COUNCIL Minutes

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Regular Council Meeting was held on November 22, 2010 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Hogan presiding. Council members present were Mr. Bonar, Mrs. Russell, Dr. McGlumphy, Mr. Leary, Mr. McGiffin, Mrs. Williams, Mr. Salters, and Mr. Ruane. Council staff members present were Police Chief Hosfelt, Ms. Russell, Mrs. Mitchell, Mrs. Townshend, Fire Chief Christiansen, Mr. DePrima, City Solicitor Rodriguez, and Mrs. McDowell. Mayor Carey was also present. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Hogan declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council was not in official session and could not take formal action. There was no one present wishing to speak during the Open Forum. The invocation was given by Chaplain Dixon, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Council President Hogan requested the deletion of Item #9 - Election of Officers, Robbins Hose Company - Year 2011 Fire Line Officers, and noted that the matter will be considered during the Regular Council Meeting of December 13, 2010. Dr. McGlumphy moved for approval of the agenda, as amended, seconded by Mrs. Williams and unanimously carried. Mrs. Russell requested that Item #5A - Review of Active Recreation Plan - Bayard Plaza be removed from the consent agenda. Dr. McGlumphy requested that Item #6B - b-2 - Ordinance #2010-30 - Budget Amendments and Item #6D - Approval of Library Funding Plan Transfers and Use of Green Energy Rate Revenue be removed from the consent agenda. Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the consent agenda, as amended, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 8, 2010 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 8, 2010 were unanimously approved by motion of Mrs. Williams, seconded by Mr. Bonar and bore the written approval of Mayor Carey. PRESENTATIONS - 2010 MAYOR=S PRAYER BREAKFAST CONTRIBUTIONS Mayor Carleton E. Carey, Sr. reminded members that each year proceeds from the Mayor=s Prayer Breakfast are donated to various organizations. Mayor Carey announced that this year=s proceeds totaled $2,200, and he presented donations, as follows: Calvary Baptist Church - Youth Program Mayor Carey presented a donation in the amount of $300 to Reverend John Moore, of Calvary Baptist Church, for the Youth Program.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 2 Elizabeth W. Murphey School Mayor Carey presented a donation in the amount of $400 to Mr. Mike Kopp of the Elizabeth W. Murphey School. United Service Organizations (USO) of Delaware Mayor Carey presented a donation in the amount of $500 to Ms. Joan Cote of the United Service Organizations (USO) of Delaware. Dover Interfaith Mission Mayor Carey presented a donation in the amount of $1,000 to Ms. Jeanine Kleimo of the Dover Interfaith Mission. Mayor Carey thanked all those who participated in this year=s Annual Mayor=s Prayer Breakfast, noting that there was a total of 412 attendees. He also thanked the Sheraton Inn for the outstanding service provided for the event. PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - 35 N. NEW STREET, OWNER OF RECORD - HOUSE OF PRIDE A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider a violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance for 35 N. New Street, owned by House of Pride. Mr. Scott Koenig, Public Services Manager/Director of Public Works, advised members that the property was damaged by a fire in 2002 and that no repairs have been made since. He stated that, in January 2003 the building was condemned, and in 2007, the building was registered as a vacant building and has remained vacant. Mr. Koenig stated that the City issued a demolition permit in January 2008; however, the owner has not taken action to demolish the building. He stated that the Code Enforcement Division performed an interior inspection of the structure in September 2010 and determined that several windows were not secure and were open to the elements. These windows were subsequently boarded by the property owner. On October 27, 2010, the Fire Marshal=s Office and Code Enforcement Division performed an inspection of the building and identified a number of structural concerns with the interior walls, flooring, and foundation. In addition, the Fire Marshal=s Office determined that the building was being used for storage in excess of what is permitted under the fire code for residential use. He advised members that the property has been the subject of numerous code violations for junk, debris, and tall grass and weeds. Mr. Koenig presented slides (Exhibit 1) depicting the condition of the structure. Staff recommended that City Council: 1) Declare this accessory building dangerous; 2) Order the property to be repaired or demolished by December 22, 2010 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structure if not completed by the owner within ten (10) days of the date set by Council; and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 3 4) Order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. Council President Hogan declared the public hearing open. There being no one present wishing to speak during the public hearing, Council President Hogan declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Leary moved that the structure located at 35 N. New Street be declared a dangerous building and subject to demolition, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bonar. Responding to Mr. Salters, Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that staff conducted inspections on other properties owned by the House of Pride and identified several corrections that are required. She stated that the House of Pride is moving forward with the corrections; however, she noted that there is another property that is vacant and in a condition similar to the subject property. If progress is not made in the near future on the other property, staff will take appropriate action in declaring this property dangerous as well. In response to Mr. Salters regarding recouping the City=s expenses, Mrs. Townshend stated that unpaid fines are submitted to collections. She noted that demolition expenses are placed as a lien against the property, which the City would recoup upon the sale of the property. Mr. Koenig stated that if a property goes to sale and the liens exceed the offer, the offer is brought to the City for acceptance of the reduced amount or deferment. Mr. DePrima stated that the City cannot bring a property to sheriff=s sale based on the lien alone and the only venue would be a tax sale. He stated that the City is expediting a tax sale in an attempt to recoup monies due to the City for those properties with liens and arrears on their property taxes. Mr. DePrima reminded members that non-profit organizations, such as House of Pride, typically apply to have their taxes waived and questioned whether liens are being placed on non-profit owned properties. He stated that the City may want to investigate this matter and decide whether or not to continue waiving fees for non-profit owned properties. Mr. Bonar moved for a call for the question, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried, with Dr. McGlumphy voting no. On a call for the question, the motion to: 1) declare the accessory building located at 35 N. New Street dangerous; 2) order the property to be repaired or demolished by December 22, 2010 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structure if not completed by the owner within ten (10) days of the date set by Council; and 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 4 to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner, as recommended by staff, was carried by a unanimous roll call vote. PUBLIC HEARING - SALE OF DOVER PUBLIC LIBRARY (45 S. STATE STREET AND ASSOCIATED PARKING LOT) In accordance with the City=s Procedure for the Sale and Disposition of Real Property, a public hearing was set for this time and place to consider the sale of the Dover Public Library and the associated parking lot at 45 S. State Street. Mr. Anthony DePrima, City Manager, advised members that the Procedure for the Sale and Disposition of Real Property includes a three (3) step process. He explained that Step 1 was completed when the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee recommended disposal of the property during their meeting of September 13, 2010 and Council=s intent to sell the property was advertised. Mr. DePrima stated that Step 2 requires advertising pertinent information in a local paper once a week for two (2) weeks and that ads were placed in the Dover Post on Wednesday, November 10, 2010 and Wednesday, November 17, 2010. He stated Step 3, which requires that a public hearing be held for the purpose of taking public comment on the sale, will be completed this evening. Mr. DePrima indicated that, according to the Procedure, after considering public comments and the public record, Council will determine whether it is in the best interest of the City to sell the property, have it rezoned, and request an opinion from the City Manager regarding the recommended method of sale and level of advertising. Members were reminded that funds from the sale of the current Dover Public Library Building and the associated parking area are planned for use in the construction of the new Dover library. During the November 8, 2010 Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee meeting, it was reported that no City Departments have a need for the property. Staff recommended that, following the public hearing, Council: 1) find it in the best interest of the City to dispose of the property through sale or long term lease; 2) request that the City Manager and City Planner obtain the necessary zoning and planning approvals for rezoning, minor subdivision, alley abandonment, and possible variances to prepare the property for sale or lease; and 3) request that the City Manager provide Council with a recommendation regarding whether an appraisal is necessary, the method of sale, and the degree and scope of advertising. In response to Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima stated that the property is currently zoned RGO (Residential and General Office) and that it may be more appropriate to rezone the property as Commercial/Professional Office or Institutional Office. In addition, he stated that in order to prepare the site for sale, it will be necessary to prepare a minor subdivision\lot line adjustment to place the library and parking lot on one parcel and annex the Carriage House to the 5 East Reed Street property, for which variances may or may not be needed. Mr. DePrima also noted that the paper alley which extends through the property must be abandoned.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 5 Responding to Mr. Ruane regarding an appraisal of the property, Mr. DePrima stated that the last step in the process will be to request that the City Manager provide Council with a recommendation regarding whether an appraisal is necessary, the method of sale, and the degree and scope of advertising. He stated that an appraisal is not required, according to the procedure. Council President Hogan declared the public hearing open. Prior to public testimony, Council President Hogan noted the receipt of a letter submitted by the Greater Dover Committee which was read into the record, as requested, by Council President Hogan (Exhibit #2). Reverend John Moore, Youth Pastor at Calvary Baptist Church (resides at 216 Fieldbrook Drive in Magnolia), stated that he has worked with children aged 3-17 for the past 10 years. He relayed the importance of education for children and noted the crippling effects of illiteracy on society. Reverend Moore expressed his pride that each high school senior in his ministry has gone to college. He noted that, although many of these children could be considered "at risk" or in need of "special education," he has found that once their minds are engaged and learning begins, children gain confidence. Reverend Moore indicated that the first 1,000 days of a child=s life are critical, since 85% of an individual=s personality is created during this time. He stated that the public library is a tremendous resource for providing education. Reverend Moore noted the critical importance of the Dover Public Library, as follows: 1) it provides resources typically not found in the home; 2) many children do not have computers or technology at home to conduct research; and 3) it provides an opportunity for children to broaden their minds. He reiterated his gratitude for the work of Dover=s Public Library. Ms. Jeanine Kleimo, Chair of Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing (resides at 79 Vining Run in Camden), stated that she deals with men everyday who have been deprived of education, are searching for work, and are welcomed at the Dover Public Library. These men are sent daily to search for employment, learn to utilize computers, and be encouraged to think of themselves as regular citizens of the community who have access to the public facilities offered by the City of Dover. She advised members that approximately 90 shelter guests have obtained full-time employment this past year. She noted that the library has been a critical resource for shelter residents in their search for employment and urged support of the Dover Public Library. Ms. Lisa Chase, 110 N. Fairfield Drive, concurred with the comments made by Reverend Moore and noted that approximately 1/3 of the first 1,000 days of her children=s lives were spent at a public library. In 2002, upon moving to Dover, she stated that one (1) of the first things she did was visit the Dover Public Library to obtain library cards. She stated that her family spends several days at the library each week. It was Ms. Chase=s opinion that the Dover Public Library is the greatest asset of the City of Dover (and Central Delaware) and is her family=s favorite place to be. She expressed the critical need for a new facility and urged members= support. Ms. Connie Myers, 14-B Seskinore Court, requested members to support the measure, noting

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 6 that the library needs Council=s support. Mr. Jim Stewart, Member of the Executive Committee for the Dover Public Library (742 Bicentennial Boulevard) explained that the sale of the Dover Public Library at 45 S. State Street is the first of several measures that will be required to keep the library project moving forward. He stated that stopping the project now would be premature and requested that members consider the amount of funds already committed by the State, private organizations, and other funding sources. Mr. Stewart urged members to approve the requested sale and support the other measures to bring the new library to fruition. Mr. Phil Martino, Vice-President of the Capital School Board of Education (resides at 370 Stonewater Way, Dover), relayed the Board=s support for the sale of the library to ensure adequate funds for the library project. With current State testing being converted to computerized format, he noted that schools do not have an adequate number of computers and felt that the new library facility would aid students in this regard. Mr. Fred Kaltreider, 2 Rodney Road, congratulated the City of Dover on careful planning for the construction and financing of the new anchor library. With most of the funds already acquired, he felt it would be easier for the fundraising committee to finish their job if Council signals their commitment by moving forward with the project. Mr. Jim Flood, 89 Laurel Drive, stated that there will always be a need for a basic source of information and that the new library will serve as this source. In addition, he felt that the new library would benefit the City economically and urged members to support the sale. Mr. N.C. Vasuki, 235 Carnoustie Road, stated that upon arriving in Dover in 1961, the Dover Public Library was one of the first places he visited. Since that time, he has seen the use of the library increase and stated that the support of Council would be helpful in making the new library a reality. Mr. Tom Worley, 248 Meadow Drive, stated that there is a need for a new library in order to meet demand, and indicated his support for the project. He relayed the importance of a good, vigorous library when executives and managers of companies consider a new business location. He encouraged members to declare the library surplus and move forward with the new library. Ms. Nicole Colbert, 303-A West Loockerman Street, stated her support for the measure to declare the Dover Public Library as surplus in order to move forward with the new anchor library project. She stated that her family utilizes the library each day and that the library provides a safe place in Dover for her teenagers to go. She felt that the library provides a means for individuals to be exposed to positive influences during a time when negativity prevails. Mr. Ruane moved to approve staff=s recommendation that Council: 1) find that it is in the best interest of the City to dispose of the property located at 45 S. State Street (and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 7 associated parking lot) through sale or long term lease; 2) request that the City Manager and City Planner obtain the necessary zoning and planning approvals for the rezoning, minor subdivision, alley abandonment, and possible variances to prepare the property for sale or lease; and 3) request that the City Manager provide City Council with a recommendation as to whether an appraisal is necessary, the method of sale, and the degree and scope of advertising. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - NOVEMBER 8, 2010 The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee met on November 8, 2010 with Chairwoman Russell presiding. Review of Active Recreation Plan - Bayard Plaza (Corner of W. Loockerman Street and S. Governors Avenue) Ms. Janelle Cornwell, Planner II, reviewed the detailed information provided to members regarding the Recreation Plan for Bayard Plaza. She noted that Bayard Plaza is being reviewed as a Site Development Plan and that the subject property consists of a parcel of land totaling 0.635+/- acres. The Site Plan is to permit the construction of a 54,998 S.F. mixed use building with 48 residential units on floors 2 through 5 and retail space on the first floor. The residential units consist of apartments. Ms. Cornwell stated that, as part of the Site Plan review process for this project, the applicant has prepared a Conceptual Recreation Plan, which illustrates how the Bayard Plaza development will provide recreation amenities in accordance with the design specifications described in Article 5, Section 10 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Plan indicates that 1,593 S.F. of land would be reserved as active recreation area in central locations on the site. She stated that the proposed amenities include a 751 S.F. multipurpose community room on the first floor of the building and a 842 S.F. picnic area with picnic tables and a grill behind the building. She reviewed information from the submitted plan (dated October 1, 2010) for the active recreation area to be constructed, as follows: Required Active Recreation Area 75 S.F. per dwelling unit Provided Multipurpose on Plan community room, (Article 5 §10.515) 48 DU = 3,600 S.F. picnic area with 2 picnic tables and Requires 3,600 S.F. grill = total of 1,593 S.F. Active Recreation Amenities Accessible Located on first floor of the (Article 5 §10.15) development. Active Recreation Amenities Age Oriented to development Multipurpose room; picnic area with (Article 5 §10.15) grills and picnic tables. Parking Onsite parking provided for most dwelling units. A parking lot with 46 spaces is located on the site. Setbacks: 30 feet from The picnic area is located within residential lots and 25 feet 30 feet of the property line; from right-of-way for street however, it is not considered a

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 8 structure and is permitted to be located within 30 feet of the property line. Landscaping The Landscape Plan provides one tree in this area. It is located on the south side of the dumpster enclosure. Ms. Cornwell noted that the applicant applied to the Board of Adjustment for a variance reducing the required amount of active recreation area on the site from 3,600 S.F. to 1,593 S.F. She advised members that during their meeting of November 3, 2010, the Board of Adjustment granted this variance and approved the proposed amenities. Staff submitted the following comments and recommendations regarding the Active Recreation Area to be constructed: 1. The proposed plan does not meet the area requirements for the Active Recreation Area. The plan is required to provide 3,600 S.F. of Active Recreation Area and it is proposing 1,593 S.F. of Active Recreation Area. 2. Staff recommends approval of the multipurpose community room and the picnic area with two (2) picnic tables and a grill. 3. Ensure that one (1) of the picnic tables is handicapped accessible. 4. Revise the following on the Active Recreation Area Plan Sheet: Revise the calculation for the Active Recreation Area required. It should state 75 S.F. per dwelling unit with a minimum of 2,500 S.F. provided on site. 5. In the event that major changes and revisions to the Site Plan occur in the finalization of the Site Plan, contact the Planning Office. Examples include reorientation of building, relocation of site components like stormwater management areas, and increases in floor area. These changes may require resubmittal for review by the Development Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, or other agencies and commissions making recommendations in regards to the plan. 6. The applicant was reminded of the requirements for construction phasing of the recreation area as associated with the development of the residential units. Article 5, §10.6 Construction phasing. The recreation and open space areas shall be completed in a proportion equal to or greater than the proportion of residential dwelling units completed, except that 100 percent of the recreation and open space areas shall be completed prior to issuing building permits for the final 20 percent of the dwelling units proposed. Building permits shall not be issued for dwelling units unless the requirements of this section are met.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 9 7. There shall be provisions which ensure that the common open space land and community room (including Active Recreation Area) shall continue as such and be properly managed and maintained. 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 maintenance of all common open space. a. Add a note on the Site Plan regarding who is responsible for maintenance and insurance on the common open space. In response to Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, indicated that the applicant submitted an application to the Board of Adjustment. She explained that if a development project requires a variance to proceed, the requested variance must go before the Board of Adjustment prior to consideration by the Planning Commission, since the Planning Commission is not authorized to approve a request that does not meet City Code. She noted that staff determined that the Code should be revised in this area and she plans to prepare such a revision. Mrs. Townshend provided a legal opinion submitted by City Solicitor Rodriguez (attachment to Committee minutes), which indicated that the applicant proved that there were exceptional practical difficulties and has met the legal criteria for a variance. Mr. Ruane clarified that his concerns related to procedures within the Planning Department. Responding, Mrs. Townshend advised members that staff does not refer matters to the Board of Adjustment, explaining that applicants submit applications to the Board. All applications received by the Planning Department are presented to the Board of Adjustment. She also explained that, procedurally, variances must be considered by the Board of Adjustment prior to review by any other body (Planning Commission, Development Advisory Committee, etc.). Responding to Mrs. Russell, Mrs. Townshend confirmed that members must now consider the proposed Active Recreation Plan within the square footage that has been granted by the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Zachery Carter, Director of Parks and Recreation, advised members that, as an alternative, he had suggested that the Board of Adjustment members consider the option of cash in lieu of parkland rather than requiring the specified land area. Since the formula for the cash in lieu would have resulted in an excessive amount and prevented the project from moving forward, he had proposed that consideration be given to taking the value of the land to determine the cash in lieu amount (similar to the action taken for Dove View), which would have equated to approximately $15,000. However, Mr. Carter stated that the City Solicitor indicated that the Board of Adjustment did not have such authority, explaining that the Board of Adjustment could only grant or deny the variance. Mrs. Townshend further explained that the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 10 Committee cannot go against the action of the Board of Adjustment. She advised members that the legal role of the Board of Adjustment is to adjust the Code by changing Code requirements as they relate to a project and that no other body can impose a requirement that has been waived by the Board. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mrs. Townshend stated that, in accordance with the Dover Code, the required minimum on-site Active Recreation Area is 2,500 S.F. The calculation for Bayard Plaza would be 3,600 S.F.; however, the code requirement was superceded by the action of the Board of Adjustment approving a variance requiring only 1,593 S.F. of on-site Active Recreation Area. Dr. McGlumphy indicated his desire to support projects that will provide improvements to the downtown area and felt that the City should not be a blockade to such projects. Mr. Matt Spong, Landscape Architectural Services, and Mr. Doug Liberman, Larson Engineering, reviewed the details regarding the proposed Active Recreation Plan for the Bayard Plaza. Mr. Ruane noted that the size proposed for the multipurpose community room is 751 S.F. and that there are 48 units proposed. He questioned if there is a standard for determining the resident ratio to space to assist in determining if the room is adequate for the number of residents. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that there is no standard in this regard. Mr. Lieberman advised members that the 751 S.F. is the area prescribed by the Delaware State Housing Authority based on the number of units. Mr. Ruane relayed his support for the project and explained that his concerns are related to procedural issues. Noting that staff intends to prepare zoning text amendments, he suggested that staff provide standards for the size of a community room that would serve as a multipurpose room. In response to Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Townshend assured members that staff will work on proposed amendments as soon as possible to address the concerns relayed. The Committee recommended acceptance of the Active Recreation Plan for Bayard Plaza as presented, with the inclusion of staff=s comments and recommendations. Mrs. Russell reiterated the concerns of the Committee regarding the matter being presented to the Committee after the review by the Board of Adjustment. She assured members that staff has been requested to review this matter for possible ordinance amendments that would prevent future occurrences. At the request of Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Townshend explained that the applicant for the Bayard Plaza made application to the Board of Adjustment for a variance from the Active Recreation

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 11 requirements. She stated that Bayard Plaza was able to provide 1,500 S.F. of Active Recreation Area on the site and requested a variance for the remaining area required as well as exemption from a cash-in-lieu payment. If the variance was not requested, Mrs. Townshend stated that the project would have required 3,600 S.F. of Active Recreation Area. She noted that a cash-in-lieu payment for the portion that could not be provided could also have been requested. Concurring with Mrs. Russell, Mrs. Williams relayed her concerns with the process. Responding, City Solicitor Rodriguez assured members that it was appropriate for the Board of Adjustment to consider the application and to grant the variance. With regards to the cash-in-lieu, he stated that the amount required would have been so great that the developer would have been unable to move forward with the project, which he felt influenced the Board=s decision to grant the variance. To the best of his recollection, this was the first time such a request had been considered by the Board of Adjustment. Reiterating the concerns relayed during the Committee meeting, Mr. Ruane felt that the matter created a precedent that provides an opportunity for others in a similar situation to go before the Board of Adjustment. He noted that members have requested that staff take the appropriate action to resolve these types of issues from recurring. Although Committee members recognized the level of financial commitment to the project; there was concern that no cash-in-lieu payment was required when other projects with less ability to commit funds have made some financial contribution. As a result of all the concerns relayed, Mr. Ruane noted that the Committee has an expectation that this type of situation will not occur in the future. Responding to Mr. Salters, City Solicitor Rodriguez explained that the Board of Adjustment has the authority to grant variances and Council does not have the authority to reverse action taken by the Board of Adjustment. Should Council vote against the action of the Board of Adjustment and the recommendation of the Committee, City Solicitor Rodriguez indicated that the variance granted by the Board of Adjustment would not be affected. In response to Council President Hogan, Mrs. Townshend stated that, in retrospect, it might have been prudent for the Board of Adjustment to exclude review by the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee on this matter. She stated that this is an unusual circumstance and is not a typical variance considered by the Board of Adjustment. Mrs. Williams questioned if there was an appellate action that could be taken against the decision of the Board of Adjustment. Responding, City Solicitor Rodriguez indicated that only those who are involved in the variance could make such an appeal, for instance, an applicant could appeal to the Superior Court if a request for variance was denied. He advised members that there is no appellate process provided for the City of Dover in this regard. City Solicitor Rodriguez noted that this particular application is very unusual and felt assured that the matter would not set a precedent. Mr. Ruane stressed that the concerns relayed by members did not reflect disapproval of the proposed project. He stated that the Committee supports the project and believes it would be beneficial to the City and the downtown Dover area. Mrs. Williams requested the City Solicitor to determine if there is a viable means to change the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 12 process due to concerns that a precedent has been set and the problem was not solved. Concurring, Mr. Bonar felt that this issue sets a precedent and will place Council in an awkward position when making decisions of this nature in the future. He also felt that Council, as a legislative body, should have absolute authority with regard to approval of all matters submitted to Council for consideration by any public body. He suggested that the City Solicitor complete the request of Mrs. Williams and bring forward a recommendation to resolve such issues in the future. Mrs. Russell moved for approval of the Committee=s recommendation for acceptance of the Active Recreation Plan for Bayard Plaza as presented, with the inclusion of staff=s comments and recommendations, seconded by Dr. McGlumphy and unanimously carried. Proposed Ordinance No. 2010-28 - Amendments to Appendix B - Zoning, Article 3 - District Regulations, Section 14 - Limited Central Commercial Zone (C-2A) and Section 30 - Recreational and Open Space Zone (ROS) Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, reminded members that staff regularly reviews the Zoning Ordinance for areas that need to be revised or rewritten. She stated that two (2) areas within the District Regulations are recommended for amendment, as follows: 1) Amend C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) to allow parking lots and structures as principal uses on suitably landscaped lots, through the Conditional Use process. This change would add the Conditional Use which is already listed in the C- 2 (Central Commercial Zone). By making this a Conditional Use, the Planning Commission would be given discretion to ensure that parking lots and structures are constructed in a way that complements the surrounding area. 2. Amend ROS (Recreational and Open Space Zone) to add cemeteries as a permitted use and to exempt interment (burial) structures, such as mausoleums, from the 30-foot setback from property lines. When staff drafted the text for the ROS zone, cemeteries were not specifically addressed; however, in mapping the zone, cemeteries were rezoned to ROS. Following discussion with the administration at Holy Cross Cemetery, staff determined that the absence of cemeteries as a permitted use in the ROS zone was an oversight and should be corrected. Staff recommended that the proposed ordinance be forwarded to City Council for First Reading on November 22, 2010, referred to the Planning Commission for consideration on December 20, 2010, and that a Final Reading and public hearing be set before City Council on January 10, 2011. In response to several members= concerns regarding the close proximity of mausoleums to residential private property, Mrs. Townshend suggested that if the Committee desired that the setback apply only when adjacent to residential areas, the proposed ordinance could be amended by adding the following to Line 23: "unless they are adjacent to residential properties." She noted that the addition of this language would not have prohibited the mausoleum currently located at Holy Cross since the cemetery is not adjacent to residential properties. Mrs. Townshend explained that adjacent properties include only those that actually abut and that

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 13 properties across the street would not be considered "adjacent." Responding to Dr. McGlumphy, Mrs. Townshend anticipated that those residential neighborhoods located on South State Street to Route 13 would remain as such, which was very clear in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. She assured members that the proposed amendment would not impact this region as it is not zoned C-2 or C-2A; therefore, a stand-alone parking lot would not be permitted. Mrs. Townshend advised members that non-residential parking cannot be provided on a residential property. She explained that the situation involving Dr. David Jawahar=s office, which is located across the street from the hospital, is due to the property being zoned RGO (General Residential and Office), which allows both residential and office use; therefore, the requested parking was permitted. However, Mrs. Townshend assured members that the parking cannot be expanded. In addition, she reminded members that the RGO is a closed zone and that the Dover Code does not allow more parking than 125% of the minimum. Referring to the proposed amendment to Line 23 suggested by staff, Mr. Ruane questioned the possibility of including a number of feet (distance), rather than the use of "adjacent," to address those concerns regarding the possibility of an intrusion into a neighborhood. Responding, Mrs. Townshend suggested that the proposed ordinance could be amended by adding the following to Line 23: "unless adjacent to residential uses. For the purposes of this section, adjacent shall include properties separated by a street." Mrs. Horsey questioned if the addition of greater footage would provide better protection. Responding, Mrs. Townshend suggested that the setback could be set at 50 feet, rather than 30 feet (as noted in Line 22 of the proposed ordinance). To include a right-of-way (across the street), she suggested that the setback be set at 60 feet. Should members wish to prohibit structures from the perimeter of a cemetery, she suggested the elimination of the following additional proposed text in blue font (Lines 22 and 23): "In cemeteries, structures associated with interment shall be exempt from this requirement." The committee recommended adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2010-28, as amended to include Lines #1-14 only, amending Article 3 - District Regulations, Section 14 - Limited Central Commercial Zone (C-2A), Subsection 14.4 - Conditional Uses, of Appendix B of the Zoning Code and that the proposed ordinance (attachment to Committee minutes) be forwarded to City Council for First Reading on November 22, 2010; referred to the Planning Commission for consideration on December 20, 2010; and that a Final Reading and public hearing be set before City Council on January 10, 2011. By consent agenda, Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the Committee=s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (The First Reading of the ordinance will take place during the latter part of the meeting). Proposed Amendment to the 2010 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Action Plan - Unanticipated Program Income Mrs. Tracey Harvey, Community Development Director, advised members that the Community Development Office has received an additional $25,087 in program income that is

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 14 uncommitted. Staff requested that these additional funds be allocated to the three (3) 2010 sub- recipient grant projects. The breakdown of the uncommitted funds is as follows: Uncommitted program income from 2010 grant allocation $12,234 Housing Rehabilitation loan payoff $ 6,953 1994 Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS) uncommitted funds $ 5,900 TOTAL $25,087 Since the grant requests from the 2010 sub-recipients were funded below the requested levels, Mrs. Harvey explained that the additional funding may be added to the existing projects to fund them at the requested level. She noted that funding all three (3) sub-recipients at the initial requested level would total $19,000, leaving a balance of $6,087, which staff recommended be added to the Housing Rehabilitation Program. Staff recommended awarding the $25,087 in additional CDBG program income to sub-recipient projects. Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Harvey confirmed that the recommended action would increase funding for the projects, as follows: Project 4 - Habitat for Humanity from $32,000 to $40,000 Project 5 - Connections Community Support Program from $12,000 to $15,000 Project 6 - RC&D from $32,000 to $40,000 In response to concerns of Mr. Ruane, Mrs. Harvey confirmed that the program administration costs would increase. She noted that program administration is funded at $58,000 and would increase to $65,000, which equates to 1.5% of the grant applications. Mr. Lewis felt that members should consider issuing the additional funds to other applicants that did not receive grant funding, noting that those recommended for receipt of the additional funds have already received some funding. Responding, Mrs. Russell questioned how members would determine which of those applicants qualified. Mrs. Harvey reminded members that the applications were scored and that, to her recollection, the remaining applicants did not score well. Mr. Ruane suggested the possibility of providing some of the additional funds to the Police Department. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that the Dover Police Department did not apply; therefore, they could not even be considered. In addition, she stated that public service funds are capped at 15% for all CDBG projects. Mr. Ruane questioned if any of the additional funds could be assigned to Project 7 - Community Revitalization Infrastructure, which involved the reconstruction of streets and curbs.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 15 Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that, although the total amount requested was not provided to the Community Revitalization Infrastructure Project, the work associated with this grant has been completed or is almost complete; therefore, additional funds would not provide for additional work being completed. The Committee recommended awarding the $25,087 in CDBG program income to sub-recipient projects, as recommended by staff. By consent agenda, Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the Committee=s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. UPDATES The following updates were provided to members: Puncheon Run Watershed Action Team Update There was no update provided for the Puncheon Run Watershed Action Team. Planning and Funding for New Library Mr. Zachery Carter, Director of Parks and Recreation, reviewed the update for the Planning and Funding for the New Library provided to members. In response to Mrs. Russell, Mr. Carter stated that the proposed opening date for the new library is September 2012, explaining that construction will take 18 months. Responding to Dr. McGlumphy, Mr. Carter assured members that he would provide them with an update on committed funds for the library project. The Committee recommended acceptance of the Update for the Planning and Funding for the New Library. By consent agenda, Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the Committee=s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. CDBG Program Mrs. Tracey Harvey, Director of Community Development, reviewed the Status of FY 2009-2010 CDBG Projects Report, which was provided to members. The Committee recommended acceptance of the Update for the CDBG Program. By consent agenda, Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the Committee=s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Housing and Recovery Act of 2008 Funds (Neighborhood Stabilization Fund)

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 16 Mrs. Tracey Harvey, Director of Community Development, reviewed the Update for the Housing and Recovery Act of 2008 Funds (Neighborhood Stabilization Fund) which was provided to members. In response to Dr. McGlumphy, Mrs. Townshend stated that the City does not take ownership of any properties, explaining that properties are owned by the Diamond State Community Land Trust or the Dover Housing Authority. She stated that the City does not have the staff or expertise to buy and sell properties. The Committee recommended acceptance of the Update for the Housing and Recovery Act of 2008 Fund (Neighborhood Stabilization Fund). By consent agenda, Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the Committee=s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Youth Advisory Committee Mrs. Russell advised members that local schools will be contacted to solicit applications from students who may be interested in serving on the Youth Advisory Committee. The committee recommended acceptance of the Update for the Youth Advisory Committee. By consent agenda, Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the Committee=s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Mrs. Williams moved for acceptance of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Bonar and unanimously carried. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - NOVEMBER 8, 2010 The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on November 8, 2010 with Chairman Leary presiding. Review and Recommendation - Filling of Critical Positions During their meeting of February 23, 2009, members recommended approval of the Hiring Freeze for Fiscal Year 2008-2009, but to allow the hiring of critical positions through the review and approval of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee and City Council. It was suggested that there be a "standing" agenda item to consider the filling of critical positions and, if there are no positions to consider, the item could be removed. Permission to Recruit - Motor Equipment Operator (MEO) II (Streets Division) - In-House, MEO I Mr. Anthony DePrima, City Manager, reviewed a request to recruit a Motor Equipment Operator (MEO) II and an MEO I in the Streets Division. He stated that a vacancy was created when a current MEO II employee was transferred to the Public Utilities Department. Mr. DePrima advised members that MEO II and III positions have traditionally been career ladder positions whereby vacancies are filled in-house. This provides an opportunity for first-level

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 17 MEO employees to advance within the department. As such, staff has requested to advertise the MEO II position in-house and, assuming that an existing MEO I employee is hired for this position, to fill the MEO I position. Mr. DePrima reminded members that an MEO I position was recently advertised; therefore, in order to speed the hiring process, staff suggested making a selection from the applications already received. The Committee recommended approval of the request to recruit for a Motor Equipment Operator (MEO) II in the Streets Division (in-house posting) and Motor Equipment Operator (MEO) I in the Streets Division, as recommended by staff. By consent agenda, Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the Committee=s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Proposed Ordinance #2010-29 - Appendix B - Zoning, Article 3 - District Regulations, Section 8 - Mobile Home Park Zone (MHP) Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, presented members with Proposed Ordinance #2010-29. She explained that the ordinance applies to areas within the MHP (Mobile Home Park) Zone where parks are developed with private streets and would require that such streets remain clear and unobstructed, including clear access to driveways and mailboxes. She explained that the proposed amendment would ensure that residents have access to their driveways and mailboxes during snow storms and other events. Staff recommended that Proposed Ordinance #2010-29 be forwarded to City Council for a First Reading on November 22, 2010, referred to the Planning Commission on December 20, 2010, and that a Final Reading and public hearing be held before City Council on January 10, 2011. The Committee recommended that Proposed Ordinance #2010-29 (attachment to Committee minutes) be forwarded to City Council for a First Reading on November 22, 2010, referred to the Planning Commission on December 20, 2010, and that a Final Reading and public hearing be held before City Council on January 10, 2011. By consent agenda, Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the Committee=s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (The First Reading of the ordinance will take place during the latter part of the meeting.) Proposed Ordinance #2010-30 - Budget Amendments Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, reviewed Proposed Ordinance #2010-30 - Budget Amendments, which was provided to members. She explained that the amendments incorporate the audited budget balances of all funds and accounts.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 18 During the City Council meeting of October 25, 2010, Mrs. Mitchell reviewed the Quarterly Revenue Report and indicated that the City=s transfer tax revenue forecast was decreased due to a decline in the overall market and a decrease in real estate sales. Mr. Ruane noted that the City=s Charter requires a balanced budget and that the projection indicates a revenue shortfall. At that time, Mrs. Mitchell stated that bringing forward a budget amendment with the additional carry forward balance would cover the shortfall from the audited budget balances. Mrs. Mitchell noted that the motion made by Council on October 25, 2010 was "to accept the Quarterly Revenue Report as of September 30, 2010, with the understanding that staff will provide a budget amendment to account for the reduction of expenditures in the amount of $350,000 related to the diminishing transfer tax estimate." She explained that the motion indicated an expectation for a reduction in expenditures without using any excess carry forward balance. Mrs. Mitchell advised members that the proposed ordinance amendment uses the excess carry forward balance rather than a reduction in expenditures. In addition, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the Electric Fund projects have also been included in the proposed amendments. She reminded members that, during their meeting of October 25, 2010, the Utility Committee recommended approval of the revised Capital Investment Project (CIP) for the Electric Revenue Fund and, since this recommendation would be considered by Council (during their meeting of November 8, 2010) prior to the proposed budget amendments being presented to Council for approval, staff included the CIP amendments as well. Staff recommended approval of the draft budget ordinance to incorporate audited budget balances and revised CIP=s to be forwarded to City Council for a First Reading on November 22, 2010. Referring to Pages 16 and 17 of the Council Meeting Minutes of October 25, 2010 as alluded to by Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. Ruane noted that the motion directed staff to provide a budget amendment to account for the reduction of expenditures in the amount of $350,000 related to the diminishing transfer tax estimate. He stated that the proposed ordinance does not carry out the intent of the motion and suggested that the ordinance be amended or deferred until such time that staff has the opportunity to prepare a budget amendment as directed by Council. In response to Mr. McGiffin, Mrs. Mitchell confirmed that the typical practice has been for all expenditures to be addressed during the mid-year review. Should members wish to address the reduction of expenditures at mid-year review, Mrs. Mitchell suggested that they also consider the reduction of revenue at this time and allow the excess to go into the ending budget balance, rather than offsetting the reduction of revenue. Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mr. DePrima confirmed that generally the mid-year report to Council is made in March rather than January of each year. Mr. Ruane relayed his concern with a delay in addressing the reduction of expenditure based on the continuing loss of revenue. Mr. DePrima assured members that although Mr. Ruane=s concerns were valid, staff is attentive to their responsibilities and that action would be taken to address any budgetary issues, even if Council does not take immediate action in this regard.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 19 Mr. Ruane referred to Line 197 of the proposed ordinance and noted that there was an adjustment to the prior year=s balance for the Electric Revenue Fund proposed in the amount of $1,451,589. He stated that, during the last review of the Electric Fund, he proposed an additional power cost adjustment for rate payers at the beginning of the year, since revenue was greater than anticipated. Mr. Ruane noted that the $1,451,589 would be available for a power cost adjustment by January 1, 2011 and suggested that the City Manager be requested to provide information to members on how this would affect rate payers and whether a rate adjustment could be provided. Noting that the suggested budget ordinance amendments were proposed for consideration at the next Committee meeting, Mr. DePrima stated that, although staff could develop information regarding the concept of a power cost adjustment, additional time may be needed to complete research. Although he was not opposed to an early power cost adjustment, he stated that adjustments are typically accomplished in June. Mr. DePrima reminded members that the last power cost adjustment issued by Council was for an increase. He cautioned members that action taken by Council in January will impact the action required in June. The Committee recommended that Proposed Ordinance #2010-30 - Budget Amendments be deferred until the next Committee meeting, with the understanding that the City Manager will present a plan to address the expenditures that would be required to meet the reduced revenue with the proposed ordinance amendment. Responding to the request of Dr. McGlumphy, Mr. Leary stated that, although this matter was considered by the Committee during a meeting held earlier in the evening, since he was not aware that there would be questions in this regard, he was not prepared to present the Committee=s recommendation; however, he assured members that the recommendation of the Committee would be presented during the Council Meeting of December 13, 2010. Clarifying, Council President Hogan stated that the Committee=s recommendation was for the approval of Proposed Ordinance #2010-30 - Budget Amendments as presented, and that any changes that may be necessary would be considered during the mid-year review. In response to Mrs. Williams, Mr. DePrima explained that the original amount budgeted for transfer tax was $1M and that, based on the quarterly projection, staff submitted a proposal to reduce the amount to $650,000. On November 18, 2010, the City received a letter from the State of Delaware indicating that the City would received a very large transfer tax in the amount of approximately $647,000 due to the sale of several large apartment buildings. Utilizing the $650,000 projection and adding in the $647,000, Mr. DePrima stated that the actual transfer tax would be approximately $1.3M, which is $300,000 over the original budgeted amount of $1M. Mr. Leary reiterated that there is no recommendation for this item at this time. (The Committee=s recommendation will be presented to members for consideration during their Regular Meeting of December 13, 2010).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 20 Review of City of Dover Identity Theft Prevention Policy Mrs. Teresa Tieman, Senior City Administrator, advised members that the City of Dover Privacy Committee met on October 15, 2010, at which time members discussed an incident that occurred on March 25, 2010 in the Information Technology (IT) Department. She noted that the incident involved a document with confidential information being placed on the City=s website for approximately 10 minutes. The document was used by a programmer in the department to test the website. Since this incident, the IT Department has adopted a policy to use only documents that have been created for the sole purpose of testing when testing the website. The Privacy Committee felt that the remedy developed by the IT Department was acceptable and that no changes were required to the Identity Theft Prevention Policy. The Committee recommended acceptance of the Report provided by the Privacy Committee. By consent agenda, Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the Committee=s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Bonar and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Approval of Library Funding Plan Transfers and Use of Green Energy Rate Revenue Mr. Anthony DePrima, City Manager, reminded members that, during the Committee meeting of October 11, 2010, a detailed status report of the new Dover Library Project was presented. The presentation included the most up-to-date funding plan. As reported at that meeting, Mr. DePrima stated that several of the funding sources found in the "Highly Probable" column could be moved into the "Committed" column by action of City Council, as follows: 1) Reynolds Trust Funds: $46,355. An estate bequest received several years ago for the library. 2) Reciprocal Borrowing Residual Funds: $30,000. These funds represent the difference between the committed column and the highly probable column in the "City Reserve Contribution" row. 3) Green Energy Rate Funds: $215,000. The City has set aside $60,000 and, since October 2009, has been setting aside half of the revenue, or about $5,400 per month. By January 2012, $215,000 will be accumulated. 4) Use of Green Energy Funds for Debt Service for Green Energy Loan. After January 2012, current plans project using $8,000 of the monthly revenue to finance a $1.5 million loan at 2.5% with a 20-year term. The loan amount and terms are subject to change and will not be sought until late 2011. At this time, staff is simply seeking approval to use these funds for this purpose. Staff recommended approval to commit the following funds to the New Library Project: 1) Reynolds Trust Funds in the amount of $46,355, 2) Reciprocal Borrowing Residual Funds in the amount of $30,000, 3) Green Energy Rate Grant funds in the amount of $215,000, and 4)

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 21 Use of Green Energy Funds: Debt Service for Green Energy Loan. The Committee recommended approval of staff=s recommendation. In response to Dr. McGlumphy regarding Recommendation #4 - Debt Service for Green Energy Loan, Mr. DePrima explained that the amount of the loan is projected to be $1.5M; however, the actual amount of the loan would not be known until the City is closer to the project, assuming it is approved and prices are obtained. The recommendation is to approve the use of these funds for this purpose. Mr. Leary moved to commit the following funds to the New Library Project: 1) Reynold Trust Funds in the amount of $46,355, 2) Reciprocal Borrowing Residual Funds in the amount of $30,000, 3) Green Energy Rate Grant funds in the amount of $215,000, and 4) Use of Green Energy Funds: Debt Service for Green Energy Loan, as recommended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried. Mr. Leary moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mr. McGiffin and unanimously carried. MONTHLY CIP REPORT - SEPTEMBER 2010 By motion of Mrs. Williams, seconded by Mr. Bonar, the Monthly CIP Report for September 2010 was accepted by consent agenda. 2010 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE DOWNTOWN DOVER PARTNERSHIP Mr. Bill Neaton, Economic Development Director, reviewed the 2010 Annual Report for the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP), which was provided to members. Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mr. Neaton stated that, although half of his time is to be devoted to the Downtown Dover Partnership as the Executive Director and half as the Economic Development Director for the City, over the last several months his role as Economic Development Director for the City has been emphasized due to inquiries regarding properties and the desire to bring businesses into the City. He advised members that during the last two (2) years, time dedicated to the Downtown Dover Partnership has been reduced due to the assistance of the Downtown Coordinator. In response to Dr. McGlumphy, Mr. Neaton indicated that the greatest impediment the City is facing in economic development is the condition of vacant properties. Although these properties are not in such a condition that would require condemnation, they are not in a condition to be suitable for immediate use. He noted that a landlord made improvements to the building located at the corner of Loockerman Street and Governors Avenue during the last year, and the building became occupied. He assured members that City staff has utilized the vacant property ordinance and that contact is made with landlords to encourage improvements.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 22 Mr. Ruane questioned if there has been success working with the owner of the vacant lot known as the Collegian. Mr. Neaton stated that a possible solution was identified during the charrette process and he has been working with a developer, who is working with a retailer in regard to this property. He advised members that the cost of the property has been substantially reduced, noting that it was initially $4M. Mr. Leary moved for acceptance of the 2010 Annual Report for the Downtown Dover Partnership, seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried. EVALUATION OF BIDS - BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION - LIBRARY Mr. Anthony DePrima, City Manager, advised members that the architectural firm of Holzman, Moss, & Bottino Architecture (HMBA) completed the Dover Public Anchor Library construction documents in November 2010. He noted that with the completion of the construction documents, the City is ready to begin the next steps for the library project. Mr. DePrima reminded members that these steps were outlined in the Dover Anchor Library presentation provided to members during the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee and Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meetings of October 11, 2010 and include the Bidding and Bidding Administration concurrently, and the Construction and Construction Administration concurrently. Mr. DePrima explained that the Council Action Form provided to members addresses the Bidding and Construction Administration Services provided by the project architect: Holzman, Moss, & Bottino Architecture. He indicated that one (1) contract is proposed for both services; however, the contract will allow the City to terminate the contract for any reason after the Bidding Services Phase. Mr. DePrima explained that Council action would be required to proceed with construction, which is planned in January/February after bidding has been completed, evaluated, and presented to members. He assured members that the contracts have been written in such a way that if the City does not move forward with construction, the City has no obligation to either party under the construction portion of the contract. Bidding: Mr. DePrima advised members that the scope of work will include working with the construction manager to prepare the final documents in the required format for the public bidding process. During the bidding process, the work will include attending a pre-bid meeting with sub- contractors, responding to sub-contractor questions, and issuing addenda as required to respond to questions about the documents. He noted that following the receipt of bids by the construction manager, the work will include reviewing the bidders and discussing financial alternatives to allow the project to proceed to the construction phase of work. The total cost for Bidding Administration and estimated 10 percent project reimbursable is $119,409. Construction Administration: Mr. DePrima advised members that this phase of work, if authorized, will include periodic reviews of the site and building construction, responding to construction manager questions

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 23 (Requests for Information), issuing clarification sketches, and reviewing all submittals and shop drawings. Participation in monthly executive committee meetings and bi-monthly site visits would also be involved. Upon substantial completion of the project, the work will include preparation of a punch-list, with the assistance of the construction manager, and review of items until they have been completed. Record drawings will not be provided as part of this scope and will be provided by the construction manager. This phase will also include review and documentation for the U.S. Green Building Council (USBGC) - Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) submittal process and coordination with all consultants and the construction manager to assure that all requirements have been established and delivered. The total cost for Construction Administration and estimated 10 percent reimbursable is $477,638. Staff recommended that the City Manager be authorized to sign a Professional Services Contract for the Bidding and Construction Administration for the Dover Public Anchor Library to Holzman, Moss, & Bottino Architecture firm for the amount of $597,047. This amount covers the total expenses and estimated 10 percent project reimbursable expenses. Total cost for bidding and estimated 10 percent project phase reimbursable is $119,409. Mr. Ruane moved for approval of staff=s recommendation, seconded by Mr. McGiffin. Responding to Dr. McGlumphy regarding the amount of $597,047, Mr. Steve Benesh of Holzman, Moss, & Bottino stated that there is a full team involved and that, in addition to the architectural fees, the amount includes architect, engineer, and consultant fees. He also noted that a local architect is performing architectural, civil engineering, and landscape architect services. Additional team members include a mechanical, electrical, and fire protection engineer as well as specialty consultants, such as audio/visual, telecommunications security, and acoustic experts who will be involved in the construction of the project. He stated that he believed that the schedule plans for 20 months of work. Responding to Mr. Bonar, Mr. Benesh stated that the Delaware firms involved include the Becker Morgan Group (architect and civil engineer) and Landscape Architectural Services (landscape architect). In response to Mr. Salters, Mr. DePrima stated that the bid process is open and competitive and there is no guarantee as to the contractors. Mr. Jerry Dougherty, Vice President of EDiS, explained that the process is similar to Title 29 of the State of Delaware Code, emphasizing that the project will be advertised, and each contract will be primed to EDiS Company and will be awarded through open, competitive bids. He stated that there is no preference for minority bids. Clarifying, Mr. DePrima advised members that EDiS Company has the City=s Purchasing Policy which they will follow. He reminded members that the City=s Policy includes local vendor and minority vendor preferences, and felt confident that EDiS will follow those portions of the City=s Purchasing Policy. Responding, Mr. Dougherty confirmed the use of the City=s Purchasing Policy. The motion authorizing the City Manager to sign a Professional Services Contract for the Bidding and Construction Administration for the Dover Public Anchor Library to Holzman, Moss, & Bottino Architecture firm in the amount of $597,047, with the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 24 understanding that this amount covers the total expenses and estimated 10 percent project reimbursable expenses, and total cost for bidding and estimated 10 percent project phase reimbursables of $119,409, was carried by a unanimous roll call vote. EVALUATION OF BIDS - CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK CONTRACT Mr. Anthony DePrima, City Manager, reminded members that EDiS Company was selected as the Construction Management firm for the Dover Public Anchor Library project in July 2009. With the completion of the construction documents, the City is ready to begin the next steps for the library project. These steps, as outlined in a recent presentation to City Council through the Parks, Recreation and Community Enhancement Committee and the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee, are the Bidding and Bidding Administration concurrently, and the Construction and Construction Administration concurrently. Mr. DePrima stated that the Council Action Form provided to members addresses the Bidding, Construction and Construction Administration Services for the project with the City=s Construction Manager, EDiS. One (1) contract is proposed for both services; however, the contract will allow the City to terminate the contract for any reason after the Bidding Services Phase. He advised members that Council action to proceed to construction is planned in January after bidding has been completed, evaluated and presented to Council. EDIS Company will prepare the library bid documents and solicit bids for the construction of the library. Once bids are submitted, he stated that EDiS will evaluate all bids and present their recommendations to Council for the construction of the library. The cost for the bidding of the project is $17,100. Mr. DePrima advised members that the proposed contract is called a "Construction Manager at Risk" contract, with EDiS Company as the Construction Manager at Risk. This contract provides that there will be a guaranteed maximum price for library construction that will be determined once the bids are received. The estimated cost of construction is $16,821,162. (This includes pricing from the Total Project Cost Summary recently provided to City Council including building construction costs, $16,736,162; signage, $80,000; and Kent County Conservation District fee, $5,000.) Once the bid prices are accepted by City Council, the EDiS contract will be amended to reflect a final guaranteed maximum price. If at the end of the project, costs are under the guaranteed maximum price or budgeted contingency costs are not used, the savings go to the City. The proposed contract stipulates that, if the project is bid and the City decides to move to construction but not use EDiS as the Construction Manager, the City would reimburse EDiS 10% of their fee, or $76,000. If the project does not advance to construction, the City would only be obligated to pay the cost for the bidding in the amount estimated at $17,100. Staff recommended that the City Manager be authorized to enter into a "Construction Manager at Risk" contract with the EDiS Company for bidding services, construction administration, and construction of the Dover Public Library for the preliminary estimated amount of $16,821,162. The contract is to include City Council approval of the final maximum guaranteed price based on bidding results prior to construction. Referring to the preliminary estimated amount of $16,821,162, Mr. DePrima explained that the amount represents the current, estimated, maximum amount for the project and that after bidding

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 25 is completed, this amount will be amended accordingly. Mr. Ruane moved to authorize the City Manager to enter into a "Construction Manager at Risk" contract with the EDiS Company for bidding services, construction administration, and construction of the Dover Public Library for the preliminary estimated amount of $16,821,162; it is understood that the contract is to include City Council approval of the final maximum guaranteed price based on bidding results prior to construction. The motion was seconded by Mr. McGiffin and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. FIRST READING - PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS Council President Hogan reminded the public that copies of the proposed ordinances are available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or can be obtained from the City Clerk's Office. Since the ordinances are amendments to the Zoning Code, a public hearing is required. Staff recommended referral of the amendments to the Planning Commission on December 20, 2010 and that a public hearing take place during the Council Meeting of January 10, 2011, at 7:30 p.m., at which time, final action by Council will take place. Mr. Salters moved to refer the amendments to the Planning Commission on December 20, 2010 and set a public hearing before City Council for January 10, 2011 at 7:30 p.m., as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Russell and unanimously carried. Referring to Ordinance #2010-29, Mr. McGiffin requested that Subsection 8.17 - Maintenance of Private Streets, include fire hydrants. Mr. McGiffin moved to amend Ordinance #2010-29 by adding "fire hydrants" to Subsection 8.17 - Maintenance of Private Streets. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bonar and unanimously carried. In accordance with Section 1-9 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: > ORDINANCE #2010-28 - AMENDMENTS TO APPENDIX B - ZONING, ARTICLE 3 - DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 14 - LIMITED CENTRAL COMMERCIAL ZONE (C-2A) AND SECTION 30 - RECREATIONAL AND OPEN SPACE ZONE (ROS) > ORDINANCE #2010-29 - APPENDIX B - ZONING, ARTICLE 3 - DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 8 - MOBILE HOME PARK ZONE (MHP)

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 22, 2010 PAGE 26 COUNCIL MEMBERS ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. McGiffin reminded members to mark their calendar for June 25, 2011 for the next African American Festival. Mrs. Russell advised members that she will be participating in the Thanksgiving Dinner at 4:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 25, 2010 at the Dover Interfaith Mission, and that the Mission will also hold a Christmas Dinner. She invited others to attend. Mr. Bonar noted that today, November 22, 2010, marks the 47th Anniversary of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which was a life-changing moment for many. Council President Hogan announced that the Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony will be held on November 29th at 6:00 p.m. and encouraged all to participate. Council President Hogan wished Mrs. Russell and Mr. Bonar a Happy Birthday. Mrs. Williams, along with several other members, wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. By unanimous consent, the meeting adjourned at 9:26 P.M. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of November 22, 2010, are hereby approved. CARLETON E. CAREY, SR. MAYOR /TM/jg mag14BC.wpd Exhibits Attached to Original Minutes and File Copy Exhibit #1 - Presentation - Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance - 35 N. New Street Exhibit #2 - Letter from the Greater Dover Committee - Sale of Dover Public Library

EXHIBIT #1 Regular Council Meeting of 11/22/2010 Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance 35 North New Street Public Services Department Dover, Delaware

35 North New Street Case History  Structure was subject of fire in 2002 and was condemned in January 2003.  In 2007, building was registered vacant.  In 2008, City issued demolition permit, which has expired.  In September 2010 City performed interior inspection and found unsecured windows. These windows have been boarded.  In October 2007 City performed interior inspection and identified a number of concerns: – Building is used for storage – Structural concerns with flooring, interior walls and foundation – Fire damage  Property has had numerous tall grass and weed and exterior property maintenance violations.

Dangerous Building Code – Chapter 22 Article XI, Sec. 22-381  (4) Fire damage, etc.  (5) Unfit for habitation.  (9) General welfare.  (12) Unoccupied buildings.

Recommended Council Action  Declare this building and all accessory buildings on the property dangerous.  Order the property repaired or demolished by December 22, 2010.  Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structure if not completed by the owner within (10) days of the date set by Council.  Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner.

EXHIBIT #2 Regular Council Meeting of 11/22/2010