Planning Commission Meeting Packet

CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, April 21, 2025 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. IN-PERSON and VIRTUAL MEETING NOTICE The Planning Commission Meeting for April 21, 2025 will be held in City Council Chambers at 7:00PM and as a Virtual Meeting using Webex, an audio/video conferencing system as an electronic means of communication. The public is welcome to attend. See participation information below to join by phone or computer. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION City of Dover Planning Commission Meeting of Monday, April 21, 2025 Join By Phone: Dial +1-650-479-3208 Access Code: 253 567 23666 Password from Phones: 3683772 Join Online: https://bit.ly/PCMeeting04212025 Webinar Number: 2535 672 3666 Webinar Password: DoverPC 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 Minutes of March 17, 2025 1

PLANNING COMMISSION - April 21, 2025 PAGE 2 COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS Meeting Reminder: The next Planning Commission regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, May 19, 2025 at 7:00 PM. Update on City Council Actions Department of Planning & Inspections Updates Education and Training Opportunities 2. City of Dover Earth Week Events - April 21-25, 2025 3. Creating a Flood Ready Community Workshop held on May 6, 2025 at 9:00AM to 12:30PM. Sponsored by the University of Delaware: Institute for Public Administration, DNREC Delaware Coastal Training Program, and Delaware Sea Grant. 4. Delaware Affordable Housing Webinar Series - Homelessness and Affordable Housing: A Conversation with Matthew Heckles to be held as a Webinar on May 7, 2025 at 10:00AM to 11:30AM. Presented by the University of Delaware: Center for Community Research & Service and the Institute for Public Administration. OPENING REMARKS CONCERNING MEETING PROCEDURES FOR APPLICATIONS OLD BUSINESS Request Extension of Planning Commission Approval - None NEW APPLICATIONS 5. AX-25-01 Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Lane - Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation to City Council on an Annexation Request and Rezoning Request for a parcel of land totaling 2.3096 acres+/- located at 582 Acorn Lane. The property is currently zoned RS-1 (Residential Single Family Zone) in Kent County. The proposed Zoning is R-8 (One Family Residence Zone). The property is located at the southeast corner of Acorn Lane and Old White Oak Road. The annexation category according to Dover’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan is Category 1: High Priority Annexation Areas and the land use designation is Residential Low Density. The property owner is Robert Pellegrino. Property Address: 582 Acorn Lane. Tax Parcel: ED-00-068.15-01-11.00-000. Proposed Council District 3. Ordinance #2025-08. The First Reading of this Annexation Request was completed on March 10, 2025. Public Hearing before the Planning Commission is scheduled for April 21, 2025 and a Public Hearing/Final Action with City Council on May 12, 2025. NEW BUSINESS 6. Summary of Applications 2024 and 2025 ADJOURN Posted Agenda: April 11, 2025 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 2

Item 1. CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 The Meeting of the City of Dover Planning Commission was held on Monday, March 17, 2025, at 7:00 PM as an In-Person Meeting and also using the phone/videoconferencing system Webex. The Meeting Session was conducted with Chair Mr. Witham presiding. Members present were Mr. Michael Lewis, Mr. Roach (virtual), Mrs. Denney, Mrs. Maucher (virtual), Mr. Baldwin, Dr. Jones (virtual), Mr. Reaves (virtual), Mrs. Welsh (virtual), and Mr. Witham. Staff members present were Mrs. Dawn Melson-Williams, Ms. Sharon Duca, Mrs. Kristen Mullaney, and Mr. Jason Lyon. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mrs. Denney moved to approve the Agenda as submitted, seconded by Mrs. Welsh and the motion was carried 9-0. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 18, 2025 Mrs. Denney moved to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 18, 2025, seconded by Mrs. Welsh and the motion was carried 9-0. COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the next Planning Commission regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, April 21, 2025 at 7 PM. Mrs. Melson-Williams provided an update on the regular City Council and various Committee meetings held on February 24 & 25, 2025 and March 10 & 11, 2025. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that they continue to interview for positions and hope to have some news for you in the near future. Just a reminder to all residents of the city, there is a Spring Clean-up that is scheduled to start on March 31, 2025, running for a little over a week where they do additional pickup of materials. See the Public Works portion of the website for more information on that. Likewise, there is information that is coming out about the mulch giveaway. We are getting ready to move into the spring flushing season from the Department of Water/Wastewater. Be aware of when they may be in your neighborhood for those activities. 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 Requests for Extensions of Planning Commission Approval: S-23-05 Tidal Wave Auto Spa at 245 N. DuPont Highway - Request for a One Year Extension of the Planning Commission conditional approval granted on March 20, 2023 for a Site Development Plan and Lot Consolidation Plan for two (2) parcels totaling 2.15 +/- acres at 245 1 3

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. North DuPont Highway. The Plan is to permit construction of a 3,690 SF Car Wash facility, 24 vacuum spaces, and associated site improvements. The properties are zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial Zone). The parcels consist of a total of 2.15 +/- acres and is located on the northeastern corner of N. Dupont Highway and White Oak Road. The owner of record is TWAS Properties LLC. Property Addresses: 245 and 243 N Dupont Highway. Tax Parcel IDs: ED-05- 068.18-01-13.00-000 and ED-05-068.18-01-12.00-000. The Final Plan Approval was granted October 15, 2024. Representative: Ms. Jenna Cooper, Bohler Engineering (virtual) Mrs. Melson-Williams stated this application S-23-05 is the Tidal Wave Auto Spa. It is proposed for development at 245 N. DuPont Hwy which is the intersection of Route 13 and White Oak Road. It was previously the location of a Rite Aid building. The Planning Commission did review it in March 2023. The applicant did move through the process following that meeting and has achieved Final Site Plan approval; that happened in October 2024. They have reviewed a Permit in late December for the project; however, at this point they more than likely would not be started before the end of March. Hence, that is the reason they are seeking their opportunity for a one-year extension. If there are any particular questions, she can try to field those, or we can ask the representative that has joined us online. Mrs. Denney moved to approve S-23-05 Tidal Wave Auto Spa at 245 N. DuPont Highway for a one-year extension from March 31, 2025, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the motion was carried 9-0 by roll call vote. Mrs. Denney voting yes; she thinks that in our particular economic state right now, it is difficult for some developers to move ahead on things and she thinks giving them an extra year to get themselves together both paperwise and financially is necessary. Mrs. Maucher voting yes. Mr. Baldwin voting yes. Dr. Jones voting yes. Mr. Reaves voting yes. Mrs. Welsh voting yes. Mr. Lewis voting yes. Mr. Roach voting yes. Mr. Witham voting yes; given the economic conditions and the progress that is being made. S-23-15 Walker Road Professional Center Medical Buildings at 101 Mont Blanc Boulevard - Request for a One-Year Extension of the Planning Commission conditional approval granted on July 17, 2023 for the Site Development Plan Application to permit the construction of two 19,800 SF office buildings, parking, and other site improvements. The parcel totals 2.615 acres +/- and is zoned CPO (Commercial and Professional Office Zone) and is subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). The property is located on the southwest corner of Walker Road and Saulsbury Road, and east of Mont Blanc Boulevard. The owner of record is Walker Pavilion, LLC and equitable owner is Walker Road Professional Center, LLC. Property Address: 101 Mont Blanc Boulevard. Tax Parcel Number: ED-05-067.19-04-52.00-000. Council District 1. Waiver Request: Elimination of Loading Spaces. The Final Plan Approval was granted January 17, 2024. Representative: Mr. Mike Glick, Lighthouse Construction Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this is Site Plan Application S-23-15 Walker Road Professional Center at 101 Mont Blanc Boulevard. It is actually at the southwest corner of Walker Road and Saulsbury Road. It went through Planning Commission review in July of 2023; 2 4

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. however, the applicant is here for another reason this evening so they went ahead and got this one on the Agenda. They do have Final Plan Approval that was granted in January 2024; however, they have not moved forward with construction of the building and she is sure that the applicant can provide some information on that. They are asking for a one-year extension. That timeframe for a one-year extension would be based on the July date of your initial action and not a March date. Mr. Glick stated that they are asking for a one-year extension as they continue to work through the development of the project and lease out of the buildings. Mr. Witham asked what seems to be the issues with respect to proceeding. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Glick stated that the economy is moving slower than we would like. Mrs. Welsh moved to approve S-23-15 Walker Road Professional Center Medical Buildings at 101 Mont Blanc Boulevard for a one-year extension from the July 17, 2023 Site Plan Application, seconded by Dr. Jones and the motion was carried 9-0 by roll call vote. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; for reasons stated. Mr. Lewis voting yes. Mr. Roach voting yes. Mrs. Denney voting yes; she thinks that the flavor of the year is the economy right now so she thinks it is necessary. Mrs. Maucher voting yes. Mr. Baldwin voting yes. Dr. Jones voting yes. Mr. Reaves voting yes. Mr. Witham voting yes; given what’s being stated on the record. Update on Development Applications – Active Recreation Area Plan Reviews: C-25-01 Lands of 4BL, LLC: Cecil Street Townhouses at 207 N. West Street Representative: Mr. Cameron Llewellyn of 4BL, LLC Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that at the February Planning Commission meeting when you considered this application, it had yet to appear before the City Council’s Committee of the Whole: Parks, Recreation and Community Enhancement Committee because of a cancellation due to snow. You did go forward and act upon the application, but they wanted to back track and fill in the gaps there regarding its Active Recreation Area review before that Committee. That Committee was looking at the potential for a Cash-in-Lieu of Active Recreation Area plan for that project. It was a project for four townhouse units to be on a property subdivided at 207 N. West Street. The Council Committee of the Whole Parks and Recreation Committee did motion to approve that request at their meeting on February 25, 2025 and then they specifically noted that the specific amount of the Cash-in-Lieu would be determined upon submission of the appraisal and we still await that. And then subsequently at City Council on March 10, 2025, the report of the Committee on that item was approved as part of the Council actions that evening. The applicant is here in the room this evening, as he continues to follow his application through the process. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that she just really wanted to update the Commission on this application. There is no need for a motion. She thinks their motion that evening (in February) gave some indication that you were aware that the Active Recreation Area Plan for that project was still completing all of its necessary reviews. 3 5

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. C-25-02 Villages of Maple Dale - Phase 3: Planned Neighborhood Design - Senior Citizen Housing Option (Revised) Representative: Mr. Doug Barry, Pennoni and Associates (virtual) Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their meeting in February and also because of that snow cancellation, its review of the Active Recreation Area Plan before the Council Committee of the Whole: Parks, Recreation and Community Enhancement Committee was actually delayed. That Committee did review the Active Recreation Area Plan for this project as you can see on the screen at their meeting on February 25, 2025. They did take action to recommend approval of the request. If you will note (she thinks they did at the meeting), there previously was a plan for a sand volleyball court but that was changed and updated to be a pickle ball court. The Parks and Recreation Committee did have some discussion about the pickle ball court and some questions about that. They did indicate some suggestions to make sure there was shade and some benches in that area but ultimately did recommend approval for the plan for this project. That recommendation from the Committee moved forward to City Council and they adopted that Committee Report at their meeting on March 10, 2025. This evening, we do have representative from the engineering firm that has joined us online should there be any general questions. But again, it’s an update to kind of fill in the gaps on that Active Recreation Area plan review since your February meeting where you took action to grant conditional approval. There were no questions. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that again, that was just meant to be an update on the review for that Active Recreation Area Plan for the Village of Maple Dale Phase 3: Planned Neighborhood Design - Senior Housing Option. NEW APPLICATIONS C-25-03 New Harvest Baptist Church at 1462 N. Little Creek Road – Public Hearing and Review of a Conditional Use Site Plan for a Place of Worship (Church) building of 11,900 SF and related site improvements. The subject property is zoned RG-2 (General Residence Zone). The property consists of 4.6686 acres on the south side of North Little Creek Road and east of Acacia Place. The owner of record is New Harvest Baptist Church. Property Address: 1462 N. Little Creek Road, Dover DE. Tax Parcel: ED-05-068.19-03-02.00-000. Council District 3. Representative: Mr. Kevin Minnich, Minnich Engineering Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that tonight we are looking at a Conditional Use Site Plan C-25-03. It is for a proposed place of worship known as the New Harvest Baptist Church. It is located at 1462 N. Little Creek Road. The property that they are looking to develop is currently vacant and is zoned RG-2. It is just over 4.6 acres of land. Their proposal is for a place of worship building and a series of parking spaces. You can see on the image on the screen, the bottom is a stormwater management facility. It has one access point from N. Little Creek Road which is at the top of the page. With the project, they have done some value engineering and are looking at 4 6

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. potentially phasing construction of the building with the northern part of the building which includes the sanctuary space being constructed first and then the southern portion of the building perhaps being constructed later. Additionally, they have looked at the parking. The parking for the site for a place of worship facility is either based on a floor area calculation or a seat count. In this case, the floor area calculation governs requiring a minimum of sixty parking spaces. Their overall parking lot shows a proposal for 121 parking spaces including those that would be handicap accessible/ADA accessible. They are looking at proposing to construct the parking in two phases: an initial Phase I which would be the parking closest to the building and then a Phase II area with the remaining portions of the parking lot should they be needed. This project will require tree planting. They are showing a tree planting plan (the image on the screen). Likewise, their site access from N. Little Creek Road will be subject to a DelDOT Entrance Plan and permit. The project will also include lighting and it has a dumpster. Sidewalks are proposed along the frontage as well as a connecting sidewalk bringing you to the building itself. The building architecture was provided. This is basically a one-story building; it is a metal structure. The entrance is on the west side of the building facing the parking lot where you see kind of the turned gable entry with a canopy design. They are looking to include a series of windows and shutters. Part of the comments from the Planning Office included a recommendation for them to look a little closer at the north elevation to ensure that there are not large expanses of blank area for that. The DAC Report includes some minor changes and updates that were needed to their Plan. They are not seeking any waivers this evening. One thing of note for this project site is that while it would be on City Water, they are proposing onsite septic. This location is some distance from the closest sanitary sewer so they are working with the Department of Water/Wastewater and DNREC in regards to an alternative for taking care of those service needs on the project site. The Development Advisory Committee Report also included the comments from the various review agencies both here at the City and the State agencies as well. Again, this is a Conditional Use Site Plan. In the RG-2 (General Residence Zone), this type of use is subject to Conditional Use review, which is why it is here before you this evening. Mr. Minnich stated that he was here representing the New Harvest Church and this Conditional Use Site Plan. As usual, Mrs. Melson-Williams did a great job of doing a summary on the project. We are in agreement with the items that need to be addressed in the DAC Report and they are just asking for the Commission’s conditional approval for the Conditional Use Site Plan. Mr. Witham stated that he noticed on the Site Plan there were a number of classrooms noted. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Minnich stated that they would be for Sunday School. Mr. Witham opened a public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public hearing. Mrs. Maucher asked if the applicant is agreeable to Staff’s design recommendation regarding the façade. Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Witham stated that the applicant is coming forward but he believes that the applicant did say that he agrees with all of the DAC comments. Mr. Minnich stated that was correct, they are in agreement with that recommendation. Mrs. Maucher moved to approve C-25-03 New Harvest Baptist Church at 1462 N. Little Creek 5 7

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. Road, seconded by Mrs. Welsh and the motion was carried 9-0 by roll call vote. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; based on DAC comments. Mr. Baldwin voting yes. Dr. Jones voting yes. Mr. Reaves voting yes (typed his response in the chat). Mrs. Welsh voting yes; it is going to be a good use of the vacant space there and the changes to the façade should make it a very pleasing building. Mr. Lewis voting yes. Mr. Roach voting yes. Mrs. Denney voting yes; she thinks it is a very well thought out plan. Mr. Witham voting yes; based on the DAC comments and it appears to be well thought out and a very good design. SB-25-01 Minor Subdivision Plan for McKee Road Apartments at 1385 McKee Road – Public Hearing and Review of a Minor Subdivision Plan to divide the 78.60-acre parcel into three (3) lots. The proposed lots consist of Lot 1 of 13.44 acres; Lot 2 of 59.90 acres, and Lot 3 of 5.26 acres. The property is the subject of a Site Plan approved for development of a multi-family community consisting of garden style apartment buildings (384 units) with garages, Clubhouse with Pool, parking, and a commercial portion for future development. 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). 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. This property was the subject of Site Plan S-21-11 McKee Road Apartments granted conditional approval by the Planning Commission on April 18, 2022 and Final Plan Approval on September 21, 2023. Representative: Mr. Jonathan Street, Becker Morgan Group (virtual) Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this is a Minor Subdivision Plan SB-25-01. The property is the McKee Road Apartments development site which is located on the east side of McKee Road. The plan shown here, McKee Road is going to be at the bottom and kind of curves up on the left hand side of the image. The overall site for this property is 78.6 acres and they are proposing to divide the tract into a series of three lots of varying sizes. Lot 1 being 13.44 acres, Lot 2 being 59.9 acres, and then Lot 3 being 5.26 acres. Lot 3 is the portion of the site which is zoned C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone). We currently do not have a development plan for that portion of the site other than where the entrance drive for the overall project will come through that property. The other two lots of Lot 1 and Lot 2 fall within that RG-2 (General Residence Zone) and a portion of Lot 2 and Lot 3 are subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). This project was previously reviewed through Site Plan Application S-21-11 for McKee Road Apartments. It was before the Planning Commission back in April 2022 and has achieved its Final Site Plan Approval for the development of the site. They do have a site work permit and other permits in place with DelDOT. They are starting some of their infrastructure work out there with the project. The reason for it to be before you this evening is that they are looking to divide the tract into several parcels, some of which is related to financing the project. Lot 1 is kind of the northeastern most portion of the project site. That is where we find one grouping of the approved apartment buildings for the complex. Lot 2 includes where the clubhouse is and the second area of buildings for the project. Lot 3 is the one that would be subject to a future development plan for that C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) area. The project does appear to comply with bulk standards for the appropriate zoning districts. Planning Staff in their review has asked that the applicant submit a follow-up sheet to allow us to confirm that the 6 8

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. setbacks are in fact in place and that the location of the subdivision lines does not impact any of the setbacks for the proposed buildings on the site. They have noted a couple of minor updates to the plan sheet to make sure that it adequately reflects any of the previous notes related to action taken on and related to the development of this overall tract as an apartment complex. The various regulatory agencies have provided comments. In most cases, it is no objection to the Subdivision. The Kent Conservation District has noted that they will also have to execute some shared use agreements as things such as stormwater will cross property lines and there will be additional easements related to other utilities on the project site as well. There were significant comments from the Dover Kent County MPO because of this parcel being adjacent to the railroad corridor; however, a lot of their concerns are related to the initial land use development of the site which has already been approved for this location. This evening, you are looking at a Minor Subdivision Plan. There are no new waiver requests for consideration related to that. This plan will just be noting all of the previous waiver requests associated with the development of the apartment complex that was done under S-21-11. Mr. Street stated that Mrs. Melson-Williams is correct. This is nothing new to the City to subdivide a piece of property once construction starts getting ramped up. The City has approved this in the past. With the Landing Square Subdivision for the State Police Building and the Government Services Building, they used that same financial means to finance the project themselves. The subdivision of the land is for the bulk of the project, the first set of buildings. The second subdivision which is the third Lot is the commercial piece. They figured they would just save some time to not have to come back through to subdivide the commercial piece off to itself. It is already zoned that way. The Subdivision will require some cross access easements between the lots which is typical for a subdivision like this and also some easements for sewer and water and the services themselves. They have already been in contact with DelDOT and the Kent Conservation District and understand the process to move forward with them to gain their letters of no objection. In addition, they have reached out to the community’s representative of Emerald Pointe across the street which is going to be the most impacted by any of the construction itself. So, they wanted to let them know what is going on and a tentative schedule of construction. He is sure that anyone in the City is aware that cones are already being placed out and construction is ramping up for the project itself. Mrs. Denney stated that obviously she would believe that he is aware of the comments that were made by the Dover Kent County MPO and she was hoping that he might be able to address those comments. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr. Street stated that in their DAC Meeting, Mr. Petit de Mange elaborated on that. He believes the study that he was referring to was talking about parcels adjacent to railroads. He guesses that he was unaware that the project had been through an approval previously and he was merely stating that for the record. Mrs. Melson-Williams can back him up on that since she was there. The bulk of the pedestrian and bicycle improvements that he thinks that Mr. Petit de Mange was also referencing in his comments are already taken care of with the plan. We have a pedestrian shared use path across the frontage all the way up to the Scarborough McKee intersection, that next light. All of those improvements are permitted and will be filled with the Entrance Plans for the Subdivision itself as well as crosswalks and pedestrian improvements at the intersection with the Emerald Pointe Subdivision. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the MPO comments did provide a lot of information about 7 9

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. some recent Freight Plan studies and Railroad Corridor studies that they have been involved in. She thinks that if this had come forth before a plan for residential development, they may have had a different scenario there but the applicant chose to pursue the residential route. The last half of the MPO’s comments do focus on bike and pedestrian improvements. A number of them as noted are actually part of the Site Development Plan that this project site is basically kicking off construction for so you are going to see those items that they make note of implemented already because they were already included in the design concepts for pedestrian and bicycle improvements along that frontage. Mrs. Denney stated thank you for that information. When she was managing the Town of Camden, it was Camden and Wyoming plans that were going on. Dealing with railroads can be pretty touchy, so she just wanted to ask some questions about that. Mr. Witham stated that apparently the applicant has already obtained Entrance Plan approval from DelDOT. Is that correct? Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Street stated yes. Mr. Witham stated that this project is going to develop to the point where you are going to need a signalized intersection. Where will that be exactly and what type of signalized connection is it going to be at this site? Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Street stated that the signal that is planned right now is for the intersection of the Emerald Pointe Subdivision, the subdivision that is part of this application, and McKee Road. That signal plan was developed, designed and approved by DelDOT in conjunction with our Entrance Plans. Our Entrance Plans and frankly the entire Site Development Plan would not have been approved or moved forward without that approval of that Signal Plan. Now what accompanies that Signal Plan and that Entrance Plan is a letter agreement with DelDOT that the developer had to enter into. That letter agreement with DelDOT specifies basically the phasing of the construction of the signal itself. The signal is to start prior to a certain permit and the phasing of the construction of the signal will have to commence and be finalized before certain permits. That signal is moving forward and once that starts, it doesn’t really stop because the developer essentially pays by the day for any DelDOT inspections. So once they start the entrance work and/or signal work, they want to complete it as soon as they can because it’s a blank check book for DelDOT to just keep charging them for inspection fees daily. That is all under way and it’s in the planning stages for construction on how that’s all going to be scheduled. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that if you are looking at the image on the screen, that intersection that is the entrance to the site is in the lower right hand corner. You can see a little bit of the cross shaped intersection there. It’s just above one of the certification signatures. It’s part of Lot 3. The entrance comes across Lot 3 and then continues across Lots 2 and 1. Mr. Reaves asked if that during the construction phase, they were going to have flag personnel directing traffic during that time period and where would they be located? Responding to Mr. Reaves, Mr. Street stated that any construction that occurs within the right-of-way, depending on what they are doing, there is traffic safety measures that DelDOT deploys and that the developer and the contractors will have to deploy. That is controlled by DelDOT depending on what they are during. On a normal construction day depending on what they are doing, hopefully on McKee Road, you won’t see much traffic other than entering or exiting. If it requires flaggers by 8 10

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. law, then they will have to have flaggers. But on a daily operation, there shouldn’t be too much activity in and out. He does not have a construction schedule; he is not in charge of construction. That would be a question for the contracting team but they may change from week to week depending on what they are doing. Any kind of safety operations or safety measures that need to be managed will be managed by the contractor or the construction team. Mr. Reaves stated that the reason he asked the question was because as the construction increases and he already noticed the barrels out on McKee Road, what happens? Due to the limit of that road and where the barrels may be placed in the right-of-way, it could be an extreme detriment to residents exiting and entering the Emerald Pointe neighborhood if there is not a flagger there that will stop the traffic in both directions to allow residents to exit and enter the community. He is asking if there is some way that they could have a conversation or some feedback to that question because it’s extremely important for the homeowners and residents to be able to exit the community. Currently on McKee Road, it can take anywhere from five to fifteen minutes just to have a break to get out into the intersection. With the increased traffic, he only anticipates that it’s going to be a lot more time to get in and out of that neighborhood. Responding to Mr. Reaves, Mr. Street stated that he can talk to the construction team. Are you saying that the barrels right now are impeding your ability to get out of the subdivision? Mr. Reaves stated no, what he is saying is that during the construction if you don’t have a flagger in front of the community, there is a high probability that the traffic will be bumper to bumper and there will be no opportunity to exit the neighborhood. Responding to Mr. Reaves, Mr. Street stated that he can drop a note to the DelDOT group but ultimately their safety regulations control where flaggers are located and what is called “maintenance of traffic during construction.” But he can certainly drop a note to them saying that the Emerald Pointe community is concerned about entering and exiting their entrance. Mr. Witham opened the public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public hearing. Mrs. Denney stated that more and more often now we are seeing those words that she really does not like, “cash-in-lieu-of”. Normally, it is Recreation Area. In some cases, in order to develop a property and to make everything fit or because of wetlands and certain what she calls “practical difficulties” there is almost but not quite enough space so they do this “cash-in-lieu of” thing. She thinks that when you are developing, most especially residential property, there should be places where you have park benches and a little place to maybe walk your dog or sit and chat. Again, it’s not specifically related to this, but she really thinks the “cash-in-lieu of” thing is becoming to be very frequently seen as we are reviewing plans. It’s not a reason why on this particular one that she would suggest that we not accept it, but she always thinks that we should say this because there has to be an end to buying your way out of really developing something with not enough room. Mr. Witham stated thank you for that policy suggestion. He is not sure what we as a Commission can do about that. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mrs. Denney stated that somebody just has to say it out loud. It doesn’t mean anything is going to happen. 9 11

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. Mrs. Denney moved to approve SB-25-01 Minor Subdivision Plan for McKee Road Apartments at 1385 McKee Road, they are going to put something there and this looks like it fits well enough, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the motion was carried 9-0 by roll call vote. Mrs. Denney voting yes; as she said in the motion, something is going to go there and it’s going to be residential and this looks like it fits the bill. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; based on previous comments. Mr. Baldwin voting yes. Dr. Jones voting yes; she considered Mr. Reaves’ comments regarding the traffic but she is in favor. Mr. Reaves voting yes; he would like to stress the construction as stated in the application, the traffic device is supposed to be concurrent with the build. He knows that there is a lot of particulars with that but he emphasizes that there is an extreme requirement for us to have some way to exit and enter the community during this construction phase and he would like for that to be noted. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; for the reasons previously stated. Mr. Lewis voting yes. Mr. Roach voting yes; he agrees with the reasons stated by all of the Commissioners. Mr. Witham voting yes; this is a fairly complex project which will eventually produce a good number of apartment availability for the City of Dover which we all understand that we need more places to live at a reasonable price. The construction necessitates some degree of discomfort for the surrounding community, some of which may be avoidable and some of which may be unavoidable. He thinks the applicant is aware that they are concerned about any congestion that may adversely impact the surrounding communities. S-25-07 The Old Post at 55 Loockerman Plaza – Public Hearing and Review of Site Development Plan Application and associated Architectural Review Certification for redevelopment of the Old Dover Post Office property consisting of 1.267 acres for a mixed-use project known as The Old Post. The project involves the demolition of the rear warehouse portion of the existing building and adaptive re-use of the front 4,560 SF portion of the building for commercial retail and business space. The property is zoned C-2 (Central Commercial Zone), subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone), and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The property is located on the north side of Loockerman Plaza and adjacent to Innovation Way. The owner of record is the City of Dover and equitable owner is Old Post, LLC. Property Address: 55 Loockerman Plaza. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.05-04-53.00-000. Council District 4. For Consideration: Parking Strategy Statement. This project is the subject of HI-25- 01 The Old Post for Historic District Commission Review and Recommendation on February 20, 2025. Representatives: Mr. Chad Warren, Davis, Bowen & Friedel; Mr. Mike Glick, Lighthouse Construction Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this application is S-25-07 for the property located at 55 Loockerman Plaza. It is a project known as The Old Post, probably most familiar to people as the former Dover Post Office Building on Loockerman Plaza and Innovation Way. Innovation Way is at the top of the screen on the image. The property is currently owned by the City of Dover and the developer that is here before us was the successful group in responding to the City’s Request for Proposal for the project site and it is under contract to purchase the location. This property is within the C-2 (Central Commercial Zone). It is also within the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) does include a portion of this property but because it’s in the Downtown Redevelopment Target Area, there are exemptions from some of those provisions. First, she wants to start with the fact that it’s in the H (Historic 10 12

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. District Zone). This project was reviewed by the City’s Historic District Commission on February 20, 2025. The Historic District Commission was charged with making a recommendation on the Architectural Review Certification for the project. The project has several components to it. The first one is a partial demolition of the building. The image on the screen is the existing building. The portion on the front of the building or the right hand portion will remain. The rear warehouse type mail sorting area is proposed for demolition so that a new three-story portion of the building can be constructed. That three-story building is the area where a series of apartment units are proposed. The rest of the parcel is parking. You can see that in the shaded image on the plan that it has access from Innovation Way to service the parking area. The Historic District Commission took action to make a recommendation. Their Recommendation Report was provided to the Planning Commission. They recommended approval subject to a series of the Staff Comments and Recommendations, some of which the applicant detailed their responses to in a Response Letter and that has been appended to that Architectural Review Report. It clarified some of the questions on materials and intent of their original submission to that body. Tonight, the Planning Commission will be taking final action on that Architectural Review Certification and whether you feel it meets the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City’s Historic District Zone. The project overall as noted, includes this demolition. The front part of the building will be renovated. There will be some exterior changes to that and then the biggest part of the project is the building addition to the rear. From a zoning perspective in the C- 2 (Central Commercial Zone) District, they are meeting the bulk standards. They are proposing a three-story building in height and the other setbacks are met from the property lines in the C-2 (Central Commercial Zone). With the C-2 (Central Commercial Zone) zoning district, it does not include a minimum parking requirement. That was one of the recent changes to the C-2 (Central Commercial Zone) zoning district; however, it does require that the applicant provide a Parking Strategy Statement. That was included in your packet. They are providing a number of parking spaces on the site and are also in discussions with the City regarding the row of about 29 parking spaces that are closest to that property as you come in the entrance on the east end of the library to that municipal parking lot. Their strategy statement focuses on giving some details about what their strategy is for parking based on their bedroom count and recognizing the location of this property in a Downtown walkable area as well. One of the things related to parking that they do need to react to is part of the Architectural Review Certification. There is a bulk standard for parking when it is adjacent to the building. For multi-family units, there needs to be fifteen feet from the wall of the building to that first parking space. Given the configuration of the building, they are not able to achieve that on the north end of the building and are seeking consideration of the Alternative that they are showing in their plans here because of the location in the Historic District. The southernmost or the front of the building, kind of sets up how big the building can be and the balance of what’s on the lot. That is a request for an Alternative Bulk Standard that you can consider as part of tonight’s deliberations. Additional parking, there is a requirement for bicycle parking. This project actually puts forth a bike storage room on the interior and Staff and others have commented that to make sure that you also include exterior bicycle parking as well. The property has sidewalks along the existing street frontages and then linkage sidewalks to the building entrances from parking lot areas and those sidewalks. The image on the screen shows us the front of the building. It looks very similar to what you see there today in keeping the columns and the triangular pediment there to the building. Obviously, there are a little bit of renovations there. The biggest change is perhaps the wings on that front elevation and that is proposed as a series of sliding doors that would open up that wall system to allow for indoor and outdoor 11 13

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. access with potential commercial space that is located in that portion of the building. The project overall, because it includes these 36 apartment units, is subject to an Open Space and Recreation Area Plan so an Active Recreation Area Plan was presented as noted earlier to the City’s Council Committee of the Whole back on March 11, 2025. That Report which was included in your packet, outlines the components of their Active Recreation Area Plan. One of them is actually visible in this location view in that there is a proposal for a rooftop patio area. It is in kind of in the upper right corner of the building when looking at it in this view. Additionally, they are proposing a dog run along the east side of the building between the building and Innovation Way as a fenced area. Then again, we noted that there is indoor bike storage. For their Active Recreation they are required because of their location in the Downtown Redevelopment Target Area to provide a minimum of 75 SF per dwelling unit of Active Recreation. Their project with those components has met that size requirement for their Active Recreation. The Parks and Rec Committee did recommend approval of that proposal for those elements. Staff also recommended approval of the Active Recreation Area noting additionally that the sidewalk network in this area can certainly lead you to other open space/green space areas such as Mirror Lake Park, Silver Lake Park, and even Legislative Mall and The Green. Additionally, those sidewalks link you to some of the nearby trail systems. The Capital City and St. Jones Greenway systems as well are in close proximity to the project site. This is a Site Plan so we did provide some revisions to the Plan in the comments from the Planning Office specifically that they recommended. The other regulatory agencies have also provided their comments. This evening, you have got a number of things to address with this Application. It is a Site Plan review, the Architectural Review Certification and then also for your consideration, their Parking Strategy Statement and the Active Recreation Area Plan. Mr. Warren stated that he is here representing his client, Lighthouse Construction who is requesting Site Development Plan approval for the redevelopment of 55 Loockerman Street (Plaza); previously known as The Dover Post Office. The existing parcel is approximately 1.27 acres in size and is located within the C-2 (Central Commercial Zone), the H (Historic District Zone) and the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The H (Historic District Zone) subjects the site to an Architectural Review Certification and the parcel is exempt from the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone) requirements due to its location within the Downtown Redevelopment Target Area. The existing site contains a vacant former post office and warehouse. The front pitched roof portion of the building, approximately 4,560 SF will be saved and the rear flat roof warehouse portion will be demolished and replaced with a 31,500 SF three-story apartment building providing 36 apartment units. The front original building will be renovated to allow for a restaurant on the first level and office spaces on the second level. As stated, due to the C-2 (Central Commercial Zone) the parcel is subject to a Parking Strategy for the redevelopment of the site. The developer proposes to provide 48 on-site reserved spaces for residential tenants at a rate of 1 per bedroom. Additionally, the developer acknowledges an additional 60 spaces are required by the business and restaurant occupancy. A total of 62 new parking spaces are proposed for the parcel providing a surplus of 14 spaces beyond what is needed for the apartments. 29 additional parking spaces are also proposed for the business and restaurant use on an adjacent parcel through a shared parking agreement easement with the City of Dover. The remaining balance of 17 spaces will be provided by public parking located directly adjacent to The Old Post parcel within the Library parking lot, Innovation Way and Loockerman Street, which combined offers an additional 180 parking spaces to serve the patrons of the 12 14

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. proposed restaurant. A letter detailing this parking strategy and the parking space counts has been provided to the City. As stated, they have gone before the Historic District Commission and the Parks, Recreation and Community Enhancement Committee. Both of them recommended approval. Also, they are requesting an exemption from a portion of Code. In conjunction with the Site Development Plan Application, they will be requesting exemption from City of Dover Code, Appendix B: Zoning Article 6, Section 5.3. Through the DAC process, they were informed that with six (6) parking spaces at the rear of the building that City Code prohibits parking of motor vehicles within fifteen feet of any wall of a multi-family dwelling. The parking lot to the rear of the building was designed to maximize the number of provided parking spaces in order to provide an adequate amount of parking for the proposed 36 unit apartment building, the restaurant and offices. In doing so, they were subject to several restrictions. These being the minimum parking space size, the minimum fire regulations fire lane widths, the City of Dover minimum drive aisle widths and above all, preserving the original Post Office building that fronts Loockerman Street for the Historic District Zone and Architectural Review Certification requirements. With all of these design restrictions considered, they were forced to place six (6) parking spaces less than fifteen feet from the rear of the building while preserving the original Post Office building structure. We have discussed our issue with the City’s Fire Marshal and they have agreed to allow us to keep the parking within fifteen feet of the building as there is very limited access through this wall of the building in the case of an emergency. Additionally, the Historic District allows for some leniency from the typical Bulk Standards providing the need to preserve the historic buildings. The need to preserve those buildings creates a hardship for the site. In our case, they cannot move the existing Post Office building forward the necessary distance to provide the fifteen feet between the parking and the building. A letter detailing this request has also been provided to the City for review. In conclusion, they respectfully request Site Development Plan approval for the redevelopment of our Old Post project. Mrs. Denney stated that she has concerns about this utilization of the City’s and/or the Library’s parking spaces in your parking space count. Our Library is well used. If you ever go down there on a Saturday morning and she does frequently because she is using the bank and she used to take her grandchildren there all the time for their activities. When she looks at this, the Library is open Monday from 10am-5pm and Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday from 9am-8pm. So as long as the people don’t come home until after 8pm, they will have plenty of space to park. She is very troubled with this. She has managed the Town of Camden and she has been on the Board of Adjustment for Kent County; she would say that she has at least 40 years doing this. Nobody has ever given her something to read that is this big. She doesn’t understand that either. You have to get a magnifying glass out or a cell phone and blow it up. Aside from that, she just doesn’t think the parking works for her. The other question is, in front of that building will there be a stop for a public bus? Some of those people will hopefully take a bus for transportation as opposed to driving. Maybe that will eliminate some of the parking congestion that we should be expecting. Responding to Mrs. Denney, Mr. Glick stated that the onsite parking that is with on this parcel is provided to the apartments. So, the statement that the residents would be parking on the Library or any other site other than this specific parcel is not the intent. The intent is for the public parking that surrounds this parcel which is on Innovation Way, Loockerman Street, as well as the many other public lots that are in and around Downtown Dover to service the restaurant. The restaurant would only be patrons that would be coming and going in a one to two hour period that would be serving just the restaurant. Much like any other restaurant in 13 15

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. Downtown Dover would utilize the public street parking. The intent is not to use the Library parking for any kind of resident parking. In addition to the resident parking on site, there is an additional fourteen spaces for the 2,000 SF of business occupancy that they have within the mixed use building. Again, there is ample parking for that business use as well. It is simply just like all other C-2 (Central Commercial Zone) properties Downtown, public parking would be utilized on the streets and the public parking lots. Mrs. Denney stated that it just appears to her that it is going to be pretty congested parkingwise which is always a problem. When she looks at the plans of the building and sees that there are studio apartments, two people can live in a studio apartment. Many couples have done it and we all know that there are no laws that govern occupancy. You can’t just say that you can only have 2 people living here and 4 people living here. You might be able to try that if you are a landlord but you can’t build a building, let somebody rent part of it and govern how many people can be in that house. It looks good on paper, but it doesn’t often happen that way. She just looks at this parking plan and is thinking that parking is already a problem. There are a lot of other things going on down there like the new Courthouse. We are getting a Parking Garage about six blocks away. She guesses if you come to visit somebody you can utilize that Parking Garage or some of the Library parking. But when she looks at this, she just sees parking issues. Mr. Reaves asked if there was any way to designate the parking that is within fifteen feet to a particular apartment. Just for the ones that they are asking for the exception for. Because if there is some type of emergency or this is designated to the apartment it may be easier for them to identified to move in that case. Responding to Mr. Reaves, Mr. Glick stated that the majority of that parking is the handicap parking for the facility so they can certainly designate that. Mr. Witham stated that he is a little confused. Is there a slide that shows where the parking is situated at the building site? Responding to Mr. Witham and referring to an image, Mrs. Melson- Williams stated that at the north end of the building you can see a couple of shaded areas. Those are actually the handicap parking and the striped areas there. There is a five foot sidewalk between these parking spaces and the building as well. There is an entrance door but there is not a large number of windows on this end of the building. For any kind of concerns from a fire perspective, the window access is along Innovation Way and then the other portion of the parking lot. Mr. Witham stated that he is not sure about the road designation. What do you call the road that runs right behind the current old Post Office that people use? Responding to Mr. Witham, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the road that you go back to the DNREC parking lot or get into the other parking lot for Treadway Towers, that is called Innovation Way. Mr. Witham stated that there is a side road that you can go from the Library around the building to get to Innovation Way. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that is on the far left hand side of this image. It is not part of the parking lot and it is a one-way coming out of the Library coming up to Innovation Way. There is no interconnection at this point along that roadway to this proposed development. Mr. Witham stated that there is not going to be anyway in which a person who has an apartment 14 16

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. will be able to exit in that back part of the building out to that roadway. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Glick stated that is correct. Mr. Witham stated that for safety reasons, he assumes you got Fire Marshal approval. Is there a need for a designated area for a fire lane on this property? Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Warren stated that they spoke with the City Fire Marshal and they have adequate access through Innovation Way, Loockerman Street and the small finger of the proposed parking lot. They weren’t concerned with any fire lane access. They said that they have plenty the way the current site is laid out. Mr. Witham asked what type of restaurant they were anticipating. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Glick stated that they don’t have that information at this time, they are just soliciting restaurants. Mr. Witham asked if they were contemplating whether it’s going to be a takeout restaurant or a sit-down restaurant. The plans indicate that it is going to be a sit-down restaurant. Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Glick stated that the intent would be a sit-down restaurant with an outdoor patio component with it and something that is complimentary to the residents that are associated with the building; so essentially something with not late hours. Mr. Witham stated that this is a pet peeve of his but as a traditionalist he would like to see it occur. The old Post Office always had a flagpole out front for the United States flag. He doesn’t see it on the plans. Is that something that you could contemplate? Responding to Mr. Witham, Mr. Glick stated that it is certainly something that they could consider. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that in one of Mrs. Denney’s questions/statements, she asked a question about where the closest bus stop was. There is a bus stop that is in the vicinity near the Library on Loockerman Plaza as well as diagonally across the street over near the Townsend Building. So, within a block you’ve got several stops depending on which route it is. Mrs. Welsh questioned that for the restaurant area, the doors that open to the patio, isn’t that similar to the things she has seen where it’s a glass garage door that comes up and down? Responding to Mrs. Welsh, Mr. Glick stated that it is a series of doors that are trimmed that would be folding left to right; it’s not a garage door that would go up. Mrs. Welsh stated that from what she just heard, you said something about an open patio in front of the restaurant. She knows that you don’t have a restaurant yet, but would there be any kind of issue that might come up with noise outside at night that would impact the residents of the apartment building? Responding to Mrs. Welsh, Mr. Glick stated that it would be their intent to find a restaurant that is complimentary both with hours and type of service that would complement the residences. They wouldn’t be looking for something late night with a band or anything along those lines. Certainly, something during the day where you can enjoy a lunch along Loockerman Street and not late hours into the evenings. Mr. Witham opened a public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public hearing. 15 17

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. Mr. Witham asked if they have to make three findings tonight. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the Planning Commission is considering the Site Plan and as part of that, the Architectural Review Certification for this project that is located in the Historic District, their Active Recreation Area Plan and then the acceptance of their Parking Strategy Statement. Certainly, all of that can be rolled into one motion or more than one motion. Mrs. Welsh stated that before a motion is made, she missed something that she wanted to express. She thinks that they have done a great job with the exterior of the facility in the front, and she has examined the photos and the elevations in the package. It’s particularly in the historic photos that they have annotated that show several different commercial establishments that are at Loockerman Street. One that she recognizes is the old Braunstein’s Building which mirror and the façade on the two sides where the apartments follow that architectural detailing that is in that building. She just wants to say that she is glad that they put some effort into that and she thinks its really important that we are sure that everything is going to come to fruition as planned so that the building does have the historic façades and compatibility to the other buildings in the area that we are looking for here. Mrs. Denney stated that she absolutely agrees. She thinks that the design is lovely and she does think it lends itself even to the way the glass doors will fold and unfold. She loves the concept, and she thinks it great. Her only issue is the parking. She thinks the design is lovely; she thinks it’s in keeping and it lends itself to the nature of what is going on. It is not necessarily complete historic, but it lends itself to a combination of both of the little bit of old and a little bit of new. She also sees it utilized by people who are over in the new Courthouse at lunchtime even though those buildings have cafeterias often. Mr. Lewis moved to approve S-25-07 The Old Post at 55 Loockerman Plaza and the associated Architectural Review Certification for the redevelopment of the old Post Office property including the Parking Strategy Statement and the Active Recreation Area Plan, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the motion was carried 9-0 by roll call vote. Mr. Lewis voting yes; he thinks it is much needed in the area and it’s an exciting plan. He is looking forward to seeing it come to fruition. Mr. Roach voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mrs. Denney voting yes; but she really does object to the parking. She sees problems but otherwise she thinks it is well done. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; for reasons stated. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; he thinks it is a great use of the building. Dr. Jones voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mr. Reaves voting yes; for reasons previously stated. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; she thinks it is a professionally well done package and she thinks it’s in keeping with what we are trying to accomplish in Downtown Dover. Mr. Witham voting yes; he thinks this is an excellent use of this property given the limited use of this space that the property has. He thinks that the parking arrangement is probably the best that they could come up with given the environment that they are faced with. It is a well-designed building and the only drawback that he see is that it does not have a flagpole indicated. He votes yes for the reasons stated in the record by fellow Commissioners as well as the DAC comments and the Planning Commission’s statements. NEW BUSINESS 16 18

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 17, 2025 Item 1. Meeting adjourned at 9:00 PM. Sincerely, Kristen Mullaney Secretary 17 19

Item 2. 20

The Institute for Public Administration, in partnership with the Item 3. Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC), Delaware Coastal Training Program, and Delaware Sea Grant presents: Creating a Flood Ready Community Course Presenters COURSE INSTRUCTOR COURSE INSTRUCTOR Danielle Swallow Jordana Cutajar Coastal Hazards Specialist, Resilience Planner IV, DNREC Delaware Sea Grant COURSE INSTRUCTOR COURSE INSTRUCTOR Lynne Pusey Kathy Potter Coastal Training Program Delaware National Flood Insurance Coordinator, DNREC Program Coordinator, DNREC MAY 6, 2025 Learn how the flood risks to Delaware communities can be addressed and mitigated. This course covers basic risk and hazard concepts; Federal Emergency Management Agency 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. (FEMA) mapping; the Delaware flood insurance program; tools Check-in begins at 8:30 a.m. to prevent hazards in a cost-effective manner; and strategies for reducing exposure. Examples presented will include: St. Jones Reserve • Flood risks and hazards 818 Kitts Hummock Rd, Dover, DE 19901 • Recommended strategies for reducing vulnerability $25 Registration Fee • National Flood Insurance Program Includes refreshments • Model floodplain ordinances • Flood planning tools and resources Register Online This session qualifies for credit toward the Certificate in Local www.ipa.udel.edu/events Government Leadership and the Certificate for Planning Education. Contact Chase Barnes (cebarnes@udel.edu) with questions. 21

Delaware Affordable Housing Webinar Series Item 4. Homelessness and Affordable Housing: A Conversation with Matthew Heckles Matthew Stephen Russell Rachel Judson Heckles Metraux Huxtable Stucker Malone Director, Director, Delaware State Senator, Executive Director, Executive Director, Delaware State Center for Community Sixth Senate District Housing Alliance The Springboard Housing Authority Research & Service, UD (Tentative) Delaware Collaborative MAY 7, 2025 Matthew Heckles has spent his career in the public sector promoting affordable housing and community development 10 TO 11:30 A.M. in the mid-Atlantic area. In January, he returned home as Director of the Delaware State Housing Authority (DSHA). Join a ‘fireside chat’ discussion with Matthew Heckles, moderator Stephen Register now Metraux, and a distinguished panel to for this free hear about Matthew’s plans for DSHA, and webinar. how he, as its Director, will spearhead the State’s response to the pressing problems of homelessness and affordable housing. www.udel.edu/0013373 Contact Mimi Rayl (mimirayl@udel.edu) with questions about this event. Presented by the Center for Community Research & Service & the Institute for Public Administration 22

Item 5. City of Dover PETITION TO ANNEX AND REZONE PROPERTY Development Advisory Committee Meeting of April 9, 2025 Public Hearing Before Planning Commission on April 21, 2025 File Number: AX-25-01 Ordinance Number: 2025-08 Applicant/ Owner of Robert Pellegrino Record: Property Address: 582 Acorn Lane, Dover DE Tax Parcel ID #: ED-00-068.15-01-11.00-000 Lot Size: 2.3096 acres +/- Present Zoning: RS-1 (Residential Single Family Zone) Proposed Zoning: R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) 2019 Comprehensive Category 1: High Priority Annexation Areas Plan Designation: 2019 Comprehensive Residential Low Density Plan Land Use Category: Present Use: Single Family Detached Dwelling Proposed Use: Single Family Detached Dwelling Utility Availability: Electric: 582 Acorn Lane is currently served by City of Dover Electric. With any future redevelopment of the property, the electric service needs will be evaluated. The property owner will be responsible for any and all costs associated with the changes in electrical service needs related to any future redevelopment including extending and providing service upgrades to the proposed property. Water: 582 Acorn Lane is served by City of Dover Water. The property owner is responsible for any and all costs associated with changes to service needs for property including extending and providing service upgrades to the existing dwelling on the property or to any new parcel created in the future, 23

Item 5. Sanitary Sewer: 582 Acorn Lane is not served by Sanitary Sewer. Sanitary Sewer is available for this property. The property owner is responsible for any and all costs associated with changes to service needs for property including extending and providing service upgrades to the existing dwelling on the property, this will include an assessment of $40 per front footage of the property for sanitary sewer, which shall be paid by the property owner prior to connection. Impact fees will also apply to this connection. Staff Recommendation The Electric Department has no objection to the annexation. for AX-25-01 regarding City Utility Services: The Department of Water & Wastewater has no objection to the annexation. P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Community Excellence Through Quality Service 24

Item 5. City of CITY OF DOVER Dover Planning Office DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY D.A.C. MEETING DATE: April 9, 2025 APPLICATION: Annexation of Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Lane FILE #: AX-25-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Planning CONTACT PERSON: Dawn Melson-Williams, AICP, Principal Planner PHONE #: (302) 736-7196 I. APPLICATION SUMMARY This application is for Review of an Annexation Request and Rezoning Request for a parcel of land totaling 2.3096 acres+/- located at 582 Acorn Lane. The property is currently zoned RS-1 (Residential Single Family Zone) in Kent County. The proposed Zoning is R-8 (One Family Residence Zone). The property is located at the southeast corner of Acorn Lane and Old White Oak Road. The annexation category according to Dover’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan is Category 1: High Priority Annexation Areas and the land use designation is Residential Low Density. The property owner is Robert Pellegrino. Property Address: 582 Acorn Lane. Tax Parcel: ED-00- 068.15-01-11.00-000. Proposed Council District 3. Ordinance #2025-08. The First Reading of this Annexation Request was completed at the City Council Meeting on March 25, 2025. At that time, a Public Hearing before the Planning Commission was scheduled for April 21, 2025 and a Public Hearing before City Council was scheduled for May 12, 2025. Existing Property The property is located on the east side of Acorn Lane at its northern terminus making it a corner property with White Oak Road/Old White Oak Road. The current boundary of the City of Dover flanks the parcel to the side and rear. The property includes an existing single-family detached dwelling and other accessory structures on a woodland lot. The property is currently zoned RS-1 (Residential Single Family Zone) in Kent County. Surrounding Land Uses The subject property is surrounded by single-family dwellings zoned R-8 and R-15 located in the City and nearby properties zoned RS-1 located in Kent County. To the west across Acorn Lane is a wooded lot and then Manchester Square a neighborhood of townhouse style units which is zoned RG-2 (General Residence Zone). To the north across White Oak Road is undeveloped land zoned C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) and then the Baytree neighborhood zoned RM-2 with a mix of single family detached houses, duplex, townhouses and apartments. II. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE REVIEW In the 2019 Comprehensive Plan, the Potential Annexation Areas (Map 13 -1) identifies the property in the Category 1: High Priority Annexation Areas. The Growth and Annexation Plan 25

Item 5. AX-25-01 Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Ln: Annexation FINAL DAC Report of April 9, 2025 Page 2 Chapter (Chapter 13) notes that “Lands in this category are primarily enclaves of unincorporated territory mostly surrounded by the City of Dover. In all or most of these cases, the City provides these parcels with one or more essential service (sewer, water, police, fire, trash).” For Category 1: High Priority Annexation Areas, it notes in the Recommendations that “the City will not extend sewer and/or water infrastructure to Category 1 areas unless the property owners annex into the City” with consideration given for issues of health, safety and welfare. The 2019 Comprehensive Plan also sets the review criteria for the review of zoning for parcels being proposed for annexation. Chapter 13, page 13-9 notes that the Zoning Review may include: • Proposed zoning be in compliance with the land use category shown on Map 13-2 and used in conjunction with Table 12-1: Land Use and Zoning Matrix; • Character and compatibility of the surrounding land uses and properties; • The street type and capacity serving the property; • Environmental concerns and conditions that may influence land use and zoning; • Market concerns and conditions; • The compatibility with the overall goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Map 13-2: Potential Land Use for Annexation Areas identifies the Land Use Classification for this property to be Residential Low Density. The goals and recommendations for the Residential Medium Density Land Use are listed in the 2019 Comprehensive Plan excerpts presented below: Goals: Residential Land Uses To develop and maintain an adequate supply of housing of varying type, size, and densities that are aesthetically pleasing and located within neighborhoods designed or redesigned to promote convenience, conservation, and access to the greater community, but which are properly buffered through distance and landscaping from incompatible land uses. Policies: Residential Land Uses • Allow flexibility in housing styles and types while regulating gross density within residential developments. • Require linkage streets and sidewalks between adjoining residential subdivisions and street right-of way stubs to adjoining vacant developable land. • Encourage the separation of residential areas from incompatible uses through buffering distances and the use of transitional zoning categories. • Encourage high density residential development in infill areas that are near essential services, public transit, and employment opportunities. • Permit limited compatible neighborhood commercial uses that support surrounding residences within residential areas. The following is an excerpt from the 2019 Comprehensive Plan regarding Residential Low Density Land Uses (beginning on page 12-3): 26

Item 5. AX-25-01 Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Ln: Annexation FINAL DAC Report of April 9, 2025 Page 3 Recommendation for Residential Low Density Residential Low Density residential land uses involve a maximum gross density of four (4) dwelling units per acre. Usually expressed as homogeneous single-family developments, provisions are made via the Zoning Ordinance to permit variety in housing types through the Planned Neighborhood Design Option, provided density caps are maintained. Specific Residential Low Density Residential zoning districts include: R-20 (One Family Residence Zone), R-15 (One Family Residence Zone), R-10 (One Family Residence Zone), R-8 (One Family Residence Zone), and R-7 (One Family Residence Zone). These are typically single family detached dwellings. Zoning districts allowing other housing styles may be appropriate on these parcels to allow the clustering of development on one portion of these sites while maintaining the integrity of significant natural features elsewhere on the parcels, provided the voluntary density caps are maintained. The Land Development Plan recommends that Residential Low Density residential uses be directed toward peripheral suburban/rural fringe areas and in locations with significant environmental constraints. Vacant tracts involving vast woodland areas, wetlands, and areas impacted by the regulatory 100-year floodplain have been designated for Residential Low Density residential uses where more intensive uses would be inappropriate. Residential Low Density residential uses are also recommended in areas immediately adjacent to existing Residential Low Density Residential neighborhoods for reasons of compatibility. As part of the Land Development Plan, Table 12-1: Land Use and Zoning Matrix specifies that the following zones are compatible with this land use classification of Residential Low Density. R-20 (One Family Residence) R-15 (One Family Residence) Residential Low Density R-10 (One Family Residence) R-8 (One Family Residence) R-7 (One Family Residence) C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) III. ZONING REVIEW Request for R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) The applicant has requested the zoning of R-8 (One Family Residence Zone). The types of permitted uses in the R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) are given in Article 3 §1 of the Zoning Ordinance and referenced sections. See the following Code excerpt: Article 3 Section 1. – One Family Residence zone [(R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8, R-7)]. 1.1 Uses permitted. In a one-family residence R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8 and R-7 zones, no building or premises shall be used and no building or part of a building shall be erected or altered which is arranged, intended or designed to be used, in whole or in part, for any uses except the following: 1.11 The raising of field and garden crops, vineyards and orchard farming, the maintenance of nurseries, and the seasonal sale of the products thereof, provided no building is erected and signs conform with article 5, section 4. 27

Item 5. AX-25-01 Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Ln: Annexation FINAL DAC Report of April 9, 2025 Page 4 1.12 One-family detached dwellings, not to exceed one such dwelling per lot. 1.13 Public buildings, structures and uses, including parks and playgrounds, subject to approval of site plans by the planning commission in accordance with article 10, section 2. 1.14 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 section 10.1 and to any specified requirements set forth below: (a) Places of worship, including parish houses; [and] schools, including nursery schools, kindergartens and day care centers in accordance with article 5, Supplementary Regulations, section 14. Child day care facilities; philanthropic and eleemosynary institutions; hospitals and sanitariums for general medical care; and funeral homes subject to the following requirements: i. Any school permitted under this paragraph [subsection 1.14(a)] shall be a nonprofit organization within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Act and shall be registered effectively as such thereunder. ii. Any school permitted under this paragraph [subsection 1.14(a)], other than a kindergarten, nursery school, or day care center, shall occupy a lot with an area of not less than two acres, plus one acre for each 100 pupils for which the building is designed. iii. Any kindergarten or nursery school permitted under this paragraph [subsection 1.14(a)] shall be limited to a maximum of 50 children in zones R-8 thru R-20 and a maximum of 100 children in all other zones. At least 100 square feet of outdoor play space per child shall be provided. Outdoor play space shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed on all sides and shall not include driveways, parking areas, or land unsuited by other usage or natural features for children's active play space. Fencing or other enclosures shall be a minimum height of four feet. The minimum lot area for each ten, or remainder over the multiple of ten, children shall be the same as the minimum lot area requirement for each dwelling unit in the districts in which such uses are to be located. iv. No such building or part thereof shall be erected with less than a 50-foot front yard or nearer than 25 feet from any other street or property line. v. The sum of all areas covered by all principal and accessory buildings shall not exceed 20 percent of the area of the lot. vi. Courts shall conform to the requirements of article 5, section 3 hereof. (b) Railroad and public utility rights-of-way and structures necessary to serve areas within the city, subject to such conditions as the planning commission may impose in order to protect and promote the health and safety and general welfare of the community and the character of the neighborhood in which the proposed structure is to be constructed. (c) Country clubs or other annual membership clubs, catering exclusively to members and their guests, and accessory private playgrounds, golf courses, swimming pools, tennis courts and recreation buildings not conducted as business enterprises, provided that the following operations shall be prohibited: i. Outdoor entertainment, live or mechanical; ii. The use of outdoor public address systems for any purpose; and iii. Exterior lighting producing glare at the lot line other than that essential for the safety of the users of the premises. No building erected under the provisions of this paragraph [subsection 1.14(c)] shall be so erected nearer than 50 feet to any street or property line. (d) Adult day care facilities in accordance with Article 5—Supplementary Regulations, Section 22—Adult Day Care Facilities. 1.15 Accessory uses, limited to the following: (a) Professional office or studio of an artist, dentist, musician, teacher, or physician, but not including veterinarians, provided that: i. Such office or studio is incidental to the residential use of the premises and is carried on by a resident thereon with not more than one nonresident assistant; and 28

Item 5. AX-25-01 Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Ln: Annexation FINAL DAC Report of April 9, 2025 Page 5 ii. Such office or studio shall occupy not more than 30 percent of the area of one floor of the main building. iii. Studios where dancing or music instruction is offered to groups in excess of four pupils at one time or where concerts or recitals are held are prohibited. iv. Medical centers, barbershops, beauty parlors, real estate offices, funeral homes or similar uses shall not be considered permitted accessory uses. (b) Garden house, tool house, playhouse, greenhouse or pool incidental to the residential use of the premises and not operated for gain. (c) Private garage, provided that, in the case of a one-family dwelling, such garage shall have a capacity of not more than three passenger automobiles. One such space may be leased to a person not [a] resident on the premises. (d) Keeping domestic animals as pets, provided not more than three (3) dogs over six months old, shall be permitted. (e) Keeping of chickens for individual domestic purposes subject to the following restrictions: i. Keeping of chickens shall not be permitted on lots smaller than 10,890 square feet in lot area. ii. No more than five (5) chickens shall be permitted on a residential lot. iii. Chickens shall be registered with the Delaware Department of Agriculture. iv. Chickens shall be penned in a coop that shall be at least four (4) square feet per chicken. v. All chicken coops shall be located in a rear yard and shall be a minimum of 20 feet from side and rear property lines. vi. Any odor associated with the chickens shall not be discernable from property lines. vii. Keeping of roosters shall be prohibited. viii. Any lot with chickens shall either comply with these requirements by June 1, 2016 or remove the chickens. (f) Dormitories accessory to schools, provided that such dormitories conform to the bulk regulations of the RG-1 zone. For purposes of computing bulk requirements, each four rooms shall be considered one dwelling unit. Parking shall be calculated as identified in Article 6—Off- Street Parking, Section 3—Required off-street parking spaces, Paragraph 3.1—Schedule of requirements. (g) Customary home occupations, provided that: i. No display of products, goods and/or signs shall be visible from the street. ii. Such home occupation shall be incidental and secondary to the residential use of the premises and shall be conducted in the principal building by the resident or residents that reside therein. iii. Nonresident assistants or co-workers shall be prohibited. iv. Such home occupation shall not occupy more than 30 percent of the area of one floor in the principal building. v. There shall be no exterior effect such as noise, traffic, odor, dust, smoke, gas, fumes, radiation, or electromagnetic interference. The property in the R-8 zoning district would be subject to the following bulk standards. The existing size of the lot and placements of the existing house and accessory structures appear to comply with the R-8 bulk standards. The Zoning Ordinance, Article 7 – Nonconforming Buildings and Uses contains provisions to address any non-conformities. See the bulk standards below for R-8. 29

Item 5. AX-25-01 Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Ln: Annexation FINAL DAC Report of April 9, 2025 Page 6 Article 4, Section 4.1. - [One-family residence zones.] Bulk and parking regulations for one-family residence, R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8 and R-7 zones [are as follows] (see also article 12, definitions; article 5, supplementary regulations; and article 6, off-street parking, driveways and loading facilities): : For Dwellings in: Minimum required: R-8 Lot area (sq. ft.) 8,000 Lot width (ft.) 70 Lot depth (ft.) 100 Front yard (ft.) 25 Minimum side yard (ft.) 10 Total both side yards (ft.) 20 Rear yard (ft.) 30 Off-street parking spaces/dwelling units 2 Maximum permitted: Building height Stories 2 1/2 Feet 35 Lot coverage 35% (Ord. of 12-14-1992) Upon Annexation into the City of Dover, the property would be subject to all provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and Land Subdivision Regulations for land use and zoning of the property and for any future subdivision or redevelopment of the property. The property would also be subject to the provisions of the Dover Code of Ordinances. IV. RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING STAFF: The request for the R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) is for a zone that focuses on one-family residences (detached dwellings) on lots of a minimum 8,000 SF size. This property is over 8,000 SF in size and currently includes a single-family detached residence. Staff recommends the annexation of the property at 582 Acorn Lane and its rezoning to R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) be approved as requested. The subject property is in the City’s Annexation Plan of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan as Category 1: High Priority Annexation Areas with a Land Use Classification as Residential Low Density. This is a High Priority Annexation Area since it is an enclave and will help fill in one of the holes in the City of Dover Boundary. The R-8 zoning is consistent with other development in the surrounding area of this parcel that includes a number of residential zones ranging from R-20 to R-8 and RM-1 and RG-2 zones. The R-8 zoning accommodates the current use of the property as a single-family dwelling. The property is also already served by the City electric and water. This Annexation/Rezoning Request does not grant approval of a specific use for the property but makes its land use subject to a listing of uses permitted and potential conditional uses as allowed in the R-8 zoning district. Staff notes that any potential redevelopment or subdivision for the site or changes of use for the existing building would have to be in line with the zoning classification and would similarly have to follow all development design guidelines of the Zoning Ordinance. Were the Application for Annexation/Rezoning to be recommended by the Planning 30

Item 5. AX-25-01 Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Ln: Annexation FINAL DAC Report of April 9, 2025 Page 7 Commission and subsequently approved by the City Council, the applicant would still have to submit Site Development Plans, Subdivision Plans and/or Permits for review for any new use of the site or the building or for the subdivision of the property. At the present time, the property is expected to remain as a single family detached residence with the only improvements related to making connections to City sewer services. The parcel meets the lot depth and lot area for a parcel zoned R-8 and the current dwelling appears to comply with the bulk standards for setbacks and lot coverage. The accessory structures (shed) and in-ground pool appear to comply with the setback from the side and rear property line. The applicant is advised of the property maintenance regulations found in the Dover Code of Ordinances as during this review process Code Enforcement Staff has identified some property conditions of concern. This recommendation is being made without the benefit of hearing the comments of surrounding landowners and residents. A Public Hearing is required on this matter and the Planning Commission should give those comments consideration. V. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW FOR RECOMMENDATION As part of the Annexation Request, the City of Dover zoning district is to be determined; therefore, it is a request for a type of zoning map amendment which changes the zoning district of a property. The Planning Commission as part of their public hearing and review process will provide a recommendation on the zoning to City Council. As part of the process outlined in Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 Section 5, the Planning Commission must evaluate the following factors when considering the request: Article 10 § 5.36 Report of the planning commission. Regarding each application for a zoning map amendment, the planning commission shall provide a report to the city council stating a recommended action with regards to the proposed amendment, along with the commission's evaluation of the following factors: (A) Whether the uses permitted by the proposed change would be compatible with the existing uses and zones in the area concerned; (B) Whether adequate public services and infrastructure exist or can be created or expanded to serve the needs of any additional demand as a result of such change; and (C) Whether the proposed change is in accordance with the city's current comprehensive plan. A Recommendation Report from the Planning Commission will be forwarded to City Council for their consideration of the Annexation/Rezoning Application. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT 1) From the agency comments received, it appears that the ability to provide City sewer is feasible due to the proximity to existing infrastructure along Acorn Lane. It would be the property owner’s responsibility to cover all costs associated with extending and connecting 31

Item 5. AX-25-01 Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Ln: Annexation FINAL DAC Report of April 9, 2025 Page 8 services to the existing dwelling. 2) Regarding connection to City services (sanitary sewer) the applicant needs to be in contact with the City’s Department of Water & Wastewater for procedures, permitting, fees and impact fees. 3) Upon annexation into the City of Dover, the property will be subject to the provisions of the Dover Code of Ordinances. This includes procedures such as property maintenance regulations and the review processes for plans and permits for construction activities, licensing, Rental Dwelling Permit, etc. 4) The applicant shall be aware that approval of any Annexation & Rezoning application does not represent a Building Permit or other construction activity permit approval. A separate application submission showing all improvements is required before issuance of permits by the City of Dover. 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. 32

Item 5. CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: APRIL 9, 2025 APPLICATION: Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Lane FILE #: AX-25-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Department of Public Works and Water & Wastewater CONTACT PERSON: Jason A. Lyon, P.E., Director of Water & Wastewater / Engineering Services CONTACT PHONE #: 302-736-7025 CONTACT EMAIL: 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 / STREETS / STORMWATER / WATER / WASTEWATER / GENERAL 1. Our office has no objections to the proposed annexation of tax parcel ED-00-068.15-01-11.00-000. Any redevelopment shall adhere to the City of Dover Water/Wastewater Handbook and the Specifications, Standards & Procedures for Public Works Construction. Impact fees will be applied to this property. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES SANITATION / STREETS / STORMWATER / WATER / WASTEWATER / GENERAL 1. None ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT SANITATION / STREETS / STORMWATER / GENERAL 1. None WATER / WASTEWATER 1. As per the Petition to Annex and Rezone Property, as heard by the Council Committee of the Whole, please find the following: a. 582 Acorn Lane is served by City of Dover Water. The property owner is responsible for any and all costs associated with changes to service needs for property including extending and providing service upgrades to the existing dwelling on the property or to any new parcel created in the future b. 582 Acorn Lane is not served by Sanitary Sewer. Sanitary Sewer is available for this property. The property owner is responsible for any and all costs associated with changes to service needs for property including extending and providing service upgrades to the existing dwelling on the property, this will include an assessment of $40 per front footage of the property for sanitary sewer, which shall be paid by the property owner prior to connection. Impact fees will also apply to this connection. 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 . 33

C F AX-25-01 Item 5. 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: 04/02/25 D S O H V A E L R APPLICATION: Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Ln FILE #: AX-25-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover, Office of the Fire Marshal CONTACT PERSON: Jason Osika, Fire Marshal PHONE #: (302) 736-4457 josika@dover.de.us 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 for an annexation and rezoning request. This office has no objections. 2. 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. 34

Item 5. 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, 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) ADDITIONAL / SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN APPROVAL: 1. While checking the property location, I saw several code enforcement violations from the right of way (violations if this were to be annexed into the City of Dover). Code Enforcement checked the property from the right of way and noted the following from what they could see: - Bamboo growing on property - Roof is in disrepair - Vehicles parked on the grass - Overgrown vegetation - Junk and debris on the property - Fence is in disrepair - Commercial vehicles are parked on the property - Dead/fallen branches and trees - Disabled/unregistered vehicles - Grading issues causing stagnant water to collect on the property 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. 35

Item 5. KENT CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1679 SOUTH DUPONT HIGHWAY • DOVER, DELAWARE 19901• (302) 608-5370 • WWW.KENTCD.ORG CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY APRIL 2025 APPLICATION: Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Lane FILE #: AX-25-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: Kent Conservation District CONTACT: Cullen Baker PHONE: 302-608-5370 EMAIL: stormwater@kentcd.org 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: Source: 2019 Delaware Sediment and Stormwater Regulations CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: Kent Conservation District has no objection to the annexation for the above referenced parcel. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: In the future, if there is any proposed disturbance that will exceed 5,000 square feet, a sediment and stormwater management plan must be reviewed and approved by our office prior to any land disturbing activity (i.e. clearing, grubbing, filling, grading, etc.). 36

Item 5. CITY OF DOVER Dover/Kent DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE County Metropolitan ADVISORY BRIEF Planning D.A.C. MEETING DATE: 4/9/2025 Organization AX-25-01 Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Lane FILE # AX-25-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: Dover/Kent County MPO CONTACT PERSON: Malcolm Jacob PHONE #: (302) 387-6030 Attached, please find comments submitted by Dover Kent MPO for each of the current City of Dover Development Advisory Committee (DAC) applications. These comments are a part of the MPO’s ongoing goals of promoting transportation safety and connectivity within the region. They are submitted in accordance with the support given by the MPO Council on November 6, 2024. 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 Annexation and Rezoning Review AX-25-01 Lands of Robert Pellegrino at 582 Acorn Lane The MPO has no objections to the Annexation Request and Rezoning Request. Further comments will be provided if changes to the property, such as subdivision or site development, take place at a later date. 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. 37

Item 5. 38

Item 5. 39

Item 6. City of Dover, Delaware Summary of Applications 2023 2024 Application Type 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total Q1 Q2 Q3* Q4 Total Board of Adjustment 20 15 15 13 15 17 14 15 16 17 12 9 5 4 0 1 0 3 0 4 0 1 3 2 6 Annexations 3 1 0 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2 1 3 4 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 Conditional Use 14 8 5 7 6 11 6 4 5 6 5 8 5 8 3 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 2 2 5 Site Plans 43 29 33 23 20 21 24 16 24 33 12 25 14 14 16 8 4 5 5 22 3 6 8 3 20 Subdivisions 2 7 5 2 2 6 5 2 0 2 4 1 2 5 5 1 0 1 1 3 0 0 1 0 1 Rezoning 11 5 8 6 2 3 4 4 7 5 3 6 3 7 3 0 1 0 1 2 2 3 0 1 6 Miscellaneous 20 15 20 17 24 22 14 14 18 8 13 8 8 11 5 2 0 1 1 4 2 2 3 3 10 Unified Sign 3 1 0 2 2 3 1 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Historic District 4 4 11 5 7 5 6 8 6 4 3 4 2 6 7 1 1 1 2 5 1 4 1 3 9 Commission TOTAL 120 85 97 75 79 91 74 66 83 77 54 62 42 59 42 15 7 11 11 44 8 17 19 14 58 *Summary of Applications through December 31, 2024 including the December 2024 Meetings of the Planning Commission, Board of Adjustment, Historic District Commission and Administrative Plan Reviews. 2024 Reviews by Planning Commission: 30 Applications, Board of Adjustment: 6 Applications, Historic District Commission: 9 Applications, and Administrative Reviews: 13 Applications. 40

Item 6. Annexations County City File # OrdNo Plan Name Location Zoning Zoning Lots Acreage Tax Parcel(s) Action PC Recommended approval Lands of Byler 9/16/2024; CC Approval AX-24-01 2024-28 Investments LLC 139 Acorn Lane RS-1 R-10 1 0.33 ED-00-068.19-01-23.00-000 10/14/2024 MISC File # Plan Name Location/Topic Type Ordinance Action 1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Map 12-1: Land PC Recommendation of Development Plan Map to Approval 2/20/2024; CC Comprehensive Plan Amendment Property at 1079 Silver change Land Use Category from deferral on 3/11/2024; CC MI-24-01 2024 Lake Boulevard Office to Mixed Use 2024-03 denial 4/22/2024 Minor Lot Line Adjustment Plan for Rojan Meadows PND Rojan Meadows PND Administrative Plan Review; MI-24-02 Subdivision - Townhouse Lots Subdivision SB-03-01F Minor Lot Line Adjustment Plan N/A Final Plan Approval 2/13/2024 Minor Lot Line Adjustment Plan Administrative Plan Review; MI-24-03 Lands of Malkiewicz 480 Troon Road Minor Lot Line Adjustment Plan N/A Final Plan Approval 8/13/2024 Minor Lot Line Adjustment Plan 19 and 21 North American Administrative Plan Review; MI-24-04 Lands of Achenbach Avenue Minor Lot Line Adjustment Plan N/A Final Plan Approval 4/12/2024 Eden Hill Farm TND -Phases 4, 5, Administrative Plan Review; MI-24-05 & 6 Open Space Little Eden Hill Minor Lot Line Adjustment Plan N/A Final Plan Approval 8/28/2024 Planned Neighborhood Design Senior Citizen Housing Option: Sketch Plan for City Council Sketch Plan Review CC MI-24-06 Luther Village IV PND - SCHO 101 Babb Drive review N/A 6/10/2024; Refer to PC 41

Item 6. Dover Code of Ordinances, Amending Appendix F - Fees and Fines, Chapter 82 Text Amendment: Application - Planning, Appendix A - Proposed Ordinance to amend Filing Fees (Boards and Subdivisions, and application filing fees to Adopted by CC 7/22/2024; MI-24-07 Commissions) Appendix B - Zoning Planning Office, BOA, HDC, PC 2024-27 Effective Date 9/1/2024 Planned Neighborhood DesignSenior Citizen Housing Option: Sketch Plan for City Council Sketch Plan Review CC MI-24-08 Villages of Maple Dale PND-SCHO 180 Maple Dale Circle Review N/A 10/28/2024; Refer to PC MISC Proposed Ordinances to establish zoning district and conditions for recreational Pc Recommendation Zoning Ordinance, Article marijuana land uses 2024-29, 11/18/2024; CC Approval on Text Amendments: Recreational 3 Sections 16, 19, 20, and (manufacturing, cultivation, 2024-30, 12/9/2024; Mayor Veto Marijuana Land Use and Related 23; Article 5 Section 24; testing, and retail stores); and 2024-24, 12/16/2024; CC Reaffirm MI-24-09 Zoning Regulations Article 12 also Business Licenses 2024-25 adoption 1/2/2025 Dover Mobility Center PC Recommendation of Request for Alley Abandonment: Garage project site; Alley approval 12/16/2024; CCOW- Part of Alley Between S. Area of 1,550 SF extending SAT Recommendation of Governors Avenue and S. Bradford 132 feet north of Minor Abandonment of a portion of Resolutio Approval 1/14/2025; CC MI-24-10 Street Street Alley the improved alley n 2025-02 Approval 2/10/2025 42

Item 6. Board of Adjustment File # Applicant Location Description Type Tax Parcel(s) Action 2 Variances regarding the Flood Plain; decrease the required reduction of the impervious surface area and an Area Approved V-24-01 Legislative Hall Parking Garage 150 W Water Street increase in the maximum impervious in the flood plain. Variance ED-05-077.10-01-02.00-000 6/20/2024 Variance Request of the requirements of Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §27.61 for future construction of a building to Area Approved V-24-02 Lands of Abhay Patel 1494 McKee Road increase maximum setback in the COZ-1. Variance ED-05-067.00-01-09.00-000 7/17/2024 Determinatio n that BOA Appeal of the determination of the Principal Planner that has no Appeal Staff Determination on Appeals before the Planning Commission are not subject to ED-05-077.09-02-25.00-000, jurisdiction in V-24-03 Hearing at PC HI-24-02 HI-24-03 148 & 150 S Bradford St. Public Hearing ( regarding HI-24-02 & HI-24-03). Appeal ED-05-077.09-02-27.00-000 the matter Area Approved V-24-04 Raising Cane's Restaurant 1151 N DuPont Highway Variance Request seeking reduction of side yard setback Variance ED-05-057.00-01-03.01-000 8/14/2024 Variance Request regarding signage to increase the number Area Approved V-24-05 Raising Cane's Restaurant 1151 N DuPont Highway of wall signs Variance ED-05-057.00-01-03.01-000 11/20/2024 Variance 1: Reduction of the minimum lot depth from 100 feet to 84.5 feet; Variance 2: Reduction of the minimum lot Area Approved V-24-06 Cecil Street Townhouses 207 N. West Street area required for a Townhouse lot Variance ED-05-076.08-02-01.00-000 11/20/2024 43

Item 6. Conditional Use Bldg Sq Ft (new File # Plan Name Location Zoning Type or addition) DU Tax Parcel(s) Action Tower Based Wireless Storage/Wireless PC Conditional Communications Communication Approval C-24-01 Facility 640 Lafferty Lane IPM Facility Monopole 0 ED-05-077.00-01-25.00-000 6/17/2024 Master Plan for Planned Neighborhood Luther Village IV Design - Senior Planned Citizen Housing Neighborhood Option and Phase ED-05-077.06-02-90.00-000, ED- Total of 9 phases Design - Senior IV: Total of 9 phases for 524 units: 05-077.06-02-90.01-000, ED-05- PC Conditional Citizen Housing for 524 units Phases 1, 2, and 3 077.06-02-90.02-000. ED- Approval C-24-02 Option 101 Babb Drive RG-2 constructed 72 05077.06-02-90.03-000 9/16/2024 Church of the PC Conditional Nazarene Building Building Addition Approval C-24-03 Addition 1430 McKee Road R-8, COZ1 to Place of Worship 9,707 SF 0 ED-05-067.00-01-17.00-000 9/16/2024 Personal Service (Make-up Aesthetics) PC Conditional Prickly Pear Studio Expansion within Approval C-24-04 LLC 872C Walker Road CPO, COZ1 Tenant Space 3,623 SF 0 ED-05-067.19-02-02.08-000 10/21/2024 Child Daycare 12,000 SF PC Conditional JJ's Learning Center (new existing tenant Approval space C-24-05 Experience 261 N DuPont Hwy SC-2 tenant) 0 ED-05-068.14-01-03.05-000 11/18/2024 44

Item 6. Historic District Commission File # Plan Name Location Type Primary Tax Parcel Action HI-24-01 Referral of Fence Permit #23- 146 S. State Fence Permit ED-05-077.09-02-58.00-000 2/15/2024 HDC granted 1868 at 146 S. State Street Street ArchRevCert subject to conditions. HI-24-02 Building Demolition at 148 S. 148 S. Review for Architectural ED-05-077.09-02-25.00-000 HDC Action to deny Bradford Street Bradford Certification for Demolition ArchRevCert on Street 5/16/2024. Appeal to Planning Commission 6/17/2024 and approval granted. HI-24-03 Building Demolition at 150 S. 150 S. Review for Architectural ED-05-077.09-02-27.00-000 HDC Action to deny Bradford Street Bradford Certification for Demolition ArchRevCert on Street 5/16/2024. Appeal to Planning Commission 6/17/2024 and approval granted. HI-24-04 Legislative Hall Parking Garage at 425 East Site Plan Review for ED-05-077.10-01-02.00-000 HDC on 5/16/2024 425 East Avenue (corner of East Avenue Architectural Review recommended approval of Avenue/E. Water Street and Certification ArchRevCert subject to Martin Luther King Jr. Bouelvard conditions. Next step to file PC South Site Plan Application. HI-24-05 Building Demolition at 120 S. 120 S. Review for Architectural ED-05-077.09-01-44.00-000 HDC on 6/20/2024 Governors Avenue Governors Certification for Demolition ecommendation of approvalon Avenue to allow Demolition of building. HI-24-06 Delaware Supreme Court 55 The Green Site Plan Review for ED-05-077.09-05-32.00-000 HDC on 9/19/2024 granted Building Addition and Architectural Review approval of ArchRevCert to allow Renovations Certification building addition. HI-24-07 Legislative Hall Building Addition 411 Site Plan Review for ED-05-077.09-05-15.00-000, HDC on 10/17/2024 Legislative Architectural Review ED-05-077.09-05-14.00-000 recommended approval of Avenue Certification ArchRevCert subject to conditions. Next step to file PC Site Plan HI-24-08 Referral of Building Permit #24- 21 N Building Permit for partial ED-05-077.05-02-23.00-000 HDC on 10/17/2024 1399 at 21 N. American Avenue American demolition and renovations recommended Approval of Avenue (and to convert Duplex into ArchRevCert subject to previously 19 single family dwelling conditions. N American Avenue) 45

Item 6. HI-24-09 Dover Mobility Center (Parking) 133 S Site Plan Review for ED-05-077.09-02-10.00-000, HDC on 12/19/2024 Garage Governors Architectural Review ED-05-077.09-02-09.00-000. recommended approval of Avenue, 139 Certification ED-05-077.09-02-08.00-000, ArchRevCert subject to S Governors ED-05-077.09-02-24.00-000, conditions. Next step to file PC Avenue, 145 ED-05-077.09-02-25.00-000, Site Plan Application. S Governors ED-05-077.09-02-27.00-000 Avenue, 136 S Bradford St, 148 S. Bradford St, 150 S Bradford St 46

Item 6. Rezoning File # Applicant Location Zone from Zone to Acres Primary Tax Parcel Ordinance Action 1 Action 2 Lands of City of Dover (Old Post 55 Loockerman C-2, SWPOZ, PC Recommended CC Approval Z-24-01 Office) Plaza IO, SWPOZ, H H 1.27 ED-05-077.05-04-53.00-000 2023-13 Approval 2/16/2024 2/12/2024 Rezoning 1079 Silver Lake 1079 Silver Lake PC Recommended CC Deniel Z-24-02 Boulevard Blvd CPO C-2A 5.04 ED-05-067.12-02-04.00-000 2024-04 Denial 2/20/2024 4/22/2024 Rezoning Lands of Duncan 600 C-2A, H, ED-05-076.12-02-44.00-000, PC Recommended CC Approval Z-24-03 Forest St 600 Forest Street IO, H, SWPOZ SWOPZ 0.51 ED-05-076.12-02-45.00-000 2024-09 Approval 4/15/2024 5/13/2024 Rezoning Lands of White Marsh 1100 and 1110 Environmental South Little Creek PC Recommended CC Approval Z-24-04 Services Road CPO IPM 10.715 ED-05-077.12-01-03.00-000 2024-10 Approval 4/15/2024 5/13/2024 Lands of Chiang 1241 College Park PC Recommended CC Approval Z-24-05 & Sons Drive CPO IO 1.1024 ED-05-067.00-02-12.08-000 2024-11 Approval 5/20/2024 06/10/2024 Lands of PAM CUBED Real Estate Holdings PC Recommended CC Approval Z-24-06 LLC 1216 McKee Road CPO, COZ-1 IO, COZ-1 1.2302 ED-05-067.00-01-34.00-000 2024-31 Approval 12/16/2024 1/13/2025 Subdivision File # Plan Name Location Tax Parcel(s) Type Lots Acreage Action Lands of 3.8904 AC Wyoming Major Subdivision PC denied on SB-24-01 Wyoming LLC Avenue Rear zoned R-10 ED-05-077.17-06-02.01-000 (Conceptual Plan) 6 4.2311 8/19/2024 47

Item 6. Site Plans Bldg Sq Ft File # Plan Name Location Zoning Description Review Type (new/addition) DU Acres Tax Parcel Action 224, 214, 200 S. Greenberry Ln; 225, 215, ED-05-076.04-01-07.00-000, ED- 205 Ann Moore St; 112, 05-076.04-01-06.00-000, ED-05- 106, 100 S. Greenberry 076.04- Filed 12/15/2023; Eden Hill Farm TND Multi- Ln; 113, 107, 101 Ann Administrative Site Plan 09.00-000, and ED-05-076.0401- Final Plan Approval S-24-01 Family Apartments Moore Street TND Apartments Review 0 144 3.2 08.00-000 8/27/2024 355 Ridgely Boulevard Filed 12/13/2023; (was 355 Ann Moore Administrative Site Plan Final plan Approval S-24-02 Ridgely Blvd Clubhouses Street) TND Clubhouses Review 6,817 0 2 ED-05-076.04-01-980-000 7/2/2024 Lands of Delmarva Land Warehouse - 6 PC Conditional S-24-03 Holdings LLC 101-1001 Cassidy Drive M, AEOZ Buildings PC Review Site Plan 59,700 0 10 ED-05-077.00-01-28.04-000 Approval 3/18/2024 Filed 2/23/2024; Administrative Site Plan Final Plan Approval S-24-04 Dunkin Donuts 1128 Forrest Avenue C-2A,COZ-1 Parking Lot Expansion Review 0 0 8 ED-05-076.11-02-59.00-000 5/31/2024 PC Conditional S-24-05 Lands of Ken Barrett 1413 New Burton Road C-1A Office Building PC Review Site Plan 3,026 0 0 ED-05-085.11-01-01.00-000 Approval 5/20/2024 2285 Forrest Avenue and Apartments entrance ED-05-075.00-01-06.00-000 PC Conditional S-24-06 Leander Lakes III 2161 Forrest Avenue RM-2, COZ1 change PC Review Site Plan 0 200 27 ED-05-075.00-01-05.00-000 Approval 5/20/2024 Large Family Child Administrative Site Plan S-24-07 Marie's Little Lamb Daycare 322 Westwind Drive R-8 Daycare Review 0 1 0 ED-05-068.10-01-41.00-000. Filed 4/19/2024 Filed 5/10/2024; Renovations- Administrative Site Plan Final Plan Approval S-24-08 Modern Maturity Center 1121 Forrest Avenue IO, COZ-1 Longwood Entrance Review 1,348 0 14 ED-05-076.07-01-250.000-000 10/6/2024 Procter & Gamble Warehouse Warehouse Expansion & Parking IPM, Expansion/Parking PC Conditional S-24-09 Improvements 1340 W North Street SWPOZ Improvements PC Review Site Plan 120,000 0 85 ED-05-076.00-01-07.00-000 Approval 6/17/2024 PC Conditional S-24-10 Stoltzfus Warehouse 1285 College Park Dr M Warehouse PC Review Site Plan 5,120 0 1.507 ED-05-067.00-02-12.02-000 Approval 7/15/2024 601 Garrison Oak Drive- IPM-3, PC Conditional S-24-11 Warehouse/Logistics Building GOTBC Lot#3 SWPOZ Warehouses PC Review Site Plan 100,000 0 12.813 LC-05-068.00-02-03.00-000 8/19/2024 48

Item 6. Mum Mum Meka's training Large Family Child Administrative Site Plan S-24-12 Academy 58 Village Drive RG-3 Daycare Review 0 1 0.1 ED-05-067.15-01-09.00-000 Filed 7/20/2024 Commercial Phase 1: 54,000, Flex Use Facilities Commercial Warehouse Business Phase 2 42,000, PC Conditional S-24-13 Warehouse Business Park 350 Lafferty Lane M, AEOZ Park PC Review Site Plan Phase 3: 123,750 SF 19.74 ED-05-077.16-02-05.00-000 Approval 9/16/2024 Site Plans Bldg Sq Ft File # Plan Name Location Zoning Description Review Type (new/addition) DU Acres Tax Parcel Action PC Review Site Plan and Parking Garage of 344 Architectural Review PC Conditional S-24-14 Legislative Hall Parking Garage 425 East Avenue IO, H parking spaces Certification 127,500 0 5.28 ED-05-077.10-01-02.00-000 Approval 9/16/2024 Delaware Supreme Court Building Addition and Administrative Site Plan S-24-15 Building 55 The Green IO, H Renovation Review 730 0 3.74 ED-05-077.09-05-32.00-000 Filed 8/6/2024 Final 9/11/2024; Large Family Child Administrative Site Final Plan S-24-16 Miracles of Life Childcare 19 Nicholas Drive R-8, PND Daycare Review 0 1 0.17 ED-05-063.20-01-51.00-000 10/11/2024 PC Conditional William Henry Middle School Regional Bus Parking Approval S-24-17 Regional Bus Parking Lot 65 Carver Road IO, COZ-1 Lot PC Site Plan Review 0 0 42.58 ED-05-076.07-01-55.00-000 10/21/2024 Administrative Site S-24-18 Raising Cane's Restaurant 1151 N DuPont Hwy C-4 New Restaurant Review 3,659 0 1.13 ED-05-057.00-01-03.01-000 Filed 9/20/2024 PC Site Plan Review and PC Conditional Legislative Hall Building 411 Legislative Avenue and Architectural Review ED-05-077.09-05-15.00-000, ED- Approval S-24-19 Addition adjacent lot TO, ROS, H Building Addition Certification 56,820 0 2.8 05-077.09-05-14.00-000 11/18/2024 PC Conditional Approval S-24-20 Lands of Ditko Properties LLC 1004 S State Street C-2A Office Building PC Site Plan Review 1,140 0 0.26 ED-05-077.17-07-27.00-000 12/16/2024 49

Item 6. City of Dover, Delaware Summary of Applications 2024 2025 Application 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Type Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total Q1* Q2 Q3 Q4 Total Board of Adjustment 15 15 13 15 17 14 15 16 17 12 9 5 4 0 4 0 1 3 2 6 0 1 - - 1 Annexations 1 0 0 1 3 0 1 3 0 2 1 3 4 3 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 - - 1 Conditional Use 8 5 7 6 11 6 4 5 6 5 8 5 8 3 3 0 1 2 2 5 3 - - - 3 Site Plans 29 33 23 20 21 24 16 24 33 12 25 14 14 16 22 3 6 8 3 20 7 - - - 7 Subdivisions 7 5 2 2 6 5 2 0 2 4 1 2 5 5 3 0 0 1 0 1 1 - - - 1 Rezoning 5 8 6 2 3 4 4 7 5 3 6 3 7 3 2 2 3 0 1 6 0 - - - 0 Miscellaneous 15 20 17 24 22 14 14 18 8 13 8 8 11 5 4 2 2 3 3 10 3 1 - - 4 Unified Sign 1 0 2 2 3 1 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - - 0 Historic District 4 11 5 7 5 6 8 6 4 3 4 2 6 7 5 1 4 1 3 9 1 1 - - 2 Commission TOTAL 85 97 75 79 91 74 66 83 77 54 62 42 59 42 44 8 17 19 14 58 15 4 - - 19 *Summary of Applications through March 31, 2025 including the March 2025 Meetings of the Planning Commission, Board of Adjustment, Historic District Commission and Administrative Plan Reviews. 50