REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
The Regular Council Meeting was held on March 9, 1998 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Christiansen presiding. Council members present were Mr. Lambert, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Leary, Mr. Truitt, Mr. Carey and Mrs. Malone. Mr. Salters and Mr. Weller were absent.
Council staff members present were Major Hirt, Mr. Lucas, Mr. O'Connor, Mr. DePrima, Chief Carey, Mrs. Boaman and Mr. Rodriguez.
OPEN FORUM
The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Christiansen declared the open forum in session and reminded those present that Council is not in official session and cannot take formal action.
There was no one present wishing to speak during the Open Forum.
The invocation was given by Reverend William Fitzhugh, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. Leary moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 1998
The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of February 23, 1998 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Truitt, seconded by Mr. Leary and bore the written approval of Mayor Hutchison.
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1207, 1209, 1211, 1213, 1215 AND 1217 COLLEGE PARK DRIVE
A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider rezoning of property located at 1207, 1209, 1211, 1213, 1215 and 1217 College Park Drive, owned by Bay Developers, Inc.
Planner's Review
The present zoning is IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing) which permits manufacturing, research and design laboratories, printing, warehousing, and trucking terminals, public utility uses, administrative offices, banks, and retail and service commercial under limited conditions on 2.5 acre lots.
The proposed zoning is CPO (Commercial/Professional Office) which permits (on 10,000 SF. lots) offices, financial institutions, service agencies, medical and dental offices, and conditionally permits accessory laboratory, retail, and business services in office complexes, drive-in facilities, and residential uses. Generally these districts should promote superior development, prevent offices in mature residential neighborhoods, and serve as a transition area between low, medium, and high intensity development.
The parcel is the vacant middle section of College Business Park and the proposed use is for Office Buildings.
This petition was considered at the February 16, 1998 meeting of the Planning Commission and the Commission recommended approval of the rezoning. In taking this position the Commission considered the following points:
Surrounding Land Uses: To the immediate south of this section of College Business Park is the front section of the park that is zoned CPO; to the west is the North Dover Elementary School, zoned I/O; and to the north is the rear section of College Business Park zoned M (Manufacturing). To the east and across the Conrail Track of this parcel is vacant industrial land zoned IL (Light Industrial) in Kent County.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan recognized the existence of College Business Park as a mixed use industrial park by showing this area for industrial uses. The expansion of the amount of area designated for office would not be contrary to the plan in that in our industrial zone office uses are permitted.
Other Considerations: This rezoning is a lateral rezoning where the permitted uses are not changing, but the bulk standards for the buildings do change. The principal reason for the rezoning is so that office buildings could be constructed on 10,000 SF lots, instead of the 2.5 acre lots required in the IPM zone. As required under the CPO zoning regulations a conceptual site plan for the land has been provided. This plan reflects a typical office park and is in keeping with the smaller buildings being attracted to this building.
It was noted that the lot lines on the concept plan do not reflect the lot lines as recorded with the City. Accurate parcel information will have to be provided with any future development of this area.
Public Hearing
Council President Christiansen declared the hearing open.
Mr. William Byler, Jr., consultant for the project, relayed his support for the project and offered to answer any questions on the proposal. Members of Council had no questions on the proposed rezoning.
Council President Christiansen declared the hearing closed.
Mr. Leary moved for approval of the rezoning request as recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Malone and by a roll call vote of seven (7) yes, two (2) absent (Mr. Salters and Mr. Weller), Council adopted the following ordinance: (The first reading of this ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of January 26, 1998.)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 1207, 1209, 1211, 1213, 1215 AND 1217 COLLEGE PARK DRIVE.
WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property within the limits of the City of Dover; and
WHEREAS, it is deemed in the best interest of zoning and planning to change the permitted use of properties described below from IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing) to CPO (Commercial/Professional Office).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1. That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Dover has been amended by changing the zoning designation from IPM to CPO for properties located at 1207, 1209, 1211, 1213, 1215 and 1217 College Park Drive, owned by Bay Developers, Inc.
ADOPTED: March 9, 1998
LEGISLATIVE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT
The Legislative and Finance Committee met on February 23, 1997 with Chairman Salters presiding. In the absence of Chairman Salters, the committee report was presented by Councilman Leary.
Request for Tax Abatement - Dover Housing Development, Inc. - 30 S. New Street
During their meeting of July 14, 1997, members of City Council denied the request of Mr. Dave Buches for tax abatement for the Dover Housing Development, Inc. for the New Hope Housing property (formerly Kent Apartments) located at 30 S. New Street. However, noting the absence of Mr. Buches, it was stipulated that the committee would entertain further discussion on the matter if requested by Mr. Buches.
Mr. Salters indicated that over the past year, tremendous progress has been made to the property at 30 S. New Street. He stated that Mr. Buches is requesting tax relief to free-up monies to use for the renovation of 30 S. New Street.
Mr. Leary stated that in accordance with the City’s past practices, relief of taxes has been granted for charitable or educational endeavors or in accordance with the City Code. It appears that the project for the New Hope Housing property does not fall under any of the categories. He relayed concern that the motion would be making an exception and suggested that a legal opinion be obtained to determine if the Dover Housing Development, Inc. could apply for tax exemption in accordance with §8105 of the Delaware Code or if there is any other means the City could use to grant a tax abatement.
Mr. Buches stated that the Dover Housing Development, Inc. is a non-profit, tax exempt organization under the laws of the State of Delaware and meets all the requirements of a charitable organization.
Mr. Salters stated that Mr. Buches has taken the initiative to revitalize the property at 30 S. New Street and has promised to do the same for property located at 134 S. New Street. He stated that he plans to replace the old frontage of the building and rehabilitate the entire unit for property located at 134 S. New Street.
Responding to Mrs. Malone, Mr. DePrima stated that Mr. Buches would not be able to apply for funding from Community Development Block Grant monies in lieu of taxes and that Mr. Buches has already received $138,000 CDBG monies for the revitalization of property located at 30 S. New Street.
Mrs. Malone relayed her concern that approval of the request for tax abatement would be precedent setting for other similar properties. Mr. Weller asked if the property would qualify for historic district tax incentives. Responding, Mr. Buches stated that he was not sure how the City’s taxes would apply to historical structures; however, federal tax credits could be applied. He stated that federal tax credits would only be applied in conjunction with capital improvements of the building. He stated that he received $138,000 from CDBG monies, which was strictly for capital improvements and that the tax abatement would only relate to ongoing operations of the building.
Mr. Pitts relayed to members that prior to the renovations of the building, the fire and police departments would be dispatched to the area several times a month. He stated that the neighborhood finally seems at peace, partially due to the improvements that have been made to the area, and he felt that the request for a one year abatement of taxes was reasonable.
Mr. Leary reminded members that this issue was first brought to the Assessment Appeals Committee; however, since the request was for tax abatement rather than an appeal of a tax assessment, the City Solicitor suggested that the matter be considered by the Legislative and Finance Committee. Mr. Leary questioned the guidelines of the State’s statute regarding this type of request and requested that the City Assessor supply this information in the future.
Mr. Lucas stated that Mr. Buches is requesting tax relief for a one year period rather than a tax exemption, which would allow him additional flexibility on the initial operation and stabilization of the building at 30 S. New Street.
The committee recommended that action on this request be tabled pending a legal opinion from the City Solicitor.
Utilizing the consent agenda format, Mr. Leary moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mrs. Malone and unanimously carried.
Proposed Planned Neighborhood (Senior Housing Option) - Westminster Village - Assisted Living Community
Presbyterian Homes, Inc. is proposing three major additions to the Westminster Village Complex to include an 18-unit apartment building, a 48,854 sq. ft. Assisted Living Facility, and a 20,000 sq. ft. addition that links the Community Center with the Health Center. Mr. DePrima stated that the developers are seeking approval under the new “Planned Neighborhood Design Senior Citizen Housing Option” ordinance which was recently adopted by City Council.
Mr. DePrima explained that the Planned Neighborhood Design Option involves a three-step review and approval process. In the first step, the developer shall meet with the City Council and present a general sketch plan. The City Council shall determine whether the proposed project is of such a design and type that it warrants further review by the Planning Commission. The second step is a more detailed conditional use hearing before the Planning Commission. For this particular proposal, the Planning Commission will most likely conduct steps two and three in one conditional use/site plan hearing.
The “Senior Housing Option” was intended to encourage housing for senior citizens by allowing senior housing in nearly all zones through the “conditional use” process. The features of this proposal are as follows:
1. Active Recreation Space -- 2.29 acres of active recreation area already exists within the development. Recreation details have not been provided but the project will be required to meet the age oriented recreation activities standards within the ordinance.
2. Density -- The project currently proposes 72 new beds in the assisted living facility and 18 new apartments. These additions will bring the total dwelling units of the development to 140 dwelling units, and 182 beds in the nursing home and assisted living facility. The development has 24.9 acres total.
3. Unit Mix -- The development currently has apartments, duplexes, and a nursing home. These additions will bring a new assisted living facility to the complex.
Mr. Salters asked if a traffic impact study had been conducted on the area with the addition of senior citizen housing. Responding, Mr. DePrima stated that senior housing complexes do not normally impact traffic because the majority of the residents no longer drive. He stated that if a traffic impact study is needed, the Planning Commission would certainly request that information.
The committee recommended that the proposed Assisted Living Facility - Westminster Village, be referred to the Planning Commission for further review.
Mr. Leary moved for approval of the recommendation of the committee, seconded by Mrs. Malone and unanimously carried.
Mr. Leary moved for acceptance of the Legislative and Finance Committee Report, seconded by Mrs. Malone and unanimously carried.
SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT
The Safety Advisory Committee met on February 23, 1998 with Chairman Truitt presiding.
Proposed Traffic Light - Intersection of Route #8 and Mifflin Road
A letter was received from the Mifflin Road Neighborhood Association expressing their support for a traffic signal at the intersection of Route #8 and Mifflin Road. The Association indicated in their letter that the need for better traffic control at this intersection is imperative and requested that this matter be reviewed by the Safety Advisory Committee. It was also suggested that the traffic signal be synchronized with the traffic light at Dover Kenton Road.
It was noted that a petition was received from residents of Mifflin Road requesting City Council to urge the Department of Transportation to install a traffic control signal at the intersection of Route #8 and Mifflin Road.
Mr. O’Connor stated that funding for the installation of the traffic light is available through the Department of Transportation, which was obtained from developers in the general area. He relayed, however, that even if such a request is submitted to the Department of Transportation, there is no guarantee that the request will be initiated. He stated that the Planning Commission has made it known on several occasions that because of recent development in that area, a signal light is necessary at that intersection. Mr. O’Connor stated that in order to fulfill this request, it should be relayed to the Department of Transportation that the City endorses the concept.
Mr. Weller stated that a representative of Cannon Mill has also requested that a letter be prepared from the City of Dover to the Department of Transportation endorsing the concept. Mr. Weller indicated that, as Chairman of the Transportation Review Committee, he would write a letter to the Department of Transportation informing them that the City of Dover endorses the concept of a traffic light being installed at Route #8 and Mifflin Road.
The committee recommended that a letter be written to the Department of Transportation from the City of Dover requesting that a traffic light be installed at the intersection of Route #8 and Mifflin Road and that the light be synchronized with the light at the intersection of Kenton Road. Mr. Leary requested that a draft of the letter be submitted at the next Council meeting for approval. Mr. Truitt noted that a draft letter was attached to the committee minutes.
Mr. Lambert stated that this matter was also discussed during the Utility Committee held just prior to the Council Meeting. He reminded members that Mrs. Ornauer requested that the draft letter be amended to include a request for traffic calming devices. Some members of Council were hesitant to make such a request without first knowing what types of devices would be used. Council President Christiansen suggested that in addition to requesting the traffic signal, that the City request that DelDOT keep the City and the Mifflin Road Civic Association apprised of any future traffic patterns that may be addressed.
Mr. Carey requested that the letter also include a request for the installation of an Opticum device for use by emergency vehicles.
Mr. Truitt moved for approval of the draft letter, to include the above suggestions by Council President Christiansen and Mr. Carey, with the letter to come under the signatures of Mayor Hutchison and Council President Christiansen. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
Proposed Pedestrian/Traffic Light - Forrest Street (in front of West Dover Elementary School)
During their Committee Meeting of July 22, 1996, members considered a request from several residents living near the West Dover Elementary School, requesting consideration of the installation of a control device to allow for pedestrian crossing at the school’s traffic signal located on Forrest Street. Although there is a crossing guard at this location before and after school, their main concern is that during other times of the day, there is no crossing guard available for children to cross the street safely. Since Forrest Street is a State maintained roadway, Mr. Salters requested that the Safety Advisory Committee review the matter for endorsement and recommendation to the State of Delaware, Department of Transportation.
Mr. O’Connor stated that in a letter to Mr. Bruce Littleton, Chief Traffic Engineer for the Department of Transportation, he indicated that the pedestrian crossing at Forrest Street is of concern to the City of Dover. He stated that the City has been told by area residents, and as indicated by the City’s traffic enforcement in this area, that there is the potential for a major safety problem. It was suggested that the light be moved to the intersection of Forrest Street and Gibbs Drive as the safest solution.
Mr. O’Connor stated that he has had discussions with the superintendent of Capital School District and the principal of William Henry Middle School on this issue and both have indicated that they have no objections to the movement of the light, as long as it continues to have actuation by the crossing guard for the students going to and from school. It was indicated by the Department of Transportation in a previous letter that the relocation cost of $42,000 would be needed to accomplish this task.
Mr. O’Connor stated that Mr. Littleton indicated that if a letter of support is written from City Council and the Capital School District, the only concern would be obtaining the funds ($42,000) for installation of the light. Mr. O’Connor stated that these funds could possibly be obtained from our state legislators.
Ms. Penny Barkley, Transportation Supervisor for the Capital School District, relayed to members that the Capital School District is very much in favor of the movement of the light and suggested that a pedestrian push button be installed to allow students a safe crossing area outside of normal school hours. Ms. Barkley stated that the Capital School District provides training for the students regarding pedestrian safety.
Mr. O’Connor stated that a letter to the Department of Transportation was written in August 1997 regarding these concerns but DelDOT has taken no action to date. He will follow-up on that letter and will also inform the Department of Transportation that the Capital School District supports these efforts. Ms. Barkley will have a letter of support sent to the Department of Transportation from the Capital School District as well.
Mayor Hutchison requested that, in the future, any safety related issues be referred to the Chief of Police for a recommendation prior to the committee’s consideration.
The committee recommended that the City Manager be authorized to write a letter to the Department of Transportation as a follow-up on a previous letter in support of the signalization change.
It was noted that the City Manager has written the letter as directed. No further action was taken by Council. Asked by Mrs. Malone if the letter from the Capital School District was enclosed with the City’s letter, Mr. O’Connor stated that it was not and that the letter has not yet been received from the Capital School District.
Mr. Truitt moved for acceptance of the Safety Advisory Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
1997 Annual Report - Inspections and Planning
Mr. Carey stated that the Inspections and Planning Report was well prepared and that it looks like the departments were very busy. Other members of Council concurred and conveyed appreciation to Mr. DePrima and his staff.
Mr. Leary moved for acceptance of the 1997 Annual Report for the Inspections and Planning Departments, seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
Confirmation of Police Pension Election - Captain J. Robert Mays
The term of office on the Police Pension Board of Captain J. Robert Mays expired on January 31, 1998. Pursuant to Section 18-47(2)(b) of the Pension Plan, notice of an election was given to all plan members. Only one nomination was received, therefore no election was held. Chief Faulkner nominated Captain J. Robert Mays to serve another three year term, to expire on January 31, 2001.
Mr. Leary moved to confirm the nomination of Captain J. Robert Mays to serve a three year term on the Police Pension Board, to expire January 31, 2001, seconded by Mrs. Malone and carried.
Mr. Leary moved to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 8:00 P.M.
DEBRAH J. BOAMAN
CITY CLERK
All orders, ordinances and resolutions adopted by City Council during their meeting of March 9, 1998, are hereby approved.
JAMES L. HUTCHISON
MAYOR
/DJB