May Planning Commission Paperless Packet

CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 16, 2022 at 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers, 15 Loockerman Plaza, Dover, Delaware AGENDA Written comments are accepted via mail to City of Dover – Planning Commission, P.O. Box 475 Dover DE 19903 and via email at CompPlan@dover.de.us. VIRTUAL MEETING NOTICE The Planning Commission Meeting for May 16, 2022 will be held as an In-Person Meeting in the City Hall Council Chambers. The public is welcome to attend in person. The meeting will also be a Virtual Meeting using WebEx audio/visual conferencing system as an electronic means of communication. See participation information below to join by phone or computer. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION City of Dover Planning Commission Meeting of May 16, 2022 Dial: 1-408-418-9388 Event number/Access code: 2347 120 3505 Event password: DoverPC Event Address: https://bit.ly/PCMeeting5162022 If you are new to WebEx get the app now at https://www.webex.com/ to be ready when the meeting starts. For problems accessing the meeting, please call the Planning Office at (302) 736- 7196. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL ADOPTION OF AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Adoption of the Minutes of April 18, 2022 COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS 1

PLANNING COMMISSION - May 16, 2022 PAGE 2 Meeting Reminder: The next Planning Commission regular meeting date is June 21, 2022 at 7:00 pm. Update on City Council Actions Department of Planning & Inspections Updates OPENING REMARKS CONCERNING MEETING PROCEDURES FOR APPLICATIONS OLD BUSINESS Request Extension of Planning Commission Approval: None Update on Revisions to Applications 2. S-19-13 Office Building at 223 and 225 West Division Street - Update to Planning Commission on Design Revisions to Site Development Plan Application S-19-13 Lands of NCALL at 223 & 225 West Division Street. This Application and Lot Consolidation Plan Application was initially approved for the construction a three-story 7,671 SF office building together with associated site improvements. The subject properties to be combined total 5,120 feet and are located north side of West Division Street east of North New Street. The property is zoned C-1A (Limited Commercial Zone). The owner of record is NCALL, Inc. Property Addresses: 223 West Division Street and 225 West Division Street. Tax Parcels: ED-05-076.08-05-28.00-000 and ED-05-076.08-05-29.00-000. Council District 4. This application received conditional approval by the Planning Commission in July 2019 and a 1- year extension of approval in June 2021. NEW APPLICATIONS 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street – Public Hearing and Review of a Site Development Plan Application, associated Lot Consolidation Plan, and Architectural Review Certification to permit the construction of a five-story 106,711 GFA government building to serve as the new Kent County Family Court. The proposal includes a five-story Parking Structure (425 vehicle parking spaces), parking lot, and other site improvements. The Site presently consists of a series of eleven (11) parcels consisting of a total of 3.7499 +/- acres and an alley. The properties are zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone), as well as the H (Historic District Zone). The properties are located on the east side of South Governors Avenue between West Water Street and Bank Lane. The owner of record/ equitable owner is the State of Delaware. Property Addresses: 401, 411, 429, 435, 439, 441, and 447 S. Governors Avenue; 101 and 117 West Water Street; 123 Bank Lane; and part of 34 The Green. Tax Parcels: ED-05-077.09-03-32.00-000, ED-05- 077.09-03-33.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-35.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-36.00-000, ED-05- 077.09-03-37.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-48.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-50.00-000, ED-05- 077.09-03-53.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-52.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-61.00-000, and an alley. Future Addresses: 415 S. Governors Avenue (Parking Garage), and 445 S. Governors Avenue (Courthouse). Council District 4. Project Site is subject to the Architectural Review Certification Application HI-22-03 as reviewed and recommended at the April 21, 2022 meeting of the Historic District Commission. For Consideration: Architectural 2

PLANNING COMMISSION - May 16, 2022 PAGE 3 Review Certification, Tree Mitigation Plan. Waiver Request: Alternative Size of Loading Spaces. 4. S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue – Public Hearing and Review of a Site Development Plan Application to permit the construction of a 45-vehicle parking lot to serve the proposed Kent County Family Court. This parking lot is in addition to the proposed parking garage facility proposed for the Kent County Family Courthouse. The Site consists of a parcel of land consisting of a total of 0.4989 +/- acres. The property is zoned C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located on the west side of South Governors Avenue, north of West Water Street. The owner of record is the State of Delaware. Property Address: 446 S. Governors Avenue. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.09-03-21.00-000. Council District 4. Project Site is associated with Site Development Plan Application S-22-06 New Family Courthouse at S. Governors Ave and W. Water Street. NEW BUSINESS 5. Update on Dover Air Force Base Compatible Use Study https://deldot.gov/projects/Studies/dafb/ Public Workshop on May 17, 2022 held at DelDOT Administration Building, South Entrance - Delaware Room and Virtually on Zoom, 5:30pm - 7:30pm ADJOURN Posted Agenda: May 6, 2022 THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. PURSUANT TO 29 DEL. C. §10004(e)(2), THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, WHICH ARISE AT THE TIME OF THE MEETING 3

Item 1. CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 The Meeting of the City of Dover Planning Commission was held on Monday, April 18, 2022 at 7:00 PM as an In-Person Meeting and also using the phone/videoconferencing system WebEx. The Meeting Session was conducted with Chair Mrs. Maucher presiding. Members present were Mr. Cooper, Mr. Roach (virtual), Mrs. Denney, Mr. Hartman, Mr. Baldwin, Mrs. Malone (virtual) and Mrs. Maucher. Dr. Jones and Mrs. Welsh were absent. Staff members present were Mrs. Dawn Melson-Williams, Mr. Julian Swierczek, and Ms. Samantha Bulkilvish. Also present were Mr. Eric Dowell, Mr. Chris Lazenby, Mr. Brett Jarett, Ms. LeeAnn Gudorp, Mr. Steve Schmidt, Mr. Jonathan Street and Mr. Michael Riemann. Speaking from the public were Mr. William Garfinkel, Mr. David Casto, Mr. Derek Headley, Mr. Mark Reaves, and Mr. Chris Moore. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Baldwin moved to approve the Agenda as submitted, seconded by Mr. Hartman and the motion was unanimously carried 7-0 with Dr. Jones and Mrs. Welsh absent. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 21, 2022 Mrs. Denney moved to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 21, 2022, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the motion was unanimously carried 7-0 with Dr. Jones and Mrs. Welsh absent. COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS Mrs. Melson-Williams provided an update on the regular City Council and various Committee meetings held on March 28 & 29, 2022 and April 11 & 12, 2022. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the next Planning Commission regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, May 16, 2022 at 7:00PM in the City Hall Council Chambers. We will continue to provide an opportunity for virtual participation as well. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that she currently continues as the Interim City Planner and is busier than ever. Our office is probably going to be a little bit more swamped as she is sad and happy to report at the same time that this is Ms. Bulkilvish’s last Planning Commission meeting this evening as a member of the Planning Staff. She is continuing her career at the Office of State Planning Coordination so you might see her name on some letters in the future. We wish Samantha all the best and the rest of us, until we get her position filled, will be very busy to say the least. This is a great time to be in Dover. We are currently in the middle of Spring Cleanup Week. The Public Works Office gives some opportunity for people to dispose of certain items and if you need more information on that, see the City’s website about how they conduct the pickup of those bulk items during Spring Cleanup Week. NASCAR will be back in town next weekend; it is a fairly early NASCAR Race for Dover. The following weekend, Dover Days is on May 7, 2022. Related to both of those, Staff has various responsibilities but there are good things to be doing here outside in Dover. 1 4

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. OPENING REMARKS CONCERNING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS Mrs. Melson-Williams presented the audience information on policies and procedures for the In- Person Meeting and Virtual Meeting using the WebEx system. OLD BUSINESS 1) Requests for Extensions of Planning Commission Approval: None 2) Pending Development Application S-22-01 Caliber Car Wash at 280 Cowgill Street – Continued Review of a Site Development Plan Application for the construction of a 3,500 SF Self-Service Car Wash facility and associated site improvements including two (2) pay stations and nineteen (19) vacuum spaces. This redevelopment includes demolition of the existing auto repair shop building. The property is zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial Zone). The property consists of 0.78 acres (33,976.8 SF) and is located on the south side of Cowgill Street and Court Street near the corner of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and S. DuPont Highway. The owner of record is Neaton’s Tire Service of Delaware. The Equitable Owner (Developer) is MPV Properties c/o John Bradley Murr. Property Address: 280 Cowgill Street. Tax Parcel Number: ED-05-077.10-01-17.00-000. Council District 4. Waiver Request - Elimination of Sidewalk on Street Frontages for Alternative. This application was heard at the February 22, 2022 Meeting of the Planning Commission where a public hearing was held and the action on the application was deffered. Representatives: Mr. Eric Dowell, MPV Properties; Mr. Chris Lazenby, Timmons Group; Mr. Brett Jarett, MPV Properties; Ms. LeeAnn Gudorp, Timmons Group; Mr. Steve Schmidt, Timmons Group (all participating virtually) Mr. Hartman motioned to lift S-22-01 Caliber Car Wash at 280 Cowgill Street from the table to continue its review, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the motion was carried 7-0 by voice vote with Dr. Jones and Mrs. Welsh absent. Ms. Bulkilvish stated that the application was tabled at our February 22, 2022 meeting due to the concerns regarding traffic in this area. This application is for a 3,500 SF Car Wash facility with nineteen (19) vacuum stations. It has a few entrances. The one directly for the Car Wash itself would take the person driving in through the pay lane and then through the Car Wash where they would exit into the vacuum station area. The other entrance would be pretty strictly for the employees so that they could access employee parking. There is also one additional exit which would be the bailout lane in case someone had gone through the Car Wash lane and maybe forgotten their wallet or something like that. The applicant is also asking for a Waiver for the frontage sidewalk. They are proposing a sidewalk connection from the existing multi-use path along Martin Luther King Jr Boulevard onto the site. Again, returning to the traffic situation, the applicant has invited her to several meetings with DelDOT. First was their Project Coordination Meeting on March 28, 2022. At that meeting, the applicant was made aware by DelDOT that this intersection at Martin Luther King Jr Boulevard and United Way, which is where the Wawa is, is a high hazardous intersection and has been identified as so. They had just completed a Conceptual Plan for the intersection, but DelDOT also informed us that the Concept Plan is just a 2 5

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. concept. They weren’t willing to share a drawing of the concept because that is how early it is in the planning stage. It hasn’t even gotten on the list for funding and that could be 15-20 years out. DelDOT also expressed to the applicant that there may be some intermediate projects in the area that they could assist with to assist with the flow of traffic in that area and to lessen the hazard. That was further discussed on April 11, 2022 at the Pre-Submittal Meeting and she thinks that the applicant has a better understanding of what is expected from DelDOT from them. She is not going to say that it is completely clear because she is still a little lost even. They are diligently working with DelDOT and they will need DelDOT approval before any Final Plan Approval is accepted. Ms. Gudorp stated that following up with what Ms. Bulkilvish has given in the summary, she is exactly right. They have been meeting with DelDOT and trying to work through their process in understanding the improvements. She introduced Mr. Steve Schmidt from their team, as he is their Traffic Engineer. He is available for any questions or concerns. She asked Mr. Schmidt to give a brief update on the Pre-Submittal Meeting that happened on April 11, 2022. Mr. Schmidt stated that during the meeting, there were a couple things that they were working with DelDOT on and waiting on. One of those is the requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis. They are going to be a part of an area-wide study which means that they will contribute some funds towards the study of the entire area. This one development alone is not the source of the traffic in this area nor the solution either. So, they will pay into a fund to help with that area-wide study. We do not know the amount of that yet, DelDOT is working behind the scenes to get them that number. As Ms. Bulkilvish mentioned, this intersection is slated for further study and potentially future improvements by DelDOT. But we do not know what those improvements are at this point and they are years out from a funding standpoint. With that said, DelDOT has informed them that they will be expected to contribute some amount of money towards those improvements as well. That is another thing that is forthcoming from DelDOT; they don’t know that number yet. But they are actively working with DelDOT and with Ms. Bulkilvish on these issues; and they will continue to do so. They will not be able to get our access until they have full approval from DelDOT; so, it is a process that they are actively working through. Ms. Gudorp stated that they have Mr. Jarett and Mr. Dowell from MPV Properties present if there is anything else that they want to add. Mr. Hartman stated that in the Memo from the Planning Office from April 8, 2022, it is mentioned that the project can be considered for conditional Site Plan approval by the Planning Commission. Does a conditional Site Plan approval provide any further assurances than the fact that DelDOT approval is needed for the Final Plan Approval? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that using the term “conditional Site Plan approval,” that is typically the type of approval that is granted by this body. You grant approval to a Site Plan conditioned upon the Development Advisory Committee Comments and getting the various agency technical approvals. It is different from a Conditional Use. It is an approval that is granted upon conditions being met. Mrs. Maucher stated that the public hearing for this application was previously held at the Planning Commission meeting of February 22, 2022. 3 6

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. Mr. Hartman moved to approve S-22-01 Caliber Car Wash at 280 Cowgill Street acknowledging that the development plan cannot move forward with the Final Plan Approval until DelDOT has given its approval and to also approve the Waiver Request for the elimination of sidewalk on street frontages for an alternative based on the fact that there is multi-modal sidewalk that runs by the facility, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the motion was carried 5-2 by roll call vote with Dr. Jones and Mrs. Welsh absent. Mr. Hartman voting yes; based on the reasons stated in the motion and the fact that they just need to place their faith in DelDOT to do their job. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; keeping in mind that this is depending on DelDOT’s decision on approval of the traffic study. Mrs. Malone voting no; for her its the same concerns of when it was brought to the Commission previously and she apologizes to Staff because she does see where they are satisfied but that intersection area is extremely dangerous, and she is still concerned with cars being parked down the road waiting to get in the Car Wash. Mr. Cooper voting yes; for the reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Roach voting yes; for the reasons previously stated. He also has concerns but trusts Staff and would like to see the DelDOT Report on this application. Mrs. Denney voting no; she feels very strongly in agreeance with what Mrs. Malone just said with the same identical comments that were made at the last meeting. This is such a highly dangerous intersection and anybody who comes and goes from Wawa would realize that. It is not just the cars around them; it is also a lot of pedestrian traffic there and somebody swerves and somebody dies. She feels very strongly that there needs to be something different done before anything goes in there that is going to have traffic coming and going so closely or directly across from the entrance of that Wawa. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; she thinks that the applicant has worked diligently with DelDOT, and it sounds as if there will be some interim measures to somewhat improve the safety of the area until DelDOT comes through with its final plan. NEW APPLICATIONS SB-22-03 Lands of Bayroadcap, LLC at 600 Bay Road: Minor Subdivision Plan – Public Hearing and Review of a Minor Subdivision Plan for the two (2) existing Lots of the overall 12.9366 +/- acre Landing Square Commercial Development on Bay Road. The Plan proposes to subdivide the larger of the Lots (with direct frontage on Bay Road) into two (2) new Lots identified as Lots 2 and 3. The Plan also notes a Minor Lot Line Adjustment between Lot 1 and the proposed Lot 2. Lot 1 is proposed to be 4.8365+/- acres and is to the rear (west) of the overall site. Lot 2 is proposed to be 4.7580+/- acres fronting on Bay Road in the northern portion of the site. Lot 3 is proposed to be 3.3421+/- acres fronting Bay Road in the southeastern portion of the Site. The subject site is located on the west side of Bay Road near its intersection with Blue Hen Boulevard and the Bay Court Plaza entrance drive. The property is zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial Zone). The owners of record are Bayroadcap Phase 1, LLC and Bayroadcap, LLC. Property Address (both Lots): 600 Bay Road. Tax Parcel Numbers: ED-05-077.00-01-09.00-000, ED-05-077.00-01-09.01-000. Council District 2. This site was most recently subject to Minor Subdivision Plan SB-21-01 which subdivided the Lot into two (2) parcels as approved by the Planning Commission on March 15, 2021. Application S-19-20 Delaware State Police Building Update at Bay Road Commercial approved by the Planning Commission in September 2019 received Final Plan Approval on March 6, 2020, regarding the development of the Lot 1 (Phase 1) area superseding Application S-17-20. Application C-20-02 Landing Square: Revised Phase 2 Area approved by the Planning Commission in August 2020 received Final Plan Approval on February 25, 2021, for the 4 7

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. commercial development of the Lot 2 area. Representatives: Mr. Jonathan Street, Becker Morgan Group Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this is a Minor Subdivision Plan for a property at 600 Bay Road. The property has been before us multiple times over the years with various development applications. The most recent was a Minor Subdivision that divided the tract of land into two lots, being Lot 1 and then Lot 2 as the residual in the eastern portion of the property. Tonight, we are looking to ultimately come up with a plan that consists of three lots. The property is zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial Zone) so the lots are required to be in compliance with the provisions of the C-4 (Highway Commercial Zone). With this project, the Lot 1 area is the westernmost portion of the property shown at the bottom of the screen. That area was developed with the Phase I Plan for an existing office building as Plan S-19-20. The Delaware State Police and associated agencies occupy that space. Lot 2 with the new plan, would consist of kindof the northern portion of the property shown on the screen to the left. There is an office building that is currently under construction that was approved most recently under C-20-02 Revised Plan. The balance of Lot 3 would be the southern corner of the property. There are proposals for development in that Phase III area on Lot 3 that were previously approved for a restaurant and parking areas there. Lot 2 additionally has a restaurant site closer to Bay Road. This evening, this is all about what she calls the “invisible lines.” It basically creates lots that are in the case of Lot 1 at about 4.8 acres, Lot 2 at about 4.7 acres, and Lot 3 at about 3.13 acres. The Plan Review involves checking the placement of the property lines for compliance of the C-4 (Highway Commercial Zone) setbacks. They need a little bit more information that the applicant can provide to confirm that the setbacks are met for that Building that is currently proposed under construction. The Lot 1 Building appears to comply. Overall for this site being divided up into multiple lots, there certainly will need to be a series of easements; some of which already exist but will need to be augmented to reflect that all three lots are a party to them. Those include cross access, drainage and other utility easements that will be necessary to ensure that all three properties work together because in some cases they share entrances to get onto the site and stormwater management areas for example. Any development activities are going to be subject to the approved Site Plans or Conditional Use Site Plans that are in place for the project unless a Revised Plan comes forward in the future. Planning Staff notes that this does qualify for a Minor Subdivision Application process which means one trip to the Planning Commission and subject to public hearing tonight. They have noted a number of corrections to the Plan just to clarify some things. Likewise from the other agencies, their comments are very similar to ours in that there are some corrections that need to be made to ensure that appropriate easements are documented on the Plan for the collection of the three properties. There are no changes to their proposed entrance locations. This is really to divide the tract into three parcels. There are no special waivers to consider this evening. She will note that Lot 1 previously received a Waiver to allow for creation of a Lot with no frontage on a public street. It does have by easement, access to a public street by use of the Bay Court entrance drive and other cross access easements crossing what are the proposed Lot 2 and Lot 3 areas. Mr. Street stated that this one is like one of his children; it seems to follow him for the past couple years. Similar to what was previously subdivided into two lots; this is the same scenario. For those of you who were here previously, they are doing it for financial reasons so that the financing of the buildings currently under construction can be kind of closed out and converted to the long term 5 8

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. financing that they have for the project. They did the same thing for the State Police Building and we are back here now with the Government Services Building which is the building that is currently under construction. That third lot will be held. Like Mrs. Melson-Williams stated, there is a parcel kind of in the front of Bay Road that has a planned restaurant that has yet to materialize but that third parcel can then be free to go back to financing for construction as well. We don’t have any concern or problems with Staff’s Report. In fact, the previous easements that were recorded with the previous Subdivision frankly cover majority, if not all of the concerns or requests coming out of KCD or Staff. He thinks that they are going to have to modify the cross access easement that is currently shown on the plan but other than that, they don’t have any comments or concerns. Mrs. Maucher opened a public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public hearing. Mrs. Denney moved to approve SB-22-03 Lands of Bayroadcap, LLC at 600 Bay Road: Minor Subdivision Plan. In reviewing this, she thinks that it meets the criteria and works well with the Comprehensive Plan as well as just generally what needs to happen to develop this piece of property, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the motion was carried 7-0 by roll call vote with Dr. Jones and Mrs. Welsh absent. Mrs. Denney voting yes; based on her motion. She thinks that this fits nicely into the plan. Mr. Hartman voting yes; based on the proposal not impede the development of the site and the access easements seem to be addressed. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; for the aforementioned statements. Mrs. Malone voting yes; for reasons stated. Mr. Cooper voting yes; for all of the reasons stated during the motion. Mr. Roach voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; for reasons previously stated. S-21-11 McKee Road Apartments at 1385 McKee Road – Public Hearing and Review of a Site Development Application for the construction of sixteen (16) 10,000 SF garden style apartment buildings each containing twenty-four (24) units for a total of 384 apartment units. Also proposed are sixteen (16) garage buildings, a Club House with Pool, walking paths, picnic areas, a dog park, playing field, parking, and other site improvements. The property is zoned RG- 2 (General Residence Zone) and C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). This development application is only for the residential zoned portion of the property. The commercial portion will be developed under separate application. The property is located on the east side of McKee Road near the intersection of McKee Road and Scarborough Road. The owner of record is McKee Cap, LLC. Property Address: 1385 McKee Road. Tax Parcel: ED-05-067.00-02-57.00-000. Council District 4. Review of Active Recreation Area Plan with Consideration of Fee-in-lieu of Active Recreation Area Construction. Waiver Requests: Partial Elimination of Upright Curbing, Reduction of Required Parking, and the Elimination of Sidewalk along the Public Street Frontage. Representatives: Mr. Jonathan Street, Becker Morgan Group; Mr. Michael Rieman, Becker Morgan Group Mrs. Bulkilvish stated that this application originally came to the Commission in November 2021 and was pulled prior to the meeting for some concerns regarding the rear access which at the time, the applicant was asking for a waiver from. In the meantime, they have provided the 6 9

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. rear access for the apartment buildings and have updated the Parks & Recreation Plan. They are now proposing the same number of apartment units; 384 apartment units including sixteen (16) apartment buildings and sixteen (16) garages which will house five (5) cars each, a Clubhouse with a pool and separate parking area, a dog park, a 28,000 SF turf field, walking trails that amount to 20,275 SF of Active Recreation Area and seven (7) picnic areas each 1,900 SF which would contain approximately two (2) picnic tables. As Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned earlier in the meeting, this Parks & Recreation Plan had gone to the Parks & Recreation Committee earlier this month and they were agreeable to plan and the Cash-in-Lieu which was calculated to be $15,561. That is just for the deficit of Active Recreation Area that has not been provided. When a residential development is proposed, the recreation area equates to 275 SF per dwelling unit. They asked for the applicant to provide an appraisal of the land to equate the value of the Parks & Recreation Area needed and then that is how we calculate the deficit and then the Cash- in-Lieu amount. This could possibly change depending on the applicant’s application and if any changes were to be made through this process. So that Cash-in-Lieu amount is the minimum for what could be. They are also asking for several waivers. Again, they are providing rear access now so that is not one of the waivers. They are asking of a partial elimination of upright curbing. There are a lot of wetlands in the area and they are proposing some grassy areas, especially between the parking areas and the backs of the apartment buildings themselves to allow for some sheet flow. They are asking for a reduction in the parking requirement. They want to provide 768 spaces and by our calculations, they would have to provide 864 spaces. The last waiver is a partial elimination of sidewalk along frontage. They are providing sidewalk along the entrance drive to the property which will be in the commercial area in front of the property and she believes that they are agreeable to expanding with that some along the frontage. They will not be providing sidewalk along the entire frontage of McKee Road as a lot of it is ditch and they have to do a lot of building up of the land there to accommodate that. There is; however, an existing multi-use path on the opposite side of McKee Road that they are looking to provide pedestrian connection to. Mr. Street stated to orient those who weren’t here previously; the tract of land is on the east side of McKee Road, essentially right across the street from the Emerald Pointe subdivision on the south side. The north side would be the intersection of the Norfolk Southern Railroad and the overpass on Scarborough Road. With that entire tract of land, if you are traveling north on Scarborough Road, the property would be off to your right. As Ms. Bulkilvish discussed, this came back starting the spring of 2020 with the Annexation and the Rezoning of the tract of land. This has been surrounded by City property and it was a targeted piece of property that we annexed into the City in June 2020. It is a split-zoned parcel. The residential portion is RG-2 (General Residence Zone) with a commercial component to the land itself that is not part of this application as of right now. Back in November 2020, a Traffic Impact Study was completed and approved with DelDOT which then they were going to come in for Planning Commission approval. They then held a community meeting in September 2021 just to kind of update the community and to hear some of their concerns and to discuss the plan itself. The Plan also went before PLUS Review in September 2021. It was slated to come to Planning Commission in October 2021 but the Fire Marshal had some concerns about rear access. To really bring the Plan together, they decided to pull it and put it on hold while they worked through the issues with the Fire Marshal. Like Ms. Bulkilvish said, last week they went before the Parks and Recreation Committee. The presented their plan and got a favorable recommendation from them as well and 7 10

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. now we are here for conditional plan approval. The Plan on the screen shows that there are sixteen apartment buildings and the interconnection of the parking and the access and the Clubhouse located in the front along McKee Road. This is the same Plan that was presented in June with just some minor tweaks here and there. The next plan shows some of the intersection improvements. The results of the TIS from DelDOT call for the signalization of this intersection, the design of the designated left turns into both our community and Emerald Pointe across the street, designated right hand turns into the apartment complex as well as a bike lane and a shoulder improvements on the east side of the road itself. It should be noted that with the approval of the TIS, that the developer is required to enter into signal agreements and provide a financial contributions to at least two other intersections. The first one is going to be the intersection just south of us which is McKee Road and College Road. There is an active project there or there will be an active project there where they are going to be contributing money for an additional right hand turn at that intersection. There will be some intersection improvements there as well as all the way down closer into town at the intersection of Forrest Street and McKee Road. He believes that DelDOT has a project going on at that intersection and they will be making some contributions to that project as well. The next couple of slides are going to be examples of some of the architecture. These are current projects that the developer has under construction right now in Middletown. They will be similar colors and similar architecture. They have some stone with some vertical board and batten style siding with some metal roofs on portions of it along with some asphalt shingles. The next slide shows a building that is slightly larger than the previous building, but the same style of architecture: stone siding, board and batten siding, and standing seam roofs. These are examples of the interiors with high-end finishes in the sitting rooms and kitchens. This builder prides itself in retention of the leasees. They would rather have a leasee stay then turn this over; so, they like to provide nice high-end finishes for them to keep them. The next slide shows an example of the garages. There is a garage for each building with five parking spaces. Again, the architecture of the garages is meant to compliment the buildings themselves and this is the same style architecture that they are building in Middletown, DE. The next slide shows the Clubhouse at the Reserve of Weston in Middletown, DE. The Staff Report mentioned that they did not provide architecturals for the Clubhouse itself. This is essentially the Clubhouse that they will be building with a standing seam type roof mixed with some asphalt shingles, board and batten style siding and a normal horizontal style siding to break up that building so that it is not just one monolific side. Some of the amenities in the Clubhouse will be a leasing office, fitness center, multimedia rooms, lounge areas, coffee bar, fireside lounge, pool table and a library. The next slide is an example of the rear of the building, the part with the pool deck that they will be providing. The next slide shows the opposite view of the deck with some lounge chairs, picnic tables and umbrellas. The next slide shows some examples of the interior and the amenities of that Clubhouse has with couches and chairs for people to gather. The next slide is the Staff Report and they don’t have any real concerns with the Staff Report itself but he will take one exception to that. The Staff Report does mention the Parks & Rec Report. Parks & Rec Committee gave us a favorable recommendation and in that meeting, they 8 11

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. were talking about suggestions that Staff had made in that Report. He knows that Staff sometimes puts things in reports that allow flexibility within that report and he just wants to confirm that they had talked about three specific things: a shade structure for the playing fields, playground equipment and exercise equipment along the multi-modal paths that are throughout the site itself. They had discussed with the Parks & Recreation Committee that the clientele or the leasees that the developers is marketing towards is a young and professional age group. They are not marketing towards a family structure and for them to provide a playground wouldn’t be feasible. An official and a large proportion of the leasees would need to be family oriented which they are not marketing that. They are about 90% in agreement with the Report and they are going to be providing mostly everything that they have mentioned in the Report. For the shade structure, again, and as long as these are recommendations and not requirements of the plan. They really intend on providing more shade for that large turf field in the upper northern quadrant of the site. It is a large empty field for them to do what they need to do. They really want to hit that more with trees and more natural shading. The last one was the exercise equipment along the path. Those just become more maintenance and a liability issue for the owner and the grounds. Again, as long as these are just suggestions and not necessarily requirements of the plan, then they are okay with working with Staff. Lastly, the application in front of you is for 384 market rate apartments and it is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. They have garages at each building. One of the things that Staff did mention was the electric vehicle charging stations and he is happy to report that they will be providing at minimum, a pair of charging stations for a pair of buildings or a charging station per building with the ability to expand if needed. Bicycle and multi-modal connections and paths throughout the development will be provided as well as entrance signal and pedestrian improvements across the front. He would be remiss to not mention the waivers that we have requested. Ms. Bulkilvish talked about partial elimination of upright curbing that is more for stormwater management. The parking reduction is mentioned in the Report as more of an overall parking number. This is really parking per building. He thinks that Code requires 54 spaces per building and they are requesting a reduction to 45 spaces per building which gets us to that overall number. Industry standard is about two spaces per unit and the City’s Code requires 2.25 spaces per unit. So that is the reason for the reduction itself. The last waiver request is for the elimination of the frontage sidewalk or more to a partial elimination of the frontage sidewalk. This is an Investment Level 1 in State Strategies in the area for DelDOT. He can’t think of an instance where he has been part of a project where they will waive a sidewalk across a frontage. In the DAC Meetings and his communications with Staff previously, they have talked about providing multi-modal frontage sidewalk from essentially our entrance to what they believe is the most logical connection which is a traffic light at the intersection of McKee Road. They believe that DelDOT will still require that anyway. What they are requesting is partial elimination of that sidewalk frontage with the extension from that light to the bridge. There are no pedestrian facilities across that bridge on that side of the road and to do a mid-block crossing in that area would be more of a safety concern. They are still asking for partial elimination of that sidewalk but it’s really from that traffic light to the bridge. Mr. Hartman stated that after his initial review of the packet, he was pretty much against the waivers for parking, sidewalk and the recreation area. He has many concerns and this may take more than five minutes to get through this. He does want to start off with a concern not related to 9 12

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. the waivers. It is mentioned in the Fire Marshal’s review that there was an agreement and for public record, could you talk about the agreement for rear access? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Street stated that with the City’s Ordinance regarding rear access for multi-story buildings, there are two sides to every story. We say it’s a little unclear as to its complete definition of the percentage of coverage. The Fire Marshal was basically invoking 100% coverage which they wanted either a fire lane or a paved road to run along the backs of the buildings or the Code allows for an 8-inch section of stone covered with soil. It is demarked by signs and landscaping and such. We went back and forth talking to the Fire Marshal about what they would like to do and what the Fire Marshal will agree to. Essentially the Code is kind of ambiguous as to how much coverage is actually required. They are going to 50% of the building; essentially, the whole half of the rear of the building will be covered by an 18 foot wide secondary type what he calls a “fire lane” but it is a turf trail. It will be an 8 inch section of stone which can support fire apparatus covered with 4 inches of top soil. That access will be provided and that was the follow- up discussions that they were having. Mr. Hartman stated that he would like to start with the fee in lieu for the Active Recreation Area. The determination in the Zoning Ordinance, Article 5Section 10.17 determines for suitability of a cash donation if the Commission determines that the construction of the recreation is not practical due to close proximity to existing available recreation facilities or are infeasible due to natural characteristics of the land that will not benefit the residents of the development, then a cash-in-lieu is considered. He couldn’t find anywhere where those concerns were addressed in your application. Is there a proximity to an existing recreation facility or is it infeasible due to the natural characteristics of the land? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Street stated that he lives about a mile from this site and travels Scarborough Road and McKee Road two or three times a day. There is a multi-modal trail on McKee Road and then Scarborough Road on the west side and that carries up into Del-Tech. They have a large track around Del-Tech and that is frequently used. So, that is proximity to some existing features. When you talk about impingement on the land and the land is not available. This is a huge site of 70 some acres and if you look at the plan that is up right now, that shaded area is all wetlands. So this site is encumbered by wetlands and trees. What they have tried to do with this development is really not impact that at all or as little as we possibly can. They have provided about as much as we can in the open space areas that are available to us so that we are not further impacting buffers or trees. We are leaving a large band of trees right in the center of everything. Again, it is more of a visual buffer than anything else and the areas that you don’t see is that they have to provide stormwater for this whole facility. So instead of providing a large stormwater pond which you see all the time, they are trying to go the route of breaking it up into smaller pieces with less impact. They will have more outfalls to minimize the impact to the wetland areas which are essentially draining across those railroad tracks. The fee-in-lieu just seemed to make sense because we are going to start impacting on natural wetlands, the trees and the like; so, they just decided to apply for the fee-in-lieu. Mr. Hartman stated that eliminating two or three buildings themselves would allow you to provide active recreation space. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Street stated to counter that, one of the biggest concerns of this area from the neighbors has been traffic and the signal. Again, they went through a TIS back in November and it has been approved through DelDOT. The signalization of this intersection actually can’t happen until the full buildout of all of the apartments are done. The site wouldn’t generate enough traffic to then warrant a signal and that 10 13

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. is controlled by DelDOT. So sure, we can take out half of this and provide all of the active recreation area but then we would be left with an intersection and an entrance. They are frankly forbidden to provide an entrance along any other piece of this property but across from Emerald Pointe. It would then negate the warrants for the signal itself. So then you are combating with providing 100% of the active recreation area but then he thinks that they are addressing bigger concerns which is traffic and the signalization of that intersection. Mr. Hartman stated that that makes some sense to him. Also in the Report, there is mention of like three levels of recreational land that is provided. He sees that the biggest level was mentioned by the Planner this evening and the other levels are like in your letter; are those now off the board? It states that you are providing roughly 41,400 SF of recreation. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Street stated that is combined with the walking trail square footage, the turf field square footage, and the seven picnic areas. We are still providing all of that and he doesn’t know the square footage of it all. Mr. Hartman stated that he thinks that it could have been a little clearer. It says it leaves a balance of 64,200 SF. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Street stated that he thinks that number is incorrect because they are not 64,200 SF shy. Ms. Bulkilvish asked Mr. Hartman which Report he was looking at. Responding to Ms. Bulkilvish, Mr. Hartman stated that on the drawing provided to the Commission, Sheet C-001 and it was a completely different number at the bottom. When he was reviewing this package, he didn’t know which number to accept. Mr. Street stated that is something that Staff Report is alluding to as well. As this Plan gets further developed, if those areas change slightly, that number may change slightly as well. They could actually increase the amount of sidewalks and that number would then further reduce. Mr. Hartman stated that it might be clearer for future applications for cash-in-lieu of recreational area if you actually address what is required, what’s required in the Ordinance, and when it comes to why it’s needed rather than actually providing recreational area. Otherwise, builders are going to continue to fill the sites with as many apartment buildings as possible and just think that the Commission is going to approve that. He wants to draw their attention to the last thing in the Ordinance which mentions that it will not benefit the residents of the development. He thinks that the Commission is appointed through our Districts and are here to speak for the people who aren’t here. He thinks that it is up to us to make a decision without anybody else speaking about it; is this going to benefit the residents or not? That was his main concern with these reductions in the recreation space. He does urge them in future applications to provide your reasonings based on the Ordinance. As long as he is here, he will be questioning those reasons. Mr. Hartman stated that parking is being reduced by nearly 100 spaces. Each building has 48 parking spaces. You mentioned 45 by he read 48 and that includes the five garages. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Street stated yes. Mr. Hartman questioned if the parking spaces will be marked for each apartment. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Street stated that he does not believe that is part of the plan at this point. He 11 14

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. doesn’t think that they do that. All of the parking spaces that we provide and there is a great amount of detail that goes into providing parking for these buildings; so, they aren’t necessarily marked for each building. They like to hold the parking as close to the buildings as they can and they try and keep those designated parking spaces for each building directly in front of the building. Mr. Riemann stated that he wanted to add a little bit onto the parking discussion. This particular developer operates thousands of apartment units and has for multiple generations. Parking is a critical element to that and to the design process. Their goal is to maintain tenants. It is in their best interest to make sure that the units are full, to make sure that they don’t turn over, and to make sure that they have tenants that stay there. That is ultimately their goal. Having parking that is easy to get in that is close to your unit that you can get to quickly is the design objective. We actually spend a great deal of time through that process ensuring that they meet those requirements. What they tend to see with all of these projects is about 1.75 to 1.9 parking spaces per unit is sufficient to meet those design objectives. We are at about 2 spaces per unit and the Code is 2.25 spaces per unit. The Code is a little more than what we see as necessary. We could add the additional 100 spots but that is just less active recreation space that they can provide. That means more stormwater management and more runoff, etc. It is not their objective to necessarily cut parking out to save costs because they want to make sure it functions for the longevity of the project. This particular developer keeps these facilities and owns them and they manage them. So, it is in our best interest to make sure that the parking is adequate and what we have designed is just that. Mr. Hartman stated that he did read a lot of that in both the DAC Report and the application. He is still trying to understand it from a tenant’s point of view. Twenty-four apartments, forty-eight parking spaces and five of them in the garage. How will these garages get allotted? Is that something that you pay extra for? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Riemann stated typically yes. Mr. Hartman stated that if somebody buys a garage space and has two cars, they can put one car in the garage and have the other car parked. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Riemann stated that could be but you have to keep in mind that the apartments are a mixture of 1 bedroom, 2 bedrooms, and 3 bedrooms. So a lot of 1 bedroom apartments will have one person in the apartment. It is an average so you are looking across the entire 24 unit building assuming all 24 units have two cars. Like he said, over the thousands of apartments that we have studied, 1.75 to 1.9 is sufficient and we are at about 2. Mr. Hartman stated that mentioned in the Staff Report, there could be a condition placed that would require open space maintained for the missing 96 spots in the event that parking is inadequate. Is that something that Planning Staff thinks should be considered? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the Zoning Ordinance does allow for the Planning Commission to require that kind of place holder space where parking could be constructed for a portion or the amount being reduced. In this case, Planning Staff did not make that as a recommendation in our review of that waiver request feeling that they are providing a significant amount of parking on site but this is also a site that is served in other fashions with public transit in the area. So that likely could reduce some of the parking needs in this day and age. 12 15

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. Mr. Hartman stated that his final concern for the waivers is the sidewalk. The Planning Office had recommended a multi-modal sidewalk on the east side of McKee Road and the commercial buildings. What is your reply to that? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Street stated that is what he was trying to describe. Across from the Clubhouse itself and then up to the intersection itself, that is what they are proposing. The sidewalk which is what Staff was asking them to provide on the frontage from our entrance up through the pool deck and amenity space and then it would have to dive down into the road itself. They were saying that DelDOT was more than likely going to require us to build it all the way to the intersection so we are fine with that. Mrs. Denney stated that her issue is with the parking as well. She feels very strongly that unless these are all one-bedroom apartments where no guests are allowed, you don’t have enough parking. The other two issues that she doesn’t love but she can live with them She typically believes that our Code is exactly that; it is the Code. It is the law and it is not a book of suggestions. When it comes to certain areas, she can be reasonable as long as we are not setting precedence that someone can come and say well you let this person have it. She is always very afraid of doing something that would set precedence but parking issues are parking issues. Setting aside land in case tends to be a good idea except who manages that. It’s not like there is a homeowners association that is going to come to you and say parking is horrible. So, she really thinks that these things need to begin with absolute adequate parking, not just for the residents but for the guests as well. And while we would hope that more people were going to buy that can walk and take public transportation. We are leaning towards that a little but on the same token, people still drive and that is a huge concern for her. The other two things, she can live with but she doesn’t love them. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr. Riemann stated that we are actually seeing a lot of jurisdictions reduce the requirement. He doesn’t know why the City’s is 2.25 or what the history was to get to that number. New Castle County just reduced their requirement from 2.25 to 2. So, 2 is a common requirement in other jurisdictions and he thinks that is the function of what you are seeing in the industry over time as projects evolve. They do think that the parking is adequate and they need it to be adequate. They need this to be a place where people can come home and park in their parking space and go enjoy dinner. It doesn’t do us or our client any good if that is not the case. We do think it is adequate and that is based on dozens and dozens of projects that meet this exact same requirement. They do not have those issues there. Mrs. Denney asked how many of those projects are in Dover, DE? Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr. Riemann stated from this particular client, he doesn’t think any but there is one in Camden and Middletown, up north and downstate. Mrs. Denney stated that one of the issues for her tends to be that Dover is different than New Castle County and it’s extremely different than Sussex County. Many years ago she wrote something for Delaware Today Magazine and she sometimes feel like Dover was the moat between the palaces and the playground and we were treated as such in many ways. Again, she really feels as though for Dover, DE, if they changed the rules and regulations in two other counties so be it, wonderful for them. She has been doing this for a long time, from town management to different boards such as this and that. In her opinion, and it’s not just a thought in her head as she has a lot of experience, she feels as this is absolutely not adequate. She realizes 13 16

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. also that 96 parking spots takes up a lot of room. She is not necessarily suggesting that it be all 96 but honestly she just doesn’t feel that it is adequate. The average apartment, if you have two bedrooms at least one of those should be two; so to her, there should be three. But you have to come up with a mean and not make them all three. Again, you have guests. The garages are nice but sometimes you come home and you don’t want to walk across. You just pull up and you have two other spaces taken. Again, she just feels that there is not adequate parking. Mr. Cooper stated that of the 24 units in each building, how many of those are going to be one bedroom, two bedrooms, or three bedrooms? Responding to Mr. Cooper, Mr. Street stated that he believes that the singles are 30%, doubles are 60% and triples are 10% typically. Mr. Cooper stated that he tends to understand the parking concern. He doesn’t necessarily have it when you talk about 2.25 spaces to 2 spaces because that doesn’t seem like a huge drop, but when you add all of the quarter spaces up, it’s 96 spaces. He also knows that the cooperate world is looking at the number of desks in their buildings and the number of people that are working there so he is trying to use the same logic. If you have 100 employees, you don’t need 100 desks because the number of people who are taking vacation or calling out sick or whatever the case may be, you can get by with a building that only has 75 desks. So he is kind of trying to run the same logic between the parking spaces and the desks at the corporate building just to draw a correlation. He does get it from the developers standpoint, if you don’t have enough parking spaces, you are not going to keep your tenants and you are not going to get more. There is a part of him that is hung up on that. It makes logical sense that if two spaces works everywhere else why wouldn’t two spaces work here. He kind of gets stuck on that but at the same time, he doesn’t know that Dover has the public transportation that New Castle has or Sussex has. He certainly doesn’t see the same number of people riding the bus in Dover that he does in New Castle County. He feels like they are more likely to have two cars per apartment here than you are in other places but he is also not married to that fact. It is just the fact that he is hung up on it. He is not sure if there is a compromise between the 2.0 to maybe a 2.1 and that would bring us up to a larger number of spaces which might help with some of the concerns but it also doesn’t get too crazy on your side for the economic standpoint because he totally understands that as well. Responding to Mr. Cooper, Mr. Riemann stated that he thinks that is doable. They can look at some areas along that main road coming in, not up by the entrance but as you get further in to the site for maybe some possible street parking. He thinks that they would be open to the option of holding some areas as well. Mrs. Denney stated that she just wants to say again, she feels like it doesn’t have to be all 96 but if you could meet us somewhere in between; she thinks that is helpful. Mrs. Maucher stated that the Clubhouse has additional parking. Is that in addition to the current two spaces per apartment? Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Street stated that the Clubhouse parking is separate based on the amenity spaces. Mrs. Maucher stated that it could count as some of the parking needed. One would think that if I lived there I would walk to the Clubhouse, I would not drive there. Mrs. Denney stated that she thinks that is reasonable if you have extra parking at the Clubhouse. 14 17

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. Let’s say that somebody is having entertainment or something, guests can park there and walk. That is better yet. Mrs. Maucher opened a public hearing. Mr. William Garfinkel – 9 Freedom Drive Dover, DE 19904 Mr. Garfinkel stated that he saw on the graphic that these are three story apartments. But it is also Overlay Zone 1. He thought that zone only allowed two story buildings. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the property is not fully encumbered by the Corridor Overlay Zone. There is only a portion of the frontage that is and that is basically the L entrance drive and then it ends kind of just past the Clubhouse. So the Clubhouse is subject to the height limitations of the Corridor Overlay Zone, the balance of the property is not. Mr. Garfinkel stated that the other observation is that if the builders are going to be required to enhance that road, his suggestion is to have them put in stadium lights to light up that intersection. McKee Road is incredibly dark and if you don’t light up that intersection with all of the traffic that is going to come, you are going to have collisions and somebody is going to get hurt. You have to be able to see to navigate that and if they are going to build it anyway, why not just put a couple stadium lights up there. Mr. David Casto – 8 Gregory Court Dover, DE 19904 Mr. Casto stated that his main concern is and you have heard it time and time again is the traffic. Traffic during peak hours in the morning and the afternoon is really bad. He goes through it all the time and it takes like three cycles of lights for him to get from The Hamlet to College Road and it’s like that every day. With the addition of 1,000 more apartments and cars and everything else that goes into that plus that commercial building as well, is just going to contribute more to the problem. He has called DelDOT and asked them to look at the timing of the light because the traffic is on Scarborough Road, not so much on College Road but the light is not in sync to relieve all of that congestion that backs up to The Hamlet. He hasn’t gotten any response from DelDOT at all as far as that is concerned. He would hope that something is relieved as far as that intersection now because it is bad and it is going to get worse. It has gotten worse over all of the years that he has lived here. He would like to see some improvement by DelDOT at that intersection and to the lighting before the construction starts because you are not going to have another light until all of the construction is done. Emerald Pointe is not that far from College Road and you see the line of traffic from The Hamlet to College Road. You are going to have it stopped again at Emerald Pointe and it is going to be backed up. You are going to have people like you see in a lot of places, blocking the intersection trying to get through. It really is a mess if you have ever traveled that way and he would just like the Commission to look into that. Mr. Derek Headley – 3 Gemstone Boulevard Dover DE, 19904 Mr. Headley stated that he is probably the one single person who is going to be impacted the most because he lives right on the corner of Gemstone Boulevard. We have been speaking with these gentlemen as they mentioned, from 2020 and he doesn’t believe that their concerns have been totally addressed or heard. As the two gentlemen mentioned, the traffic is horrendous. Between 8:30AM-9:00AM you can’t even get out of the development. From 3:00PM-4:30PM coming from Rite Aid all the way down to Emerald Pointe to try to make that left hand turn into 15 18

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. the development, you can be waiting there multiple times. There have been multiple accidents at that corner from people being so impatient trying to turn into that development. This gentleman here mentioned that he lives maybe 5-10 minutes away and he passes this development all of the time. If that is true, he doesn’t see how he can say with a straight face that those extra potential people moving into that area will not have a negative impact not only on the community and especially his community, Emerald Pointe. How are we going to allow this to continue? We have 110 homes in Emerald Pointe with the average person paying $5,000-$6,000 in property taxes. There is going to be 384 apartment units built across the street from us. What is the impact that that is going to have on our property values? What is the source of revenue that the City of Dover is going to be getting from those 384 apartment units? What is the benefit that it is going to bring to our community? Has this discussion been made already because we are already talking about parking and how many parking spaces should be allotted? So is this a done deal and we are supposed to just be here to give a statement? Have minds already been made up or is this a serious discussion and conversation on what the community is feeling? He would ask that the Commission please take these things seriously and understand the impact that it is going to have on the Emerald Pointe community as well as Dover as a whole. Mr. Mark Reaves – 10 Tanzanite Court Dover, DE 19904 Mr. Reaves stated that he is the Emerald Pointe HOA President and he would like to speak for a few of our homeowners and also the community. When this plan was put together, we had a comprehensive conversation with the developers and builders of this project. Coming to this meeting tonight, it is clear to him that we don’t have that communication. We don’t have the information that we should have in order to make some decisions or comments on what is going on. He didn’t know anything, personally, about the Fire Marshal issue and he didn’t know anything about the Parks & Recreation issue. We are completely uninformed. We have a management company and we explained through our management company for our attorney’s office to be included in everything that is going on in the process of this development and build. So, he is not really sure why they are not being included but in order for this process to move forward, he would strongly recommend that the Planning Commission and the City enforce communication to our community so that we can have something to say in regards to that. With over 100 houses, this is definitely going to impact all of our homeowners. One thing that is extremely concerning, the Code is the Code and there is a reason for the Code. If parking is going to impact people that can’t even be present for this hearing at this time. He completely agrees with the City enforcing that requirement for parking because it is completely necessary. And to have an alternative to substitute the parking for holding some space or making adjustments is going to set a precedence for a number of builders just would potentially just roll past those requirements. He thinks that the City should stand firm on the parking requirements. There was mention of the traffic light being placed into effect after the development. That would significantly deteriorate the traffic in our area. The traffic light should be the primary focus before you start building. If anyone is familiar with the intersection where we have had three fatalities happen just by us, having a lane to turn into our development from College Road. There is a go-around lane that a lot of times people who that may not live in that area aren’t even aware of that lane. So each time that he pulls up to turn in, he has to look in his rearview mirror for a substantial amount of time just for the fact that someone may be driving behind me and not see the other cars that have went around. It could potentially hit the back of his car at speeds of 50- 60 MPH. Who knows what would happen if he gets pushed into the traffic or pushed straight 16 19

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. ahead or whatever it is; it is extremely dangerous. If you don’t have that traffic light prior to starting construction, that is going to significantly deteriorate that intersection because there is no other opportunity for anyone headed north on that road to move around that traffic. The traffic light has to be first priority. As far as the recreational space, he understands that they may accept a fee-in-lieu and he is really not even sure what that is. His experience with Blenheim Homes that built our neighborhood, either the Parks & Recreation rules are new or they must have paid to circumvent that particular aspect of the Parks & Recreation requirement because the numbers that he hears tonight in this conversation do not match how many units we have or how much active recreation space that we have. It is great that they speak to providing some parks and recreation space to their development; however, when you mention a fee-in-lieu, it seems to betray that they can possibly just pay a fee and then eliminate the parks & rec space which could have a negative impact on the community or whatever they are proposing to build. Everything sounds nice, a dog park, walks and trails and shade but then it really comes out you are going to be out there walking around but you are not really going to have shade to stop and do your exercise if it is summertime. It is just very confusing because the paperwork says one thing and then one day there could be something else that is different. Which are they really considering? Is it the true documentation or is it something that was mistakenly added or taken away? It just goes back to them trying to understand what is really being presented to the Planning Commission. His suggestion is to have some type of consideration to the true presentation of what is planned to be proposed here and have that communicated to the individuals that are going to be sincerely impacted by this build. He is not in opposition to the build; however, he thinks that there needs to be some clear communication so that the Board can make a clear decision on what is truly being presented and how that is going to affect the community. One primary thing that he could definitely say to the Planning Board, if you have influence over it, is to require that that intersection is managed prior to the beginning of any type of development for that particular area. Because he doesn’t want to present himself as the President of the HOA and have to communicate to his fellow homeowners that someone has involved in a tragic accident or their kids have been involved in a tragic accident because there was a decision made by a Board to forego a traffic regulating device until after the completion which could theoretically take a year or more to get that done. Mr. Chris Moore – 219 Meadow Drive Dover, DE 19904 Mr. Moore typed in the chat “I have nothing more to add at this point, thank you.” Mrs. Maucher closed the public hearing. Mr. Hartman stated that he would ask the applicant if they could address the concerns of the HOA President for Emerald Pointe concerning communications with the neighbors. Mr. Riemann stated that there were a couple of questions that were asked as well about lighting, and he will be happy to answer those as well as it relates to the communication. He is a little disappointed to hear that frankly. They have been at this project since June 2020. They have presented that this would be an apartment project back then when it was annexed and zoned and he thinks that they even showed plans that showed the number of units. They have been very clear about that this whole time and the plan hasn’t really changed. They then held a community meeting separate from this process and not required by this process so that we could engage 17 20

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. feedback. The biggest concern that we got from Emerald Pointe was traffic. They can’t get out of their development, and we can’t turn left in and can’t turn left out. The solution is a signal; and whether our project happens or not, a signal there is the solution for them to be able to turn left in and turn left out of their development. This project allows that to happen and it won’t happen without this project or some development on this property is what is going to drive that signal. Mr. Street talked about the timing of that signal. What he was referring to was the fact that we can’t put the signal in in the beginning; in the first day. Signals go in when DelDOT determines that they are warranted. They have very strict requirements for when signals are warranted and they have to meet those warrants. Typically, the project will start construction and then once DelDOT feels that the signal is warranted, then they will require the installation. They have to sign an agreement with DelDOT that bines us to do it when they tell us to do it. They have total control over that. We don’t have a problem putting it in on day one, but they just don’t have the control. They have to let them tell us when that happens and that is up to them. They are happy to do it whenever DelDOT says to do it. They have agreed to do that. That signal is going to help the people of Emerald Pointe get in and out of their development. It’s going to provide a stop and it’s going to provide safe turning in and out. Lighting will be provided. They have designed many signals for DelDOT over the years and there is lighting provided at intersections so it will be lit and it won’t be an issue at all. They do feel that they have engaged the community. He does think that they spoke at the annexation and that they participated in the community meeting and again here tonight. He thinks that there has been a lot of communication. The number one concern that they have gotten is being able to get in and out of Emerald Pointe which is a fair concern. They think that their project is going to help with that because it is going to cause the installation of a signal which DelDOT has already agreed to. The other intersection that was brought up was at McKee and College and there are improvements planned there. They are part of another project that is already happening. There are improvements planned there and there are turn lanes. This project is contributing financially to these improvements. There are improvements happening at Route 8 and Saulsbury Road with this project contributing to those improvements. So, there are lots of improvements happening along this corridor. As tends to happen, DelDOT plans these projects out and other projects come along and have to contribute to those projects financially and help support these projects. This project is certainly contributing and paying its fair share in helping to mitigate the traffic concerns in the area. Mr. Hartman stated that in DelDOT’s Report it says the developer should schedule a pre- submittal meeting to discuss the development with DelDOT Subdivisions. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Riemann stated that was very normal. They way the process works with DelDOT in any land development application, the first step is the Traffic Impact Study. You have what is called a Scoping Meeting, DelDOT tells you what the scope of the Traffic Study is. We do the study which is an 8 month process, which is what they have been going through already for some time and it is now wrapped up. Once that piece is done and the next piece for the actual design of the physical entrance is what they call a Pre-Submittal Meeting. That is where you get into the details of the geometry of the entrance and that is because you are getting ready to file a construction plan for the entrance itself. That is a very normal comment that he is guessing Mrs. Melson-Williams has probably seen on every single DAC Report that she has ever read. Mr. Hartman asked if that is an opportunity for them to go before DelDOT and implore them to install a light prior to construction commencement. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Riemann 18 21

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. stated not really at that meeting because the people that are reviewing that really aren’t the decision makers for that particular conversation; it is based on DelDOT’s traffic section. They can certainly make that request and he is happy to do it formally if the Commission requires that to be a condition. They would do that and say that they would like to do that. They just can’t agree to do it because they have zero say over it. They went through this when they did the hospital in Milford, DE. The hospital wanted it in the very beginning, and it was a challenge and it wasn’t until the hospital was constructed that the signal went it. They are happy to try but DelDOT is in charge. Mr. Hartman asked if he heard the HOA President of Emerald Pointe say that they have been fatalities at that intersection. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Riemann stated that he does not know that he was aware of it. He is sure that DelDOT is aware of that. When the Traffic Studies are being completed, he is sure that with DelDOT’s recommendation to install a signal there, that probably played into DelDOT’s decision making for adding the signal which will certainly make that movement there safer. Mr. Hartman asked if the HOA President of Emerald Pointe will have an opportunity to address DelDOT about his concerns. Is there a public meeting requirement that he could attend? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Riemann stated no, there is not a public meeting but his experience with DelDOT is that anytime somebody from the public gives them a call, they talk to them. He has definitely had situations where he has gotten feedback as the designer and engineer in charge of a project that has gotten feedback from constituents and citizens. He has not heard DelDOT turn them down but there is no public meeting like this; so, he will have to give them a call. Mrs. Denney moved to approve re-opening the public hearing to allow the public to speak again, seconded by Mr. Cooper and the motion was carried 7-0 by voice vote. Mr. Mark Reaves – 10 Tanzanite Court Dover, DE 19904 Mr. Reaves stated that yes, they did have a conversation with the builder or developers’ representative, and they did explain some things to us. What he is looking for is something a little bit more substantial. As you know, homeowner associations are purely volunteer and with COVID, they have been very restricted. So to have an opportunity to have the paperwork that they submitted to this Board so that they can review and do their own review in order to have comprehensive questions or have some comprehensive comments. Yes, you have included us in a Zoom call and we have talked about things but these are significant actions: this Fire Department Report, the Parks & Recreation Report, the parking issue, the traffic light and the dealings with DelDOT, and the Traffic Impact Study. All of those are significant things that they are asking just to be included in. If you send us a link, they can review it, they can read it, they can understand and digest it amongst their homeowners and just have some significant questions. He is coming here tonight and listening and finding out things that they had no knowledge of. We have a management company that is fully staffed and they have an attorney that is working with them and has had some communication with him. They are just asking to be fully included in the documentation that they present to the Commission so that they may be able to also untangle some of the confusion that surrounds these particular documents and have some communication amongst our Board members. They don’t have that. They asked for that in the 19 22

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. beginning when they first started this process two years ago and they continue to ask for that. They want what gets submitted to the Commission as a representation of what they are actually going to do. In good faith, if their desire is to truly serve the community and also get your project done, then make a recommendation to DelDOT to have this signal expedited or put in place first because he guarantees the minute that a construction vehicle starts down that road and tries to turn in, someone is going to run into the back of a person trying to turn into the development. It is just an unnecessary tragedy and if you just request it, that could go a long way to at least having the community feel like you guys actually really care. Ask the City to back you up and those voices would probably go a long way to get that done ahead of time rather than to just sit back and say they don’t do that. They are just asking for the opportunity to have the things that are going to benefit the community and your project. He wanted to make a follow-up comment because he doesn’t want it to seem as if they are trying to subvert the project. They just want to be considered and have the true information that the Commission receives because they are in the dark with a lot of information and that is not fair to them. Mr. Hartman stated that as far as the submittals to the Planning Commission, he will ask the Planning Office to provide that to you but everything that the City has is online. That includes the DAC Report, the applicant’s submittal, their drawings and their justification for parking. It is on the City of Dover website and it is called a “Packet” and it would be under the April 18, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting. Mr. Reaves stated that there were some suggestions that were made to say that they may adjust particular things. He just wants to know from this Commission, is there a timeframe that you are requiring that the proposals that the said they would maybe add to their plan would be added or updated to that plan. Responding to Mr. Reaves, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that she wanted to address two concerns. First the concern about communication, the Zoning Ordinance requires for a Site Development Plan such as this that there is public notice of tonight’s hearing. That public notice happens in three ways: the bright yellow sign that is posted on the property that includes information on the project name and how to reach out to the Planning Office. There is also a legal ad that has to be published in a local newspaper, again, including information about this meeting tonight and how to contact the Planning Office. The third is a mailing that goes to property owners within 200 feet of the subject property. So that likely picked up some of the direct residents of the Emerald Pointe subdivision and she is thinking that maybe some of the buffer area that is out front that is owned by the HOA through your management company. Again, that is a notice that there has been an application filed and there is a hearing tonight. Ms. Bulkilvish has brought up (on the screen) the City’s website which is www.cityofdover.com . From that main page, there is a link that says Meetings & Agendas and that takes you to all the meeting agendas and their associated packets for the various Boards and Commissions and City Council. You can find the meeting agenda as well as what Mr. Hartman referred to as the Packet. The Paperless Packet is published basically ten days prior to the Planning Commission Meeting and posted on online for viewing. It includes the DAC Reports and the initial agency comments. That same packet goes to the Planning Commission members ahead of the meeting. We do try to include at least a couple of the plan sheets in the Paperless Packet realizing that most projects have a significant number of plan pages and it would just bog down anybody trying to download the entire thing. In any case, all of this information can be viewed by the public by contacting the Planning Office. We can accommodate in person visits to our office or work with an individual 20 23

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. in other ways if they truly need to see the application that was filed or review the plans. So we are trying to make things available electronically. It is not in our Code to specifically contact specific interest groups with individual applications. The notice elements that she talked about (the mailing, the ad and the physical posting of the sign) are required to be completed a minimum of fifteen days prior to the Planning Commission meeting. That is established for all applications that are required to come before this Board. There is the ability to get some of that information ahead of time. It is a little bit about understanding how the process works so she hopes that this has been at least an information session for you as well. Responding to Mrs. Melson-Williams, Mr. Reaves stated that Mr. Headley is within that 200 foot zone. Fortunately, his house is that; however, the Emerald Pointe HOA is a corporation which they are represented by a management company so he would respectfully ask that the Planning Commission include our management company as a minimum just to get the same notification that Mr. Headley gets so that they can be aware of any coming information. Our main entrance which is part of our corporation is within that distance and the notification for anything like that would have to go to our management company or the corporation itself. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the mailing list is generated by property ownership records. So what the City has on file as the owner and their contact information for the property is what is utilized. If it is held by the HOA then they probably need to look into where that mailing is going. Responding to Mrs. Melson-Williams, Mr. Reaves stated that they do get electric services at the front entrance also so that is on the mailing list also. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that sometimes the electric billing may go to a different entity than the property ownership so that is why we don’t use the customer utility information and we use the property tax information. The other question is about how you would find out updates to the plan, once the Planning Commission takes action on an application. The applicant has a period of up to two years to make the corrections to the plan and finalize the plan. By getting the various agency approvals of DelDOT, the Planning Office, the Water & Sewer Plan and that process to finalize the plan is an administrative process that the Planning Office handles on behalf of the Planning Commission. The only reason it would reappear before the Planning Commission would be if there were significant changes to the project such as they decided to not build apartments and do something else or totally reconfigured everything. Then it would have to go back through this public hearing process. This site, because it has an area that is zoned C2-A (Limited Central Commercial) for commercial development, that will be subject to a separate Site Plan review process that will have to come back through this review body. As they fix things on the plan, we are not obligated to send out notice but you are certainly welcome to reach out to the Planning Office. We can advise you to kind of where there are with getting these various agency approvals and once that happens. Mr. Cooper stated that just so everybody is aware, he has had a similar discussion with the Department of Transportation as you guys are having about the traffic signal. It was very frustrating until he totally understood and wrapped his head around DelDOT’s position on the subject which is if the traffic doesn’t warrant a traffic device such as a stop light or a stop sign, which he thinks is what Mr. Street was talking about. He was saying that the development will create the amount of traffic then that intersection would then need a device. So DelDOT is not going to give them the permission to do what we are asking them to do and what you are asking 21 24

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. them to do until the number of cars are coming through there because of the apartments that create that. When he had the discussion with DelDOT, it was because his dog got hit by a car that was going at least twice the posted speed limit on a four block section that has no stop signs. His hands were tied and DelDOT’s hands were tied because of Federal Regulations that tie everybody’s hands up. It sounds like Becker Morgan Group is going to make their request but from somebody who has had a very similar argument all be it about a pet as opposed to a human life, he just wants you to understand that if they don’t get the results that you want them to, it very well may not be for the lack of trying. If those cars aren’t going through there, DelDOT is not going to authorize it.It is frustrating but if it is there and it is not warranted then it actually becomes more dangerous because people end up running stop light or stop sign as opposed to stopping for it. You have created more problems than you solve by putting a device there. Mr. Derek Headley – 3 Gemstone Boulevard Dover DE, 19904 Mr. Headley stated that he just wanted to ask the developers how far the proposed apartments are going to be from the entrance. Responding to Mr. Street stated that the last time he recalls, he thinks they were more than 1,000 feet from the entrance itself. Mr. Headley asked if that will be visible from the corner of Gemstone Boulevard. Responding to Mr. Headley, Mr. Street stated that what you are going to see from the entrance of Gemstone Boulevard would be street trees lining that whole entrance. Part of the City’s Code is the Corridor Overlay Zone and that requires one tree every 50 feet along McKee Road across that frontage. So right now on McKee Road if you were to look at the site, you would have to look between those two pockets of trees to get to what you are looking at now. Once the project is developed, what you are going to have is not only those pockets of trees that you can barely see through now, you are going to have trees lining those streets and trees across that frontage. There is going to be landscaping that fills that frontage on McKee Road. The only thing that you are going to be able to really see from McKee Road would be the Clubhouse. Mr. Headley stated that when you are looking at the view from a homeowner, as soon as you come out of the house you don’t want to see the Clubhouse or a bunch of parking areas. That’s what it seems like he is going to be looking at. Responding to Mr. Headley, Mr. Street stated that the parking is behind the Clubhouse. It is the gray block that is shown on the map behind the Clubhouse itself and you’ve also got trees really buffering up the building itself. If you were to look from the entrance of Gemstone Boulevard up to where that Clubhouse is going to be situated, you’ve got buffering of trees, landscaping and the like. Mr. Headley asked what the average price of the apartments are going to be. He is trying to understand the clientele to expect. Responding to Mr. Headley, Mr. Street stated that these are market rate apartments that range in price from $1,495 to $2,100. Mrs. Maucher closed the public hearing. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that Staff would remind the Commission about what they have to make a decision on. It is a Site Development Plan. They have three Waivers that they have requested. The partial elimination of upright curbing is actually a Waiver that the City Planner as the authority to issue and they have recommended approval of that. The two Waiver Requests for 22 25

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. Planning Commission are a reduction of the parking requirements and the Code does allow for the Planning Commission to require a placeholding for future construction of parking areas if you feel that is necessary. The other Waiver Request is the partial elimination of sidewalk along the property frontage. Then there is the consideration of the Active Recreation Plan and the Cash-in-Lieu of Recreation Area construction that are part of the process as well. It can be done in one motion or multiple motions if you feel that you need to split it up to make it make sense for you. Mrs. Maucher asked how long the placeholding area for parking would have to be set aside. Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the Zoning Ordinance, Article 6 Section 3.9 notes that the Planning Commission can require development plans to have an area of open space designated where parking could be constructed less than or equal to the number that is being reduced. They have to put a note on the plan and in accepting that reduction, they agree to construct such additional parking if the Planning Commission after a hearing, determines that the reasons for granting the reduction no longer exist. If you determine on that rehearing that the reasons for granting the reduction no longer exist, the owner of record must construct the parking to meet the regulations during the next construction season just to give some allowances for time of year. It gives the Planning Commission the ability to require the placeholding of that parking that they are seeking relief from. Then if it comes to a situation where it is potentially needed, then there is a hearing on that need to construct the parking before this body. There is not a specific timeframe but she thinks that if we were experiencing it from a Code Enforcement matter, people parking on grass surfaces which tends to be a problem or finding other creative ways to park in the apartment complex, we could certainly bring the application back to the Commission to consider requiring them to go ahead and build that parking. Her guess is that if they were experiencing something along those lines and they had placeheld areas for parking, then they would probably do it on their own accord as they want to keep their tenants. Mrs. Maucher stated that that placeholding would not come from any designated building space already; it would be space other than what has already been designated. Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that Active Recreation Areas are kind of already designated and if the Commission said they would like them to retain an area where twenty-five parking spaces could be constructed in the future, then she thinks that their design of the overall development then would have to figure out where to place those in mass or in several areas to satisfy that. Mrs. Denney stated that she is not prepared to make a motion but she feels very strongly that for her to entertain a motion she would prefer that it include reserved space for parking later. If she had her rather, it would be that they have to have the parking initially. So, to her, her preference would be that that space definitely be set aside for the future. Mr. Hartman asked that if the Commission were to approve this and not approve the Waiver Request for the parking at all, what kind of problem would that create? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that they could grant approval to the Plan and deny the request to reduce the parking. In that instance, they would have to revise the design of the Plan in order to accommodate the full parking requirement which is about 96 parking spaces. That could 23 26

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. probably be achieved in a number of ways by adding parking spaces or reducing the requirement to start with. That could mean that a building goes away so then there is less of a parking requirement. That would be up to the developer to satisfy the design requirement meeting the parking requirement. Mr. Hartman asked if they could come forward with a Waiver Request for partial parking rather than the full 96. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that they could or he could as part of your action on the Waiver that is before you this evening. You could waive a certain number of parking spaces or set a parking rate at something like 2.1 for them to achieve on their site. Mr. Cooper stated that he pulled that 2.1 number straight out of the air. He has no mathematical baring on that, it was just between 2.0 and 2.25. Mr. Hartman stated that it is all out of the air accept what’s in the Code. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Cooper stated that he totally agrees. He doesn’t have any heartburn with the partial curb elimination or the frontage sidewalk as it goes up and then cuts across to the additional walk on the west side of the street. He is still kind of hung up on the parking. He recognizes the traffic issue which is a whole separate issue and you can’t address it without making it worse, as bad as that sounds. That is just the nitch that you are in. He would like to go through the steps to make up a motion to grant the application with the partial curb elimination waiver and the sidewalk waiver and then he would like to include the reserved space for future need. He doesn’t remember what the wording was that Mrs. Melson-Williams used but he forgot it all. He also doesn’t know the number of spaces that he would want to put in the motion either. It is reserved space and he thinks that if you split the difference between 96 and 0 and call it 50 as reserved spaces but it’s not actually parking unless it’s needed. So if you are right, it never happens and if we’re right it does happen but no harm no foul. Mrs. Denney stated that she has another suggestion and she doesn’t know how this would work but in the past, she did see a situation like this handled where instead of totally changing the parking plan that they limited the amount of the sizes of apartments. There were more one bedroom apartments instead of three bedroom apartments so that it would fit within a reasonable amount of parking. She does believe what Mr. Cooper has offered is probably the easiest way and it saves a lot of math. She does think that right now there is just not adequate parking and we all know that parking is almost always an issue somewhere. Mr. Hartman stated that with any set-aside, he would not want to see the loss of any Active Recreation space that has already been diminished Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mrs. Maucher stated that’s what she indicated, that there would be no reduction in active space. Mr. Cooper stated that you are going to have to have a reduction in something so it would be a reduction in open space as opposed to the active space but you are going to have to have a reduction in something to provide more blacktop. Which is why he thinks going with the recommendation with requesting the set-aside for the future is the best environmental and economical compromised way. He can see where an additional 96 spots is probably too many but he can see where 96 few is too little. He thinks that if they create the set-aside for the future, we 24 27

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. are doing it economically and environmentally which is the best of both worlds. Mrs. Maucher stated that analytically, you could add two spaces per building so if there are sixteen buildings, that would be thirty-two extra spaces and then the rest would be other spaces. Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Cooper stated that you could put the rest of them up at the pool house as long as you have the space and so that you are not cutting into that active space and you are not cutting into the open space any more than you have to. Mr. Hartman asked if we can add a condition to require that the formal contact be made with DelDOT requesting that a light be placed prior to construction? That might be feudal but if it’s in writing the politicians will have to act if there are any accidents there and DelDOT didn’t act. Can we require that as a condition? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that she would say yes because it goes to some of the public health, safety, and general welfare objectives that you need to consider with a Site Development Plan. She would caution you that that doesn’t mean that it will happen. If the wording would be that it would encourage the applicant to seek an earlier timeframe for installation of that signal at the intersection. It is all going to come down to the DelDOT review and their Entrance Plan and their Entrance Permit process. In order for them to start any kind of construction, they have to have an access point to that State maintained road. What the character of that access point is is what she thinks you are hoping includes a signal sooner rather than later. Mr. Hartman moved to approve S-21-11 McKee Road Apartments at 1385 McKee Road and the development application for the construction of sixteen apartment buildings each containing twenty-four units and to include the condition for a setaside of 50 parking spaces as a condition of this approval so that if parking spaces are required or needed in the future, that those parking spaces can be activated and built. Also, with the condition that the applicant formally submit a request to DelDOT and a courtesy copy to the Emerald Pointe HOA to request a traffic light or traffic device be installed prior to construction beginning at the site. And to approve the Waiver for the elimination of the sidewalk and the Waiver for the Cash-in-Lieu of Active Recreation Area as long as the Active Recreation Area does not diminish below what was represented at this hearing tonight. Mr. Cooper asked if he also approved the partial elimination of the curb. Responding to Mr. Cooper, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that technically the partial elimination of curbing is granted by the City Planner. We always include it so the Commission knows. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Denney and approved 5-2 by roll call vote with Dr. Jones and Mrs. Welsh absent. Mr. Hartman voting yes; based on the motion. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; with all of the things that were previously said. Mrs. Malone voting no; the City got in big trouble many years ago regarding this Cash-in-Lieu of land thing. Mr. Cooper voting yes; for all reasons previously stated. Mr. Roach voting no; he definitely agrees with Mrs. Malone in regards to Cash-in-Lieu. He is also very concerned about the concerns of the constituents in that area. He feels as though we can give it a little bit more time to get well versed in regards to construction. He definitely loves the plan; it looks beautiful. Mrs. Denney voting yes; with due respect to Mrs. Malone’s comment about the Cash-in-Lieu of and she does recall that there was some issues some time ago. She does believe that this project is one of many of the things that 25 28

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2022 Item 1. could have happened there, she thinks that this is a good use for this particular property in this area. She definitely feels that DelDOT will have to do something but those of us who do this all the time, we realize that you don’t tell DelDOT, DelDOT tells us. To her, the best that can happen with the DelDOT situation is that letters with copies to the Governor and the Secretary of Transportation are the best avenue of helping to make that happen sooner than later. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; it is a Level 1 Investment Area so there is infills predicted and expected. She thinks this is a good infill project for the area. She has concerns about the traffic as she travels that road on a regular basis and she thinks this is desperately needed there. NEW BUSINESS Meeting adjourned at 9:48 PM. Sincerely, Kristen Mullaney Secretary 26 29

Item 2. MEMORANDUM Department of Planning & Inspections P.O. Box 475 Dover, Delaware 19903 Phone: 302.736.7196 Fax: 302.736.4217 DATE: May 6, 2022 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Office SUBJECT: Update on Design Revisions of S-19-13 NCALL Offices at 223 & 225 W. Division Street Background On July 15, 2019, the Planning Commission reviewed and held a public hearing on Site Development Plan S-19-13 NCALL Office Building. The Site Development Plan and Lot Consolidation Plan Application was approved for the construction of a three-story 7,671 SF office building together with associated site improvements. The project is located at 223 and 225 West Division Street which is located on the north side of West Division Street east of North New Street and is zoned C-1A (Limited Commercial Zone). The Site Plan was approved with the following Waivers: 1) Waiver Request – Elimination of Upright Curbing: The Planning Commission noted the City Planner/Staff approval to eliminate the requirement for upright curbing as stipulated in Zoning Ordinance, Article 6 Section 3.6 (b). Staff’s approval to eliminate the upright curbing requirement was determined due to the applicant’s statement that installing the upright curbing would hinder stormwater conveyance, and also due to the applicant having stated they will provide bollards to prevent any damage to surrounding infrastructure. 2) Waiver Request – Consideration of Tree Mitigation Plan: The Planning Commission granted approval of the Tree Mitigation Plan allowing instead for the required trees to be planted at off-site locations within the City of Dover. This was determined as Staff noted the difficulty planting on this site due to the limited amount of pervious areas available for suitable planting. The applicant had instead proposed planting one (1) additional tree each at 18 North Kirkwood Street and 28 North Kirkwood Street. The Tree Mitigation Plan must also be noted on the Plans. This Site Development Plan and associated Lot Consolidation Plan further received an Extension of Planning Commission Approval at their June 2021 meeting. Approval of Site Development Plan is valid through July 31, 2022. A redesign of the proposed building was cited as one of the reasons for the delay in finalizing the project. 30

Memo to the Planning Commission: Design Revisions of S-19-13 NCALL Offices at 223 & 225 W. Division St. Item 2. Page 2 of 2 Plan Status as of May 6, 2022 – Update on Design Revisions The applicant has been working diligently with Planning Staff and all other Reviewing Agencies on working towards Final Plan Approval which is expected imminently. The Final Plan submission was received on May 6, 2022 and will be evaluated for final approval by the Planning Staff. The Applicant had put their Plans on hiatus during the COVID-19 Pandemic but reached out to Planning Staff in November of 2021 noting intended design changes. These design changes include the reduction of the number of stories from three (3) to two (2), the reduction of overall square footage from 7,671 to 5,120, as well as some aesthetic changes to the exterior of the building. These Revisions are presented in the attached Revised Architectural Rendering and Site Plan. Recommendations Planning Staff is satisfied that the applicant has diligently working towards achieving Final Plan Approval and ensuring that all Reviewing Agencies are satisfied with the Plans. As the scope of the building is being somewhat reduced, Planning Staff recommended that they come before the Planning Commission to apprise them of their planned changes as an item of Old Business. Once the Final Plan Approval is achieved, they will be seeking the Building Permit to commence construction work as soon as possible. Attachments: • S-19-13 Original Application Submission: Architectural Rendering and associated Site Development Plan Set • Notice of Decision Letter dated July 22, 2019 noting Planning Commission Approval • Letter dated May 24, 2021 requesting a One-year Extension of Planning Commission Approval • S-19-13 Revised Architectural Rendering, Floor Plan and associated Site Development Plan Set as revised by Applicant (and subject of this memo) 31

Item 2. 32

Item 2. NCALL - DIVISION STREET OFFICE 103 S. BRADFORD ST. DOVER, DE 19904 P.O. BOX 558 DOVER, DE 19903 T-302-744-9875 F-866-672-6428 33

Item 2. City of Dover July 22, 2019 Karen B. Speakman NCALL 363 Saulsbury Road Dover, DE 19904 Via email: kspeakman@ncall.org Re: Site Development Plan: S-19-13 NCALL Office Building at 223 and 225 West Division Street, Dover, DE Tax Parcels: ED-05-076.08-05-28.00-000 and ED-05-076.08-05-29.00-000 Dear Ms. Speakman: At its meeting of July 15, 2019, the City of Dover Planning Commission moved to grant conditional approval to Site Development Plan S-19-13 for construction of a three-story 7,671 SF office building and accompanying site improvements at the above referenced parcels at 223 and 225 West Division Street, Dover. These properties are also the subject of variance application V-19-04 approved by the Board of Adjustment in April 2019. As adopted by the Planning Commission, the conditions of plan approval for Site Development Plan S-19-13 from all reviewing agencies, including the Planning Staff Recommendations (as adopted), are outlined in the Development Advisory Committee (D.A.C.) Report dated July 3, 2019. A copy of the D.A.C. Report for S-19-13 is enclosed for your reference. If in the future major changes and revisions are proposed to the site design as presented to the Planning Commission, you are required to contact the Planning Office to discuss. These changes may require resubmittal of the plan/drawings for review by the Development Advisory Committee, the Planning Commission or other agencies making recommendations or taking action in regard to the application. In addition, the Planning Commission took action on the following: 1) Waiver Request – Elimination of Upright Curbing: The Planning Commission noted the City Planner/Staff approval to eliminate the requirement for upright curbing as stipulated in Zoning Ordinance, Article 6 Section 3.6 (b). Staff’s approval to eliminate the upright curbing requirement was determined due to the applicant’s statement that installing the upright curbing would hinder stormwater conveyance, and also due to the applicant having stated they will provide bollards to prevent any damage to surrounding infrastructure. 2) Waiver Request – Consideration of Tree Mitigation Plan: The Planning Commission granted approval of the Tree Mitigation Plan allowing instead for the required trees to be planted at off-site locations within the City of Dover. This was determined as Staff noted the difficulty planting on this site due to the limited amount of pervious areas available for suitable planting. The applicant had instead proposed planting one (1) additional tree each at 18 North Kirkwood Street and 28 North Kirkwood Street. The Tree Mitigation Plan must also be noted on the Plans. P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 34 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Item 2. Notice of Decision Letter: S-19-13 Office Building at 223 and 225 West Division Street July 22, 2019 Page 2 of 2 Planning Commission approval is valid for two (2) years from the date of approval, during which time the Site Development Plan shall be finalized, Building Permits obtained, and the project commenced. For Site Development Plan S-19-13, the approval expiration date is July 31, 2021. To apply for an extension of time from the Planning Commission, this office shall be in receipt of a letter from the owner/applicant requesting such extension at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the original approval. The letter requesting the extension shall state the reasons why an extension is necessary. When all necessary revisions have been made to the Plan, a Check Print of the Site Plan must be submitted to the Planning Office for review. Check Print submittals to other Development Advisory Committee member agencies are required for their approval of the Plan as well. Coordinate with the other agencies as necessary and forward approval letters to the Planning Office as they are obtained. Upon determination that the Plan is complete, we will request that you submit a specific number of signed and sealed copies of the Final Plan to our office for approval and endorsement for approval. As a reminder the Public Notice Physical Posting signage should be removed from the property by July 22, 2019. Physical Posting signage not removed in a timely manner will be treated as an abandoned sign per the Zoning Ordinance. Should you have any questions or require further assistance, please contact the plan reviewer Julian Swierczek at (302) 736-7196 or jswierczek@dover.de.us. Sincerely, Department of Planning & Inspections Dawn E. Melson-Williams, AICP Principal Planner Enclosures: Final D.A.C. Report Cc: David S. Hugg III, Planning Director via email Patricia Kelleher, NCALL Jason Lyon, Public Works via email File S-19-13 Troy L. Adams, P.E., Mountain Consulting, Inc. 35

Item 2. May 24, 2021 Dawn Melson-Williams, AICP Principal Planner City of Dover, Delaware Department of Planning & Inspections Delivery via Email: dmelson@dover.de.us RE: Request for Extension Site Development Plan: S-19-13 NCALL Office Building at 223 and 225 W Division Street Dear Mrs. Melson-Williams: The Notice of Decision Letter for the above-referenced project is dated July 22, 2019. The approval expiration date is July 31, 2021. The project experienced a major delay due to the redesign of the proposed building. As a result, this has impacted the site plan design process. We are requesting an additional year to finalize the site development plans, obtain the Building Permit, and commence construction. Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to an approval of our request. Kind regards, MOUNTAIN CONSULTING, INC. Troy L. Adams, P.E. Vice President Cc: NCALL 36

Item 2. From: Nick Fedyk To: Patricia Kelleher; Karen Speakman Subject: NCALL Office Building update Date: Thursday, November 5, 2020 1:32:54 PM Attachments: NCALL First Floor 11.5.pdf NCALL Second Floor 11.5.pdf Screen Shot 2020-11-05 at 1.27.53 PM.png Screen Shot 2020-11-05 at 1.27.34 PM.png Hi Trish and Karen, We wanted to share the updated floor plan for the two story building. We also looked at how the massing can work which I have attached a few screen shots of the model. Sincerely, Nick Nicholas L Fedyk | Project Manager Architectural Alliance Inc. 1309 Veale Rd Suite 22 Wilmington, Delaware 19810 t 302.478.3777 f 302.478.9577 e n.fedyk@archalli.com This message is intended solely for the recipient and should not be opened, read, or utilized by any other party. This message shall not be construed as official project information or as a direction except as expressly provided in the contract documents. 37

Item 2. 53'-11" 91/8" 91/8" 2'-0" 91/8" 11'-81/4" 11'-73/4" OFFICE OFFICE 7'-1" SPRINKLER 91/8" 8'-7" 5 1/2" 5'-4" 51/2" 11'-71/4" 5 1/2" 12'-6" 51/2" 12'-61/2" 91/8" STORAGE 51/2" 31/2" STAIR 51/2" 1'-113/4" 27'-7" 51/2" 7'-71/2" F WOMEN JAN 19'-7" HALLWAY 51/2" 21'-10" UP 19 RISERS 91/8" 8'-7" 51/2" 5'-4" 51/2" 19'-63/4" 51/2" 3'-81/2" 4'-10" 51/2" 8'-1" 91/8" 51/2" 7'-7" DATA 55'-9" 51/2" MEN MEETING ROOM 31/2" COPY 51/2" MECH 10'-1/4" 9'-31/8" LOBBY ELECT 5'-2" HALLWAY 51/2" 23'-10" 51/2" 51/2" OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE 11'-10" 91/8" 14'-101/4" 51/2" 12'-31/2" 51/2" 12'-11" 51/2" 12'-111/2" 91/8" 13'-10" 13'-10" 91/8" 2'-0" 4" 91/8" 91/8" N FIRST FLOOR - 11.9.20 38

Item 2. 53'-11" 91/8" 91/8" 91/8" 2'-0" 91/8" STORAGE PHONE ROOM 9'-75/8" 9'-71/2" 7'-1" 31/2" 91/8" 51/2" 8'-7" 51/2" 5'-33/4" 5'-5" 6'-8" 5'-31/2" 6'-0" 5'-31/2" 6'-0" 3'-41/2" 91/8" 4'-0" OPEN OFFICE AREA 7'-23/8" 27'-7" 51/2" 7'-71/2" WOMEN JAN 19'-7" 39'-71/4" 51/2" DN 19 RISERS 17'-13/4" STAIR 51/2" 8'-31/4" 51/2" 10'-7" 10'-21/2" 4'-101/2" 51/2" 8'-1/2" 91/8" 7'-7" 51/2" 55'-5" MEN 31/2" 51/2" F 51/2" 9'-31/8" MECH ELECT RECEPTION 5'-2" 51/2" 23'-10" 22'-33/4" 51/2" 51/2" OFFICE MEETING ROOM OFFICE COPY AREA 13'-10" AND 13'-10" 14'-2" LOCKERS 91/8" 11'-2" 51/2" 8'-81/4" 51/2" 9'-4" 51/2" 11'-0" 51/2" 12'-41/2" 91/8" 2'-0" 91/8" 91/8" 91/8" 91/8" N 55'-11" SECOND FLOOR - 11.9.20 39

Item 2. 40

Item 3. City of Dover DATA SHEET FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW & ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CERTIFICATION DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF May 4, 2022 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF May 16, 2022 Plan Title: New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street: Kent County Family Court S-22-06 Plan Type: Site Development Plan Location: East side of South Governors Avenue between Bank Lane and W. Water Street Addresses & 123 Bank Lane ED-05-077.09-03-33.00-000 Tax Parcels: Part of 34 The Green ED-05-077.09-03-35.00-000 401 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-32.00-000 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-36.00-000 411 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-37.00-000 429 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-48.00-000 435 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-50.00-000 439 S. Governors Avenue/117 West Water Street ED-05-077.09-03-51.00-000 441 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-52.00-000 447 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-61.00-000 101 West Water Street ED-05-077.09-03-53.00-000 and an alley Future Addresses: 415 S. Governors Avenue (Parking Garage) 445 S. Governors Avenue (Courthouse) Size: 3.7499 +/- acres and alley Present Uses: Vacant lots, Vacant Residential and Commercial Buildings (proposed for demolition), and a Parking Lot Proposed Use: Future site of Family Court (Courthouse) Zoning: IO (Institutional and Office Zone SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) H (Historic District Zone) Building Area(s): 106,711 SF (Courthouse) and 144,173 GFA Parking Garage Structure Off Street Parking: Required – 356 spaces Proposed – 495 spaces Sewer & Water: City of Dover For Consideration: Architectural Review Certification Tree Mitigation Plan Waiver Request: Alternative Size of Loading Spaces P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 41 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

Item 3. CITY OF DOVER City of DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Dover Planning APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY Office D.A.C. MEETING DATE: May 4, 2022 APPLICATION: S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street FILE #: S-22-06 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Planning CONTACT PERSON: Dawn Melson-Williams, AICP PHONE: 302-736-7196 I. PLAN SUMMARY This Application for Review of a Site Development Plan Application, associated Lot Consolidation Plan, and Architectural Review Certification to permit the construction of a five- story 106,711 GFA (*also listed as 105,259 GFA) government building to serve as the new Kent County Family Court. The proposal includes a five-story Parking Structure (425 vehicle parking spaces), parking lot, and other site improvements. The Site presently consists of a series of eleven (11) parcels consisting of a total of 3.7499 +/- acres and an alley. The properties are zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone), as well as the H (Historic District Zone). The properties are located on the east side of South Governors Avenue between West Water Street and Bank Lane. The owner of record/ equitable owner is the State of Delaware. Property Addresses: 401, 411, 429, 435, 439, 441, and 447 S. Governors Avenue; 101 and 117 West Water Street; 123 Bank Lane; and part of 34 The Green. Tax Parcels: ED-05-077.09-03-32.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-33.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03- 35.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-36.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-37.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-48.00- 000, ED-05-077.09-03-50.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-53.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-52.00-000, ED- 05-077.09-03-61.00-000, and an alley. Future Addresses: 415 S. Governors Avenue (Parking Garage), and 445 S. Governors Avenue (Courthouse). Council District 4. The Project Site is also subject to Application HI-22-03 New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue: Kent County Family Court. At the April 21, 2022 meeting of the Historic District Commission, they considered the Application and have provided a Recommendation on the Architectural Review Certification for the project. See attached Recommendation Report. Previous Applications The Rezoning Application (HI-22-02/Z-22-01) to adjust the boundary of the H (Historic District Zone) was recently approved to include a series of six (6) parcels consisting of a total of 1.74 +/- acres and an alley as the balance of the lands for the new Kent County Family Courthouse project site. Following recommendations of the Planning Commission (March 21, 2022) and the Historic District Commission (March 24, 2022), the City Council on April 11, 2022 adopted Ordinance #2022-02 making this zoning change. By the action, the entire project subject area is within the H (Historic District Zone). 42

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 3 At its meeting of July 15, 2021, the City of Dover Historic District Commission took action to grant approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the Parking Lot Reconfiguration and Improvements project at 30 The Green (HI-21-04) along the Bank Lane rear area of the property. The associated Administrative Site Plan for these parking lot improvements is pending approval as Final Plans have been submitted. A portion of the subject area involving the parcel at 439 S. Governors Avenue/117 West Water Street) and the parcel at 101 West Water Street was previously redeveloped as a parking lot from its use as a Transit Center. The project was reviewed for Architectural Review Certification as Application HI-10-11 Kent County Courthouse Parking Lot Addition and Conditional Use/Site Development Plan S-11-03 Parking Lot on West Water Street: Renovations and Addition (Kent County Courthouse Parking Lot Addition). Preliminary Land Use Services Review (PLUS) #2022-04-12: A development application for this property was reviewed on April 27, 2022 by the Preliminary Land Use Services. The PLUS Review is required by a City of Dover Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for certain types of projects. This MOU requires that non-residential development of over 75,000 S.F. complete the PLUS Review process prior to application submission. Due to its Downtown Dover Redevelopment Target Area, this project was not required to complete PLUS Review process; however, it chose to do so anyway. The PLUS Review Letter has not been issued; upon its issuance, the applicant must provide a written response to the Review. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Existing Properties of Subject Project Area: The subject area has frontage along South Governors Avenue on the east side of the block between West Water Street and Bank Lane. Several of the properties also have frontage on West Water Street. There is also an alley running north from West Water Street a distance of approximately 288 feet. Dover City Council has approved the transfer of this alley from the City to the State. The Historic District Commission approved Demolition of the building at 401 S. Governors Avenue on August 19, 2021 (HI-21-05); a Demolition Permit #21-1036 has been approved for issuance. Additionally, there are three (3) buildings (two residential and one office building) and an accessory structure within the subject area that are proposed for demolition. These Demolition Permits were filed February 7, 2022 and are under review pending issuance. Along Water Street is the Water Street parking lot which currently serves as public parking for the Kent County Courthouse (located one block to the east at 414 Federal Street/38 The Green) and other nearby State buildings. The multiple parcels and alley of the subject area are proposed for a lot consolidation to create the project site for the proposed Kent County Family Courthouse. Surrounding Land Uses The subject area lies within the urban street grid of Downtown Dover to the southwest of the historic Green. To its west across South Governors Avenue is a series of residential and commercial buildings zoned C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone); this area is not located within the H (Historic District Zone). Adjoining the area to the north in this block consists of several parking lot areas serving properties at 30 and 34 The Green along with a small one story commercial building at 401 S. Governors Avenue that is approved for demolition (under Demolition Permit #21-1036 and HI-21-05). This area is zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). To the east of the subject area, are a series of properties fronting on The Green and others fronting on South State Street where the zoning is 43

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 4 RGO (General Residence and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The buildings in that area include several residences and previous residential buildings now converted to office use. Directly adjacent is the Water Street parking lot which serves as public parking for the Kent County Courthouse (located one block to the east at 414 Federal Street/38 The Green) and other nearby State buildings. To the south across West Water Street, the block includes a commercial retail building zoned C-2 and a series of office buildings zoned either IO (Institutional and Office Zone) or RGO (General Residential and Office Zone). Only the property at the corner of West Water Street and South State Street is within the H (Historic District Zone) along this street frontage. III. ZONING REVIEW IO (Institutional and Office Zone) The subject property is zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone); this zoning designation will remain in place. The description of the IO (Institutional and Office Zone) zoning district is provided in Article 3 §10 of the Zoning Ordinance and provisions identify the allowable (permitted) uses and the related bulk standards for the IO zone. The Courthouse and associated Parking Garage Structure are permitted uses. SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) The property is located within the SWPOZ (Tier 3: Excellent Recharge Area) found in Article 3 Section 29.7 of the Zoning Ordinance. However, this project site is within the Downtown Redevelopment Target Area which is exempted from the SWPOZ requirements and restrictions as per Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §29.79. H (Historic District Zone) The entire project site is now located in the H (Historic District Zone) and subject to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §21 and referenced sections. The H (Historic District Zone) is described in Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 Section 21 with the following purpose statement: Article 3, Section 21. - Historic district (H). 21.1 Purpose. The purpose of this historic district regulation is to preserve and enhance that unique character and value of the old portion of Dover as an area of special charm and interest. It is particularly intended that the regulations prevent, in the historic dis trict, any change of conditions that would be deemed to be a disfigurement or degradation of the present unique visual and architectural qualities of the district. IV. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CERTIFICATION Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §3.2 outlines the review process for Architectural Review Certification and related building height, bulk, and setback standards. This process begins with Review by the Historic District Commission. Review of DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES Location within the H (Historic District Zone) requires proposals for demolition, new construction, additions, and certain renovation or rehabilitation activities to receive an Architectural Review Certificate. As stated in the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone, an Architectural Review Certificate will be granted “if it is found that the architectural style, general design, height, bulk and setbacks, arrangement location and materials affecting the exterior appearance are generally in harmony with neighboring structures and 44

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 5 complementary to the traditional architectural standards of the historic district.” Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §3.2 outlines the review process for Architectural Review Certification and related building height, bulk, and setback standards. This proposal must be reviewed for conformity with the design criteria guidelines found in Chapter 4: New Construction, Additions, Demolition and Relocation. The Design Standards and Guidelines for New Construction (Chapter 4: pages 4-1 through 4-8) provide the design criteria and development guidelines. The guidelines specify a series of individual considerations for new construction to be considered in the review by the Historic District Commission (and Planning Commission) of the project for Architectural Review Certification. Additionally, the proposal should be reviewed for conformity with the design criteria and development guidelines found in the Design Standards and Guidelines of Chapter 3: Maintenance, Repair, Preservation, and Restoration of Existing Historic Buildings. More specifically the sections on Design Guidelines for Landscaping and Site Amenities, Fencing and Walls, Paving and Bordering, and Parking Lots found on pages 3-24 through 3-27. The proposed project must also be reviewed for compliance with the standards established by the Zoning Ordinance. The standards include items such as setbacks from property lines, lot coverage, height, etc. This Proposal for the new Courthouse Building and Parking Structure appears to conform to most of the bulk requirements of the IO Zoning District. The City of Dover Zoning Ordinance authorizes the Historic District Commission to waive certain bulk standards when issuing its recommendation to the Planning Commission for an Architectural Review Certificate if necessary. Alternative Bulk Standards – Consideration of Rear Yard Setback The setbacks of the buildings from the property lines are met except for an area at the rear of the Courthouse building. This rear setback is required to be 30 feet when adjacent to residential properties. At its closest point the building is 26.75 feet; therefore, relief must be granted to allow the encroachment of 3.25 feet (i.e., the rear year setback to be 26.75 feet). The buildings’ height and number of stories is in compliance with the IO zone. The total lot coverage of the project is listed as 79% in compliance with the maximum lot coverage of 85% in the IO zone. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION - RECOMMENDATION For the Kent County Family Court project, the Historic District Commission considered the application HI-22-03 on April 21, 2022 regarding an Architectural Review Certificate for construction of the Courthouse Building, the Parking Garage Structure, and the various other Site Improvements. The Historic District Commission considered the proposal for construction and has provided a recommendation to the Planning Commission in regard to the Architectural Review Certification for the project. The specific recommendation involved consideration of the Design Standards and Guidelines. See attached Recommendation Report from the Historic District Commission. The Planning Commission should act upon the Architectural Review Certification as part of any motion to approve this project, or as a separate motion if necessary. In taking this action, the Planning Commission is to consider the standards and guidelines found in Chapter 4 of the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone and other referenced sections. 45

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 6 V. PARKING SUMMARY The parking requirement for the IO (Institutional and Office Zone) is based on a rate of one parking space per 300 square feet of floor area. Based on a total floor area of 106,711 SF the new Courthouse facility would require 356 parking spaces. The plan notes a total of 495 parking spaces in structured and surface parking areas. Parking Garage Structure: The Parking Garage Structure located on the northern portion of the Site is to house 425 parking spaces. Some of this parking will be secured parking for Court staff. The entry into the Parking Garage Facility is on its east side from the circulation drive internal to the site. See description under Building Architecture Section. Parking Lot Reconfiguration: The current Parking Lot area along W. Water Street will be reduced in size and have only one access point to the street. The Parking Lot appears to be planned for 56 parking spaces. It is also the proposed location of an underground stormwater management system. The Parking lot includes planted island areas. This Water Street Parking Lot was previously constructed in its current form with Site Plan S-11-03 and serves as parking for the Kent County Courthouse (HI-06-03/S-06-20) as part of a series of strategies to meet that Courthouse’s required parking (after a 20% Parking Reduction was granted). The Parking Lot was to provide 126 parking spaces accessory to the Kent County Courthouse. This project for the New Kent County Family Court Courthouse will accommodate those parking spaces. The Applicant has noted that they are planning to locate Electric Vehicle charging stations in the east parking lot area and also with the Parking Garage Structure. It noted that Application S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue will also develop a Parking Lot of 45 vehicle parking spaces. The Parking Lot is being constructed as an accessory parking area for this project. Loading Berths Waiver Request: Alternative Size of Loading Spaces Article 6 Section 4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance states that for governmental buildings, loading spaces are required at a rate of one loading space per 10,000 SF and one space for each additional 25,000 SF. For the Courthouse, this rate would calculate to five (5) loading spaces. However, the Code does limit the maximum required to three (3) loading berths (spaces) for buildings up to 150,000 SF in size. Thus, three (3) loading spaces would be required. The Courthouse has specialized loading area known as a sally port which occurs internal to the building but also appears to have three dedicated parking spaces for its associated vehicles. Also, at the rear of the Courthouse additional service areas are located. The Plan does not show marked loading spaces matching the required dimensions dictated by the Code. However, the applicant has submitted a written Waiver Request seeking to recognize an alternative size for the loading spaces by designating the rear of the Courthouse Building as a service area where loading/delivery activities can occur. This is a gated area (see Fence and Gate Exhibit Plan). Bicycle Parking Bicycle parking shall be provided for parking spaces at a rate of one (1) bicycle parking space for every twenty (20) parking spaces. Based on the 495 parking spaces provided, twenty-five (25) bicycle spaces are required. The Plans submitted note Bicycle Parking spaces being provided 46

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 7 within the Parking Garage Structure and an outside bicycle parking rack at for a total of 20 spaces; additional spaces must be designated. VI. SITE CONSIDERATIONS Access The property includes multiple points of access from the adjacent streets. On West Water Street is access to the surface Parking Lot and also to the sally port of the Courthouse. On South Governors Avenue, about mid-block between the Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure, is the entrance drive leading into the site. Another entrance point is off Bank Lane. The circulation pattern of the drive aisle onsite on the east side of the Parking Garage provides access to the entry points into the Parking Garage and also serves as the circulation drive to the adjacent parcels. The drive aisle also continues behind the Courthouse Building is proposed to be partially gated to limit access. The project has also completed a Traffic Impact Study (TIS). A copy of the review Letter (dated March 4, 2022) is available in the Application file. The Letter outlines improvements related to the adjacent physical roadways or traffic controls and the Site Access points. A series of bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements are also noted. Lighting Lighting of parking areas is required. The plan currently does not show the location of building mounted or freestanding light poles in the parking lot area. In general, the broader area using a decorative black pole with lantern type light fixture. The streetlights along the north side of West Water Street are currently a single gull wing style light with a silver metal finish. The plan is unclear regarding the concept for street lighting. Dumpsters The Courthouse Building as an institutional type building requires two (2) dumpster pad for the first 80,000 S.F. of building area and one (1) for each additional 40,000 S.F. of building area or a fraction thereof. Based on this calculation, three Dumpsters are required for the Courthouse. The Plan shows two Dumpsters at the rear of the Courthouse building in a service area and are not visible from the public right-of-way (street). An additional Dumpster area can be reserved for future use to meet the Code requirement. The Dumpster enclosure detail shall be provided on the plan to ensure that the architectural components of the Dumpster enclosures match the construction materials of the proposed buildings. Sidewalks Sidewalk is required along all street frontages. The street frontage sidewalks along all three frontages of West Water Street, South Governors Avenue, and Bank Lane appear to be brick. Along South Governors Avenue, the wide sidewalk becomes part of the plaza entry system to the Courthouse Building. Internal to the site there are some concrete sidewalk systems on the south and east (rear) sides of the Parking Structure. The applicant will be reconstructing the curb and sidewalks where site improvements and site entrance improvements are proposed. Curbing The parking areas and access drives are required to be curbed with upright curbing (Zoning Ordinance, Article 6 §3.6). Curbing appears to be provided throughout the site. 47

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 8 Fencing: For the equipment compound area, it is partially enclosed by a metal shadow fence revised to be six feet in height. The compound where a generator and other mechanical (chiller) equipment will be placed is to the northeast rear of the Courthouse building. There is also a four foot black ornamental fence proposed on the east side of the Parking Garage Structure entrance drive/shared access drive adjacent to residential properties. The northern and eastern sides of the surface Parking Lot also have 4-foot black ornamental fencing proposed. See Fence and Gate Exhibit Plan dated May 5, 2022 for updated information on the proposed fencing for the project. VII. BUILDING ARCHITECTURE The application proposes two buildings for the Kent County Family Court project with the construction a Courthouse Building and a Parking Garage Structure. A series of building renderings and drawings were submitted as a Project Architecture Presentation Set (11x17 size Plan set dated April 1, 2022). Courthouse Building: A three-story, L-shaped building is proposed at the corner of South Governors Avenue and West Water Street. The main entrance to the new Courthouse building is from the multi-level plaza and ramp and stair system on the west side of the building near the intersection of South Governors Avenue and West Water Street. The first floor of the building is elevated from the street/sidewalk level. An ornamental tower/cupola element is located on the West Water Street side of the building. The lobby entry is a building segment that projects towards the street and consists of paired brick columns capped by a cast stone cornice with name-brand element. The space between the Courthouse building and W. Water Street includes a lawn area and tree plantings. The sally port has access from W. Water Street. The predominant exterior finish material of the Courthouse is brick with detailing provided through the use of surface definition, brick patterning and cast stone elements. The first floor level is treated differently from the upper two floors on each façade. The use of brick column details and glass window openings create a vertical pattern on the west elevation. Glass wall systems figure more predominately on the south elevation for large openings with a pattern of bay windows in four segments. The Courthouse building has a flat roof system. The height is 55 feet 4 inches. to the top of the parapet wall with the ornamental clock tower reaching a height of 74 feet 6 inches at its roof. The roof provides a location for roof mounted equipment which is screened. Additional mechanical equipment is proposed to be located in a fenced compound to the northeast of the building thus screened from view. Parking Garage Structure: The Parking Garage Structure is located to the north of the Courthouse Building at the corner of S. Governors Avenue and Bank Lane. The 5-story structure is predominately brick and rises to a roof height of 56 feet 10 inches. The stair tower which includes more glass is located at the southeast corner. The west, north, and east elevations are very building-like in appearance hiding the ramped parking decks within. The vehicle access to the garage is via access point from S. Governors Avenue and from Bank Lane which lead to a shared access drive along east side of the Parking Structure. There are two entry points into the Parking Structure on its east elevation. There is a second floor level pedestrian bridge connection from the Parking Garage Structure to the Courthouse; it is predominately glass. 48

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 9 See the attached Site Plan set and Project Architecture Presentation Set. The attached elevation drawings and site plan drawings for detailed information on building dimensions, locations, and material choices. VIII. TREE PLANTING AND LANDSCAPE PLAN Tree Planting Requirements The Zoning Ordinance further requires a tree planting/landscape plan for at a rate of one tree per 3,000 SF of development area. Based on the development area of 3.7499 acres, a total of fifty-five (55) trees are required. The Plan notes 43 trees being provided on the Courthouse project main site; the site is deficient twelve (12) trees. The trees include a variety of deciduous and ornamental trees. The project proposes a majority of the new trees along the W. Water Street frontage and throughout the east parking lot islands. There are also trees in the Courthouse entry plaza. Also, for the Water Street Parking Lot, there are also shrub plantings proposed under the trees adjacent to the street for further screening. A seasonal planting bed is located at the corner of the Courthouse building near the clocker tower and also part of the entry plaza area. There are plantings on the east side of the Parking Garage Structure. Tree Mitigation Plan The project site is deficit twelve (12) trees. The Zoning Ordinance allows for consideration of a Tree Mitigation Plan. The applicant has submitted a Letter providing reasons for the request for Tree Mitigation and the intent to satisfy the tree planting deficit by planting the trees are other State of Delaware owned property located within the City. Opaque Barrier The Zoning Ordinance requires a buffer between a residential use and a non-residential use (Article 5 Section 7.2). The buffer has two components: an opaque barrier consisting of a wooden fence, a masonry wall or an earthen berm and a landscape component. For this project, a buffer is required along the certain portions of the east property line of the subject area. The east property line abuts the several residential properties and where an access drive/connection to those properties is not located the plan shows a fence and landscape planting component with one exception. The southern boundary line of the N/F Lands of Alstadt shows only a fence. Currently, there is a four-foot metal fence adjacent to that property line and the proposal shows segments of a 6-foot shadow/privacy fence or a 4-foot black ornamental fence for the area. The Zoning Ordinance, Article 5 Section 7.22 additionally notes that the Landscape Component of the Opaque Barrier be either a durable and continuous evergreen planted screen, 6-feet in height at the time of planting; or a hedge that will grow to a height of at least 6-feet at maturity. The Zoning Ordinance Article 5, Section 7.24 does allow the Applicant to seek a waiver from the Planning Commission for the fencing component. There are no provisions to allow for the waiver of the landscaping component. There are existing trees and vegetation located on the adjacent property. VIII. CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: The subject proposal has been reviewed for code compliance, plan conformity, and completeness in accordance with the agency’s authority and area of expertise. The following items have been identified as elements which need to be addressed by the applicant: 1) Information on a proposed Tree Mitigation Plan was submitted to identify the concept for planting locations for the deficient 12 trees. 49

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 10 2) A written waiver request regarding the requirements for loading spaces was received seeking to acknowledge a service area as the loading spaces. 3) Ensure handicapped access continues to be met at all sidewalk intersections at the entrances and sidewalks internal to the site. Check access route from Parking Garage to Courthouse. 4) Add handicapped parking spaces to east surface parking lot. 5) Cover Sheet, C001: a) Site Data #3: Identify building for each address. b) Site Data #14: List locations of parking and tally number. c) Site Data#15: Update bicycle parking required to 25 spaces and clarify location on the plan drawing. d) General Note #13: Pylon signs are not an eligible sign type for this location. e) General Note #25: Note exception to SWPOZ for this property’s location. f) List any waivers and conditions of approval from the Planning Commission. 6) Sheet C101: Note associated Administrative Site Plan for 30 The Green, King of Clubs Parking Lot Expansion. 7) Sheet C201: a) Clarify fence (and landscaping) along the property line with Lands of Alstadt property. b) Clarify location of street frontage sidewalks c) Identify any special loading spaces/parking i.e., sally port. 8) Sheet C301: a) Identify location of lighting in parking lot and along street frontages. b) Identify any overhead electric lines that will be undergrounded in the vicinity of the property. c) Update General Notes to reflect Department of Public Works and Department of Water & Wastewater (rather than Department of Public Utilities). 9) Sheet C601: a) Give distance from parking row to wall of Parking Garage. b) Show location of striping for fire lanes, traffic control, etc. c) Show location of any proposed gate system at rear of Courthouse building. d) Confirm clearance height of pedestrian bridge. 10) Sheet C901: It is recommended that bicycle rack be black in color. 11) Landscape Plan Sheet Series, L101 and L102: a) Ensure Plan series includes items required by Zoning Ordinance, Article 5 §16.81. b) Provide tree planting requirement calculation and totals of trees. It appears plan is deficient 12 trees; a Tree Mitigation Plan has been submitted for consideration. c) Add certification note and signature block for Landscape Architect. d) Ensure tree planting locations do not conflict with fire hydrants and also maintain separation distances from utilities lines. e) Ensure tallies match: check inkberry shrubs. Check the plantings near Lands of Twilley are included in listing. 50

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 11 f) While the Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue may be shown for clarify, this site has its own development area for calculation of tree planting requirements separate from the Courthouse. g) Clarify types (material, form) and heights of proposed fences. 12) Opaque Barrier: The Zoning Ordinance requires that the Opaque Barrier be implemented where the subject site is adjacent to residential uses. 13) A third Dumpster location must be reserved on the project site. 14) Additional evaluation and review of this project as proposed may be necessary due to the environment contamination in this area and/or the site’s potential participation in any environmental remediation program. a) Provide copies of any agency approvals/permits to the Planning Office so that we may be aware of any specific conditions of redevelopment. 15) A Record Plan sheet must be provided for review and approval to record the Lot Consolidation and any proposed easements. 16) Provide construction details for the following items but not limited to, dumpster pad/enclosure, traffic control signage, lighting fixtures, handicap signage, etc. 17) The construction of the site and parking lot entrances must comply with the requirements of DelDOT and the City of Dover Public Works Department. 18) The Historic District Commission recommends conditional approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the construction of the project. See attached Recommendation Report for recommended conditions. 19) Any Erosion & Sediment Control Plans and Stormwater Management Plans granted approval by the DNREC must reflect the Site Plan layout and design conditionally approved by the Planning Commission and be in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and technical review requirements of other agencies. 20) The Final Plan set must include notes documenting any action taken by the Planning Commission on the requested waivers and must list any additional conditions of approval. IX. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: In accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §2.2, the Planning Commission in considering and acting upon Site Development Plans may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards so that the public health, safety, and welfare, the comfort and convenience of the public in general, and the residents of the immediate neighborhood in particular shall be taken into consideration. These safeguards may to the maximum extent possible further the expressed intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the accomplishment of several objectives in particular listed in subsections 2.21 to 2.28. 51

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 12 1) Architectural Review Certification Staff recommends conditional approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the construction of the Kent County Family Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure finding that each building to be of a contemporary design yet compatible with the intent of the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone. a) Staff provided a series of recommendations and comments regarding the Architectural Review Certification and review of the project for compliance the Design Standards and Guidelines. These items were previously identified during the review of the project by the Historic District Commission. See HDC Recommendation Report. 2) Tree Mitigation Plan: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Tree Mitigation Plan given the development limitations of the site due to environmental concerns and spacing limitations to meet separation distances from utilities and proposed buildings. Staff notes that while the applicant has not specifically identified an off-site location for the twelve (12) tree plantings that they are deficient there are many options given the State of Delaware’s land holdings within City limits. Planning Staff can review and confirm specific tree planting locations as the project design and plan refinement continues. 3) Opaque Barrier: Staff recommends acceptance of the plan for implementation of the Opaque Barrier shown on the Fence and Gate Exhibit Plan and the tree and shrub plantings shown on the Landscape Plan. Given the existing conditions of property access points, utility placements and property uses, the project appears to be meeting the intent of this buffer requirement between non-residential and residential uses given the location of the area (subject site and adjacent properties) within the Historic District. 4) Electric Vehicle Charging Stations: Planning Staff is encouraged to hear that this project is planning for the installation of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations in its parking lots. Currently, the Zoning Ordinance does not require them, but many other jurisdictions have implemented such requirements. Electric Vehicle Charging Stations formats include EV-Capable, EV- Ready, and EV-Installed. X. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: 1) The Planning Commission should act upon the Architectural Review Certification as part of any motion to approve this project, or as a separate motion if necessary. 2) The Planning Commission should act upon the request for waivers as part of any motion regarding this project application, or as a separate motion as necessary. Note: All waivers are at the discretion of the Planning Commission. The Commission may approve or deny waiver requests. 3) In the event, that major changes and revisions to the Site Plan occur in the finalization of the Plan contact the Department of Planning and Inspections. Examples include relocation of site components like paving and increases in floor area. These changes may require resubmittal for review by the Development Advisory Committee, Historic District Commission, Planning Commission, or other agencies and commissions making recommendations in regard to the Plan. 4) Following Planning Commission approval of the Site Plan, the Plan must be revised to meet all conditions of approval from the Development Advisory Committee or as otherwise noted. A Check Print must be submitted for review by Planning Office Staff and the other commenting 52

Item 3. S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 13 agencies. Upon determination that the Plan is complete and all agency approvals have been received, copies of the Plan may be submitted for final endorsement (Final Plan Approval). 5) Other agencies and departments which participate in the Development Advisory Committee may provide additional comments related to their areas of expertise and code requirements. 6) The applicant should be aware of the potential for historic archaeological resources which may include previous building locations, wells, privies, etc. on the property. The State Division of Historical & Cultural Affairs can provide technical assistance when dealing with archaeological resources including previous studies at the subject location. 7) Additional specialized evaluation and review of this area may be necessary due to the environment contamination in this area and/or the site’s participation in any environmental remediation program. 8) The applicant/developer shall be aware that prior to any ground disturbing activities on the site the appropriate Site Plan approvals, Pre-Construction meetings, site inspections and permits are required. 9) Construction and demolition will have an effect on the adjacent property owners, employees of adjacent buildings, and nearby sidewalks and streets. Any work requiring the closing or rerouting of potential customers, employees, or visitors to the adjacent properties (including those who park in the existing parking lot), and streets or alley should be coordinated as to offer the least amount of inconvenience. Careful consideration will need to be given to the access to other properties which requires the crossing of these properties or travel over the public alley. 10) For building new construction, the requirements of the building code and the fire code must be complied with. Consult with the Chief Building Inspector and City of Dover Fire Marshal for these requirements. The resolution of these items may impact the site design including such items as building dimensions and height, building openings, and fire protection needs, etc. 11) The applicant shall be aware that Site Plan approval does not represent a Building Permit and associated construction activity permits. A separate application process is required for issuance of a Building Permit from the City of Dover. Building Permits will be required for each building. 12) The applicant shall be aware that Plan approval does not represent a Sign Permit, nor does it convey permission to place any sign on the premises. Any proposed site or building identification sign may require a Sign Permit from the City of Dover prior to placement of any such sign in accordance with Zoning Ordinance Article 5 §4. 13) The applicant shall be aware that use may be subject to a separate licensing process through the City of Dover Licensing and Permitting Division. All businesses operating in the City of Dover are required to obtain a City of Dover Business License. Certain types of uses also require a Public Occupancy Permit. If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person and the Planning Office as soon as possible. 53

Item 3. CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: APRIL 27, 2022 APPLICATION: New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street FILE #: S-22-06 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Department of Public Works and Water & Wastewater CONTACT PERSON: Jason A. Lyon, P.E., Director of Water & Wastewater CONTACT PHONE #: 302-736-7025 CONTACT PHONE #: jlyon@dover.de.us T HE S UBJECT P ROPOSAL HAS BEEN R EVIEWED FOR C ODE C OMPLIANCE , P LAN C ONFORMITY AND C OMPLETENESS IN A CCORDANCE WITH THIS A GENCY ’ S A UTHORITY AND A REA OF E XPERTISE . T HE F OLLOWING I TEMS HAVE BEEN I DENTIFIED AS E LEMENTS W HICH N EED TO BE A DDRESSED BY THE A PPLICANT : CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS SANITATION 1. Every commercial customer shall provide such premises with a sufficient number of solid waste containers to provide adequate capacity for the solid waste placed out for collection without overloading the capacity of the containers. The City of Dover shall provide commercial customers with a maximum of two (2), 90-gallon trash containers and two (2), 90-gallong recycling containers. 2. Trash collection site shall be oriented for side-loading pick-up if customer is utilizing City of Dover sanitation services. 3. Any commercial customer requiring more containers, or larger containers, than provided above, must utilize private service. STORMWATER 1. Final site plan approval will not be granted until a copy of the approved Stormwater/Erosion and Sediment Control Plan from Kent Conservation District / DNREC is submitted to our office. 2. The size, length, slope, type and flow directions must be shown on all existing and proposed storm sewer lines. Rim and invert elevations must be labeled on all stormwater structures. STREETS 1. Final site plan approval will not be granted until a copy of the approved entrance plan, signed by DelDOT is submitted to our office. 2. The current City of Dover standard street section provides for a 3’ grass strip between the curb and sidewalk. This standard was administratively revised to meet ADA and FHA compliance with cross slope requirements and to prevent cars from scrapping at driveways. The revised standard utilizes a five feet (5’) wide public sidewalk with a five feet (5’) wide grass strip behind the curb. WATER 1. All water utility components must meet the requirements of the Water Wastewater Handbook, effective date March 22, 2010. Please contact our office for more information. 54

Item 3. New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street File #: S-22-06 April 27, 2022 Page 2 of 4 2. The following notes must be added to the plans: a. Hydrant connections by the contractor are prohibited. This method may not be utilized during any phase of the project. b. Any existing water lines not to be utilized by the proposed facility must be properly abandoned at the mains in accordance with the City of Dover Department of Water & Wastewater specifications and requirements. c. The site contractor shall contact the City of Dover Department of Water & Wastewater Construction Manager at (302) 736- 7025 prior to the start of construction. A representative from the City of Dover Department of Water & Wastewater must observe and approve all City owned water and sanitary sewer interconnections and testing. All water taps must be performed by a City of Dover approved contractor. The proposed location for the water connection may need to be adjusted in the field due to conditions of the existing main. Possible conditions that would require tapping relocation include proximity to pipe joints, other taps, concrete encasements, conflict with other utilities, and the like. Test holes must be performed by the contractor to determine the best tapping location. The City of Dover will not be held responsible for field conditions requiring adjustment of the tapping location or for any work required by the contractor to make an appropriate and lawful connection. 3. The size, type, and location of all proposed and existing water lines and valves must be shown on the plan. 4. Water usage projections (peak demand or plumbing fixtures) must be submitted to our office to correctly determine the size of the domestic and irrigation (if applicable) water meter for the proposed building. These projections must be submitted prior to approval so the meter size can be placed on the final site plan. The proposed water meter must be installed in a pit per City of Dover requirements and manufacturer’s recommendations. Also, a dual check valve is required downstream of the meter. 5. The domestic service, fire main connection and valves must be clearly shown for each building. A valve must be installed at the tee to isolate combined fire and domestic water service to the building from the water loop. Typically, this valve is installed at the tee or an acceptable distance from the building. A valve must be provided on the domestic water service, which must be tapped off of the combined eight-inch (8”) fire/domestic service outside of the building. The domestic water tap and valve should be as close to the building as possible. Typically, the domestic tap and valve are located within five feet (5’) to ten feet (10’) of the building. A blow up detail of this layout is recommended. 6. Provide a construction detail for the proposed restraining system for the fire main located within the buildings. The Department of Public Works will test and inspect all fire mains to a blind flange located inside the buildings. The blind flange with tap is used for hydrostatic pressure testing (200 psi for two (2) hours) and dechlorination. The flange must be restrained in the direction of the pipe entering the facility. A pipe entering horizontally through a wall sleeve shall be restrained with rods through the wall. A pipe entering vertically through a slab shall be restrained through the floor to the ninety degree (90 ) bend and thrust block. All rods shall be a minimum of ¾” all thread. All pipes through walls and slabs must be Class 52 cement lined ductile iron pipe. Confirm particulars to meet this requirement with mechanical designer. 7. Please call out that the connection to the water main shall be accomplished with a Powerseal 3490AS tapping sleeve and valve. WASTEWATER 1. All wastewater utility components must meet the requirements of the Water Wastewater Handbook, effective date March 22, 2010. Please contact our office for more information. 2. The following notes must be added to the plans: a. Any existing sanitary sewer lines not to be utilized by the proposed facility must be properly abandoned at the mains in accordance with the City of Dover Department of Water & Wastewater specifications and requirements. b. Part II, Chapter 180, Article III, Section 180-10 of the Code of Kent County requires that “no person shall discharge or cause to be discharged any stormwater, surface water, uncontaminated groundwater, roof runoff, subsurface drainage, uncontaminated noncontact cooling water or unpolluted industrial process waters to any sanitary sewer”, this shall include condensate. Sec. 110-231 of the City of Dover Code defines storm sewer as “…any system used for conveying rain water, surface water, condensate, cooling water or similar liquid wastes, exclusive of sewage.” The contractor, developer, owner and designers shall ensure during construction that no illegal discharges to the sanitary sewer system are created with the site improvements. 3. The size, length, slope, type and flow directions must be shown on all existing and proposed sanitary sewer lines. Rim and invert elevations must be labeled on all sanitary structures. 55

Item 3. New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street File #: S-22-06 April 27, 2022 Page 3 of 4 4. Cleanouts must be installed on sanitary sewer laterals within five feet (5’) of the building, one foot (1’) outside of the right-of- way and at all bends. Any cleanout located within a traffic bearing location shall be installed with a heavy duty cast iron frame and cover to prevent damage to the cleanout and lateral. 5. Sizing (flow) calculations must be submitted for all sanitary sewer laterals (other than for single-family dwellings) showing that velocity and all other requirements are met. 6. The minimum size of all sanitary sewer laterals shall be six-inch (6”). 7. If kitchen facilities are proposed a minimum 1,000 gallon, two chamber grease trap, meeting all Kent County ordinance requirements, must be provided. A construction detail for the proposed grease trap, as well as the proposed location, must be provided on the plan. 8. Sanitary sewer laterals shall be connected directly to the main, not manholes, unless impracticable, as determined by the Department of Water & Wastewater. GENERAL 1. All existing utilities shall be adjusted to final grade in accordance with current City of Dover requirements and practices. This must be included as a note on the plan. Please remove note #5 on sheet C301. 2. No trees may be planted within ten feet (10’) of utility infrastructure. 3. No structure may be installed within ten feet (10’) of utility infrastructure, please depict all underground utilities and structures on the utility plan sheet to confirm compliance. 4. The final site plan must be submitted in the following compatible digital formats: a. AutoCAD 2018 (.dwg format). b. Adobe Reader (.pdf format). RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES STREETS / SANITATION / STORMWATER / WATER / WASTEWATER / GENERAL 1. None. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT WATER 1. The City of Dover water system is available to this site. The developer is responsible for all costs associated with extending and providing service to the proposed development. 2. Prior to plan approval, the water system plans must be submitted to the Division of Public Health, Office of Drinking Water for review and approval. The owner/developer will be responsible for providing all completed forms and plan sets to the City of Dover as required for submission to the Office of Drinking Water. Plans will not be submitted to the Office of Drinking Water until review has been completed by our office. 3. Hydrant flow testing is currently only performed during the spring and fall. The applicant must call the Department of Water & Wastewater directly to schedule these tests. This applies to both existing hydrants as well as those proposed for the site. 4. Water impact fees may be required to be paid prior to Certificate of Occupancy for this project. WASTEWATER 1. The City of Dover sanitary sewer system is available to this site. The developer is responsible for all costs associated with extending and providing service and capacity to the proposed development. 2. Prior to plan approval, it may be required to submit the sanitary sewer system plans to the DNREC, Division of Water Resources, Surface Water Discharges Section for review and approval. The owner/developer is responsible for providing all application fees, completed forms and plan sets directly to DNREC. 56

Item 3. New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street File #: S-22-06 April 27, 2022 Page 4 of 4 3. Wastewater impact fees may be required to be paid prior to Certificate of Occupancy for this project. GENERAL 1. The applicant is advised that depending upon the size of the existing water service and sanitary sewer lateral to be abandoned, flowable fill may be required. 2. Construction plans will not be reviewed by our office unless all previous comments have been clearly addressed within the plan set and accordingly identified within an itemized response letter and with the Water/Wastewater Initial Plan Submission Checklist, which can be obtained from the following website: https://imageserv9.team- logic.com/mediaLibrary/198/WaterWastewaterHandbookFinal_1.pdf, page 88. STORMWATER 1. Please be advised that this area is prone to flooding and the City is recommending over management on the site prior to the connection to the City’s stormwater system. STORMWATER / STREETS 1. None I F Y OU H AVE A NY Q UESTIONS OR N EED TO D ISCUSS ANY OF THE A BOVE C OMMENTS , P LEASE C ALL THE A BOVE C ONTACT P ERSON AND THE P LANNING D EPARTMENT AS S OON AS P OSSIBLE . 57

Item 3. CITY OF DOVER ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: APRIL 27, 2022 APPLICATION: New Courthouse at South Governors Ave & West Water St FILE #: S-22-06 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Electric Department CONTACT PERSON: Shawn Burgett, Engineering Services & System Operations Superintendent CONTACT PHONE #: 302-674-7568 CONTACT EMAIL #: sburgett@dover.de.us T HE S UBJECT P ROPOSAL HAS BEEN R EVIEWED FOR C ODE C OMPLIANCE , P LAN C ONFORMITY AND C OMPLETENESS IN A CCORDANCE WITH THIS A GENCY ’ S A UTHORITY AND A REA OF E XPERTISE . T HE F OLLOWING I TEMS HAVE BEEN I DENTIFIED AS E LEMENTS W HICH N EED TO BE A DDRESSED BY THE A PPLICANT : CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS ELECTRIC 1. The roadway and curbing must be in. 2. The right-of-way must be within 6" of final grade. 3. The property corners must be staked. 4. Owner is responsible for locating all existing underground electric, communications and water facilities. 5. Owner is responsible for installing all conduits and equipment pads per the City of Dover Engineering Department specifications. 6. Owner is responsible for site and/or street lighting. 7. Meter locations will be determined by City of Dover Engineering Department. 8. Load sheets and AutoCAD compatible DXF or DWG diskettes of site plans, including driveways, are required prior to receiving approved electrical construction drawings. 9. Any relocation of existing electrical equipment will be engineered by the City of Dover Electric Department. Developer may be required to perform a quantity of the relocation. Any work performed by the City of Dover will be at the owner’s expense. 10. Prior to construction, owner is responsible for granting an easement to the City of Dover Electric Department. Easement forms will be furnished and prepared by the City of Dover Electric Engineering Department. 11. Fees will be assessed upon final site plans. The owner will be responsible for fees assessed prior to construction. Owner is required to sign off plans prepared by the Electric Department. 12. Must maintain 10' clearance around all electrical equipment, unless pre-approved by the City of Dover Electric Engineering Department. 58

Item 3. New Courthouse at South Governors Ave and West Water St File #: S-22-06 Apr 27, 2022 Page 2 of 2 13. Prior to the completion of any/all designs and estimates, the owner is responsible for providing the Electric Engineering Department with a physical address of the property. 14. All Engineering and design for Dover Electric will be engineered upon final approved plans. All Engineering work will be furnished by the City’s Electric Engineering Department. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES ELECTRIC 1. Owner must give the City of Dover Electric Department three (3) months’ notice prior to construction. Owner is responsible for following the requirements outlined in the City of Dover’s Electric Service Handbook. The handbook is now available on the website at the following link: https://evogov.s3.amazonaws.com/media/27/media/13108.pdf. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT ELECTRIC 1. Provide load sheets if the new load requirements will change as soon as possible to verify proper sizing of transformers and creation of primary fee estimates. Current load sheets can be found at the following link: https://www.cityofdover.com/media/Electric%20Department/COD%20Electric%20Load%20Sheet.pdf. I F Y OU H AVE A NY Q UESTIONS OR N EED TO D ISCUSS ANY OF THE A BOVE C OMMENTS , P LEASE C ALL THE A BOVE C ONTACT P ERSON AND THE P LANNING D EPARTMENT AS S OON AS P OSSIBLE . 59

C F S-22-06 I IItem 3. T R CITY OF DOVER Y E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE O M F A APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY R D.A.C. MEETING DATE: 04/27/22 D S O H V A E L APPLICATION: New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street R FILE #: S-22-06 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover, Office of the Fire Marshal CONTACT PERSON: Jason Osika, Fire Marshal PHONE #: (302) 736-4457 THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY, AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY’S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESS BY THE APPLICANT: CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Proposed occupancy classification is Mixed Use Courthouse (Business/Assembly/Detention) and a Parking Structure/Storage. 2. Building Access shall be no further than 50 feet from a primary entrance Where buildings are provided with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with NFPA 13, access shall be no further than 100 feet from the primary entrance. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 5, 3.4) 3. Parking shall be prohibited in front of the primary entrance for a width of not less than 1.5 times the width of the door(s) or for 10 feet, whichever is greater. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 5, 6.3.2) 4. Perimeter access shall be 100% for the Courthouse and 100% for the Parking Structure and clearly shown on the plans. Perimeter Access minimum width shall be10 feet for one-story buildings and 15 feet for buildings of two or more stories, measured from the face of the building at grade with a maximum slope of ten percent (10%). Plantings and utility services (includes condenser units, transformers, etc.) shall be permitted within the perimeter access, and shall not interfere with emergency services fire ground operations. If a physical barrier (fence, pond, steep slope, etc) prevents access, that portion of the building perimeter shall not be included in the calculation of Percent of Perimeter Access. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 5, 3.5) Where parking is located between the building and perimeter access area, parking shall not be located closer than 10 feet to the exterior wall for one-story buildings and 15 feet to the exterior wall for building of two or more stories. 60

Item 3. 5. Fire lanes shall cover 50% for the Courthouse and 50% for the Parking Structure of the proposed building. Fire lanes are required to be 24 feet wide and run along the front of the building as determined by the primary entrance(s). In cases where there is more than one primary entrance(s), each shall be served by a fire lane even if this exceeds the percentage as required. The closest edge of fire lanes shall not be located closer than ten (10) feet to the exterior wall and the closest edge of fire lanes shall not be located further than 50 feet from the exterior wall if one or two stories in height; 40 feet if three or four stories in height, or 30 feet if over four stories in height. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 5) 6. Where parking is located between the building and the fire lane, parking shall not be located closer than 15 feet to the exterior wall. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 5, 6.4.1) 7. All Fire Lanes shall be marked as follows: both the inner and outer edges of the fire lane shall be marked, where curbs are present, the top and face of the curb shall be painted yellow, where no curbs are present, a four inch (4”) solid yellow demarcation line shall mark the edge(s) of the fire lane. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 5, 7) 8. The specific color yellow shall be the uniformly accepted yellow as utilized by State of Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT). Only vivid and durable paint shall be used and shall be suitable for street surfaces 9. Fire lane signs shall be located as follows: see Figure 5-16 – Approved Sign For Marking Fire Lanes, fire lane signs shall be spaced at 150 foot intervals maximum, all fire lane signs shall be located no less than six feet (6’) and no higher than eight feet (8’) above the pavement, signs shall be placed at each end of the fire lane, and signs shall face all oncoming traffic. Where parking is not restricted roadway markings shall utilize the words "FIRE" and "LANE" in lieu of fire lane signs and shall conform to the specifications of 7.6. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 5, 7) 10. Where overhangs, canopies, balconies, or any other building or site features must project over any fire lane, an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13’-6” above the fire lane shall be provided and the portion of the building perimeter which contains overhangs, canopies, balconies, or any other building features shall not apply towards the fire lane accessibility requirements of Section 4.0, Table 5-1 in this chapter. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 5, 6.8) 11. Emergency access to rear building areas compliant with City of Dover Code (Appendix B-Zoning, Article 5- Supplementary Regulations, Section 17); all four stories and greater buildings require 24ft fire lane at the rear. All two to three story apartment structures require an 18ft Secondary Fire Lane at the rear. All townhouses (3-8 units with no fire protection) require a 16ft alley or 18ft secondary fire lane at the rear. 61

Item 3. 12. Multiple Access Roads shall be provided when a fire department access road (fire lane) is determined by the Fire Marshal to be impaired by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic conditions, or other factors that could limit access such as placement of fire hose from fire equipment. 13. Street width shall be in accordance with City of Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix A, Article VII, Section A. 13, Residential areas 24 feet wide with no parking, 30 feet wide with parking on one side, or 36 feet wide with parking on both sides Commercial areas 26 feet wide with no parking, 32 feet wide with parking on one side, or 38 feet wide with parking on both sides Alley 12 feet wide 14. Any dead-end road more than 300 feet in length shall be provided with a turnaround or cul-de-sac as outlined in the 2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 705, chapter 5, 2.3. 15. Speed Reduction Devices must be approved, please see City of Dover Ordinance Chapter 98-10 in reference to this process. 16. Gated Areas: Fire Department access shall be provided to the property through the use of a system or device approved by the Fire Marshal. The system or device required shall be located in an area accessible to the fire department and approved by the Fire Marshal. All gates shall be either automatic or manual. An automated system shall consist of one manual and one automated means to open the gate. The owner or their representative shall meet with the Fire Marshal prior to submission to agree on the system. A letter of agreement shall be created and signed by both parties. The letter shall include a detailed description of both the manual and automated means. A manual gate shall consist of one manual means to open the gate. The owner or their representative shall meet with the Fire Marshal prior to submission to agree on the means to open. A letter of agreement shall be created and signed by both parties. The letter shall include a detailed description of the manual means to open. To be considered accessible for fire department apparatus the actual clear openings shall be not less than 14 feet, the paved surface through the gate shall be not less than 12 feet, and the gate shall be setback from the perpendicular street by at least 50 feet. Please contact this office to discuss options available to comply with this requirement. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 705, Chapter 5, 2.6) 17. All fire hydrants shall be marked as prescribed within the appropriate section of this regulation and as illustrated by the appropriate figures of this regulation. All fire hydrants shall have minimum of four-inch (4") solid yellow demarcation lines to define specific areas, where fire hydrants are located along a curb line with permitted parking, the area between the fire hydrant and the street or fire lane shall be stenciled with four inch (4") demarcation lines and the words "NO PARKING", demarcation lines shall be measured from the center line of the fire hydrant and extend for a distance 15 feet on both sides. 62

Item 3. Where fire hydrants are located in parking lots or other areas susceptible to blockage by parked vehicles they shall be treated as follows: fire hydrants shall be protected in all directions for a distance of seven feet (7') with barriers or curbing, Minimum four-inch (4") diameter steel bollards filled with concrete and marked yellow shall be installed at the outermost corners of the fire hydrant demarcation area. The minimum height of the bollard shall be 36 inches above the finished grade of the adjacent surface, and the steamer connection of all fire hydrants shall be positioned so as to be facing the edge of the street, or traffic lane. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 6, 2) The owner is responsible if the hydrant is private. 18. Hydrant barrels shall be provided with reflective material, such as paint, durable for highway/roadway markings or a reflective tape of a minimum of 2” in width around the barrel under the top flange, hydrant bonnets shall be color coded based on the following criteria: class AA 1500 GPM - painted light blue, class A 1,000 GPM -1499 GPM - painted green, class B 500 - 999 GPM - painted orange, class C 250 - 499 GPM - painted red, class D under 250 GPM - painted black. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 703, Chapter 3. 4) The owner is responsible if the hydrant is private. 19. NFPA 72 compliant Fire Alarm System required per occupancy code requirements. Fire alarm in place of assembly. Fire alarm required. Any new occupancy or new portion of an occupancy determined to be a place of assembly by the fire marshal and is capable of receiving an occupant load of 75 persons or greater, shall be required to install a fire alarm in accordance with NFPA codes governing the installation of fire alarms and the National Electrical Code. Fire alarm system required. Any existing occupancy or portion of an existing occupancy determined to be a place of assembly by the fire marshal, and is undergoing renovations in excess of 50 percent of the assessed value of the building and is capable of receiving an occupant load 75 persons or greater or is being enlarged to receive an occupant load of 75 persons or greater, shall be required to install a complete fire alarm system in accordance with NFPA codes governing the installation of fire alarms and the National Electrical Code. Public mode audible requirements. To ensure that audible public mode signals are clearly heard by occupants of a structure, they shall have a sound level at least 15 decibels (dB) above the average ambient sound level or five decibels (dB) above the maximum sound level having a duration of at least 60 seconds, whichever is greater, measured five feet (1.5m) above the floor in the area required to be served by the system using the A-weighted scale dBA. In the event the stated requirement cannot be met a shunt trip relay/switches shall be the approved method of meeting the intent of this section of the Code. (City Code of Ordinances 46-171) 20. Sprinkler system required. System is to be monitored by an approved Fire Alarm System. This chapter shall apply to all buildings, structures, marine vessels, premises, and conditions which are modified by more than 50% after the effective date of these Regulations. The 50% figure shall be calculated utilizing the gross square footage of the building, structure, marine vessel, premises and conditions as to arrive at the correct application. Any proposal that is presented to the Office of the State Fire Marshal for review and approval for a building rehabilitation as defined in the 101 Life Safety Code, for less than 50% of the gross square footage of a non-sprinklered building, may not have another such project for the same building submitted for review and approval any sooner than three (3) years after the date of the final inspection unless sprinkler projection is provided throughout the entire building. In all buildings exceeding 10,000 square feet of aggregate, gross floor area. 63

Item 3. In all buildings in excess of 40 feet in height or more than four (4) stories in height. In all buildings or areas thereof used for the storage, fabricating, assembling, manufacturing, processing, display or sale of combustible goods, wares, merchandise, products, or materials when more than two (2) stories or 25 feet in height. In all basement areas exceeding 2,500 square feet floor area. In residential occupancies when of: Type V (0,0,0) or Type III (2,0,0) construction and exceeding two (2) stories or 25 feet in height. Type V (1,1,1) and Type III (2,1,1) or Type IV (2,H,H) construction exceeding three (3) stories or 3In all residential apartment buildings storage areas except individual unit closets that are located within individual residential living units. In all buildings used as health care occupancies as defined in the Life Safety Code, NFPA 101, as adopted and/or modified by these Regulations. In all buildings or areas classified as "high hazard" under the Life Safety Code, NFPA 101, or "extra hazard" under the Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, NFPA 13, as adopted and/or modified by these Regulations. All buildings used as dormitories, in whole or in part, to house students at a public or private school or public or private institution of higher education. (16 Del.C. Ch. 88) This applies to all such dormitories regardless if new or existing. (2015 State of Delaware fire Prevention Regulations, 702, Chapter 4) Places of assembly shall be sprinklered throughout in accordance with the most recently adopted edition of NFPA 13 when the following apply: All new indoor places of assembly with an occupant load of 150 persons or greater. Any interior renovations of 50 percent or more to an existing place of assembly with an occupant load greater than 150 persons. Any additions or increase in interior size to an existing place of assembly that would create an occupant load of 150 persons or greater. Places of assembly where alcohol is served for consumption on the premises shall be sprinklered throughout in accordance with the most recently adopted edition of NFPA 13 when the following apply: All new indoor places of assembly with an occupant load of 100 persons or greater and where alcohol will be served for consumption on the premises. Any interior renovation of 50 percent or more to an existing place of assembly with an occupant load greater than 100 persons and where alcohol will be served for consumption on the premises. Any additions or increase in interior size to an existing place of assembly which would create an occupant load of 100 persons or greater and where alcohol will be served for consumption on the premises. New educational occupancies of 5,000 square feet or greater shall be sprinklered throughout in accordance with the most recently adopted edition of NFPA 13. (City of Dover Code of Ordinances 46-162) 21. Fire Department Connection is to be a 5-inch stortz connection on a 30-degree elbow located within 50 feet of main entrance. Access to the Fire Department Connection must be clear unobstructed access as defined by the AHJ. Fire department connections. Unless otherwise approved by the fire marshal, fire department connections shall be on the street side of the building and shall be located and arranged so that hose lines can be readily and conveniently attached to without interference from any nearby obstructions as defined by the fire marshal's office. Fire department connections shall be a five- 64

Item 3. inch Storz. Fire department connections shall be within 300 feet of an approved City of Dover Fire Hydrant and within 50 feet of the main entrance of the structure it serves. All fire department connections shall be not less than three feet nor more than five feet in height above finished grade. The fire marshal shall have the authority to require more stringent requirements when deemed necessary. (City of Dover Code of Ordinances 46-162) 22. Parking and/or obstructions shall be prohibited in front of fire department connections for a distance measuring from the center line and extending four feet on both sides. (2015 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 5, 6.3.4) 23. Fire Department Connection to be located within 300 feet of fire hydrant, measured as hose would come off the fire equipment. 24. If there is any type of rack storage, the following will be required: 1) a diagram showing the layout and type of rack system 2) a list and quantity of items being stored 3) a letter from an authorized/licensed fire suppression contractor stating that in rack sprinklers are or are not needed. If in rack sprinklers are not needed, a letter may be requested from an authorized/licensed fire suppression contractor to ensure that the sprinkler system is adequate for the storage presented. 25. All standpipe and sprinkler connections shall be marked as prescribed within the appropriate section of this regulation and as illustrated by the appropriate figures of this regulation. All standpipe and sprinkler connections shall have minimum of four inch (4") solid yellow demarcation lines to define specific areas, Solid yellow demarcation lines shall be measured from the center line of the connection and extend for a distance of four feet (4') on both sides, and where parking is allow between the building and the street or fire lane the solid yellow demarcation lines shall extend from the end of the sidewalk surface to the street or fire lane (Markings shall not be required on the sidewalk surface). All fire department connections (standpipe and sprinkler) shall have a minimum 12" x 18" sign that reads FIRE DEPT. CONNECTION, sign lettering shall be a minimum of 3 inches (3") in height with red scotchlite letters on white scotchlite background. The sign shall be clearly visible from the fire lane or roadway, and signs using NFPA international symbols shall be an acceptable alternative. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations, 705, Chapter 6, 3) 26. Standpipes shall be provided in all areas and buildings as required in the codes and standards listed in Regulation 701 as well as the following areas or buildings: In all Class A and Class B places of assembly and institutional occupancies two (2) stories or 25 feet in height or over, In any building over three (3) stories, In any building over 35 feet in height, In any building that has a floor above the first floor over 10,000 square feet gross floor area, In all buildings where the 1st floor exceeds 60,000 gross square feet, a Class I horizontal standpipe system installed in accordance with the applicable codes and standards listed in Regulation 701 of these Regulations shall be provided. All standpipe systems shall be installed in accordance with the applicable codes and standards listed in Regulation 701. The standpipe system shall be carried up with each floor and shall be installed and ready for use as each floor progresses. Standpipes shall not be more than one floor below the highest forms of staging, The 2½-inch of hose connections on Class I systems shall be provided in the following locations, At the highest intermediate landing between floor levels in every required exit stairway, 65

Item 3. Where intermediate landing is not provided, hose connections shall be permitted to be located at the main floor landings in exit stairways when approved by the authority having jurisdiction, Where the local fire department has the capability of providing the required pressure, hydraulically designed standpipe systems in fully sprinklered, non-high-rise buildings shall be designed to provide the required waterflow rate. A sign shall be provided at each landing, in all interior stairways, designating the floor level. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 702, Chapter 4, 2) 27. The installation of natural gas and LP gas meters, regulators, valves, and LP gas bottles shall be protected from impact damage by impact protection. Natural gas and LP gas meters, regulators, and valves located inside structures shall have impact protection, except when located in separate protected utility rooms. Dimensions of bollards. Bollards shall be a minimum of six-inch diameter filled with concrete. The bollard shall be set into the ground at a depth of at least 36 inches (three ft.) embedded in concrete at a minimum of 18 inches surrounding the bollard. The bollards must be a least 48 inches (four ft.) in height above the finish grade elevation. Any deviation of the stated requirements must be approved by the fire marshal and/or chief building inspector. The above dimensions shall serve as the requirement for installation; however, the fire marshal and/or chief building inspector shall have the authority to require more stringent dimensions to fit the needs of devices warranting impact protection. Color of bollards. Bollards should be of the following colors; yellow, amber or orange. All colors shall be of fluorescent or have a reflective coating. Any deviation of the stated requirements must be approved by the fire marshal and/chief building inspector. (City of Dover Code of Ordinances, 46-4) 28. Every house, building or structure used or intended for use as living quarters or as a place for conducting business, and having any wall facing or abutting any public or private street or alley, shall have displayed on that wall, in legible, easily read characters which are of contrasting color to the background, the proper street number for such house, building, or structure in accordance with the following: One-family and two-family residential structures, height, the number shall measure a minimum of four inches in height, location, the number shall be placed on the house above or to the left or right of the front entrance, color, the number shall be contrasting to the background color, Arabic numerals, all numbers shall be Arabic numerals. Multiple-family dwellings, measurements, the number shall measure a minimum of six inches when identifying individual apartments with exterior doors, and 12 inches when identifying buildings with apartment complexes where there are two or more buildings not assigned street addresses. Individual buildings with street addresses shall have numbers measuring six inches, location, numbers shall be placed either in the center of the building or on the street end of the building so as to be visible from either the public or private street or from the parking lot, color, numbers shall be contrasting to the background color, Arabic numerals, all numbers used shall be Arabic numerals. Commercial, industrial and office buildings, height, the numbers shall measure a minimum of 12 inches in height, location generally, numbers shall be placed either in the center of the building or on the street end of the building so as to be visible from either the public or private street or from the parking lot, 66

Item 3. property line or driveway, should the building be located far enough from a public or private road so that the numbers are not clearly visible from the street, then the street address shall also be posted on the property at or near the property line or driveway to said building, color; each building, numbers shall be contrasting to the background color and shall be placed on each building in the complex, Arabic numerals, all numbers used shall be Arabic numerals, Shopping centers. Shopping centers consisting of two or more stores shall have a tenant or suite number affixed to the front of the tenant space and on the outside of the rear door which corresponds with that tenant space. Numbers shall measure six inches in height. (City of Dover Code of Ordinances, 98-344) 29. A lock box (Knox) containing any and all means necessary for fire department access shall be provided at the following occupancies: any occupancy that contains a fire alarm signaling system that is monitored off-site, or any occupancy that contains an automatic sprinkler system. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 705, Chapter 5, 2.4) Secured key systems. When required; exemption. A secured key system shall be required for any new or existing building where a fire alarm or sprinkler system is being installed. It shall be the responsibility of the owner or occupant to keep a set of keys in the secured key box that are current to the locks of the protected occupancy. Buildings with 24-hour staffing or guard service shall be exempt from this subsection. Location. The secured key system shall be located as close to the main entrance as possible. Should the building design not allow the secured key system to be located by the main entrance, the fire marshal and fire chief shall come to an agreement as to an alternate location for the key box. A secured key system, once installed, shall not be obstructed from view or obstructed by any means that would delay the fire department access to the box. Required keys. Keys to be secured in the key box shall include keys to all points of ingress or egress, whether on the interior or exterior of the building, and keys to locked mechanical rooms, electrical rooms, elevator rooms, fire alarm and sprinkler controls and any area protected by automatic fire detection. Keys to individual residential apartment units are not required. Ordering responsibility. It shall be the responsibility of the general contractor to order the key box for new buildings. It shall be the responsibility of the owner or tenant to order the key box for existing buildings. Installation before testing. No acceptance test for sprinklers or fire alarms shall be conducted before the installation of a key box. (City Code of Ordinances 46-127) Knox Box to be mounted 6 feet above ground level 30. All required means of egress shall have an exit discharge consisting of a non-slip surface and leading to and terminating at a public way. NFPA 101 31. All new passenger elevators in a building shall be provided with a car sized to accommodate an ambulance cot 24 inches (609 mm) by 84 inches (2133 mm) in its horizontal open position. Where two or more new passenger elevators are located in a single hoist way and serve all or the same portion of the building, only one elevator car that provides a car sized to accommodate an ambulance cot 24 inches by 84 inches in its horizontal position for each hoist way shall be required. Elevator 67

Item 3. cars required to comply with 15.1 or 15.2 shall be identified by the international symbol for emergency medical services (star of life). The symbol shall be not less than 3 inches (76 mm) in height and shall be placed inside on both sides of the hoist way door frame. Firefighter recall keys shall be provided in a manner acceptable to the local fire department. (2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 705, Chapter 1, 15) 32. Buildings over 25,000 Sq. Ft are to have radio performance testing done by Delaware State Communications prior to Final CO. This must be scheduled in advance with Delaware State Communications. 33. Project to be completed per approved Site Plan. 34. Full building and fire plan review is required. 35. Separate building permits/plans submission will be required for each building and/or tenant fit out. If the permit submission is for a “shell” a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued. Separate plans and permits submissions will be required for each “tenant fit out” at which time a Certificate of Occupancy will be issued upon compliance/completion of each “tenant fit out”. Each “shell” will require a fire permit for sprinkler and fire alarm if applicable. Those systems (for the “shell”) must be accepted into service prior to any “tenant fit out” fire permits being issued. 36. Construction or renovations cannot be started until building plans are approved. 37. Fire alarm systems, fire suppression systems, hoods, exhaust ducts, and hood suppression systems require a fire permit from the Fire Marshal’s Office. This work cannot be started until the permit is approved. 38. Building cannot be occupied by the public until a Certificate of Occupancy is obtained. 39. The following is City Ordinance, Appendix B-Zoning, Article 8 Enforcement and Penalties: Section 1. - Building permits. No building or structure in any district shall be erected or structurally altered without a building permit duly issued upon application to the building inspector. No building permit shall be issued unless the proposed construction or use is in full conformity with all the provisions of this ordinance. Any building permit issued in violation of the provisions of this ordinance shall be null and void and of no effect, without the necessity for any proceedings for revocations or nullification thereof, and any work undertaken or use established pursuant to any such permit shall be unlawful (see section 4 for penalties). 1.1 No building permit shall be issued for the construction or alteration of any building upon a lot without frontage upon, or legal permanent access to, a public street improved to the satisfaction of the planning commission, or without access to a public sewer. 1.2 No building permit shall be issued for any building where the site development plan of such building is subject to approval by the planning commission, except upon approval of such plans approved by the said commission. 1.21 No building permit shall be issued for any building in a subdivision unless the subdivision plot has been approved by the planning commission. 1.3 No building permit shall be issued for a building to be used for any conditional use in any zone where such use is allowed only with approval of the planning commission, unless and until such approval has been duly granted by the said commission. (Ord. of 7-12-1993, § 3 68

Item 3. ADDITIONAL / SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN APPROVAL: 1. Please confirm that there is 15’ spacing between the buildings (Courthouse and Parking Structure) and parking areas as outlined in item # 4 listed above. 2. Please provide the distance of the closest edge of the Fire Lane as outlined in item # 5 listed above. 3. Ensure that the pedestrian bridge has an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13’- 6” 4. Emergency rear access required as outlined in item # 11 listed above 5. Please provide the hydrant locations and ensure that there is proper distance from them to the FDC’s. 6. A discussion will need to take place regarding the locations of the FDC’s. 7. Need to confirm the height of the buildings to determine if midrise or high-rise requirements need to be provided. Midrise is certain occupancy classifications (including detention and correction) that exceed 50 feet in height up to 75 feet in height. High rise is any building that exceeds 75 feet in height. 8. Ensure landscape plan does not interfere with item #4 listed above 9. Dumpster enclosure appears to be in the way of emergency rear access APPLICABLE CODES LISTED BELOW (NOT LIMITED TO): 2021 NFPA 1 Fire Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2021 NFPA 101 Life Safety Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2019 NFPA 72 National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2019 NFPA 13 Installation of Sprinkler Systems (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2009 IBC (International Building Code) Latest editions of all other NFPA Codes as defined by the Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations City of Dover Code of Ordinances *If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person listed. 69

Item 3. CITY OF DOVER D E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE L APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY D O T =============================================================== APPLICATION: New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street FILE#: S-22-06 REVIEWING AGENCY: DelDOT CONTACT PERSON: Ryan Schroder PHONE#: 302-760-2674 =============================================================== THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY & STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: No person, firm, corporation or the like shall construct, open, reconstruct, maintain, modify or use any crossing or entrance onto a state-maintained highway, street or road, including any drainage modifications leading into or carried by the highway drainage system, without first having complied with standards and regulations adopted by the Department and having obtained a permit issued by the Department. Please contact the Delaware Department of Transportation - Development Coordination section to begin permit process. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: 1. A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) Letter for this site was issued on March 4, 2022. 2. Pre-Submittal Meeting was held on March 31, 2022. 3. DelDOT Subdivisions will need to review and approve the development through the Commercial Record and Entrance Plan process. 4. This project and the Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue (S-22-07) are being reviewed as one project by DelDOT under the name Kent County Delaware Family Courts 70

Item 3. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL DIVISION OF WATERSHED STEWARDSHIP CONSERVATION PROGRAMS ENTERPRISE BUSINESS PARK PHONE: (302) 739-9921 SECTION 285 BEISER BOULEVARD, SUITE 102 FAX: (302) 739-6724 DOVER, DELAWARE 19904 MEMORANDUM TO: Dawn Melson-Williams City of Dover Planning Office FROM: Elaine Z. Webb, P.E. DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program DATE: April 27, 2022 SUBJECT: City of Dover Development Advisory Committee Comments S-22-06 New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue CC: Bonnie Arvay, Program Manager II, Sediment and Stormwater Program DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program has reviewed the D.A.C. application for the above reference projects and offers the following comments: S-22-06 New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street 1. A Sediment and Stormwater Management Plan must be approved by DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program prior to any land disturbance taking place on site. a. DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program has had preliminary meetings with the owner and consultant regarding stormwater compliance for the site. b. The site will comply with Resource Protection Event (RPv, 1-yr storm) requirements through implementation of a remediation plan. c. Conveyance (Cv, 10-yr storm) and Flooding (Fv, 100-year storm) event compliance must be met for the project. An underground stormwater storage facility is proposed. d. Due to the contamination on site a Contaminated Materials Management Plan (CMMP) must be adhered throughout construction of the project. 2. A Sediment and Stormwater Plan for the demolition phase of the project is currently under review. The demolition plan includes the total area of applications S-22-06 and S-22-07. It is expected that both of the City of Dover DAC applications will be submitted to DNREC as a single Sediment and Stormwater Plan for the redevelopment phase. 71

Item 3. S-22-06 and S-22-07 DAC Comments April 27, 2022 Page 2 of 2 3. A Notice of Intent (NOI) for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity has been submitted that includes the total area of applications S-22-06 and S-22-07. This NOI Permit No. 6692 will continue through the construction phase for both applications until project closeout. S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue 1. A Sediment and Stormwater Management Plan must be approved by DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program prior to any land disturbance taking place on site. Regarding stormwater management compliance: a. DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program has had preliminary meetings with the owner and consultant regarding stormwater compliance for the site. b. The site will comply with Resource Protection Event (RPv, 1-yr storm) requirements through reduction of 15% or greater in impervious surface. c. Conveyance (Cv, 10-yr storm) and Flooding (Fv, 100-year storm) event compliance will likely be met through reduction of impervious surface on the site. 2. A Sediment and Stormwater Plan for the demolition phase of the project is currently under review. The demolition plan includes the total area of applications S-22-06 and S-22-07. It is expected that both of the City of Dover DAC applications will be submitted to DNREC as a single Sediment and Stormwater Plan for the redevelopment phase. 3. A Notice of Intent (NOI) for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity has been submitted that includes the total area of applications S-22-06 and S-22-07. This NOI Permit No. 6692 will continue through the construction phase for both applications until project closeout. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (302) 608-5460 or Elaine.Webb@delaware.gov. 72

Item 3. CITY OF DOVER Dover/Kent DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE County Metropolitan APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY Planning D.A.C. MEETING DATE: 5/27/2022 Organization APPLICATION: New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street FILE #:S-22-06 REVIEWING AGENCY: Dover/Kent County MPO CONTACT PERSON: James Galvin, Jr AICP PHONE #: (302) 387-6030 The MPO requested the opportunity to bring the recommendations on issues of our concern to the City as well. The MPO will limit comments to projects to development proposals and applications that may lead to new development. Issues of concern to the MPO are effective transit, reducing the amount of vehicle emissions by shortening or eliminating trips, and facilities for alternative modes of transportation, including bicycle and pedestrian access. The MPO considers the bicycle facilities required by the City of Dover to be the standard for all applications, not to be waived. City of Dover Planning Commission 5/16/2022 Project Review The Dover/Kent County MPO had commented on the nature of the development of the Family Court House in the previous application for inclusion in the Historic District, referring to the MPO’s Transit Center Neighborhood Plan. A copy of the 2010 plan is on the MPO’s website: (https://doverkentmpo.delaware.gov/files/2019/04/Dover-Transit-Center-FY11-min.pdf) My one question was about transit stop with shelter facilities. It was answered at the PLUS presentation later in the day (4/27), after the Staff DAC review. There is a pad near the mid- block access to the parking garage that is acceptable to DTC. The MPO has no other comments. If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person and the Planning Department as soon as possible. 73

Duffield Associates, Inc. 5400 LimestoneItem Road3. Wilmington, DE 19808 Phone: 302.239.6634 Fax: 302.239.8485 duffnet.com May 5, 2022 Via Electronic Mail Ms. Dawn E. Melson-Williams, AICP Principal Planner City of Dover 15 Loockerman Plaza Dover, DE 19901 RE: Project No. 12598CE (Duffield) Kent County Family Court – Waiver Requests Tax Parcel Nos. 2-05-07.709-03-(32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 61).00-00001 File # S-22-06 City of Dover, Kent County, DE Dear Ms. Melson-Williams: Duffield Associates, LLC (Duffield) is pleased to submit this letter requesting waivers on behalf of the State of Delaware for the Kent County Family Courthouse. The project site is located east of South Governors Avenue between Bank Lane and West Water Street. The site is comprised of Tax Parcel Nos. 2-05-07.709-03-(32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 61).00- 00001 consisting of approximately 3.75 and is currently zoned IO (Institutional and Office) and H (Historic). The site is situated within the historic downtown area of the City of Dover along South Governors Avenue. The site currently has several vacant buildings, parking lots, existing building pads and alley ways. The proposed site condition consists of a 106,771 gross square foot courthouse, a 5-story parking structure, parking lot, drive aisles and grass surfaces. The first waiver request is from relief of the Tree Density requirement. As mentioned in the planning comments for Application S-22-06 New Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street project, the project requires 55 trees based on the development area. The plan currently proposes 43 trees, making the site deficient of 12 trees. We are requesting a waiver from Appendix B, Article 5, Section 16.62 Tree Density requirement for the tree deficiency. To meet this requirement, the Zoning Ordinance allows for the consideration of a Tree Mitigation Plan. Per section Appendix B, Article 5, Section 16.9, “The planning commission may waive the provisions of subsections 16.52, 16.53, and 16.62, and require replacement planting for mitigation purposes should the planning commission determine, after demonstration by the applicant, that due to physical limitations of the land which would otherwise prohibit the reasonable use of the land, or for purposes of preserving, protecting and promoting the interest of public health, safety, welfare and/or public convenience. All tree mitigation plantings must occur within the corporate limits of the City of Dover.” Due to the constraints on the site from environmental conditions and required utility placement, there are limited locations to be able to provide trees to meet the Tree Density requirement. The property is owned Enhancing our community one project at a time. 74

Item 3. Ms. Dawn Melson-Williams RE: Project No. 12598CE (Duffield) Kent County Family Court May 5, 2022 Page 2 by the State of Delaware, which also owns may properties within the City of Dover. Although a specific site has not been identified for the tree mitigation plan, it is the intention of this project to provide the required number of trees through plantings on site and the tree mitigation plan. A total of 55 trees will be planted for this project. The second waiver request is for the Alternative Size of Loading Spaces. Per Article 6 Section 4.2 of the Zoning Code, loading spaces are required at a rate of one loading space per 10,000 sf and one additional space for each additional 25,200 sf for government buildings with a maximum of 3 loading berths required. The loading spaces are required to be 12 feet wide by 60 feet long for the first space and 12 feet wide by 40 feet long for the other spaces. At the rear of the building, the service area is proposed to be approximately 5,800 sf of “loading area.” This area is not accessible to the public but will be used for deliveries to the site. Although the physical dimensions have not been provided to meet the loading space sizes, the area provided for loading meets the intent of the code. Please do not hesitate to contact us, if you have any questions or comments about the above items. We appreciate your review of this project. Very truly yours, DUFFIELD ASSOCIATES, LLC K. James Taylor, Jr., P.E. Senior Project Manager KJT:tmm \\Headquarters.duffnet.com\DFS\Share\Projects\12000\12598\CE\Correspondence\Exports\Dover\2022-05-05 DAC Items\SubLtr-12598CE- 20220505.docx cc: Bill Lenihan, Tevebaugh Architecture 75

Item 3. City of Dover ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW RECOMMENDATION REPORT Recommendation from the Dover Historic District Commission Meeting of April 21, 2022 And Staff Review Repost Application: New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue: Kent County Family Court HI-22-03 Owner: State of Delaware Location: East side of South Governors Avenue between Bank Lane and W. Water Street Addresses & 123 Bank Lane ED-05-077.09-03-33.00-000 Tax Parcels: Part of 34 The Green ED-05-077.09-03-35.00-000 401 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-32.00-000 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-36.00-000 411 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-37.00-000 429 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-48.00-000 435 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-50.00-000 439 S. Governors Avenue/117 West Water Street ED-05-077.09-03-51.00-000 441 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-52.00-000 447 S. Governors Avenue ED-05-077.09-03-61.00-000 101 West Water Street ED-05-077.09-03-53.00-000 and an alley Future Addresses: 415 S. Governors Avenue (Parking Garage) 445 S. Governors Avenue (Courthouse) Size: 3.7499 +/- acres and alley Present Uses: Vacant lots, Vacant Residential and Commercial Buildings (proposed for demolition), and a Parking Lot Proposed Use: Future site of Family Court (Courthouse) 2019 Comprehensive Plan Designation –Land Use Category: Mixed Use Present Zoning: IO (Institutional and Office Zone SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) H (Historic District Zone) For Consideration: Architectural Review Certification Item: Reduction of Rear Yard Setback, Fence Heights P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Community Excellence Through Quality Service 76

Item 3. HI-22-03 New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue and West Water Street Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report from Historic District Commission April 21, 2022 Meeting Page 2 of 11 ACTION OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION: The application was considered at the April 21, 2022 meetings of the Historic District Commission. The following members were present at the April Meeting: Chairman Mr. Eric Czerwinski, Mrs. Ann Horsey, Mr. Jonathan Street, and Ms. Mary Mason. Ms. Mason did not participate in the review of the Application due to a conflict of interest (per By-Laws). The application was represented by Elio Battista, Parkowski Guerke and Swayze PA; Michael Newell, Chief Judge of Family Court of the State of Delaware; William J. Lenihan, Tevebaugh Architecture; K. James Taylor Jr, PE of Verdantas (Duffield Associates, LLC) and Mr. Macia. Public testimony was received during the Public Hearing. Action Taken by Historic District Commission: The motion to recommend approval passed 3-0 of the members present (with one abstention) at the April 21, 2002 Meeting. The Historic District Commission recommends approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the application referencing the Staff Recommendation Report and Addendum. The Commission also recommended approval of the Alternative Bulk Standards to allow a Rear Yard Setback of 25 feet and the use of a fence that is 6-foot in height at the rear of the building. During the Meeting the Historic District Commission heard the applicant’s response to the series of Staff Comments and Recommendations (Items 1-13). They presented information on the materials and finishes selected, agreeing to the 25-foot setback, bicycle parking strategy, sidewalks, building placement, landscaping, etc. See excerpt of Meeting Minutes. The following information was considered by the Historic District Commission in marking their recommendation including the initial recommendations made by Planning Staff in regard to the application. I. PROPERTY INFORMATION The Historic District Commission will act on a recommendation for an Architectural Review Certificate for a New Courthouse and Parking Structure for the Kent County Family Court. This application consists of a project for the construction of a five-story 105,259 GFA government building to serve as the new Kent County Family Court. The proposal includes a five-story Parking Structure (425 vehicle parking spaces), parking lot, and other site improvements. The Site presently consists of a series of eleven (11) parcels consisting of a total of 3.7499 +/- acres and an alley. The properties are zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone), as well as the H (Historic District Zone). The properties are located on the east side of South Governors Avenue between West Water Street and Bank Lane. The owner of record/ equitable owner is the State of Delaware. Property Addresses: 401, 411, 429, 435, 439, 441, and 447 S. Governors Avenue; 101 and 117 West Water Street; 123 Bank Lane; and part of 34 The Green. Tax Parcels: ED-05-077.09-03-32.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-33.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03- 35.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-36.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-37.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-48.00- 000, ED-05-077.09-03-50.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-53.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-52.00-000, ED- 05-077.09-03-61.00-000, and an alley. Future Addresses: 415 S. Governors Avenue (Park Garage), and 445 S. Governors Avenue (Courthouse). 77

Item 3. HI-22-03 New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue and West Water Street Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report from Historic District Commission April 21, 2022 Meeting Page 3 of 11 Existing Properties of Subject Project Area: The subject area has frontage along South Governors Avenue on the east side of the block between West Water Street and Bank Lane. Several of the properties also have frontage on West Water Street. There is also an alley running north from West Water Street a distance of approximately 288 feet. Dover City Council has approved the transfer of this alley from the City to the State. The Historic District Commission approved Demolition of the building at 401 S. Governors Avenue on August 19, 2021 (HI-21-05); a Demolition Permit #21-1036 has been approved for issuance. Additionally, there are three (3) buildings (two residential and one office building) and an accessory structure within the subject area that are proposed for demolition. These Demolition Permits were filed February 7, 2022 and are under review pending issuance. Along Water Street is the Water Street parking lot which currently serves as public parking for the Kent County Courthouse (located one block to the east at 414 Federal Street/38 The Green) and other nearby State buildings. The multiple parcels and alley of the subject area are proposed for a lot consolidation to create the project site for the proposed Kent County Family Courthouse. Surrounding Land Uses The subject area lies within the urban street grid of Downtown Dover to the southwest of the historic Green. To its west across South Governors Avenue is a series of residential and commercial buildings zoned C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone); this area is not located within the H (Historic District Zone). The area to the north of Bank Lane is also zoned C-2A and located in the H (Historic District Zone) with several commercial office and retail buildings. To the east of the subject area, are a series of properties fronting on The Green and others fronting on South State Street where the zoning is RGO (General Residence and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The buildings in that area include several residences and previous bank building and other residential buildings now converted to office use. To the south across West Water Street, the block includes a commercial retail building zoned C-2 and a series of office buildings zoned either IO (Institutional and Office Zone) or RGO (General Residential and Office Zone). Previous Applications The Rezoning Application (HI-22-02/Z-22-01) to adjust the boundary of the H (Historic District Zone) was recently approved to include a series of six (6) parcels consisting of a total of 1.74 +/- acres and an alley as the balance of the lands for the new Kent County Family Courthouse project site. Following recommendations of the Planning Commission (March 21, 2022) and the Historic District Commission (March 24, 2022), the City Council on April 11, 2022 adopted Ordinance #2022-02 making this zoning change. By the action, the entire project subject area is within the H (Historic District Zone). At its meeting of July 15, 2021, the City of Dover Historic District Commission took action to grant approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the Parking Lot Reconfiguration and Improvements project at 30 The Green (HI-21-04) along the Bank Lane rear of the property. The associated Administrative Site Plan for these parking lot improvements is pending approval as Final Plans have been submitted. A portion of the subject area involving the parcel at 439 S. Governors Avenue/117 West Water Street) and the parcel at 101 West Water Street was previously redeveloped as a parking lot from its use as a Transit Center. The project was reviewed for Architectural Review Certification as 78

Item 3. HI-22-03 New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue and West Water Street Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report from Historic District Commission April 21, 2022 Meeting Page 4 of 11 Application HI-10-11 Kent County Courthouse Parking Lot Addition and Conditional Use/Site Development Plan S-11-03. II. HISTORIC PROPERTY INFORMATION National Register of Historic Places – Dover Green Historic District The subject area is located within the boundaries of a National Register Historic District, specifically the Dover Green Historic District. The National Register of Historic Places nomination for the Dover Green Historic District (K-394) was completed 1973-76 and amended in 1979 and 1984. This federal designation focuses on the area immediately around The Green and extends for several blocks to its south. The nomination recognizes “the significance of the evolution of Dover during the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.” In the subject area, a series of contributing and non-contributing resources were listed in the inventory for the National Register nomination. The resources were predominately dwellings of the 19th century through mid-twentieth century. A more detailed architectural description is given in the nomination. It is noted that only three buildings remain today in the subject area on the properties addressed as 429, 435, and 447 S. Governors Avenue. The building at 429 S. Governors appears to be of twentieth century construction or remodeling having served as office space. The building at 435 S. Governors Avenue may be the oldest surviving building dating to a nineteenth century initial construction with later additions. The building at 447 S. Governors Avenue is a dwelling of twentieth century construction. These building are proposed for demolition as part of the redevelopment. Review of Historic Maps A series of historic maps were reviewed by Planning Staff for preliminary information on this east side of South Governors Avenue between Bank Lane and West Water Street. The 1859 A.D. Byles Map of Kent County (Dover insert) shows the beginnings of development in this area with several buildings along each street frontage as an edge of the urbanized for Dover at the time. Development continues as more buildings fronting S. Governors Avenue (then known as High Street) and several buildings fronting on Water Street are shown on the 1868 Beers Map published by Pomeroy & Beers. The 1885 Bird’s Eye View of Dover appears to indicate that the structures are a collection of two story buildings with rear additions (residential in appearance) and other detached accessory structures. The 1887 Map of the Town of Dover by W.R. Roe continues to show a series of buildings fronting Governors Avenue and Water Street. Also, shown on this map is the alley leading north from Water Street which serves other properties which front on State Street. The ownership names listed on these maps seem to indicate that a lot the properties were held by owners with multiple properties in the general area. The series of Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps would also be a reference source for information on the buildings which occupied the subject area over time. For Dover, the Sanborn Maps date from 1897- 1944. The 1919 and 1929 Sanborn Maps show about a dozen of dwelling and duplex dwellings lining the street frontage at this corner of the block. 79

Item 3. HI-22-03 New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue and West Water Street Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report from Historic District Commission April 21, 2022 Meeting Page 5 of 11 Other Studies The parcel now addressed as 117 W. Water Street (now a parking lot to the west of the alley) was the location of a series of three dwellings (detached dwelling and duplex units) which were demolished (by controlled burn) in 1999. See Photo 24 in the Design Standards and Guidelines. This series of houses on West Water Street was documented by the University of Delaware’s Center for Historic Architecture and Design as part of the Threatened Buildings Survey program. III. PROJECT PROPOSAL PROJECT PROPOSAL (Drawings dated April 1, 2022): The application proposes construction a Courthouse Building, a Parking Garage Structure, a Parking Lot, and other site improvements for the development of the Kent County Family Court. The elements of the project are as follows: 1. Courthouse Building: A three-story, L-shaped building is proposed at the corner of South Governors Avenue and West Water Street. The main entrance to the new Courthouse building is from the multi-level plaza and ramp and stair system on the west side of the building near the intersection of South Governors Avenue and West Water Street. The first floor of the building is elevated from the street/sidewalk level. An ornamental tower/cupola element is located on the West Water Street side of the building. The lobby entry is a building segment that projects towards the street and consists of paired brick columns capped by a cast stone cornice with name-brand element. The space between the Courthouse building and W. Water Street includes a lawn area and tree plantings. The sally port has access from W. Water Street. The predominant exterior finish material of the Courthouse is brick with detailing provided through the use of surface definition, brick patterning and cast stone elements. The first floor level is treated differently from the upper two floors on each façade. The use of brick column details and glass window openings create a vertical pattern on the west elevation. Glass wall systems figure more predominately on the south elevation for large openings with a pattern of bay windows in four segments. The Courthouse building has a flat roof system. The height is 55 feet 4 inches. to the top of the parapet wall with the ornamental clock tower reaching a height of 74 feet 6 inches at its roof. The roof provides a location for roof mounted equipment which is screened. Additional mechanical equipment is proposed to be located in a fenced compound to the northeast of the building thus screened from view. 2. Parking Garage Structure: The Parking Garage Structure is located to the north of the Courthouse Building at the corner of S. Governors Avenue and Bank Lane. The 5-story structure is predominately brick and rises to a roof height of 56 feet 10 inches. The stair tower which includes more glass is located at the southeast corner. The west, north, and east elevations are very building-like in appearance hiding the ramped parking decks within. The vehicle access to the garage is via access point from S. Governors Avenue and from Bank Lane which lead to a shared access drive along east side of the Parking Structure. There are 80

Item 3. HI-22-03 New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue and West Water Street Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report from Historic District Commission April 21, 2022 Meeting Page 6 of 11 two entry points into the Parking Structure on its east elevation. There is a second floor level pedestrian bridge connection from the Parking Garage Structure to the Courthouse; it is predominately glass. 3. Parking Lot Reconfiguration: The current Parking Lot area along W. Water Street will be reduced in size and have only one access point to the street. The Parking Lot appears to be planned for 56 parking spaces. It is also the proposed location of an underground stormwater management system. The Parking lot includes planted island areas. 4. Sidewalks: The street frontage sidewalks along hall three frontages appear to be brick. Internal to the site there are some concrete sidewalk systems on the south and east (rear) sides of the Parking Structure. 5. Tree Planting and Landscaping: The project proposes a majority of the new trees along the W. Water Street frontage and throughout the east parking lot islands. Also, for the Water Street Parking Lot, there are also shrub plantings proposed under the trees adjacent to the street for further screening. A seasonal planting bed is located at the corner of the Courthouse building near the clocker tower and also part of the entry plaza area. 6. Fencing: For the equipment compound area, it is partially enclosed by a metal shadow fence to be eight feet in height. The compound where a generator and other mechanical (chiller) equipment will be placed is to the northeast rear of the Courthouse building. There is also a six foot fence proposed on the east side of the Parking Structure entrance drive/shared access drive adjacent to a residential property. See the attached Site Plan set and Project Architecture Presentation Set. The attached elevation drawings and site plan drawings for detailed information on building dimensions, locations, and material choices. IV. ZONING REVIEW The entire project site is now located in the H (Historic District Zone) and subject to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §21 and referenced sections. Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §3.2 outlines the review process for Architectural Review Certification and related building height, bulk, and setback standards. The subject project area is zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and portions are located within the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone – Tier 3: Excellent Recharge Area). The IO zone allows the use for a Courthouse as a type of public and institutional building and makes the development subject to provisions of regulations the IO zone. Review of DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES The subject project site is located in the Dover Historic District Zone within The Green Historic Context. The Green Historic Context is described on pages 2-3 through 2-5. Location within the Dover Historic District Zone requires proposals for demolition, new construction, additions, and 81

Item 3. HI-22-03 New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue and West Water Street Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report from Historic District Commission April 21, 2022 Meeting Page 7 of 11 certain renovation or rehabilitation activities to existing buildings to receive an Architectural Review Certificate. As stated in the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone, an Architectural Review Certificate will be granted “if it is found that the architectural style, general design, height, bulk and setbacks, arrangement location and materials affecting the exterior appearance are generally in harmony with neighboring structures and complementary to the traditional architectural standards of the historic district.” In accordance with Article 10 §3.2, the Historic District Commission will provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission regarding the project’s compliance with the architectural review standards. This proposal must be reviewed for conformity with the design criteria guidelines found in Chapter 4: New Construction, Additions, Demolition and Relocation. Information on the review considerations is given below. New Construction The Design Standards and Guidelines for New Construction (Chapter 4: pages 4-1 through 4-8) provide the design criteria and development guidelines. The guidelines specify the following individual considerations for new construction to be considered in the review by the Historic District Commission (and Planning Commission) of the project for Architectural Review Certification: • Style • Scale (building to reflect dominant cornice and roof height of adjacent buildings) • Elevation of the First Floor • Floor-to-Floor heights • Bays, windows and doors (size, relationship, spacing of) • Absolute Size (compare overall size of new building) • Massing (relationship of solid-to-void) • Orientation (location of primary façade) • Proportions (comparison of height to width of building and elements) • Materials • Forms (shape of building and roof to be complementary) • Siting (location of building on lot and in relation to street) • High density/ large-scale construction The proposed project must also be reviewed for compliance with the standards established by the Zoning Ordinance. The standards include items such as setbacks from property lines, lot coverage, height, etc. This Proposal for the new Courthouse Building and Parking Structure appears to conform to most of the bulk requirements of the IO Zoning District. The City of Dover Zoning Ordinance authorizes the Historic District Commission to waive certain bulk standards when issuing its recommendation to the Planning Commission for an Architectural Review Certificate if necessary. Alternative Bulk Standards – Consideration of Rear Yard Setback The setbacks of the buildings from the property lines are met except for an area at the rear of the Courthouse building. This rear setback is required to be 30 feet when adjacent to residential 82

Item 3. HI-22-03 New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue and West Water Street Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report from Historic District Commission April 21, 2022 Meeting Page 8 of 11 properties. At its closest point the building is 26.75 feet; therefore, relief must be granted to allow the encroachment of 3.25 feet (i.e., the rear year setback to be 26.75 feet). The buildings’ height and number of stories is in compliance with the IO zone. The total lot coverage of the project is listed as 79% in compliance with the maximum lot coverage of 85% in the IO zone. Additionally, the proposal should be reviewed for conformity with the design criteria and development guidelines found in the Design Standards and Guidelines of Chapter 3: Maintenance, Repair, Preservation, and Restoration of Existing Historic Buildings. More specifically the sections on Design Guidelines for Landscaping and Site Amenities, Fencing and Walls, Paving and Bordering, and Parking Lots found on pages 3-24 through 3-27. These guidelines highlight the consideration that should be given to the areas surrounding buildings including the choice of materials. It notes that fences in the Historic District should not exceed four (4) feet in height. Also, the Design Guidelines recommend that 20% of parking lots should be unpaved and planted. STAFF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Staff Comments and Recommendations for this application regarding project activities and Architectural Review Certification were originally provided in an Addendum document to be reviewed in conjunction with the Architectural Review Staff Report issued for the April 21, 2022 Historic District Commission Meeting. These Staff Comments and Recommendations have been incorporated into the Recommendation Report and are given below. The following are Staff comments and recommendations for this application regarding project activities and Architectural Review Certification. 1) Staff recommends conditional approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the construction of the Kent County Family Courthouse and Parking Garage Structure project finding that each building to be of a contemporary design yet compatible with the intent of the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone and with its recommendations for large-scale development in The Green Historic Context. The proposed Courthouse is oriented to the corner and sited to bring the building close to the street/sidewalk creating a scale in proportion to the pedestrian and also to other nearby buildings. Its brick exterior finishes and detailing with building elements and cornice lines at varying heights break-up the expanse of the building elevations. The materials of brick, glass window openings, black railings, cast details, the tower cupola element, etc. are more contemporary in design but reflective of the architectural styles seen in the government buildings in the nearby Capital Complex. The proposed Parking Garage Structure follows a similar approach in its design and most notably is very building-like in its exterior appearance, design and detailing while the parking deck ramp system hidden within its walls. The on-site Parking Lot also incorporates tree plantings and other landscaping. 2) Associated with the Architectural Review Certification, the following items were given specific consideration: a. The project seeks a reduction in the Rear Yard Setback for the Courthouse building from the required 30 feet when adjacent to residential properties to accommodate a building placement of approximately 26.75 feet from the property line (also listed as 26.6 feet and 23 feet in various documents). Staff recommends that the Rear Yard 83

Item 3. HI-22-03 New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue and West Water Street Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report from Historic District Commission April 21, 2022 Meeting Page 9 of 11 Setback be set at a minimum of 25 feet. This will allow a reasonable setback from the property line and also space for the circulation drive to access the rear of the building. b. It appears that a series of fence segments at a 6-foot height are proposed along the adjoining property lines to the east. This may be in conjunction with the Opaque Barrier requirements of the Zoning Ordinance where an opaque barrier(fence) of 6- foot height and landscape screening is required adjacent to residential properties. Since this project is in the Historic District, fences generally should not exceed 4 feet. Staff recommends the continued use of a 4-foot black metal fence system along with landscape plantings for these areas where possible. 3) The following conditions are recommended by Staff to improve project’s compliance with the recommended guidelines of the Design Standards and Guidelines. The following are recommended conditions: a. The selected brick choices should be compatible to the brick of other existing buildings in the area. b. Utilize some type of detailing, scoring or division lines to break-up the large cast stone/concrete foundation area of the building that is visible due to the change in grade along the site. c. Utilize black posts for any signage elements to be attached to posts i.e., handicapped parking signage and any traffic control signs. d. Signage identifying the Courthouse is integrated into the building as part of a sign band area in a cornice line. However, consideration of any free standing signage may require additional review. e. Any light fixtures/poles utilized on the property for site lighting should utilize a black finish color. Light fixtures/poles continue style of the lighting used in the nearby areas of the Historic District. A taller style fixture may be more appropriate within the parking lot areas and as replacement of overhead lighting along street frontage. f. Ensure proposed trees are appropriate to urban planting settings in the parking lot islands and along streets. Clarify where trees are to be planted as the architectural renderings include street frontage trees on South Governors Avenue and Bank Lane that do not appear on Landscape Plan sheet. g. Any revisions or changes in the identified materials may be subject to further review by the Historic District Commission. 4) Some of the site improvements/amenities were not specifically described or had limited information within the application information. Please provide information for consideration and discussion. a. Clarify the surface treatment (lawn areas, plantings, type of mulch, etc.) of the parking lot islands and for planting areas of shrub groupings. b. Based on the number of parking spaces, the property will require twenty-five (25) bicycle parking spaces. The bicycle parking rack should be black in finish color and of a decorative style. Only a location for a 10-space bicycle parking rack outside the parking garage was found on the plan. 84

Item 3. HI-22-03 New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue and West Water Street Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report from Historic District Commission April 21, 2022 Meeting Page 10 of 11 c. Clarify areas where the sidewalks or portions of the sidewalks will be constructed of brick versus granite pavers and sidewalk. The use of brick paving materials for sidewalk construction is a key feature found throughout the Historic District area. d. The location of the sidewalk along the street frontages must be evaluated with sidewalk construction standards as sidewalk placement typically includes a grass area along the curb line setting the sidewalk back from the curb. The minimum width of the sidewalk is five feet but may be greater. 5) The following items should be clarified regarding the building designs. a. Identify brick material (size, form, etc.) and patterning. b. Clarify the type of glazing for the window and curtain wall systems as tinted and reflective glass system may not be appropriate. c. Clarify the type of system proposed for roof drainage via scuppers, gutters, and down sprouts, etc. d. Identify roof screen material (screening for roof mounted equipment areas). e. Identify style, form, material, etc. for the sally port doors facing W. Water Street. f. Clarify screening methods for the equipment compound area. g. Clarify format of “window” openings in the Parking Garage Structure. 6) Staff notes that the project location (buildings and site) may be an opportunity for the incorporation of public art projects. 7) For building construction, the requirements of the building code or fire code must be complied with. Consult with the Chief Building Inspector and Fire Marshal for these requirements. The resolution of these items can impact the site design in some cases. 8) The applicant should be aware of the potential for historic archaeological resources which may include previous building locations, wells, privies, etc. on the property. The State Division of Historical & Cultural Affairs can provide technical assistance when dealing with archaeological resources including previous studies at the subject location. 9) In the event, that major changes and revisions to the design, materials, or site layout occur in the finalization of the plan and/or construction drawings contact the Department of Planning and Inspections. These changes may require resubmittal for review by the Historic District Commission. 10) This site development plan for this project is also subject to the application and review process for Site Development Plan (Article 10 §2 of the Zoning Ordinance) before the Planning Commission. Note: Additional technical items for compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and other regulations may be identified during the Site Plan Process. Review comments pertaining specifically to the Site Plan set will be issued at that time. 11) The subject area is also subject to completion of a Parcel/Lot Consolidation Plan to combine the multiple parcels involved into a large tract and to establish any required easements. 12) The applicant shall be aware that Building Permits are required to proceed with any construction activities on the project site. The permit applications must comply with the 85

Item 3. HI-22-03 New Courthouse on South Governors Avenue and West Water Street Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report from Historic District Commission April 21, 2022 Meeting Page 11 of 11 approvals and conditions granted through the Architectural Review Certification and Site Plan Review process. 13) The applicant shall be aware that a Sign Permit is required to proceed with the placement of signage on the property. Historic District Commission Action Required The Historic District Commission considered the proposal at their Meeting of April 21, 2022 and have provided a recommendation in regard to the Architectural Review Certification for the Courthouse, Parking Garage Structure, and associated Site Improvements. The recommendation should reflect consideration of the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone. The specific conditions of the Recommendation are noted in this Report under the heading of “Action of the Historic District Commission.” See also an Excerpt of the Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes. Documents Considered by the Historic District Commission • Application Submission Letter • Site Plan Set (14 pages: C001, C101, C201, C301, C401, C601, C901- C906, L101, L102) • Project Architecture Presentation Set (11x17 plan set) including project site, design philosophy, architectural renderings and building elevation drawings of Courthouse and Parking Structure, and photographs of example architecture. 86

Item 3. .. CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION April 21, 2022 Excerpt from Meeting Minutes The Meeting of the City of Dover Historic District Commission was held on Thursday, April 21, 2022, at 3:30 PM in person and virtually using the videoconferencing system WebEx with Chairman Czerwinski presiding. Members present were Mr. Street, Ms. Horsey, and Mrs. Mason (Note: The fifth Historic District Commission member has not been appointed following the completion of the term of Mr. McDaniel in 2020). Planning Office Staff members present were Mrs. Melson-Williams, Mrs. Savage-Purnell, Mrs. Bulkilvish, and Mr. Swierczek. NEW APPLICATION HI-22-03 New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street – Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation on Architectural Review Certification for a Site Development Plan Application and associated Lot Consolidation Plan to permit the construction of a five-story 105,259 GFA government building to serve as the new Kent County Family Court. The proposal includes a five-story Parking Structure (425 vehicle parking spaces), parking lot, and other site improvements. The Site presently consists of a series of eleven (11) parcels consisting of a total of 3.7499 +/- acres and an alley. The properties are zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone), as well as the H (Historic District Zone). The properties are located on the east side of South Governors Avenue between West Water Street and Bank Lane. The owner of record/ equitable owner is the State of Delaware. Property Addresses: 401, 411, 429, 435, 439, 441, and 447 S. Governors Avenue; 101 and 117 West Water Street; 123 Bank Lane; and part of 34 The Green. Tax Parcels: ED-05- 077.09-03-32.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-33.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-35.00-000, ED-05- 077.09-03-36.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-37.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-48.00-000, ED-05- 077.09-03-50.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-53.00-000, ED-05-077.09-03-52.00-000, ED-05- 077.09-03-61.00-000, and an alley. Future Addresses: 415 S. Governors Avenue (Park Garage), and 445 S. Governors Avenue (Courthouse). Council District 4. Project Site subject to Rezoning Application Z-22-01/HI-22-02 which was reviewed by the Planning Commission on March 21, 2022, Historic District Commission on March 24, 2022, and City Council on April 11, 2022. Mrs. Melson-Williams gave a summary of Application HI-22-03 with the Staff Recommendation Report and Addendum. The applicant is requesting a Recommendation on Architectural Review Certification for a Site Development Plan Application and associated Lot Consolidation Plan to permit the construction of a five-story 105,259 GFA government building to serve as the new Kent County Family Court. The proposal includes a five-story Parking Structure (425 vehicle parking spaces), parking lot, and other site improvements. The Site presently consists of a series of eleven (11) parcels consisting of a total of 3.7499 +/- acres and an alley. 87

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 Two items that were noted for the Commission for consideration are the Alternative Bulk Standards consideration of a reduction of the rear yard setback as well as the request of a 6-foot height fence in the rear on the east side of the Courthouse building where it adjoins some residential properties. The Code requires that the setback be 30-feet; the applicant is looking for a reduction to 25-foot. It also includes the Addendum outlining the Staff Recommendations in regard to the Architectural Review Certification. The same By-laws of the Historic District Commission are in place as the last meeting. Ms. Mason, a member of the Historic District Commission will be unable to participate in the Commission deliberation on this Application as she is a property owner within 200-feet of this Application. As part of the By-laws of the Historic District Commission that is deemed a conflict of interest. Representatives: Elio Battista, Parkowski Guerke and Swayze PA; Michael Newell, Chief Judge of Family Court of the State of Delaware; William J. Lenihan, Tevebaugh Architecture; Mr. K. James Taylor Jr. PE Verdantas (Duffield Associates, LLC) Mr. Battista stated that he was present to seek Architectural Review Certification and approval from the Historic District Commission from a legal perspective. Because this is an Architectural Review Certification you will hear from the Architect. He introduced the fellow members of the team and guests: Michael Newell, Chief Judge of Family Court of the State of Delaware; Judicial Officers; representatives from the Kent County Bar Association and Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce; and the Design Team, Mr. James Taylor, William J. Lenihan and Mr. Rick Macia. Afterwards we will get into the perviable bricks and mortor of the project. PRESENTATION Mr. Taylor stated that the existing Family Court is not sized appropriately for the current use. The State went through and examined property where they could develop the future Family Court site. It was selected to be at the corner of Governors and Water Street. As mentioned, they purposely sought to come fully into the Historic District over the past month to be acquainted with The Green and other things in the Historic District in the City of Dover. The existing site is made up of a parking lot that is used for the Court. All of the buildings shown are proposed to be demolished. This also the site of the contaminated Capital Cleaners site. There have been some environmental pieces and cleanup that we have had to deal with throughout the process. As we look at the site design, the Courthouse is approximately 106,000 square foot and the other proposed building is the parking structure that will be 5-story and 425 parking spaces. All the properties along The Green are adjacent neighbors. There is access through our site so an updated access easement has been provided to allow them to get access to their site to continue and, continue to maintain the integrity of the properties that are facing The Green themselves. As was mentioned, we are seeking relief of the setback right in this area that's supposed to be 30- foot but he believes the application mentioned 23-foot. Staff recommended 25-foot and we believe we would have no issue with the recommendation. The measurement is 26.5 -foot So we are going have a little bit of play there for construction. If something happens, we don't want to have to come back to talk to you guys again. The Site itself is zoned IO (Institutional and Office 2 88

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 Zone) and the Historic District Overlay. Access points to the Site are going to be from South Governors Avenue, Bank Lane and Water Street. On that property the back area is actually a drive aisle. There is a house that sits roughly 300-foot from the building. On this site, brick is being proposed for the sidewalk. One of the recommendations was to make sure that all of the sidewalk was brick. We do not not have any issue with and that will be addressed later as well. Parking is proposed in the parking structure, but there's also a small surface lot that is on the right-hand side of the property. On the Plans where there is landscaping, we are trying to invest and meet the intent of the landscaping plan, but there's a large number of trees that are proposed for the site. We are not able to meet the tree requirement directly, but we are looking at offsetting the allotment. We want this to be a bright spot in the community as you enter the City of Dover from the south. The Plaza area along the frontage of the building will allow people access through that area. They are looking at the interconnection between the parking garage and the sidewalk. Mr. Lenihan mentioned that they met and updated the Friends of Old Dover, the Downtown Dover Partnership and Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce on the project. There was a feasibility study that justified the need for the square footage for these buildings. The existing building is approximately 35,000 square feet and the space study showed that we needed approximately 105,000 square feet to be able to have a safe, secured, and dignified experience for all working and visiting the Courthouse. That is obviously a large challenge when you are working within the Historic District. Many small parcels needed to be acquired and assembled into a larger contiguous site. As you can see on the screen and the top image is a 3D view of the Courthouse on the right and to the left is the Parking Structure and their large volumes. The Courthouse is a three-story structure. The parking deck is a four and a half level because it is a helix going up the ramping system through the garage. We went to great detail of really thinking about the massing of the building. As I stated before, you have an excellent set of Historic District Guidelines that really talks about where to place larger buildings in the District. This parcel was noted that it is appropriate for larger scale buildings and staying with the Comprehensive Plan and the greater Metropolitan Planning Group stated that as well. With the building, we really have different elements that Mr. Maseeia is going to get into with the massing of how we broke down the components and really studied the existing Historic District and the different buildings in the component’s styles and details, so that we would really apply those materials on this building as we went forward. With the siting, the main entrance of the Courthouse is facing the intersection. In the other rendering you'll be able to see that the building is at a bit of a pedestal at the main intersection there because the grade drops about 6 feet down to the intersection there. It gave us a larger opportunity to have a larger cast stone base around the building at that area and have the two- story entrance lobby that presents itself on the South Governors Ave with the entrance Plaza, which steps in plateau areas that people will make their way off through ramps or steps in the front entrance way. With the Historic District Guidelines and also the Secretary of Interior’s Standards really talked about new construction is to be contemporary but compatible and differentiated. With the approach we took here, you can see a number of buildings on the right-hand side and bottom. The buildings and the detailing in the brick and the soldier courses and the heads and the bond of the brick and the joinery and the top right is actually the Kent County Courthouse which is 3 89

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 similar scale of this size building here. Mr. Maseeia who will be speaking next. His office was involved as an architect designer with the Justice consultant on that project as well. Between all our joint experience of working in Dover, we truly understand the significance of the details and the character of the community that we are trying to design this building in a manner that fits into the existing community. This is a transitional site because we are at the edge of the Historic District. We have a very modern and new complex with Bayhealth just south of us. We have mixed development across the street. This gives us the opportunity to design an institutional building to add to the government civic complex and to make a real Courthouse campus and a gateway to the site in Dover as people approach Downtown from the south and from the west. The large rendering is a view from South Governor Avenue looking north. You would see that there is a tower element with a light at the top, the entrance way, and the circulation tower of the Parking Garage beyond. You will also see that there is a number of elements, as we call them as the box window elements, along Water Street. Each of those elements is closer to the scale of lot of the smaller buildings in the area. So, you'll see that the fenestration within those elements and along the first-floor banding is a much more human scale as we then have a backdrop of a bigger building there with it. Mr. Macia mentioned that he would start first talking a little bit about the process of the building design’s national Standards and Historic District Guidelines that are very well written compared to some of the other ones we have seen in other places in the country. We spent a lot of time walking around, really getting to know the building. Dover has such a rich history about Colonial, Georgian and Federal. You have a little bit of everything that is really quite interesting. We also looked at similar projects that really illustrates that. You will recognize the Kent County Courthouse on the presentation presented. These are projects all over the country that take a similar approach in terms of creating “compatible and sympathetic but contemporary building designs.” The one thing that you will see that they have in common is the use of materials, proportion and types of windows sizes and massing. The fact that all these buildings although they are contemporary, they have some richness in terms of having different materials, colors, proportions, and shapes. We really did look at quite a few items and issues. The first thing that we spent a lot of time on was to make the building fit well into the concepts here in Dover was material. You can see that the primary material is brick. It is not a jumbo brick. It is a traditional proportion modular red clay brick that is very typical in this area. We highlighted that as you can see with expanses of watertable and cast stone or cast stone elements. Again, those are some materials that you see on the historic buildings in the area that provides a nice contrast to the brick. Those two materials are quite important. Where we have glass at the pedestrian human scale and on some of the special features, there are individual punch windows vertically portioned, and we try to capture that feeling. It is not reflective glass at all. It is a clear glass with a little bit of gray. The richness of the texture that you know those three simple materials provided is enhanced through the massing and the scale of these elements. So, rather than doing just a simple big box we pulled out the lobby as a two- story piece and as a primary element so that the public can see it going north or south on Governors Avenue. 4 90

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 The main body of the building itself on Governors Avenue from the most visible street is actually set back three plus feet. This does a couple of things for us; it makes the lobby the feature we want the public to help find the entry easily. It really helps to be a wayfinder user experience, and it breaks down the scale. Additionally, instead of having just one large plane for the façade, you will see that for both the Garage and the Courthouse, we added a second plane and pulled the brick forward a little bit. This will add layers and some richness to the building. The elevator tower is plated with some of the cast stone and extended the top. A lot of your public buildings here including the State House have these wonderful Colonial Era or Colonial Revival cupolas. With our contemporary version that will be lit at night and visible from all sides. We have added a clock to the tower that has double columns and detailed shadow and richness. The columns are repeated in the lobby. You know those columns, cornices, clock and tower are all civic elements. This is a Courthouse and public building, so it is important that it feel like a public building and not a residential or commercial building. This building will serve a public purpose and at the same time it is a Family Court. We don’t want to be overpowering, but we do want visitors to the Court to understand that they are entering a public building where important matters are discussed and held, and people lives are impacted. We tried to find a balance between creating a dignified, exterior specific attributes including the flag poles at the corner, but nothing overpowering. The previous view is going north on South Governors Avenue. If you go past the hospital this would be the next thing you see. If you are going south on Governors Avenue it is a side view from the north, then this would be a little bird’s eye view and you would see the side of the building. You can clearly see where we expressed the second plane with individual punched windows with the civic feeling that we are trying to achieve without becoming overwhelming. It was previously mentioned that we had 6 feet of grade change, but it is almost 8-feet to the back corner when you get the Bank Lane. We had to deal with the 6-feet for people in wheelchairs and ADA Access. It turned out to be a really nice opportunity. So, we created our entrance plaza as a stepped plaza that comes up with an ADA ramp that comes out of the Parking Garage. This gives the building some regimen. The railings we are proposing would be a simple black painted metal very similar to what is on most of the buildings here in town. The plaza gives something back to the city. We have these steps on both sides from the north and south as you are coming up from Water Street. The other nice thing about sitting the building back on both Governors Avenue and Water Street is it also allows a more generous yard for landscaping. With that generous space, the trees can grow to mature size and provide some canopy. On Water Street you will see a little more glass. The glass is very important to us in the sense that this is where the eight courtrooms are, and all the family matters are held. This is actually the lobby area, the waiting space in front of the courtroom. We want to have as much natural 5 91

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 light in there as possible. We did not want an all-glass building. That certainly would be out of character. We tried to find the balance by adding bay windows (smaller buildings). The elements with individual windows are really a scale of some of the traditional building that you see on State Street. The façade on Water Street has a slightly different character but the base and the rest of the building continues with some of the same elements. The Garage is on the north side of the property. The Garage will be cladded in brick. It will be the same brick that is on the Courthouse. We will be thickening the panels for the first few floors so that we get those layers of façade. The openings in the Garage will have windows. It is important in a Garage to make sure that the people using it feel safe; so we try to make sure that the elevator has glass or a glass wall. We have also repeated some portion of the glass design in the Courthouse. There will also be a decorative arch panel on the ground floor cut with a pattern to screen the cars at a pedestrian level. One of the challenges that we faced is the one place that this building can be seen from The Green in the Historic District is Bank Lane. If you stand from the west end of The Green, you will see the garage. We created it so that it will be a little more directly related to the traditional architecture of the rest of the town. Mr. Marcia asked if there were any questions before moving on to the Appendix items. Chairman Czerwinski mentioned that the Design Standards and Guidelines for the Historic District could be quite vague. This is The Green Context and one of the four Historic Zones in the Historic District. It states “The Green and the buildings that surround it and by extension its immediate environs are extremely significant historic resources by any criteria. The complete enclosure of the Green as well as the excellent state of preservation its buildings make it an extremely significant historic resource. The Green historic context should be very carefully preserved and requires the most restrictive design standards. New construction should be very carefully designed to be compatible with the scale of the Green historic context. Large-scale development that might be considered for the vacant lots along Governors Avenue or as part of the hospital complex should be very carefully sited, screened and massed so as not to overwhelm the character of the Green historic context.” (Pages 2-4, and 2-5 Design Standards and Guidelines) Chairman Czerwinski question was regarding the massing as compared to the Kent County Courthouse. They did a really good job where the windows were enlarged. Here you have so many windows on the side of the building that it looks like a school. The massive windows are not compatible compared to what he thinks should be compatible in the Historic District. This building is actually the cornerstone building of The Green Context. This is the first building that you will see when you enter the Historic District in Dover from the south. So, when you see this, you see the massing of the windows as they are. I mean, to me it just does not compliment the area very well because you are making the windows very small. You have the vertical stripes, and that to me is kind of in the tower itself. I understand the intent that we are not supposed to necessarily replicate the architectural design on The Green itself. His concern is the scale and size. The absolute size of this building “the proportions of new construction should relate to proportions and the styles present in the immediate neighborhood.” 6 92

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 Chairman Czerwinski mentioned that his concern was the 5-story building in the Historic District. Mr. Marcia responded by stating that the Courthouse is a 3-story building, and the Parking Garage is a 4 ½ story building. Chairman Czerwinski asked what the overall height was equivalent to. Mr. Marcia responded by stating that the cornice line of the Courthouse is approximately 55-feet high and the top of tower is approximately 75-feet high. Those heights come from the third-floor heights. The first floor and the second floor are 15-feet and 4 inches to accommodate all the uses in the building systems. The second and third floors are both 18-feet floor-to-floor heights because of the courtrooms that have the higher volume; just like this room that we are in here as a higher volume. Chairman Czerwinski asked if this was the typical height for a building of this type or because of the chambers. Mr. Marcia replied that it is typical for this building type. Office buildings may have something like a 14-foot floor height for each of the floors. Many of the buildings on The Green, many of them have a first floor that have a 12 or 14-foot first floor height. The second or third floor would have a reduced height in those residential buildings. Chairman Czerwinski as he referred to the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone that the “development pressure in the City of Dover has resulted in proposals for projects involving structures larger than the predominant two-and three-story scale of the Historic District. Whenever possibl,e alternative sites for large structures should be sought outside of the Dover Historic District, and the City of Dover should provide assistance to the applicant in identifying alternate sites that would be mutually benefit to the applicant and the City. If alternate sites are not available, the means by which the negative impact of large-scale buildings can be minimized…” (pages 4-6) Chairman Czerwinski mentioned that the Design Standards and Guidelines do identify this plot of land to the southwest of The Green. The “large lots which can be easily screened, areas with few or no historic structures, or areas which can best accommodate parking facilities.” It talks about how dominant this structure is compared to everything around it. Now again with the Kent County Courthouse, they seemed to do a really good job of mitigating some of that effect of the building by larging the windows and making the scale look a little smaller. This building with the number of windows and of course the Parking Garage really dominates the skyline especially when you look at the plan view. When you're coming from the south, it is a very large building. The design and elements on this building does not necessarily compliment The Green. The building does not necessarily have to have the architectural features, but there should be some elements in the Postmodern structure; and he did not see them. He did not see this building as being the cornerstone of the Historic District in Dover. Mr. Lenihan mentioned that they went through a very extensive site selection process for this building. The building became very evident that it was extremely important to keep these Courthouses directly Downtown. Courthouses are part of the civic structure of the downtown and do really create a Courthouse campus with the Kent County Courthouse on the other side of the 7 93

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 State Street and all the efficiencies that it brings. Obviously, the City of Dover was pushing for the Courthouse to go on this site as well for those reasons and because of the contaminated site with Capitol Cleaners and some of the other Brownfield sites. Putting in the Parking Structure here is really the highest and best use for that land and having the State invest and advance the development of those properties. It really prohibited any other private developer to do that kind of work here. We thought that this was really a win-win for that part of the site and to put the Courthouse at this location. You're correct and we have a lot of small-scale development right across the street. We don't think that all of that will remain into the future especially right across Water Street with Bayhealth buying one of the properties there. You know they are going to be expanding up towards the Water Street as well as we go forward. So, we know that larger scale buildings are coming here. We had a choice about the Historic District. As you know this site was split zoned with the Historic District. You requested the balance of the site not being in Historic District or do you put it all the way in? Based on many conversations with the Planning Department and that the National Register had the full block in, we thought it was more straight forward to put the rest of the site in the Historic District. We are on that edge on the boundary of the Historic District. How do you work with the mass of the building and all the details? Responding, Mr. Lenihan stated that we would with the direction of having more smaller pieces of fenestration on the building to try to fit with the scale of the things. The Kent County Courthouse is on the edge of the Legislative Mall where it is adjacent to much larger buildings. That is why the design team went with that particular approach. Yes, there are multiple ways to approach these buildings, but after consensus with many people that what lead the design to where it is at the current time. We are not mimicking any particular one of them or trying to recreate one particular style. Chairman Czerwinski asked if there were any questions or comments? Mr. Lenihan stated that Mr. Taylor had previously mentioned the setbacks. We are fine with Staff Recommendation of using 25-feet for that one area. It's a small piece of the Courthouse on the Site Plan that is adjacent to a residential property. As he stated that residence is 300-feet away and we need the floor plan of the Courthouse for the space plan of those departments required in order to place the Courthouse where we are proposing it. We are proposing to reduce the setbacks from 30-feet to 25-feet. We think that it is still in keeping with intent of the setback. Fencing Mr. Lenihan mentioned right now there is a metal decorative fence along the rear side of the Water Street parking lot that is 4-feet high. We would like to keep that style fence there for the bulk of that area. Directly behind the Courthouse, we have our loading and receiving area. We will have gates at both sides to keep it a secure area. We also need to screen some mechanical equipment, so we are requesting to go to a 6-foot-high fence for that area. We will have a safe and secure area visually screening the mechanical equipment directly behind the Courthouse. For the balance of the fencing along the back of the Water Street lot we could go to the 4-foot fencing. Going north along the new alley off Bank Lane, there is a stockade fence at one section located near The Green and we want to replace the fencing in that area. The brick for the building is going to be a modular brick. This is a sample that we're looking to make the basis of 8 94

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 design for the brick. One of the things that we talked about is we want the same brick on the Parking Garage and on the Courthouse that really makes it a campus. With that the Parking Garage Structure is precast concrete so the pieces will be made in a factory and bought to the site. We have years of experience with detailing and making sure they really look like they are buildings with the detailing on the joinery. This particular brick comes in full depth, but it also comes in this half inch thickness as shown, but it is the same exact brick that will be cast in and the tolerances are very tight. This particular kind of brick works for both buildings. We looked at every single building around the site, around The Green, down State Street and along Water Street and Legislative Mall. We took all selection of bricks and pieces of cast stones like this and looked at the full range of bricks, the many different colors, sizes, and the joinery. This particular brick has a range of color within the brick. It also has a range that when you see a larger sampling of it you will see more range in between the bricks as well. For this project, we will have a full-scale mockup approximately 6-feet tall and15-feet long where we will have all the different materials so that we can all have an opportunity to really see it before it goes on the building, but it is also for the construct ability of the building, to make sure that all the detail is done properly. A test stone sample was also provided. We have a sister Courthouse in Georgetown, and the cast stone is more of a buff color for most of the buildings. Here, it is more of a light gray. Some of it is granite, marble or cast stone. Post for the Signage The signage should be painted black, and we will absolutely do that. We will have signage on the Site and on the Courthouse. Right now, we are proposing some signage on the south and north side of the lobby cornice. We have not designed it to any greater detail than that at the current time. Of course, for any Site Signage etc. we would absolutely come back to you and work through your signage program. Light poles Yes, they would be black as well. We have been working with the City of Dover and across the street outside the Historic District on another Site. This will be entered into the street light program with the City of Dover and use their fixtures there and around the perimeter of this Site. We would like to use the fixtures of the district and then we will see if we need a different style. We want to make sure we have the right footcandles in the parking lot levels. They will be painted black. Trees (Urban Planting) Mr. Taylor mentioned they are currently proposed to work appropriately in the parking lot areas. There was question about whether there would be trees along South Governors Avenue in front of the Parking Structure. That was one thing that we had been looking at, but unfortunately there were a number of things that came into play. DelDOT is requesting a bus stop to be placed along the northbound South Governors Avenue frontage. The other piece is the City of Dover Electric Department has requested electric run in the space between the property line which is shown is the dark thick black line. Unfortunately, currently in that area we will not be proposing trees to be placed between the spacing of the sidewalk and spacing of the building where the electric wants to go. We cannot maintain 10-foot in order for those trees to grow. So that's one thing unfortunately, that we were trying to get that we could not do. 9 95

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 Site Improvements and Amenities Mr. Taylor mentioned that there was a question regarding the surface treatment. There is a wide variety that was labeled on the Landscape Plan that was part of the packet submission. There were areas where lawn and groundcover plantings were identified. There will be some mulch and river stone areas. There is a wide variety of surface treatments being proposed throughout the site. Twenty-five bicycle parking spaces are required for the Site, we are currently proposing 10 parking spaces. Ten of the spaces are shown exterior of the Parking Garage and ten interior spaces. We will make sure that there are 25 spaces shown whether it is interior or exterior to the site. Sidewalks Mr. Taylor stated that as previously mentioned that all of the sidewalk on the Site will be constructed of brick rather than granite. The ADA ramp area will be concrete. The granite pavers are going to be used on the plaza area and the remainder will be brick sidewalks. There was a question regarding the location of the sidewalks on the street frontage and grass strip between the road and the sidewalk. Currently, the Water Street side actually has the brick sidewalk directly up against Water Street which we will continue to maintain. If you look at the Historic District throughout Dover there is not much of a grass strip, most of the sidewalk is right up against the roadway. We are trying to carry the historical look and feel into this property. Building Design Mr. Lenihan mentioned that the pattern of the brick will be a running bond with concave joints. The glazing of the windows will be insulated glass of two panes with air space in between and clear to slightly gray tinted on the interior. This is required to reduce the solar heat gain into the building. The downspouts of the roof will be roof drained within the roof so you will not see gutters or downspouts along the perimeter. They will all be contained within the building. The roof screen will be a painted metal screen. We will have more detailed information once the product is selected for the equipment screening and with the fencing product that was recommended. As previously mentioned, the windows in the Parking Garage will be openings with aluminum frames and air opening ventilation through the Parking Structure. There will be a 4-feet high, 24-feet long mural coming over from the courtroom. We have identified other areas within the Courthouse like the second story area of the internal lobby as an area for artwork. We have not designed it or worked with another group. We have a rich history of working with other organizations and artists with projects. We are familiar with the requirements from the State and the City of Dover for archeological surveys. We will notify the State Historical and Cultural Affairs. As previously mentioned by Mr. Marcia, we do not propose any other major changes or revisions, but we are fully aware if we need to come back before you for those items we will. We are working on advancing the Parcel and Lot Consolidation. There is one parcel (The Shank Shack) that is very close to going to settlement and everyone agrees. We are aware that we need permits including building and signs for the project. Chairman Czerwinski asked if there were any additional questions from the Historic District Commission members. Ms. Horsey asked for a point of clarification about the landscaping. She understood what was previously mentioned about trees not been planted on the northbound South Governors Avenue frontage. She wanted to know if any other type of the plantings could go there? Mr. Taylor 10 96

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 replied that it is up to the City of Dover Electric Department because it is their utility going in that area. They have requested it to go into that area in case they would need to access in case there is any issue in the future. It has to be on a property and there is about 5-foot on the backside of the sidewalk to our property line that we cannot touch because it is in the DelDOT right-of- way. Therefore, we are left with the 10-foot setback. Mr. Lenihan also replied if they could get any type of plantings or flowers, they would pursue that. They are proposing trees along Water Street side of the Courthouse. Mr. Street mentioned that not to disagree with Chairman Czerwinski because they were great points. He has seen the presentation for the second time. This is the second time a new application has come in that has at least been considerate of the architecture of the city. He liked what you tried to do on the Water Street side because that is a challenging side due to the change in grade and building elevation. Having worked in the Bank Lane area, he liked what you are trying to do in the Bank Lane area which almost mimics the visual of what is on The Green. He can appreciate that, so thank you. Mr. Czerwinski opened the public hearing to those in the room and also those in the virtual meeting. Also, in the virtual audience was Ms. Addie Spicer that is involved with the project team. Ms. Dina Carol Vendetti, President of the Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce mentioned that she was present to enthusiastically support the project. She too has heard the presentation three times and there is much about this project that they are excited about. They are excited about the additional foot traffic Downtown, the potential use of the parking garage, bringing people closer to the historic area and having them understand that there are things there to avail themselves of and there are ways to learn about the rich history of our area. We like the rendering and design of the building. They understand the safety factor and that the building needs to be bigger than the current Courthouse. There is only so much that you can do with a great big building to make it look like the area. We felt like the design team did a really good job. Although, it does not look like a historic building, there is a balance there that kind of ties it into the area. When you approach the City of Dover from either the west or the south, we like the idea that this is what you will see instead of the often-overlooked corner that you currently see. For us it is what is good for the businesses. This is something that would be very good for the businesses in that area. Our Board have put their heads together and decided to support this project. Mr. Adam Gerber, Past President on behalf of the Kent County Bar Association mentioned that they supported the building and the design. There is definitely a need for more space and parking as he appears before the Court few times throughout the year. Mr. Czerwinski closed the public hearing to those in the room and also those in the virtual meeting after seeing no one else wishing to speak. Mrs. Melson-Williams noted the letter received from Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce on 4-21-22. The letter was provided to all members of the Historic District Commission members. The letter reflects the comments that Ms. Vendetti just made about their support of this project, both the Courthouse and Parking Garage. 11 97

Item 3. Excerpt of Historic District Commission Meeting Minutes APRIL 21, 2022 There were no additional questions from the Historic District Commission members. Mr. Street moved for approval of the Architectural Review Certification for Application HI-22- 03 and Staff Recommendation Report and Addendum, the Alternative Bulk Standards- Consideration of 25-foot Rear Yard Setback as well as the request of a 6-foot height fence in the rear. The motion was seconded by Ms. Horsey and approved 3-0 with one member abstaining due to conflict of interest. Roll Call Vote Ms. Horsey – Yes Mr. Street – Yes Ms. Mason – Abstaining due to conflict of interest Mr. Czerwinski – Yes 12 98

x 4' BLACK x ORNAMENTAL x FENCE PROPOSED PARKING 5-STORY STRUCTURE PROPOSED FAMILY 6' SLIDING GATE COURT BUILDING x x x 4' BLACK ORNAMENTAL 4' BLACK x 6' SLIDING GATE 6' SHADOW / FENCE ORNAMENTAL GATE x PRIVACY FENCE EXISTING FENCE x TO BE REMOVED x 4' BLACK ORNAMENTAL FENCE 4' BLACK x ORNAMENTAL FENCE x x 4' BLACK ORNAMENTAL FENCE DESIGNED BY: AR DUFFIELD DATE: SHEET: SCALE: ASSOCIATES FENCE AND GATE EXHIBIT Soil, Water & the Environment DRAWN BY: AR 5400 LIMESTONE ROAD WILMINGTON, DE 19808-1232 KENT COUNTY FAMILY COURT TEL. 302.239.6634 PROJECT NO. FAX 302.239.8485 CHECKED BY: KJT 415, 445 & 446 S GOVERNORS AVENUE OFFICES IN DELAWARE, MARYLAND PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JERSEY CITY OF DOVER ~ KENT COUNTY ~ DELAWARE FILE: EX-Fence-12598CE E-MAIL: DUFFIELD@DUFFNET.COM 1" = 80' 12598CE MAY 5, 2022 Item 3. FIGURE 199

Item 3. OFFICES IN DELAWARE, MARYLAND, WEB: HTTP://DUFFNET.COM DUFFIELD ASSOCIATES Soil, Water & the Environment SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 5400 LIMESTONE ROAD KENT COUNTY FAMILY COURT WILMINGTON, DE 19808-1232 PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JERSEY E-MAIL: DUFFIELD@DUFFNET.COM HST SG ORT WN OVE NORTH NORTH ATE S ST TEL. 302.239.6634 RNO S NE RS A ST SITE T 415 & 445 SOUTH GOVERNORS AVENUE WS VE H ST FAX 302.239.8485 NE ORT K LA WN BAN E K LAN BAN S ST R ST ATE ST WW ATE LG-Lot1-Index-12598CE SITE P.E. #21140 KENNETH JAMES TAYLOR, JR., P.E. R ST OVE CHECKED BY: TH ST SOU SG ER FILE NAME: WAT WS W S NE SA T NOR VE KJT 4/1/2022 DESIGNED BY: STATE: DELAWARE DRAWN BY: T TH S SOU SCALE: 1" = 400' LOCATION MAP LOCATION MAP SCALE: 1" = 1,200' KJT AR SITE DATA: CHK'D BY GENERAL NOTES: 1. APPLICATION NO.: DATE 2. TAX PARCEL NOS./ ED05-077.09-03-32.00 ED05-077.09-03-33.00 ED05-077.09-03-35.00 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LAWS AND THE CITY OF DOVER ROAD SITE ADDRESS/ 401 GOVERNORS AVE 123 BANK LANE 34 THE GREEN CODE AND STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, MOST CURRENT EDITION. SOURCE OF TITLE/ D 4627 0013, D0562 0135 D 0675 0057 D 5968 0065, D 0325 0101 2. EXISTING UTILITIES ARE SHOWN FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE CONTRACTOR, BUT THE COMPLETENESS OF ACCURACY OF THE ZONING: IO, H, SWPOZ IO, H, SWPOZ IO, H, SWPOZ SAME IS NOT GUARANTEED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AT HIS x PROPOSED PARKING x ED05-077.09-03-36.00 ED05-077.09-03-37.00 ED05-077.09-03-48.00 OWN EXPENSE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DAMAGES AND REPAIRS TO EXISTING UTILITIES DURING S GOVERNORS AVE 411 S GOVERNORS AVE 429 GOVERNORS AVE CONSTRUCTION. 5-STORY STRUCTURE D 5968 0065, D 0325 0099 D 10530 0336, D 8349 0134 D 9539 0184, D 5362 0259 3. THE EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN WERE TAKEN FROM THE BEST AVAILABLE RECORDS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT MISS 28,825 SF IO, H, SWPOZ E 0019 0082 D 0576 0132 IO, H IO, H UTILITY OF DELMARVA (1-800-282-8555) TO VERIFY THEIR EXACT LOCATION PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY CONSTRUCTION. ANY (144,173 ± GFA x REVISION DAMAGE INCURRED TO ANY UTILITIES SHALL BE REPAIRED IMMEDIATELY AT THE CONTRACTORS' EXPENSE. IF THE CONTRACTOR 425 PARKING SPACES ED05-077.09-03-50.00 ED05-077.09-03-51.00 ED05-077.09-03-52.00 RELIES ON THE UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN HEREON, HE DOES SO AT HIS OWN RISK AND WILL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ADDITIONAL 435 S GOVERNORS AVE 117 W WATER ST 441 S GOVERNORS AVE 10 BICYCLE SPACES) D 9375 0211 16855, D 0028 0357 D 5537 0321, D 0576 0132 D 9305 0223, IS 0033 0396 COMPENSATION DUE TO THE DELAYS FROM SAID RELIANCE. IO, H IO, H H 0037 0092 4. ALL ROADS, PARKING AND OTHER PAVED AREAS WILL BE PRIVATELY OWNED AND MAINTAINED AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR 415 SOUTH IO, H DEDICATION. GOVERNORS ED05-077.09-03-53.00 ED05-077.09-03-61.00 5. DELAWARE REGULATIONS PROHIBIT THE BURIAL OF CONSTRUCTION DEMOLITION DEBRIS, INCLUDING TREES AND STUMPS ON AVENUE 101 W WATER ST 447 S GOVERNORS AVE CONSTRUCTION SITES. ANY SOLID WASTES FOUND DURING EXCAVATION MUST BE REMOVED AND PROPERLY DISPOSED. D 0334 0347 D 9373 0337, D 8809 0223 6. ALL HANDICAPPED PARKING DEMARCATION, STALLS AND BUILDINGS ACCESSIBLE ROUTES SHALL COMPLY WITH THE AMERICANS IO, H, SWPOZ IS 0033 0396 IO, H WITH DISABILITIES ACT AND ANSI A117.1-1998 ACCESSIBLE AND USABLE BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES. 7. THIS DRAWING DOES NOT INCLUDE NECESSARY COMPONENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION SAFETY. ALL CONSTRUCTION MUST BE DONE IN 3. PROPOSED ADDRESS: 415 & 445 GOVERNORS AVE COMPLIANCE WITH THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT OF 1970 AND ALL RULES AND REGULATIONS THERETO DOVER, DE 19901 APPURTENANT. 4. LEGAL OWNER/ THE STATE OF DELAWARE 8. BEFORE THE CONTRACTOR CAN BEGIN CONSTRUCTION, HE MUST OBTAIN THE PROPER PERMITS AND/OR APPROVALS FROM THE DEVELOPER: ATTN: JENNIFER COVERDALE CITY OF DOVER, KENT CONSERVATION (KCD), DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DELDOT), AND APPROPRIATE STATE 540 S DUPONT HIGHWAY STE 1 No. - - AND COUNTY AGENCIES. DOVER, DE 19901 PHONE (302) 739-6148 9. ALL CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND MATERIALS SHALL BE ACCORDING TO THE CITY OF DOVER AND THE STATE OF DELAWARE FAX (302) 739-3037 STANDARDS AND CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS. EMAIL: JENNIFER.COVERDALE@DELAWARE.GOV 10. ALL FIRE LANES, FIRE HYDRANTS, AND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONS SHALL BE MARKED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE FIRE OWNER/ STATE OF DELAWARE PREVENTION REGULATIONS. 5. SITE ACREAGE: EXISTING: 163,347 SF (3.7499 AC) PROPOSED: 163,347 SF (3.7499 AC) 11. ALL WORK WITHIN STATE MAINTAINED ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAYS SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS AS SET FORTH IN THE CURRENT 6. ZONING: EXISTING: IO (INSTITUTIONAL & OFFICE) REVISION OF THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE ROAD AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION, BY THE DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF H (HISTORIC DISTRICT) DOVER, DE 19901 TRANSPORTATION (DELDOT). SWPOZ (SOURCE WATER PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONES TIER 3 EXCELLENT x x x x RECHARGE AREAS), 12. TRAFFIC AND SAFETY CONTROL SHALL BE MAINTAINED DURING CONSTRUCTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CURRENT VERSION OF PROPOSED: IO, SWPOZ, H THE DELAWARE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS. DEVELOPER: 540 S DUPONT HIGHWAY x 6. LAND USE: EXISTING: VACANT BUILDINGS/PARKING PROPOSED: COURTHOUSE 13. ALL PROPOSED SIGNAGE (PYLON SIGNS, MONUMENT SIGNS) IS SUBJECT TO A SEPARATE CITY OF DOVER PERMIT. 14. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SEDIMENT/EROSION CONTROL SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT DELAWARE SEDIMENT 7. NUMBER OF LOTS: EXISTING: 11 PROPOSED: 1 AND STORMWATER REGULATIONS BY THE DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL (DNREC). 8. MONUMENTS: EXISTING: 0 PROPOSED: 15 15. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL/STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS OF PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINTS. THE PROPOSED 9. DATUM: HORIZONTAL: NAD 83 DE STATE PLANE VERTICAL: N.A.V.D. 1988 BUILDING FOOTPRINTS, AS SHOWN ON SITE PLAN, SHOULD ONLY BE USED AS A REFERENCE TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED PLANS. PROPOSED FAMILY 16. WATER SUPPLY, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAIN LINES PROPOSED BY THIS PLAN ARE PRIVATE AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY COURT BUILDING 10. BENCHMARK: MAG NAIL SET #1 MAG NAIL SET #3 THE OWNER. 43,620 SF 445 SOUTH N: 420408.77'± N: 420972.34'± GOVERNORS E: 625469.58'± E: 625291.28'± 17. THE SITE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT 302-736-7070 (106,711 ± GFA) ELEV.= 22.07' ELEV.= 28.71' PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES MUST AVENUE OBSERVE AND APPROVE ALL CITY OWNED WATER AND SANITARY SEWER INTERCONNECTIONS AND TESTING. ALL WATER TAPS MUST 11. REQUIRED PROVIDED BE PERFORMED BY A CITY OF DOVER APPROVED CONTRACTOR. THE PROPOSED LOCATION FOR THE WATER CONNECTION MAY DISTRICT AND BULK STANDARDS: IO (INSTITUTIONAL & OFFICE) NEED TO BE ADJUSTED IN THE FIELD DUE TO CONDITIONS OF THE EXISTING MAIN. POSSIBLE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD REQUIRE MINIMUM LOT AREA: 10,000 SF 163,347 SF TAPPING RELOCATION INCLUDE PROXIMITY TO PIPE JOINTS, OTHER TAPS, CONCRETE ENCASEMENTS, CONFLICT WITH OTHER MINIMUM LOT WIDTH: 100' MINIMUM LOT DEPTH: 100' UTILITIES, AND THE LIKE. TEST HOLES MUST BE PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR TO DETERMINE THE BEST TAPPING LOCATION OR MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK: 10' 10' KENT COUNTY FAMILY COURT FOR ANY WORK REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACTOR TO MAKE AN APPROPRIATE AND LAWFUL CONNECTION. MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK: 10' 10' 18. PART II, CHAPTER 180, ARTICLE III, SECTION 180-10 OF THE CODE OF KENT COUNTY REQUIRES THAT NO PERSON SHALL DISCHARGE MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK: 15' (30' WHEN ADJOINING RESIDENCE ZONE) 26.75' MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFER N/A OR CAUSE TO BE DISCHARGED ANY STORMWATER, SURFACE WATER, UNCONTAMINATED GROUNDWATER, ROOF RUNOFF, MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 10 STORY / 150 FEET 5 STORY / 54'7" SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE, UNCONTAMINATED NONCONTACT COOLING WATER, CONDENSATE, OR UNPOLLUTED INDUSTRIAL PROCESS MAX FLOOR AREA RATIO: 6.0 1.54 WATERS TO ANY SANITARY SEWER. THE CONTRACTOR/DEVELOPER SHALL ENSURE DURING CONSTRUCTION THAT NO ILLEGAL MAX LOT COVERAGE: 85% 79% CITY OF DOVER ~ KENT COUNTY ~ DELAWARE DISCHARGES TO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM ARE CREATED WITH THE SITE IMPROVEMENTS. 19. BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY DATA SHOWN HERE WAS PREPARED BY TRANSITION ENGINEERING SURVEYING, INC. DATED 12. LAND DEVELOPMENT DATA: FEBRUARY 16, 2021. EXISTING BUILDINGS: 5,832 S.F. [0.1339 AC.] (3.57%) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 20. THE ENTIRE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN FLOOD ZONE X AS DEPICTED ON FEMA MAP #10001C0169J, DATED JULY 7, 2014. EXISTING OTHER IMPERVIOUS: 152,517 S.F.[3.5013 AC.] (93.37%) EXISTING OPEN SPACE: 4,998 S.F. [0.1147 AC.] (3.06%) 21. A WETLAND EVALUATION WAS CONDUCTED BY DUFFIELD ASSOCIATES IN MARCH 2021 AND NO WETLANDS WERE FOUND ON THE SITE. 60' 0 60' 120' EXISTING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREAS: 0 S.F. [0.0000 AC.] 22. ANY GAS FIRED HVAC EQUIPMENT MUST BE EQUIPPED WITH EMERGENCY CUT OFF SWITCHES REMOTELY LOCATED. EXISTING TOTAL: 163,347 S.F. [3.7499 AC.] (100.0%) 23. ADDRESS NUMBERS OF AT LEAST 12 INCHES IN HEIGHT MUST BE PLACED ON THE STREET SIDE OF THE BUILDING VISIBLE FROM THE DRAWING SCALE 1" = 60' PROPOSED BUILDINGS: 74,879 S.F. [1.7190 AC.] (45.84%) STREET, 2 REQUIRED. PROPOSED OTHER IMPERVIOUS: 54,178 S.F. [1.2438 AC.] (33.17%) PROPOSED OPEN SPACE: 34,290 S.F. [0.7872 AC.] (20.99%) 24. ANY NATURAL OR LP GAS BOTTLES, METERS, REGULATORS, ETC. MUST HAVE IMPACT PROTECTION. LEGEND PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREAS: 0 S.F. [0.0000 AC.] 25. THIS SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN A SOURCE WATER PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONE (SWPOZ). RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE PROPOSED TOTAL: 163,347 S.F.[3.7499 AC.] (100.0%) INDEX SHEET PROPERTY LINE 13. GROSS FLOOR AREA: 144,173 GFA PARKING STRUCTURE ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE 106,711 GFA COURTHOUSE GOVERNMENTAL BOUNDARY LINE 250,884 GFA TOTAL SHEET INDEX BENCHMARK 14. PARKING RATIONALE: REQUIRED: 106,711 SF @ 1 SPACE PER 300 SF = 356 SPACES C001 INDEX SHEET CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND PROPOSED: 495 P.S. C101 EXISTING FEATURES / DEMOLITION PLAN CAPPED REBAR FOUND C201 SITE PLAN IRON PIPE FOUND 15. BICYCLE PARKING: 1 SPACE PER 20 PARKING SPACES, 20 SPACES MAX C301 UTILITY PLAN EASEMENT LINE (495 P.S. / 20 = 24.75) 20 SPACES REQUIRED, 20 PROVIDED C401 GRADING PLAN SIGNS 16. SOURCE OF WATER: CITY OF DOVER 415 & 445 S GOVERNORS AVE C601 PAVEMENT, SIGNAGE AND STRIPING PLAN ON-SITE CURB C901-906 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 17. SOURCE OF SEWER: CITY OF DOVER L101-102 LANDSCAPE PLAN ON-SITE CONCRETE 18. SOURCE OF ELECTRIC: CITY OF DOVER ON-SITE STRIPING 19. SOURCE OF GAS: CHESAPEAKE UTILITIES OFF-SITE CURB 20. TRASH COLLECTION: PRIVATE CONTRACTOR FIRE HYDRANT PR. RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE PR. PROPERTY LINE PR. EASEMENT LINE PR. BUILDINGS PR. ON-SITE CURB PR. ON-SITE CONCRETE PR. ON-SITE STRIPING CERTIFICATION OF ACCURACY FIRE HYDRANT I, KENNETH JAMES TAYLOR, JR., P.E., HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER WITH A BACKGROUND IN CIVIL ENGINEERING IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE, THAT THE INFORMATION SHOWN HERON HAS BEEN PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF REPRESENTS GOOD ENGINEERING PRACTICES AS REQUIRED BY THE APPLICABLE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE. __________________________________ DATE KENNETH JAMES TAYLOR, JR., P.E. REGISTRATION #21140 DUFFIELD ASSOCIATES, LLC CERTIFICATION OF ACCURACY OWNER / DEVELOPER'S PLAN DEVELOPMEMENT APPROVAL I, JOHN J. TRAYNOR III, P.L.S., HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR IN THE DATE: APRIL 1, 2022 STATE OF DELAWARE AND THAT THE BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION ON THIS PLAN IS TRUE AND I, JENNIFER COVERDALE, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AND SHOWN ON THIS PLAN, THAT THE PLAN WAS MADE AT MY DIRECTION, AND THAT I ACKNOWLEDGE THE SAME TO ME BY CORRECT TO THE ACCURACY REQUIRED BY ACCEPTED SURVEYING STANDARDS AND PRACTICES. SCALE: 1" = 60' ACT AND DESIRE THE PLAN TO BE DEVELOPED AS SHOWN AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. __________________________________ PROJECT NO. 12598.CE __________________________________ DATE JOHN J. TRAYNOR III, P.L.S. DATE JENNIFER COVERDALE REGISTRATION #S6-0LS0507 SHEET: C001 THE STATE OF DELAWARE TRANSITION ENGINEERING SURVEYING, INC. 100

Item 3. OFFICES IN DELAWARE, MARYLAND, WEB: HTTP://DUFFNET.COM DUFFIELD ASSOCIATES Soil, Water & the Environment SOIL DATE: LEGEND 5400 LIMESTONE ROAD SYMBOL NAME RATING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE HkB HAMBROOK-URBAN LAND COMPLEX; B PROPERTY LINE 0-5 PERCENT SLOPES ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE LOC x ZONING BOUNDARY LINE WILMINGTON, DE 19808-1232 BENCHMARK PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JERSEY CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND E-MAIL: DUFFIELD@DUFFNET.COM CAPPED REBAR FOUND LOC LOC LOC IRON PIPE FOUND TEL. 302.239.6634 CONTOUR ELEVATION SPOT ELEVATION UTILITY POLE TO BE RELOCATED BUILDINGS LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD x x FENCES FAX 302.239.8485 LOD LOC SIGNS BOLLARDS CURB LOD CONCRETE LOD UTILITY POLE ON-SITE STRIPING TO REMAIN. OFF-SITE SOLID STRIPING LG-Lot1-Exist-12598CE PROTECT IN OFF-SITE BROKEN STRIPING P.E. #21140 KENNETH JAMES TAYLOR, JR., P.E. CHECKED BY: PLACE. OFF-SITE DASHED STRIPING LOD FILE NAME: COMMUNICATION LINE LOC COMMUNICATION MANHOLE LOD CABLE TELEVISION LINE FIBER OPTIC LINE TELEPHONE LINE KJT 4/1/2022 TELEPHONE MANHOLE STATE: DELAWARE LOD NATURAL GAS LINE NATURAL GAS MANHOLE LOD DESIGNED BY: OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINE DRAWN BY: ELECTRIC POLE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE ELECTRIC MANHOLE LOD LIGHT POLES LOD HVAC UNIT KJT AR LOC SANITARY SEWER LINE SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE SANITARY SEWER FLOW ARROW CHK'D BY SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN LOD STORM DRAIN LINE DATE LOD x x x x x x STORM MANHOLE STORM DRAIN FLOW ARROW LOC LOD x STORM DRAIN INLET STORM ROOF DRAIN WATER MAIN LOD WATER VALVE FIRE HYDRANT x WATER MANHOLE LOC WATER WELL LOD MONITORING WELL REVISION BORINGS OR TEST PITS LOD ON-SITE AREA TO BE DEMOLISHED AND REMOVED x LOD AREA OF PAVEMENT TO BE MILLED LOD LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE LOD LOC LIMIT OF CONSTRUCTION x x AREA OF PAVEMENT PATCH LOD LOD LOD No. - - LOD LOC x LOD OWNER/ STATE OF DELAWARE AREA OF 2" MILLING LOD DOVER, DE 19901 LOC LOD DEVELOPER: 540 S DUPONT HIGHWAY x x x x LOD LOD x LOD x LOC LOD x LOD EXISTING CONDITIONS / DEMOLITION PLAN x KENT COUNTY FAMILY COURT LOD LOC x x x x LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x CITY OF DOVER ~ KENT COUNTY ~ DELAWARE LOD LOD SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN x x x ALL EXISTING BUILDINGS, PARKING, UTILITIES, LOD LOD LOD LOD ETC. WITHIN THE BOUDNARY ARE TO BE LOD RELOCATED OR DEMOLISHED AND REMOVED LO UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED D LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD 415 & 445 S GOVERNORS AVE LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD UTILITY POLE TO REMAIN PROTECT IN PLACE LOD LO D LOD D LO D LO LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOC LOC LOC LOC LOC LOC LOC AREA OF 2" MILLING LOC LOC LOC LOC DATE: APRIL 1, 2022 LOC SCALE: 1" = 30' 30' 0 30' 60' PROJECT NO. 12598.CE DRAWING SCALE 1" = 30' SHEET: C101 LOC 101

Item 3. OFFICES IN DELAWARE, MARYLAND, WEB: HTTP://DUFFNET.COM DUFFIELD ASSOCIATES Soil, Water & the Environment LEGEND 5400 LIMESTONE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE PROPERTY LINE x ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE ZONING BOUNDARY LINE WILMINGTON, DE 19808-1232 BENCHMARK PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JERSEY CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND E-MAIL: DUFFIELD@DUFFNET.COM CAPPED REBAR FOUND IRON PIPE FOUND TEL. 302.239.6634 BUILDINGS R1 0' x x FENCES PCC CURB SIGNS R1 TYPE 1-8 BOLLARDS FAX 302.239.8485 5' CURB 200.00' N74°03'32"E 10' BUILDING SETBACK PCC CURB N16°10'46"W 116.55' TYPE 1-6 CONCRETE R15' ON-SITE STRIPING R5' OFF-SITE SOLID STRIPING R1 OFF-SITE BROKEN STRIPING 0' OFF-SITE DASHED STRIPING LG-Lot1-Site-12598CE FIRE HYDRANT P.E. #21140 KENNETH JAMES TAYLOR, JR., P.E. PCC CURB CHECKED BY: 24' PR. RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 10' FRONT YARD SETBACK R5 TYPE 1-6 FILE NAME: ' ' PR. PROPERTY LINE BUS STOP R5 TYPE 1 PR. BENCHMARK CONC.MON.SET. PR. CONCRETE MONUMENT CAPPED REBAR SET PR. CAPPED REBAR KJT 4/1/2022 R5 I.P.SET PR. IRON PIPE STATE: DELAWARE ' PR. BUILDING SETBACK LINE PR. PAVING SETBACK LINE DESIGNED BY: ' PR. EASEMENT LINE DRAWN BY: R5 30' REAR YARD SETBACK PR. BUILDINGS x x PR. FENCES S16°14'05"E PR. SIGNS N73°32'50"E PR. BOLLARDS KJT AR 16.76' PR. CURB R5 ' PR. BRICK CHK'D BY PR. CONCRETE DATE x x x x x x PR. ON-SITE STRIPING x PR. OFF-SITE SOLID STRIPING PROPOSED PARKING PR. OFF-SITE BROKEN STRIPING PCC CURB 5-STORY STRUCTURE PR. OFF-SITE DASHED STRIPING LIGHT POLES TYPE 1-8 28,825 SF (144,173 ± GFA FIRE HYDRANT 9' x S16°22'10"E 425 PARKING SPACES 61.25' 10 BICYCLE SPACES) 14 REVISION 24' 18' x N73°32'50"E 2.50' ' R5 S16°22'10"E 20.00' R 5' S73°32'50"W 24' No. 20.00' - - R1 0' BIKE RACK - 10 SPACES x (SEE DETAILS) ' OWNER/ R5 115.84' STATE OF DELAWARE S16°22'10"E 30.00' DOVER, DE 19901 R1 5 N73°32'50"E DEVELOPER: 540 S DUPONT HIGHWAY ' 0.47' R ' 2 5 PCC CURB 24' ' TYPE 1-6 R25 0' R2 26.6' PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE S16°14'05"E TO SECOND FLOOR TRANSFORMER PAD 24.8' GENERATOR PAD 8' SHADOW FENCING KENT COUNTY FAMILY COURT (SEE DETAILS) PCC CURB TYPE 1-8 GUARDRAIL R10' BOLLARD, TYP. CHILLER PADS PROPOSED RAMP 322.58' x x x x x x x x x N73°42'32"E CITY OF DOVER ~ KENT COUNTY ~ DELAWARE . 5' R1 BIKE RACK - 10 SPACES (SEE DETAILS) 15 18' S16°26'44"E 9' SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN x x R4. 75.30' x x x 0' R1 30' REAR YARD SETBACK 5' R4 .5' .5' R4 ON-SITE PCC CURB 24' 10' SIDE YARD SETBACK TYPE 1-6, TYP. ' R4 11 R4 R4 .5' .5' R4 .5 .5 ' 0' R2 N73°38'38"E 5' ' .5 R1 27.29' R4 TRASH ENCLOSURE SITE PLAN 24' (SEE ARCHITECTURAL) 4.5' R R4 R .5 R4 5' 4. 5 ' .5 4. ' ' R R4.5' 24' PROPOSED FAMILY R2 98.01' 18' COURT BUILDING ' 5' R1 43,620 SF 7 10 9 ' .5 415 & 445 S GOVERNORS AVE 24' 24' (106,711 ± GFA) R4 24' R4 9' .5' R4.5' 18' 7 R4.5' R4.5' ' ' R4 .5 .5 18' ∆=19°36'42"' R4 R4 .5 ' R4 ' L=11.30' 24.2' 24' 9' 3 .5 R=33.00' .5' R4 . R45' R4 .5 R4 9' .5 R4 .5' ' ' S16°13'39"E 3 508.05' 9' 11 18' 9' 18' 12 24' R4. 18' 15' FRONT YARD SETBACK 10' FRONT YARD SETBACK 5' PCC CURB R35 S73°48'36"W TYPE 1-6 ' 544.04' R4 ' 0' 33 5' R R2 R1 PCC CURB 5' 5' R1 PCC CURB PCC CURB TYPE 1-8 TYPE 1-6 TYPE 1-8 DATE: APRIL 1, 2022 SCALE: 1" = 30' 30' 0 30' 60' PROJECT NO. 12598.CE DRAWING SCALE 1" = 30' SHEET: C201 102

Item 3. OFFICES IN DELAWARE, MARYLAND, WEB: HTTP://DUFFNET.COM DUFFIELD ASSOCIATES Soil, Water & the Environment LOC 5400 LIMESTONE ROAD x WILMINGTON, DE 19808-1232 PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JERSEY E-MAIL: DUFFIELD@DUFFNET.COM LOC LOC LOC TEL. 302.239.6634 LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD COMM COMM LOD FAX 302.239.8485 COMM COMM COMM COMM COMM COMM LOD LOC CO M COMM COMM COMM COMM COMM COMM M MM CO UE UE UE UE UE UE UE UE UE CO UE UE UE UE UE UE MM MM CO M M CO LOD UE PROP. LAWN LOD PROP. 5-RGL LAWN LG-Land-12598CE COMM R.L.A. #0285 CHECKED BY: 63-CXD LOD FILE NAME: UE LOC PETER MOSCUFO, R.L.A. LOD 45-CXD AF PMo COMM STATE: DELAWARE UE LOD LOD DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: SD UE 1-IXS LOD COMM PMo JJL LOD LOC 5-TLH SD UE CHK'D BY 1-IXS LOD DATE COMM LOD x x x x x x 1-RBM 5-TLH LOC SD CCH UE LOD x PROPOSED PARKING PRELIMINARY 5-STORY STRUCTURE 1-IXS CCH LOD 28,825 SF x 18-RB (144,173 ± GFA COMM SD UE 5-TLH CCH x LOC 425 PARKING SPACES LOD NOT FOR 10 BICYCLE SPACES) REVISION x CCH LOD 1-IXS SD COMM x LOD UE PROP. 6' HT. FENCE CCH CONSTRUCTION PROP. LAWN 5-TLH LOD 1-IXS SD UE AF M M LOD O SD C LOD SD UE LOD 83-CXD No. - - UE COMM UE 207-CXD SD 45-CXD LOD LOC 7-TLH x LOD 107-CXD AF UE 7-TLH SD COMM 97-CXD SD LOD OWNER: STATE OF DELAWARE 800 BAY ROAD LOC LOD UE DOVER, DE 19901 SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD COMM LOD PHONE: (302) 760-2080 SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS LOD UE SD UE UE UE UE UE UE LOD UE UE COMM 8W 8W 8W 8W 8W 8W 8W SS 8W UE LOC LOD SD 26.6' CCH PROP. LAWN PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PROP. 3/8" TO 1/2" DELAWARE TO SECOND FLOOR 8W SS LOD TRANSFORMER PAD UE COMM KENT COUNTY FAMILY COURTS VALLEY RIVER STONE GENERATOR PAD CCH LOD PROP. LANDSCAPE EDGING CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PLANS LOC EAST DOVER HUNDRED ~ KENT COUNTY ~ DELAWARE SEASONAL ROTATIONS: SPRING = DAFFODILS (24"HT), BOLLARD, TYP. CHILLER PADS CCH SUMMER AND FALL FLOWERING ANNUALS (24"HT) 8W SS LOD x COMM LOD x LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD COMM x xCOMM x 173-CXD UE x x COMM x x COMM COMM COMM COMM COMM COMM COMM COMM SD SD LOD SS SD x LOD 6-RB 6-IGB UE UE UE UE UE UE UE UE UE SD PROP. 6' HT. FENCE 1-RBM 45-RB x x x x x x 8W SD SD SD SD UE x LOD xLOD x LOD x LOD x LODx x LOD SD SS 8W SS SS SS LOD SS LO D G G G G LOD LANDSCAPE PLAN 8W 8W 8W SD UE UE UE UE UE UE UE LOD SD LOD GTS CCH G LOD GTS GTS 3-IGB GTS UE PROP. 6' HT. FENCE LOD 3-NJT 4-CND CCH UE GTS 3-NJT LOD SD G LOD LOD UNDERGROUND PROPOSED FAMILY SD SWM FACILITY LOD COURT BUILDING RD RD 3,525 SF UE U UE UE GTS 6-IGB UE LOD E UE 43,620 SF SOUTH GOVERNORS AVENUE SD G LOD PROP. 6' HT. FENCE (106,711 ± GFA) 1-RBM SD CCH GTS GTS SD GTS GTS GTS GTS UE LOD GTS CCH G UE SD LOD GTS xLOD CCH SD GTS 3-NJT 12-IGB SD SD UE 3-IGB 3-NJT LOD 15-RB LOD PROP. LAWN G UE SD LOD SEASONAL ROTATIONS: SPRING = DAFFODILS (24"HT), x SUMMER AND FALL FLOWERING ANNUALS (24"HT) PROP. LAWN SD SD SD SD LOD 3-IGB MV UE G UE UE SD UE UE LOD 3-CND 3-CND 6-CND SD GTS UE SD UE UE UE 7-CND UE x LOD D LO 3-CND LOD E GTS U GTS LQR LQR LQR GTS GTS MV CVS CVS CVS CVS CVS CVS CVS CVS CVS CVS UE RD 3-IGB G D SD LO D LO 5-IGB LOC LOD LOD LOD LOD 3-CND LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD 5-IGB 5-IGB 5-IGB 5-IGB LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD UE 3-IGB 8-IGB 3-IGB 7-IGB LOC LOC LOC LOC LOC LOC LOC UE LOC LOC LOC LOC LOC DATE: APRIL 1, 2022 LOC LOC SCALE: 1" = 30' 30' 0 30' 60' PROJECT NO. 12598.CE DRAWING SCALE 1" = 30' SHEET: L101 LOC 103

Item 3. KENT COUNTY FAMILY COURTHOUSE GOALS REVITALIZE DOWNTOWN DOVER & ACTIVATE LEGISLATIVE HALL CORNER OF GOVERNORS AVE AND WATER ST EXISTING FAMILY CENTRALIZE COURT SERVICES AND RESOURCES LEGISLATIVE CENTRAL COURT EASY ACCESS TO JUSTICE GREEN PARK PROVIDE FULL SERVICES FOR THE COMMUNITY SAFE AND SECURE COURTHOUSE THE GREEN KENT COUNTY COURT HOUSE S. G OV ERN ST. JONES RIVER OR SA VEN S T R EET PROJECT TER SITE UE A W View North at intersection of S. Governors Ave and Water Street View East at intersection of S. Governors Ave and Water Street View East at intersection of S. Governors Ave and Bank Street 104

Item 3. “Designing new construction on a historic site or in a historic setting that it is compatible but differentiated from the historic building or buldings”. THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS FOR THE TREATMENT OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES 105

Item 3. DEPT OF JUSTICE JUDICAL CHAMBERS REMOTE TESTIMONY SE BREAK WOMEN'S IT ELEC MEN'S DE SE DE STANDARD FAMILY STANDARD FAMILY STANDARD FAMILY COURTROOM STANDARD FAMILY COURTROOM COURTROOM COURTROOM OFFICE OF THE CHILD ADVOCATE VEST VEST VEST VEST DN WAITING CHILD WAITING PE PE LEVEL 3 TO SECURE PARKING JUDGE ENTRY JP OFFICES/ CHAMBERS COMMISSIONERS' CHAMBERS VEST TRUANCY COURTROOM DN BULK SE STORAGE AERIAL VIEW - FROM S GOVERNORS AVE JC WOMEN'S ELEC IT REMOTE MEN'S TESTIMONY STANDARD FAMILY STANDARD FAMILY STANDARD FAMILY STANDARD FAMILY COURTROOM COURTROOM COURTROOM COURTROOM OPEN OPEN DN UP DN VEST VEST VEST VEST WAITING CHILD WAITING PE PE LEVEL 2 COUNT ADMIN RECORDS ROOM PROCESSING MEDIATION SERVICE DUMPSTERS ENTRY SOUTH GOVERNORS AVENUE UP SE FIRE PUMP LOADING AND MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MECH MECH (PUMP ROOM) EMERG MAIN WOMEN'S ELEC MDF ELEC ELEC PUBLIC ENTRY MEN'S DE SE CONTROL ROOM CENTRAL HOLDING DE UP LOBBY UP SECURE DCSS CHILD INC. ENTRY DSCYF OFFICE OF DEFENSE SERVICES BREAK PE PE WEST WATER STREET LEVEL 1 AERIAL VIEW - FROM BANK LANE 106

Item 3. PROPOSED DESIGN - VIEW FROM INTERSECTION OF WATER STREET AND S GOVERNORS AVENUE LOBBY ENTRY PROPOSED DESIGN TOWER CUPOLA PROPOSED DESIGN - Multi-level plaza creates ceremonial entry to building - Symmetrical design with windows on four sides -Black spindle railing reference back to historic cast and - Elaborate stepped profile cornice defines top of tower rod iron throughout Dover - Corner columns use similar language to other paired - Paired brick columns with pre-cast concrete capitals add elements throughout facade a dignified prominence to the lobby, and glazing between provide ample natural light to the lobby - Clock face acts as civic marker - Stepped pre-cast concrete cornice helps denote entry and provide location for clear signage - Adjacent parking structure uses similar materials to create a campus feel along Governors Avenue 107

Item 3. PROPOSED DESIGN - SOUTH GOVERNORS AVENUE GOVERNORS AVE PROPOSED DESIGN PROPOSED GOVERNORS AVE ENTRY - Brick colonnade with pre-cast capitals flanked by two - Multi-level plaza creates ceremonial entry to building, large glass panels create symmetry along facade with ramp providing barrier free access - Large windows with gray infill panel at the floor slab -Black spindle railing reference back to historic cast and contribute to the rhythm and vertical proportion of the rod iron throughout Dover facade and enhance the civic imagery of the building - Paired brick columns with pre-cast concrete capitals add a dignified prominence to the lobby, and glazing between provide ample natural light to the lobby - Stepped pre-cast concrete cornice helps denote entry and provide location for clear signage VIEW OF PLAZA ON S GOVERNORS AVE 108

Item 3. VIEW ON WATER STREET WATER STREET BAY WINDOW TOWER CUPOLA PROPOSED DESIGN PROPOSED DESIGN - Bay windows break up curtainwall along the courtroom - Symmetrical design with windows on four sides corridor while allowing large amounts of natural light and views for court users - Elaborate stepped profile cornice defines top of tower - Bay windows reference back to smaller scale buildings - Corner columns use similar language to other paired along The Green and throughout Dover elements throughout facade - Large windows with gray infill panel within the bay - Clock face acts as civic marker windows contribute to the rhythm and vertical proportion of the facade 109

Item 3. VIEW OF PARKING GARAGE FROM SOUTH GOVERNORS AVENUE PARKING GARAGE FROM S GOVERNORS AVE AND BANK LANE VIEW OF PARKING ENTRANCE FROM BANK LANE 110

Item 3. KENT COUNTY COURTHOUSE, DOVER, DELWARE FRANKLIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE, MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT, BRIDGEPORT, CONNECTICUT DELAWARE COUNTY COURTHOUSE, DELAWARE, OHIO RENFREW COUNTY COURTHOUSE, CANADA 111

Item 3. KENT COUNTY FAMILY COURTHOUSE GOALS REVITALIZE DOWNTOWN DOVER & ACTIVATE LEGISLATIVE HALL CORNER OF GOVERNORS AVE AND WATER ST EXISTING FAMILY CENTRALIZE COURT SERVICES AND RESOURCES LEGISLATIVE CENTRAL COURT EASY ACCESS TO JUSTICE GREEN PARK PROVIDE FULL SERVICES FOR THE COMMUNITY SAFE AND SECURE COURTHOUSE THE GREEN KENT COUNTY COURT HOUSE S. G OV ERN ST. JONES RIVER OR SA VEN RS TR E E T PROJECT TE SITE UE A W View North at intersection of S. Governors Ave and Water Street View East at intersection of S. Governors Ave and Water Street View East at intersection of S. Governors Ave and Bank Lane NEW SITE PLAN MARCH 2022 KENT COUNTY FAMILY COURT 112

Item 3. Two Mill Road, Suite 210 Wilmington, Delaware 19806 302.984.1400 FAX 302.984.2957 F 158 W 27 Street Floor 10 New York, New York 10001 212.563.9154 ELEVATOR / ORNAMENTAL TOWER ELEVATOR TOWER TOWER ROOF 74' - 6" ROOF SCREEN ELEVATOR ROOF 71' - 4" 5400 Limestone Rd. Wilmington, Delaware 19808 STAIR TOWER ROOF 302.239.6634 66' - 6" T.O. ROOF SCREEN FAX 302.239.8485 65' - 0" MAIN ROOF PARAPET MAIN ROOF PARAPET 55' - 4" 1050 S. State St. ROOF Dover, Delaware 19901 51' - 4" 302.734.7400 E 7067 Columbia Gateway Drive, Suite 250 LEVEL 3 Columbia, MD 21046 33' - 4" 410.579.8100 T.O. PARAPET 18' - 0" 550 Township Line Rd, Suite 100 LEVEL 2 Blue Bell, PA 19244 15' - 4" 484.342.0200 LEVEL 1 0" D AVERAGE GRADE 21' - 1" TR GRADE VARIES UE 0' - 62" to F.F. PROJECT 1 COURTHOUSE SOUTH ELEVATION - WATER STREET A203 Scale : 1/8" = 1'-0" ELEVATOR / ORNAMENTAL TOWER ELEVATOR TOWER TOWER ROOF 74' - 6" ELEVATOR ROOF STAIR TOWER 71' - 4" The professional services of the architect are undertaken and performed in the interest of STATE OF DELAWARE, OMB / DFM _________________________________________________. No contractual obligation is assumed by the architect for the benefit of any ROOF SCREEN other person involved in the project. C STAIR TOWER ROOF 66' - 6" PROJECT T.O. ROOF SCREEN 19' - 2" DELAWARE FAMILY 65' - 0" COURT - KENT MAIN ROOF PARAPET COUNTY MAIN ROOF PARAPET Project Address 55' - 4" Project City, Project State Project 4' - 0" Zip ROOF 51' - 4" OWNER STATE OF 18' - 0" DELAWARE, OMB / DFM THOMAS COLLINS BUILDING PARKING GARAGE ACCESS 540 S. DUPONT HIGHWAY, SUITE 1 ROOF OF BRIDGE LEVEL 3 33' - 4" 33' - 4" DOVER, DELAWARE 19901 55' - 4" 18' - 0" KENT COUNTY B FAMILY COURTROOM BUILDING BOTTOM OF BRIDGE LEVEL 2 15' - 4" 15' - 4" 15' - 4" OPEN TO BEYOND Project Status LEVEL 1 0" NOTE: THESE DRAWINGS ARE CONFIDENTIAL FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY, NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION. A AVERAGE GRADE DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE THAT 21' - 1" THE PUBLICATION OF THESE PLANS COULD COMPROMISE PUBLIC SAFETY AND GRADE VARIES ARE NOT AVAILABLE PURSUANT TO 0' - 62" to F.F. DELAWARE CODE, TITLE 29, §10002 (I)(17) 3 WEST ELEVATION_ (a)(2) AND (3). A203 Scale : 1/8" = 1'-0" ISSUED FOR NO. DATE DESCRIPTION A Date 10/22/2021 Scale 1/8" = 1'-0" Drawn Author Checked Checker Approved Approver Project Project Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 © 2021 TEVEBAUGH ARCHITECTURE Sheet A203 113

Item 3. Two Mill Road, Suite 210 Wilmington, Delaware 19806 302.984.1400 FAX 302.984.2957 F 158 W 27 Street Floor 10 New York, New York 10001 212.563.9154 ELEVATOR / ORNAMENT TOWER ELEVATOR TOWER TOWER ROOF ROOF SCREEN STAIRWAR TOWER 74' - 6" ELEVATOR ROOF 71' - 4" 5400 Limestone Rd. Wilmington, Delaware 19808 302.239.6634 STAIR TOWER ROOF FAX 302.239.8485 T.O. ROOF SCREEN 66' - 6" 65' - 0" MAIN ROOF PARAPET MAIN ROOF PARAPET 55' - 4" 4' - 0" 1050 S. State St. ROOF Dover, Delaware 19901 51' - 4" 302.734.7400 E 18' - 0" 7067 Columbia Gateway Drive, Suite 250 LEVEL 3 Columbia, MD 21046 33' - 4" 410.579.8100 PARKING GARAGE 55' - 4" ACCESS 18' - 0" 550 Township Line Rd, Suite 100 Blue Bell, PA 19244 LEVEL 2 15' - 4" 484.342.0200 15' - 4" LEVEL 1 0" D AVERAGE GRADE 21' - 1" TR UE GRADE VARIES 0' - 62" to F.F. PROJECT 2 NORTH ELEVATION_ A204 Scale : 1/8" = 1'-0" ELEVATOR / ORNAMENT TOWER ELEVATOR TOWER TOWER ROOF 74' - 6" STAIR TOWER ROOF SCREEN ELEVATOR ROOF The professional services of the architect are undertaken and performed in 71' - 4" the interest of STATE OF DELAWARE, OMB / DFM _________________________________________________. No contractual obligation is assumed by the architect for the benefit of any other person involved in the project. C STAIR TOWER ROOF PROJECT 66' - 6" T.O. ROOF SCREEN DELAWARE FAMILY 65' - 0" MAIN ROOF PARAPET COURT - KENT COUNTY Project Address MAIN ROOF PARAPET 55' - 4" Project City, Project State Project Zip ROOF 51' - 4" OWNER STATE OF 18' - 0" DELAWARE, OMB / DFM THOMAS COLLINS BUILDING PARKING GARAGE ACCESS 540 S. DUPONT HIGHWAY, SUITE 1 LEVEL 3 DOVER, DELAWARE 19901 33' - 4" 55' - 4" 18' - 0" KENT COUNTY B FAMILY COURTROOM T.O. PARAPET BUILDING 18' - 0" LEVEL 2 15' - 4" 15' - 4" OPEN TO BEYOND Project Status LEVEL 1 0" AVERAGE GRADE NOTE: THESE DRAWINGS ARE 21' - 1" CONFIDENTIAL FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY, NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION. A GRADE VARIES DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE THAT 0' - 62" to F.F. THE PUBLICATION OF THESE PLANS COULD COMPROMISE PUBLIC SAFETY AND ARE NOT AVAILABLE PURSUANT TO DELAWARE CODE, TITLE 29, §10002 (I)(17) (a)(2) AND (3). ISSUED FOR 1 EAST ELEVATION_ NO. DATE DESCRIPTION A204 Scale : 1/8" = 1'-0" A Date 10/22/2021 Scale 1/8" = 1'-0" Drawn Author Checked Checker Approved Approver Project Project Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 © 2021 TEVEBAUGH ARCHITECTURE Sheet A204 114

Item 3. Two Mill Road, Suite 210 Wilmington, Delaware 19806 302.984.1400 FAX 302.984.2957 TOP OF STAIR TOWER TOP OF STAIR TOWER 8' - 5 7/8" 8' - 5 7/8" F TOP ROOF TOP ROOF 158 W 27 Street Floor 10 New York, New York 10001 56' - 10" 56' - 10" 212.563.9154 7' - 5" 7' - 5" TOP TIER TOP TIER 19' - 8" 19' - 8" 10' - 8" 10' - 8" FOURTH TIER 5400 Limestone Rd. FOURTH TIER Wilmington, Delaware 19808 18' - 0" 18' - 0" 302.239.6634 62' - 6 7/8" FAX 302.239.8485 10' - 8" 10' - 8" 62' - 6 7/8" THIRD TIER THIRD TIER PARKING GARAGE ACCESS 16' - 4" 16' - 4" 11' - 4" 11' - 4" 1050 S. State St. Dover, Delaware 19901 302.734.7400 SECOND TIER SECOND TIER 14' - 0" 14' - 0" E 14' - 0" 14' - 0" 7067 Columbia Gateway Drive, Suite 250 GROUND LEVEL GROUND LEVEL Columbia, MD 21046 410.579.8100 28' - 9" 28' - 9" 3 BACK GARAGE 4 FRONT GARAGE A205 Scale : 1/8" = 1'-0" A205 Scale : 1/8" = 1'-0" 550 Township Line Rd, Suite 100 Blue Bell, PA 19244 484.342.0200 TOP OF STAIR TOWER TOP OF STAIR TOWER PROJECT 8' - 5 7/8" D TR TOP ROOF UE 56' - 10" 7' - 5" TOP TIER 19' - 8" 10' - 8" FOURTH TIER 18' - 0" 10' - 8" 62' - 6 7/8" THIRD TIER 16' - 4" 11' - 4" SECOND TIER The professional services of the architect are undertaken and performed in the interest of STATE OF DELAWARE, OMB / DFM _________________________________________________. 14' - 0" No contractual obligation is assumed by the architect for the benefit of any other person involved in the project. C PROJECT 14' - 0" DELAWARE FAMILY COURT - KENT COUNTY GROUND LEVEL Project Address 28' - 9" Project City, Project State Project Zip OWNER 5 LEFT GARAGE STATE OF A205 Scale : 1/8" = 1'-0" DELAWARE, OMB / DFM THOMAS COLLINS BUILDING TOP OF STAIR TOWER TOP OF STAIR TOWER 540 S. DUPONT HIGHWAY, SUITE 1 DOVER, DELAWARE 19901 TOP OF ELEVATOR TOWER 8' - 5 7/8" TOP ROOF 56' - 10" KENT COUNTY B 7' - 5" FAMILY COURTROOM TOP TIER - GARAGE 19' - 8" 10' - 8" FOURTH TIER 18' - 0" Project Status 10' - 8" 62' - 6 7/8" THIRD TIER NOTE: THESE DRAWINGS ARE 16' - 4" CONFIDENTIAL FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY, NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION. A DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE THAT 11' - 4" THE PUBLICATION OF THESE PLANS COULD COMPROMISE PUBLIC SAFETY AND ARE NOT AVAILABLE PURSUANT TO DELAWARE CODE, TITLE 29, §10002 (I)(17) (a)(2) AND (3). SECOND TIER 14' - 0" ISSUED FOR NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 14' - 0" A GROUND LEVEL 28' - 9" Date 10/22/2021 6 Scale 1/8" = 1'-0" RIGHT GARAGE Scale : 1/8" = 1'-0" Drawn Author A205 Checked Checker Approved Approver Project Project Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 © 2021 TEVEBAUGH ARCHITECTURE Sheet A205 115

Item 3. Two Mill Road, Suite 210 Wilmington, Delaware 19806 302.984.1400 FAX 302.984.2957 TOWER ROOF ELEVATOR / ORNAMENT 74' - 6" TOWER ELEVATOR TOWER F ELEVATOR ROOF STAIR TOWER STAIR TOWER ROOF ROOF SCREEN 66' - 6" 71' - 4" TOP OF STAIR TOWER 158 W 27 Street Floor 10 T.O. ROOF SCREEN TOP OF STAIR TOWER New York, New York 10001 65' - 0" 212.563.9154 MAIN ROOF PARAPET TOP ROOF MAIN ROOF PARAPET 56' - 10" 55' - 4" ROOF 51' - 4" TOP TIER 19' - 8" FOURTH TIER 18' - 0" LEVEL 3 5400 Limestone Rd. 33' - 4" THIRD TIER Wilmington, Delaware 19808 302.239.6634 16' - 4" FAX 302.239.8485 T.O. PARAPET SECOND TIER 18' - 0" 14' - 0" LEVEL 2 15' - 4" GROUND LEVEL LEVEL 1 28' - 9" 0" 1050 S. State St. Dover, Delaware 19901 302.734.7400 1 EAST ELEVATION__ A206 Scale : 1/16" = 1'-0" E 7067 Columbia Gateway Drive, Suite 250 Columbia, MD 21046 410.579.8100 550 Township Line Rd, Suite 100 Blue Bell, PA 19244 ELEVATOR / ORNAMENTAL TOWER 484.342.0200 STAIR TOWER TOWER ROOF 74' - 6" MAIN ROOF PARAPET TOP OF STAIR TOWER ROOF SCREEN ELEVATOR ROOF TOP OF STAIR TOWER T.O. ROOF SCREEN 71' - 4" 65' - 0" MAIN ROOF PARAPET TOP ROOF 55' - 4" 56' - 10" ROOF TOP TIER 51' - 4" PROJECT D 19' - 8" TR UE FOURTH TIER 18' - 0" LEVEL 3 33' - 4" 55' - 4" THIRD TIER 16' - 4" SECOND TIER LEVEL 2 14' - 0" 15' - 4" GROUND LEVEL 28' - 9" LEVEL 1 0" 5 WEST ELEVATION__ A206 Scale : 1/16" = 1'-0" The professional services of the architect are undertaken and performed in the interest of STATE OF DELAWARE, OMB / DFM _________________________________________________. No contractual obligation is assumed by the architect for the benefit of any other person involved in the project. C PROJECT DELAWARE FAMILY COURT - KENT COUNTY Project Address Project City, Project State Project Zip OWNER STATE OF DELAWARE, OMB / DFM THOMAS COLLINS BUILDING ELEVATOR / ORNAMENTAL TOWER 540 S. DUPONT HIGHWAY, SUITE 1 ELEVATOR TOWER DOVER, DELAWARE 19901 TOWER ROOF 74' - 6" ROOF SCREEN ELEVATOR ROOF 71' - 4" STAIR TOWER ROOF 66' - 6" T.O. ROOF SCREEN 65' - 0" MAIN ROOF PARAPET MAIN ROOF PARAPET KENT COUNTY B 55' - 4" ROOF FAMILY COURTROOM 51' - 4" - ELEVATIONS LEVEL 3 33' - 4" LEVEL 2 T.O. PARAPET 18' - 0" Project Status 15' - 4" NOTE: THESE DRAWINGS ARE LEVEL 1 CONFIDENTIAL FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY, 0" NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION. A DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE THAT THE PUBLICATION OF THESE PLANS COULD COMPROMISE PUBLIC SAFETY AND ARE NOT AVAILABLE PURSUANT TO DELAWARE CODE, TITLE 29, §10002 (I)(17) (a)(2) AND (3). ISSUED FOR NO. DATE DESCRIPTION 2 COURTHOUSE SOUTH ELEVATION - WATER STREET__ A206 Scale : 1/16" = 1'-0" A Date 10/22/2021 Scale 1/16" = 1'-0" Drawn Author Checked Checker Approved Approver Project Project Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 © 2021 TEVEBAUGH ARCHITECTURE Sheet A206 116

Item 3. 117

Item 4. City of Dover DATA SHEET FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF May 4, 2022 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF May 16, 2022 Plan Title: Parking Lot at 446 S. Governors Avenue S-22-07 Plan Type: Site Development Plan Owners of Record: State of Delaware Location: West side of South Governors Avenue, north of West Water Street Address: 446 South Governors Avenue Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.09-03-21.00-000 Site Area: 0.4989 +/- acres (21,733 SF) Zoning: C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) Existing Use: Vacant Commercial Building (To be demolished) Proposed Use: Parking Lot Impervious Areas: Existing – 97.8% Proposed – 76.63% Off Street Parking: Existing – undetermined Required – 0 (Proposed Parking Lot is Accessory to proposed Courthouse) Proposed – 45 parking spaces (10 bicycle parking) Waiver Requests: None P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Community Excellence Through Quality Service 118

Item 4. City of Dover CITY OF DOVER Planning Office DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY D.A.C. MEETING DATE: May 4, 2022 APPLICATION: Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue, Dover, DE FILE #: S-22-07 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Planning Office CONTACT: Julian Swierczek AICP, Planner II PHONE #: (302) 736-7196 I. PLAN SUMMARY This is a review of a Site Plan application to permit the construction of a 45-vehicle Parking Lot to serve the proposed Kent County Family Court. This Parking Lot is in addition to the proposed Parking Garage facility proposed for the Kent County Family Courthouse. The site consists of a parcel of land consisting of a total of 0.4989 +/- acres. The property is zoned C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located on the west side of South Governors Avenue, north of West Water Street. The owner of record is the State of Delaware. Property Address: 446 S. Governors Avenue. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.09-03-21.00-000. Council District 4. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject Site Development Plan Application is related to Site Development Plan Application S-22-06 New Courthouse to serve as the Kent County Family Court. Specifically, this Application S-22-07 is to provide an Annex Parking Lot for 45-vehicle parking spaces for the primary use of the Courthouse. It is noted by Planning Staff that parking lots are listed as a Conditional Use within the C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone). However, the subject Parking Lot is associated with the overall New Courthouse Project across South Governors Avenue to the east, and subsequently is accessory to the Courthouse as opposed to a standalone parking lot. The site was most recently the location of the Box Outlet, a retail store in the commercial buildings. The building is proposed for demolition under Demolition Permit #22-182. The property subject to the present Site Plan is bound on the south by West Water Street, on the east by South Governors Avenue, and on the west by Shotgun Alley. The Plan shows that forty-five (45) vehicle parking spaces are proposed. III. ZONING REVIEW Request for C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) Zoning The proposed use is classified as a Parking Lot which is an allowable use in the C-2A Zone. The following description of the C-2A zoning district is provided from Article 3 §14 of the Zoning Ordinance. 119

Item 4. S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 3 of 7 Article 3 Section 14. – Limited Central Commercial Zone (C-2A). 14.1 Uses permitted. No building or premises shall be used and no building or part of a building shall be erected, which is arranged, intended or designed to be used, in whole or in part, for any purpose, except the following: (a) Retail Stores (b) Business, professional or government offices (c) Personal service establishments. (d) Restaurants. (e) Service establishments. (f) Hotels. (g) Places of public assembly. (h) Drive-throughs. (i) One family residences, including attached and semi-detached dwellings, complying with the bulk standards of the RG-1 (General Residence) zone. (j) Apartments and multi-family dwellings 14.2 Conditional Uses. The following uses are permitted, conditional upon the approval of the planning commission in accordance with the procedures and subject to the general conditions set forth in article 10, section 1: (a) Parking lots and parking structures as a principal use on suitably landscaped lots. (b) Fuel pumps accessory to a permitted use. 14.3 Enclosed buildings. All permitted uses and all storage accessory thereto, other than off street parking, shall be carried on in buildings fully enclosed on all sides, except for outdoor eating areas associated with restaurants and outdoor sales areas approved by the city planner. 14.4 Performance standards. All uses are subject to performance standards as set forth in article 5, section 8.1. 14.5 Site development plan approval. Site development plan approval in accordance with article 10, section 2 hereof shall be required prior to the issuance of building permits for the erection or enlargement of all structures and prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for any change of use. SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) The site is also within the Source Water Protection Overlay Zone (SWPOZ). The purpose of the SWPOZ is to establish additional standards and requirements for property within the zone including the prohibition of certain uses and limitations on impervious surfaces, ground cover, and floor area ratios in order to protect, to maintain, and to minimize contamination of drinking water supplies held in groundwater aquifers. Tier 3 areas of the SWPOZ are known as Excellent Recharge Areas. However, given the location of the property in the Downtown Redevelopment Target Area it is exempt from the SWPOZ requirements per Article 3 Section 29.79. See City of Dover Zoning Ordinance Article 3 Section 29 for more details on the SWPOZ. However, with the redevelopment of this parcel, the project will reduce the impervious surface on the site from 97.8% to 76.63% (a reduction of 21.17%). This is accomplished by the 120

Item 4. S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 4 of 7 implementation of grass/ landscaped areas around the periphery of the site as well as in the island central to the overall Parking Lot area. IV. PARKING SUMMARY The Zoning Ordinance, Article 5 Section 4.14 requires vehicle parking to be provided at a rate of one parking space per 300 SF of floor area. However, this proposed Parking Lot is associated with New Courthouse subject to Site Development Plan Application S-22-06, which is proposed at 106,711 GFA. This would require 356 total vehicle parking space to be provided for the Courthouse. The vehicle parking spaces proposed for this Parking Lot, as well as those located on the site of the new Courthouse combined are 540 vehicle parking spaces. This subject Parking Lot proposal specifically shows forty-five (45) vehicle parking spaces. These are accessed via 24-foot-wide drive-aisles which themselves connect to two (2) site entrances. One site entrance is a one-in/one-out entrance off South Governors Avenue, and the second is a shared entrance to the Shotgun Alley located to the west of the parking lot. There are no ADA parking spaces shown on this lot. However, it is again noted that the bulk of vehicle parking for the proposed Courthouse is shown on the actual Courthouse site. Vehicle parking on the Courthouse site would be closer to the proposed building where ADA-compliant vehicle parking spaces would be more beneficial for Courthouse use. Planning Staff would however still consider it beneficial to provide at least one (1) ADA compliant parking space within this Parking Lot. Bicycle Parking The site is required to provide bicycle parking. The bicycle parking calculation is one for every twenty parking spaces or fraction thereof. With 45 vehicle parking spaces specific to this subject Parking Lot, a minimum of three (3) bicycle parking spaces are required. The Cover Sheet submitted notes three (3) spaces are to be provided; however, the Site Plan Drawing shows ten (10) bicycle parking spaces are to be provided. There are also bicycle parking spaces to be provided on the Courthouse site as well. V. SITE CONSIDERATIONS Lighting The Site Plan does appear to indicate the locations of proposed lighting features on the site. There appear to be eight (8) light poles proposed. Five (5) light poles are shown around the periphery of the site, including along the alley. The remaining three (3) light poles are located within the central island of the Parking Lot. Sidewalks There is existing street frontage sidewalk serving the site along both the South Governors Avenue and West Water Street frontages. There is no sidewalk along Shotgun Alley. There is however no dedicated sidewalk connection from either road frontage, nor is there a sidewalk connection to the bicycle parking area shown at the northeast of the site along the Governors Avenue frontage. Sidewalks should be included to provide dedicated pedestrian access onto the site from the South Governors Avenue and West Water Street frontages, as well as from the sidewalk along Governors Avenue to the bicycle parking area. 121

Item 4. S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 5 of 7 VI. TREE PLANTING AND LANDSCAPE PLAN The submitted Site Plan contains information for elements of as a Landscape Plan. The tree planting requirement is based on the total lot area and one (1) tree is required for every 3,000 S.F. of land area. This project site consists of a total lot area of 0.4989 +/- acres (21,733 SF); therefore, eight (8) trees are required. The applicant proposes to eight (8) Skyline Honey Locust trees on site. The plans show two (2) are planned along the South Governors Avenue frontage, two (2) along the West Water Street frontage, and the remaining four (4) are shown in the central island of the Parking Lot. Opaque Barrier The Zoning Ordinance requires a buffer between a residential use and a non-residential use (Article 5 Section 7.2). The buffer has two components: an opaque barrier consisting of a wooden fence, a masonry wall or an earthen berm and a landscape component. The property immediately adjacent to the north of the subject site is similarly zoned C-2A but appears to be of a residential use. An Opaque Barrier buffer would therefore be required along the north property line of the parcel. The Plan submitted does appear to show shrubbery providing screening along the northern property line and a proposed fence. According to Zoning Ordinance, Article 5 §7.24, the Planning Commission can consider a waiver request to eliminate the opaque barrier (fence component) and require only landscaping in cases where noise is not a concern, and the vegetation alone is considered a desirable aesthetic alternative. The applicant has chosen not to pursue a waiver request and will implement the Opaque Barrier requirements. THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY, AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY’S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. VII. CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1) Ensure implementation of the Opaque Barrier (fence, wall, or berm) portion of the buffer and the continuous 6-foot-tall landscape component shall be planted along all residential use boundaries. The Opaque Barrier is not required in the front yard setback of 15 feet and if a fence is placed in the front yard setback it is limited to 4 feet in height. 2) Ensure that at least one parking space is ADA compliant. 3) Ensure that there is a pedestrian connection between the parking lot and the South Governors Avenue and West Water Street frontages. 4) Note the footcandles of the lighting proposed. 5) Note if any trash collection is proposed on site. 6) The applicant must receive approval for all stormwater management and erosion/sediment control plans. 122

Item 4. S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 6 of 7 7) Corrections to Sheet C001: a) In the Data column: i) Add the total proposed Impervious Lot Coverage in both square feet and as a percentage. ii) Provide Existing parking figures. iii) For Zoning, note the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone: Tier 3, Excellent Recharge Area) iv) Note Bulk Standards for the SWPOZ Zone. b) Provide a 1=1,200 Scale Map. c) Provide square footage of the proposed parking lot, as well as impervious surface area overall. d) Add a note indicating that any new utilities to be constructed on the site shall be constructed at the expense of the developer. VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: In accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 the Planning Commission in considering and acting upon Site Development Plans may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards so that the public health, safety, and welfare, the comfort and convenience of the public in general, and the residents of the immediate neighborhood in particular shall be taken into consideration. These safeguards may to the maximum extent possible further the expressed intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the accomplishment of stated objectives. 1) Pedestrian Connectivity: Staff recommends that a dedicated, paved access to the bicycle parking area should be provided connecting to the sidewalk along South Governors Avenue. Also recommended is the addition of sidewalk into the Parking Lot from the street frontage sidewalk system; this could be implemented near the corner intersection of South Governors Avenue and West Water Street. IX. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: 1) Other agencies and departments which participate in the Development Advisory Committee may provide additional comments related to their areas of expertise and code requirements. 2) Following Planning Commission approval of the Site Plan, the Plan must be revised to meet all conditions of approval from the Development Advisory Committee or as otherwise noted. A Check Print must be submitted for review by Planning Office Staff and directly to other agencies. Upon determination that the Plan is complete and all agency approvals have been received, copies of the Plan may be submitted for final endorsement. 3) In the event, that major changes and revisions to the Site Development Plan occur in the finalization of the Site Plan contact the Planning Office. Examples include relocation of site components. 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. 123

Item 4. S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue DAC Report of May 4, 2022 Page 7 of 7 4) For construction, the requirements of the building code or fire code must be complied with. Consult with the Chief Building Inspector and City of Dover Fire Marshal for these requirements. 5) The applicant/developer shall be aware that prior to any ground disturbing activities on the site the appropriate site inspections, Pre-Construction meetings (including a City of Dover Pre-Construction meeting), and permits are required. 6) Construction may have an effect on the adjacent property owners and nearby travel lanes. Any work requiring the closing or rerouting of potential customers or visitors to adjacent properties should be coordinated as to offer the least amount of inconvenience to the adjacent property owners. 7) The applicant shall be aware that Site Plan approval does not represent a Sign Permit, nor does it convey permission to place any sign on the premises. Any proposed site or building identification sign shall require a Sign Permit from the City of Dover prior to placement of any such sign. 8) The applicant shall be aware that Site Plan approval does not represent a Building Permit and associated construction activity permits. A separate application process is required for issuance of a Building Permit from the City of Dover and will be required to track construction of this Parking Lot. If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person and the Planning Department as soon as possible. 124

Item 4. CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: APRIL 27, 2022 APPLICATION: Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue FILE #: S-22-07 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Department of Public Works and Water & Wastewater CONTACT PERSON: Jason A. Lyon, P.E., Director of Water & Wastewater CONTACT PHONE #: 302-736-7025 CONTACT PHONE #: jlyon@dover.de.us T HE S UBJECT P ROPOSAL HAS BEEN R EVIEWED FOR C ODE C OMPLIANCE , P LAN C ONFORMITY AND C OMPLETENESS IN A CCORDANCE WITH THIS A GENCY ’ S A UTHORITY AND A REA OF E XPERTISE . T HE F OLLOWING I TEMS HAVE BEEN I DENTIFIED AS E LEMENTS W HICH N EED TO BE A DDRESSED BY THE A PPLICANT : CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS SANITATION 1. None. STORMWATER 1. Final site plan approval will not be granted until a copy of the approved Stormwater/Erosion and Sediment Control Plan from Kent Conservation District / DNREC is submitted to our office. 2. The size, length, slope, type and flow directions must be shown on all existing and proposed storm sewer lines. Rim and invert elevations must be labeled on all stormwater structures. STREETS 1. Final site plan approval will not be granted until a copy of the approved entrance plan, signed by DelDOT is submitted to our office. WATER 1. Any existing water lines not to be utilized by the proposed facility must be properly abandoned at the mains in accordance with the City of Dover Department of Water & Wastewater specifications and requirements. Please locate on the plans 2. The size, type, and location of all proposed and existing water lines and valves must be shown on the plan. WASTEWATER 1. Any existing sanitary sewer lines not to be utilized by the proposed facility must be properly abandoned at the mains in accordance with the City of Dover Department of Water & Wastewater specifications and requirements. Please locate on the plans. 2. The size, length, slope, type and flow directions must be shown on all existing and proposed sanitary sewer lines. Rim and invert elevations must be labeled on all sanitary structures. 125

Item 4. Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue File #: S-22-07 April 27, 2022 Page 2 of 2 GENERAL 1. All existing utilities shall be adjusted to final grade in accordance with current City of Dover requirements and practices. This must be included as a note on the plan. 2. No trees may be planted within ten feet (10’) of utility infrastructure. 3. No structure may be installed within ten feet (10’) of utility infrastructure, please depict all underground utilities and structures on the utility plan sheet to confirm compliance. 4. The final site plan must be submitted in the following compatible digital formats: a. AutoCAD 2018 (.dwg format). b. Adobe Reader (.pdf format). RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES STREETS / SANITATION / STORMWATER / WATER / WASTEWATER / GENERAL 1. None. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT WATER / WASTEWATER 1. None GENERAL 1. The applicant is advised that depending upon the size of the existing water service and sanitary sewer lateral to be abandoned, flowable fill may be required. 2. Construction plans will not be reviewed by our office unless all previous comments have been clearly addressed within the plan set and accordingly identified within an itemized response letter and with the Water/Wastewater Initial Plan Submission Checklist, which can be obtained from the following website: https://imageserv9.team- logic.com/mediaLibrary/198/WaterWastewaterHandbookFinal_1.pdf, page 88. STORMWATER 1. Please be advised that this area is prone to flooding and the City is recommending over management on the site prior to the connection to the City’s stormwater system. STORMWATER / STREETS 1. None I F Y OU H AVE A NY Q UESTIONS OR N EED TO D ISCUSS ANY OF THE A BOVE C OMMENTS , P LEASE C ALL THE A BOVE C ONTACT P ERSON AND THE P LANNING D EPARTMENT AS S OON AS P OSSIBLE . 126

Item 4. CITY OF DOVER ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: APRIL 27, 2022 APPLICATION: Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue FILE #: S-22-07 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Electric Department CONTACT PERSON: Shawn Burgett, Engineering Services & System Operations Superintendent CONTACT PHONE #: 302-674-7568 CONTACT EMAIL #: sburgett@dover.de.us T HE S UBJECT P ROPOSAL HAS BEEN R EVIEWED FOR C ODE C OMPLIANCE , P LAN C ONFORMITY AND C OMPLETENESS IN A CCORDANCE WITH THIS A GENCY ’ S A UTHORITY AND A REA OF E XPERTISE . T HE F OLLOWING I TEMS HAVE BEEN I DENTIFIED AS E LEMENTS W HICH N EED TO BE A DDRESSED BY THE A PPLICANT : CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS ELECTRIC 1. The roadway and curbing must be in. 2. The right-of-way must be within 6" of final grade. 3. The property corners must be staked. 4. Owner is responsible for locating all existing underground electric, communications and water facilities. 5. Owner is responsible for installing all conduits and equipment pads per the City of Dover Engineering Department specifications. 6. Owner is responsible for site and/or street lighting. 7. Meter locations will be determined by City of Dover Engineering Department. 8. Load sheets and AutoCAD compatible DXF or DWG diskettes of site plans, including driveways, are required prior to receiving approved electrical construction drawings. 9. Any relocation of existing electrical equipment will be engineered by the City of Dover Electric Department. Developer may be required to perform a quantity of the relocation. Any work performed by the City of Dover will be at the owner’s expense. 10. Prior to construction, owner is responsible for granting an easement to the City of Dover Electric Department. Easement forms will be furnished and prepared by the City of Dover Electric Engineering Department. 11. Fees will be assessed upon final site plans. The owner will be responsible for fees assessed prior to construction. Owner is required to sign off plans prepared by the Electric Department. 12. Must maintain 10' clearance around all electrical equipment, unless pre-approved by the City of Dover Electric Engineering Department. 127

Item 4. Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue File #: S-22-07 Apr 27, 2022 Page 2 of 2 13. Prior to the completion of any/all designs and estimates, the owner is responsible for providing the Electric Engineering Department with a physical address of the property. 14. All Engineering and design for Dover Electric will be engineered upon final approved plans. All Engineering work will be furnished by the City’s Electric Engineering Department. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES ELECTRIC 1. Owner must give the City of Dover Electric Department three (3) months’ notice prior to construction. Owner is responsible for following the requirements outlined in the City of Dover’s Electric Service Handbook. The handbook is now available on the website at the following link: https://evogov.s3.amazonaws.com/media/27/media/13108.pdf. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT ELECTRIC 1. Provide load sheets if the new load requirements will change as soon as possible to verify proper sizing of transformers and creation of primary fee estimates. Current load sheets can be found at the following link: https://www.cityofdover.com/media/Electric%20Department/COD%20Electric%20Load%20Sheet.pdf. I F Y OU H AVE A NY Q UESTIONS OR N EED TO D ISCUSS ANY OF THE A BOVE C OMMENTS , P LEASE C ALL THE A BOVE C ONTACT P ERSON AND THE P LANNING D EPARTMENT AS S OON AS P OSSIBLE . 128

C F S-22-07 Item 4. I I T R CITY OF DOVER Y E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE O M F A APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY R D.A.C. MEETING DATE: 04/27/22 D S O H V A E L R APPLICATION: Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Ave FILE #: S-22-07 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover, Office of the Fire Marshal CONTACT PERSON: Jason Osika, Fire Marshal PHONE #: (302) 736-4457 THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY, AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY’S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESS BY THE APPLICANT: CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Proposal is a parking lot, this office has no objections 2. Project to be completed per approved Site Plan. ADDITIONAL / SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN APPROVAL: 1. N/A APPLICABLE CODES LISTED BELOW (NOT LIMITED TO): 2021 NFPA 1 Fire Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2021 NFPA 101 Life Safety Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2019 NFPA 72 National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2019 NFPA 13 Installation of Sprinkler Systems (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2009 IBC (International Building Code) Latest editions of all other NFPA Codes as defined by the Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 2021 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations City of Dover Code of Ordinances *If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person listed. 129

Item 4. CITY OF DOVER D E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE L APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY D O T =============================================================== APPLICATION: Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue FILE#: S-22-07 REVIEWING AGENCY: DelDOT CONTACT PERSON: Ryan Schroder PHONE#: 302-760-2674 =============================================================== THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY & STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: No person, firm, corporation or the like shall construct, open, reconstruct, maintain, modify or use any crossing or entrance onto a state-maintained highway, street or road, including any drainage modifications leading into or carried by the highway drainage system, without first having complied with standards and regulations adopted by the Department and having obtained a permit issued by the Department. Please contact the Delaware Department of Transportation - Development Coordination section to begin permit process. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: 1. This project and the New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street (S-22-06) are being reviewed as one project by DelDOT under the name Kent County Delaware Family Courts 130

Item 4. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL DIVISION OF WATERSHED STEWARDSHIP CONSERVATION PROGRAMS ENTERPRISE BUSINESS PARK PHONE: (302) 739-9921 SECTION 285 BEISER BOULEVARD, SUITE 102 FAX: (302) 739-6724 DOVER, DELAWARE 19904 MEMORANDUM TO: Dawn Melson-Williams City of Dover Planning Office FROM: Elaine Z. Webb, P.E. DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program DATE: April 27, 2022 SUBJECT: City of Dover Development Advisory Committee Comments S-22-06 New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue CC: Bonnie Arvay, Program Manager II, Sediment and Stormwater Program DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program has reviewed the D.A.C. application for the above reference projects and offers the following comments: S-22-06 New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street 1. A Sediment and Stormwater Management Plan must be approved by DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program prior to any land disturbance taking place on site. a. DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program has had preliminary meetings with the owner and consultant regarding stormwater compliance for the site. b. The site will comply with Resource Protection Event (RPv, 1-yr storm) requirements through implementation of a remediation plan. c. Conveyance (Cv, 10-yr storm) and Flooding (Fv, 100-year storm) event compliance must be met for the project. An underground stormwater storage facility is proposed. d. Due to the contamination on site a Contaminated Materials Management Plan (CMMP) must be adhered throughout construction of the project. 2. A Sediment and Stormwater Plan for the demolition phase of the project is currently under review. The demolition plan includes the total area of applications S-22-06 and S-22-07. It is expected that both of the City of Dover DAC applications will be submitted to DNREC as a single Sediment and Stormwater Plan for the redevelopment phase. 131

Item 4. S-22-06 and S-22-07 DAC Comments April 27, 2022 Page 2 of 2 3. A Notice of Intent (NOI) for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity has been submitted that includes the total area of applications S-22-06 and S-22-07. This NOI Permit No. 6692 will continue through the construction phase for both applications until project closeout. S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue 1. A Sediment and Stormwater Management Plan must be approved by DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program prior to any land disturbance taking place on site. Regarding stormwater management compliance: a. DNREC Sediment and Stormwater Program has had preliminary meetings with the owner and consultant regarding stormwater compliance for the site. b. The site will comply with Resource Protection Event (RPv, 1-yr storm) requirements through reduction of 15% or greater in impervious surface. c. Conveyance (Cv, 10-yr storm) and Flooding (Fv, 100-year storm) event compliance will likely be met through reduction of impervious surface on the site. 2. A Sediment and Stormwater Plan for the demolition phase of the project is currently under review. The demolition plan includes the total area of applications S-22-06 and S-22-07. It is expected that both of the City of Dover DAC applications will be submitted to DNREC as a single Sediment and Stormwater Plan for the redevelopment phase. 3. A Notice of Intent (NOI) for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity has been submitted that includes the total area of applications S-22-06 and S-22-07. This NOI Permit No. 6692 will continue through the construction phase for both applications until project closeout. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (302) 608-5460 or Elaine.Webb@delaware.gov. 132

Item 4. OFFICES IN DELAWARE, MARYLAND, WEB: HTTP://DUFFNET.COM DUFFIELD ASSOCIATES Soil, Water & the Environment LEGEND 5400 LIMESTONE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE PROPERTY LINE ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE ZONING BOUNDARY LINE WILMINGTON, DE 19808-1232 BENCHMARK CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND CAPPED REBAR FOUND PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JERSEY IRON PIPE FOUND E-MAIL: DUFFIELD@DUFFNET.COM BUILDINGS TEL. 302.239.6634 x x FENCES SIGNS BOLLARDS CURB FAX 302.239.8485 CONCRETE ON-SITE STRIPING OFF-SITE SOLID STRIPING OFF-SITE BROKEN STRIPING OFF-SITE DASHED STRIPING LG-Lot2-Sign-12598CE P.E. #21140 KENNETH JAMES TAYLOR, JR., P.E. FIRE HYDRANT CHECKED BY: PR. RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE FILE NAME: PR. PROPERTY LINE PR. BENCHMARK CONC.MON.SET. PR. CONCRETE MONUMENT CAPPED REBAR SET PR. CAPPED REBAR KJT 4/1/2022 STATE: DELAWARE I.P.SET PR. IRON PIPE PR. BUILDING SETBACK LINE DESIGNED BY: PR. PAVING SETBACK LINE PR. EASEMENT LINE DRAWN BY: PR. BUILDINGS x x PR. FENCES PR. SIGNS KJT DPM PR. BOLLARDS PR. CURB MARKING LEGEND PR. BRICK CHK'D BY PR. CONCRETE DATE SOLID WHITE OR YELLOW LINE 5" or 10" ** (SWL/5" **, SWL/10" ** OR SYL/5") PR. ON-SITE STRIPING ** SEE NOTE 5 5" PR. OFF-SITE SOLID STRIPING DOUBLE SOLID YELLOW LINE 6" PR. OFF-SITE BROKEN STRIPING 5" PR. OFF-SITE DASHED STRIPING (DSYL/5") LIGHT POLES 10' 30' BIKE RACK - 10 SPACES FIRE HYDRANT BROKEN WHITE LINE (BWL/5") 5" (SEE DETAILS) x PR. ON-SITE STANDARD 2' DUTY ASPHALT x x x x x x REVISION DOTTED WHITE LINE 6' (DWL/5" ** OR DWL10" **) 5" or 10" ** DWL/5" ** SEE NOTE 5 9' 18' 6' WIDE CROSSWALK NOTES: 1. ALL EXISTING PAVEMENT MARKINGS THAT ARE NO LONGER APPROPRIATE SHALL BE 16" WHITE STOP BAR ERADICATED BY PERMITTEE. ERADICATION SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY WATER SWL/5" 24' BLASTING. PERMITTEE SHALL PLACE ALL REQUIRED NEW MARKINGS. No. - - 2. DIMENSIONED LANE WIDTHS ARE CURB-TO-CURB OR CENTERLINE OF STRIPING. 4' 3. ALL NEW LONGITUDINAL PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE EPOXY RESIN PAINT MARKINGS, AND ALL NEW SHORT / TRANSVERSE AND SYMBOL MARKINGS SHALL BE HOT STATE OF DELAWARE R1-1 STOP OWNER/ THERMOPLASTIC, AS DIRECTED BY DELDOT. SIGN 4. REFER TO SIGNAGE AND STRIPING DETAILS AND LEGEND THIS SHEET. 18' DOVER, DE 19901 5. ** NORMAL WIDTH LONGITUDINAL MARKINGS SHALL BE 5 INCHES. WIDE WIDTH MARKINGS (10 INCHES) SHALL BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DELAWARE MUTCD WHERE SPECIFIED ON THIS PLAN 24' 9' DEVELOPER: 540 S DUPONT HIGHWAY 9' 18' KENT COUNTY FAMILY COURT PARKING LOT SWL/5" DSYL/5" 18' 24' 16" WHITE STOP BAR CITY OF DOVER ~ KENT COUNTY ~ DELAWARE 18' 9' SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SIGNAGE AND STRIPING PLAN 446 S GOVERNORS AVE 10' WIDE CROSSWALK DSYL/5" SWL/5" AREA OF 2" MILLING DATE: APRIL 1, 2022 SCALE: 1" = 20' 20' 0 20' 40' PROJECT NO. 12598.CE DRAWING SCALE 1" = 20' SHEET: C601 133

Item 5. Dover Air Force Base (DAFB) Compatible Use Study PUBLIC WORKSHOP Tuesday, May 17, 2022 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. To join via Zoom: https://deldot- gov.zoom.us/j/84704454648?pwd=OTJUaUZBUTc2ejNCS2RHQVpDTVdsQT09 Meeting ID: 847 0445 4648 To attend in-Person: DelDOT Administration Building- East 1st Floor South Entrance- Delaware Room 800 Bay Road Dover, DE Project Website: https://deldot.gov/projects/Studies/dafb/ The Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) along with its consultants is holding a Public Workshop to solicit public input on the Dover Air Force Base Compatible Use Study. The workshop will introduce the public to the purpose, planning process, schedule and the initial data gathering phase. The public is invited to attend anytime between 5:30 and 7:30. The schedule is as follows: 5:45 to 6:15: A live presentation with Q & A will be presented both in person and via zoom. 6:15 to 7:30: The in-person public is invited to view the project information and direct comments and questions to project staff. The virtual attendees will be provided links to the project information, including videos and mapping. Questions and comments will be accepted live over zoom. The recorded presentation will be available after the meeting on the project website listed above. Comments will be received during the workshop, submitted online, or can be sent via email to dotpublic@delaware.gov or Humaira.Nabeela@delaware.gov 134