PC Minutes 6-21-22

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 The Meeting of the City of Dover Planning Commission was held on Monday, June 21, 2022 at 7:00 PM as an In-Person Meeting and also using the phone/videoconferencing system WebEx. The Meeting Session was conducted with Vice Chair Mr. Hartman presiding. Members present were Mr. Cooper, Mr. Roach (virtual), Mrs. Denney, Mr. Hartman, Mr. Baldwin, Dr. Jones, Mrs. Welsh (virtual). Mrs. Malone and Mrs. Maucher were absent. Staff members present were Mrs. Dawn Melson-Williams, Mr. Julian Swierczek, Mr. Jason Lyon (virtual) and Mrs. Kristen Mullaney. Also present were Mr. Brian Turner, Mr. Elio Baltista Jr., Chief Judge Michael Newell, Mr. Bill Lenihan, Mr. James Taylor, Mr. John Rathfon and Mr. Joseph Dopsovic. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Dr. Jones moved to approve the Agenda as submitted, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the motion was unanimously carried 7-0 with Mrs. Malone and Mrs. Maucher absent. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 18, 2022 Mrs. Welsh moved to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 18, 2022, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the motion was unanimously carried 7-0 with Mrs. Malone and Mrs. Maucher absent. COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS Mrs. Melson-Williams provided an update on the regular City Council and various Committee meetings held on April 25 & 26, 2022, May 9 & 10, 2022, May 23 & 24, 2022 and June 13 & 14, 2022. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the next Planning Commission regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, July 18, 2022 at 7:00PM in the City Hall Council Chambers. At this point, she is not sure that we will be having this meeting and it will depend on if there is any business. They have no new applications, but they haven’t officially cancelled that meeting yet. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the City Manager has announced the selection of Mary Ellen Gray as the next City Planner and to serve as the Director of Planning & Inspections. Her start date is July 18, 2022 so they will certainly may sure that you have the opportunity to meet and greet her. Mary Ellen has previously served as the Assistant Director in the Kent County Department of Planning & Inspections and is currently serving as the Director in the City of Newark. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that one of our previous Planning Commission members, Mr. Ronald Shomo has passed away in recent weeks. He served as a Planning Commission member for a three-year term that began in June 2010 through July 2013. Some of the people on the Commission may remember Mr. Shomo. That was a gig in his retirement after serving as a Band Director for the Capital School District for many years. 1

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 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) Update on Revisions to Applications: 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. Representatives: Mr. Brian Turner, Mountain Consulting Mr. Swierczek stated that this is an application for a Site Development Plan and Lot Consolidation Plan that was recently before the Planning Commission in July 2019. It did receive an extension of plan approval in the summer of 2021; so the plan is valid through July 2022. There is not necessarily any action required on the part of the Planning Commission this evening. This is merely a courtesy update as they have revised their plans. Originally when this came before the Planning Commission in 2019, this was a building of a little over 7,600 SF and three stories. The original design was something more of a French Provençal aesthetic where as now, it is a little bit more of a mission aesthetic. As this was a revision of the original design to a smaller square footage and a reduction to the overall height of the building, this was not necessarily requiring any specific action on the part of the Planning Commission. This application had been approved with two waiver requests. One for the partial elimination of upright curbing at the rear of the building where they are proposing a couple parking spaces and a tree mitigation plan as this facility takes up the bulk of the site on West Division Street. They are going to be planting their required two trees off-site at two other NCALL properties within the City. NEW APPLICATIONS 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 2

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 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 Review Certification, Tree Mitigation Plan. Waiver Request: Alternative Size of Loading Spaces. Representatives: Mr. Elio Baltista Jr., Parkowski Guerke and Swayze PA; Chief Judge Michael Newell, Delaware Family Court; Mr. Bill Lenihan, Tevebaugh Architecture; Mr. James Taylor, Duffield & Associates Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this is one of the bigger projects that we have seen in recent times for a new Courthouse and an associated Parking Structure to be located on the east side of South Governors Avenue in the block that is between Bank Lane and West Water Street. For the image that is shown on the screen, West Water Street is at the bottom of the page and Bank Lane would be at the top and then Governors Avenue kind of runs up and down vertically just to the left of the two buildings shown in blue. It does consist of a number of tax parcels but in total, the property area including an alley, will be 3.7499 acres. The properties are zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and are now all in the Historic District Zone thanks to a recent Rezoning Application that brought the balance of the block into the Historic District. The properties are all subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone); however, in this Downtown, properties are exempt from certain provisions of that zoning designation. Tonight for consideration, we will be dealing with an Architectural Review Certification. That is the review process for something being constructed in the City’s Historic District Zone. That process started in April with the application being reviewed by the Historic District Commission and as a result of that, they have made a recommendation. For consideration, there is also a Request for Tree Mitigation. Portions of this property are intended to be landscaped with tree plantings; however, space is somewhat limited and they are seeking a Request to plant some of the required trees on other State owned properties here in Dover. There is also a Waiver Request associated with the alternative size of loading spaces. There is not a designated marked loading space. There is an area that is located to the northeast side of the Courthouse Building. A little bit about the project site; it does include a number of existing properties and there are several buildings that are currently located on them that have been proposed for demolition and Demolition Permits have been filed for those as part of a first phase of improvements to the site. As mentioned, the Architectural Review Certification process began with the Historic District Commission. They, like the Planning Commission, are charged with reviewing the project in concert with the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover’s Historic District Zone. It looks at a number of 3

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 things related to placing the building on the site and then the form and materials of the buildings themselves. She does want to, by reference; note that there is a Recommendation Report that was forwarded from the Historic District Commission from their April meeting and that is included in the Planning Commission packet. Specifically, the Historic District Commission did recommend approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the application. They did note that they recommend approval of an Alternative Bulk Standard related to the rear yard setback. There is a portion of the Courthouse that was unable to meet the setback requirements but the Historic District Commission is recommending that rear yard setback be reduced to a twenty-five foot wide rather than a thirty foot one. They also, in their action on the Architectural Review Certification Recommendation, recommended the use of fencing and it’s appropriate in areas adjacent to the residential areas that adjoin this property. The Courthouse itself is a three-story L- shaped building. Its main exterior is brick. There is also a variety of cast stone elements and definition provided in size of openings and differences in the plain of the building. Likewise, the Parking Garage structure is also brick. It is a series of parking decks that would allow for over four hundred parking spaces within it. There is also included in the packet, additional information about the design of the parking structure in that the parking spaces within it will be slightly reduced in size from the standard parking space but they tend to follow typical parking structure layouts. This would allow the building to remain the size that it is and its placement in proximity to the street while still providing that significant number of parking spaces undercover. Going back to the DAC Report and the review process related to the Zoning Ordinance, parking is being provided in both the parking structure and then with the reconfiguration of a parking lot that is located along West Water Street. The lower right-hand corner of the property is where the parking lot will be, slightly reconfigured but generally the same portion of the location that there is a parking lot today. The project is providing bicycle parking on site and the other requirements related to street frontage sidewalks and sidewalks that lead into the site to access both buildings and then also to connect both buildings. She did mention the tree planting requirement and the Tree Mitigation Plan. Basically, the site is deficient twelve trees and the applicant believes that they can certainly satisfy that tree planting deficit by accommodating those on other State-owned properties located here within the City of Dover. Staff can work with them to ensure that the mitigation occurs. Planning Staff is recommending approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the project and also the Tree Mitigation Plan. They do note that with this property being adjacent to some residential properties, there are some requirements for opaque barriers. In most cases, there is a fence component that will be implemented and where utilities are not in conflict, either existing trees or new plantings will be implemented. They do plan for some electrical vehicle charging stations as part of the project. It is not currently a requirement of our Code, but they are taking that step. Additionally in the packet, is their Letter of Request. This project did go through PLUS Review even though it is not required to given its location so that PLUS Review Letter was also provided since it came in after the May distribution to you on this project. Mr. Baltista stated that as Mrs. Melson-Williams indicated, they are here with respect to the proposed Kent County Family Courthouse, Parking Structure and adjacent lot. He would like to begin by stating that this has been a long road going through this public process; he sees light at the end of the tunnel and the Planning Office has been great working hand-in-hand with the applicant in helping guide us through that process. 4

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 Mr. Lenihan stated that Mrs. Melson-Williams did a great job of updating the Commission on the project. They had great meetings with the Historic District Commission and the Development Advisory Committee and they will continue to work with the Planning Office, the Fire Marshal’s Office and all of the other DAC members as they develop the design and they will have continuous administrative reviews with them on each of the components and regulations to make sure that they are in compliance all the way through this project. As Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned, there were a few key items; one was the Tree Mitigation Plan that they have a game plan for and they will continue to work with the Planning Department on that as they move forward. They had several waivers. One was for the alternate size of the loading space. They had that area on the back side of the Courthouse; it’s kind of a service yard area and adequately accommodates the loading spaces in that area we just don’t have them specifically defined. Also, with the parking space width, all of the surface parking spaces will meet the City of Dover requirement of nine-foot-wide parking spaces but they are requesting for within the parking structure only, to reduce the width to an 8.5 foot width. 8.5 foot is a standard width for parking structures. Even some of the industry literature recommends that size width for these types of parking structures and they recommend going with that because to increase the width, they would also have to increase the height of the parking structure to accommodate the same amount of vehicles to meet our parking demand that was stated in our parking study for the project. The other one was the rear setback line because we are adjacent to a residential property at the rear of the building for the width of the one yard there. They can only accommodate a twenty-five-foot setback based on the requirements of the use groups within the building. They believe that they are meeting the intent of that regulation of having enough space between an institutional building and a residential property. The existing historic home is several hundred feet away from the Courthouse and the property line; so, we feel that they are meeting the intent of that requirement there by adjusting the setback only five feet. It was also mentioned about fencing, that the Code has a requirement in the Historic District for four-foot-high fencing. We want to keep the four- foot-high fencing in most areas but right behind our service area in the rear to cover and obscure some mechanical equipment and also for security reasons, they are requesting to go to a six-foot- high fence just in that area. They are asking for approval of the Architectural Review Certificate that was recommended by the Historic District Commission. Mr. Hartman opened the public hearing. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that there was one written piece of correspondence regarding the application that was received from the Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce. It is a letter dated April 22, 2022 signed by their President, Dina Vendetti who is in the room this evening. They note their support of the Courthouse and parking garage project that is proposed at this Downtown location. Mr. Hartman closed the public hearing after seeing no one wishing to speak. Dr. Jones moved to approve S-22-06 New Courthouse at South Governors Avenue and West Water Street to include the Architectural Review Certificate as presented, the Tree Mitigation Plan and the alternative size of the loading space and the reduction in parking spaces, seconded by Mrs. Denney. 5

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 Mrs. Melson-Williams asked the motion maker to clarify if they are approving the Site Development Plan as well with reference to the DAC Report and Comments. Mr. Lenihan asked if the motion could also include all of the waivers that they outlined here tonight. One was the Tree Mitigation Plan and the waivers were the alternate size for loading space, the parking space width for the parking spaces within the parking structure, the rear setback from thirty feet to twenty-five feet and the six-foot high fencing at that rear yard area. Dr. Jones moved to amend the motion to include approving the Site Development Plan and the DAC Report and Comments as well as the Tree Mitigation Plan and all waivers requested (as listed above by applicant), seconded by Mrs. Denney and the motion was carried 7-0 by roll call vote with Mrs. Malone and Mrs. Maucher absent. Dr. Jones voting yes. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; the facility is badly needed, and she thinks the design has come through as a very well thought out and exceptionally planned facility. Mr. Cooper voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mr. Roach voting yes; for reasons previously stated. It is definitely needed and he appreciates the applicants working so hard with the Planning Staff. Mrs. Denney voting yes; she thinks this is a lovely enhancement to our City and to that area and she as well, is very excited and looking forward to seeing this progress. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; for all of the statements that have been made. Mr. Hartman voting yes; based on the comments of the Planning Staff and the DAC Meeting and the Architectural Review Recommendation Report. 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. Representatives: Mr. James Taylor, Duffield & Associates; Mr. Elio Baltista Jr., Parkowski Guerke and Swayze PA; Mr. Bill Lenihan, Tevebaugh Architecture Mr. Swierczek stated that this application is for a parking lot located at 446 South Governors Avenue. This is accessory to the Courthouse project and has been accompanying the Courthouse review through both the Historic District Commission review process as well as the DAC review. This property is zoned C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and is also subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone); however, as Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned earlier, the Downtown area is not subject to some of the restrictions that it would be elsewhere in the City. However, it is worth noting that the proposed development which is on the site of the previous Box Outlet would reduce the impervious coverage there by a little over 21%. They are meeting their tree planting requirements and landscaping requirements. After some determination by Planning Staff, the adjoining property that is zoned commercial is actually a residential use. After discussions with the applicant, they were accommodating it and meeting 6

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 the Code requirements. Therefore, they will add additional landscaping for screening along that northern property line and the recommendation of Planning Staff that pedestrian connectivity be improved under this Site Plan. The applicant has expressed willingness to work with that as well, saying that they would include added sidewalk to the bicycle parking pad as well as to the parking area in general. Mr. Taylor stated that he would like to thank Planning Staff for all of their support and working through this project. As Mr. Swierczek mentioned, the two major comments related to this were pedestrian connectivity into the parking lot as well as ADA parking spaces and they are working to come up with that accommodation. With all of the comments received, we are anticipating working with the different members of the DAC to make this project happen. Mr. Hartman opened the public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public hearing. Mrs. Denney stated that she has a comment in regards to this aspect of the project. Just because for many years she worked in that vicinity on Queen Street and living on North State Street, she often, after a substantial rain events, found it very difficult to get to her home. Because with the impervious soil aspect of that area, the old Eden Hill Farm space, and plenty of land; but for some reason rainwater wants to run downhill and of course that runs on the impervious soil. There have been many floods and many opportunities for the City of Dover Police Department to busy themselves putting up barriers for that reason when they could be doing other things. She just wanted to make that comment because that is of concern to her. She used to dream that somebody would take down that building there that is going to be taken down for parking space and instead make a stormwater management area. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr. Taylor stated that it is one thing that has been identified and noted. He is sure Mr. Lyon can comment on this as well but the City is currently working on projects in this area to improve drainage. There is currently a project from about this intersection down towards the discharge part to the east which is called the Meeting (House) Branch and then there is also other drainage improvements proposed. We are currently working with the City of Dover as part of this project to be able to put an underground stormwater facility in this parking lot. Although not shown currently as part of this plan, this is something that has been discussed in the last two months with the City and the State is willing to work with them to provide some additional storage area for those rain events. Mrs. Denney stated that over the years, she has had a lot of experience with parking lots, driveways, etc. that they used to call “parkable turf” and she realized that there are a lot of safety issues for tripping and stuff. But she was just wondering if there had been any discussion about something like that. Obviously, we have to have a place for water to go. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr. Taylor stated that the project, as Mr. Swierczek mentioned, is almost 100% impervious on the lot today with the building and the parking. They are reducing that by about 21% which is adding a lot more green space than what exists today. Through the State, with the redevelopment requirements, which is what they try to do to meet those events if they want to get enough water back into the ground, they consider redevelopment to be 15% so they are exceeding that expectation. Having a turf block type thing versus having asphalt surface gets a little tough in this type of area because if you want to have it from a maintenance perspective, 7

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 you need to be able to provide people with a safe place to park. All of the area that is impervious (all of the area that is asphalt), would drain to an underground stormwater facility to be collected and held for a period of time before releasing back into the system. What that is usually designed for is, let’s get it away from those peak hours of where the high intensity comes down, you start getting your flooding and they let everything go back out. They are still in design of exactly what that’s going to look like, but all of those things have been taken into consideration with the design of this lot to try and help mitigate some of the issues that the City has seen within the last number of years. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that Mr. Jason Lyon from the Department of Water and Wastewater would like to make a comment as well. His department, in conjunction with others, has been working on this drainage issue. Mr. Lyon stated that the State has been extremely gracious to partner with us on this project. The City actually has a stormwater management project in this area, although it’s not timing with this project. We are kind of expediting a little bit to kind of utilize this parking lot as an underground storage facility as it kind of functions the same way as the comment about the permeable turf. The water would still get underground and beheld there. It is important to note that that intersection of Water Street and Governors Avenue is for all intents and purposes a bath tub; it drains all of those roads. As one would imagine, the stormwater structure in that area was never really designed to today’s standards so part of our long term project is to upgrade that area. But with the cooperation with the State, they are working on utilizing that parking lot to have some sort of storage. As Mr. Taylor mentioned, they are still working through the details of that. It is also important to note that the parking lot is actually a little bit higher than the intersection so just putting a stormwater facility in that parking lot is not going to solve all of the problems, but it certainly will help it as well. Mrs. Welsh moved to approve S-22-07 Parking Lot at 446 South Governors Avenue as there are no waivers and she would imagine that the applicant will comply with all of the DAC comments, seconded by Mr. Cooper and the motion was carried 7-0 by roll call vote with Mrs. Malone and Mrs. Maucher absent. Mrs. Welsh voted yes; it’s apparent that it’s a necessary accessory to the Courthouse and it appears to be a good use of the space on that corner and it sounds like with the stormwater mitigation that it’s going to provide some needed improvement to the drainage in that area. Mr. Cooper voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mr. Roach voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mrs. Denney voting yes; obviously, we have to have a parking space there and she just really hopes that when all is said and done, some of the flooding in that area will be gone. Mr. Baldwin voting yes. Dr. Jones voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mr. Hartman voting yes; he agrees with the comments of the DAC Report. S-22-09 Dover Apartments at Leipsic Road – Public Hearing and Review of a Site Development Application for the construction of six (6) 3-story, 46,800 GSF garden style apartment buildings each containing thirty-six (36) units for a total of 216 apartment units. Also proposed are eleven (11) garage buildings, a Clubhouse with Pool, Recreation Facilities, parking, and other site improvements. The property is zoned SC-2 (Community Shopping Center Development Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) Tier 3: Excellent Recharge Area. The property is located on the southeast side of Leipsic Road east of North DuPont Highway. The owner of record is Rojan DD 15, LLC and equitable owner/developer is 8

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 Metropolitan Group. Property is currently unaddressed. Tax Parcel: ED-05-068.05-01-15.01- 000. Council District 3. This site was previously subject to Minor Subdivision Application SB-18- 01. The related commercial development immediately adjacent to the southwest was reviewed as Master Plan S-19-03 Retail Center at 747 N. DuPont Highway (DuPont Plaza). Waiver Request: Reduction of Parking Requirement. Review of Active Recreation Area Plan with Consideration of Partial Fee-in-lieu of Active Recreation Area Construction. Representatives: Mr. James Taylor, Duffield & Associates; Mr. John Rathfon, Metropolitan Group; Mr. Joseph Dopsovic, Metropolitan Group Mr. Swierczek stated that this is a Site Development Plan application for a series of six apartment buildings. Each is to contain about thirty-six apartment units and be 46,800 SF and three stories in height. There are also eleven garage buildings proposed on site containing five parking spaces and some storage facilities in each one of those buildings. This site had previously gone through a Preliminary Land Use Services Review or PLUS Review. To the left on the Site Plan, there is a ten-acre parcel of land. This had previously been one overall site of twenty-five acres that had been subdivided in 2018 under Application SB-18-02. In 2018 was this PLUS Review which is generally a process which is required whenever there are commercial developments of over 75,000 SF or residential developments containing 125 of more dwelling units. This has also been submitted with an Active Recreation Plan for your consideration as well as a partial cash-in-lieu for a Recreation Area construction as well as a Waiver Request for the partial reduction of parking requirements. With regards to the Active Recreation Plan, that was a separate Report that was included in your packets. This is a Report that was sent to the Parks and Recreation Committee in which the original submission of the applicant was presented to them. The requirements for this development per Code would be that 59,400 SF or approximately 1.36 acres of Active Recreation be provided on-site. The submission of the applicant had originally shown about 38,011 SF of Active Recreation. This had included a Clubhouse with a swimming pool, fire pit, sports court, as well as some indoor active recreation area and then elsewhere on- site there was a Dog Park that was identified. As this was not quite meeting the 59,400 SF as required by Code, the applicant could either revise their design to meet that requirement or present a proposal for Cash-in-lieu. They did not have the appraisal for that but the presentation to the Parks and Recreation Committee did note that they are willing to do that for whatever portion of that requirement that they would not be able to meet. They are still looking at ways to increase the Active Recreation Area. With regards specifically to the Waiver for parking, the minimum requirement for parking is dictated by Code to be 2.25 parking spaces per unit proposed which with this application would be 486. The plans show 428 parking spaces being provided. The Waiver submitted by the applicant notes that they manage several other large scale residential developments in which their experience generally tells them that it’s 1.25 vehicle parking spaces (per unit) necessary. However, they are asking for a reduction from 2.25 to 1.98 vehicle parking spaces. They also note in their request that it is somewhat smaller units being proposed of one and two bedrooms as well as the availability of different types of transportation in the area with bus routes in the vicinity, shared use paths and then the close proximity with commercial properties nearby. Overall, Staff in review of the plans submitted, they had noted that they were somewhat deficient in things like tree plantings; however, in the DAC review process they indicated that they will be revising the plans to ensure that they are meeting minimum requirements for tree plantings and landscaping in general. They had noted some 9

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 concern on their initial review of the pedestrian connectivity noting that there did seem to be some opportunities to improve pedestrian access internal to the site between the buildings and the Active Recreation Areas, more specifically the Clubhouse and its facilities as well as to neighboring properties to the south. Again, discussing this with the applicant, they have indicated that they are willing to revise the plans to show that they will provide pedestrian facilities. In regards to the Active Recreation Plan, it was the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Committee that the application be approved noting that they were still looking at ways to increase the active recreation proposed. Mr. Taylor stated that he would like Mr. Rathfon to come up and talk about Metropolitan Group as a whole and then they will dive into the project itself. Mr. Rathfon stated that the Metropolitan Group is a family owned and operated, fully integrated land development company. He says family operated and fully integrated for two reasons; he deals with the section of the company that takes the ground from acquisition through approvals and then he oversees the construction. Once this is approved, they pass it to their D&B construction group; they are their general contractors as well. They manage the site work and construction which then gets transferred to Metropolitan Management Group which is our full- service apartment management group with in-house maintenance staff and leasing staff. They also do have a residential portion and a commercial portion of our company, so they basically do it all. One thing that is very important for the Commission to know is that they are family operated. The owner of the company is self-made and he has come from owning one apartment to now owning about 3,500 apartments. They build about 300-500 a year in-house. He has six children and the first of the children has just entered the business. They are here for the long haul. When they come into communities like this, they come trying to better the community and trying to bring housing to the community that is in need. They are here to be a long-term partner with the community. We don’t get a project approved and flip it. We don’t build it and then flip it. They plan to own this for 35-50 years and have it passed to the generations of the family. Mr. Taylor stated that Mr. Swierczek has been great to work with as always. There we some specific recommendations that were listed in the Report for the conditions to meet approval and he wanted to talk through some of those. For the pedestrian connectivity as Mr. Swierczek mentioned, they are committed to providing that connectivity interior to the site. One item that ties into the Active Recreation Area piece of it is that they have been working on developing a trail path that would go around the bottom portion of the site and then connect up to the shared use path along Leipsic Road. That would add about 16,000 SF into the Active Recreation Area, reducing the Cash-in-lieu amount to about 5,000-6,000 SF. We are still working on the exact design of that and look forward to working with Staff on showing that and getting that down to an additional amenity for this community. One of the other pieces was regarding bicycle parking facilities and providing some type of cover. In discussion with the owners, we are looking at providing bicycle spaces in the breezeways that go between the residential units. There are three on each building and being able to provide some bicycle racks in that area would provide some shelter for those spaces. He is going to have Mr. Dopsovic come up and talk about some of the other Active Recreation pieces and the parking spaces and the electrical vehicle charging stations. As far as DelDOT process, the TIS is about 50% through the process. They are requiring them to analyze the intersection of Route 13 and Leipsic Road as well as their site 10

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 access points. As shown on the plan, there are two access points. One that is a shared access point with the commercial development; and then about three quarters to the right, you can see an entrance on Leipsic Road as well. DelDOT has previously stated that those two access points make sense. He believes from the number of units perspective; they need to make sure that they have two access points to the site as well. For stormwater management, they are working with Kent Conservation District on the stormwater design for the site. A portion of the site falls with the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) which permits a maximum of 30%; however, we can go up to 60% if we provide certain practices or at least try to meet superior infiltration design. So, they are currently undergoing some geo-technical testing and working on the stormwater design for the site. They are at about 40% in that SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) which is the portion to the left-hand side. Regarding lighting, site lighting will be designed in accordance with the City of Dover Code. They don’t anticipate any issues with that. Mr. Dopsovic stated that in regards to the parking, historically, like Mr. Rathfon said, our 3,500 properties they have never really exceeded 1.25 spaces per unit necessary or required. 2.25 is a little excessive from what they are used to; however, they are trying to get to around 2 which would be far in access of anything that we’ve provided before. They always make sure that if there is a problem to address, they will take care of it and that even requires certain parking spaces per building and where they are located. That is always in the back of our minds. That would be the only large variance that we are really looking for at this time. In terms of tree count, we are trying to provide a green space. In fact, part of the fee-in-lieu of for our Active Recreation would be to not just place a bunch of playgrounds or anything on our space to want to have some green space there if possible. We are trying to provide a trail now to get closer to that number but above and beyond the fee-in-lieu of is not a problem. They will be fine providing back to the City to make sure the City of Dover has enough green space as well. Right now, they are trying to convert inactive land and make a nice space for residents. Also beyond that, getting back to the transportation aspect of it, the bike spaces that they are planning on providing per building will be in excess of what is required by far. He thinks it will be something like six per building that would be required, and they will probably end up providing something like eighteen per building; so, the bikes shouldn’t be an issue. In terms of electrical vehicle charging, they have a stub directly in front of the Clubhouse that will be available from day one. Then moving forward, all of our buildings are getting over-amperage so that they can provide stubs out to parking spaces. As they see an influx of absorption of how many people are actually going to be using electrical vehicles, we will be able to upgrade as necessary. Beyond that, their garages are also going to be wired up so that they can have individual units per meterage. So, somebody could lock up their car at night and charge it in their own dedicated spaces. They are all ways that they are trying to future proof not just this building or facility but all of the facilities that they have moving forward because they obviously know that this is the direction that transportation is moving. Mr. Taylor stated that a Dog Park was mentioned and there is also a Clubhouse block which is shown in the middle of the screen, which is have a Clubhouse, a pool, a sports court, playground, a car wash, a dog wash and then also a fire pit as well. That kind of covers all of the active recreation. Just a comment on the Active Recreation Area reduction, this site as mentioned has a Source Water Protection Overlay Zone (SWPOZ) which has a limit on the impervious coverage. 11

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 In addition to the impervious coverage, the site also has a little bit of a high groundwater table which makes their stormwater facilities larger in size versus smaller and allowing for lots of infiltration. They are working through that balance as a whole for the site. Mr. Hartman asked what the expected deficit is for the Recreation Area now. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Taylor stated that originally, they were looking at 21,000 SF as the deficit but with the addition of the trail along the bottom side, that added about 16,000 SF. So, they will be in the range of 5,000 to 6,000 SF as a deficit. Mr. Cooper asked if there was a break-down of how many of the apartments are going to be one bedroom, two bedroom and three bedroom apartments? Responding to Mr. Cooper, Mr. Rathfon stated that they tend to be about two thirds to one third. Two thirds are 2-bedroom apartments and one third are 1-bedroom apartments. This product, a thirty-six unit product does have a little more 1-bedroom units so it’s around 65/35. They don’t do any 3-bedroom units. Typically, our tenants don’t have that many school aged children. Mr. Hartman opened the public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public hearing. Mrs. Welsh moved to approve S-22-09 Dover Apartments at Leipsic Road inclusive of all DAC comments and the Waiver Request for the reduction of the parking requirement. Mrs. Melson-Williams asked Mrs. Welsh to provide action on the Active Recreation Plan and their request for a use of partial Cash-in-lieu as well in the motion. Mrs. Welsh moved to approve S-22-09 Dover Apartments at Leipsic Road inclusive of all DAC comments, the Waiver Request for the reduction of the parking requirement, the Active Recreation Plan, and the request for partial cash-in-lieu of the Recreation Area construction, seconded by Mrs. Denney and the motion was carried 7-0 by roll call vote with Mrs. Malone and Mrs. Maucher absent. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; she thinks that it’s a well-designed project and she thinks that it will work well in the space. The floor plans are well thought out and she was quite impressed with the renderings of the exterior of the facility; it looks to be a very well thought out and beautiful community. Mr. Cooper voting yes; for everything Mrs. Welsh said. Mr. Roach voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mrs. Denney voting yes; she is excited for this project. She thinks it’s beautiful and well thought out. Certainly living space is needed here and she also has an appreciation for the way they look towards the future with the electric car parking and she agrees with Mrs. Welsh; it really addressed recreation well. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Dr. Jones voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mr. Hartman voting yes; he agrees with the DAC plan and Staff comments. NEW BUSINESS Update on Dover Air Force Base Compatible Use Study Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that included in the packet for the May Meeting was information about a Public Workshop to be held on May 17, 2022. You can still see what the Workshop was all about because the project site for the Dover Air Force Base Compatible Use Study does 12

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 include a copy of the Workshop Presentation and a recording. That project site includes other information as they have been in the data gathering phase. Staff has participated in a driving tour of the Base and the associated assets that are necessary for the Base including all the way out to Port Mahon to see the fuel off-loading facility which is quite an adventure on a school bus. It is an ongoing study and they are moving into what they call stakeholder interviews. There will be other opportunities for public workshop participation, so she encourages the Commissioners to take a look at the Study site. It is an area of study that the focus is obviously on the Dover Air Force Base and the 5-mile area around the Base, which includes a large part of the City and also areas within Kent County and several other municipalities. There is a Policy Committee and a Technical Support Committee that are assisting the consultant team on this project as you can see at the bottom on the flyer. It is related to the Department of Transportation, Century Engineering, the University of Delaware, and a consultant that is specifically related to airport and airplane functions; and this is a US Department of Defense funded study. She certainly encourages the Commissioners to stay in the loop on that and as opportunities for public outreach happen, Staff will certainly bring those to the Commission. Update on Downtown Dover Strategic Master Plan Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that on the meeting agenda they provided the webpage link for this Master Plan. The Downtown Dover Partnership has a consultant team led by Mosaic Development Partners that is working on this Study. It is a little bit more of a faster pace with the Study hopefully to be completed by this Fall. There is an opportunity for a survey for you to participate in and it’s in the packet. There is a QR Code that you can scan or you can certainly find the information by visiting the website as well. They have had a pretty good response on the survey and they are quite pleased with that but they are asking for your big ideas for Downtown. They would love to hear them. There will be opportunities for some public participation in this Study as well. They are still moving through stakeholder interviews and really focusing on what we need to do to make Downtown Dover more vibrant once again. They are willing to listen to just about anyone and what you think is a crazy idea because it might not be so crazy. If you have any questions Staff can try to answer those. Mr. Hartman encouraged everyone to please fill out the survey. One of the comments that he is going to make is that the multiple websites that they have Downtown. When he asks a question about something that is going on, he never hears back. Mrs. Denney stated that she was so excited when she saw it that she completed it immediately. She finds it exciting because when you go through years and years where you think, does anybody really care. Because we are so focused on what’s wrong that it’s a good feeling to talk about what would be right and exciting. Mr. Hartman asked if they are actually going to look at the surveys. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated yes, they have actually been looking at them. There may be some reporting on the early findings of the survey on the website. She has heard that the number of people that completed the survey in the first week; they were amazed by it. They have been hearing good things but that is through her position on the Downtown Dover Partnership Board at the current moment because the City Planner is one of the named positions there. She 13

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 21, 2022 encourages you to be involved in your community and take a look at both of these studies and opportunities to share. Meeting adjourned at 8:46 PM. Sincerely, Kristen Mullaney Secretary 14