Este texto se extrajo de el PDF de forma automática y puede contener errores. El PDF es el registro oficial, así que consúltelo antes de confiar en esto.
Página 1
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 16, 2024
The Meeting of the City of Dover Planning Commission was held on Monday, December 16,
2024, at 7:00 PM as an In-Person Meeting and also using the phone/videoconferencing system
Webex. The Meeting Session was conducted with Chair Mr. Witham presiding. Members
present were Mr. Michael Lewis, Mrs. Denney, Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Baldwin, Mrs. Welsh, and
Mr. Witham. Mr. Roach, Dr. Jones, and Mr. Reaves were absent.
Staff members present were Mrs. Dawn Melson-Williams, Ms. Sharon Duca, Mrs. Kristen
Mullaney, and Mr. Jason Lyon (virtual).
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mrs. Maucher moved to approve the Agenda as submitted, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the
motion was carried 6-0 with Mr. Roach, Dr. Jones and Mr. Reaves absent.
APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF SESSION #1 OF NOVEMBER 18, 2024
Mrs. Welsh moved to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Session #1 of
November 18, 2024, seconded by Mrs. Maucher and the motion was carried 6-0 with Mr. Roach,
Dr. Jones and Mr. Reaves absent.
APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF SESSION #2 OF NOVEMBER 18, 2024
Mrs. Maucher moved to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Session #2 of
November 18, 2024, seconded by Mrs. Welsh and the motion was carried 6-0 with Mr. Roach,
Dr. Jones, and Mr. Reaves absent.
COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS
Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the next Planning Commission regular meeting is scheduled
for Tuesday, January 21, 2025. That is a Tuesday evening because Monday is a holiday. We do
have an application that should be coming to you for that meeting so please put that on your
calendar.
Mrs. Melson-Williams provided an update on the regular City Council and various Committee
meetings held on November 25 & 26, 2024 and December 9 & 10, 2024.
Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that for the Department of Planning and Inspections updates,
included in your packet is the Schedule of Deadlines and Meetings for 2025 for the Planning
Commission. This sets our deadlines as the first Friday of each month and the Planning
Commission Meetings continue to be the third Monday of the month unless that Monday
happens to be a holiday and then things are adjusted from there. You can utilize this to update
your calendars and we’ll have one final check on meeting dates, then we will confirm this. She
already sees one that will change because of action of Council related to their April meeting
timeframe. We will update this and be ready to utilize it for all of our upcoming deadlines in the
next year.
Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the last item on Communications and Reports is the Education
1
Página 2
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
and Training Opportunities. They included in the packet, a Workshop that was actually held last
week on December 12, 2024. The “Advanced Land Use Law Workshop” was presented by the
University of Delaware’s Institute for Public Administration. As we move into calendar year
2025, they will begin their series of Planning related education opportunities and Staff will
certainly get those to you. This one kind of snuck up on us. She doesn’t think they had pushed
information on it before our last meeting and then unless you are a diligent person and delved
right into your packet, you may not have seen it until after the fact. Just keep an eye out that
there will be some opportunities there and they do have some training monies where you can
attend those workshop sessions.
OPENING REMARKS CONCERNING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS
Mrs. Melson-Williams presented the audience information on policies and procedures for the In-
Person Meeting and Virtual Meeting using the Webex system.
OLD BUSINESS
Requests for Extensions of Planning Commission Approval:
SB-23-03 Revised Stonebrook East Planned Neighborhood Design at McKee Road and W.
Denneys Road - Request for an Extension of the Planning Commission conditional approval
granted December 18, 2023 and extension granted May 20, 2024 for the Revised Subdivision
Plan to increase the number of townhouses from 87 to 103 townhouses (increase of 16
townhouse units) and to decrease the number of garden apartment units from 168 to 138 garden
apartment units (decrease of 30 units). This development known as Stonebrook East Planned
Neighborhood Design (PND) proposes 241 dwelling units, recreational areas, open space, and
stormwater management areas. The conditional approval included PND- Alternative Design
Standards. The property is zoned RM-1 (Medium Density Residential Zone) and approved as a
PND (Planned Neighborhood Design Option). The site is on the northeast corner of McKee Road
and W. Denneys Road. Property Address: intersection of McKee Road and West Denneys Road.
Property Owners: Hanae Harmony Properties and Stonebrook East 168 LLC. Tax Parcels: ED-
05-057.03-01-01.00-000 to ED-05-057.03-01-92.00-000. Council District 1.
Representative: None (Letter of Request only)
Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that as noted, this is SB-23-03 Revised Stonebrook East Planned
Neighborhood Design at McKee Road and W. Denneys Road. It was a Revised Subdivision Plan
as part of that neighborhood. You originally saw it in December of last year and with a
Subdivision Plan. They are good for an initial period of six (6) months. This application had to
seek an Extension which was granted in May 2024 which brings us to tonight. They are seeking
an additional six (6) month extension regarding this project. They submitted a letter detailing
what they have been working on. It appears that they had to redo some of the stormwater
management plans and designs for the project which is the principal reason of why they are
asking for an Extension. The Revised Plan actually made some changes to the number of
townhouse units with this project but the overall concept for townhouse and apartment units does
remain the same from its initial design a number of years ago. She doesn’t see a representative of
the application here but we do have their letter of submission making their request.
2
Página 3
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
Mrs. Maucher moved to approve SB-23-03 Revised Stonebrook East Planned Neighborhood
Design at McKee Road and W. Denneys Road for a six-month Extension, seconded by Mrs.
Welsh and the motion was carried 6-0 by roll call vote with Mr. Roach, Dr. Jones, and Mr.
Reaves absent. Mrs. Maucher voting yes. Mr. Baldwin voting yes. Mrs. Welsh voting yes. Mr.
Lewis voting yes. Mrs. Denney voting yes; she thinks an extension is appropriate for this. Mr.
Witham voting yes; the letter submitted with the request is appropriate.
S-22-14 Commerce Way Dover DE LLC Warehouse on Commerce Way – Request for
Extension of the Planning Commission conditional approval granted on December 19, 2022 for a
Site Development Plan to permit construction of a 234,000 SF +/- warehouse and associated site
improvements on Commerce Way. The property is zoned IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing
Zone). The property is located on the northwest side of Commerce Way, north of W. North
Street. The owner of record is H & M Properties, LLC. The Equitable Owner is Commerce Way
Dover DE, LLC. Property Address: 22.967-acre unaddressed parcel on Commerce Way. Tax
Parcel: ED-05-076.10-02-07.03-000. Council District 1. PLUS #2022-09-05. Approved Waiver
Requests: Partial Elimination of the Fence Component of the Opaque Barrier; and Approved
Performance Standards Review.
Representative: Ms. Courtney England, Mondari Properties
Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this Application S-22-14 is a Site Development Plan that the
Commission saw in December 2022. Joining us online is Courtney England of the Mondari
Properties. The Planning Commission, after you reviewed and granted that series of waiver
requests and conditional approval to the Site Plan, that approval was initially good for a period of
two years which brings us to December 2024. The Planning Office and others did complete the
review process on the Plan and the Plan achieved Final Site Plan approval in April 2024. At this
point, they have not moved to construction which is one of the components of the approval
process. They are requesting by this letter a one-year Extension which would carry the approval
through December 2025. The property ownership entity is working with potential tenants and is
hoping to have them onboard before commencing construction. This is a very large warehouse
project off of Commerce Way in the northwest corner of Commerce Way in the Enterprise
Business Park.
Ms. England stated that she is here for any questions tonight.
Mr. Witham asked where they are in the process with respect to potential tenants. Responding to
Mr. Witham, Ms. England stated that they recently partnered with Cushman Wakefield and they
are speaking with several tenants but as she is sure you are aware, these conversations can take
quite a bit of time. As Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned, given the size of the warehouse, they
would prefer to secure a tenant or two prior to starting construction. The conversations are
underway but it’s that stage of talking to tenants that continues on.
Mrs. Maucher moved to approve S-22-14 Commerce Way Dover DE LLC Warehouse on
Commerce Way a one-year Extension as she thinks it is a wise decision to secure a tenant before
building, seconded by Mrs. Denney and the motion was carried 6-0 by roll call vote with Mr.
3
Página 4
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
Roach, Dr. Jones, and Mr. Reaves absent. Mrs. Maucher voting yes. Mr. Baldwin voting yes.
Mrs. Welsh voting yes. Mr. Lewis voting yes. Mrs. Denney voting yes. Mr. Witham voting yes.
NEW APPLICATIONS
Z-24-06 Lands of PAM Cubed Real Estate, LLC at 1216 McKee Road: Rezoning C-PO to IO -
Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation to City Council on a Rezoning application for a
parcel of land consisting of 1.2302 acres +/-. The property is zoned C-PO (Commercial and
Professional Office Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). The proposed
zoning for the property is IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor
Overlay Zone). The property is located on the west side of McKee Road and north of the
intersection of McKee Road and College Road. The owner of record is PAM Cubed Real Estate,
LLC. Property Address: 1216 McKee Road. Tax Parcel: ED-05-067.00-01-34.00-000. Council
District 1. Ordinance #2024-31. The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance was completed on
November 25, 2024 and Public Hearings were scheduled for Planning Commission on
December 16, 2024 and City Council on January 13, 2025.
Representative: Mr. Mike Riemann, Becker Morgan Group
Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this a Rezoning Request. The Planning Commission will be
making a recommendation regarding this Request. The property shown on the screen in yellow is
just to the northwest of the intersection of McKee Road and College Road. The property is
addressed as 1216 McKee Road. It is currently zoned CPO (Commercial and Professional Office
Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). They have made a Request for
Rezoning to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) with it remaining subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor
Overlay Zone). As this is an Ordinance, the Planning Commission will be conducting their
public hearing and making a Recommendation regarding the Rezoning. It then moves onto City
Council for their own public hearing and final action on the Rezoning Request. The Report
details what the allowable uses and zoning requirements of the IO (Institutional and Office Zone)
and COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) zoning districts are. The Comprehensive Plan places this in
a Land Use Category of Office. The recommendation from the Planning Staff is a
recommendation for approval for Rezoning of the property. They note that the IO (Institutional
and Office Zone), while it’s commercial in nature it does allow for a number of institutional type
buildings and the property owner has a future plan related to institutional expansion in that area.
Their submission also included a location diagram of the property itself. Staff is recommending
that it be rezoned to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) finding that it’s consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and the goals of the Plan related to that Land Use Category. They are also
recommending that the property remain subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) because
of the frontage that it has on McKee Road. In the interest of time, she knows the applicant has a
more detailed presentation so she will let them run through that.
Mr. Riemann stated that he wanted to highlight a little more detail on top of what Mrs. Melson-
Williams has already mentioned. The subject site is located on McKee Road just north of the
intersection with College Road. It is a 1.23-acre parcel that their client has recently purchased.
They have owned it for the last couple of years and it is associated with the PAM Rehabilitation
Facility that is located directly to the north. They are here tonight requesting a Rezoning from
4
Página 5
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) to IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and they
are okay with this remaining within the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) as well. The Code
outlines the criteria as it relates to Rezoning, which he knows the Commission is very familiar
with, but basically there are three criteria that they must demonstrate that they meet. First, is
whether or not adequate services and infrastructure exist or can be created to support the zoning
change; then whether the uses permitted by the proposed change would be compatible with
existing uses and zones in the area, and whether or not the proposed zoning is in compliance with
the City of Dover proposed Comprehensive Plan. As it relates to each of these points, they
believe this Rezoning application does meet these three criteria specifically as it relates to
adequate public facilities. The project would be served by City of Dover sewer, water, and
electric. There is already sewer and water serving the adjacent facility which this Rezoning will
help for that facility to expand. That is the purpose of this Rezoning so that this facility can
expand and serve the health care needs of the community. There is already an existing access as
well onto McKee Road for that project. Secondly, whether or not the use is permitted by the
proposed change would be compatible. The IO (Institutional and Office Zone) is a permitted
zone in the Office and Office Park Land Development Matrix which he will get to in a minute as
part of the Comprehensive Plan. It is located along McKee Road. There are number of other
Institutional zones in the area which we will show on the next slide and a number of other
compatible commercial and institutional uses in the area. Lastly, is whether or not the proposed
application is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The 2019 Comprehensive Plan calls
for this area to be designated as Office and Office Park; and IO (Institutional and Office Zone) is
a zone that is permitted within that designation. The next slide shows the arrows pointing to the
subject parcel. The light blue color is IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and you can see that IO
(Institutional and Office Zone) is in the vicinity of the project which is directly to our north. That
is the existing zone of the existing PAM Facility and then to our south we have C-2A (Limited
Central Commercial Zone) as well. We do believe that the zoning is compatible with the zoning
in the area. As it relates to the Comprehensive Plan, one of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan
is to maintain and improve the City’s position as a center of government, education, and
medicine through the support of existing institutions and encourage well-designed campuses that
are integrated into community and have room to expand. That’s exactly what this Application is
about. This is about the PAM Facility; they essentially need to expand to add beds to serve that
community and that is why they need to do this Rezoning. That is why they purchased this piece
of property. They believe that this Rezoning Request does exactly that. The next slide shows a
snippet from the Comprehensive Plan. As you know, the Comprehensive Plan defines various
areas for development and uses. This is the Office and Office Park portion of the Comprehensive
Plan. As you can see on the right side, those are the various zoning districts that are compatible
with Office and Office Park; and you can see IO (Institutional and Office Zone) is listed as one
of those permitted zonings. The next slide lists the different uses that are permitted with the IO
(Institutional and Office Zone) for your refence. With that, the project did go through DAC. Of
course, as part of that process, you hear back from other relevant agencies such as Kent
Conservation District, DelDOT, the Fire Marshal, etc. All agencies had no objection to this
particular Zoning Request. With that, they believe that they do meet the three criteria outlined in
the Code. They do believe that this is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and he would be
happy to answer any questions.
Mr. Witham opened a public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public
5
Página 6
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
hearing.
Mrs. Denney stated that they have from time to time, as they look at different things that might
occur in the area of McKee Road and College Road, are reminded by residents locally with
regard to the already challenged traffic that exists. As things improve and things happen,
DelDOT becomes involved, but they tend to not become involved at this level. She just wanted
to remind us all. Especially Mr. Reaves, at some point he has always had some concern about
things in that area. She doesn’t take it often but occasionally she does, and he makes a point.
Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr. Witham stated that obviously with any development you are
going to have an impact on local roads as well. He recognizes the issue that you just raised but
he is not sure how they can address it. It is always going to be an issue.
Mrs. Denney stated exactly, nor does she have a suggestion. Again, what tends to happen in a
situation like this is if DelDOT needs to become involved at some point they will, but right now
that’s not the case for them. They are not going to do a Traffic Study for this.
Mrs. Welsh stated that she will comment just because of the traffic issue. She is on the road three
or four times a day. She recalls that traffic was an issue when the original PAM Building was
under review. While traffic does tend to get busy at different times and at different stages and
different seasons, she says having traveled that road at least three times a day for the last ten (10)
years, it might be a little bit busy but it has not appreciably increased over what it used to be. Her
thought is that if it’s a similar use that she thinks with DelDOT’s cooperation, the traffic can be
addressed. Responding to Mrs. Welsh, Mr. Witham stated that he would agree. Of course, we
would have to speculate on what the impact was going to be but obviously that particular road is
a corridor that directly connects onto Route 1. So, it’s obviously utilized by a lot of people not
just from the PAM Facility but other businesses out there as well.
Mrs Welsh stated that she will make a further comment on what Mr. Witham just said. The
traffic is backed up from McKee Road to Division Street a lot. It is just bumper to bumper at
certain times of the day and it’s been bumper to bumper for a few years like that. So, she hopes
that DelDOT will jump in and address issues but unless you add 3,000 beds there, she is not sure
that she can imagine that there would be detrimental impact on traffic other than what the normal
growth of the City would generate.
Mr. Riemann stated that they are adding twelve (12) beds. When they come in for the Site Plan
Application, keep in mind that the Site Plan for this will come back to this body, that will be the
time that they go through DelDOT with the details on entrance access and all of those things as
part of that process. It’s not currently as part of the Rezoning. He knows that some other projects
in the area, be believes, are contributing to some intersection improvements at McKee Road and
College Road. So, there are plans to do some work there from other projects in the area that are
contributing. He thought that might be helpful.
Mrs. Welsh moved to recommend approval to City Council for application Z-24-06 Lands of
PAM Cubed Real Estate, LLC at 1216 McKee Road: Rezoning C-PO to IO.
Mrs. Maucher asked to make a friendly amendment before seconding the motion. She wants to
6
Página 7
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
add that it remains subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). Responding to Mrs. Maucher,
Mrs. Welsh stated that she agreed.
Mrs. Welsh moved to recommend approval to City Council for application Z-24-06 Lands of
PAM Cubed Real Estate, LLC at 1216 McKee Road: Rezoning C-PO to IO with the property to
remain subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone), seconded by Mrs. Maucher and the
motion was carried 6-0 by roll call vote with Mr. Roach, Dr. Jones, and Mr. Reaves absent. Mrs.
Welsh voting yes; the presentation was well presented. Becker Morgan always does a great job
and it is apparently a needed addition to the PAM Center and should be a good improvement
and something that the community needs. Mr. Lewis voting yes. Mrs. Denney voting yes; she
definitely thinks that the extra beds are needed. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; the Rezoning meets the
criteria outlined in that the new zoning is compatible with existing land uses, there is sufficient
infrastructure to service the new property, and that it’s consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Baldwin voting yes; based on Staff recommendation. Mr. Witham voting yes; for the reasons
set forth on the record by the Commissioners and Staff.
S-24-20 Office Building of Ditko Properties, LLC at 1107 S. Bradford Street – Public Hearing
and Review of Site Development Plan for construction of 2,140 SF one story Office Building on
the parcel of land totaling 11,326 SF (0.26 +/- acres). The zoning is C-2A (Limited Central
Commercial Zone). The property is located on the east side of S. Bradford Street approximately
135.37 ft south of Wyoming Avenue. The owner is Ditko Properties, LLC. Property Address:
1107 S. Bradford Street, Dover DE. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.17-07-27.00-000. Council District 2.
Waiver Requests: Partial Elimination of Upright Curbing and Elimination of Street Frontage
Sidewalk. This property was the subject of Annexation Application AX-22-02 and annexed into
the City on December 12, 2022.
Representative: Mr. Kevin Minnich, Minnich Engineering; Dr. Douglas Ditty; Ditko Properties,
LLC
Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this is a Site Development Plan Application for the property at
1107 S. Bradford Street. The property is zoned C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone). It was
annexed into the City of Dover in 2022. It previously had a single family detached house on the
lot. It is now vacant after that house having been demolished. What is brought to us this evening
is a proposal for a small office building just over 2,100 SF and one-story in size. The zoning of
C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) does allow for office use. The packet included the
architecture for this building and it is a one-story building. The front of the building actually is
the north side of the building. There is a proposal for a sidewalk springing from the street to that
front door area of the building. To the rear of the building is where we find a small parking lot
which is accessed from S. Bradford Street. This Application makes two Waiver Requests. One is
related to the Partial Elimination of Curbing associated with that parking lot area. That is a
Waiver that Planning Staff has granted approval to finding that the Elimination of Upright
Curbing in select areas is related to drainage plans that are anticipated for the project site. The
second Waiver Request is related to the Partial Elimination of Sidewalk; and this is for the
sidewalk that would be on the street frontage of S. Bradford Street. The applicant is providing
the on-site sidewalk network to move from the street and/or parking areas to the building front.
As part of the Development Advisory Committee Report, they provided some summary notes on
7
Página 8
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
the application itself. They noted the Planning Staff’s approval of the Elimination of Upright
Curbing. And then the Staff recommendation on the Partial Elimination of the Frontage
Sidewalk. Planning Staff is not recommending approval of that Waiver seeking; we feel that this
is an opportunity to go ahead and make that construction of the street frontage sidewalk happen
on this segment of Bradford Street. They do realize they do not have those street frontage
sidewalks and it is not quite to City street standards that they expect today. But this is an
opportunity for development. The additional portions of the Development Advisory Committee
Report include the comments from the other regulatory agencies and she would enter those by
reference. They do have the applicant’s representative here tonight both in their project engineer
and their project architect Mr. Brian Cusick is online if there are questions for him. The property
owner’s representative is here as well.
Mr. Minnich stated that they are in receipt of all of the DAC comments and are in agreement
with all of the comments. There are a couple of revisions on there for the plans themselves which
are minor. And like Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned, they do have two Waivers that they are
asking for. One is the Partial Elimination of Upright Curbing and the Elimination of the frontage
Sidewalk. Originally, he had the frontage sidewalk shown on the plan, but they decided to take it
off after talking to Dr. Ditty on that. One of the reasons why he did it was because there was
already a shoulder out there. Within that lot and the next two or three lots down, there is a
shoulder where they park off of the actual roadway. That’s why he kind of took that off of there.
He knows Dr. Ditty would probably like to talk about the elimination of that sidewalk.
Mrs. Maucher stated that she doesn’t think there is any existing sidewalk on either side.
Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Minnich stated that the sidewalk stops at Wyoming Avenue
right at the returns. As you come in onto S. Bradford Street, it stops and ends right there.
Mrs. Denney stated that the sidewalk issue often comes up. At one point, she was the Town
Manager for Camden and she is also on the Board of Adjustment for Kent County. These
Requests for Waivers often appear but the best way to grow the sidewalks and make it safer for
pedestrian traffic is as the properties are developed to incorporate the development of the
sidewalk as you move along. She tends to like to see that happen in that way and she has never
been a fan of waving it. Again, to her, pedestrian safety is of great importance.
Mr. Witham stated that he is sure you understand that the policy of the City is to support
sidewalk construction through the City. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Minnich stated that he
is fully aware.
Dr. Ditty stated that he owns First State Oral Surgery on the corner of Wyoming Avenue and
State Street. They are looking to expand our practice to accommodate this area. They need to
bring in more oral surgeons. They currently have one slated to come in June and they are trying
to decide where to put them. The options are Rehoboth, Seaford, or Dover. They feel, in general,
that Dover needs our help. There are not a lot of us around here. They are building this building
so that they can get our insurance department out of our office and accommodate another oral
surgeon. Where he is going with this is that they want to say to the Commission that they have
always tried to be very cooperative with the City and building structures that look beautiful and
fit the architecture of the City. He is not going to push back very hard on the sidewalk. He can’t
8
Página 9
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
begin to understand all of the things and all of the overview and long-terms goals that you have.
He will say that the area of Bradford Street where we are locating this building is a dead-end
street. None of you have walked on this street. This is not a street that people are walking on.
This is a quiet little street. Our building is going to be isolated. There is no sidewalk on the very
large parking lot next to this lot and there is no sidewalk on the other side. There is already no
contiguous sidewalk on either side of it which is one of the reasons why he thought they could
hopefully get a Waiver. Also, he can’t imagine that this sidewalk is going to generate more
walkable space in the City of Dover. Also, let’s be honest, this project is getting expensive for
us. They are building a brand-new building in Rehoboth, DE and they did a lot of things for
improvements in the City of Dover when they built their building on Wyoming Avenue and State
Street such as crosswalks and all types of things. We cooperated with anything that you have
ever wanted and they will continue to do so. This is just one of the things from his standpoint
that doesn’t seem to make sense and would make a big difference for them when it comes to
building this building.
Mrs. Denney asked if this building was going to be primarily a billing center as opposed to a
practice where you will have an orthodontist and patients. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Dr. Ditty
stated that there is no patient care in this building. They are leaving the building versatile for its
use. Managers will probably be in there and maybe some doctor offices. Right now, the plan is
for our insurance department to start working out of this building. Again, if you look at the
architecture, he thinks they have designed a very nice-looking building for our administrative
staff.
Mrs. Denney stated that the building represents you well and it is beautiful. She was just
wondering with regard to the sidewalk if it’s primarily just going to be office with billing and
people aren’t coming and going from it. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Dr. Ditty stated no.
Mr. Witham stated that he notes for the applicant that the Planning Office has already approved
the Elimination of the Upright Curbing.
Mr. Witham opened a public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public
hearing.
Mrs. Maucher stated that there are several residential homes along that street. And is the zoning
residential? Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that for the block that
we are talking about on S. Bradford Street, the two adjoining parcels that are on the same side of
the street where this property is are actually located in Kent County and have single family
residences there. The other property where the Solid Waste Authority would be was previously
located across the street and a little further to the south is zoned RGO (General Residence and
Office Zone). There is a series of lots that would be the lower left corner of this plan image that
are vacant lots that front of Wyoming Avenue. She believes they are CPO (Commercial
Professional Office Zone). So, we have got a mix of zoning in general in this area. There is
commercial with office type uses with some limited residential zoning.
Mr. Witham asked if any of these adjoining lots or the lot itself in question abut up against any
County land. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the subject site is
9
Página 10
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
within the City. If you are looking at the two parcels to the south, they are located within the
County and then one to the east where the Melvin Sunoco motor vehicle services is also in the
County. The property adjoins to the north and to the northeast with lands that are also owned by
the same ownership group and those are within the City.
Mr. Witham asked if we know whether or not any of those lots have sidewalks. Responding to
Mr. Witham, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that none of the properties along S. Bradford Street
have sidewalks along their frontage. There are some rolled curb areas but no sidewalks. The
extent of that (ok sidewalks) in this area would be along the Wyoming Avenue frontage of
properties.
Mrs. Maucher moved to approve S-24-20 Office Building of Ditko Properties, LLC at 1107 S.
Bradford Street inclusive of the Elimination of Sidewalk Waiver. That seems to be almost an
alley type street and not a regular City street. It does dead-end at two businesses. She has
problems with sidewalks to nowhere and the likelihood of development of other sidewalks in that
area doesn’t seem high. She walks up Wyoming Avenue quite regularly and she never goes down
that section. She also noted that the Partial Elimination of Upright Curbing (Waiver) has
already been approved by Planning Staff. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Denney and the
motion was carried 6-0 by roll call vote with Mr. Roach, Dr. Jones and Mr. Reaves absent. Mrs.
Maucher voting yes; based on reasons stated in her motion and she thinks it’s a good use of the
property and encourages more services in the Dover area. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; based on
previous statements. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; in conjunction with the comments in the motion. Mr.
Lewis voting yes; for reasons previously stated. He was convinced by the applicant’s statement
and it all made sense to him. Mrs. Denney voting yes; she thinks it’s a perfect use to put those
buildings right by each other. Again, in keeping with what has been done by Dr. Ditty, she thinks
it will be an asset and is needed. Mr. Witham voting yes; this application meets the conditions in
spirit of the Zoning Ordinance and the use of the property is appropriate. It does appear to him
that there will be a low level of traffic to this place to begin with so there will be less of a need
for the sidewalk for the premises. He thinks it is supported by the record.
MI-24-10 Request for Alley Abandonment: Part of Alley Between S. Governors Avenue and S.
Bradford Street – Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation to City Council on a Request
for Abandonment of a portion of the improved alley, located between South Governors Avenue
and South Bradford Street and extending approximately 132 feet north of the Minor Street Alley,
consisting of 1,550 square feet in area. The portion of the alley to be abandoned is adjacent to the
properties located at 133 S. Governors Avenue, 139 S. Governors Avenue, 145 S. Governors
Avenue, 136 S. Bradford Street, 148 S. Bradford Street, and 150 S. Bradford Street, Dover DE.
Representatives: Mr. Mike Riemann, Becker Morgan Group; Ms. Diane Laird, Downtown
Dover Partnership; Mr. JD Bartlett, EDiS Company
Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this is a Request of Alley Abandonment. It’s not your typical
application to the Planning Commission; however, you are called upon to participate in the
process for consideration of Alley Abandonments. You can see in the image on the screen; we
are located between S. Bradford Street and S. Governors Avenue to the north of Loockerman
Street and to the north of the Minor Street Alley. We are talking about an area that springs north
10
Página 11
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
from the Minor Street Alley. On the image on the screen, it is a shaded hatched area that shows.
There are a series of six parcels that are either adjacent to or the alley actually crosses the
property itself. They have done some of the deed research and some of the alley portions here are
located specifically in the right-of-way but in other instances, it traverses parts of the adjacent
parcels. She will list those adjacent parcels that are adjacent to this alley segment. They are
specifically moving from left to right and top to bottom. 133 S. Governors Avenue referenced as
owned by the Downtown Dover Development Corporation and we now know that as the
Downtown Dover Partnership. The property at 139 S. Governors Avenue, again, referenced with
the Downtown Dover Development Corporation and the Dover Parking Authority now
recognized as the Downtown Dover Partnership. The property at 145 S. Governors Avenue is
actually owned by the City of Dover. Moving over to the eastern side, again, from the top to the
bottom. The property at 136 S. Bradford Street is owned by the City of Dover. The property at
148 S. Bradford Street is now owned by the Capital City Transformation Alliance Inc. and then
the property at 150 S. Bradford Street is currently or soon to be formally owned by CEI
Properties LLC. The applicants making the request collectively were the Downtown Dover
Partnership. The Request for Alley Abandonment moves through the review process with the
Development Advisory Committee for some initial comments and review. The Planning
Commission takes a look at the Alley Abandonment Request and provides a Recommendation.
That Recommendation will be forwarded to City Council and its appropriate City Council
Committees who will have their own consideration of this Request moving into the new year.
The Alley Abandonment is brought forth because these properties are to be involved in a project
known as the Dover Mobility Center Garage. It is a parking garage project which will eventually
come before this body but right now we are just dealing with the Alley Abandonment. The image
on the screen shows that for the most part, we’ve got a series of parcels that are functioning as
surface parking lot areas. There are two properties that currently have buildings but their
demolitions were authorized by other Applications already considered. The Alley Abandonment,
again, is located in the middle and as noted, some of it is right of way and some of it just crosses
some of the properties including some that are City owned. It is also noted that a couple of these
properties, as she mentioned, are owned by the City of Dover. The City Manager’s Office under
separate proceedings has been working with City Council to transfer some of this land ownership
in the City of Dover to the Downtown Dover Partnership and associated entities for this
redevelopment project. So, you are not really considering that issue at the moment but the alley
is a separate matter per our Charter and Code. This redevelopment project is identified as a
priority project in the Transforming Downtown Dover: Capital City 2030 Plan. The Planning
Staff is recommending that the Alley Abandonment happen because it is part of those longer-
term efforts to revitalize Downtown Dover. They do note and recognize that appropriate
planning is going to have to occur related to utility infrastructure that may be located in this alley
segment here. There actually is a fairly substantial water line that they have already been in
discussion with the City’s Department of Water/Wastewater in regards to. Tonight, the Planning
Commission is charged with conducting your own public hearing and making a recommendation
on this Alley Abandonment Request which will then be forwarded to the Utility Committee and
City Council.
Mr. Witham stated that the assumption that he has here and the assumption that he thinks that
they need to understand is that there are six different addresses and six different tax parcel
numbers some of which are owned by different entities other than the Downtown Dover
11
Página 12
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
Partnership. The assumption that he has here is that all of these entities have an agreement to the
development of these six parcels. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that
the short answer to that is yes, there is a collective effort. Even as part of this request for Alley
Abandonment, the City Clerk’s Office was required to reach out to each of those involved parcel
owners to gage their participation in this Alley Abandonment process. The short answer is, she
believes that all of the property owners are well aware of this request that is being made this
evening.
Mr. Witham stated that some of these parcels were subject by this Commission for a Request for
Demolition which was considered earlier. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mrs. Melson-Williams
stated yes, there are two properties.
Mr. Riemann stated that Mrs. Melson-Williams has done an excellent job of summarizing the
Application. He asked Mrs. Melson-Williams to zoom in on the easement itself so you can get a
little better of a look about what’s actually on the ground versus the black and white. The area in
question is this hatched area in the middle that’s got this yellow cross hatch. It’s actually in an
easement; so, it’s not a separate deeded right of way. It is actually an easement of about 1,500 SF
that is on the six parcels in question that were referenced. The Downtown Dover Partnership
either owns, has already acquired, or is contracted to purchase all of the parcels in question. They
have settled on one of the parcels there and are going to settlement on Wednesday on the last
parcel. They will own and have them under their control, all of these particular properties. The
alley, at this point, really is no longer needed. It doesn’t really serve a purpose with the parking
lot in its current configuration. It certainly would impact the future Mobility Hub that is planned
to go there that will come before this Commission soon in another Site Plan Application. This
was really the first step to get through that process that needed to be accomplished first; so, we
are going through this process now. As part of any application, this was sent to all of the same
agencies as part of the Development Advisory Committee. They received no objections from all
of the other agencies. They were all supportive of this Request as has been the Staff. The only
item of mention that Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned was a water line that exists. They have
already met with Public Works on that and there will be a plan to relocate that waterline outside
of that which would happen as part of that Mobility hub project anyway. So that is not an issue
and will be solved as part of this project. We are asking for the Commission’s support.
Mrs. Denney stated that when she is looking at the parking and realizing that the intent is for a
parking garage building for which she is certain there should be a charge because she
understands that it might be Colonial and they would certainly charge. She actually volunteered
for many years at Catholic Charities that used to be in one of the buildings on Loockerman
Street. They utilized the parking behind it as did employees from the accountant and the bridal
shop. She can’t remember what all was down there, but they had access to free parking. It is
especially important in Catholic Charities because people are volunteering their time and the
majority of clients that come in there really can’t afford to park. But at any rate, that said, at this
point in this design there will be no free parking because Loockerman Street is not going to have
parking on the street. So, there will be no free available parking for somebody who just wants to
go and do something with their EZ Pass. Does everybody have to park in the garage and pay?
Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr. Riemann stated that the Application that is before us tonight is
not the parking garage. It is the Alley Abandonment and so he thinks that would be more
12
Página 13
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
appropriately addressed at the time that we come before you with the parking garage application.
Mrs. Denney stated that the Alley Abandonment is a step towards a final result which would
include elimination of the free parking as her understanding. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr.
Riemann stated that he is honestly not prepared to answer that particular question this evening.
The Alley that is in question that they are proposing to abandon is no longer needed given the
configuration of the parcels and the ownership of the parcels being a singular owner at this time.
There is access to the parcels currently from both sides, S. Governors Avenue and Bradford
Street; so, the Alley itself is no longer needed. There is no purpose for the Alley any further.
Mrs. Maucher stated that she used to work on State Street. Does this Alley continue further
north? Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Riemann stated it does but it terminates at the fire
station. It doesn’t go all the way out.
Mrs. Maucher stated that the elimination of that section of the Alley is going to have limited
impact on properties. She used to work on State Street and utilized the alley to get to the parking
behind her building on State Street. With that elimination, are there properties that would be
affected to the north? Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Riemann stated no, there really
wouldn’t be. They are only eliminating the portion from Minor Street up. The Alley does
continue behind Harry Louie’s, but it terminates at the fire station.
Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that if we scan back out on the plan shown on the screen.
Mrs. Maucher asked if the Alley came out to Reed Street. Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mrs.
Melson-Williams stated that the Alley does not. You would run into the back side of the Fire
Department’s building before that would happen; it kind of melds into those adjacent parking lot
areas to the north at the top of the page.
Mr. Witham stated that he thinks it is safe to say that once all of the parcels are owned by one
entity, not only will the Alley not exist on paper, it will not physically exist because it will be
gone. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Riemann stated correct and all of the parcels would be
combined into one.
Mr. Witham further stated that there would be no need of an alley, period. Responding to Mr.
Witham, Mr. Riemann stated correct.
Mr. Witham opened a public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public
hearing.
Mrs. Maucher moved to recommend approval to City Council for MI-24-10 Request for Alley
Abandonment: Part of Alley Between S. Governors Avenue and S. Bradford Street. With the
upcoming project, it’s pretty much necessary.
Mr. Witham asked if Mrs. Maucher would entertain an amendment to note that the Planning
Commission recommends that once the full integration of the alley is accomplished by deed into
one entity the Abandonment would be affective. As of right now, they are still in the process of
13
Página 14
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2024
combining those lots so there could be a limited need for the alleyway until they are all
combined. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mrs. Maucher stated understood but it’s a joint
application of the individual property owners and they are jointly requesting Abandonment of
their Alley.
Mr. Witham stated that it’s a joint request in the sense that all of the individual property owners
are a part of the Downtown Dover Partnership but that would be a legal document which is not
before us. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mrs. Maucher stated the Amendment to the motion is
accepted.
Mrs. Maucher moved to recommend approval to City Council for MI-24-10 Request for Alley
Abandonment: Part of Alley Between S. Governors Avenue and S. Bradford Street. With the
upcoming project, it’s pretty much necessary. Once the full integration of the alley is
accomplished by deed into one entity, the Abandonment would be effective, seconded by Mrs.
Welsh and the motion was carried 6-0 by roll call vote with Mr. Roach, Dr. Jones and Mr.
Reaves absent. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; based on Staff recommendation and reasons stated in
the motion. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; based on Staff recommendation. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; for
reasons previously stated. Mr. Lewis voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mrs. Denney
voting yes. Mr. Witham voting yes; based on Staff recommendation and the documents submitted
to the Planning Commission and based upon the oral discussion before the Commission today.
NEW BUSINESS – no items
Meeting adjourned at 8:32 PM.
Sincerely,
Kristen Mullaney
Secretary
14