Historic District Minutes 9-19-19

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION September 19, 2019 The Regular Meeting of the City of Dover Historic District Commission was held on Thursday, September 19, 2019 at 3:30 PM with Chairperson Mr. McDaniel presiding. Members present were Mr. Street, Mr. Czerwinski, Mr. McDaniel and Ms. Mason. Ms. Horsey was absent. Planning Office Staff members present were Mrs. Melson-Williams, and Mrs. Mullaney. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Street moved for approval of the agenda and to move the New Business before Communications and Reports, seconded by Mr. Czerwinski and the motion was unanimously carried 4-0. Ms. Horsey was absent. ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 20, 2019 Mr. Czerwinski moved for approval of the meeting minutes of June 20, 2019, seconded by Mr. Street and the motion was unanimously carried 4-0. Ms. Mason was absent. ADOPTION OF SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE REGULAR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 15, 2019 Mr. Czerwinski moved for approval of the summary meeting minutes of August 15, 2019, seconded by Mr. Street and the motion was unanimously carried 4-0. Ms. Horsey was absent. NEW BUSINESS Review of Permits Referred to Commission HI-19-04 Referral of Fence Permit #19-1218 at 2 Kings Highway NE – Referral by the City Planner to the Historic District Commission for Review of Architectural Review Certification for Fence Permit application #19-1218 for fence replacement project. Project involves replacement of an existing white wood fence (and chain-link fence) with five-foot metal picket fence along the Kings Highway and Division Street frontages. The property is zoned R-10 (One-Family Residence Zone) and is subject to the H (Historic District Overlay Zone). The property is located at the corner of Kings Highway NE where Kings Highway and Division Street merge, south of the intersection with Maple Lane. The owner of record is Samuel Ryan Halpern. Address: 2 Kings Highway NE. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.05-04-44.00-000. Council District 2. A previous Application HI-16-02 for construction of Carriage House Building at this property was reviewed April 21, 2016. Mrs. Melson-Williams gave a brief introduction of application HI-19-04 regarding the proposed fence project and the Staff Report on the Permit requested. Chairman McDaniel mentioned that as Chairman on the Murphey School Board he did not think their property adjoins that property. Mrs. Melson-Williams replied it did not. Representative(s): Mr. Ryan Halpern and Mrs. Stephany Halpern as property owners; and Mr. Chris Volkomer, contractor.

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19, 2019 Mr. Halpern mentioned that he wanted to make clear that he is sensitive to the Historic District; he lives in Dover and he did not want to do anything to cause any friction. He simply wants to make something more pleasing. The chain-link fence is disgusting and has been disgusting. Now is the time because we are redoing all the landscaping and have several projects on the house itself which includes interior renovation and at the back of the house a complete landscape and redesign and cleaning of the property. We are also removing old trees. We will now have a fence to view into the property which will be something very nice to look at. The last phase of the house will be to replace all the vinyl siding with some type of lap siding or hardie board to bring it back to and away from the vinyl siding that is not part of the historic recommendation. He loves the white wood fence and it looks great, but he cannot maintain it. It is constant maintenance. There are sections now that look like it is going to fall, and he must do something different. There is true iron at the Governor’s property that he thinks is cost prohibitive and that probably has further maintenance. Across the street is Zimmerman’s old property currently has aluminum wrought iron. We are looking to keep the five-foot fence height for a couple of reasons such as security and pets. The back of the property has been done from a prior Permit. As he referred to the first picture that represented the back of the property free landscaping, there is an example of the black fence. The aluminum wrought iron tends to look cheap at times and that is the reason he was thinking to put up brick piers along the fence line. He is sensitive to the recommendations from the Planning Commission (Staff). If we can put them at the corner of the property or at the joining of the fences and minimize the amount of brick pillars, he is willing to do that because it is cheaper for him. In the alley access behind the house there is a weird triangle, and there have been many times he has almost hit a pedestrian coming out of the area because he cannot see them nor can the pedestrian see him. He thought about a mirror system, but that is not going to work. He would like to cut the corner and move the fence back to a 45-degree angle where the chain-link fence is located. He could put two brick pillars there and joined it together with the black aluminum fence or a brick wall where we could put the addresses and a planter or lantern. He is open for suggestions. The side entrance has been the bain of my existence and have since secured it with screws. There are times children will open the fence and leave it open as they are walking down the street. This is also the area where we found a squatter and their belongings. He has since removed all the grass on the sidewalk near the chain-link fence and slats. A sprinkler has been installed and he will be receiving sod next week. Besides the sidewalk, the street will look much better as well. There will most likely be some type of fast vegetation such as an Emerald Arbor or something that will allow privacy. He will temporarily put some type of mesh for privacy behind it which will look nice until there are trees and coverage. There is also a photo of the termite ridden 6x6 fence post. He stated that he saw a Recommendation from Planning Staff to leave the pergola in place and put brick piers in front of it with a fence. He wants to figure out a way to save it. The base is toast from terminate damage to the point that the fears for the mailman every time he walks in. He is thinking that a good compromise is to take the top off because it does match the front of the property and build two brick pillars. It would then rest on top of the brick pillar system and it would maintain the top. Whether we would restore or rebuild, we would do something. We would paint it white and have it rest on two of the brick columns as a base system. He stated that he listed 8-foot brick pillars with a 7-foot sunburst top matching aluminum gate that will be secured for the mailman. There will be some type of electric fence access. If the Commission feels that this is a good compromise, whatever the current height is we will leave in place and just build the new foundation made of brick. He mentioned that he showed the intersection of the white picket fence with the adjacent Hall House fence which is a 4-foot black wrought iron 2

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19, 2019 fence. He believes if he breaks that up and puts a brick pillar it would be nice and look much better. The adjacent property looks like aluminum, but he thinks it is a 4 ½ -foot fence. It does not appear to be a 4-foot fence or a 5-foot fence. Mr. Halpern was asked which property was he referencing? Mr. Halpern replied the Governor’s Café (across the street). Mr. Halpern also referenced another photo on the corner where the trash trucks also have a problem. He stated that he also paid to have the electric buried in the alley. The only wires on the pole is the cable TV wires (lines). He was not sure if the City had any dealing with Comcast which sometimes can be difficult. We would like to propose without paying to have the pole relocated where the telephone intercepts the home. The other property he also owns so there would be no permission that would need to be granted. There are some renderings of the exact height, style of the gate that would be at the front of the building and a brick pillar with a molded cornice with the dimensions. He stated that coming out of the alley you cannot see from the left and he would like to bump it back. The City Planning was leading towards Kings Highway and Division Street for that corner. He understands the safety concerns. He took a picture of the angle where a driver would sit and the ability to view down the street which is pretty good clearance. He thinks with the opening in the new aluminum fence system you will gain even more visibility. Mr. Street asked for clarification if the applicant was proposing 5-foot brick pillars and fencing. Mr. Halpern replied that initially he was; but he is open to just the major intersection points verses every so often. Mr. Street mentioned that he was okay so far. He just wanted to make sure that it was clear on the request of the brick pillars, fencing, alleyway, and columns. He thinks that it is fine. The only caution is regarding the corner and Division Street it is State street maintained by DelDOT. He advised the applicant to obtain the necessary Permits. Chairman McDaniel asked Mr. Street if he was referring to coming out of the alley or off the street. Mr. Street replied that he was talking about any fence work that is being done on Division Street. Mr. Halpern replied that Pierce Fencing Company did the work in the back yard. Mr. Czerwinski mentioned that he did not have any questions, but he did have concerns regarding the 5-foot height of the fence. The fact that no other properties have a 5-foot fence. The height of the fence comes across as a high security presence. Historically, we did not have high fences like that. The 4-foot fence with the spike top is enough for security. If you want to put the 5-foot across the back which he believes is currently there. Mr. Halpern replied all if it is a 5-foot fence. Mr. Czerwinski stated that he personally had an issue with the 5-foot fence. Aesthetically you have this high fence that looks like it is meant to be high security. There are no other properties in the area that actually that has a fence like that. He thinks that it is rather unappealing when you have a high fence like that. He could be the only one feeling this way. There is a fence next to you which is the Hall House and the fence across the street. There are fences in the whole area that are 3 to 4 foot-tall and then there is your 5-foot fence which sticks out and does not historically match the area. When you were along State Street, any wrought iron fence was 3 to 4-feet. Mr. Halpern asked Mr. Czerwinski if he was referring to the existing 5-foot fence. Mr. Czerwinski stated that this was built before the Ordinance was made regarding the 5-foot fence. Mr. Halpern asked Mr. Czerwinski if he 3

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19, 2019 felt it represents the same type of cosmetic appearance. Mr. Czerwinski replied yes. Mr. Czerwinski mentioned that he understands the privacy and that there was a secondary fence built in the back. From an aesthetic point of view when you are trying to present your house and you have a high fence that it comes across rather odd to have a high fence that is purposeful built to block the view of the house. Whoever lived there before, the high fence had the same sense that regarding privacy. He thinks the fence was built in the 90’s before the requirements for the Architectural Review. Again, he is personally against the 5-foot fence because it comes across as “offputting” and is not historically accurate. If you are doing the spike fence, it is going to give you security. He stated that he was cool with everything else (the pillars and he is happy with the design). He thinks it will be very fitting for the area. Mr. Volhomer asked when the existing 5-foot fence was actually built? Mr. Halpern replied in the 90’s. Mr. Volhomer mentioned that from an aesthetic point of view if it was a brand-new fence sitting there, it would not look out of place with that house and it is a 5-foot fence. Mr. Volhomer mentioned that the fence that is going to be installed now instead of having a 2 ½ inch wide pickets they are ½ inch. Technically, with this fence you get an even better view of the house verses the old fence where you have less view of the house. He thinks that you are going to end up with a better view. Mr. Czerwinski mentioned if you look at the area as a whole and you drive down the street and you are going down Kings Highway you have 3-foot fences and then all of a sudden there is a 5-foot fence going around the corner. It sets itself off and it is not within the purview. There is a reason why they put the 4-foot fence limit in the Historic District because that is what was historically in the neighborhood. The 5-foot fence does not work in the City, perhaps in the suburbs. When you have something that tall in the City, it stands out. Mr. Halpern asked a question regarding the height of the fence at the substation that is down the street. He thinks is owned by the City and was not sure it was in the Historic District. Mr. Czerwinski replied yes, it is about 10-feet tall and it was done because they did not want people climbing the fence. Ms. Mason stated that she did not have a problem with the 5-foot fence. She said that she thinks it is attractive. As she looks at the other fences and aside from the color, she thinks it looks so much better in the neighborhood. She thinks this existing fence does stick out. She mentioned that she walks all over Dover daily and as she walks by the house located at 2 Kings Highway, she would always say I really cannot peak into this house to get a better look. She suggested maybe there could be a compromise. You have the spike; the spikes can be very dangerous. Mr. Czerwinski mentioned that the spikes are part of the design. Mr. Halpern mentioned that he was open, there are other designs and points. Ms. Mason mentioned that the fence is also to keep the dogs inside the yard. Mr. Halpern mentioned that the fence itself it double picketed which means they are closer together to prevent the smaller dogs from getting through. 4

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19, 2019 Ms. Halpern mentioned that it will also prevent a lot of trash from being thrown over into their yard which is currently happening. Mr. Czerwinski asked what the overall height of the fence was. Mr. Halpern replied that the connecting joints were right at 5-feet. The actual 6x6 that is currently there is higher. Chairman McDaniel mentioned that the new 5-foot fence was just replacing the existing fence and it will be better and easier to see through. 4:02 (58) Mr. McDaniel asked about the gate opening on Division Street (showing an image of the existing). Mr. Halpern replied that he would like to break the joint up with maybe a wider brick column or brick pillars and separating it by fence. He does not want to have a gate on that side. Chairman McDaniel mentioned that he did not like the idea of the brick wall with lettering or something with letters on it. He was not sure if the applicant was trying to appease the City or the Historic District Commission, but he did not like the idea of the lettering. Mr. Czerwinski asked if that was a request or was that something that was just brought up at the meeting. Mr. McDaniel replied no, it was not a request. Mr. Halpern mentioned that the reason he did not invest a lot of money in actual designs is because he knew there would need to be changes. He was presenting ideas that he had and was looking for some feedback. Mr. McDaniel said he understood, and overall, he liked the designs. He mentioned that they were a little fuzzy on how many brick pillars there will be, where they will be located, and how big they are and if you are changing things around regarding the entrance way. Overall, as he previously mentioned he likes this design and concept. He can see what the applicant is trying to do and thinks that he is doing a good job. He is very ambivalent about the Kings Highway corner and setting the fence back as suggested by Staff. He could not help but think that you will be able to see better around the corner than you can now. The way the street is angled now because he comes down that street all the time and he always turns right. He does not have to worry about trying to cross over at the other side. He knows that in previous hearings the Commission has worried about corners, but that corner seems to be an easier one to see around. Mr. Halpern mentioned that he could amend his application for the brick columns. Now, if he could try to visualize all the columns, he realizes that the brick pillars can change the appearance of the house even by doing it at the corner or intersections of the fences. This will enrich the look without just putting up a straight black fence. Mr. Street suggested lowering the number of 5-foot pillars to 3 or 4 pillars to the transition. Whether you put 3 or 4 columns along that road you will still have a problem with at least ½ - to one dozen brick pillars on Kings Highway and Division Street. Mrs. Melson-Williams gave a brief overview of Staff Findings from the Review of the Building Permit. She suggested another option for the entrance pergola is that it has some depth to it so she is not sure how they would set it on brick piers. It may be better to, in that case, give it new posts that come down and that may be an easier fix if that is where the termite problem is happening. 5

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19, 2019 Mr. Halpern asked if 19 ½ inches was the suggested and if that was based on the construction number width of the pier system and how the bricks line up. He mentioned that 22 inches is the next size of a pier system that they can do. Mr. Volhomer mentioned that one of the entrances was deeper because the fence is out closer to the road. The fence turns at a 90-degree angle and goes in about 3-feet and then you have the structure. The structure is only about 2-feet deep. Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned that Staff was suggesting that the structure become a free-standing element once you pass through your gate or fence line. Then it is something you walk under enroute to the house. Mr. Street asked when the arched gate entry was constructed. Mr. McDaniel replied we don’t know, but he is glad to see the fence go. Mr. Street wanted to know how they could dictate saving the pergola if it was built in the 1990’s. He mentioned that it is a nice piece; he likes it. If you could do something to compliment it or keep it, but at the same time they are trying to replace a fence that needs some work and help. Ms. Mason mentioned that she thinks they should keep the pergola because it is part of the original design of the house. Chairman McDaniel mentioned that he did not think they should keep the pergola because it was constructed with pressure treated wood. Mr. Halpern mentioned that he has a picture and it was not a fence system. It was just shrubbery all over the place for that house. What makes the fence so hard to maintain is having to go to the Amish and get them to hand make it and then replace it. Mr. Street recommended approval of application HI-19-04 with the Staff Findings of the Architectural Review Certification for the replacement of the existing fence materials, brick piers, corner visibility on Kings Highway; and the applicant can choose to keep the existing wood pergola feature; and the applicant can choose to retain or not retain the existing arched (side) gate entry. The motion was seconded by Ms. Mason and unanimously carried 4-0. Ms. Horsey was absent. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that as a follow up Planning Staff will prepare a written decision and with that we can complete the review of the Permit. The Permit will reflect where you have options to make the choices regarding the pergola and the gate section. If there are any drawings that will reflect how it is going to work out to be, then Planning Staff can amend that information into the Permit. Mr. Volhomer asked if they could make the 45 into the alley (45 turn of the fence at the alley intersection with Division Street)? Mrs. Melson-Williams replied yes, that is not a problem. 6

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19, 2019 COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS Summary of Applications for 2018 and 2019 Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that there have not been any changes other than this application HI- 19-04 as the fourth application for this year. Summary of Architectural Review Certifications for 2019 Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that with the Summary of Applications there were 18 applications. There was only one that had Historic District Commission interaction and that was the one associated with the Governor’s Café at 144 Kings Hwy SW. The Building Permit was issued but she is not sure if the work has started. She thinks they had a meeting regarding their ABC license that they had to pursue because of the expansion of the kitchen. Majority of the Permits through the end of August consist of interior renovations, exterior renovations, roof and Demolition Permits and signage. Chairman McDaniel mentioned that Delaware State University applied for a Sign Permit for the Parsonage Building and asked if they purchased the building. Mrs. Melson-Williams replied that the building was a gift. She was not sure how they plan to use the building. Ms. Mason mentioned that the Doggy Daycare is now a tattoo parlor (property at S. Governors Avenue). Department of Planning & Inspections Update Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned that there was no update. The Planning Office is still down one Planner. Update on August 15, 2019 Presentation on Small-Cell Wireless Installations (HI-19-03) Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned that a copy of the Power Point presentation was provided for information in your packet that Mr. Robinson, Electric Director gave out at the last meeting. There is no way to make the stuff historic, but there are ways to minimize the potential impact. Mr. Czerwinski asked how many towers were going to be downtown. Mrs. Melson-Williams replied that it depends on the multiple carriers potentially involved and the technology is much shorter of a distance that they have to be spaced. Certified Local Government (CLG) Program Status of FFY2018 CLG Grant Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that there is one of the latest progress reports related to the Comprehensive Plan Chapter. On June 20, 2019 there was the Historic District Workshop Event. The handouts from the event is available. Update on FFY2019 CLG Grant Application Submission The grant focus will be to hire a consultant to work on the Design Standards and Guidelines. We have not heard anything at the current time regarding the Grant Agreement. Office received the Grant Application for FFY2019 that will start July 1, 2019. 7

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19, 2019 Chairman McDaniel asked if Mrs. Melson-Williams would hear something within the next month. Mrs. Melson-Williams replied she hoped so. Chairman McDaniel asked if we are going to hire a consultant to do the update of the Design Standards and Guidelines. Mrs. Melson-Williams replied yes. Mr. Street asked what was the timeframe on the Grant? Mrs. Melson-Williams replied that the Grant is typically a July-June timeframe which is different than the Federal Fiscal Year that starts on October 1. She was not sure how it plays out if you have not started yet. There are ways they can extend the June 30th end date on the backend. Mr. Czerwinski asked if the Grants had to be bid on? Mrs. Melson-Williams replied from the City’s procurement side of the rules you have to follow; it depends on what the total cost is. We are under $25,000 so that gives us a little bit more of flexibility on how we can go out and seek consultant services. This will probably not be your typical Request for Proposal because it is very specialized. We have had work done previously on the Request for Proposal. There are firms out there that are qualified. Ms. Mason asked if $5000 was the total of the Grant? Mrs. Melson-Williams replied that it was more than that. It is a Grant and match scenario. The Grant is $9200 and the required City match is $6100. We actually have more than the required match on the City side which is $10,000 in the Budget. Project for Dover’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan Update on Project Activities Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the Comprehensive Plan is required every ten years. A Project Update through September was handed out to all members present at the meeting. In the past few months, Staff has been working on intense text writing and map development. In mid-August, we issued internally a Staff Draft #1where Staff compiled all the chapters that different individuals were writing into one document so that we could read through the entire thing and share it with the City’s Department Head. We are in the process of taking all the feedback from amongst the City Planning Staff as well as several Department Heads. We do expect to hear from the City Manager tomorrow. The next key deadline is October 1, 2019. We need to submit a draft of the Comprehensive Plan and the Maps to the State for the Plus Review process. We will also be using the October 1, 2019 deadline to release the draft to the public in its entirety. We are planning two Open House Events which will be held on October 23, 2019 and a visitation day at City Hall on October 24, 2019. Once we have the Plus Review comments then we will have to go back into the plan and make any necessary changes and then we will be back into the formal Public Hearing process that has to occur with the Planning Commission and City Council. That is shaping up into a December or January timeframe. The Plan includes short- and long-term future implementation and goals. This also includes the Historic Preservation section. The Design Standards and Guideline is a short term. We will also be updating the website on the Comprehensive Plan. Mrs. Melson-Williams asked the members of the Historic District Commission to review Chapter 15 of the Draft Comprehensive Plan and if there are any questions or concerns please reach out to her. Staff will be doing an update and Plan 8

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19, 2019 Implementation Chapter to City Council at their Council Committee of the Whole on September 24, 2019. They have previously seen the Goals and Recommendations. Planning Commission was updated earlier this week and we will be doing a more formalized presentation of the draft in October. Mr. Street moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Ms. Mason and unanimously carried 4-0. Meeting adjourned at 4:45 PM Sincerely, Maretta Savage-Purnell Secretary 9