Packet

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA July 11, 2005 - 7:30 P.M. - Council Chambers - City Hall - City of Dover OPEN FORUM - 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO OFFICIAL MEETING (7:15 P.M.) INVOCATION BY CHAPLAIN WALLACE DIXON PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS * CONSENT AGENDA Those items on the Council Agenda which are considered routine and non-controversial shall be marked with an asterisk (*) and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of Council so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered a separate item. * 1. Adoption of Minutes - Regular Council Meeting of June 27, 2005 2. Presentations - Recognition of Services A. Francis Winsley - Planning Commission (June 2001 through June 2005) B. Carol Young - Planning Commission (May 2004 through May 2005) C. David Anderson - Parks, Recreation and Community Enhancement Committee (May 2004 through May 2005) 3. Lutheran Senior Services of Dover, Inc. - Contribution in Lieu of Taxes 4. Public Hearing/Final Reading - Rezoning Property located at 834 W. North Street, owned by Eden Hill Farm, Inc. and the State of Delaware (equitable owners: Investment Properties Associates, L.L.C. and Dover Medical Properties, L.L.C.). The property is currently zoned IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing) and A (Agriculture) and the proposed zoning is TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design) The First Reading of the proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of May 23, 2005. * 5. Utility Committee Report - June 27, 2005 A. Street Waiver Request (Length of Cul-de-Sac Street) - Somerset Park Subdivision B. Annexation Requests b-1. Property Located on the Northwest Corner of Kenton Road and Fox Hall Drive, owned by Clifton and Marie Hutton (Adoption of Resolution Setting Annexation Referendum for August 11, 2005 - See Item #9A) b-2. Property Located at 80 Nixon Lane, owned by Traci A. McDowell and Craig L. Gahm (Adoption of Resolution Setting Annexation Referendum for August 11, 2005 - See Item #9B) C. Staff Report - Alternative Fuels

Council Agenda July 11, 2005 Page 2 * 6. Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee Report - June 28, 2005 A. Consideration of Proposed Ordinance Amendment - Chapter 13, Motor Vehicles and Traffic - Section 13-30.2, Vehicle Parking Limited Where Carrying Capacity is in Excess of One Ton, and Trailer and Motor Home Parking (See Item #10-A) 7. Evaluation of Bid - Electric Pole Testing Contract * 8. Appointment of Planning Commission 4th District Representative - Charles Benton (To Fill Unexpired Term of Carol Young - Term to Expire June 2007) - Mayor Speed 9. Annexation Rezoning Requests - First Readings (Recommended for referral to the Planning Commission on July 18, 2005 and that a Public Hearing be set for August 22, 2005 at 7:30 p.m.) A. Properties located on the northwest corner of Kenton Road and Fox Hall Drive and on the south side of Fox Hall Drive adjacent to Kenton Road, owned by Clifton and Marie Hutton. The present zoning classification is RS-1 - Single Family Residential (Kent County) and the proposed zoning classification is RG-3 - Group Housing (City of Dover) B. Property located at 80 Nixon Lane, owned by Traci A. McDowell and Craig L. Gahm. The present zoning classification is RS-1 - Single Family Residential (Kent County) and the proposed zoning classification is R-8 - One Family Residential (City of Dover) 10. First Reading - Proposed Ordinance The First Reading is offered on the following proposed ordinance. Final action by Council will take place during the Second Reading of the ordinance on July 25, 2005. Copies of all proposed ordinances are available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or can be obtained from the City Clerk's Office. A. Chapter 13 - Motor Vehicles and Traffic, Division I - Generally, Sec. 13-30.2. Vehicle Parking Limited Where Carrying Capacity is in Excess of One Ton, and Trailer and Motor Home Parking (Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee) 11. Council Members Comments /jg S:\ClerksOffice\Agendas&Minutes\Council-Agendas\2005\07-11-2005.wpd THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Regular Council Meeting was held on June 27, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Williams presiding. Council members present were Mr. Carey, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Sadusky, Mr. Slavin, Mr. Ritter, Mr. Hogan, and Mr. Salters. Mr. Ruane was absent. Council staff members present were Police Chief Horvath, Ms. Russell, Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. Galvin, Fire Chief Bashista, Mr. DePrima, City Solicitor Rodriguez, Mrs. Green, and Mayor Speed. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Williams declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council is not in official session and cannot take formal action. Mr. Richard Snyder (Newark, Delaware), noting that he had previously addressed members regarding concerns of toxic waste being distributed on the banks of the Delaware River by the DuPont Company, submitted additional resolutions adopted by other municipalities (Newark and Smyrna) and again requested that the City of Dover consider the same. Mr. Eric O’Brien, 30 N. New Street, continued statements that began during the Open Forum Segment of the Regular Council Meeting of June 13, 2005 regarding problems of loitering, loud music, and other quality of life issues that continue in his neighborhood. Written documentation was submitted and is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. The invocation was given by Chaplain Dixon, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Carey moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried. Mr. Carey moved for approval of the consent agenda, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent). ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of June 13, 2005 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Carey, seconded by Mr. Salters and bore the written approval of Mayor Speed. CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION - JOHN J. FRIEDMAN - 2005 SMALL BUSINESS PERSON OF THE YEAR Mayor Speed read and presented a Certificate of Recognition to Mr. John J. Friedman, as follows: WHEREAS, the City of Dover realizes the important role small businesses play in maintaining and improving the economic health of our community and that a successful business is evidence of the independence, initiative, and hard work of the owners; and WHEREAS, the Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce engages in activities to assist small business persons and each year, nominates small business persons as examples of the quality of the business persons in Central Delaware; and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 2 WHEREAS, this year, the Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce has named John J. Friedman as the 2005 Small Business Person of the Year in recognition of the growth and innovation of his business, as well as for his community contributions; and WHEREAS, John J. Friedman currently serves as the Chairman of the City of Dover Planning Commission, President of the Dover 4th of July Committee, Chairman of the Community Partners of the Air Force Association, serves on the Board of Directors for the Dover Cultural Commission, and is the Vice President of the Economic Development Division for the Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce; and WHEREAS, in recognition of his distinguished service to City of Dover, it is deemed an honor and privilege to present this Certificate of Recognition to JOHN J. FRIEDMAN 2005 Small Business Person of the Year Congratulations from the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover June 2005 Mr. Friedman thanked the Mayor and members of Council for the recognition and noted that his success has been the result of a team effort. PROPERTY ASSESSMENT APPEALS REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING As indicated during their Regular Meeting of June 13, 2005, the Property Assessment Appeals Committee extended hearings through June 17, 2005; therefore, additional recommendations of the committee would be forthcoming. Members were provided with the Property Assessment Appeals Report for the Hearings from May 16, 2005 through June 17, 2005. Council President Williams reminded members that during their Regular Meeting of June 13, 2005, Council approved Rules for the Tax Appeals Hearings to be held before City Council at this time and place. Those appellants who have gone before the Board of Tax Appeals and wish to present further information and appeal to the City Council may do so by submitting to the City Clerk by 12:00 noon on June 22, 2005 a written summary of why they are appealing to City Council and a certified appraisal not more than 30 days old, which was not considered by the Board of Tax Appeals. The City Clerk reported that no one has come forth requesting to appeal to City Council; therefore, Council President Williams stated that a public hearing would not be necessary. Mr. Salters moved for approval of the adjusted property values as recommended by the Property Assessment Appeals Committee for the purposes of incorporating the adjustments and exemptions into the City’s Tax Rolls (Exhibit #1). The motion was seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 3 LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - JUNE 13, 2005 The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on June 13, 2005 with Chairman Salters presiding. Voluntary Donation Program Members were provided detailed information regarding Voluntary Donation Programs. Mrs. Tieman, Director of Administrative Services, explained that staff conducted research on these programs as a part of their strategic goals. She noted that a Voluntary Donation Program can give the Dover community the opportunity to help make a positive impact on the City’s Quality of Life Task Force initiative. The program is designed to provide emergency assistance funds to groups in crisis situations or for other community projects. The most effective way to offer and encourage participation is through the monthly utility bill, whereby customers may find this to be a convenient, pressure-free method of contributing at will. Customers, upon remittance of the monthly utility payment, would check off a donation box appropriate to the additional contribution they wish to enclose. These programs are successful and widely implemented with municipalities and businesses across the country. Based on their research, staff suggested that the City develop such a program to be known as “Dover Cares Contribution Program” and that the method for its development include changes to the utility bill form to include donation box information by changing the order with the printer, which appears to be the easiest and least costly way to proceed with this program. Mrs. Tieman stated that the steps necessary to accomplish this are minimal. She explained that customers would be sent information regarding donation programs once per year. New customers would receive this information when they initiate service. Customers would have the option of simply checking the desired donation box(es) and add amount to total of utility payments throughout the year. During the committee meeting, Mrs. Tieman advised members that staff would like the contributions to be distributed among the following funds and agencies: Utility Assistance - Administrative Services; Parks Improvement and Programs - Parks and Recreation; Library Programs - Library and Arts Program-Arts Council. Staff recommended that the Administrative Services Department be permitted to implement the program as recommended in the report provided. The committee recommended acceptance of the concept of the Voluntary Donation Program as outlined by staff and that staff report back to members more details regarding the program. By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent). By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent). PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - JUNE 14, 2005 The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee met on June 14, 2005 with Chairman Sadusky presiding.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 4 Neighborhood Open Space - Somerset Park Subdivision: Request for Cash-in-Lieu of Recreation Area Construction Members considered a request for cash-in-lieu of recreation area construction for the Somerset Park Subdivision, which proposes a total of 14 residential units on 12.5733+/- acres. In accordance with Article 5, Section 10, Subsection 10.17 of the Zoning Code, if the commission determines that the construction of recreation is not practical due to close proximity to existing available recreation facilities or infeasible due to natural characteristics of the land or will not benefit the residents of the development, the commission shall require a full or partial cash in lieu of areas of donation to be made by the developer in lieu of a full or partial dedication of land. Also, in accordance with Article 5, Section 10, Subsection 10.173, the cash donation shall be equivalent to the appraised value of land area required in Section 10.16 of the Zoning Code. For the Somerset Park Subdivision, the cash donation based on the submitted appraised raw land value is $38,573.80 per acre. For the .5 acres of land that is required for this area, the amount of cash donation is $19,286.90 Staff provided the following review of the request for cash-in-lieu of recreation area construction. A recommendation is also provided regarding the other proposed open space areas (woodland, wetland, and stormwater facilities): 1. Staff recommended approval of a cash donation of $19,286.90 in lieu of recreation area construction. 2. The applicant should be aware of the requirements for payment of the cash in lieu of recreation area construction as associated with the development of the residential units. Article 5 §10.175 Payment of Cash Donation. One hundred (100) percent cash donation provided under this section shall be collected prior to issuing the first building permit for the development . 3. There shall be provisions which insure that the common open space land shall continue as such and be properly managed and maintained. These provisions shall be in a form acceptable to the City of Dover. The developer shall either retain ownership and responsibility for maintenance of such open land; or provide for and establish one (1) or more organizations for the ownership and maintenance of all common open space i.e. a Homeowners Association. The organization shall be responsible for maintenance, insurance and taxes on the common open space. The committee recommended approval of the Neighborhood Open Space - Somerset Park Subdivision: Request for cash-in-lieu of recreation area construction, as well as the staff recommendations contained in the report on the basis that it is infeasible due to natural characteristics of the land as stated in the Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix B, Article 5, Section 10.171. By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved to approve the committee’s recommendation for approval of a cash donation in the amount of $19,286.90 in lieu of recreation area construction for the Somerset Park Subdivision. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 5 The committee also recommended that the Department of Planning and Inspections procedurally incorporate into their review an opportunity for the City Assessor’s Office to look at any appraisals that are submitted for the purpose of cash-in-lieu. By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation and directed the Department of Planning and Inspections to incorporate into their procedural review an opportunity for the City Assessor’s Office to look at any appraisals that are submitted for the purpose of cash-in-lieu. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent). By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for acceptance of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent). MONTHLY REPORTS - MAY 2005 By motion of Mr. Carey, seconded by Mr. Salters, the following monthly reports were accepted by consent agenda: Budget Report Chief of Police Report City Clerk/Alderman Report (Fines) City Manager's Report Mayor's Report Planning and Inspections Report Robbins Hose Company No. 1 Report EVALUATION OF BID - AUTOMATED SUMMONS PROCESSING SYSTEM UPGRADE The Police Department is in the process of upgrading and replacing the program that is currently used for processing summons violations. This system processes and tracks all City ordinance violations, including parking tickets, alarms, inspections, and others. It was noted that the current system was programmed by Enforcement Technology, Inc. and that the upgrade would be sole sourced to maintain interoperability. Staff recommended approval of the following purchases: Component Vendor Status Cost AutoProcess software Enforcement Tech. Sole Vendor $46,300 AutoCite software & hardware Enforcement Tech. Sole Vendor 10,080 Server Dell State Contract 4,500 Oracle database server software Insight State Contract 1,470 Total $62,350 Funding from two (2) grant sources has been obtained for this purchase: State Law Enforcement Assistance Fund (SLEAF), in the amount of $50,000; and Local Law Enforcement Grant (LLEBG), in the amount of $12,350.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 6 Mr. Carey moved for approval of the automated summons processing system upgrade as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent). EVALUATION OF BID - AMENDMENT TO BASIC LIFE SUPPORT CONTRACT Members were advised that, in accordance with Section I, Definitions, and Section IX, Personnel, of the current three-year basic life support contract with PrimeCare (dated June 2003), ambulances providing services to the City must be staffed by two (2) NREMT-Bs. A letter has been received from Mr. Larry Bradley, CEO of PrimeCare Medical Transport, LLC, requesting that the contract be amended to allow for EMT-Bs rather than NREMT-Bs. He explained that the State of Delaware does not require EMT-B’s to keep their “NR” (Nationally Registered) after the first two (2) years. Mr. DePrima, City Manager, explained that the amendment would enable all qualified EMT-Bs employed by PrimeCare to provide services to the City of Dover rather than just those who are nationally registered and that the contract would be equivalent to the guidelines of the State of Delaware and the Fire Commission. Staff recommended approval of the amendment to the contract with PrimeCare as requested. Mr. Hogan moved for approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Salters. Responding to Mr. Ritter, Mr. Carey explained that 36 hours of training are required for Delaware Certification and 72 hours of training are required for National Registration. Mr. Salters relayed concerns, feeling that the City may be lowering their standards. It was Mr. Carey’s opinion that as long as the EMT-Bs had originally been “NREMT-Bs” (Nationally Registered), and continue to obtain Delaware Certification, the City would continue to receive quality care and services. Mr. Carey moved to amend the amendment to the contract by stipulating that the EMT-Bs must have been “NREMT-Bs” (Nationally Registered) before being accepted as “EMT’Bs”. The motion was seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried with Mr. Salters not voting. The motion to approve the amendment to the Basic Life Support Contract with PrimeCare, as amended, was carried by a roll call vote of seven (7) yes, one (1) abstention (Mr. Salters), and one (1) absent (Mr. Ruane). CONTRACT RENEWAL WITH DELAWARE PARENT ASSOCIATION TO IMPLEMENT CREATING LASTING FAMILY CONNECTIONS PROGRAM The City of Dover’s Delaware Prevention Network Program (DPN), which has been in existence for 15 years, is administered by the State of Delaware Department of Services for Children, Youth and Their Families, Office of Prevention and Early Intervention. The DPN Program is a specific science-based program known as Creating Lasting Family Connection (CLFC), which is a comprehensive family strengthening, substance abuse, and violence prevention curriculum that has scientifically demonstrated that youth and families in high-risk environments can be assisted to become strong, healthy, and supportive people. The CLFC will serve 15 to 20 youth and their families over a 20-week period allowing two (2) sessions during the contract year. The City contracted with the Delaware Parents Association to implement this program during the past two (2) years, and it has done an outstanding job.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 7 Staff recommended approval of the contract with the Delaware Parents Association for program implementation at a cost not to exceed $67,000 for a period of July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006, with an amount of $3,000 allotted for administrative costs. Funding, in the amount of $70,000, will be provided by the State of Delaware Department of Services for Children, Youth and Their Families, Office of Prevention and Early Intervention. Mr. Salters moved for approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Pitts and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent). REAPPOINTMENTS - PLANNING COMMISSION (3 YEAR TERMS TO EXPIRE JUNE 1, 2008) - MAYOR SPEED Mayor Speed requested the following reappointments to the Planning Commission for a three (3) year term to expire June 1, 2008: Mr. Francis C. Nichols (First District) Ret. Col. Robert D. Welsh (Second District) Mr. Fred Tolbert (Third District) By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the reappointments to the Planning Commission as recommended by Mayor Speed, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent). REAPPOINTMENT - SILVER LAKE COMMISSION (ANNUAL APPOINTMENT; TERM TO EXPIRE MAY 2006) - MAYOR SPEED Mayor Speed requested the reappointment of Ms. Cheryl Biddle to the Silver Lake Commission for a term to expire May 2006. By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the reappointment of Ms. Biddle to the Silver Lake Commission as recommended by Mayor Speed, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent). REZONING REQUEST/FIRST READING - 487 S. QUEEN STREET, OWNED BY MICHAEL SANCHEZ A request was received to rezone property located at 487 S. Queen Street, owned by Michael Sanchez. The property is currently zoned C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) and the requested zoning is C1-A (Limited Commercial). Prior to amending the zoning ordinances and zoning map of the City of Dover, a public hearing is required. Mr. Carey moved to refer the request to the Planning Commission on July 18, 2005 and set a public hearing before City Council for August 8, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. as suggested by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Pitts and unanimously carried. In accordance with Section 1-6 of the Dover Code, Council acknowledged the First Reading of the Zoning Ordinance Amendments as read by the City Clerk, by title only, as follows: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 487 SOUTH QUEEN STREET.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 8 FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCES The First Reading of the following proposed ordinances was accomplished during the Council Meeting of June 13, 2005. Mr. Hogan moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinances be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried. Notification of Tax Rate Increase Over the Rolled Back Tax Rate [Required in accordance with 22 Delaware Code Section 1105(b)] Mr. DePrima advised members that as a result of the Tax Appeal Hearings and the Property Tax Exemption for Senior Citizens, the revenues originally projected for the 2005/2006 Budget were low. He recommended that the proposed ordinance be amended to reduce the tax rate by .01¢, which would also result in the rolled-back tax rate to be 9.65%, by amending the last paragraph as follows: striking $.34 and inserting in lieu thereof $.33 and striking 9.68% and inserting in lieu thereof 9.65%. Mr. Slavin moved for adoption of the Notification of Tax Rate Increase Over the Rolled Back Tax Rate, as amended, seconded by Mr. Sadusky. Mr. Hogan reiterated his feeling that although the budget was well prepared, it contained some items that were wanted and not necessarily needed, and; therefore, expenditures could have been further reduced. Mr. Ritter moved to amend the ordinance to maintain the current tax rate, by striking $.34 and inserting in lieu thereof $.31. The motion failed for the lack of a second. The motion for adoption of the following ordinance was carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes, two (2) no (Mr. Ritter and Mr. Hogan) and one (1) absent (Mr. Ruane): Budget Ordinances - 2004/2005 Revised and 2005/2006 City of Dover Budget Mr. Hogan moved for adoption of the 2004/2005 Revised and 2005/2006 City of Dover Budget Ordinances (Exhibit #2), seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by roll call vote of seven (7) yes, one (1) no (Mr. Ritter) and one (1) absent (Mr. Ruane). Downtown Dover Business Improvement District - Cash Receipts/Budget FY 2005-2006 Mr. Carey moved for adoption of the Downtown Dover Business Improvement District Budget for FY 2005-2006, seconded by Mr. Salters and by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent), Council adopted the following ordinance: DOWNTOWN DOVER BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT CASH RECEIPTS BUDGET FOR 2005-06 BID TAX REVENUE AND EXPENSES CHARGED AGAINST THIS REVENUE ADMINISTERED THROUGH MAIN STREET, INC. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 9 1. The amount hereinafter named aggregating Fifty thousand, two hundred and sixty-five dollars ($50,265) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by the City of Dover/Main Street, Inc. for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2005, and ending June 30, 2006: REVENUE PROPOSED Tax Revenue $50,265 EXPENSES Salary and Personnel Costs $50,265 ADOPTED: JUNE 27, 2005 Recodification Ordinance - City of Dover Code of Ordinances Mr. Salters moved for adoption of the Recodification Ordinance, seconded by Mr. Hogan, and by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Ruane absent), Council adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AND ENACTING A NEW CODE FOR THE CITY OF DOVER DELAWARE; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CERTAIN ORDINANCES NOT INCLUDED THEREIN; PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE MANNER OF AMENDING SUCH CODE; AND PROVIDING WHEN SUCH CODE AND THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER IN COUNCIL MET: Section 1. The Code entitled "Code of Ordinances, City of Dover, Delaware," published by Municipal Code Corporation, consisting of chapters 1 through 118, each inclusive, is adopted. Section 2. All ordinances of a general and permanent nature enacted on or before March 14, 2005, and not included in the Code or recognized and continued in force by reference therein, are repealed. Section 3. The repeal provided for in section 2 hereof shall not be construed to revive any ordinance or part thereof that has been repealed by a subsequent ordinance that is repealed by this ordinance. Section 4. Unless another penalty is expressly provided, every person convicted of a violation of any provision of the Code or any ordinance of the city shall be punished by a fine of not less than $25.00 nor more than $1,000.00. Each act of violation and each day upon which any such violation shall continue or occur shall constitute a separate offense. The penalty provided by this section, unless another penalty is expressly provided, shall apply to the amendment of any Code section, whether or not such penalty is reenacted in the amendatory ordinance. In addition to the penalty prescribed above, the city may pursue other remedies such as abatement of nuisances, injunctive relief and revocation of licenses or permits.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 10 Section 5. Additions or amendments to the Code when passed in such form as to indicate the intention of the city council to make the same a part of the Code shall be deemed to be incorporated in the Code, so that reference to the Code includes the additions and amendments. Section 6. Ordinances adopted after March 14, 2005, that amend or refer to ordinances that have been codified in the Code shall be construed as if they amend or refer to like provisions of the Code. Section 7. This ordinance shall before effective June 28, 2005 at 12:01 a.m. ADOPTED: June 27, 2005 COUNCIL MEMBERS COMMENTS Mr. Hogan explained his vote in opposition to the tax rate increase, feeling that the City has simply gone too far too soon. Although he felt that staff produced a stringent budget, it was his feeling that the obligations could be met with a .01¢ to .02¢ tax increase. Mr. Salters thanked everyone that participated in this year’s African American Festival, indicating that it was very successful. Mr. Slavin moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried. Meeting Adjourned at 8:20 P.M. JANICE C. GREEN CITY CLERK All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of June 27, 2005, are hereby approved. STEPHEN R. SPEED MAYOR /JG S:\ClerksOffice\Agendas&Minutes\Council-Minutes\2005\06-27-2005 Council.wpd Exhibits Attached to Original Minutes and File Copy Exhibit #1 - Property Assessment Appeals Report for the Hearings from May 16, 2005 through June 17, 2005 Exhibit #2 - 2004/2005 Revised and 2005/2006 City of Dover Budget Ordinances

PETITION TO AMEND ZONING DISTRICT Before The Dover City Council July 11, 2005 Plan Title: Lands of Eden Hill Farm Z-05-03 Plan Type: Rezoning to Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone and General Overall Master Plan Review Applicants/Owners: Eden Hill Farm Inc. State of Delaware Applicants/Equitable Owners: Investment Properties Associates, LLC Dover Medical Properties, LLC Project Engineers/Architects: Becker Morgan Group Location: 834 W. North Street located on the south side of West North Street and west of the railroad corridor and West Street Tax Parcels: ED-05-076.00-01-13.00-000 ED-05-076.00-01-14.00-000 ED-05-076.00-01-14.01-000 Area of Rezoning: 272.04 acres +/- Present Zoning: IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing) A (Agriculture) Proposed Zoning: TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone) allows for the creation of a walkable, pedestrian friendly mixed use neighborhood with residential, commercial, and professional office areas. Present Use: Residence Agricultural land and woodland areas Proposed Use: Traditional Neighborhood Design with residential, commercial, office, and open space areas

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 2 of 19 Findings and Recommendations of the Dover Planning Commission This petition was considered at the June 20, 2005 meeting of the Planning Commission. The following members were present: Chairman Mr. Friedman, Mr. DiMondi, Mr. Tolbert, Mr. Nichols, Mr. Holt, Mr. VonReider, and Col. Welsh. The Planning Commission recommends approval of this request (Rezoning application Z- 05-03) Lands of Eden Hill Farm, Inc. at 834 West North Street to rezone three (3) parcels consisting of 272.04 acres ± of land from IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing) and A (Agriculture) to TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design). The subject parcels are located on the south side of West North Street and west of the railroad corridor and West Street. As part of the Planning Commission recommendation of approval for the rezoning of the subject area to Traditional Neighborhood Design zone (TND), the Planning Commission also recommends acceptance of the General Overall Master Plan including the Master Comprehensive Development Standards Manual (Pattern Book) with its addendum of 6/9/05 for the project in accordance with the conditions of approval outlined in the Development Advisory Committee (DAC) comments. The motion for approval of the rezoning passed 7-0 of those members present. The following information was considered by the Planning Commission in addition to the guidance provided in the Zoning Ordinance: Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone Ordinance On November 8, 2004 the Dover City Council approved an amendment to the City of Dover Code, Appendix B: Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 - District Regulations creating Article 3, Section 28: Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone (TND). (Application MI-04-05) This amendment established the development criteria and procedure for the Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone (TND). The first step of the Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone is an application for rezoning to TND which includes review of a Master Plan. The subsequent steps in the process include review of the Implementation Plan and Site Plans/Subdivision Plans. As the Zoning Ordinance states, “the intent of the Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) zone is to create a walkable and pedestrian-friendly, economically viable professional, commercial and mixed use residential neighborhood for people of different ages and incomes that draw from the best architectural and community design features of Delaware and the Delmarva Peninsula from its colonial past to the mid 20th century.” The TND zone intends to encourage greater integration of land-uses and diversity of lot sizes than is permitted under other provisions of the Land Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Dover. Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone: Step 1-Rezoning & General Overall Master Plan Review The first step this process is a Rezoning application including review of a General Overall Master Plan. See Procedure in Article 3 §28.4. The application submission for Step 1 consists of the following items.

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 3 of 19 • Site Plan Map of Existing Conditions providing items listed in Zoning Ordinance, Article 10, Section 5.18 • Narrative on the nature of the applicant’s interest • Listing of the development team involved in the proposed development • General Overall Master Plan consisting of a set of maps composed showing: o Plans of existing natural features showing topography, soils, drainage vegetation and potential limitations to development o Plans of the proposed building areas, streets, roads, parking, open space and storm water management o Overall program of uses including showing general use location, proposed building height, and total gross square feet by use • Master Comprehensive Development Standards Manual A document prepared in narrative and graphic form for purpose of showing that the proposed development meets the purpose and intent of the TND and that explains the concepts behind the implementation of the proposed TND on the parcel. The Master Comprehensive Development Standards Manual consists of brief written and graphic descriptions of the proposed approach to each of the items following items: o Historical Precedents and their influence on proposed project o Circulation (system of streets, alleys, and pedestrian and bicycle routes) o Building Lots (proposed lot types, sizes and setbacks, building locations) o Buildings (architectural character of the residential, commercial, office and mixed-use buildings) o Accessory Structures (fences, sheds, pools, garages, gazebos, etc.) o Open Spaces o Landscape Design (hard materials, plant materials, street furniture, etc.) o Lighting design o Signage o Application and Administration of requirements and guidelines Request for Submission of Implementation Plans by District The TND code provisions provide for the opportunity to submit separate Implementation Plans by individual use districts (Residential, Commercial or Office). The review of the Implementation Plan is the second step in the TND procedure. The Planning Commission reviews the TND Implementation Plan(s) for compliance with the approved General Overall Master Plan. However, in order to separate Implementation Plan submissions additional information is required at the time of Rezoning and General Master Plan review. “To request such consideration, the submission of the General Overall Master Plan shall include more detail of the design elements of the project, including, but not limited to, architectural standards, design relationships between uses and different scales of buildings, parking and open spaces, and an explanation of how the segregated Implementation Plan conforms to the intent of the approved General Overall Master Plan.” (Article 3 §28.42.) Plan Summary for Application Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: This application proposes the rezoning of the Lands of Eden Hill Farm, Inc. at 834 West North

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 4 of 19 Street from IPM and A to TND. The subject area consists of three (3) parcels consisting of 272.04 acres ± of land. The properties are currently zoned IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing) and A (Agriculture). The proposed zoning classification is TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design). The subject parcels are located on the south side of West North Street and west of the railroad corridor and West Street. The owners of record are Eden Hill Farm, Inc. and the State of Delaware. The equitable owners are Investment Properties Associates, LLC and Dover Medical Properties, LLC. Tax Parcels: ED-05-076.00-01-13.00-000, ED-05-076.00-01-14.00-000 and ED-05-076.00-01-14.01-000. Surrounding Land Uses: The area of petition to be considered for rezoning is located on the south side of West North Street between the railroad corridor and the intersection of West North with Saulsbury Road. The land to the west of the subject property is zoned IPM (Institutional Park Manufacturing Zone) and includes Kraft-General Foods facility and other large industrial facilities. To the north across West North Street is the residential area known as Lincoln Park. It is zoned RG-1 (General Residence Zone) and primarily consists of single family dwellings with some multi- family development. To the northeast and east of the subject site adjacent to the railroad corridor are properties zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone), C-3 (Service Commercial Zone), and C- 1A (Limited Commercial Zone). This area includes the area targeted for redevelopment as part of the West Side Redevelopment Plan and existing office buildings, a court building, the Dover Police Station, service establishments, and retail establishments. To the southeast across the railroad corridor and New Burton Road are the residential areas zoned R-8 and R-10 (One Family Residence Zone) known as Sherwood, Woodbrook, and Crossgates. The Puncheon Run is just south of the subject area and further to the south are agricultural lands currently zoned R- 20 (One Family Residence Zone). Comprehensive Planning The Land Development Plan Map of the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003 as amended shows this area as Mixed Use. Within Chapter 11: Land Development Plan, the “Mixed Use” land use category is described and includes information on the Eden Hill Farm property specifically. The Plan recognized the potential opportunity for development with a mixed use focus. A series of goals were outlined including: encouraging the creation of neighborhood centers with mixed use development, pedestrian friendly public environments and opportunities for connections to future transit; clustering of activities in walkable distances; and development design ideas for building and parking locations. (See Comprehensive Plan Update 2003 as amended, Chapter 11 – pages 132-134). Preliminary Land Use Services Review (PLUS) The Traditional Neighborhood Design Rezoning Application/ Master Plan application was reviewed during December 2004 by the Preliminary Land Use Services as required by the City of Dover’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). This MOU requires certain types of projects complete the PLUS Review process prior to application submission. See attached PLUS Review comment letter dated January 7, 2005. The applicant has submitted a letter dated June 6, 2005 in response to the PLUS comments. Staff notes that some areas the Master Plan has been further revised since the Draft Master Plan was submitted for the PLUS review; however, the overall concept of the Master Plan remains the same.

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 5 of 19 Determination of Eligibility for TND The land area must meet certain eligibility requirements to be rezoned to Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) (See Article 3 §28.3 a,b,c,d). The review of these criteria for the subject application is as follows. Criteria Eden Hill Farm TND proposal The land area shall have access to an existing or planned Land area has access from West North Street and the arterial or collector road proposed continuation of Saulsbury Road. Saulsbury Road and portions of West North Street are considered minor arterials and part of North Street is a collector road. The land area shall be served by adequate existing or Utilities such as water and sewer are in the vicinity of planned infrastructure this land area. The proposed project will build additional infrastructure as required. This is subject to the Department of Public Works review. The land area may contain a single or multiple parcels. The land area consists of three parcels of land totaling The rezoning application for the land area shall be filed 272.04 acres. All current property owners and equitable jointly by all owners of the involved land area owners are participating in the application submission. Finding by the Planning Commission and City Council The Planning Commission public hearing and review is that the proposed TND location is generally consistent scheduled for June 20, 2005 with the City Council with the Comprehensive Plan public hearing and review on July 11, 2005. The Land Development Plan of the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003 identifies this land area with the land use category of Mixed Use. Request for TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone) The types of permitted uses with the Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone are outlined in Article 3 §28.5: 28.51 Uses allowed in all areas of the TND: 28.511 All residential uses, accessory uses, and conditional uses currently permitted in the residential zones of the City identified in Article 3, Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9. Proposed conditional uses shall be identified in the application to the Planning Commission. 28.512 Accessory dwelling units in conjunction with detached single-family houses. A maximum of one accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted in conjunction with a detached single-family house. 28.513 Open space. 28.514 Civic uses including, but not necessarily limited to: a) Government buildings; b) Education buildings; c) Libraries; d) Meeting halls; e) Museums; f) Recreational facilities; g) Places of Worship; h) Other cultural, civic or social use as designated on the approved Implementation Plan. 28.52 Neighborhood Commercial District: Additional uses permitted in this district include the following subject to the requirements set forth in subsection 28.7:

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 6 of 19 28.521 Convenience retail stores such as, but not limited to, drug stores, grocery stores, restaurants, variety stores, or combinations thereof. Drive through drug stores shall be allowed if they are of superior design and screening consistent with the intent of the TND zone. There shall be no drive-through restaurants. 28.522 Personal service stores such as, but not limited to, barber shops, beauty parlors, and laundry/dry cleaning establishments. 28.523 Service establishments furnishing services other than of a personal nature, but excluding gasoline filling stations and motor vehicle storage, repair, or service. 28.524 Business, professional, and government offices, banks, philanthropic or not-for- profit offices, and financial institutions. Drive through banks shall be allowed if they are of superior design and screening consistent with the intent of the TND zone. 28.525 Any of these uses mixed with residential uses in the same building. 28.53 Professional Office, Medical, and Financial District: Additional uses permitted in this district include the following, subject to the requirements set forth in subsection 28.7: 28.531 Business, professional, and government offices, banks, philanthropic or not-for- profit offices, and financial institutions. Drive through banks shall be allowed if they are of superior design and screening consistent with the intent of the TND zone. 28.532 Medical and dental offices including clinics, laboratories, and hospital services. Drug stores, eye wear sales, and similar medical related retail uses, along with luncheonettes or delicatessens shall be allowed if designed as an accessory use or tenant space in a medical office building. 28.533 Nursing or extended care facilities offering overnight accommodations Eden Hill Farm TND General Overall Master Plan Review The application has provided a Site Plan Map including information on the existing conditions including information on the parcels involved in the proposal, existing buildings, woodland areas, topography, and other data information. See Parcel Plan sheet. The applicant has supplied a narrative on the nature of the applicant’s interest and a listing of the development team involved in the proposed development. Some of this information is also provided with the plan sheets and Master Standards Manual submission. General Overall Master Plan The General Overall Master Plan consists of a set of plan maps (Parcel Plan sheet and Master Plan sheet in color) showing: existing natural features, proposed building areas, location of streets/roads, parking options, location of open space, and stormwater management areas. The overall program of uses is identified. Additional information on these topics is also included in the Master Standards Manual (Pattern Book) document. The Eden Hill Farm TND Master Plan identifies development areas as a Residential District, Neighborhood Commercial District (with the opportunity for residential uses), and Professional Office, Medical, and Financial District. The Residential District includes a total of 665 residential units in the form of single family detached houses, single family detached houses with

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 7 of 19 carriage houses (second dwelling unit on lot), duplex units, townhouses, and condominium buildings. The lot sizes are developed on a module system which would allow for the mixing of unit types within a given street block. The Residential District has a mix of street sections with sidewalks, pedestrian network, parking options, and landscaping. The street network also includes a service alley system. The Neighborhood Commercial District area located in the northwest corner of the site consists of a variety of building forms with provisions for a grocery store, drug store with drive-thru, bank with drive-thru, retail and office buildings. Several buildings also provide the option for residential uses on the upper floors. A portion of this Commercial District is focused on a ‘main street’ which connects to the existing street network at West North Street and also links to the internal street network and pedestrian network. Parking in this area includes on street and the traditional parking lot format but with increased landscaping and pedestrian amenities. The Professional Office, Medical and Financial District area is located in the northeast portion of the site and consists of a series of multi-story office buildings. A portion of this office district is focused on a ‘main street’ which connects to the existing street network at West North Street as a continuation of Clarence Street. The area is also linked to the internal street network and pedestrian network. A large green space is also central to the area. Parking in this area includes on street and the traditional parking lot format but with increased landscaping and pedestrian amenities. The parking space calculation is approximately 1 (one) parking space per 250 square feet of building floor area. A future parking structure is also proposed within this area to serve buildings located on the eastern part of the site. The overall site exceeds the minimum of 25% open space by creating a community walking trail area, parks, and greens throughout the site and large open space/park area in the southwest portion of the site. The existing historic house of Eden Hill Farm and its tree allees (entrance drives) are preserved within a large public open space area. Master Comprehensive Development Standards Manual The Master Comprehensive Development Standards Manual consist of a brief written and graphic description of the owner/developer’s proposed approach to each of the items listed in Article 3§28.84. The purpose of this document is “to insure that the owner/developer gives adequate thought to the nature of a TND designation and understands the impacts of such a designation on site development.” For this application, the submission includes a document entitled Eden Hill Farm: Pattern Book (First Edition – May 6, 2005). An ADDENDUM to the Pattern Book was submitted on June 9, 2005. The Addendum highlights some revisions and clarifications to the Pattern Book dated May 6, 2005. The Pattern Book presents information on the overall plan, typical urban spaces, and individual buildings. The following table lists required items to be included in the Master Comprehensive Development Standards Manual (Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §28.84). The Eden Hill Farm: Pattern Book (and Addendum of 6/9/2005) presents information on each of these topic areas. Following Master Plan approval, the process will require greater detail on each of these elements as part of the Implementation Plan submission. Element Pattern Book Reference

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 8 of 19 Historical Precedents – a discussion and illustration of Section A, pages 1-9 local and regional precedents in the design of the City of Also building examples in Sections C, Dover’s traditional neighborhoods, communities, buildings, D, and E and landscape and how they will be reflected in the proposed development. Circulation – classification and illustration of a system of Section B, pages 10-38 streets, alleys, and pedestrian and bicycle routes that creates Section B2 - Street Types an integrated network serving the TND development and Section B3 - Pedestrian Way links it to adjacent areas. Detailed design standards and Section C - concepts for driveway illustrations for each component of the system are required. access in residential district A plan of the circulation systems shall be included Also Master Plan Map Building Lots – a classification and illustration of the full Section C, pages 39-62 for Residential range of proposed lot types, sizes and setbacks, locations of District potential accessory buildings, and access by auto and foot. Section C.1 – Lot Types A plan of their location throughout the development shall Section E, pages 74-91 for Commercial be included. and Office Districts Also Master Plan Map Buildings – a classification of the full range of buildings, Section C, pages 39-62 and Section D, residential, commercial, office or mixed, to be constructed pages 63-73 for Residential District including detailed guidelines addressing their architectural Section E, pages 74-91 for Commercial character and essential required elements, such as size, and Office Districts composition and massing, windows, doors, porches, roof Also Master Plan Map design, fenestration, and all materials. A plan of their location by use type throughout the development shall be included. Accessory Structures – detailed design guidelines for Section D6, pages 71-73 for garages accessory structures including, but not limited to, fences, and carriage houses in residential sheds, pools, garages, gazebos shall be included and district compatible with the TND design principles. Also Section C – lot layout examples by building type Section F.4, page 95 - Fences Open Spaces - a classification of a system of landscaped Section B, pages 10-38 open spaces (in addition to private yards) with a plan of the Section B.4 – Open Space (Active and network created by the open spaces and pedestrian and Passive) bicycle circulation systems. Section C.7-C.14 Also Master Plan Map Landscape Design – a palette of hard (paving) and plant Section F, pages 92-97 materials along with street furniture, major focal elements Section F.2 – Site Furnishings and ornamentation shall be provided. These shall be Section F.3 – Hardscape located on a plan of the development. Details of plant Section F.5 – Landscape species and hard materials shall be included. Lighting Design – Placement of public and private lighting Section F.1, page 92 – Lighting throughout the development and design of the lighting Also Section B.2 – Street Types fixtures, globes, illumination patterns and intensities. Signage – Provide the design, size, height and placement of Section E.13, page 91 all signs for public and private uses in the neighborhood. Section F.2, page 93 – Street name Include standards for street signs, parking signs, fire lanes, signs and signs for businesses in residential, office and

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 9 of 19 commercial districts. Application and Administration – a presentation of the Forward, page I manner in which the Comprehensive Development Sections D and E: Architectural Standards Manual requirements and guidelines will be Patterns with Required, Encouraged, administered and enforced on behalf of the developer. The and Prohibited elements roles and responsibilities of the developer, builders and homeowners and/or homeowners’ association in overall administration of Comprehensive Development Standards Manual requirements shall be addressed. Recommendation of the Planning Staff: The Planning Staff recommends that the rezoning from IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing zone) and A (Agriculture zone) to TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design zone) be approved. In general, the Master Plan and Master Comprehensive Design Standards Manual (Pattern Book dated May 6, 2005 with Addendum of June 9, 2005) comply with the purpose and intent of the Traditional Neighborhood Design zone by presenting a proposal for a mixed use development with residential, commercial, office, and open space uses. The Planning Staff finds that the Master Plan submission contains sufficient detail to allow for the submission of Implementation Plans by district. Planning Staff offers comments regarding the applicant submission as follows: Comments of Planning Staff for City and State Code Requirements: 1) Clarify the building format and sizes of Buildings #7 and #8 within the Neighborhood Commercial District as they appear to exceed the maximum building footprint requirements. 2) Remove proposal for ‘speed table’ at trail crossing of streets (i.e. Ridgley Boulevard). These items are prohibited by the Dover Code of Ordinances Chapter 7 Fire Prevention and Protection Section 7-4 Speed Reduction Devices. (Pattern Book page 34). Note: Pattern Book Addendum of 6/9/2005 item #9 indicates that the speed table(s) will be eliminated. 3) Provide additional information for the Professional Office, Medical, and Financial District (Section E.12) on the precedents, building design elements, etc. Currently Section E does not clearly indicate if items E.1-E.11 also refer to the Office District in addition to the Commercial District. 4) The Master Plan and Master Comprehensive Design Standards Manual will need to be amended to reflect any changes recommended by the Planning Commission and City Council included in their approvals. Comments of Planning Staff as Recommendations to meet Code objectives: 1) The location of Signers Park appears to be somewhat isolated to the rear of a series of residential parcels. Staff recommends revising the location to provide greater street frontage for this park.

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 10 of 19 2) Staff encourages the incorporation of a greater mix of uses especially in the Commercial District and the Office District so that residential development is included in these areas as well. 3) A series of proposed street names where included on the Master Plan to assist in presenting information on the overall proposal. Initial comments regarding these street names have been received from the Kent County GIS/Mapping/911 Addressing Section. Approval of this rezoning application and Master Plan will not finalize the street names for the Eden Hill Farm development. Additional review and consideration of the street names will follow as part of the Implementation Plan submissions. The City Planning Staff will work with the applicant to revise street names as necessary to avoid duplication or confusion with existing streets in the City of Dover or the immediate vicinity of Kent County. 4) Currently the Master Plan Pattern Book refers to the Dover Zoning Ordinance for the sign requirements. Staff recommends development of requirements specific to this Traditional Neighborhood Design project. Note: Pattern Book Addendum of 6/9/2005 item #16 indicates that the guidelines for signage will be developed during the Implementation Phase of the project. Planning Staff Advisory Comments to the Applicant: 1) The applicant shall be aware that approval of the rezoning to the Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone does not represent final Subdivision or Site Plan approval. The next step in the application process is the submission and review of the Implementation Plan. 2) The Master Plan and Master Comprehensive Design Standards Manual documents have a series of editing, grammatical and visual image corrections (spelling, numbering, mislabels, missing photos, text repeats, etc.) that will need to be corrected. These corrections do not impact the overall concept and intent of the TND Master Plan. Planning Staff will work with the applicant to identify and make these corrections. 3) At the present time, the West Dover Connector is a concept and not a street name. Revise references and labels appearing in the Master Plan and Pattern Book accordingly. We would anticipate that the road name of Saulsbury Road would continue south of North Street for the proposed road located parallel to the west property line of the project site. 4) Staff encourages the Residential District to include a mix of unit types within a street block. The Pattern Book notes that the opportunity is there through the use of the lot modules established in the plan. The Implementation Plan for this district can provide more examples of how to accomplish this mix of units. 5) Staff recommends that the Site Elements and Landscape Features include additional discussion of the concept and intent for these items including lighting, furniture, paving products, fencing, etc. similar to the approach taken the architectural patterns of building elements. We would caution the applicant about the naming of specific manufacturers and products by model number. Note: Pattern Book Addendum of 6/9/2005 items #17, 18, and 19 indicates that the references to manufacturers will be revised to “approved manufactures or equal.”

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 11 of 19 6) Some items identified for clarification in future Implementation Plan submissions: a) Identify the dedication intention for the public streets to the State of Delaware and/or to the City of Dover and also finalize street names b) Identify the public streets and private circulation systems (i.e. parking lot, drive aisles) within Neighborhood Commercial district and Professional Office district c) Provide the Phasing of each development district and associated elements such as street network, building sites, parking areas, stormwater management and open space d) Explain the elements of the residential lot layout i.e. buildable area, setbacks, porch zone, etc. e) Identify the Ownership and maintenance of the Open Space areas (active and passive open space areas) and the Community Center f) Responsibility for Landscape Plantings including those tree plantings in right-of-ways, open spaces, etc. g) Clarify the Administration of the Design Elements including the associated responsibilities and procedures. One section includes references to an ARB (Architectural Review Board). (Pattern Book- Section F2 and F4 and Note: Pattern Book Addendum of 6/9/2005 item #15 indicates that this reference will be revised). Public Comments: The application was represented by the project engineer Mr. Gregg Moore, Becker Morgan Group and owner Deb Scheller, Eden Hill Farms, Inc. It is also noted that other members of the development team were present in the audience at the meeting. Mr. Moore shared a PowerPoint presentation of the residential, commercial, and office areas including three-dimensional animations of example streets in each district. The following individuals appeared and spoke in regards to the rezoning application. (See the Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for additional information.) • Carol Jason, 833 North Street: She was concerned with access locations and traffic along North Street and the potential views of back of buildings. • Sandy Kinkus, 365 Fiddlers Green: She was concerned about the impact to the existing neighborhood, stormwater management as related to the Puncheon Run, accessibility of parks, and street widths for fire trucks. • Janice Sibbald, 144 Blue Beach Drive: She commented on the beautiful plan but is concerned that the connection from existing neighborhoods to Schutte Park was not shown on plan. She also had questions on the community center and park area parking locations. • Cheryl Precourt, 260 Kesselring Avenue: She commented on it as a great idea; however, she is concerned with the West Dover Connector issue and potential increase in traffic. Agency Comments from DAC Report: • Department of Public Works has no objection to the proposed rezoning. The Department provided several advisory comments regarding design of the future development as related to landscaping, streets, and utilities.

Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm: Rezoning to TND and General Overall Master Plan Review Planning Commission Recommendation Report Page 12 of 19 • The Dover Office of the Fire Marshal provided comments regarding fire protection measures necessary for the development’s design and construction activities. • The City Electric Department has no objections to rezoning. • DelDOT has no objection to the rezoning. They provided advisory comments related to traffic analysis. • The Kent Conservation District has no objection to rezoning. They provided advisory comments regarding stormwater management planning and drainage for future development. • The Kent County GIS/Mapping/911 Addressing Division provided initial comments regarding the proposed street names. Attachments to the Report: • Development Advisory Committee Application Review Commentary (comment sheets) from the following: Department of Public Works Dover Office of the Fire Marshal City Electric Department Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) Kent Conservation District Kent County GIS/Mapping/ 911 Addressing Division • Comprehensive Plan Update 2003, excerpt from Chapter 11: Land Development Plan • Pattern Book Addendum Letter dated June 9, 2005 • Development Team Summary • Narrative of Applicants Interest • PLUS Review Comment Letter from Office of State Planning Coordination, dated January 7, 2005 • PLUS Comment Response Letter from applicant, dated June 6, 2005 • General Overall Master Plan Review materials. (Due to project size and scope these materials are provided by hard copy only.): • Parcel Plan Sheet • Master Plan Sheet (in color) • Master Comprehensive Development Standards Manual (Pattern Book) The complete application submission is available for review at the Department of Planning & Inspections and will be display at the City Council meeting.

C C CITY OF DOVER I P T U DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Y B L APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY O I F C STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: June 2, 2005 D W ==================================================================== O O V R APPLICATION: Lands of Eden Hill Farm, Inc. @ 834 W. North Street E K R S FILE#: Z-05-03 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Public Works CONTACT PERSON: Scott Koenig or Andrew Riggi PHONE#: 736-7025 ===================================================================== THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Our office has no objection to the proposed re-zoning of the site. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: Although more information than is typically required has been submitted as part of the package for this site, the information contained within raises various questions and concerns to our department. The following should be addressed by the applicant prior to the next submission for this site. 1. Landscaping a. Overall, the plan is well done. We particularly like the wide medians within some of the streets and the larger areas between the curb and sidewalk which allow for larger canopy trees to grow. The applicant should note, however, that our office typically requires ten to fifteen feet (10’-15’) of separation between trees and utilities. The applicant must take into consideration all utilities located within the right-of-way, should trees be proposed to be located therein, to ensure that there is not an unnecessary disturbance of services due to root systems. b. Future plan submissions must designate which public areas are to be maintained by the City. This includes parks, open space and right-of-ways. The level of landscaping proposed for this site will require the procurement of additional departmental staff and equipment in order to maintain these areas in order to ensure that the current level of service provided within the City is not decreased. c. We strongly recommend that areas to be maintained by the City not contain large mulched areas containing groundcovers, shrubs or perennials. The Grounds Division of the Department of Public Works is primarily set up to maintain turf and trees and the City Manager has agreed that our current Beautification Program has reached its limit in work load. The high maintenance level required of mulched areas would place an even higher burden on our office. d. Our office recommends the use of Red Maples (cultivars ‘October Glory’ with lesser ‘Red Sunset’) and Sugar Maple (cultivars ‘Green Mountain’ with lesser ‘Legacy’) for deciduous canopy trees. e. Our office discourages the use of Ash trees as they have a high level of pests and other problems. These

species should be substituted with ‘Green Vase’ Zelkova or ‘Greenspire’ Littleleaf Linden. f. Our office highly recommends the use of Oriental Spruce (Picea orientalis) for evergreen trees. g. Our office discourages the use of Redbud as an ornamental understory tree. We have not had success with this tree as it is not very hardy. This species should be substituted with the ‘Okame’ Cherry. h. Our office recommends incorporating Cherry trees into the design. The following selections have done well in the City: Yoshino, ‘Kwanzan’ and ‘Accolade’. We typically incorporate these trees into most of our projects citywide in order to meet our long term goals. 2. Streets a. The plan must clearly designate as to which streets are to be dedicated to the City and which streets are to be dedicated to the State. b. The following roads are shown containing curbed planter islands: Type 6 Roads, residential Allee Streets (Sheet 16 of the Pattern Book) and Type 8 Roads, commercial Main Streets (Sheet 20 of the Pattern Book). Our office highly discourages the use of these planter islands due to their high tendency to be hit by passing traffic. c. On Sheet 19 of the Pattern Book, alleys within the Commercial District are referred to as Type 4. On Sheet 20 of the Pattern Book, alleys within the Commercial District are referred to as Type 9. This conflict must be resolved prior to the next submission. d. On Sheet 23 of the Pattern Book, Type 10 Roads within the Professional Office, Medical & Financial District are shown in plan view as having a two-way traffic pattern but within the description it is noted that they are to have a one-way traffic pattern. This conflict must be resolved prior to the next submission. e. On Sheet 25 of the Pattern Book, Type 11 Roads, commercial Connector Roads, are shown in plan view as having an eight feet (8’) wide planter strip but within the description it is noted that they are to have a ten feet (10’) wide planting median/island on both sides of the road. This conflict must be resolved prior to the next submission. f. All on street parking spaces are to be designed and marked as per the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The MUTCD requires that parking space tick marks be located eight feet (8’) off the curb, provide a twenty-two to twenty-six feet (22’-26’) long parking space, and be spaced eight feet (8’) apart. g. Our office recommends that lighting be incorporated into the alley design within the Residential District. h. The Townhouse Lot design (Sheets 49 and 50 of the Pattern Book) show a significant amount of paving within the rear yards. Our office highly recommends that driveway entrances to these units, off the alleys, be designed with a minimum width of twelve feet (12’) and a maximum width not to exceed fifty percent (50%) of the lot width for the associated townhouse unit. This requirement will assist in maintaining the buffer between the alley and the parking area for each lot. 3. The developer is responsible for reimbursement to the City for sewer and water utilities extended to the property with the DelDOT North Street Improvement Project. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED TO DISCUSS ANY OF THE ABOVE COMMENTS, PLEASE CALL THE ABOVE CONTACT PERSON AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

D O M CITY OF DOVER V A E R DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE R S H APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY F A I L D.A.C MEETING DATE: June 9, 2005 R E ==================================================== APPLICATION: Eden Hill ____________________________________________________ FILE#: Z-05-03 REVIEWING AGENCY: Dover Fire Marshal____________________________ CONTACT PERSON: Dave Truax PHONE#: 736-7011______________________ ========================================== THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY & STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. During construction every building shall be accessible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access roadways with all weather driving surface of not less than 20 feet of unobstructed width to withstand the live loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches vertical clearance. Dead-end Fire Department access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of Fire Department apparatus. 2. Water supply for fire protection either temporary or permanent shall be made available as soon as combustible material accumulates. There shall be no delay in the installation of fire protection equipment. Where underground water mains and hydrants are to be provided, they shall be installed, completed, and in service prior to construction work. 3. Building permits will not be issued until the area has been inspected for the condition of the roadway and fire protection water is available. 4. Any gas fired HVAC equipment must be equipped with emergency cut off switches remotely located. 5. Address numbers of at least 4 inches in height must be placed on the street side of each residence. 6. Plan to show hydrants 600 feet on center. 7. More detail needed on each type of building. 8. Site Plan needed for each individual non-single family dwelling. 9. Review with Fire Department overall access to site. 10. Review street width and speed reduction device with Fire Department. DAC Report

Eden Hill Page 2 RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED FOR AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: NONE ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: 1. After any application has been approved by the Planning Commission, the applicant has a maximum of thirty (30) days t appeal to the Code Board of Appeals Committee. 2. All comments from this office, approved by the Planning Commission are at the expense of the owner/applicant. 3. The City of Dover uses the 2003 NFPA Life Safety Code, 2003 International Building Codes, latest editions of all other International Codes and NFPA Codes and the 2003 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations. If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person and the Planning Department as soon as possible.

DD O E CITY OF DOVER V L DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING E E APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY R C T JUNE 2, 2005 - 10:00 A.M. - CAUCUS ROOM R I C APPLICATION: LANDS OF EDEN HILL FARM, INC. - 834 WEST NORTH STREET FILE NO.: Z-05-3 REVIEWING AGENCY: CITY OF DOVER ELECTRIC CONTACT PERSON: STEPHEN A. ENSS PHONE #: 736-7091 THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY & STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: The Electric Department reviewed the plans for rezoning and has no objections. The Electric Department will offer comments during the Planned Neighborhood phase of the project. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED FOR AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: If you should have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please contact Stephen Enss at 736-7091 or contact the Planning Department at 736-7010 as soon as possible.

CITY OF DOVER D DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE E APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY L D D.A.C. MEETING DATE: June 2, 2005 O T ====================================================== APPLICATION: Lands of Eden Hill Farm, Inc. FILE#: Z-05-03 REVIEWING AGENCY: DelDOT CONTACT PERSON: Richard A. Woodhall PHONE#: 760-2262 =============================================================== THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY & STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: We have no objection to the rezoning. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: DelDOT fully supports the concept plan but will require a traffic analysis or TIS at the subdivision level. If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person and the planning department as soon as possible.

K CITY OF DOVER E C N O D DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE T N I APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY S S D.A.C. MEETING DATE: May 26, 2005 E T R R V I APPLICATION: Eden Hill Farm A C FILE #: Z-05-03 REVIEWING AGENCY: Kent Conservation District T T I CONTACT PERSON: Jared C. Adkins, P.E. PHONE #: 741-2600 ext.3 O N THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY’S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. The Kent Conservation District has no objection to the rezoning of this site. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: The Following comments are advisory and apply to the development of a detailed site plan for this project. 1. As the disturbance for this site will exceed 5,000 square feet, a detailed sediment and stormwater management plan must be reviewed and approved by our office prior to any land disturbing activity (i.e. clearing, grubbing, filling, grading, etc.) taking place. 2. This project outfalls to both the Puncheon Run and the Tar Ditch drainage systems which both have a well documented history of flooding downstream from this site. A downstream drainage study will be required for this project to determine the impacts of the site development on those systems. Stormwater management requirements for this site will be based on the results of the drainage study and may involve over-managing the stormwater discharges from this site in order to minimize downstream flooding. 3. It appears that the existing stormwater facility near the northeast corner of the project is to be expanded. Since this facility was constructed by DelDOT, confirmation will be requested that DelDOT will allow this project to utilize that facility and clarification of who will be responsible for its maintenance. 4. The preferred methods of stormwater management are those practices that maximize the use of the natural features of a site, promote recharge and minimize the reliance on structural components. 5. It is recommended that the stormwater management areas be incorporated into the overall landscape plan to enhance water quality and to make the stormwater facility an attractive community amenity. 6. A letter of no objection to recordation will be provided once the detailed Sediment and Stormwater Management plan has been approved. 7. Based on the site characteristics, a pre-application meeting will be required to discuss stormwater management and drainage for this site.

City of Dover Comprehensive Plan Chapter 11 Land Development Plan are also recommended in areas immediately adjacent to existing low-density residential neighborhoods for reasons of compatibility. Recommendation for Medium Density Residential Medium density residential land uses involve a maximum gross density of eight (8) dwelling units per acre. This type of development may include single family houses on smaller lots, duplexes and townhouses. Apartments may be permitted if approved through the Planned Neighborhood Design option. Mobile home park developments would also be considered medium density. Medium density residential uses are permitted in the following zoning districts: R-8 (Single Family Residential), R-7 (Single Family Residential), RM-1 (Medium Density Residential), and MHP (Mobile Home Park). The Comprehensive Land Development Plan recommends that medium density residential uses be permitted in close proximity to existing and planned service and employment centers and in locations well supported by transportation infrastructure and mass transit services. Recommendation for High Density Residential High Density Residential land uses involve a gross density of 8 or more dwelling units per acre and may include high rise, mid-rise or garden apartments, and townhouse developments. Duplexes and single family homes are also permitted in mixed-use developments. The following Zoning Districts permit high density residential development: RG-1 (General Residence), RG-2 (General Residence), RG-3 (Group Housing), RG-4 (Multi-Story Apartments), RG-5 (Mid-Rise Apartments), and RM-2 (Medium Density Residential - note: the name of this zone was proposed to be changed in the implementation of the 1996 Plan to reflect High Density). The Comprehensive Land Development Plan recommends that high density residential be dispersed throughout the City along arterial roadways in close proximity to other high-density residential uses, schools, neighborhood commercial areas and other compatible non-residential land use areas. Although very few vacant developable acres have been designated for high- density residential use, housing types usually associated with higher density zones may be accommodated through the Planned Neighborhood Design option. Participants in the 1996 community planning workshops generally viewed high-density residential development as less desirable. However, analysis of population and employment projections and trends in the local housing market indicate that there will be continued demand for high-density development. Mixed Use Areas The 1996 Plan noted the land use of Downtown Mixed Use. This category has been renamed Mixed Use since other areas of the City are also appropriate for this type of land use. Downtown Dover One Mixed-Use area consists of the Downtown area. The historic City center -- clustered around The Dover Green -- dates back as early as the 1700s. It expands to also include the traditional City pattern of grid streets, which developed during the 19th and early 20th centuries. As a result of its earlier development, Downtown Dover like many other historic cities includes a variety of intermingled land uses. The area is bounded by Wesley College on the north, the The Dover Plan 2003 Update September 2003 - Page 132 -

City of Dover Comprehensive Plan Chapter 11 Land Development Plan railroad tracks on the west, Water Street on the south and St. Jones River on the east. It includes residential, commercial, office, cultural and institutional uses. Assumptions: Downtown Dover 1. Downtown Dover is the traditional and symbolic center of the community and is vitally important to the overall image and identity of the City. 2. As the largest area of employment in the City, Downtown Dover is vital to the economy. It is important to preserve the area as a safe, convenient and aesthetically pleasing environment. 3. Downtown provides a unique residential environment in close proximity to commercial, cultural, education and employment resources. There is a wide variety of housing types Downtown. 4. Downtown provides a unique and affordable commercial environment where locally owned businesses reflect the small town nature of the community. 5. The age of the buildings and infrastructure in the downtown area requires special attention and incentives to assist in continual use and revitalization activities. Goal: Downtown Dover Preserve and enhance the role of Downtown Dover as a major employment, residential and commercial center as well as the symbolic and cultural heart of the community, and recognize its unique heritage and historic resources. Provide for mixed use development allowing greatest variation of uses. Policies: Downtown Dover 1. Enhance the Downtown area through economic development and historic preservation programs. 2. Continue to support the preservation of buildings and infrastructure through public investments, property maintenance enforcement, housing grants and financial incentives. 3. Promote zoning districts and regulations that support the traditional mixed-use nature of the Downtown area. A second large area has been designated mixed use – the Eden Hill Farm Property. Eden Hill Farm The City of Dover and the State of Delaware share an extraordinary opportunity to shape the future development of a large tract of land within the community. Eden Hill Farm comprises 265 acres of lands available to market. Found between the Norfolk Southern railroad tracks and the Kraft General Foods Plant, the property represents a wonderful opportunity to the development community. Currently, the property is zoned industrially with permitted uses ranging from manufacturing, researching design laboratories, warehouses, professional and governmental offices, to retail and services establishments within a planned industrial park. Certainly, the community can anticipate a rezoning request to provide for more desirable development known as “mixed use.” – development plans that produce the greatest variety of land usage. It is rare for a community to find a large tract of land enveloped by urbanization The Dover Plan 2003 Update September 2003 - Page 133 -

City of Dover Comprehensive Plan Chapter 11 Land Development Plan available to the development community providing for a central theme to be established rather than tracts of land sold off piecemeal. The project also represents an opportunity to address some major traffic concerns within the community through the extension of Saulsbury Road. The connection of Saulsbury Road with New Burton Road will ease traffic congestion on the North Street corridor. The State of Delaware in 2002 expressed in their bond legislation the importance of this land and was committed, “to increase and expedite employment, economic development, transportation, cultural and recreational opportunities.” It charged appointed officials to pursue a plan that would make the best use of this property and still protect its character. It is with that knowledge that the City, the State, and the community need to work cooperatively to ensure that the development of the Eden Hill Farm is in keeping with Governor Minner’s Livable Delaware initiative and to ensure that the rich heritage and historic significance of the property is not diminished. The type of development should provide the same quality of life for residents in the community that they have enjoyed and the qualities that have attracted residents in the past. Goal: Eden Hill Farm and Other Appropriate Areas 1. Encourage creation of neighborhood centers. 2. Within the close knit neighborhood fabric there are opportunities for the creation of “urban villages” or centers. These centers should be established along major roadways and feature mixed use development, pedestrian-friendly public environments and opportunities for connection to future transit. 3. In order to encourage non-automobile access to the center, the activities should be clustered within a one-half mile radius (or 10-minute walk), and be located so as to draw upon residents from a number of surrounding neighborhoods. 4. Rezoning of strategic parcels to permit mixed-use. 5. Develop a strategy for accommodating on-street and behind building parking, and the creation of build-to lines for new development. These strategies will encourage the creation of well-defined public street spaces and pedestrian-friendly village areas that encourage walking and bicycle use. Commercial Land Uses As a central City, Dover serves as a regional center for commerce and trade within the Delmarva Peninsula. An integrated transportation system consisting of arterial highways, freight rail service, and air transport provide for the efficient movement of goods to and from Dover in support of business development and activities. Dover’s residential neighborhoods also create various local commercial needs. The Comprehensive Land Development Plan identifies specific locations for the development of neighborhood retail and community shopping center uses within the suburban fringe. More intensive regional commercial development is directed toward the US Route 13/113 corridor close to existing highway commercial and regional shopping center establishments. The Dover Plan 2003 Update September 2003 - Page 134 -

June 9, 2005 Mr. James Galvin, AICP, Director City of Dover Planning/Inspections P.O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903-0475 RE: Rezoning Application EDEN HILL FARM PATTERN BOOK Dover, Delaware 1999053.04 Dear Mr. Galvin: On behalf of our clients, Eden Hill Farms, Inc., Dover Medical Properties, L.L.C. and Investment Properties Associates, L.L.C., we are hereby submitting revisions and clarifications to the Development Standards Manual (Pattern Book), dated May 6, 2005. These revisions and clarifications will be inserted into the Pattern Book during the Implementation phase of the project. Please except the attached document as a formal document associated and included as part of the submission. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, BECKER MORGAN GROUP, INC. Gregory V. Moore, P.E. Vice President GVM/rlh 199905304hp-PB addedum.doc

EDEN HILL FARM RE-ZONING APPLICATION Lands of Eden Hill Farm Z-05-03 PATTERN BOOK – ADDENDUM June 9, 2005 The following revisions and clarifications shall be inserted into the Development Standards Manual (Pattern Book) dated May 6, 2005. The comments either replace or clarify information previously provided as follows: General Comments: 1. All canopy trees listed as 4”–5” shall be changed to read “….planted with up to 4” caliper canopy trees (16’-18’ ht.).” 2. All sidewalks graphics and text to be changed to 5’ sidewalks. 3. The State will construct the bike path that runs along the railroad tracks within the 100’ buffer. This trail will be 10 feet wide. The remaining bike paths on the project will be 5 to 6 feet wide. The signage and site amenities along these portions of the trail, which exists in all other locations throughout the project, will be less elaborate then those provided along the state bike path. 4. The screening fence indicated on the master plan and in the pattern book shall be clarified as follows: A 6 ft. fence is planned for between the entry and back of the grocery store along Wemyss Road, all other fencing shall be 4 ft. high. 5. Graphics throughout the Pattern Book refer to “textured walk with border” for sidewalks. The intent is to use the textured border in limited locations throughout the project rather then all sidewalks. Add “….textured walk with border limited to accent areas only.” Specific Clarifications and Revisions: 6. Pg. 25 – Type 11 Road – Connector Streets – Graphic indicates a 5’ sidewalk on both sides. Change the graphic to read 5’ sidewalk on one side only. 7. Pg. 33 – Professional Office Zone – Delete 2nd paragraph in it’s entirety. 8. Pg. 33 – Tree Density – Delete entire section as it does not apply. 9. Pg. 34 - The internal bike path crosses several streets throughout the development. Pg. 34 indicates a 10’ speed table with decorative paving as a crosswalk. The speed table is to be eliminated in all locations and the decorative paving is to be changed to diagonal painted striping. 10. Pg. 38 – Passive Open Space – text reads “Other proposed embellishments include a water feature and sitting area as the main focal point at the center of the green…..A colored, textured walkway system, six feet wide, will link together the various buildings of the professional office complex with other areas of Eden Hill”. Change to read “Other proposed embellishments include a central icon feature and sitting area as the main focal point at the center of the gree…..A colored, textured walkway system will link together the various buildings of the professional office complex with other areas of Eden Hill. Walkway pattern is flexible in its extent and location in order to provide more open space”. Graphics

indicate a series of crossing and intersecting walkways. Add note to indicate “Walkway pattern is flexible in its extent and location in order to provide more open space”. 11. Pg.51 – Condominiums – add a sentence to the last paragraph “The buildings will have (3) levels of living space. Some units may be (4) storey with 1st floor parking and 3 storey living units above”. 12. Pg. 70 & 85 – Siding – Prohibited Materials – Delete Diagonal Siding, as diagonal siding is typically detail in many historic structures especially on dormers. 13. Pg. 70 – Materials-Delete reference to chimneys, as they will be addressed in the Implementation phase. 14. Pg. 81 – Awnings & Canopies – 2nd paragraph – Change “Canvas, shed-type…” to read, “ Shed-type awnings of various materials such a canvas, metal, wood, etc are allowed.” 15. Section F – Site Elements and Landscape Features – delete all references to “…..are subject to approval by the ARB….” Sentences should read as “…are subject to approval.”. 16. Pg. 91 – Signage – 3rd paragraph in total - Change “The size of all signs is regulated by the City of Dover zoning ordinance……” to read “The size, design, material and location of all signs will be developed as part of the Implementation phase of the project. The general guidelines that will be used as a model in developing the Eden Hill Farm signage guidelines are outlined on pgs. 5-5 through 5-8 of “Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic Zone”. These guidelines refer to a historic application however the general intent of providing signage that can unify the commercial street while serving to identify and promote….” as well as “consider the entire façade of the building as the sign”. 17. Pg. 92 – Lighting Standards – references to “Approved manufactures” should be changed to “ Approved manufactures or equal”. The intent is to establish a level of quality and not to limit other manufactures of equal quality. 18. Pg. 93 – Site Furnishings - references to “Approved manufactures” should be changed to “ Approved manufactures or equal”. The intent is to establish a level of quality and not to limit other manufactures of equal quality. 19. Pg. 95 – Fencing - references to “Approved manufactures” should be changed to “ Approved manufactures or equal”. The intent is to establish a level of quality and not to limit other manufactures of equal quality. 20. In several locations throughout the Pattern Book, there are spelling and grammar errors. These corrections will occur in the Implementation phase of the project. This ends all addendums to the Pattern Book dated May 6, 2005. 199905304hp-PB addedum.doc

EDEN HILL FARM DEVELOPMENT TEAM SUMMARY RE-ZONING APPLICATION Lands of Eden Hill Farm Z-05-03 Eden Hill Farm, Inc. - Comprised of the family, which has owned Eden Hill Farm for generations, and now consists of the Horsey and Scheller families. Bob Thomas of Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP – Attorney for Eden Hill Hill Farm, Inc. and Investment Properties Associates, LLC. State of Delaware – Contract purchaser of the 30.509 acre allee open space and historic home, and potential purchaser of the 80.128 acre open space on the south west corner of the project. Dover Medical Properties, LLC – Contract purchasers of the 25.4725 acre parcel along North Street title professional office, medical, and financial district. Mark F. Dunkle, Esq. of Parkowski Guerke & Swayze, PA – Land development attorney for Dover Medical Properties, LLC. Investment Properties Associates, LLC – Contract purchasers of the multi use residential district consisting of 108.95 acres and 15.71 acres for a Neighborhood Commercial District. Becker Morgan Group, Inc. – Architects and engineers responsible for the preparation of the pattern book, master plan, and rezoning submission package. Marasco & Associates, Inc. – Specialty architects hired by Dover Medical Properties, LLC for the architecture of their Phase I building. Landscape Architectural Services, LLC – Landscape architect responsible for landscape and open space, site amenities, walkways and lighting sections of the pattern book. 199905304hq-lst.doc

EDEN HILL FARM NARRATIVE OF THE APPLICANTS INTEREST RE-ZONING APPLICATION Lands of Eden Hill Farm Z-05-03 In 2001, the Horsey and Scheller families, which makeup Eden Hill Farm, Inc., recognized that Eden Hill Farm was no longer sustainable as an agricultural operation. The challenge confronting the families was how to realize Eden Hill Farm’s development potential while preserving as much of its historic character as possible, most particularly the farmstead and allées, Cedar and Maple Lanes. Through conversations with the administration of Governor Ruth Ann Miner, which recognized the opportunity to apply the Governor’s “Livable Delaware” principles to the development of Eden Hill Farm, the Scheller and Horsey families receive the support and assistance in there initiative. Under the auspices of The Honorable Nathan Hayward III, Secretary of the Delaware Department of Transportation, the State organized an “Eden Hill Farm Working Group” comprised of representatives of the Horsey and Scheller families, the City of Dover, Kent County, the General Assembly and other State agencies. The Group met six times over nine months to fashion a statement of desired objectives. The Group consensus was that a development embodying the principles of Traditional Neighborhood Design would best realize those objectives. In January 2003, the state, acting through its Department of Transportation and the Scheller and Horsey families, entered into a letter of intent setting forth their shared objectives to promote the development of Eden Hill Farm in a manner that would preserve the historic farmstead; provide for green space; encourage bicycle, pedestrian and transit alternatives to automobile traffic; and employ the most successful principles and practices of Traditional Neighborhood Design communities. This cooperation was eventually to lead to the state purchasing some 95 acres, including the historic homestead and allées, and the families donating to the state a further 28 acres. Over 40% of Eden Hill Farm’s 272 acres will thus be preserved in perpetuity for green space and public recreational activities. Investment Properties Associates has entered into an agreement with the owners to purchase approximately 108.94 acres in order to develop a mixed-use residential traditional neighborhood. The parcel will include approximately 665 units of single family, duplex, town home and condominium units. The proposed use also calls for approximately 598,006 square feet (13.73 acres) of ponds, parks and squares, boulevards and walking trails, which supports the “Livable Delaware” initiative, Principle 3 – Build Livable Communities. It also supports the principle of traditional neighborhood design through street pattern design that mimics the general design of the street pattern in many older communities and creates

streetscapes which are human in scale and create a relationship between the homes, streets and open space. Investment Properties Associates has also entered into an agreement with the owners to purchase 15.71 acres in order to develop a mixed-use commercial neighborhood. The parcel will include approximately nine buildings totaling approximately 217,200 square feet. It proposes to have retail use on the first floor and office and/or residential use on the second floor. The proposed use also calls for approximately 30,313 of boulevards and has a high density of concentrated buildings. It supports the principle of traditional neighborhood design through street pattern design that mimics the general design of the street pattern in many older communities and creates streetscapes which are human in scale and create a relationship between the buildings, streets and open space. The sidewalks along “main street” will be wider then traditional sidewalks to provide and encourage outdoor dining and community activity. Dover Medical Properties, LLC, has entered into an agreement with the owners to purchase 25.47 acres in order to develop a mixed-use professional office, medical, and financial neighborhood. The parcel will include approximately nine buildings totaling approximately 398,250 665 square feet. The proposed use also calls for approximately 87,409 square feet of open space, which supports the “Livable Delaware” initiative, Principle 3 – Build Livable Communities. The plan divides the land into sections, which are intended to mimic Legislative Mall on the east- west axis and Lookerman Street on the north-south axis. The parking would be limited to small sections around the buildings and divided into two small sections in the center of the parcel, which would be further divided by landscape islands. The design also supports the principle of traditional neighborhood design through street pattern design that mimics the general design of the street patterns for commercial/businesses in many older communities and creates streetscapes which are human in scale and create a relationship between the buildings, streets, parking and open space. The combined efforts of the Horsey and Scheller families, the State of Delaware, the City of Dover, Kent County, the General Assembly, Investment Properties Associates, Dover Medical Properties and numerous State agencies has lead to proposal that is keeping with “The Land Development Plan” updated 2003, which shows this area as “Mixed Use” and includes information on the Eden Hill Farm property specifically. The plan creates a neighborhood center with mixed-use development, pedestrian friendly public environment, opportunity for connections to mass transit and an overall master plan 199905304hr-narrative.doc

January 7, 2005 Mr. Gregory V. Moore, P.E. Becker Morgan Group, Inc. 738 S. Governors Avenue Dover, DE 19904 RE: PLUS review – PLUS 2004-12-07 Eden Hill Farms Dear Mr. Moore, Thank you for meeting with State agency planners on December 22, 2004 to discuss the proposed plans for the rezoning of Eden Hill Farms from IP/Ag to TND in the City of Dover. According to the information received, the developers are seeking approval for a 620-unit mixed-use development between West North Street and New Burton Road on the west side of Dover. Please note that changes to the plan, other than those suggested in this letter, may result in additional comments from the State. Additionally, these comments reflect only issues that are the responsibility of the agencies represented in the PLUS review. The developers will need to comply with any Federal, County and local regulations regarding this property. As the City of Dover is the governing authority over this land, the developers will need to comply with any and all regulations/restrictions set forth by the City. This office has received the following comments from State agencies: Office of State Planning Coordination – Contact David Edgell 739-3090 This project is located in Investment Level 1according to the 2004 State Strategies for Policies and Spending. This site is also located in the City of Dover. Investment Level 1 reflects areas that are already developed in an urban or suburban fashion, where infrastructure is existing or readily available, and where future redevelopment or infill projects are expected and encouraged by State policy. This project is a mixed use project providing commercial, office, residential and open space uses. Our office supports mixed use infill projects as essential to the Livable Delaware strategy of concentrating growth in and around existing communities and infrastructure. This

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 2 of 17 is the type of project that is highly desirable to allow us to meet our goals of revitalizing our already urbanized areas while protecting agricultural lands and natural resource areas from encroachment by sprawling suburban and rural development. Our office has no objections to the proposed rezoning and development of this project in accordance with the relevant City codes and ordinances. In addition, we would like to commend the property owners, developers, and project designers for working collaboratively with the State to instill this project with an exceptionally high level of urban design quality and open space preservation. There have been many months of discussions between and amongst these parties, and the result is truly a project which we are sure will fit well into its immediate surroundings, the available and future infrastructure, and the fabric of the City as a whole. We are particularly encouraged that the owners and applicants have chosen to develop a “Traditional Neighborhood Design”. For the most part, this development appears to be consistent with the principals of “Traditional Neighborhood Design” (which is also known as “New Urbanism” by some planners and architects). Portions of this development embody all six of the guiding principals found in our publication titled Better Models for Development in Delaware: Principle 1. Conserve Farmland, Open Space, and Scenic Resources: This plan has a significant and noteworthy open space component. The important historic farmstead and “tree alleys” were preserved. Too often open space is an afterthought – here you have made it a guiding principle in the design of the project, and chosen to integrate open spaces that relate to the historical use of the property as a farm. These open spaces will be valuable features for residents, employees, and the larger City of Dover community. The large park area in the southwestern corner of the site will have a great benefit for regional recreation. Principle 2. Maintain a Clear Edge Between the Town and Countryside: This chapter of Better Models talks about the importance of growing through infill and redevelopment, rather than sprawling outward and impacting farmland and open space. This principle is addressed through the project’s location as an infill parcel. This project will provide a range of residences, jobs, commercial, and professional services close to Dover’s downtown, rather than on a greenfield site on the edge of town or in a rural area. Principle 3. Build Livable Communities: The term “livable communities” can mean many things to many people. We are impressed that the owners, developers, and designers have incorporated so many different aspects of community life into this mixed use plan. Most new developments we see through PLUS contain homes and some component of open space. New residents are compelled to drive to work, to shop, to go to restaurants, and even to go to a park. This development provides not only homes but extensive open space, preserved historic sites, commercial services and medical and office uses. It is truly a live-work community that can meet a range of needs for future residents and employees alike.

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 3 of 17 Principle 4. Preserve Historic Resources: The owners, designers, and developers thought of preservation first and protected the historic structures, tree alleys and open space on the site. Principle 5. Respect Local Character in New Construction: The choice of the “Traditional Neighborhood Design” style of development has resulted in a traditionally designed street pattern that mimics the general design of the street pattern in many older communities, Dover included. While we have not seen nor reviewed any conceptual architectural drawings for the buildings we understand that the City of Dover’s ordinance does compel the applicants to link the architectural design to historic precedents in Dover and the region. Principle 6. Reduce the Impact of the Car: One of the basic tenets of Traditional Neighborhood Design is to design developments for people first by creating human scale streetscapes. There is no denying that the automobile has transformed our culture in the last 50 – 60 years, and the best Traditional Neighborhood Design projects balance the design goals of creating the human scale streetscape with the reality and necessity of accommodating automobiles. The relationship between the buildings and the streets and open spaces is very important in creating the “public rooms” and “public spaces” that define all of our great cities and towns. This plan is largely successful in this regard. With the notable exception of the medical office complex, the buildings are oriented to the streets, and parking is available on the street, behind commercial buildings, in alleys or on individual lots. The streets also appear to be very pedestrian friendly, and there are a network of trails and paths linking the different components of the development which will provide residents and employees the option of walking for recreation or to get to the different uses on the site. As noted above in Principle 6, the one disappointing aspect of this plan is the medical complex. The design, as presented, does not appear to be consistent with the overall “Traditional Neighborhood Design” design philosophy in the following regards: 1. No Mixed Uses: This district appears to be a single use district for medical offices. The design and marketability of the project could probably be enhanced by integrating other uses into this complex. Residential uses, such as condo or apartment units, or perhaps a residential and nursing facility for the elderly might be good matches. Small scale commercial uses that serve the medical complex (snack bars, gift shops, etc.) would also probably work well in this portion of the plan. 2. The Buildings Do Not Contribute to Urban Form: As designed, the buildings are completely surrounded by parking. This design has more in common with a typical suburban mall than it does with a Traditional Neighborhood Design design. One of the basic principles of Traditional Neighborhood Design is that the buildings should frame streets (to create

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 4 of 17 streetscapes) and open spaces (to create three dimensional public spaces). Parking is essential to any urban or suburban use, but the best Traditional Neighborhood Design projects balance this by designing buildings that hide the parking in internal blocks, place it on the streets, integrate parking structures, or a combination of all three. The appearance, function, and success of this component of the plan could be enhanced by revisiting the basic design of the buildings as they relate to the streets and open spaces. The goal should be to reduce the visual impact of the parking while using buildings to enhance the urban form of streets and open spaces. 3. An Excessive Amount of Parking: We have not done any detailed calculations, but it does appear that the amount of parking proposed is more typical of a suburban mall than a mixed use, infill project. The parking calculations typically used for suburban commercial and office uses tend to assume a “worst case scenario” of full occupation of the use at all times, and that there are no alternatives to driving to the site. This project is accessible to transit, and will be connected to other neighborhoods and employment sites through a pedestrian network. The mixed use nature of the project may also decrease single occupant vehicle trips and provide for joint use parking. We ask the applicants to reconsider the total amount of parking provided. Other project goals, such as providing parking near the building entrance for patients, could be met by reserving certain spaces or instituting other parking restrictions rather than by providing an excessive amount of parking. This is an extremely valuable piece of property. It would be a shame to not take advantage of opportunities to maximize its use in order to provide extra parking for vehicles that will rarely be used. To summarize, our office commends the applicants, owners, designers, and developers for proposing a very innovative and creative mixed use project on an important infill parcel in Dover. This project combines elements of all six “Design Principles” encouraged by Better Models for Development in Delaware into a very attractive and viable project for the City of Dover. We do ask that the designers and applicants consider making some design changes to the medical complex in order to ensure that it is consistent with the high level of design quality exhibited by the rest of the development proposal. Please note below that the State Historic Preservation Office has some more detailed design comments for the project that are intended to improve the integration of the new development with the historic resources on the site. Please consider these design comments as well. Our office has no objections to the rezoning and development of this project in accordance with all of the relevant City codes and ordinances. In addition, we would like to extend an invitation to the designers and developers of the medical office plan component to meet with us to discuss design alternatives. Our office will be able to provide examples of other successful “Traditional Neighborhood Designs” and provide design assistance based on the concepts found in Better Models for Development in Delaware.

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 5 of 17 State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) – Contact Anne McCleave 739-5685 Eden Hill is listed in the National Register of Historic Places because of its contribution to agriculture, its association with significant people (Nicholas Ridgley), its architecture, and its potential to yield information (historic information illustrated in the initial construction and subsequent additions and alterations of the house). The property retains its historic integrity, including location, setting, design, feeling, workmanship, and association. The property’s history and its visual representation and continuity of that history are important characteristics of the property. It is good to see that the proposed plan includes retention of the house and outbuildings, and some historic landscape features, such as the historic entrances to the property. Nevertheless, the proposed development represented in the Master Plan would have an adverse effect on the historic property. We feel the design of the Master Plan could be more sensitive to the historic property. A large block of preserved open space around the historic buildings, rather than the “strips” of open space shown in the Master Plan, would have been more ideal. As proposed, the development is too densely located around the historic buildings, resulting in diminishment of the historic property’s integrity of setting, feeling, and association. We appreciate the attempt to develop a Traditional Neighborhood Development design and feel the design is successful in the residential section of the property; however, we feel the design is unsuccessful with the medical and commercial complexes on the northern part of the development. We suggest the following changes to the plan: 1) The Medical Complex turns in on itself and becomes an isolated component of the development instead of being part of the Traditional Neighborhood. 2) Reduce amount of parking spaces. 3) Move some of the three story condominiums to the south portion of the Medical Complex, which could help the complex become part of the Traditional Neighborhood. 4) Move the condominiums immediately south of the Allee and open space to the north side of The Allee. a. Currently, the design of the Allee includes residential/condominiums on the south side and a landscape buffer, backs of medical buildings, and parking on the north side. Moving some of the condominiums to the north side of the Allee enhances the streetscape and Traditional appearance. b. As stated above, this would help tie the medical office complex into the development; and

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 6 of 17 c. Allow for more open space within the condominium section, minimizing the density of the condominiums and minimizing the effect on the historic buildings. 5) The Commercial Complex, located on the northwest corner, affects the historic property, specifically the proposed grocery store located immediately adjacent to the historic buildings. a. The size and massing of the grocery store is not compatible with the historic buildings. b. The grocery store use would require truck access to the back of the building, which abuts the historic property, and debris and other equipment resulting from the grocery store use will find its way onto the historic property. c. If it is necessary for a grocery store or big box building to be located on this property, we suggest locating with the retail/office buildings. d. Locating the grocery store away from the historic buildings and the “traditional main street” closer to the historic buildings provides a more traditional and compatible use and design. 6) Remove the proposed road between the historic buildings and the “future public use” building and remove the road connecting the Medical Complex to the Commercial Complex. a. This will provide a unity to the open space; and b. Provide a better connection between the “future public use” building and the historic buildings. 7) There are Native American archaeological sites on the south part of the Master Plan and a high probability for historic archaeological sites in the area surrounding the house and the hedgerows. The potential historic sites are associated with the house and past outbuildings. a. We recommend the developers and DelDOT hire an archaeological consultant to provide a Phase I survey of their respective properties (SHPO can provide a scope of work). 8) The arc road connection on the western side of the Allee separates the open space. This road connection should be designed and landscaped to blend in as much as possible and to contain a pedestrian connection or crosswalk to connect the two sides of the open space. Parking should be restricted in the arc to limit the visual impact cars would have on the continuity of the historic open space. 9) Road widths should be consistent with traditional town street widths. 10) Make sure the construction is high quality throughout the development. Furthermore, new construction, while keeping with the traditional town feel,

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 7 of 17 should be compatible with the historic buildings in scale, materials and workmanship. 11) As the development is designed, we are confident that the landscaping will be appropriate for a Traditional Neighborhood Development. Please keep in mind that the historic landscape of this property is the open space. Planting additional landscape features along the edges of the open space may work to buffer the new developments from the historic property. However, a large amount of buffering would be unnecessary if the design of the new development is sensitive to the historic property. 12) As the use of the historic buildings may change, SHPO can provide assistance to DelDOT and other parties involved in determining future uses and rehabilitation and preservation of the buildings. SHPO would also like to assist with any new construction in the public areas as it relates to compatibility, design, siting, etc. This includes the “future use public building” indicated on the plan. The historic complex is the attraction of the property. The design of the plan should focus on the property’s historic attraction and not hide it from view by locating the dense development so close to the historic buildings and along the outer streets. The design of the development should illustrate the open space that has always been historically associated with the property. A better open space design would preserve the property’s integrity. We hope the developers use the historic property to their advantage and take our suggestions into consideration. Department of Transportation – Contact: Bill Brockenbrough 760-2109 Daniel & Deborah Scheller seek to develop an approximately 272-acre assemblage of parcels (Tax Parcels ED-05-076.00-01-13.00-000, ED-05-076.00-01-14.00-000, ED-05- 076.00-01-14.01-000) on the south side of West North Street (Kent Road 73) and the west side of the Norfolk Southern railroad tracks in the City of Dover. The development would be neo-traditional in design and would include 620 dwellings of various types, 134,400 square feet of commercial uses, a 280,000 square foot medical complex and a seasonal farmer’s market pavilion. The land is zoned IP/Ag (Industrial Park and Agriculture) and a rezoning to TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design) would be needed for the proposed development to proceed. Our comments are as follows: 1) DelDOT has been an active participant in the development of the concept plan for this project and has spent over $2,400,000, appropriated through three different Bond Bills, for planning and acquiring the 28 acres including the farmstead. We fully support the proposed rezoning. We wish to continue working with the design team for both the medical complex and the residential development to arrive at the best arrangement of building sites and streets, in the interest of safety and efficiency.

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 8 of 17 2) We are interested in reconnecting Eden Hill Farm to Water Street for the purpose of providing good access to the medical complex and the townhouse and condominium uses. However, making this connection across the Norfolk Southern railroad tracks at grade will require the closure of an existing grade crossing in another location. We are working with Norfolk Southern to accomplish that. If we are unsuccessful in that regard, legislation will be necessary to permit the creation of a new grade crossing at Water Street. 3) The road that is shown on the Master Plan as “Salisbury Rd.” would be an extension of Saulsbury Road (Kent Road 156). DelDOT has a project, known as the West Dover Connector (WDC), which could extend Saulsbury Road from its intersection with West North Street to an as yet undetermined point on New Burton Road (Kent Road 190). Accordingly, since this road may become part of Saulsbury Road, it should be designed and built to State standards. Presently we do not have a typical section that we would use in extending Saulsbury Road, but we expect to develop one for planning purposes in 2005. In planning the development, we recommend that a 150-foot right-of-way be set aside for Salisbury Road. Any typical section that we are likely to develop would fit within that width. If the developer is ready to proceed with the first phase of development before the appropriate road section has been determined we will work with the developer on a suitable alternative or temporary access arrangement so the project is not delayed. Regarding the alignment of the WDC, thus far we have developed several concepts. We are not referring to them as “alternatives” because “alternative” is a defined term in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process and we are only just beginning that process. As mentioned at the PLUS meeting, all of the concepts that involve extending Saulsbury Road follow the proposed Salisbury Road south to the proposed roundabout and depart from there. As also mentioned, some of those concepts would extend the road through the proposed development. It is also possible that the stormwater management pond may need to be moved, as alternative alignments receive further study as part of the NEPA process (preparation of either an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or an Environmental Assessment (EA)). Depending on that outcome, we may then be able to change that recommendation. We expect to complete the NEPA process and arrive at a determination in 2006. DelDOT’s preference is that the developers delay the platting of this area until the alternatives have been selected. However, we are aware that the developer must show a conceptual master plan for this site in order to apply for the rezoning at the City. Any plan that is presented to the City for this section should contain the caveat that the area south of the round about may need to be redesigned or re-platted based on the desired alternatives selected through the WDC study process. The project should also be phased so that the area south of the roundabout is in a later phase of construction. More information about the WDC project is available at www.DelDOT.net. Questions regarding the project may be directed to our project manager, Mr. Jay Kelley at (302) 760-2365.

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 9 of 17 4) While not required as part of the City’s approval process, a traffic impact study (TIS) is important to ensure that the transportation infrastructure needed to support this development is sized properly. We recognize that the WDC, if it is built, will significantly change travel patterns in the area of this project and we take responsibility for having the area road network function well in that event. However, the developers of Eden Hill Farm want to proceed now and we have not yet determined what, if any, alignment will be built for the West Dover Connector. Therefore, at least the initial phases of the development must be designed, and have sufficient improvements to the existing road network, to function without the WDC. As part of the engineering studies done for the WDC, a significant amount of traffic data has been collected. That data is available from Mr. Kelley and may be used in the TIS. To obtain a scope of work for the TIS, the developer should have their traffic engineer contact our project engineer, Mr. Todd Sammons, at (302) 760-2134. 5) The developer’s engineer should contact our project manager for Kent County, Mr. Brad Herb of Johnson, Mirmiran & Thompson, regarding our requirements for access. Mr. Herb may be reached at (302) 266-9080. Delaware Transit Corporation – Contact Catherine Dennis 739-3278 The area is served by DART Routes 102, 113 on North St. and Route 103 on New Burton Road. DART requests the site plan include sidewalks and wishes to discuss the possibility of implementing bus stops. Please contact DART Planner Wayne Henderson at (302) 577-3278 extension 3553. Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control – Contact Kevin Coyle 739-3091 General Comment This project plan represents what Livable Delaware should be about. The plan preserves wetlands and forests. It provides ample recreational opportunity and is within an established metropolitan region. Soils According to the Kent County soil survey, Sassafras and Woodstown were mapped in the immediate vicinity of the proposed construction. Sassafras is well-drained upland soil that has few limitations for development. Woodstown is a moderately well-drained soil of low-lying uplands that has moderate limitations for development. Wetlands Statewide Wetland Mapping Project (SWMP) maps indicate the presence of palustrine wetlands. Site plans show that there will not be direct impacts to these wetlands through construction activities; however, secondary impacts of construction could be detrimental to the health of these wetlands and their associated streams. These wetlands are regulated

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 10 of 17 by the Army Corps of Engineers through Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. In addition, individual 404 permits and certain Nationwide Permits from the Army Corps of Engineers also require 401 Water Quality Certification from the DNREC Wetland and Subaqueous Land Section and Coastal Zone Federal Consistency Certification from the DNREC Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Delaware Coastal Programs Section. Each of these certifications represents a separate permitting process. Impacts to streams and associated riparian wetlands, including road crossings, are regulated by the DNREC Wetlands and Subaqueous Lands Section, and by the Corps of Engineers. These wetlands provide water quality benefits, attenuate flooding and provide important habitat for plants and wildlife. Vegetated buffers of no less than 100 feet should be employed from the edge of the wetland complex. The developer should note that both DNREC and Army Corps of Engineers discourage allowing lot lines to contain wetlands to minimize potential cumulative impacts resulting from unauthorized and/or illegal activities and disturbances that can be caused by homeowners. To find out more about permitting requirements, the applicant is encouraged to attend a Joint Permit Process Meeting. These meetings are held monthly and are attended by federal and state resource agencies responsible for wetland permitting. Contact Denise Rawding at (302) 739-4691 to schedule a meeting. TMDLs Although Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) as a “pollution runoff mitigation strategy” to reduce nutrient loading have not yet been developed for most of the tributaries or subwatersheds of the Delaware Bay watershed to date, work is continuing on their development. TMDLs for the St. Jones River subwatershed, of which this parcel is part, are scheduled for completion in December 2006. Therefore, until the specified TMDL reductions and pollution control strategies are adopted, it shall be incumbent upon the developer to employ best available technologies (BATS) and/or best management practices (BMPs) as “methodological mitigative strategies” to reduce degradative impacts associated with development. Water Supply The project information sheets state water will be provided to the project by the City of Dover via a central water system. Our records indicate that the project is located within the public water service area granted to the City of Dover under Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity 90-CPCN-07. Should dewatering points be needed during any phase of construction, a dewatering well construction permit must be obtained from the Water Supply Section prior to construction of the well points. In addition, a water allocation permit will be needed if the pumping rate will exceed 50,000 gallons per day at any time during operation.

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 11 of 17 All well permit applications must be prepared and signed by licensed water well contractors, and only licensed well drillers may construct the wells. Please factor in the necessary time for processing the well permit applications into the construction schedule. Dewatering well permit applications typically take approximately four weeks to process, which allows the necessary time for technical review and advertising. Should you have any questions concerning these comments, please contact Rick Rios at 302-739-3665. Sediment and Erosion Control/Stormwater Management Requirements: 1) Land disturbing activities in excess of 5,000 square feet are regulated under the Delaware Sediment and Stormwater Regulations. A detailed sediment and stormwater management plan must be reviewed and approved by the Kent Conservation District prior to any land disturbing activity (i.e. clearing, grubbing, filling, grading, etc.) taking place. The review fee and a completed Application for a Detailed Plan are due at the time of plan submittal to the Kent Conservation District. Construction inspection fees based on developed area and stormwater facility maintenance inspection fees based on the number of stormwater facilities are due prior to the start of construction. Please refer to the fee schedule for those amounts. 2) The following notes must appear on the record plan: • The Kent Conservation District reserves the right to enter private property for purposes of periodic site inspection. • The Kent Conservation District reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any erosion or sediment control measure, as it deems necessary. • A clear statement of defined maintenance responsibility for stormwater management facilities must be provided on the Record Plan. 3) Ease of maintenance must be considered as a site design component and a maintenance set aside area for disposal of sediments removed from the basins during the course of regular maintenance must be shown on the Record Plan for the subdivision. 4) All drainage ways and storm drains should be contained within drainage easements and clearly shown on the plan to be recorded by the City of Dover. 5) A soils investigation supporting the stormwater management facility design is required to determine impacts of the seasonal high groundwater level and soils for any basin design. Comments: 1) This project outfalls to both the Puncheon Run and the Tar Ditch drainage systems which both have a well documented history of flooding downstream from this site. A downstream drainage study will be required for this project to determine the impacts of the site development on those systems. Stormwater management requirements for this site will be based on the results of the drainage study and may involve over-managing the stormwater discharges from this site in

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 12 of 17 order to minimize downstream flooding. Groundwater recharge is encouraged, however, without proper construction techniques and effective maintenance, infiltration practices have a high failure rate. Any infiltration practice must meet the minimum requirements for infiltration design and be constructed in strict accordance with the approved plan. 2) It appears that the existing stormwater facility near the northeast corner of the project is to be expanded. Since this facility was constructed by DelDOT, confirmation will be requested that DelDOT will allow this project to utilize that facility and who is responsible for its maintenance. 3) It is recommended that the stormwater management areas be incorporated into the overall landscape plan to enhance water quality and to make the stormwater facility an attractive community amenity. 4) A letter of no objection to recordation will be provided once the detailed Sediment and Stormwater Management plan has been approved. 5) Proper drainage of developed lots and active open space should be considered in the development of the grading plan for this subdivision. 6) Based on the site characteristics, a pre-application meeting is suggested to discuss stormwater management and drainage for this site. Drainage The Drainage Section is aware of existing drainage problems on Puncheon Run, downstream of this project. The Drainage Section requests the volume of stormwater released offsite match existing pre-construction volume, and that stormwater infiltration practices be utilized on this project. The Drainage Section further requests that all precautions be taken to ensure the project does not hinder any off site drainage upstream of the project or create any off site drainage problems downstream by the release of on site stormwater. Floodplains A small portion of the site is within the 100-year floodplain. Development should be limited to areas outside of the floodplain Forests According to 2002 aerial photos, forested areas are found in the southwestern portion of the parcel and along a strip in the northeastern portion. The developer is strongly encouraged to preserve, and where possible, enhance forested resources on site. The forested areas on-site should be viewed as a community asset and managed appropriately. Forested areas on-site set aside for conservation purposes should be placed into a permanent conservation easement or other binding protection. These areas should be clearly marked and delineated so that residents understand their importance and so that homeowner activities do not infringe upon these areas.

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 13 of 17 Open Space PLUS materials indicate that 115 acres of open space is proposed for this parcel. In areas set aside for passive open space, the developer is encouraged to consider establishment of additional forested areas or meadow-type grasses. Once established, these ecosystems provide increased water infiltration into groundwater, decreased run-off into surface water, air quality improvements, and require much less maintenance than traditional turf grass, an important consideration if a homeowners association will take over responsibility for maintenance of community open spaces. Open space containing forest and/or wetlands should be placed into a permanent conservation easement or other permanent protection mechanism. Conservation areas should also be demarked to avoid infringement by homeowners. Stormwater Ponds, Buffers, and Nuisance Species The stormwater management ponds incorporated within the site plan will likely attract waterfowl like resident Canada geese and mute swans that will create a nuisance. The large pond planned next to the athletic field would be especially attractive to these species. High concentrations of waterfowl in ponds create water-quality problems, leave droppings on lawn and paved areas and can become aggressive during the nesting season. Ponds that remain in the plan should be landscaped to deter nuisance species. Short manicured lawns around ponds provide an attractive habitat for these species. However, native plantings, including tall grasses, wildflowers, shrubs, and trees at the edge and within an adequate buffer area (we recommend 50 feet) around ponds, are not as attractive to geese because they do not feel as safe from predators and other disturbance when their view of the area is blocked. The Division of Fish and Wildlife does not provide goose control services, and if problems arise, residents or the home-owners association will have to accept the burden of dealing with these species (e.g., permit applications, costs, securing services of certified wildlife professionals). Solutions can be costly and labor intensive; however, with a reduction in the number of ponds, proper landscaping, monitoring, and other techniques, geese problems can be minimized. It is further recommended that all stormwater ponds be at least 100 feet from all wetlands and waterbodies. Revegetation/Landscaping We request that no invasive species be used in the revegetation of disturbed or landscaped areas. A list of species considered invasive in Delaware can be found on the DNHP web site, www.dnrec.state.de.us/fw/invasive.htm. We further encourage, where possible/feasible, the use of native plants for habitat restoration projects on-site and our Bill McAvoy, Botanist, can be contacted at (302) 653-2880 to assist you in developing a plant list.

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 14 of 17 Recreation We encourage the designer/builder to involve the Dover Parks and Recreation Department in the recreation components of this project. Zach Carter can be reached at (302) 736-7050. We recommend that sidewalks be built fronting every residence and stub streets. A complete system of sidewalks will: 1) fulfill the recreation need for walking and biking facilities, 2) provide opportunities for neighbors to interact in the community, and 3) facilitate safe, convenient off-road access to neighboring communities, public mass transit stops, schools, stores, work, etc. Community trail systems with long continuous trails, perimeter-only trails, and systems with few access points, often go unused and neglected. For trail design/construction specifications, contact Susan Moerschel at (302) 739-5285. Underground Storage Tanks There are six inactive LUST site(s) located near the proposed project: George & Lynch Inc, Facility # 1-000087, Project # K9402048 Chesapeake Supply & Equipment, Facility # 1-000247, Project # K9705070 Chesapeake Utilities Corp, Facility # 1-000251, Project # K8905233 Dover city Police Department, Facility # 1-000310, Project # K9510232 Coca Cola Bottling Co., Facility # 1-000471, Project # K9306119 B & J Investments, Facility # 1-000601, Project # K0009114 No environmental impact is expected from the above inactive/active LUST site(s). However, should any underground storage tank or petroleum contaminated soil be discovered during construction, the Tank Management Branch must be notified as soon as possible. It is not anticipated that any construction specifications would be need to be changed due to petroleum contamination. However, should any unanticipated contamination be encountered and PVC pipe is being utilized, it will need to be changed to ductile steel in the contaminated areas. Site Investigation and Restoration There are 10 SIRB sites located near the proposed project: DE-0060, 1110, 1213, 1212, 1240, 1143, 0057, 1107, 1171, and 1214. Several of these SIRB sites are areas that were studied as potential Brownfields sites. Other SIRB sites have found that the shallow groundwater is contaminated with organic compounds. There is PCE in the shallow groundwater and other dry cleaner solvents; however, it has been found that this contamination is moving to the southeast from Governors Ave to the St. Jones River, and it is not likely that the proposed project will be affected. The proposed project application states that public water will be used, but if domestic wells will be installed, SIRB should be notified.

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 15 of 17 Air Quality Once complete, vehicle emissions associated with this project are estimated to be 47.6 tons (95,163.5 pounds) per year of VOC (volatile organic compounds), 39.4 tons (78,789.0 pounds) per year of NOx (nitrogen oxides), 29.1 tons (58,131.9 pounds) per year of SO2 (sulfur dioxide), 2.6 ton (5,174.7 pounds) per year of fine particulates and 3,980.2 tons (7,960,308.1 pounds) per year of CO2 (carbon dioxide). Emissions from area sources associated with this project are estimated to be 19.2 tons (38,383.8 pounds) per year of VOC (volatile organic compounds), 2.1 ton (4,223.4 pounds) per year of NOx (nitrogen oxides), 1.8 ton (3,504.8 pounds) per year of SO2 (sulfur dioxide), 2.3 ton (4,522.8 pounds) per year of fine particulates and 77.8 tons (155,599.3 pounds) per year of CO2 (carbon dioxide). Emissions from electrical power generation associated with this project are estimated to be 7.6 tons (15,212.6 pounds) per year of NOx (nitrogen oxides), 26.5 tons (52,913.3 pounds) per year of SO2 (sulfur dioxide) and 3,902.4 tons (7,804,708.8 pounds) per year of CO2 (carbon dioxide). VOC NOx SO2 PM2.5 CO2 Mobile 47.6 39.4 29.1 2.6 3980.2 Residential 19.2 2.1 1.8 2.3 77.8 Electrical 7.6 26.5 3902.4 Power TOTAL 66.8 49.1 57.4 4.9 7960.4 The Eden Hill project will have characteristics that will significantly mitigate the air quality impacts. The project is a mixed use, live-work community in an infill location, next to downtown Dover, with a pedestrian network and trails that are connected in multiple places to the City's existing street and pedestrian network and access to transit. Regardless, there still will be impacts on air quality from energy use. Electrical usage via electric power plant generation alone totaled to produce an additional 8 tons of nitrogen oxides per year and 27 tons of sulfur dioxide per year. A significant method to mitigate this impact would be to require the builder to construct Energy Star qualified homes. Every percentage of increased energy efficiency translates into a percent reduction in pollution. Quoting from their webpage, http://www.energystar.gov/: “ENERGY STAR qualified homes are independently verified to be at least 30% more energy efficient than homes built to the 1993 national Model Energy Code or 15% more efficient than state energy code, whichever is more rigorous. These savings are based on heating, cooling, and hot water energy use and are typically achieved through a combination of: • building envelope upgrades, • high performance windows,

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 16 of 17 • controlled air infiltration, • upgraded heating and air conditioning systems, • tight duct systems and • upgraded water-heating equipment.” Our energy office in DNREC is in the process of training builders in making their structures more energy efficient. The Energy Star Program is excellent way to save on energy costs and reduce air pollution. We highly recommend the Eden Hill development and other residential proposals increase the energy efficiency of their homes. State Fire Marshal’s Office – Contact John Rossiter 323-5365 No comment. This project is under the jurisdiction of the City of Dover Fire Marshal. Department of Agriculture - Contact Mark Davis 739-4811 The Department of Agriculture staff reviewed the Eden Hill Plan and supports the development concept and design. Ongoing design issues will be addressed with the Delaware Forest Service, the City of Dover, and the developer. The site is located within city limits and as such development is appropriate. DDA requests that every effort be made to preserve any historic structures. The Delaware Forest Service defers all comments to the City of Dover’s existing land- use ordinances and extends its services to assist with this project at the request of the City of Dover. Delaware Economic Development Office – Contact Dorrie Moore 672-6816 The Delaware Economic Development Office supports the project as it relates to Livable Delaware. To address concerns about down zoning this industrial parcel that is served by rail, and in an effort to create employment opportunities, the DEDO would like to join forces with the Office of State Planning Coordination and the City of Dover to explore other sites for industrial development throughout the City. Public Service Commission - Contact Andrea Maucher 739-4247 Any expansion of natural gas or installation of a closed propane system must fall within Pipeline Safety guidelines. Contact: Malak Michael at (302) 739-4247. Recent legislation (Senate Bill 99) placed non-governmental companies providing wastewater services to 50 or more customers (in the aggregate) under the regulatory control of the PSC. While rules are not yet in place, governmental agencies offering wastewater services must file data with the Commission regarding its service areas. Contact: Kevin Neilson at (302) 739-4247. Delaware State Housing Authority – Contact Jimmy Atkins 739-4263 The proposal is to develop 620 units on 272 acres between West North Street and New Burton Road on the west side of Dover. According to the State Strategies for Policies and Spending, the proposal is located in Investment Level Areas 1 and 2. DSHA

PLUS January 7, 2005 Page 17 of 17 supports this proposal because it is located in an area where the state is encouraging compact, mixed use, and superior design. Furthermore, the proposal builds upon the State’s Livable Delaware initiative and targets first time homebuyers. The provision of this type of unit will help address the need for affordable homeownership opportunities identified in the 2003 Statewide Housing Needs Assessment. Delaware Emergency Management Agency – Contact Don Knox 659-3362 No comment. Department of Education – Contact Nick Vacirca 739-4658 No comment. This concludes our comments. Upon filing of an application with the local jurisdiction, the applicant shall provide to the local jurisdiction and the Office of State Planning Coordination a written response to these comments noting whether or not specific recommendations were incorporated into the project design and the reasons therefore. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions, please contact me at 302-739-3090. Sincerely, Constance C. Holland, AICP Director CC: City of Dover

June 6, 2005 Constance Holland, AICP Delaware State Office of Planning Coordination 540 S. Dupont Highway, Suite 7 Dover, DE 19901 RE: Preliminary Land Use Service EDEN HILL FARMS Dover, Delaware 1999053.04 Dear Ms. Holland: The Delaware Office of State Planning Coordination reviewed the proposed plans for re- zoning of Eden Hill farms from IP/AG to TND in the City of Dover through their Preliminary Land Use Service (PLUS) process on January 7, 2005. The developers are seeking approval for a 620-unit mixed use development between North Street and New Burton Road on the west side of Dover. Attached, are the PLUS comments received by the various state agencies, with our response in italics and a revised master plan as a result of PLUS comments: Office of State Planning Coordination – Contact David Edgell 739-3090 This project is located in Investment Level 1according to the 2004 State Strategies for Policies and Spending. This site is also located in the City of Dover. Investment Level 1 reflects areas that are already developed in an urban or suburban fashion, where infrastructure is existing or readily available, and where future redevelopment or infill projects are expected and encouraged by State policy. This project is a mixed use project providing commercial, office, residential and open space uses. Our office supports mixed use infill projects as essential to the Livable Delaware strategy of concentrating growth in and around existing communities and infrastructure. This is the type of project that is highly desirable to allow us to meet our goals of revitalizing our already urbanized areas while protecting agricultural lands and natural resource areas from encroachment by sprawling suburban and rural development. Our office has no objections to the proposed rezoning and development of this project in accordance with the relevant City codes and ordinances. In addition, we would like to commend the property owners, developers, and project designers for working collaboratively with the State to instill this project with an exceptionally high level of urban design quality and open space preservation. There have been many months of discussions between and amongst these parties, and the result is truly a project which we are sure will fit well into its immediate surroundings, the available and future infrastructure, and the fabric of the City as a whole. We are particularly encouraged that the owners and applicants have chosen to develop a “Traditional Neighborhood Design”. For the most part, this development appears to be consistent with the principals of “Traditional Neighborhood Design” (which is also known as “New Urbanism” by some planners and architects). Portions of this development Page 1 of 19

embody all six of the guiding principals found in our publication titled Better Models for Development in Delaware: Principle 1. Conserve Farmland, Open Space, and Scenic Resources: This plan has a significant and noteworthy open space component. The important historic farmstead and “tree alleys” were preserved. Too often open space is an afterthought – here you have made it a guiding principle in the design of the project, and chosen to integrate open spaces that relate to the historical use of the property as a farm. These open spaces will be valuable features for residents, employees, and the larger City of Dover community. The large park area in the southwestern corner of the site will have a great benefit for regional recreation. Principle 2. Maintain a Clear Edge Between the Town and Countryside: This chapter of Better Models talks about the importance of growing through infill and redevelopment, rather than sprawling outward and impacting farmland and open space. This principle is addressed through the project’s location as an infill parcel. This project will provide a range of residences, jobs, commercial, and professional services close to Dover’s downtown, rather than on a greenfield site on the edge of town or in a rural area. Principle 3. Build Livable Communities: The term “livable communities” can mean many things to many people. We are impressed that the owners, developers, and designers have incorporated so many different aspects of community life into this mixed use plan. Most new developments we see through PLUS contain homes and some component of open space. New residents are compelled to drive to work, to shop, to go to restaurants, and even to go to a park. This development provides not only homes but extensive open space, preserved historic sites, commercial services and medical and office uses. It is truly a live-work community that can meet a range of needs for future residents and employees alike. Principle 4. Preserve Historic Resources: The owners, designers, and developers thought of preservation first and protected the historic structures, tree alleys and open space on the site. Principle 5. Respect Local Character in New Construction: The choice of the “Traditional Neighborhood Design” style of development has resulted in a traditionally designed street pattern that mimics the general design of the street pattern in many older communities, Dover included. While we have not seen nor reviewed any conceptual architectural drawings for the buildings we understand that the City of Dover’s ordinance does compel the applicants to link the architectural design to historic precedents in Dover and the region. Principle 6. Reduce the Impact of the Car: One of the basic tenets of Traditional Neighborhood Design is to design developments for people first by creating human scale streetscapes. There is no denying that the automobile has transformed our culture in the last 50 – 60 years, and the best Traditional Neighborhood Design projects balance the design goals of creating the human scale streetscape with the reality and necessity of accommodating automobiles. The relationship between the buildings and the streets and open spaces is very important in creating the “public rooms” and “public spaces” that define all of our great cities and towns. This plan is largely successful in this regard. With the notable exception of the medical office complex, the buildings are oriented to the Page 2 of 19

streets, and parking is available on the street, behind commercial buildings, in alleys or on individual lots. The streets also appear to be very pedestrian friendly, and there are a network of trails and paths linking the different components of the development which will provide residents and employees the option of walking for recreation or to get to the different uses on the site. As noted above in Principle 6, the one disappointing aspect of this plan is the medical complex. The design, as presented, does not appear to be consistent with the overall “Traditional Neighborhood Design” design philosophy in the following regards: 1. No Mixed Uses: This district appears to be a single use district for medical offices. The design and marketability of the project could probably be enhanced by integrating other uses into this complex. Residential uses, such as condo or apartment units, or perhaps a residential and nursing facility for the elderly might be good matches. Small-scale commercial uses that serve the medical complex (snack bars, gift shops, etc.) would also probably work well in this portion of the plan. 2. The Buildings Do Not Contribute to Urban Form: As designed, the buildings are completely surrounded by parking. This design has more in common with a typical suburban mall than it does with a Traditional Neighborhood Design. One of the basic principles of Traditional Neighborhood Design is that the buildings should frame streets (to create streetscapes) and open spaces (to create three dimensional public spaces). Parking is essential to any urban or suburban use, but the best Traditional Neighborhood Design projects balance this by designing buildings that hide the parking in internal blocks, place it on the streets, integrate parking structures, or a combination of all three. The appearance, function, and success of this component of the plan could be enhanced by revisiting the basic design of the buildings as they relate to the streets and open spaces. The goal should be to reduce the visual impact of the parking while using buildings to enhance the urban form of streets and open spaces. 3. An Excessive Amount of Parking: We have not done any detailed calculations, but it does appear that the amount of parking proposed is more typical of a suburban mall than a mixed use, infill project. The parking calculations typically used for suburban commercial and office uses tend to assume a “worst case scenario” of full occupation of the use at all times, and that there are no alternatives to driving to the site. This project is accessible to transit, and will be connected to other neighborhoods and employment sites through a pedestrian network. The mixed-use nature of the project may also decrease single occupant vehicle trips and provide for joint use parking. We ask the applicants to reconsider the total amount of parking provided. Other project goals, such as providing parking near the building entrance for patients, could be met by reserving certain spaces or instituting other parking restrictions rather than by providing an excessive amount of parking. This is an extremely valuable piece of property. It would be a shame to not take advantage of opportunities to maximize its use in order to provide extra parking for vehicles that will rarely be used. Page 3 of 19

To summarize, our office commends the applicants, owners, designers, and developers for proposing a very innovative and creative mixed-use project on an important infill parcel in Dover. This project combines elements of all six “Design Principles” encouraged by Better Models for Development in Delaware into a very attractive and viable project for the City of Dover. We do ask that the designers and applicants consider making some design changes to the medical complex in order to ensure that it is consistent with the high level of design quality exhibited by the rest of the development proposal. Please note below that the State Historic Preservation Office has some more detailed design comments for the project that are intended to improve the integration of the new development with the historic resources on the site. Please consider these design comments as well. Our office has no objections to the rezoning and development of this project in accordance with all of the relevant City codes and ordinances. In addition, we would like to extend an invitation to the designers and developers of the medical office plan component to meet with us to discuss design alternatives. Our office will be able to provide examples of other successful “Traditional Neighborhood Designs” and provide design assistance based on the concepts found in Better Models for Development in Delaware. No response required. State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) – Contact Anne McCleave 739-5685 Eden Hill is listed in the National Register of Historic Places because of its contribution to agriculture, its association with significant people (Nicholas Ridgley), its architecture, and its potential to yield information (historic information illustrated in the initial construction and subsequent additions and alterations of the house). The property retains its historic integrity, including location, setting, design, feeling, workmanship, and association. The property’s history and its visual representation and continuity of that history are important characteristics of the property. It is good to see that the proposed plan includes retention of the house and outbuildings, and some historic landscape features, such as the historic entrances to the property. Nevertheless, the proposed development represented in the Master Plan would have an adverse effect on the historic property. We feel the design of the Master Plan could be more sensitive to the historic property. A large block of preserved open space around the historic buildings, rather than the “strips” of open space shown in the Master Plan, would have been more ideal. As proposed, the development is too densely located around the historic buildings, resulting in diminishment of the historic property’s integrity of setting, feeling, and association. We appreciate the attempt to develop a Traditional Neighborhood Development design and feel the design is successful in the residential section of the property; however, we feel the design is unsuccessful with the medical and commercial complexes on the northern part of the development. We suggest the following changes to the plan: 1) The Medical Complex turns in on itself and becomes an isolated component of the development instead of being part of the Traditional Neighborhood. Page 4 of 19

We have met with the City of Dover and the Owners to provide a more introspective approach to the design while allowing cross access from the commercial and medical neighborhoods via a main street. Reduce amount of parking spaces. We will work with the City of Dover to identify parking requirements. 2) Move some of the three story condominiums to the south portion of the Medical Complex, which could help the complex become part of the Traditional Neighborhood. We will take this comment into consideration during the design. The office area has been redesigned to respect the feel of the Dover Legislative Hall, thus providing a TND design element. 3) Move the condominiums immediately south of the Allee and open space to the north side of The Allee. a. Currently, the design of the Allee includes residential/condominiums on the south side and a landscape buffer, backs of medical buildings, and parking on the north side. Moving some of the condominiums to the north side of the Allee enhances the streetscape and Traditional appearance. Streetscape has been enhanced with more urban layout accomplishing the goal. b. As stated above, this would help tie the medical office complex into the development; and Relocation of entrance into the medical complex at Clarence Street meets the intent of the comment and provides connectivity to both neighborhoods. c. Allow for more open space within the condominium section, minimizing the density of the condominiums and minimizing the effect on the historic buildings. Open space on the property is in excess of 40%. 4) The Commercial Complex, located on the northwest corner, affects the historic property, specifically the proposed grocery store located immediately adjacent to the historic buildings. a. The size and massing of the grocery store is not compatible with the historic buildings. The grocery store has been moved away from the historic buildings, toward Kraft Foods.. b. The grocery store use would require truck access to the back of the building, which abuts the historic property, and debris and other equipment resulting from the grocery store use will find its way onto the historic property. Page 5 of 19

Fencing and screening have been added to alleviate the concern. c. If it is necessary for a grocery store or big box building to be located on this property, we suggest locating with the retail/office buildings. This comment has addressed in the revised layout. The grocery store location and the medical office district would yield same issues. d. Locating the grocery store away from the historic buildings and the “traditional main street” closer to the historic buildings provides a more traditional and compatible use and design. Design has been modified per the above comment. 5) Remove the proposed road between the historic buildings and the “future public use” building and remove the road connecting the Medical Complex to the Commercial Complex. a. This will provide a unity to the open space; and b. Provide a better connection between the “future public use” building and the historic buildings. Change made. Road removed. Future public use building is now on the same parcel as the historic home. There are Native American archaeological sites on the south part of the Master Plan and a high probability for historic archaeological sites in the area surrounding the house and the hedgerows. The potential historic sites are associated with the house and past outbuildings. c. We recommend the developers and DelDOT hire an archaeological consultant to provide a Phase I survey of their respective properties (SHPO can provide a scope of work). A cultural resource survey – archeological site form has been obtained from Bureau of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Archeological and historic sites identified are not part of the development area, and are in the open space acres. Any further investigation will be coordinated with SHPO. 6) The arc road connection on the western side of the Allee separates the open space. This road connection should be designed and landscaped to blend in as much as possible and to contain a pedestrian connection or crosswalk to connect the two sides of the open space. Parking should be restricted in the arc to limit the visual impact cars would have on the continuity of the historic open space. Design changed per the comment. Walking path, landscaping and minor parking access to the open space have met comments intent. 7) Road widths should be consistent with traditional town street widths. Roadways have been designed to meet traditional street widths and comply with emergency access needs. Page 6 of 19

8) Make sure the construction is high quality throughout the development. Furthermore, new construction, while keeping with the traditional town feel, should be compatible with the historic buildings in scale, materials and workmanship. Pattern book identifies construction materials and quality.. 9) As the development is designed, we are confident that the landscaping will be appropriate for a Traditional Neighborhood Development. Please keep in mind that the historic landscape of this property is the open space. Planting additional landscape features along the edges of the open space may work to buffer the new developments from the historic property. However, a large amount of buffering would be unnecessary if the design of the new development is sensitive to the historic property. The design as revised provides open space buffers around historical and cultural features and screening where appropriate. 10) As the use of the historic buildings may change, SHPO can provide assistance to DelDOT and other parties involved in determining future uses and rehabilitation and preservation of the buildings. SHPO would also like to assist with any new construction in the public areas as it relates to compatibility, design, siting, etc. This includes the “future use public building” indicated on the plan. Assistance from SHPO welcome. The historic complex is the attraction of the property. The design of the plan should focus on the property’s historic attraction and not hide it from view by locating the dense development so close to the historic buildings and along the outer streets. The design of the development should illustrate the open space that has always been historically associated with the property. A better open space design would preserve the property’s integrity. We hope the developers use the historic property to their advantage and take our suggestions into consideration. Agree with the intent of the comment and believe the revised design respects the comment. Department of Transportation – Contact: Bill Brockenbrough 760-2109 Daniel & Deborah Scheller seek to develop an approximately 272-acre assemblage of parcels (Tax Parcels ED-05-076.00-01-13.00-000, ED-05-076.00-01-14.00-000, ED-05- 076.00-01-14.01-000) on the south side of West North Street (Kent Road 73) and the west side of the Norfolk Southern railroad tracks in the City of Dover. The development would be neo-traditional in design and would include 620 dwellings of various types, 134,400 square feet of commercial uses, a 280,000 square foot medical complex and a seasonal farmer’s market pavilion. The land is zoned IP/Ag (Industrial Park and Agriculture) and a rezoning to TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design) would be needed for the proposed development to proceed. Our comments are as follows: 1) DelDOT has been an active participant in the development of the concept plan for this project and has spent over $2,400,000, appropriated through three different Page 7 of 19

Bond Bills, for planning and acquiring the 28 acres including the farmstead. We fully support the proposed rezoning. We wish to continue working with the design team for both the medical complex and the residential development to arrive at the best arrangement of building sites and streets, in the interest of safety and efficiency. No response required. 2) We are interested in reconnecting Eden Hill Farm to Water Street for the purpose of providing good access to the medical complex and the townhouse and condominium uses. However, making this connection across the Norfolk Southern railroad tracks at grade will require the closure of an existing grade crossing in another location. We are working with Norfolk Southern to accomplish that. If we are unsuccessful in that regard, legislation will be necessary to permit the creation of a new grade crossing at Water Street. No response required. 3) The road that is shown on the Master Plan as “Salisbury Rd.” would be an extension of Saulsbury Road (Kent Road 156). DelDOT has a project, known as the West Dover Connector (WDC), which could extend Saulsbury Road from its intersection with West North Street to an as yet undetermined point on New Burton Road (Kent Road 190). Accordingly, since this road may become part of Saulsbury Road, it should be designed and built to State standards. Presently we do not have a typical section that we would use in extending Saulsbury Road, but we expect to develop one for planning purposes in 2005. In planning the development, we recommend that a 150-foot right-of-way be set aside for Salisbury Road. Any typical section that we are likely to develop would fit within that width. If the developer is ready to proceed with the first phase of development before the appropriate road section has been determined we will work with the developer on a suitable alternative or temporary access arrangement so the project is not delayed. Regarding the alignment of the WDC, thus far we have developed several concepts. We are not referring to them as “alternatives” because “alternative” is a defined term in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process and we are only just beginning that process. As mentioned at the PLUS meeting, all of the concepts that involve extending Saulsbury Road follow the proposed Salisbury Road south to the proposed roundabout and depart from there. As also mentioned, some of those concepts would extend the road through the proposed development. It is also possible that the stormwater management pond may need to be moved, as alternative alignments receive further study as part of the NEPA process (preparation of either an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or an Environmental Assessment (EA)). Depending on that outcome, we may then be able to change that recommendation. We expect to complete the NEPA process and arrive at a determination in 2006. DelDOT’s preference is that the developers delay the platting of this area until the alternatives have been selected. However, we are aware that the developer must show a conceptual master plan for this site in order to apply for the rezoning at the City. Any plan that is presented to the City for this section should contain the caveat that the area south of the round about may need to be redesigned or re- Page 8 of 19

platted based on the desired alternatives selected through the WDC study process. The project should also be phased so that the area south of the roundabout is in a later phase of construction. More information about the WDC project is available at www.DelDOT.net. Questions regarding the project may be directed to our project manager, Mr. Jay Kelley at (302) 760-2365. We will work with DelDOT representatives regarding the extension of Saulsbury Road. 4) While not required as part of the City’s approval process, a traffic impact study (TIS) is important to ensure that the transportation infrastructure needed to support this development is sized properly. We recognize that the WDC, if it is built, will significantly change travel patterns in the area of this project and we take responsibility for having the area road network function well in that event. However, the developers of Eden Hill Farm want to proceed now and we have not yet determined what, if any, alignment will be built for the West Dover Connector. Therefore, at least the initial phases of the development must be designed, and have sufficient improvements to the existing road network, to function without the WDC. As part of the engineering studies done for the WDC, a significant amount of traffic data has been collected. That data is available from Mr. Kelley and may be used in the TIS. To obtain a scope of work for the TIS, the developer should have their traffic engineer contact our project engineer, Mr. Todd Sammons, at (302) 760-2134. Growth projections and intersection analysis of the developments impact on the existing roads will be provided in the design and permit stages of the project. 5) The developer’s engineer should contact our project manager for Kent County, Mr. Brad Herb of Johnson, Mirmiran & Thompson, regarding our requirements for access. Mr. Herb may be reached at (302) 266-9080. The developers will contact Mr. Herb to discuss access requirements. Delaware Transit Corporation – Contact Catherine Dennis 739-3278 The area is served by DART Routes 102, 113 on North St. and Route 103 on New Burton Road. DART requests the site plan include sidewalks and wishes to discuss the possibility of implementing bus stops. Please contact DART Planner Wayne Henderson at (302) 577-3278 extension 3553. The developers will contact Mr. Henderson to discuss the possibility of implementing bus stops. Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control – Contact Kevin Coyle 739-3091 General Comment This project plan represents what Livable Delaware should be about. The plan preserves wetlands and forests. It provides ample recreational opportunity and is within an established metropolitan region. No response required. Page 9 of 19

Soils According to the Kent County soil survey, Sassafras and Woodstown were mapped in the immediate vicinity of the proposed construction. Sassafras is well-drained upland soil that has few limitations for development. Woodstown is a moderately well-drained soil of low- lying uplands that has moderate limitations for development. No response required. Wetlands Statewide Wetland Mapping Project (SWMP) maps indicate the presence of palustrine wetlands. Site plans show that there will not be direct impacts to these wetlands through construction activities; however, secondary impacts of construction could be detrimental to the health of these wetlands and their associated streams. These wetlands are regulated by the Army Corps of Engineers through Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. In addition, individual 404 permits and certain Nationwide Permits from the Army Corps of Engineers also require 401 Water Quality Certification from the DNREC Wetland and Subaqueous Land Section and Coastal Zone Federal Consistency Certification from the DNREC Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Delaware Coastal Programs Section. Each of these certifications represents a separate permitting process. Impacts to streams and associated riparian wetlands, including road crossings, are regulated by the DNREC Wetlands and Subaqueous Lands Section, and by the Corps of Engineers. These wetlands provide water quality benefits, attenuate flooding and provide important habitat for plants and wildlife. Vegetated buffers of no less than 100 feet should be employed from the edge of the wetland complex. The developer should note that both DNREC and Army Corps of Engineers discourage allowing lot lines to contain wetlands to minimize potential cumulative impacts resulting from unauthorized and/or illegal activities and disturbances that can be caused by homeowners. To find out more about permitting requirements, the applicant is encouraged to attend a Joint Permit Process Meeting. These meetings are held monthly and are attended by federal and state resource agencies responsible for wetland permitting. Contact Denise Rawding at (302) 739-4691 to schedule a meeting. The developers will contact Ms. Rawding to discuss and schedule a meeting. TMDLs Although Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) as a “pollution runoff mitigation strategy” to reduce nutrient loading have not yet been developed for most of the tributaries or subwatersheds of the Delaware Bay watershed to date, work is continuing on their development. TMDLs for the St. Jones River subwatershed, of which this parcel is part, are scheduled for completion in December 2006. Therefore, until the specified TMDL reductions and pollution control strategies are adopted, it shall be incumbent upon the developer to employ best available technologies (BATS) and/or best management practices (BMPs) as “methodological mitigative strategies” to reduce degradative impacts associated with development. Page 10 of 19

No response required. Water Supply The project information sheets state water will be provided to the project by the City of Dover via a central water system. Our records indicate that the project is located within the public water service area granted to the City of Dover under Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity 90-CPCN-07. Should dewatering points be needed during any phase of construction, a dewatering well construction permit must be obtained from the Water Supply Section prior to construction of the well points. In addition, a water allocation permit will be needed if the pumping rate will exceed 50,000 gallons per day at any time during operation. All well permit applications must be prepared and signed by licensed water well contractors, and only licensed well drillers may construct the wells. Please factor in the necessary time for processing the well permit applications into the construction schedule. Dewatering well permit applications typically take approximately four weeks to process, which allows the necessary time for technical review and advertising. Should you have any questions concerning these comments, please contact Rick Rios at 302-739-3665. City of Dover Public Works has indicated adequate capacity to serve the development as proposed. Sediment and Erosion Control/Stormwater Management Requirements: 1) Land disturbing activities in excess of 5,000 square feet are regulated under the Delaware Sediment and Stormwater Regulations. A detailed sediment and stormwater management plan must be reviewed and approved by the Kent Conservation District prior to any land disturbing activity (i.e. clearing, grubbing, filling, grading, etc.) taking place. The review fee and a completed Application for a Detailed Plan are due at the time of plan submittal to the Kent Conservation District. Construction inspection fees based on developed area and stormwater facility maintenance inspection fees based on the number of stormwater facilities are due prior to the start of construction. Please refer to the fee schedule for those amounts. We will provide a detailed Sediment and Stormwater Management Plan to Kent Conservation District as required, along with the applications and appropriate fee. 2) The following notes must appear on the record plan: • The Kent Conservation District reserves the right to enter private property for purposes of periodic site inspection. • The Kent Conservation District reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any erosion or sediment control measure, as it deems necessary. • A clear statement of defined maintenance responsibility for stormwater management facilities must be provided on the Record Plan. Page 11 of 19

We will add the notes during the Implementation phase of the project. 3) Ease of maintenance must be considered as a site design component and a maintenance set aside area for disposal of sediments removed from the basins during the course of regular maintenance must be shown on the Record Plan for the subdivision. We will comply with this comment. 4) All drainage ways and storm drains should be contained within drainage easements and clearly shown on the plan to be recorded by the City of Dover. We will comply with this comment. 5) A soils investigation supporting the stormwater management facility design is required to determine impacts of the seasonal high groundwater level and soils for any basin design. We will provide the soils investigation information. Comments: 1) This project outfalls to both the Puncheon Run and the Tar Ditch drainage systems which both have a well documented history of flooding downstream from this site. A downstream drainage study will be required for this project to determine the impacts of the site development on those systems. Stormwater management requirements for this site will be based on the results of the drainage study and may involve over-managing the stormwater discharges from this site in order to minimize downstream flooding. Groundwater recharge is encouraged, however, without proper construction techniques and effective maintenance, infiltration practices have a high failure rate. Any infiltration practice must meet the minimum requirements for infiltration design and be constructed in strict accordance with the approved plan. We will provide the downstream drainage study, and work with Kent Conservation District in identifying the stormwater management requirements. 2) It appears that the existing stormwater facility near the northeast corner of the project is to be expanded. Since this facility was constructed by DelDOT, confirmation will be requested that DelDOT will allow this project to utilize that facility and who is responsible for its maintenance. An agreement to utilize the existing pond is being pursued by the developers. 3) It is recommended that the stormwater management areas be incorporated into the overall landscape plan to enhance water quality and to make the stormwater facility an attractive community amenity. We will take this comment into consideration during the design phase. Page 12 of 19

4) A letter of no objection to recordation will be provided once the detailed Sediment and Stormwater Management plan has been approved. No response required. 5) Proper drainage of developed lots and active open space should be considered in the development of the grading plan for this subdivision. We will provide proper drainage of developed lots and active open space. 6) Based on the site characteristics, a pre-application meeting is suggested to discuss stormwater management and drainage for this site. We will schedule a preapplication meeting to discuss stormwater management for this project. Drainage The Drainage Section is aware of existing drainage problems on Puncheon Run, downstream of this project. The Drainage Section requests the volume of stormwater released offsite match existing pre-construction volume, and that stormwater infiltration practices be utilized on this project. We intend to comply with the states sediment and stormwater management requirements. The Drainage Section further requests that all precautions be taken to ensure the project does not hinder any off site drainage upstream of the project or create any off site drainage problems downstream by the release of on site stormwater. We will take this comment into consideration during the Implementation phase of the project. Floodplains A small portion of the site is within the 100-year floodplain. Development should be limited to areas outside of the floodplain We will not develop within the floodplain, floodplain area identified in an open space. Forests According to 2002 aerial photos, forested areas are found in the southwestern portion of the parcel and along a strip in the northeastern portion. The developer is strongly encouraged to preserve, and where possible, enhance forested resources on site. The forested areas on-site should be viewed as a community asset and managed appropriately. Existing forest and historic trees aligning access ways of the past are being maintained.. Forested areas on-site set aside for conservation purposes should be placed into a permanent conservation easement or other binding protection. These areas should be Page 13 of 19

clearly marked and delineated so that residents understand their importance and so that homeowner activities do not infringe upon these areas. We will take this comment into consideration during the Implementation phase of the project. Open Space PLUS materials indicate that 115 acres of open space is proposed for this parcel. In areas set aside for passive open space, the developer is encouraged to consider establishment of additional forested areas or meadow-type grasses. Once established, these ecosystems provide increased water infiltration into groundwater, decreased run-off into surface water, air quality improvements, and require much less maintenance than traditional turf grass, an important consideration if a homeowners association will take over responsibility for maintenance of community open spaces. We will take this comment into consideration during the Implementation phase of the project once all open space uses have been identified. Open space containing forest and/or wetlands should be placed into a permanent conservation easement or other permanent protection mechanism. Conservation areas should also be demarked to avoid infringement by homeowners. We will take this comment into consideration during the Implementation phase of the project. Stormwater Ponds, Buffers, and Nuisance Species The stormwater management ponds incorporated within the site plan will likely attract waterfowl like resident Canada geese and mute swans that will create a nuisance. The large pond planned next to the athletic field would be especially attractive to these species. High concentrations of waterfowl in ponds create water-quality problems, leave droppings on lawn and paved areas and can become aggressive during the nesting season. Ponds that remain in the plan should be landscaped to deter nuisance species. Short manicured lawns around ponds provide an attractive habitat for these species. However, native plantings, including tall grasses, wildflowers, shrubs, and trees at the edge and within an adequate buffer area (we recommend 50 feet) around ponds, are not as attractive to geese because they do not feel as safe from predators and other disturbance when their view of the area is blocked. The Division of Fish and Wildlife does not provide goose control services, and if problems arise, residents or the home-owners association will have to accept the burden of dealing with these species (e.g., permit applications, costs, securing services of certified wildlife professionals). Solutions can be costly and labor intensive; however, with a reduction in the number of ponds, proper landscaping, monitoring, and other techniques, geese problems can be minimized. No response required. Page 14 of 19

It is further recommended that all stormwater ponds be at least 100 feet from all wetlands and waterbodies. We will take this comment into consideration, current plan respects this comment. Revegetation/Landscaping We request that no invasive species be used in the revegetation of disturbed or landscaped areas. A list of species considered invasive in Delaware can be found on the DNHP web site, www.dnrec.state.de.us/fw/invasive.htm. We further encourage, where possible/feasible, the use of native plants for habitat restoration projects on-site and our Bill McAvoy, Botanist, can be contacted at (302) 653-2880 to assist you in developing a plant list. The developer will contact Mr. McAvoy during the Implementation phase of the project to aid in minimizing invasive species being introduced into the area. Recreation We encourage the designer/builder to involve the Dover Parks and Recreation Department in the recreation components of this project. Zach Carter can be reached at (302) 736- 7050. The developer will contact Mr. Carter during the Implementation phase of the project, which is a required element of the city process. We recommend that sidewalks be built fronting every residence and stub streets. A complete system of sidewalks will: 1) fulfill the recreation need for walking and biking facilities, 2) provide opportunities for neighbors to interact in the community, and 3) facilitate safe, convenient off-road access to neighboring communities, public mass transit stops, schools, stores, work, etc. Sidewalks, walking paths, and bike transit corridors have all been added to the design. Community trail systems with long continuous trails, perimeter-only trails, and systems with few access points, often go unused and neglected. For trail design/construction specifications, contact Susan Moerschel at (302) 739-5285. The developer will contact Ms. Moerschel during the Implementation phase of the project, and has provided a community trail. Underground Storage Tanks There are six inactive LUST site(s) located near the proposed project: George & Lynch Inc, Facility # 1-000087, Project # K9402048 Chesapeake Supply & Equipment, Facility # 1-000247, Project # K9705070 Chesapeake Utilities Corp, Facility # 1-000251, Project # K8905233 Dover city Police Department, Facility # 1-000310, Project # K9510232 Coca Cola Bottling Co., Facility # 1-000471, Project # K9306119 B & J Investments, Facility # 1-000601, Project # K0009114 Page 15 of 19

No environmental impact is expected from the above inactive/active LUST site(s). However, should any underground storage tank or petroleum contaminated soil be discovered during construction, the Tank Management Branch must be notified as soon as possible. It is not anticipated that any construction specifications would be need to be changed due to petroleum contamination. However, should any unanticipated contamination be encountered and PVC pipe is being utilized, it will need to be changed to ductile steel in the contaminated areas. No comment required. Site Investigation and Restoration There are 10 SIRB sites located near the proposed project: DE-0060, 1110, 1213, 1212, 1240, 1143, 0057, 1107, 1171, and 1214. Several of these SIRB sites are areas that were studied as potential Brownfields sites. Other SIRB sites have found that the shallow groundwater is contaminated with organic compounds. There is PCE in the shallow groundwater and other dry cleaner solvents; however, it has been found that this contamination is moving to the southeast from Governors Ave to the St. Jones River, and it is not likely that the proposed project will be affected. The proposed project application states that public water will be used, but if domestic wells will be installed, SIRB should be notified. City of Dover to provide all water to the development. Air Quality Once complete, vehicle emissions associated with this project are estimated to be 47.6 tons (95,163.5 pounds) per year of VOC (volatile organic compounds), 39.4 tons (78,789.0 pounds) per year of NOx (nitrogen oxides), 29.1 tons (58,131.9 pounds) per year of SO2 (sulfur dioxide), 2.6 ton (5,174.7 pounds) per year of fine particulates and 3,980.2 tons (7,960,308.1 pounds) per year of CO2 (carbon dioxide). Emissions from area sources associated with this project are estimated to be 19.2 tons (38,383.8 pounds) per year of VOC (volatile organic compounds), 2.1 ton (4,223.4 pounds) per year of NOx (nitrogen oxides), 1.8 ton (3,504.8 pounds) per year of SO2 (sulfur dioxide), 2.3 ton (4,522.8 pounds) per year of fine particulates and 77.8 tons (155,599.3 pounds) per year of CO2 (carbon dioxide). Emissions from electrical power generation associated with this project are estimated to be 7.6 tons (15,212.6 pounds) per year of NOx (nitrogen oxides), 26.5 tons (52,913.3 pounds) per year of SO2 (sulfur dioxide) and 3,902.4 tons (7,804,708.8 pounds) per year of CO2 (carbon dioxide). VOC NOx SO2 PM2.5 CO2 Mobile 47.6 39.4 29.1 2.6 3980.2 Residential 19.2 2.1 1.8 2.3 77.8 Electrical 7.6 26.5 3902.4 Power TOTAL 66.8 49.1 57.4 4.9 7960.4 Page 16 of 19

The Eden Hill project will have characteristics that will significantly mitigate the air quality impacts. The project is a mixed use, live-work community in an infill location, next to downtown Dover, with a pedestrian network and trails that are connected in multiple places to the City's existing street and pedestrian network and access to transit. Regardless, there still will be impacts on air quality from energy use. Electrical usage via electric power plant generation alone totaled to produce an additional 8 tons of nitrogen oxides per year and 27 tons of sulfur dioxide per year. A significant method to mitigate this impact would be to require the builder to construct Energy Star qualified homes. Every percentage of increased energy efficiency translates into a percent reduction in pollution. Quoting from their webpage, http://www.energystar.gov/: “ENERGY STAR qualified homes are independently verified to be at least 30% more energy efficient than homes built to the 1993 national Model Energy Code or 15% more efficient than state energy code, whichever is more rigorous. These savings are based on heating, cooling, and hot water energy use and are typically achieved through a combination of: • building envelope upgrades, • high performance windows, • controlled air infiltration, • upgraded heating and air conditioning systems, • tight duct systems and • upgraded water-heating equipment.” Our energy office in DNREC is in the process of training builders in making their structures more energy efficient. The Energy Star Program is excellent way to save on energy costs and reduce air pollution. We highly recommend the Eden Hill development and other residential proposals increase the energy efficiency of their homes. No response required. State Fire Marshal’s Office – Contact John Rossiter 323-5365 No comment. This project is under the jurisdiction of the City of Dover Fire Marshal. No response required, applicant will meet with city Fire Marshal. Department of Agriculture - Contact Mark Davis 739-4811 The Department of Agriculture staff reviewed the Eden Hill Plan and supports the development concept and design. Ongoing design issues will be addressed with the Delaware Forest Service, the City of Dover, and the developer. The site is located within city limits and as such development is appropriate. DDA requests that every effort be made to preserve any historic structures. The Delaware Forest Service defers all comments to the City of Dover’s existing land-use ordinances and extends its services to assist with this project at the request of the City of Dover. Page 17 of 19

No response required. Delaware Economic Development Office – Contact Dorrie Moore 672-6816 The Delaware Economic Development Office supports the project as it relates to Livable Delaware. To address concerns about down zoning this industrial parcel that is served by rail, and in an effort to create employment opportunities, the DEDO would like to join forces with the Office of State Planning Coordination and the City of Dover to explore other sites for industrial development throughout the City. No response required, historic structures and wooded areas being preserved. Public Service Commission - Contact Andrea Maucher 739-4247 Any expansion of natural gas or installation of a closed propane system must fall within Pipeline Safety guidelines. Contact: Malak Michael at (302) 739-4247. No response required applicant will contact Michael Malaer. Recent legislation (Senate Bill 99) placed non-governmental companies providing wastewater services to 50 or more customers (in the aggregate) under the regulatory control of the PSC. While rules are not yet in place, governmental agencies offering wastewater services must file data with the Commission regarding its service areas. Contact: Kevin Neilson at (302) 739-4247. No response required. Delaware State Housing Authority – Contact Jimmy Atkins 739-4263 The proposal is to develop 620 units on 272 acres between West North Street and New Burton Road on the west side of Dover. According to the State Strategies for Policies and Spending, the proposal is located in Investment Level Areas 1 and 2. DSHA supports this proposal because it is located in an area where the state is encouraging compact, mixed use, and superior design. Furthermore, the proposal builds upon the State’s Livable Delaware initiative and targets first time homebuyers. The provision of this type of unit will help address the need for affordable homeownership opportunities identified in the 2003 Statewide Housing Needs Assessment. A mixture of all unit types are planned for the development, from large single-family to apartments above retail. Delaware Emergency Management Agency – Contact Don Knox 659-3362 No comment. No response required. Department of Education – Contact Nick Vacirca 739-4658 No comment. No response required. Page 18 of 19

If you should have any questions regarding the responses provided, please contact me directly. Sincerely, BECKER MORGAN GROUP, INC. Gregory V. Moore, P.E. Vice President GVM/rlh cc: Mr. Bill Hughes, Limestone Medical Center Mr. Thomas E. Mulhern, MBA Limestone Medical Center Mr. Robert L. Thomas, Esq., Young Conaway Stargate & Taylor Mr. Daniel L. Scheller, Eden Hill Farm, Inc. Mr. Edmond P. Horsey, Eden Hill Farm, Inc. Mr. James McGinnis, McGinnis Realty Mr. Leonard Iacono, Daisy Construction Company Mr. Mark Dunkle, Parkowski Guerke & Swayze Mr. Mattew T. Spong, ASLA, RLA, Landscape Architectural Services Mr. Michael C. Selvaggio, GRI, CRS, Patterson Swartz Mr. Sean Mace, Dover Medical Properties, LLC Mr. Thomas P. Barnett, MD, Dover Medical Properties, LLC Miss. Dawn Melson, City of Dover. Mr. Jim Galvin, City of Dover Enclosure: Revised Master Plan 199905304ho-comments.doc Page 19 of 19

EXCERPT FROM CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION June 20, 2005 (Note: The following minutes were completed using notes only due to technical difficulties with recording equipment) Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm, Inc. at 834 West North Street – Rezoning from IPM and A to TND – Public Hearing and Review for recommendation on the rezoning application of Lands of Eden Hill Farm, Inc. for three (3) parcels consisting of 272.04 acres +/- of land. The properties are currently zoned IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing) and A (Agriculture). The proposed zoning classification is TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design). The subject parcels are located on the south side of West North Street and west of the railroad corridor and West Street. The owners of record are Eden Hill Farm, Inc., and the State of Delaware. The equitable owners are Investment Properties Associates, LLC and Dover Medical Properties, LLC. Representatives: Mr. Gregg Moore, Becker Morgan Group, Inc.; and Mrs. Deb Scheller, Representing the family (Eden Hill Farm, Inc.). Ms. Melson stated that the intent of the Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) zone is to create a walkable and pedestrian-friendly, economically viable professional, commercial, and mixed use residential neighborhood for people of different ages and incomes that draws from the best architectural and community design features of Delaware and the Delmarva Peninsula from its colonial past to the mid 20th century. The TND zone intends to encourage greater integration of land-uses and diversity of lot sizes than is permitted under other provisions of the Land Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Dover. Ms. Melson further stated that the General Overall Master Plan consists of a set of maps composed of plans of existing natural features showing topography, soils, drainage vegetation and potential limitations to development, plans of the proposed building areas, streets, roads, parking, open space and stormwater management and the overall program of uses including showing general use location, proposed building height, and total gross square feet by use. Ms. Melson further stated that the TND code provisions provide for the opportunity to submit separate Implementation Plans by individual use districts (Residential, Commercial or Office). The review of the Implementation Plan is the second step in the TND procedure. The Planning Commission reviews the TND Implementation Plan(s) for compliance with the approved General Overall Master Plan. However, in order to separate the Implementation Plan submissions additional information is required at the time of Rezoning and General Master Plan review. To request such consideration, the submission of the General Overall Master Plan shall include more detail of the design elements of the project, including, but not limited to, architectural standards, design relationships between uses and different scales of buildings, parking and open spaces, and

an explanation of how the segregated Implementation Plan will conform to the intent of the approved General Overall Master Plan. Ms. Melson further stated that the area to be considered for rezoning is located on the south side of West North Street between the railroad corridor and the intersection of West North Street with Saulsbury Road. The land to the west of the subject property is zoned IPM (Institutional Park Manufacturing Zone) and includes Kraft-General Foods facility and other large industrial facilities. To the north across West North Street is the residential area known as Lincoln Park. It is zoned RG-1 (General Residence Zone) and primarily consists of single family dwellings with some multi-family development. The northwest and east of the subject site adjacent to the railroad corridor are properties zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone), C-3 (Service Commercial Zone), and C-1A (Limited Commercial Zone). This area includes the area targeted for redevelopment as part of the West Side Redevelopment Plan and existing office buildings, a court building, the Dover Police Station, service establishments, and retail establishments. To the southeast across the railroad corridor and New Burton Road are the residential areas zoned R-8 and R-10 (One Family Residence Zones) known as Sherwood, Woodbrook, and Crossgates. The Puncheon Run is just south of the subject area and further to the south are agricultural lands currently zoned R-20 (One Family Residence Zone). Ms. Melson further stated that the Land Development Plan Map of the Comprehensive Plan as amended shows this area as Mixed Use. Mixed Use land use category is described and includes information on the Eden Hill Farm property specifically. The Plan recognized the potential opportunity for development with a mixed use focus. A series of goals were outlined including: encouraging the creation of neighborhood centers with mixed use development; pedestrian friendly public environments and opportunities for connections to future transit; clustering of activities in walkable distance; and development design ideas for building and parking locations. Ms. Melson further stated that the Traditional Neighborhood Design Rezoning Application/Master Plan application was reviewed during December 2004 by the Preliminary Land Use Services as required by the City of Dover’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). This MOU requires certain types of projects complete the PLUS Review process prior to application submission. The applicant has submitted a letter dated June 6, 2005 in response to the PLUS comments. Staff notes that some areas of the Master Plan have been further revised since the Draft Master Plan was submitted for the PLUS review; however, the overall concept of the Master Plan remains the same. Ms. Melson further stated that the land area must meet certain eligibility requirements to be rezoned to Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND). The review of these criteria for the subject application is first, the land shall have access to an existing or planned arterial or collector road. The land area has access from West North Street and the proposed continuation of Saulsbury Road. Saulsbury Road and portions of West Street are considered minor arterials and part of North Street is a collector road. Second, the land area shall be served by adequate existing or planned infrastructure. Utilities such as water and sewer are in the vicinity of this land area. The proposed project will build

additional infrastructure as required. This is subject to the Department of Public Works review. Third, the land area may contain single or multiple parcels. The rezoning application for the land area shall be filed jointly by all owners of the involved land area. The land area consists of three parcels of land totaling 272.04 acres. All current property owners and equitable owners are participating in the application submissions. And fourth, a finding by the Planning Commission and City Council that the proposed TND location is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council public hearing after tonight’s hearing will be held on July 11, 2005. The Land Development Plan of the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003 identifies these land areas with the land use category of mixed use. Ms. Melson further stated that the types of permitted uses within the Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone are listed with the DAC Report provided. Ms. Melson further stated that the General Overall Master Plan consists of a set of plan maps (Parcel Plan sheet and Master Plan sheet in color) showing: existing natural features, proposed building areas, location of streets/roads, parking options, location of open space, and stormwater management areas. The overall program of uses is identified. Additional information on these topics is also included in the Master Standards Manual (Pattern Book) document. Ms. Melson further stated that the Eden Hill Farm TND Master Plan identifies development areas as a Residential District, Neighborhood Commercial District (with the opportunity for residential uses), and Professional Office, Medical, and Financial District. The residential district includes a total of 665 residential units in the form of single family detached houses, single family detached houses with carriage houses (second dwelling unit on lot), duplex units, townhouses, and condominium buildings. Ms. Melson further stated that the Neighborhood Commercial District area located in the northwest corner of the site consists of a variety of building forms with provisions for a grocery store, drug store with drive thru, bank with drive-thru, retail and office buildings. Several buildings also provide the option for residential uses on the upper floors. A portion of this Commercial District is focused on a “Main Street: which connects to the existing street network at West North Street and also links to the internal street network and pedestrian network. Ms. Melson further stated that the Professional Office, Medical and Financial District area is located in the northwest portion of the site and consists of a series of multi-story office buildings. A portion of this office district is focused on a “Main Street” which connects to the existing street network at West North Street as a continuation of Clarence Street. Ms. Melson further stated that the overall site exceeds the minimum of 25% open space by creating a community walking trail area, parks, and greens throughout the site and large open space/park area in the southwest portion of the site. The existing historic house of Eden Hill Farm and its tree allees (entrance drives) are preserved within a large

public open space area. Ms. Melson further stated that the Master Comprehensive Development Standards Manual consists of a brief written and graphic description of the owner/developer’s proposed approach to items of the site development. An addendum highlights some revisions and clarifications to the Pattern Book dated May 6, 2005. The Pattern Book presents information on the overall plan, typical urban spaces, and individual buildings. Ms. Melson further stated that the Planning Staff recommends that the rezoning from IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing zone) and A (Agriculture zone) to TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design zone) be approved. Some items identified for clarification in future Implementation Plan submissions includes identifying the dedication intention for the public streets and to finalize street names; identifying the public streets and private circulation systems within Neighborhood Commercial district and Professional Office district; providing the phasing of each development district and associated elements such as street network, building sites, parking areas, stormwater management and open space and clarifying the Administration of the Design Elements including the associated responsibilities and procedures. Ms. Melson stated that other agencies commenting included the Public Works Department who stated that future plans must designate which public areas are to be maintained by the City of Dover which includes parks, open space and right-of-ways. The Plan must clearly designate as to which streets are to be dedicated to the City and which streets are to be dedicated to the State. The Fire Marshal’s Office addressed access to roadways during construction and water supply for fire protection that must be made available as soon as combustible materials accumulate. The Electric Department and DelDOT had no objections to the application. Mr. Moore at this time presented a Power Point presentation of the site. This site will consist of a professional office, residential, and commercial areas. The commercial street that will be known as Lloyd Street in the Commercial office area will house retail on the first floor with offices and residences on the second floor. In the Professional area, they used elements of vernacular architecture for large buildings; similar to those used at Wilmington Trust, Wesley College and Wilmington College. The residential area will also house a community center with a bicycle trail that will be located adjacent to the railroad. A community walking path system is located in the development connecting all public spaces. Statements of “awesome”, “exception package”, and “we are overwhelmed” were made by various Planning Commission members. Mr. Nichols stated that they have spent a lot of time in developing this site plan and while he hates to see farmland disappearing he feels that this is a good plan. The existing drive that comes off of North Street, will it be abandoned? Responding to Mr. Nichols, Mr. Moore stated that the drive will be abandoned. The area will be maintained as a park consisting of thirty (30) acres. The tree lines will also be maintained.

Mr. Nichols further questioned the grade crossing at Water Street? Responding to Mr. Nichols, Mr. Moore explained that DelDOT is pursuing the crossing. Mr. Nichols questioned if there is only two entrances. Responding to Mr. Nichols, Mr. Moore stated there would be more than two entrances: one on Water Street, Lloyd Street, and Clarence Street extension, which would extend from North Street into the development and the extension of Saulsbury Road. Mr. Holt stated commented that he liked the building architecture but questioned how to hold each building to those standards and what would be the sequence of construction. Mr. Galvin stated that the sequence of the construction would be identified in the Implementation Plans. Mr. Holt further questioned the status of the new extension of Saulsbury Road and the West Dover Connector. Responding to Mr. Holt, Mr. Galvin noted that this project can continue without a decision being made on the West Dover Connector. Mr. Holt asked is a rail station was planned for this community? Responding to Mr. Holt, Mr. Galvin noted that the City would be participating in a DelDOT committee studying the George and Lynch site for multi-model transportation options. Mr. Friedman opened a public hearing. Mrs. Carol Jason - 833 West North Street – Stated that she lives directly across from the Eden Hill Farm entrance and she has to wait to turn into her driveway for people who want to turn to go up the driveway to the greenhouse now. This is an industrial area all the way over to the railroad tracks and into the downtown Dover area. Traffic in this area currently concerns her. Will Saulsbury Road extension be completed prior to the end of construction and what will be done for people living on North Street and traffic going up this alley? Responding to Mrs. Jason, Mr. Moore stated that the current entry into this site would be closed and the house area and park would then be accessed by interior streets only. Mrs. Sandy Kinkus – 365 Fiddlers Green – Stated that she is a resident of Crossgates and is worried about the existing neighborhoods. They do not want to be compromised and stormwater management is a big concern along the Puncheon Run. She would also like to know how services such as the park would be accessible and how the park would be utilized by surrounding neighborhoods. She also questioned the width of the streets and if they would be wide enough for accessibility for newer fire trucks that would be wider? Responding to Mrs. Kinkus, Mr. Galvin stated that the widths of streets vary in the draft Pattern Book and are in line with the street width regulations that were passed by City Council in February 2005.

Mrs. Janice Sibbald – 144 Blue Beach Drive – Stated that she feels that this is a beautiful concept plan. She stated that as part of the plan there was to be a connection to Schutte Park and the connecting neighborhoods, this was not shown as part of the plan. Responding to Mrs. Sibbald, Mr. Galvin stated that the underpass (part of the path connection) is a part of Capital Improvements project and they are waiting on the West Dover Connector or other mechanisms for this connection. Mrs. Sibbald further questioned who the community center would be for and who would use it? Who would pay and maintain this center? Responding to Mrs. Sibbald, Mr. Moore stated that the community center would be paid for by the developer for the residential area within the development. The bike path connection is anticipated as part of an eighty (80) acre open space area that will eventually connect into Schutte Park. Mrs. Sibbald further questioned with regards to the park area center, what type of parking would be made available? Responding to Mrs. Sibbald, Mr. Moore stated that parallel parking on street would be available throughout this area. Mrs. Carol Jason – 833 West North Street (Additional Question) – Questioned if they would see the back of the buildings along with dumpsters from North Street? Responding to Mrs. Jason, Mr. Moore stated that as you proceed down North Street you would only see the front or sides of the buildings not the back of the buildings. The only objectionable area is the rear of the supermarket but it would face North Street and the rear is screened by fencing and landscaping. Mrs. Cheryl PreCourt – 260 Kesselring Avenue – Stated that she lives in the Mayfair subdivision and thinks that this is a great idea. She is; however, concerned with the West Dover Connector and feels that they need to be involved with this process as this will significantly increase traffic in their neighborhood. Mr. Friedman closed the public hearing seeing no one else wishing to speak. Mr. von Reider moved to recommend approval of Z-05-03 Lands of Eden Hill Farm, Inc. at 834 West North Street, Rezoning from IPM and A to TND to City Council and accept the General Mast Plan with all DAC comments, seconded by Colonel Welsh and the motion was unanimously carried.

NOTICE Please note that the corresponding maps and the Eden Hill Farms Pattern Book are available for review in the City Clerk’s Office. I apologize for any inconvenience. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 736-7008 should you have any questions. Janice C. Green City Clerk

FINAL READING BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 834 WEST NORTH STREET 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 property described below from IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) and A (Agriculture Zone) to TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone) 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 have been amended by changing the zoning designation from IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) and A (Agriculture Zone) to TND (Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone) on that property located at 834 West North Street, owned by Eden Hill Farm, Inc. ADOPTED: * S:\ClerksOffice\Rezonings\2005\834 W North Street - Eden Hill Farm\Ordinance - Final Reading - 834 W North Street - Eden Hill Farm.wpd

UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee Meeting was held on June 27, 2005, at 3:30 p.m. with Chairman Carey presiding. Members present were Mr. Sadusky, Mr. Cregar, and Mr. Snaman. Mr. Ruane was absent. Mr. Hogan and Mayor Speed were also present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Sadusky moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Snaman and unanimously carried. Street Waiver Request (Length of Dead-End/Cul-de-Sac Street) - Somerset Park Subdivision In accordance with Appendix A, Article VI, Section A15 of the Land Subdivision Regulations, a street waiver request was received from Delta Acquisitions on McKee Road, LLC, for property located on the west side of McKee Road, west of the McKee Road and Scarborough Road intersection, known as the Somerset Park Subdivision. The applicants have requested a waiver of 271 feet from the maximum length of a dead-end/cul-de-sac street (400 feet) to permit the construction of a 671 foot cul-de-sac street, since the shape of the property would not provide room for an additional road on the site. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested waiver from the maximum 400 feet length of a dead-end (cul-de-sac) street to allow for a street of 671 feet in length. Mr. Galvin, Director of Planning and Inspections, advised members that the Planning Commission recognized the design limitations of the width of the development parcel; however, they encouraged the applicant to work with the Department of Public Works to determine the location of a designated right-of-way in order to provide the opportunity for interconnection to the adjacent parcel south of this property. Mr. Cregar moved to recommend approval of the requested street waiver to allow for a 671 foot cul-de-sac street for the Somerset Park Subdivision, stipulating that the developers work with the City on providing an interconnection to the adjacent parcel south of this property. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried. Annexation Request - Lands of Clifton & Marie Hutton - Kenton Road and Foxhall Drive Members reviewed a request for annexation of three (3) parcels of land located near the intersection of Foxhall Drive and Kenton Road, owned by Clifton and Marie Hutton, with a zoning classification of RG-3 (Group Housing). The Department of Public Works has determined that the City does have the ability to provide utilities sufficient for the proposed uses. Mr. Galvin, Director of Planning and Inspections, indicated that if approved, the annexation request will be considered by the Planning Commission on July 18, 2005 and that the referendum and public hearing before City Council would be scheduled. Mr. Cregar noted that although the requested zoning classification is similar to those to the south of the property, it is significantly more dense than the properties to the north and west. He relayed concern with the impact the requested zoning classification could have for this area.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 2 Mr. Snaman moved to recommend that the City move forward with the consideration of the annexation request for three (3) parcels located near the intersection of Foxhall Drive and Kenton Road (Attachment #1 - Resolution Setting Annexation Referendum for August 11, 2005). The motion was seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried with Mr. Cregar voting no. City Clerk’s Office Note: It should be noted that consideration of an annexation request by the committee is to consider infrastructure issues and the ability to provide city services; therefore, approval of the committee’s recommendation does not annex said property. Final action on this annexation request will take place during the Council Meeting of August 22, 2005. Annexation Request - Lands of Traci A. McDowell and Craig L. Gahm - 80 Nixon Lane Members reviewed a request for annexation of property located at 80 Nixon Lane, owned by Traci A. McDowell and Craig L. Gahm, with a zoning classification of R-8 (Single Family Residence). It was noted that the original request was for a zoning classification of R-20 (One Family Residential). The Department of Public Works has determined that the City does have the ability to provide utilities sufficient for the proposed uses. Mr. Galvin, Director of Planning and Inspections, indicated that if approved, the annexation request will be considered by the Planning Commission on July 18, 2005 and that the referendum and public hearing before City Council would be scheduled. Mr. Snaman moved to recommend that the City move forward with the consideration of the annexation request for property located at 80 Nixon Lane (Attachment #2 - Resolution Setting Annexation Referendum for August 11, 2005). The motion was seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried. City Clerk’s Office Note: It should be noted that consideration of an annexation request by the committee is to consider infrastructure issues and the ability to provide city services; therefore, approval of the committee’s recommendation does not annex said property. Final action on this annexation request will take place during the Council Meeting of August 22, 2005. Staff Report - Alternative Fuels During the Regular Council Meeting of January 10, 2005, members accepted the Utility Committee’s recommendation directing the City Manager to investigate the use of alternative fuels and fuel vehicles. Mr. DePrima, City Manager, provided members the following information: 1) The City has purchased its first hybrid vehicle, and it has been assigned to the City Manager. The gas mileage is currently 25.6 miles per gallon. This is approximately 25% better than comparable models/makes of vehicles. 2) The current price differential between bio-diesel and regular diesel is only $.01. This would amount to less than $1,000 difference in fuel costs citywide. There would also be only a minor increase in cost for one or two additional oil filters per vehicle. We have about 30 diesel trucks in our fleet. Switching to using bio-diesel fuel would reduce air pollution from our vehicles, lessen dependence on foreign oil, support the agricultural economy, and cause less maintenance on City vehicles. Based on this, I am planning on switching to bio-diesel fuel.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 PAGE 3 3) Central Services staff has been directed to purchase flexible fuel vehicles when possible if there is no extra cost. This may allow the City to use ethanol fuel if it is available in the future. 4) Councilman Carey provided information to me on various tax incentives for alternative fuels. There are no apparent incentives available to cities at this time. Mr. Sadusky moved to recommend that the City Manager be authorized to move forward with the purchase of alternative fuel vehicles, seconded by Mr. Snaman and unanimously carried. Mr. Snaman moved to recess, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried. Meeting recessed at 4:20 p.m. and reconvened at 5:30 p.m. Mr. Snaman moved to recess into executive session for legal matters, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried. Meeting recessed into executive session at 5:32 p.m. and reconvened at 7:12 p.m. Mr. Sadusky moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Cregar and unanimously carried. Meeting Adjourned at 7:12 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Carleton E. Carey, Sr. Chairman CEC/jg S:\ClerksOffice\Agendas&Minutes\Committee-Minutes\2005\06-27-2005 Utility.wpd Attachments Attachment #1 - Annexation Resolution - Foxhall Drive Attachment #2 - Annexation Resolution - 80 Nixon Lane

ATTACHMENT #1 Utility minutes of 06/27/2005 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: A RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE INCLUSION OF AN AREA WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF DOVER AND CALLING FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE SAID AREA. WHEREAS, the Charter of the City of Dover authorizes Council to extend the boundaries of the said City after a special election of the qualified voters and real estate owners of the territory proposed to be annexed, and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover deem it in the best interest of the City of Dover to include an area located on the northwest corner of Kenton Road and Fox Hall Drive and on the south side of Fox Hall Drvie adjacent to Kenton Road, which is contiguous to the present City limits, into the limits of the City of Dover and within a zoning classification as recommended by the City of Dover Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 1. That a special election be held for an area located on the northwest corner of Kenton Road and Fox Hall Drive on the south side of Fox Hall Drive adjacent to Kenton Road, situated in East Dover Hundred, Kent County, State of Delaware. 2. That the election be held on the 11th day of August, 2005 commencing at the hours of 11:00 a.m. in the City Hall Annex, 15 E. Loockerman Street, Dover, Delaware, for the purpose of submitting the question of annexation of the above area to those persons entitled to vote thereon. 3. That the election be held and conducted pursuant to the provisions of the Charter of the City of Dover as amended. 4. That this resolution be published in accordance with the City of Dover Charter. ADOPTED: * S:\ClerksOffice\Attachments and Exhibits\Committee Attachments\2005\06-27-2005 Utility - Att 1 - Fox Hall Drive Resolution.wpd

ATTACHMENT #2 Utility minutes of 06/27/2005 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: A RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE INCLUSION OF AN AREA WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF DOVER AND CALLING FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE SAID AREA. WHEREAS, the Charter of the City of Dover authorizes Council to extend the boundaries of the said City after a special election of the qualified voters and real estate owners of the territory proposed to be annexed, and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover deem it in the best interest of the City of Dover to include an area located at 80 Nixon Lane, which is contiguous to the present City limits, into the limits of the City of Dover and within a zoning classification as recommended by the City of Dover Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 1. That a special election be held for an area located at 80 Nixon Lane situated in East Dover Hundred, Kent County, State of Delaware. 2. That the election be held on the 11th day of August, 2005 commencing at the hours of 11:00 a.m. in the City Hall Annex, 15 E. Loockerman Street, Dover, Delaware, for the purpose of submitting the question of annexation of the above area to those persons entitled to vote thereon. 3. That the election be held and conducted pursuant to the provisions of the Charter of the City of Dover as amended. 4. That this resolution be published in accordance with the City of Dover Charter. ADOPTED: * S:\ClerksOffice\Attachments and Exhibits\Committee Attachments\2005\06-27-2005 Utility - Att 2 - 80 Nixon Lane Resolution.wpd

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE The Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee Meeting was held on June 28, 2005, at 6:33 p.m. with Chairman Hogan presiding. Members present were Mr. Carey, Mr. Link, and Mr. Lakeman. Mr. Ritter was absent. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Carey moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Link and unanimously carried. Consideration of Proposed Ordinance Amendment - Chapter 13, Motor Vehicles and Traffic - Section 13-30.2, Vehicle Parking Limited Where Carrying Capacity is in Excess of One Ton, and Trailer and Motor Home Parking During their meeting of May 24, 2005, members of the committee considered the proposed amendment to Chapter 13, Motor Vehicles and Traffic, and, after much discussion, deferred the matter until the next meeting in order to allow Mr. Galvin, Director or Planning and Inspections, an opportunity to revise the proposed amendment to Section 13-30.2(d) to include a provision for motor homes. Mr. Galvin presented the proposed ordinance and recommended the addition of a new section (f) related to parking based on street size. After noting the changes, Mr. Galvin advised members that Chief Horvath, Dover Police Department, and Chief Bashista, Robbins Hose Company, are in agreement with the proposed amendment. Mr. Link moved to recommend adoption of the ordinance with the recommended changes (Attachm ent #1) , seconded by Mr. Lakeman and unanimously carried. Briefing on DelDOT Projects - Gary Laing The briefing on DelDOT Projects by was postponed due to the absence of Mr. Laing. Mr. Hogan recommended that this item be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. Mr. Carey moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Lakeman and unanimously carried. Meeting Adjourned at 7:01 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Kenneth L. Hogan Chairman KLH/rm S:\ClerksOffice\Agendas&Minutes\Committee-Minutes\2005\06-28-2005 SA&T.wpd Attachments Attached to Original Minutes and File Copy: Attachment #1 - Chapter 13, Section 13-30.2 - Vehicle Parking

ATTACHMENT #1 SA&T minutes of 06/28/2005 SA&T Committee -05-24-2005-1 Sec. 13-30.2. Vehicle parking limited where carrying capacity is in excess of one ton, and trailer and motor home parking of the Dover Code be amended by deleting the RED STRIKEOUTS text and inserting the text in BLUE ITALICS as follows: (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to park any vehicle with a carrying capacity of more than one (1) ton, any trailer which includes but is not limited to boat, utility, construction or one that is used to carry goods regardless of weight capacity and is designed to be towed or pulled by another vehicle, or any vehicle or trailer on the City of Dover streets for a period longer than two (2) consecutive hours. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to park any commercial vehicle with a carrying capacity of more than one (1) ton, any trailer which includes but is not limited to boat, utility, construction or one that is used to carry goods regardless of weight capacity and is designed to be towed or pulled by another vehicle, or any vehicle or trailer combination thereof, or any motor home or travel trailer in any residential zone in the city except for temporary parking for immediate deliveries, pickups, and/or service calls to residences or for construction work on residential properties. A commercial vehicle shall be one which is used or maintained for the transportation of persons or property for hire, compensation or profit, except taxicabs. (c) It shall be unlawful for any person to park a trailered boat under twenty-five (25) feet on the streets of Dover for a period longer than twelve (12) consecutive hours. For any trailered boat twenty-five (25) or greater, refer to Section 13.30.2(a). (amended at the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee of May 24, 2005) (d) It shall be unlawful for any motor home to park on any residential street for a period longer than twelve consecutive hours without a permit. A resident owner of a motor home may request a parking permit from the City of Dover to park on a residential street in the vicinity of their residence for a period not to exceed 72 hours. The permit would be made available at no cost to the resident. The parking permit shall be displayed in the front window of the vehicle visible from the street. A resident may only request such a permit three times in any twelve month period. (e) Nonresidents are exempt from subsection (d) for a period of up to seven (7) days as long as their motor home or travel trailer does not create a safety hazard or interfere with traffic in the residential area that they are parked in. (f) All parking allowed in this section only applies to streets that can accommodate parking in compliance with Appendix A, Article VI, Section A. (The alternative to (e) would be to require a parking permit for non-residents as well to park any longer than 12 hours.)

SYNOPSIS Original Amendment This proposed amendment would extend the time limit for parking boat trailers from 2 hours to 12 consecutive hours. (SPONSORS: C OU NC IL M EM BER S C AR EY , S LA VIN , A N D W ILLIA M S ) Supplemental Am endment This proposed amendm ent would extend the time limit for parking motor homes from 2 hours to 12 consecutive hours. (S TAFF P ROPOSAL )

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: Council AGENDA ITEM NO.: 7/11/05 - 7 DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Electric Department DATE SUBMITTED: 6/29/05 PREPARED BY: Richard Gardner, Line Crew Foreman SUBJECT: Electric Pole Testing Contract REFERENCE: N/A RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: City Manager and Finance Director EXHIBITS: N/A EXPENDITURE ESTIMATED: $ 28,624.70 per year AMOUNT BUDGETED: See Funding Source FUNDING SOURCE (Dept/Page in CIP & Budget): 2005-2006 Operating Budget, Page 219, Acct. No. 480-8200-562-30.31 has $499,000 budgeted. This expense was estimated at $25,000 within the account. The total budgeted amount will not be exceeded. This will be done by managing other expenses charged. TIMETABLE: July 1, 2005 through July 1, 2008 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends awarding the three (3) year contract to Osmose Utilities Services, Inc. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS This is an ongoing maintenance program to treat and preserve wooden electric poles that make up the City’s electric infrastructure. This maintenance program allows the Electric Department to target rotten poles and replace them prior to jeopardizing the integrity of our electric system. To complete testing of all poles (transmission and distribution) throughout the City requires a ten (10) year cycle; approximately 10% of the poles will be completed in a year’s time. July 1, 2005 will begin the fourth (4th) year of this ten (10) year cycle. This three (3) year contract was bid through the Purchasing Department. City of Dover Pole Inspection and Treatments Contract Quotes July 1, 2005 - July 1, 2008 Osmose Utilities Estimate Per 3 Years U.P.T. Inc. Services, Inc. Required Test % Type of Estimated Quote 2005 Quote 2005 Testing Quantity Prices Estimate Prices Estimate Excavate/Bore/Evaluate/In ternal Treat/ External Treat 33.00% 344 $29.60 $10,182.40 $36.64 $12,604.16 Sound and Bore 56.00% 584 $6.50 $3,796.00 $4.23 $2,470.32 Visual Inspection 9.00% 98 $4.00 $392.00 $3.33 $326.34 Internal Treat 1.60% 17 $12.95 $220.15 $9.59 $163.03 MITC Fumes Used 2399 $5.85 $14,034.15 $5.51 $13,218.49 Annual Estimated Cost $28,624.70 $28,782.34

FIRST READING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF KENTON ROAD AND FOXHALL DRIVE AND ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOXHALL DRIVE ADJACENT TO KENTON ROAD 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 property described below from RS-1 - Single Family Residential (Kent County Zoning Classification) to RG-3 - Group Housing (City of Dover Zoning Classification) 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 RS-1 (Kent County zoning classification) to RG-3 (City of Dover zoning classification) on that property located on the northwest corner of Kenton Road and Foxhall Drive and on the south side of Foxhall Drive adjacent to Kenton Road, owned by Clifton and Marie Hutton. ADOPTED: * S:\ClerksOffice\Annexations\Annex-2005\98 Foxhall Drive\Rezoning Ordinance - First Reading.wpd

FIRST READING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 80 NIXON LANE 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 property described below from RS-1 - Single Family Residential (Kent County Zoning Classification) to R-8 - One Family Residential (City of Dover Zoning Classification) 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 RS-1 - Single Family Residential (Kent County Zoning Classification) to R-8 - One Family Residential (City of Dover Zoning Classification) on that property located at 80 Nixon Lane, owned by Traci A. McDowell and Craig L. Gahm. ADOPTED: * S:\ClerksOffice\Annexations\Annex-2005\80 Nixon Lane\Rezoning Ordinance.wpd

FIRST READING BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Sec. 13-30.2. Vehicle parking limited where carrying capacity is in excess of one ton, and trailer and motor home parking of the Dover Code be amended by deleting the RED STRIKEOUTS text and inserting the text in BLUE ITALICS as follows: (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to park any vehicle with a carrying capacity of more than one (1) ton, any trailer which includes but is not limited to boat, utility, construction or one that is used to carry goods regardless of weight capacity and is designed to be towed or pulled by another vehicle, or any vehicle or trailer on the City of Dover streets for a period longer than two (2) consecutive hours. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to park any commercial vehicle with a carrying capacity of more than one (1) ton, any trailer which includes but is not limited to boat, utility, construction or one that is used to carry goods regardless of weight capacity and is designed to be towed or pulled by another vehicle, or any vehicle or trailer combination thereof, or any motor home or travel trailer in any residential zone in the city except for temporary parking for immediate deliveries, pickups, and/or service calls to residences or for construction work on residential properties. A commercial vehicle shall be one which is used or maintained for the transportation of persons or property for hire, compensation or profit, except taxicabs. (c) It shall be unlawful for any person to park a trailered boat under twenty-five (25) feet on the streets of Dover for a period longer than twelve (12) consecutive hours. For any trailered boat twenty-five (25) or greater, refer to Section 13.30.2(a). (amended at the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee of May 24, 2005) (d) It shall be unlawful for any motor home to park on any residential street for a period longer than twelve consecutive hours without a permit. A resident owner of a motor home may request a parking permit from the City of Dover to park on a residential street in the vicinity of their residence for a period not to exceed 72 hours. The permit would be made available at no cost to the resident. The parking permit shall be displayed in the front window of the vehicle visible from the street. A resident may only request such a permit three times in any twelve month period. (e) Nonresidents are exempt from subsection (d) for a period of up to seven (7) days as long as their motor home or travel trailer does not create a safety hazard or interfere with traffic in the residential area that they are parked in. (f) All parking allowed in this section only applies to streets that can accommodate parking in compliance with Appendix A, Article VI, Section A.

(The alternative to (e) would be to require a parking permit for non-residents as well to park any longer than 12 hours.) SYNOPSIS Original Amendment This proposed amendment would extend the time limit for parking boat trailers from 2 hours to 12 consecutive hours. (SPONSORS: C OU NC IL M EM BER S C AR EY , S LA VIN , A N D W ILLIA M S ) Supplemental Am endment This proposed amendm ent would extend the time limit for parking motor homes from 2 hours to 12 consecutive hours. (S TAFF P ROPOSAL )