BOA 8-21-19

CITY OF DOVER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES August 21, 2019 A Regular Meeting of the City of Dover Board of Adjustment was held on Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:00 A.M. with Chairman Sheth presiding. Members present were Chairman Sheth, Mr. Keller, Mr. Hufnal, Colonel Ericson. Mr. Senato was absent. Staff members present were Mr. Swierczek, Mr. Hugg, City Solicitor Mr. Rodriguez, and Mrs. Mullaney arrived at 9:15 A.M. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Hufnal moved to approve the agenda as submitted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Keller and unanimously carried 4-0. Mr. Senato was absent. APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 17, 2019 Mr. Keller moved to approve the meeting minutes of July 17, 2019 with the necessary corrections. The motion was seconded by Colonel Ericson and unanimously carried 4-0. Mr. Senato was absent. OPENING REMARKS CONCERNING APPLICATIONS Mr. Dave Hugg, Planning Director stated that the meeting today will be conducted in accordance with the Agenda. There is one (1) application on the agenda under New Business. Each Application file will be read, and the floor will be opened for questions of the applicant by the Board and for public testimony. If the Board needs to consult the City Solicitor, they will recess to discuss legal matters. If the applicant must leave, they can contact the Planning Office at 736-7196 to learn of the Board’s decision. A formal notice of the decision will be mailed to the applicants. Approved variances expire after one year if the approved project has not commenced. All public notice for the new application on this agenda was completed in accordance with Code requirements. The meeting agenda was posted in accordance with Freedom of Information Act requirements. COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS The next Board of Adjustment regular meeting is scheduled for September 18, 2019 at 9:00am in the City Council Chambers. NEW BUSINESS Applicant #V-19-07 805 and 815 Forest Street, and 726 West Division Street. Victor Giangrant has requested a variance from the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, Article 4 §4.15 pertaining to the maximum lot coverage in the C-3 (Service Commercial) Zone, and Article 3 §27.67 pertaining to the lot coverage, front, side and rear yard setbacks/landscaping requirements for the Corridor Overlay Zone (COZ-1). They are requesting the above variances to be able to utilize the entirety

CITY OF DOVER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 21, 2019 of the two lots addressed as 815 Forest Street and 726 West Division Street for their expanded car wash facilities, namely thirteen (13) new parking spaces with vacuum stations. Subject properties are zoned C-3 (Service Commercial Zone) and are subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). Tax Parcels: ED-05-076.08-01-40.00-000, ED-05-076.08-01-38.00-000, ED-05- 076.08-01-39.00-000. The owners of record are Clean Cars Inc. and Melinda F. Giangrant. Exhibits for the Record: Staff Report, Zoning Exhibit, and statement and plans submitted by the applicant. Legal Notice was published in the Delaware State News on August 4, 2019. The public was notified in accordance with regulations. Chairman Sheth questioned if there was any member present who had a conflict of interest and there was none. Mr. Swierczek gave a summary presentation of the Variance Application Request for a variance from the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, Article 4 §4.15 pertaining to the maximum lot coverage in the C-3 (Service Commercial) Zone, and Article 3 §27.67 pertaining to the lot coverage, front, side and rear yard setbacks/landscaping requirements for the Corridor Overlay Zone (COZ-1). They are requesting the above variances to be able to utilize the entirety of the two lots addressed as 815 Forest Street and 726 West Division Street for their expanded car wash facilities, namely thirteen (13) new parking spaces with vacuum stations. The summary included references to the Staff Report on the Application. Chairman Sheth asked Mr. Swierczek whether he had a prior meeting with the applicant? Mr. Swierczek replied that there was a Pre-application meeting with the applicant prior to today’s meeting. Chairman Sheth asked Mr. Swierczek if all the issues mentioned today were explained to the applicant? Mr. Swierczek replied no, not since receiving the material(s) subject to the application. Chairman Sheth questioned if there was any member present who had a conflict of interest and there was none. Representative: Mr. Victor Giangrant, Owner, Clean Cars Inc. Mr. Giangrant testified that there have been radical changes in their industry. It seems like the trend is going away from full-service car wash which we are. This means vacuuming out the vehicles, wiping down the dashboard, windows and washing the exterior of the vehicle. Some days we have close to 30 employees. We currently employ a total of forty-two employees. Last year we had 120 employees on our books. That trend is coming to an end with the labor being the way that it is; everyone is going to what is called an Express Service. The Express Service for the size of his operation can be run by two persons. The Express Service offers free vacuums to customers, whereas, they vacuum their own vehicle. Then they sit in their vehicle and drive through the car wash. It eliminates a lot of jobs. They do not want to do that; they want to keep the full-service tradition alive. They have a lot of families depending on their operation. They need to get with the times and technology. They need to offer the flex service which consists of 2

CITY OF DOVER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 21, 2019 the free vacuum as well as the full-service. This is the situation that we are in right now. In order for us to keep up with the competition, we need to offer this service. Chairman Sheth mentioned that the Board of Adjustment tries to help the applicant as well as make the interpretation of the Ordinance. Mr. Swierczek expressed the Recommendation. Chairman Sheth asked the applicant if he asked any questions regarding the Recommendation. Mr. Giangrant replied that the first time he spoke with Mr. Swierczek in the office they discussed the application process. They have not spoken since that time. Evidently, there were some other suggestions made that he was not aware of until just now. Colonel Ericson mentioned that if the Board voted on the application and the variance is disapproved then the applicant will have to wait one year before coming back before the Board. If the application is tabled, it will give the applicant the opportunity to talk with Staff to see if they could come up with an idea on how to meet the requirements of the Corridor Overlay Zone and the other plans that are restricting the use of this property. He may not need a variance. Chairman Sheth asked the applicant if he understood that if the Board rejects the variance application, then he would not be able to come before the Board with the same variance until a year later. Colonel Ericson stated that his recommendation is that the variance application be tabled and then looked at again in the future after the applicant has had a chance to talk with Staff to see if the property can be developed to meet the compliance of all requirements. Chairman Sheth asked Solicitor Rodriguez if it was a good suggestion. Solicitor Rodriguez replied it was an appropriate suggestion. Chairman Sheth asked the applicant if he understood the recommendation and he if agreed. Mr. Giangrant replied yes, he understood, and he agreed with the recommendation. Chairman Sheth mentioned that the hearing will be continued at the next meeting. The persons that came today in the audience for the hearing will not have to come back, but they can come back if they want. Mr. Hufnal stated that he agreed with Chairman Sheth and he thought that the Planners gave some good suggestions of what could be done to alter the Plans to bring it into conformity. If the applicant and Staff can sit down and discuss the suggestions, it would be beneficial for both sides. Chairman Sheth asked Mr. Swierczek if it was okay if the applicant met with him. Mr. Swierczek replied that Staff would be happy to meet with the applicant and of course Staff would respect the Board’s decision. Colonel Ericson asked if the Board should continue this and the applicant comes up with a new Plan for the Board, would they have another chance to come forward and open up the hearing. Chairman Sheth replied yes, the public hearing will remain open. 3

CITY OF DOVER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 21, 2019 Mr. Hufnal asked if the application still had to go before the Planning Commission to get the plan approved to demolish the two (2) houses and consolidate the three (3) Lots into one. Can they still continue to do that part of the process before the Board hears it again? Mr. Swierczek replied it is the practice of the Planning Office to wait until the Board of Adjustment makes any pertinent decision before going to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission would not like to review a project that has not yet received approved variances if required. Chairman Sheth asked Mr. Hufnal if that answered his question. Mr. Hufnal replied yes, but he did not think it was right. Mr. Keller asked Mr. Hufnal if he did not think it was correct or if he did not necessarily approve of that procedure. Mr. Hufnal stated that he did not approve of the procedure. He would think the applicant would go before the Planning Commission and get that approval first. Because if they did not get approved at the Planning Commission then they would have spent the money on this variance application which they would not have needed to do. Mr. Swierczek mentioned that it would work the other way as well if the applicant would go before the Board of Adjustment first and the proposed variances were denied while they were waiting for Planning Commission. They would have to go through an application process for Planning Commission as well. If that was approved and the variance was denied, then the application for the Planning Commission would subsequently not be permitted to proceed. Colonel Ericson recommended that the Board continue with the case and talk about the procedure later. Mr. Keller asked the applicant if he employed Elliott Surveying for the Plans that have been presented as an Exhibit with the submission for the variance application. Mr. Giangrant replied yes. Mr. Keller mentioned that he had to agree and go along with the tone of what has transpired so far. Mainly, it appears that the applicant has some willingness to perhaps table the presentation for a subsequent presentation without interfering with the one-year delay if the application was to be denied. Mr. Keller asked when Elliott Surveying was employed were other possibilities for the proposed layout considered other than the one presented on the Exhibit Plan. Mr. Giangrant replied they looked at a lot of possible ways, but this one made more sense as far as the traffic flow. Mr. Keller mentioned that perhaps it is understood by virtue of his (Mr. Giangrant’s) history at the car wash and he understood that, but there is no designated traffic flow pattern quite frankly. He questioned people exiting the new proposed vacuum station; there was no exiting strategy for them. He did not know if they circled around to then have their car washed or they exit directly into Division Street. Mr. Giangrant replied they come right around the building and get in line, there will be three (3) lanes. 4

CITY OF DOVER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 21, 2019 Mr. Keller asked if he would not anticipate someone simply utilizing the vacuuming and not getting a car wash. Mr. Giangrant replied of course he is sure that is going to happen. There is an escape exit in the event that does happen. Mr. Keller mentioned that it was not shown, but he understood. Mr. Giangrant replied it is existing. Mr. Keller mentioned that West Division Street and Forest Street are under State maintenance control. The applicant would require certain approvals for entrances and exits by virtue of redevelopment of the Lot. Mr. Giangrant replied he spoke with them and they stated that it was just a standard procedure since the egress and ingress is existing; it would be fine. As a matter of fact, Mr. Giangrant mentioned that he asked if he could slide the entrances and exits down, and they said yes. Chairman Sheth asked the applicant that after the Board meeting is it possible that the entire Plan may be changed. Mr. Giangrant replied yes, of course. Chairman Sheth stated that the best thing would be to agree to have a meeting with the Planning Staff. Mr. Keller agreed. Mr. Keller mentioned that the Board has a history of willingness to work with applicants. The burden of proof to gain approval for the application is upon the applicant, company and/or corporate entity. Mr. Keller mentioned that it is a good idea; and he would be in agreement to accept the tabling for further consideration on the part of possibilities with regards to this layout with City personnel. Chairman Sheth mentioned the audience and the public hearing. Those speaking in favor of or against will be given a chance to speak in case a decision is not made today. When whatever future plan comes, the audience will be most welcome and invited to present their concerns whether in favor or against. At the current time, the Board is not going to discuss the same Plan. The Plan will be changed. He’s not sure how it will be changed, but the audience will be invited to present their concerns. City Solicitor suggested a public hearing after Mr. Giangrant comes back with the changes and after meeting with Staff. Then the ladies and gentlemen will know exactly what is proposed and they are not going to know that today. Mr. Keller questioned the possibility of members of the audience who would perhaps otherwise would like to elect to speak today in favor of or against. Would that weigh on the future proposal? Would there be benefits by hearing their comments, one way or another which could possibly guide the future production of a proposed change to this Plan? Chairman Sheth mentioned his concern is what if those in favor or against comment it should not be prejudicial on the present understanding verses the future proposal that may be totally different. Colonel Ericson mentioned that the public has taken their time to come to the meeting. They have position that they would like to express because they may not be able to attend the meeting the next time. The Board should have a Public Hearing now and keep in mind when it comes back. True, the Plan may change and the audience that are here today may come back again. At least we will have their thoughts on record; and it will also help the owner meet their interests and affect the final decision. 5

CITY OF DOVER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 21, 2019 Chairman Sheth and Solicitor mentioned that they agreed with Mr. Keller and Colonel Ericson. Chairman Sheth opened the public hearing. Mr. Hector Stevenson Green who lives at 830 Forest Street was sworn in by Mr. Rodriguez. Mr. Green mentioned that his main concern with the expansion of the Car Wash is the traffic flow. We need a one-way entrance to the Car Wash. If you are coming from Saulsbury Street towards Loockerman Street, the cars are making a left-hand turn. It puts a hardship on the neighbors trying to back out of their driveways. With the State and DelDOT being in Phase 1 of the bike path, Division Street will become a one lane road going towards Saulsbury Road. Therefore, you will be losing half of Division Street. We have not heard anything regarding the exits or entrances to the new Phase of the Car Wash. Traffic flow is our main concern because it is busting at the seams at the current time. Plus, school is getting ready to start back up; it will get worse. The expansion project is probably good for the business, but it is bad/negative for the community and people that live near the Car Wash unless we can work with a traffic flow in and out of the Car Wash. The expansion is also a hazard, children walking and with one sidewalk being totally eliminated because of the Phase I Project construction near Bennie Smith Funeral Home. He noticed a proposal to the Car Wash that was going to be built on DuPont Highway. He had the same complaint regarding the water and sewer system, tire shine chemicals that is used, drainage system, etc. The neighbors need to know all that information with the EPA and what the impact will be in their neighborhood. Chairman Sheth replied that those questions will be addressed at the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Green also mentioned the neighbors was also concerned about safety. Mr. Keller asked Mr. Green if the street construction currently on Division Street was part of what he was referring to regarding the sidewalk reconstruction. Mr. Green replied he was referencing the Bike Path Phase I that is supposed to go from Subway on Saulsbury Road to St. Jones River/Silver Lake extension. It will eliminate half of the road on Division Street. Ms. Amelia Howard who lives at 814 Forest Street, directly across from the Car Wash was sworn in by Mr. Rodriguez. Ms. Howard mentioned that her concern was the same as Mr. Green’s concern. The traffic is currently horrendous. There are times when she needs to come out of her driveway; she will have to go east and go around to go west. It is a serious accident waiting to happen. Years ago, there were vacuums on the opposite side of the Car Wash, she wanted to know why they could not put the vacuums on the right side instead of demolishing the houses in our neighborhood. As mentioned by Mr. Green, the children are getting ready to go back to school and the traffic is terrible. If you have ever gone to the Car Wash, you are aware the traffic is terrible. DelDOT or someone has to do something to protect the children. Again, as previously mentioned it is going to be a serious accident because the traffic flow is horrible. She asked that the neighbors be considered when making plans because they live there. The owners do not live in the neighborhood, they just have their business and work there. Mr. Hugg mentioned as a reminder that the Board is only committed to have one public hearing on an application; and he recommended that the Board suspend or whatever the proper legal term is to keep the hearing open so that at the next meeting the hearing will continue and the Board will not violate the Code. 6

CITY OF DOVER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 21, 2019 Chairman Sheth mentioned that it will be part of the motion to keep the public hearing open. Colonel Ericson moved to keep the public hearing open until the next meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Keller. The motion unanimously carried 4-0. Chairman Sheth questioned if there was any additional correspondence for the record. There was none. Colonel Ericson moved to table variance application V-19-07. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hufnal. The motion unanimously carried 4-0. The meeting was adjourned by Mr. Keller and seconded by Mr. Hufnal at 9:43 A.M. Sincerely, Maretta Savage-Purnell Secretary 7