property LLC is facing backlash from Southbridge residents, underscoring a divide not only between Wilmington’s administration and its constituents but within the very community this controversial warehouse is being proposed.

Supporters’ perspective

New Castle-based Cirillo Bros. Inc. began working with Southbridge organizations and community leaders months prior to proposing a warehouse along the Christina River in 2022.

LATEST ON PROPOSAL: This project added housing to get Wilmington's support. Why it's still not approved

The project, initially proposed by the construction company’s limited liability company Diamond Port Property at 51 S. Heald St., aimed to build two warehouses on vacant land once the site of Diamond Oil.

The conversations ultimately led to a Community Benefits Agreement that promises significant cash investments to established Southbridge organizations; outlines efforts the developer will make to ensure the development doesn’t negatively impact neighbors; and opens the door for construction and warehouse jobs to be filled by local residents.

The agreement provides:

• $250,000 to the Southbridge Community Development Corp. for a housing trust fund for planned development in the neighborhood.

• $100,000 to the Henrietta Johnson Medical Center, Neighborhood House Inc. and the Southbridge Civic Association for overall community needs.

• $25,000 for workforce development and employment placement services for hiring Southbridge residents to the Eastside Career Development Center.

• Carve-outs for addressing water runoff from the construction site; handling truck traffic; installing privacy fencing; and ensuring local minority contract hiring, among other benefits.

Hanifa Shabazz, interim executive director of the Southbridge Community Development Corp; and former City Council president, said the warehouse proposal was the first time developers came to the community seeking a partnership.

The city does not keep a record of community benefit agreements struck in Wilmington neighborhoods, but Shabazz said there have been only a handful in the past, and few bore the benefits it promised.

“If the community doesn’t stay on top of the terms, then you don’t get the benefits. They’ve been done but we never got the benefits,” she said. “This time, we are more astute, and we do have an attorney who helped us write it and there is a coalition of stakeholders to make sure all the terms are met once the development is successful.”

But city planners last year opposed the project at the Southbridge waterfront property, which encompasses 1, 25 and 51 S. Heald and 0 Lobdell streets, because it doesn't align with development plans for the area nor the city’s waterfront design standards.

CITY OPPOSITION: Why did Wilmington surprise Southbridge residents, developers and oppose project?

Hoping to garner more support from the city, developers revised plans to remove one of the warehouses and instead offer affordable housing.

The project was before the Wilmington Planning Commission on Oct. 17, but action was postponed by the members so they could review developers’ arguments in support of the project moving forward.

The developer’s perspective

Attorneys representing Diamond Port Property say the department has failed to acknowledge the laws and facts surrounding the warehouse proposal while seemingly holding them to a higher standard than other developers.

Shawn Tucker, an attorney from Barnes & Thornburg LLP representing the developers, said in a letter responding to a Sept. 15 negative recommendation on the project by the planning department that the developers have “not been treated with fairness,” nor have they been treated equally under city law.

“Indeed, we located a number of other waterfront applications and related Planning Department Memorandums for W-4 zoned parcels that have not been held to the same level of scrutiny relating to design, waterfront recreational use, and the scope & sophistication of material required to meet the waterfront standards as applied by the department in its report for this project,” Tucker wrote.

Wilmington officials bristled at the suggestion that other projects may have been given leniency in the review and approval process.

“The Department of Land Use & Planning has given this project the same scrutiny that it gives any project, and the project is not consistent with the types of uses that have developed along A Street in the past decade,” said Jeff Starkey, director of Wilmington’s Land Use and Planning Department. “It would be appropriate to note that this is a larger project with a more intensive use than has ever come to the Department of Land Use & Planning.”

The city’s perspective

Wilmington’s planners have twice denied Diamond Port Property’s requests for zoning variances.

The city maintains that the proposal doesn’t align with waterfront view standards nor the neighborhood’s long-term vision for the area, and would negatively impact Southbridge residents as well as future and existing development.

“We are pro-business and are not opposed to the construction of warehouses,” Starkey said. “However, the proposed warehouse is not a permitted use in the W-4 district and is inconsistent with the economic development that has already taken place along A Street and the Christina River, and which has benefited the community.”

Starkey also pushed back on project supporters’ arguments that development plans for Southbridge potentially allow for this type of use.

“We also participated in the development of several of the Southbridge plans which clearly do not support this type of development,” he said.

Further, city officials stressed that the “technical review” that new development plans undergo isn’t influenced by public comment.

“This isn’t a matter of comparing votes for and against - it is not a popularity contest,” Starkey said. “This is a technical review process, and while public comment is solicited and appreciated, it does not impact the outcome of the independent review process.”

Opponents’ perspective

Adding another hurdle to the project, a petition submitted to the city on Sept. 25 and signed by about 50 Southbridge residents asked the city to postpone any decision on the project until another community meeting can be held for all impacted residents to weigh in on the plan.

“The public review process, particularly as it is linked to a project of this magnitude, is crucial to our community. Many were unaware of the vote that had taken place on the proposal of the development of the warehouse to include a housing development project,” the letter reads. “We believe that approval at this time should not be considered. We ask that another community meeting be held to have the consensus of all involved.”

The petition doesn’t mention the fact that the Wilmington Planning Department has been opposed to the project from the beginning.

While the project has been discussed at Southbridge Civic Association meetings held monthly at the Neighborhood House on B Street, the petitioners claim that the neighborhood group did not do enough to ensure all impacted residents were aware of the warehouse proposal.

The petitioners include some people who spoke in opposition to the project during a recent Wilmington Planning Commission meeting, too.

TAX BREAK CONTROVERSY: Tax breaks to lift impoverished Wilmington areas are being used to build luxury apartments

Some opposed the notion of a warehouse business in their community at all. Others took jabs at the community benefits agreement, dismissing any claims that it will benefit Southbridge residents and suggesting the organizations that stand to benefit from the agreement don’t help the community.

Thomas Jackson, who identified himself as a business owner and longtime Southbridge resident during the October planning commission meeting, said that after reviewing the agreement, he feels “it’s not in the best interest of the community.”

“In the agreement about creating jobs for the community, it stated that jobs for the community would be on a good faith basis,” Jackson said. “We don’t think that’s acceptable. If somebody is going to build something in our backyard, we should have first access.”

The Wilmington Planning Commission meets every third Tuesday of the month, and is slated to meet again Nov. 21. The project could be on the agenda at that time, but plans for the upcoming meeting have yet to be released.

Got a tip? Contact Amanda Fries at afries@delawareonline.com, or by calling or texting 302-598-5507. Follow her on X at @mandy_fries.

This article originally appeared on Delaware News Journal: How a Wilmington warehouse proposal divided residents, city leaders