Attachment

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA OCTOBER 27, 2014 - 7:30 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 15 LOOCKERMAN PLAZA DOVER, DELAWARE OPEN FORUM - 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO OFFICIAL MEETING (7:15 P.M.) The “Open Forum” segment is provided to extend the opportunity to the general public to share their questions, thoughts, comments, concerns, and complaints. Discussion of any item appearing on the agenda as a public hearing is prohibited during the Open Forum as an opportunity will be provided during consideration of that item. Citizen comments are limited to three (3) minutes. Council is prohibited from taking action since they are not in official session; however, they may schedule such items as regular agenda items and act upon them in the future. INVOCATION BY BISHOP THOMAS L. HOLSEY PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA - TROOP 903 - THE ELK’S LODGE #1903 AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS * CONSENT AGENDA Those items on the Council Agenda which are considered routine and non-controversial are marked with an asterisk (*) and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of Council so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered a separate item. * 1. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 2. PRESENTATIONS A. LEED GOLD CERTIFICATION - DOVER PUBLIC LIBRARY (DOUG MOSS) B. CERTIFICATE OF CONGRATULATIONS - KRAFT FOODS 50TH ANNIVERSARY 3. PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2014-18 WITH STAFF AMENDMENT #1 (SA#1) THE FIRST READING OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WAS ACCOMPLISHED DURING THE COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 25, 2014. THE FINAL READING WAS DEFERRED DURING THE COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014. COPIES ARE AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS. A. #2014-18 WITH STAFF AMENDMENT #1 AMENDING APPENDIX B - ZONING, ARTICLE 3 - DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 24 - PLANNED NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN OPTION (PND), SUBSECTION 24.62 - BUFFERS AND ARTICLE 4 - ZONING BULK AND PARKING REGULATIONS, SECTIONS 4.10 AND 4.11

COUNCIL AGENDA - OCTOBER 27, 2014 PAGE 2 4. PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1370 COLLEGE ROAD, OWNED BY SARAH E. JONES (Staff recommends: 1. Declaring this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2. Ordering the property repaired or demolished by November 27, 2014 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3. Ordering the Building Inspector to cause the demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; 4. Ordering the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner.) 5. PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - OCTOBER 13, 2014 * A. UPDATE - RECREATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT (Committee action not required) * B. BENCHMARKS ESTABLISHED FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICE (Committee action not required) C. REVIEW OF DRAFT DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT APPLICATION AND PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 2014-13 IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION AS A DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (Committee recommended endorsement of the Draft Downtown Development District application, acknowledging that staff will continue to refine the application prior to its final presentation to City Council, and adoption of Resolution No. 2014-13 as submitted) * 6. UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - OCTOBER 13, 2014 A. TUDOR PUMP STATION - ACCEPTANCE AND DEDICATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE (Committee recommended acceptance and dedication of the Tudor Pump Station to allow the City of Dover Department of Public Works to take on all operation and maintenance responsibilities (excluding the gravity wastewater system internal to the site, as that infrastructure will remain the responsibility of the property owner) in an effort to protect and maintain the safety, health, and welfare of the public in this area) B. TEA/NAES REPORT (JULY AND AUGUST) (Committee recommended acceptance of the reports) * 7. QUARTERLY REVENUE REPORT * 8. SEMI-ANNUAL INSPECTION BY CITY MANAGER - ROBBINS HOSE COMPANY 9. TENTATIVE LABOR CONTRACT WITH AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES (AFSCME) * 10. APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES - ROBBINS HOSE COMPANY ELECTION - NOVEMBER 17, 2014 A. JAMES HOWLETT B. JAMES HURLEY, JR. C. WILLIAM H. HURLEY IV (ALTERNATE)

COUNCIL AGENDA - OCTOBER 27, 2014 PAGE 3 * 11. APPOINTMENTS/REAPPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY MAYOR ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN A. AWARDS COMMITTEE - RONALD R. GOUGH (To fill the expired term of Mary Skelton) B. ELECTION BOARD B-1. CURTIS E. RAYMOND (THIRD DISTRICT) (To fill the unexpired term of John J. Davis - term to expire May 2016) B-2. M. MILFORD CALDWELL (FOURTH DISTRICT) (To fill the unexpired term of Lillie Mae Johnson - term to expire May 2016) 12. FIRST READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2014-23 - REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 603 WEST DIVISION STREET THE FIRST READING IS OFFERED ON THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE. IT IS RECOMMENDED FOR REFERRAL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON NOVEMBER 17, 2014 AND THAT A PUBLIC HEARING BE SET FOR DECEMBER 8, 2014 AT 7:30 P.M., AT WHICH TIME THE FINAL READING AND COUNCIL ACTION WILL TAKE PLACE. COPIES ARE AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OR CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. A. PROPERTY LOCATED AT 603 WEST DIVISION STREET, CONSISTING OF TWO (2) PARCELS (16,538 S.F +/- AND 14,465 S.F. +/-), OWNED BY WEST DIVISION HOLDINGS, LLC. THIS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED M (MANUFACTURING), SUBJECT TO COZ-1 (CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE) AND THE PROPOSED ZONING IS C-3 (SERVICE COMMERCIAL), SUBJECT TO COZ-1 (CORRIDOR OVERLAY ZONE) (TAX PARCEL: ED-05-076.08-01-19.00-000 AND ED-05-076.08-01-19.01-000, FOURTH COUNCIL DISTRICT; PLANNING REFERENCE: Z-14-03) 13. FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2014-22 THE FIRST READING OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WAS ACCOMPLISHED DURING THE COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014. COPIES ARE AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS. A. PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2014-22 - BUDGET AMENDMENT RELATED TO CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN - FISCAL YEAR 2014 (FY14) CARRY-FORWARD BALANCES 14. COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\COUNCIL-AGENDAS\2014\10-27-2014.WPD THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Regular Council Meeting was held on October 13, 2014 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Bonar presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Perza, Mr. Slavin, Mrs. Williams, and Mr. Hutchison. Mr. Hare was absent. Council staff members present were Police Chief Bernat, Mrs. Mitchell, Mrs. Townshend, Deputy Fire Chief Hall, Mr. Koenig, City Solicitor Rodriguez, and Mrs. McDowell. Mayor Christiansen was also present (departed at 8:16 p.m.). OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Bonar declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council was not in official session and could not take formal action. There was no one present wishing to speak during the Open Forum. The invocation was given by Reverend Theodore Henderson, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Council President Bonar requested that the Certificate of Congratulations for Kraft Food’s 50th anniversary be deferred until the next meeting. Mr. Hutchison moved for approval of the agenda, as amended, seconded by Mrs. Williams and unanimously carried. Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the consent agenda, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hare absent). ADOPTION OF MINUTES - SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 25, 2014 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of August 25, 2014 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Slavin, seconded by Mrs. Williams and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 22, 2014 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of September 22, 2014 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Slavin, seconded by Mrs. Williams and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION - AMY MULLEN The City Clerk read the following Certificate of Appreciation into the record:

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 2 CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION presented to Amy Mullen for her countless hours spent organizing and managing the Loockerman Way Farmers' Market held during the Summer and Fall of 2014. Beginning preparations early during the previous winter, Ms. Mullen amassed vendors for the market, developed entertainment enhancements to draw visitors to the downtown area, and facilitated and marketed the event. Her energy and enthusiasm have contributed greatly to the success of the Farmers' Market, and her efforts are greatly appreciated by the Downtown Dover Partnership, the City of Dover, and the entire local community. In grateful appreciation October 13, 2014 On behalf of the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP), City of Dover, and all of the vendors involved, Mayor Christiansen expressed appreciation and presented the certificate to Ms. Mullen. Mr. Bill Neaton, Economic Development Director, stated his opinion that the Farmers’ Market went from a “ho-hum” event to a “wow” event this year, and this was all due to Ms. Mullen. On behalf of the Board of the DDP, Mr. Gregg Moore, President, expressed his appreciation to Ms. Mullen for the countless hours put into the Farmers’ Market and requested that she return next year. Mr. Slavin expressed concurrence with the previous comments and thanked Ms. Mullen for the many hours devoted to the Farmers’ Market. Ms. Mullen stated her appreciation for the opportunity to work on the Farmers’ Market and thanked the DDP for their patience as she learned the protocol for operating the event. PRESENTATION - COLONEL ALLEN MCLANE PUBLIC SYMPOSIUM (TOM WELCH) Mr. Tom Welch, Historical Interpreter and Coordinator, Allen McLane Symposium, attended the meeting in period dress and advised members that a group of citizens had planned an all-day symposium at Wesley College on Saturday, October 25, 2014 to honor local Delaware hero Colonel Allen McLane and the other men and women who fought during the American Revolution. Mr. Welch recounted a brief history of Colonel McLane and invited members to attend the symposium, noting that all who attended would receive a copy of a book, entitled, “Allen McLane - Patriot, Soldier, Spy, Port Collector,” and that prints of post cards printed in 1975-1976 during the American Bicentennial would also be distributed. He explained that the event would begin at 9:00 a.m. in the Peninsula Room on the second floor at Wesley College, and many outstanding speakers would be attending. Council President Bonar thanked Mr. Welch for the information presented.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 3 PRESENTATION - 2014 MAYOR'S ARTS AWARDS The Mayor's Arts Award was established to recognize the importance of the arts in Dover and to honor groups and individuals that have made outstanding contributions to the artistic and cultural life of our great city. The award honors visual and performing artists, arts educators, arts organizations, arts volunteers, and supporters of the arts. The recipients of this prestigious award exemplify excellence, inspire the community through their artistic pursuits, and ensure a cultural legacy for future generations. Mayor Christiansen and Mr. Brian Miller, representing the Mayor’s Arts Council, presented awards, as follows: Sharon Crossen Mrs. Crossen thanked her family and friends for their support and stated that it was a honor and a privilege to work with children, young adults, and parents in a community such as Dover that supports the arts. The Delaware Friends of Folk Mr. John Kidd, Co-President, Delaware Friends of Folk, expressed thanks to the Mayor, noting that the Delaware Friends of Folk had been performing folk music in Dover for well over 20 years and they wished more people to be aware of their events. He explained that their next event, a musical performance by Guy Davis, was scheduled for November 22, 2014 at Wesley College Chapel and invited those present to attend. Gary Knox Mr. Knox thanked the Mayor, Council, and the Mayor’s Arts Council, stating that receiving such an award made getting up “at the crack of dawn,” as well as the gas mileage spent going back and forth to Bombay Hook, worthwhile. He noted that residents have a beautiful city, thanks to the groundskeepers, and a beautiful State, and that it was a honor to share what he sees with everyone else. PRESENTATION - 2014 MAYOR'S YOUTH ARTS AWARDS Also recognizing the value and importance of young people's contributions to the arts, the Mayor's Youth Arts Award was established to identify, encourage, and honor talented high school arts students. This award highlights the importance of an arts education in fostering future citizens of our great city. Mayor Christiansen and Mr. Brian Miller, representing the Mayor’s Arts Council, presented awards, as follows: Elizabeth Stant Alex Brown (unable to attend) Marius Sander Tymir Thompkins

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 4 By unanimous consent, the meeting recessed for light refreshments. Meeting recessed at 7:51 p.m. By unanimous consent, the meeting reconvened at 8:04 p.m. PRESENTATION - DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PROGRAM (CONSTANCE HOLLAND) Ms. Constance Holland, Director, Office of State Planning Coordination (OSPC), stated that the idea for a Downtown Development District came from the Governor in January 2013 and that Senate Bill 191 establishing the districts was introduced in April 2013 and passed with no opposition. She explained that in the Application for Designation as a District, local governments must identify proposed Downtown Development Districts in accordance with the Act. She encouraged the City to be sure that the application is filled out completely and offered the assistance of the OSPC staff, including herself and Mr. David Edgell, Principal Planner for Kent County. Ms. Holland reviewed information from a presentation entitled, “Delaware Downtown Development Districts - Application Process for Designation as a District” (Exhibit #1). Ms. Holland advised members that the City of Milford had put together a master plan before this program was available. At this point, the area in Milford was “shovel ready” and the municipality would not have to change their Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, or site plan, which Ms. Holland stated would be extremely attractive to any developer in Milford. Ms. Holland explained that the Application for Designation would be due November 1, 2014. The Office of State Planning would review all applications during November and December and they would be scored based on a rubric. She reminded members that the funds would go to the developer rather than the local government, but it is important that the developer goes by the District Plan. Ms. Holland noted that funds had been received from the Secretary of the Delaware Economic Development Office (DEDO) for municipalities. In addition, she suggested if consultants had been contacted in regard to the application, that receipts be saved, as it was hoped that DEDO would provide grants for the local jurisdictions to help with the master plan. She stated that the Cabinet Committee on State Planning would make recommendations for designation and the Governor would designate the Districts in January/February of 2015. On behalf of Council and staff, Council President Bonar expressed appreciation for the information and for the $7M the legislature had allocated to help communities address their problems with downtown development efforts. He stated that the program was extremely important and hoped that the City would be able to take advantage of it. PROCLAMATION - NATIONAL COMMUNITY PLANNING MONTH The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, in every community, change is constant and affects all of us however community planning and plans can help manage this change in a way that provides better choices for how people work and live; and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 5 WHEREAS, community planning provides an opportunity for all residents to be involved in making choices that determine the future of their community; the full benefits of planning requires public officials and citizens who understand, support, and demand excellence in planning and plan implementation; and WHEREAS, the American Planning Association and its professional institute, the American Institute of Certified Planners, endorse National Community Planning Month as an opportunity to highlight the contributions sound planning and plan implementation make to the quality of our communities and environment; and WHEREAS, the celebration of National Community Planning Month gives us the opportunity to publicly recognize the participation and dedication of the members of the City of Dover Planning Commission and other citizen planners who have contributed their time and expertise to the improvement of the City of Dover. NOW THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby proclaim the month of October 2014 as NATIONAL COMMUNITY PLANNING MONTH in the City of Dover, and encourage all citizens to recognize the valuable contributions made by community and regional planners and our partner agencies at the State and county level, and extend our heartfelt thanks for the continued commitment to public service by these professionals. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, expressed her opinion that Delaware was a great place to be a planner because of the relationships formed among planners and because there is less red tape than in other locations. She also felt that it was a good time to be a planner. Ms. Holland stated that she was very fortunate to have her current job and to work with the individuals that she encounters in her work. She also expressed gratitude for being a part of the City of Dover, State of Delaware, and Kent County, where planners know and respect each other and want the very best for the State. Council President Bonar stated that the City of Dover has a fine Planning Department and credited Ms. Holland for “bringing along” Mrs. Townshend and Mr. David Edgell, who was formerly employed as a planner with the City of Dover. Mr. Bonar stated that long after Mrs. Holland retires, Mrs. Townshend and Mr. Edgell will exemplify the quality of planning and directorship that Ms. Holland had demonstrated at the county and state levels. He thanked Ms. Holland for making Dover and Delaware better. PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2014-18 A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider approval of proposed zoning text amendments to Appendix B - Zoning, Article 3 - District Regulations, Section 24 - Planned Neighborhood Design Option (PND), Subsection 24.62 - Buffers and Article 4 - Zoning Bulk and Parking Regulations, Sections 4.10 and 4.11.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 6 Mr. Slavin moved that the Final Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2014-18 be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Dixon and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of the ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of August 25, 2014.) Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that the ordinance would eliminate the requirement for a 40-foot buffer around the perimeter of developments approved under the Planned Neighborhood Design (PND) option. She noted that no structure could be built in this buffer and this provision had not posed a problem in many cases since staff had worked over the years to attain this 40 feet in the open space. However, in a number of places, she explained, houses had been built right to the 40-foot line; therefore residents could not construct sheds, decks, fences, and other types of improvements that are typical in a rear yard. Mrs. Townshend indicated that the buffer requirement was put in place when the PND section was originally developed, possibly due to concerns regarding compatibility with surrounding development; however, it had been shown that PNDs blend to their surroundings and the 40-foot buffer was not needed. She explained that the ordinance would also change front and rear property setbacks but not lot coverage, and this would provide builders more flexibility in laying out lots. She informed members that a public hearing for the ordinance was held before the Planning Commission in September and approval was unanimously recommended. Mrs. Townshend advised members that, when reviewing the meeting packet materials, she realized that the amendment recommended by the Planning Commission was not included in the packet. She recommended proceeding with the public hearing, tabling the ordinance, and taking final action on the ordinance at the City Council meeting scheduled for October 27, 2014. She stated that Staff Amendment #1 would add language to the ordinance to clarify that it was intended to be retroactive and that developments previously approved with the 40-foot buffer as part of the requirement would not be subject to the buffer. She apologized for the error. Noting that placement of fences, sheds, and outbuildings was not permitted outside of the setback areas, Mr. Perza questioned why it was not proposed to change the code to permit placement of non-residential structures outside of the setback areas rather than making drastic changes to the code, as proposed in the ordinance. Mrs. Townshend explained that approximately one (1) year ago, staff began reviewing this matter with additional amendments being considered for the PND. Consideration was given to allowing certain things within the 40-foot buffer; however, staff concluded that the buffer requirement did not really add any value. The choice was to provide exceptions regarding what could be put in the buffered area or remove the buffer and allow the setbacks to remain. Mr. Perza inquired if modifying the setbacks by trimming them back by 10 to 15 feet would provide the value that the people of the community were looking for, versus modifying the entire 40-foot safety zone. Responding, Mrs. Townshend explained that modifying the setbacks would only address a portion of the problem because, for example, the 40-foot buffer would override a 20-foot setback. As an example, she explained that the Zoning Ordinance would allow for an open deck in the rear setback; however, because of the 40-foot buffer, staff had to deny deck permits.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 7 Mr. Perza questioned if the Planning Commission had considered trimming the buffer from 40 feet to 20 feet. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that this was not discussed and the ordinance was sponsored by Council members, drafted, and evaluated based on the way it was drafted. In response to Mr. Anderson regarding whether City code required a 40-foot buffer for any other type of development, Mrs. Townshend indicated that it did not. Mr. Anderson stated his feeling that this was a unique experiment that did more harm than good and, based on feedback received from individual lot owners, Mrs. Townshend concurred. Mr. Anderson advised members that during his previous service as a civilian member of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee, he had some concern about the buffer requirement and stated that he was glad this was being reviewed, as he felt it had harmed using the PND code. In response to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Townshend stated she did not recall an instance where an applicant had opted not to pursue the PND designation due to the “red tape” involved; however, she reminded members that there had not been a great deal of PND activity since 2006 when she joined the City. She indicated that the PND classification had been used since that time for senior citizen housing projects and had become an issue in the Village of Cannon Mill and Clearview Meadow, where lots were affected by the 40-foot buffer. Responding to Mr. Lynn as to whether or not Council should proceed with the public hearing on this matter, given the absence of information from the meeting packet, Mr. Nicholas Rodriguez, City Solicitor, stated that it would be better to hold the public hearing during the next Council meeting. Responding to Mr. Lynn regarding which subdivisions this ordinance was aimed to address, Mrs. Townshend stated that most of the related issues had been brought up in the Village of Cannon Mill and Clearview Meadow developments. Other subdivisions had kept 40-feet in open space; therefore, there had been no associated problems. To address these subdivisions retroactively, Mrs. Townshend stated that if the ordinance were adopted, affected property owners would be notified in writing that they could record an updated survey which would show the required buffer being removed. She stated that there were no other subdivisions “in the pipeline” that would seek to take advantage of this change. Mr. Hutchison stated that this proposal was a “housecleaning” matter and concurred with the recommendation to defer consideration of this matter. Mr. Slavin moved to defer consideration of this item, seconded by Mrs. Williams. Noting that the public hearing was advertised for this evening and anyone who was interested in being present for the hearing was aware of the deferral, Mrs. Townshend questioned if the City would be in violation of public notice. Mr. Rodriguez stated that there was no violation, in his opinion.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 8 The motion to defer consideration of Ordinance #2014-18 was carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2014-20 A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider approval of proposed zoning text amendments to Appendix B - Zoning, Article 10 - Planning Commission, Section 2 - Site Development Plan Approval. Mr. Hutchison moved that the Final Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2014-20 be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Slavin and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of the ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of August 25, 2014.) Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, reminded members that on July 14, 2014, City Council adopted Ordinance #2014-08, which rewrote the commercial and office zones within the Zoning Ordinance and streamlined processes for zoning administration. One change that helped to streamline processes allowed for an existing building expanding by up to 15% to be reviewed administratively. In drafting the language, staff did not develop similar language for expansion of impervious cover, although that was the intent. The proposed amendment would correct this omission and allow for up to 15% expansion of impervious cover on a site to be reviewed administratively. She explained that the omission was discovered when working with Playtex on a proposed expansion project. Mrs. Townshend explained that a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014, no members of the public spoke regarding the ordinance, and the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. Council President Bonar declared the hearing open. There being no one present wishing to speak during the public hearing, Council President Bonar declared the hearing closed. Mrs. Williams moved for adoption of the ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutchison and, by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent), Council adopted Ordinance #2014-20, as follows: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 10 - Planning Commission, Section 2 - Site Development Plan Approval, subsection 2.1 - Required, of the Dover Code be amended to read as follows: Section 2. - Site development plan approval. 2.1 Required. Site development plan approval shall be required for the erection or enlargement of all structures and the establishment of any use for which site development plan approval is required by this ordinance. Site development plan shall be required according to the following criteria:

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 9 2.11 Planning commission site plan review. Site development plans shall be subject to review and approval by the planning commission if they meet the following thresholds: (a) New structures. Site plans for new structures of 5,000 square feet or greater in floor area; or (b) Additions to existing structures. Site plans for additions to existing structures that (1) constitute 15 percent or more of the existing floor area, and (2) new floor area is greater than 5,000 square feet; or (c) Additions of Impervious surface. Site plans that propose new or additional impervious surfaces that (1) constitute 15% or more of the existing impervious surface area and (2) are equal to or greater than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface; or (d) Adjacent to residential. Nonresidential site plans with site disturbance greater than 2,500 square feet and adjacent to residential uses or residential zones. 2.12 Site development master plan. Site development master plans shall be subject to review and approval by the planning commission in accordance with subsection 2.44. 2.13 Zoning review. For site development plans involving construction of a single-family detached, single-family attached, or single-family semidetached dwelling; an accessory structure; or a nonresidential change of use for which no building addition or increase in impervious surface is proposed, the city planner or his designee may approve the site development plan in conjunction with building permit review. 2.14 Administrative site plan. All site development plans that do not meet the thresholds for zoning review in accordance with subsection 2.13 or planning commission site plan review in accordance with subsection 2.11 shall be reviewed as administrative site development plans. ADOPTED: OCTOBER 13, 2014 UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - SEPTEMBER 22, 2014 The Utility Committee met on September 22, 2014 with Chairwoman Williams presiding. Amendments to the Lakeland Interconnection Agreement (Tidewater Utilities) Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, informed members that the Lakeland Interconnection is located on South State Street, past Wolf Creek and Highview Avenue, which extend back to St. Jones Commons. He explained that the City of Dover extended water to that area in 2002-2003, and, in May 2004, the City of Dover and Tidewater Utilities, Inc. (TUI) entered into an interconnection agreement for the primary purpose of providing fire protection (water supply) assistance to Tidewater's service territory on South State Street. This interconnection, known as the Lakeland Interconnection, had been functioning in this capacity since the agreement was

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 10 signed. Mr. Koenig stated that in late July 2014, TUI submitted a request to City staff to alter the agreement so that domestic water supply could be purchased for this area at the "in city" rate. TUI indicated that the domestic demand in this area had been between 800,000 and 1,200,000 gallons per month. Having reviewed the request, Mr. Koenig felt that amending the agreement would be in the best interest of both entities. Provided a monthly facilities charge for the existing 6" meter (currently billed at $497.55 per month per Tidewater's tariff) remained in place, Mr. Koenig stated that staff had no objections to extending the "in city" rate, since this would amount to a substantial bulk purchase of water. Mr. Koenig informed members that Mr. Bruce Patrick, Director of Engineering, TUI, advised him that in order for TUI to continue to provide domestic water service, they would be facing significant upgrades, such as putting in an elevated storage tank or additional pumping system. Mr. Koenig stated that, upon approval of the agreement, the City would bill TUI a monthly facilities charge based on the in-city rate, and TUI would then bill their individual customers. He advised members that the monthly facilities charge was identified in TUI’s tariff; therefore, it would fluctuate based on any changes to TUI’s tariff, noting that it had gravitated upward significantly over time. Mr. Koenig explained that under the initial agreement with TUI for fire protection, the City billed TUI a facilities charge on a quarterly basis and, if there was a fire, they were also billed on the fire demand. Mr. Koenig stated that under the new proposal TUI would buy domestic supply as well as fire supply. Mr. Koenig indicated that the relationship with TUI had been well established since around 1997-1998 and noted the profitability that the relationship had brought to the City. He informed members that the City had several existing interconnection agreements with TUI, including Carlisle Village, Winding Ridge, and Lakeland, as well as a two (2) way, stand-by agreement for an interconnection at Wilmington College that would allow TUI to buy water from the City or vice versa in the event of an emergency. Mr. Koenig stated that if the amendments were approved by Council, TUI would expect to open the connection for domestic supply in early 2015. Staff recommended that the City Manager be authorized to amend the existing Lakeland Interconnection Agreement with Tidewater Utilities, Inc., to include the monthly facilities charge allowed in Tidewater’s tariff and to also include the supply of both domestic water and fire protection at the meter location. Responding to Mr. Perza regarding the cost to the City, Mr. Koenig indicated that there would be no additional expense to the City since the interconnection was already in place and the pipe had been in place for 12-15 years. Mr. Koenig said that the only cost was to produce and supply the water; all other costs were imbedded in the already existing agreement. Mr. Perza questioned whether providing domestic water to Lakeland could drain the City’s supply or create shortages in other areas. Responding, Mr. Koenig assured members that this would not create a drain on capacity. He explained that the usage

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 11 was between 800,000 - 1.2M gallons per month and the City had been planning for capacity. He noted that TUI was a good customer and a substantial user, the agreement would bring revenue, and only one (1) meter would be required, rather than 25 or 50. In response to Mrs. Williams regarding whether this expansion would set a precedent, Mr. Koenig stated that this would not be the case, explaining that the interconnection agreement was already in place relating to fire demand using the “in-city” rate. He said that the City had the right to set rates as long as it follows the Council approval process. In addition, Mr. Koenig noted that the facilities charge was unique to this customer and helped to offset the “in-city” rate. Responding to Mayor Christiansen regarding fire hydrants in the area, Mr. Koenig stated that there were fire hydrants on Highview Avenue and that the feed into the Lakeland Mobile Home Park also had a hydrant. He was uncertain of the number or location of other hydrants in the area. Mayor Christiansen questioned who would bear the expense of additional hydrants, if necessary. Responding, Mr. Koenig assured members the City would not be responsible for adding hydrants in the TUI service territory and confirmed that use of City of Dover fire hydrants would be required if more hydrants were installed. The Committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation to authorize the City Manager to amend the existing Lakeland Interconnection Agreement with Tidewater Utilities, Inc., to include the monthly facilities charge allowed in Tidewater’s tariff and to also include the supply of both domestic water and fire protection at the meter location. By consent agenda, Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the Committee's recommendation, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). By consent agenda, Mr. Slavin moved for acceptance of the Utility Committee Report, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - SEPTEMBER 22, 2014 The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on September 22, 2014 with Chairman Slavin presiding. Proposed Financial Reforms - Compensation Policies (Deferred during the Committee Meeting of August 11, 2014) During the Committee meeting of June 23, 2014, Mr. Slavin advised members that during the June 11, 2014 Special City Council Meeting - Budget Review he proposed a series of 14 financial reforms to be addressed over the next six (6) to nine (9) months that would assist in shaping the City's Budget for FY 2015/2016. He stated that the proposed reforms were clustered into four (4) separate areas, as follows: 1) public safety; 2) compensation policies; 3) property tax governance; and 4) restrictions on uses of appropriations. He requested that members consider the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 12 public safety area first and that staff be requested to review the reforms, develop recommendations, and provide information on any financial gap that may result. He explained that the review would allow members to identify whether there was a need to create policy, ordinances, or Charter changes to implement any changes that may result from those discussions. Mr. Slavin reviewed the three (3) financial reforms related to proposed compensation policies, as follows: 6) Council will not authorize pay raises, bonuses, or other forms of compensation in consecutive fiscal years for any City employee, including Council appointees. A two-thirds vote of Council is required to authorize an exception to this policy. 7) Council will not authorize more than 1% compensation increases (which shall include the total of salary, bonus, and other forms of compensation) for any one fiscal year. A two-thirds vote of Council is required to authorize an exception to this policy. 8) Council will not authorize any compensation package with a bargaining unit which results in a total compensation increase of more than 2.5% in any three-year period. A two-thirds vote of Council is required to authorize an exception to this policy. In reference to proposal #8, Mr. Slavin requested that the phrase “with a bargaining unit” be stricken, noting that the reforms were intended to address all employees equally. He explained that the reforms were intended to provide policy level guidance to executive branch staff on the compensation of all employees, including both employees who were represented by unions and those who were not. He indicated that his experience had been that there had been some “fairly alarming miscommunication” occurring between the executive branch and the legislative body regarding compensation. He stated that he did not believe that this was the fault of anyone but Council and that Council needed to state its expectations in relation to compensation early in the process. Absent this policy-level guidance from Council, he felt that the City would continue to find itself in situations similar to one that occurred two (2) weeks ago, when the negotiating team returned with results of negotiations and found that they were unacceptable to Council. Mr. Slavin indicated that these reforms were also intended to send a very plain and simple message that the City was not the type of employer that would be able to give annual increases which are out of alignment with its resources and the status of the rest of the economy. He stated that City employees do “a great job,” expressed pride in serving with them, and indicated that this was not a statement against employees but merely a statement of fact. Mr. Slavin expressed his opinion that the City could not afford to be the type of employer that it had been in the past.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 13 Mr. Anderson expressed his feeling that this was a well thought out item and stated appreciation that it was brought forward, noting that it would open up a discussion about where the City was going with its budgets. However, he indicated that he was unsure whether he was “on board” with some of the specifics because he felt they may be too restrictive, with inflation. Mr. Anderson expressed skepticism that the rate of inflation would be less than 2% in a year and 6% over the course of three (3) years. Mr. Anderson stated that it would be important to take inflation rates and other realities into account if a cap were to be set. In addition, he stated that he did not wish to preclude negotiations before they begin. Mr. Anderson noted that he definitely believed in fiscal restraint and had a problem with the 9% raises in a one (1) year period and 6% retroactive raises that were recently proposed for the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) contract. He felt that the City had gotten out of control in the past with raises that became unsustainable and did not want to see the City at that point again, particularly when revenues were not as strong as they could be. However, he was unsure if the proposed numbers were realistic. Mr. Hutchison stated that he firmly believed that this was about building a policy and a partnership with employees regarding future pay raises and he felt that the City must work with employees to reach some standard or understanding about what could and could not be done. He expressed his opinion that sometimes the City is its own worst enemy, noting that discussions are held about the City’s financial matters and then contrary actions are taken, such as building a library or doing other things that are not budgeted for. After having been a part of the City for more than 40 years, he felt that it was “way past time” to clearly establish guidelines in regard to payroll, income, and expenses that everyone could work with. Referring to his memorandum to members of the Committee, dated August 5, 2014, regarding proposed compensation policies, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, reiterated that he was very concerned about the potential impact of these proposed compensation policies. He stated that the City had been operating in a very contentious union environment since he became City Manager in 2011. He advised members that he realized that the economic conditions facing the City and its citizens were not ideal by any means; however, expressed his opinion that the City’s financial issues were still well within the manageable scale. From a recruiting and retention perspective, Mr. Koenig stated that the proposed compensation constraints, especially by individual employee, would likely hinder the City’s recruiting and retention efforts. He noted that there were existing wage compression issues that could be further expounded by implementing the policies as written. He advised members that the Consumer Price Index (CPI) had ranged from 1.1% - 2.5% per year from February 2008 - February 2014 and the proposed compensation increases seem unrealistic, especially in a union-dominated environment. Mr. Koenig stated that, while the implementation of such policies was within the Council’s legal authority, he believed that it may not promote good public policy. From a negotiator’s perspective, as well as management’s perspective, the policies

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 14 represented initiatives that would ultimately handcuff the ability to be creative at the bargaining table and would, therefore, not be helpful to the negotiating process. The ability to consider all possible solutions to any given issue at the table is critical to success. While Mr. Koenig agreed that these policies represented a strict adherence to fiscally conservative positions, they would likely increase the City’s costs associated with the negotiation process as the unions would be agitated by the restrictions from the start. In addition, he stated that any policy that is limited strictly to bargaining units had the potential to create legal issues for the City. He explained that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects employees’ rights to organize and bargain without employer interference. Mr. Koenig agreed, from a negotiating standpoint, that staff would like clear and concise direction; however, he believed that this direction should be in the form of strategies discussed in executive session rather than formal policies. He noted that staff needed the ability to be flexible and creative in the negotiation process and a lot of ideas, comments, constraints, and opinions go into this. He indicated that he would gravitate toward direction being provided to the negotiating team as informal and directive comments rather than formal policy. Responding to Mr. Sudler as to whether his concerns had been discussed with the City Solicitor, Mr. Koenig stated that these policies had not been discussed with the City Solicitor; however, he had provided them to Baird Mandalas Brockstedt, LLC, the City’s labor attorneys, who were very careful to say that in an ideal world it is best not to be constrained by any specific policies when entering into negotiations because it limits the ability to be creative at the table. Mr. Koenig reiterated that it would be within Council’s legal authority to adopt the policies; however, in some cases it would create additional challenges in the negotiating environment. In response to Mr. Sudler regarding whether feedback had been received from the union, Mr. Koenig stated that he had not received direct feedback. He expressed his belief that someone from the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) and a representative from the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) had spoken to Mr. Glenn Mandalas, Baird Mandalas Brockstedt, LLC, regarding this, but there had been no comments on the record from Mr. Mandalas regarding consideration of this item during the current meeting. In response to Mr. Anderson regarding the cost of legal fees and staff preparation for arbitration, Mr. Koenig stated that typically these discussions go to mediation first, and costs had ranged from approximately $5,000 to $15,000 in legal fees, in addition to the cost of staff time. He advised members that legal fees for arbitration with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) were roughly $20,000, with an additional $15,000 spent for expert witness preparation. Mr. Koenig estimated that the total costs in arbitration, which involves a lot of detailed submissions and expert testimony, would be easily in the $30,000 - $50,000 range. Mr. Anderson noted that there would be additional time spent prior to arbitration in negotiations and mediation.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 15 Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding the percentage of pay that mediation and arbitration costs would represent in an average contract, Mr. Koenig stated that he was unsure of this figure at this time; however, he estimated that approximately 3% of the IBEW contract amount would equate to about $80,000. He indicated that for contracts related to some of the smaller bargaining units, 3% would be in the range of approximately $80,000 - $90,000 for one (1) year, which would be compounded going forward. Mr. Anderson questioned if successful negotiations could result in a potential savings of 1% per year. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the City’s legal fees could range $50,000 - $80,000 per year, depending on the intensity of negotiations. Mr. Slavin inquired if Mr. Anderson’s questions regarding the cost of arbitration were based on the assumption that the proposed policies would cause arbitration more often. Responding, Mr. Anderson stated his feeling that the potential for arbitration would exist more often. Mr. Slavin indicated that the example that was cited (IBEW) referenced arbitration that occurred before the proposed policies were on the table and noted that the City had been in arbitration before. Referring to the IBEW contract previously referenced, Mr. Anderson stated that a goal of a 0% raise was set at that time for the negotiators, which eventually happened, noting that negotiators did not have a lot of flexibility at the time this contract was negotiated. Mr. Slavin explained that the compensation policies were put forth not to be strictly prohibitive, noting that the changes were proposed at the policy rather than ordinance level, and that there was allowance for an override by a two-thirds vote of Council. He stated that when an annual 3% increase is discussed, the City is often shortsighted and the cost of the contract is not advertised; it is merely stated that a four (4) year contract was presented with 3% raises in each of the four (4) years and that this is an aggregate 12% increase. However, Mr. Slavin noted that these raises are much more expensive because they carry forward beyond the term of the contract and are added onto by the next contract. These costs are not calculated; only the four (4) year cost is considered, and then it is said that funds will be saved with the retirement benefits that are realized over 20 years. He felt that the true picture would show that some of the raises that had been given by contract were hurting the City’s finances because they escalate exponentially as the years go by. Mr. Matt Knight, past President, Dover FOP Lodge 15, advised members that he had been asked to attend by the current FOP President Dave Gist, and that the FOP was monitoring this matter and was concerned. He felt that the proposed policies would be constraints to contract negotiations and explained that the FOP had reached out

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 16 to its attorney, who reached out to Mr. Mandalas. Mr. Knight indicated that the union was “keeping an eye” on this discussion. He stated that he understood the override provided but reiterated that these policies would constrain negotiations. Mr. Anderson inquired if the FOP, to Mr. Knight’s knowledge, was skeptical about the idea of any constraints at all or about the numbers reflected in the proposed reforms. Responding, Mr. Knight stated that the FOP was concerned about “both”; however, he indicated that, based on his knowledge of past negotiations, any constraints at all were a concern going into negotiations. He concurred with Mr. Koenig that these matters could be discussed individually among each union negotiating team. Mr. Anderson expressed his opinion that there was some merit to the proposed policies and that they needed to be discussed; however, stated that before proceeding he would like to obtain an opinion from the City Solicitor on these items and to determine, if they are moved forward, how this could be done. He expressed a desire to make sure that everything was “on firm legality” before proceeding. Mr. Anderson moved to recommend that the proposed compensation policies be referred to the City Solicitor for a legal opinion, seconded by Mr. Sudler. Mr. Slavin stated that this was a prudent step, noting that he felt that there was some discomfort regarding the vehicle by which these proposals could be accomplished but not the intent of the proposals. The Committee recommended that the proposed compensation policies be referred to the City Solicitor for a legal opinion. By consent agenda, Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the Committee's recommendation, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). Bank Qualified Loan for the Completion of the Street and Storm Water Improvements at the Garrison Oak Technical Park (GOTP), Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) (Fire), and Radios (Fire and Police) Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that City of Dover Finance Department solicited proposals from local banks to finance the following projects as presented in the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget presentation: GOTP - Street & Stormwater Improvements $2,600,000 Radios - Police 329,500 Radios - Fire 296,800 Self Containing Breathing Apparatus - Fire 292,000 Issuance Cost 61,000 Total $3,579,300

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 17 Mrs. Mitchell explained that she had reviewed the proposals and they were also reviewed by Public Financial Management, Inc. (PFM), the City’s financial advisor, and PFM indicated that PNC Bank had the best proposal in terms of financing rates. Mrs. Mitchell stated that the rate proposed by PNC Bank was 66% of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR), and other proposals were 66% or 67% of LIBOR plus 1%; therefore, there was a vast difference. She indicated that she had asked PFM to request the other submitters to provide a best and final rate, which was done; however, PNC’s was still the best proposal. Staff recommended acceptance of the PNC Bank proposal and adoption of Resolution No. 2014-12 authorizing the issuance and sale of up to $4,135,000 General Obligation Bonds of the City of Dover. [City Clerk’s Office Note: Subsequent to the meeting, the legal authority for the resolution was revised to list the City of Dover Charter rather than the Laws of Delaware. This change was approved by Ms. Emilie Ninan, City of Dover Bond Counsel, as well as Mr. Nicholas Rodriguez, City Solicitor, and Resolution No. 2014-12 was amended accordingly.] Noting that the loan was amortized for 20 years, Mr. Anderson inquired if the City was planning to pay it back in seven (7) years. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the amortization schedule was based on 20 years, which would reduce the payments; however, at the end of seven (7) years, it was planned to refinance the loan, along with an additional loan related to the Dover Public Library. She indicated that these loans would probably be merged together and there would be a bond issue to pay them off, or another loan would be obtained to extend payments on the balance. Mrs. Mitchell stated that this loan was broken into two (2) facilities since the City was also refinancing its 2003 bond issue, which had only two (2) remaining payments; however, the interest rate was so much better that the City would save approximately $15,000 - $20,000 in interest. She noted that this amortization would keep the principle payments at the same level they would have been if the bonds were paid. Mrs. Mitchell indicated that payments would be higher during first two (2) years and amounts would then drop off for the last five (5) years. Mr. Sudler questioned what the forecast for the loan payoff would be without merging it with the Dover Public Library loan. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that $190,000 per year was forecast for radio and fire equipment in the budget forecast model. The total in the forecast model for this loan was $440,000 per year, without the additional debt service. The Committee recommended acceptance of the PNC Bank proposal and adoption of Resolution No. 2014-12 authorizing the issuance and sale of up to $4,135,000 in General Obligation Bonds. By consent agenda, Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Williams and, by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent), Council adopted Resolution No. 2014-12, as follows:

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 18 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF UP TO [$4,135,000] GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE CITY OF DOVER TO REFINANCE CERTAIN PRIOR DEBT; FINANCE STREET AND STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE AT THE GARRISON OAK TECHNOLOGY PARK, RADIO EQUIPMENT FOR POLICE AND FIRE OPERATIONS, AND SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS FOR FIREFIGHTERS; AND AUTHORIZING ALL NECESSARY ACTION IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, the City of Dover (the “City”) is authorized pursuant to Section 50, Volume 77, Chapter 130, as amended (“the City Charter”) to issue general obligation bonds for the municipal purposes of the City as set forth in a resolution authorizing such issuance; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the City Charter, the City desires to issue general obligation bonds in one or more series for the municipal purposes set forth herein (the “2014 Bonds”); WHEREAS, the City has (I) certain Series of 2003 Bonds that can be refunded for savings (the “Prior Bonds”), and (ii) approved certain capital construction projects and improvements and desires to issue the 2014 Bonds to finance the costs of said improvements, including, but not limited to the following: 1. Street and storm water infrastructure at the Garrison Oak Technology Park 2. Radio equipment for Police and Fire operations 3. Self-contained breathing apparatus for firefighters (collectively, the “Projects”). NOW THEREFORE THE CITY OF DOVER HEREBY ORDAINS (AT LEAST THREE FOURTHS OF THE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL CONCURRING HEREIN): Section 1. Amount and Purpose of the Bonds. Acting pursuant to the City Charter, the City shall issue its general obligation bonds in the maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed [$4,135,000] to finance or refinance a portion of the cost of the Projects. The monies raised from the sale of the 2014 Bonds (including the investment earnings thereon) after the payment of the costs of issuance, shall be expended only for the purposes authorized herein or as may otherwise be authorized by subsequent action by City Council. Authorized purposes include the costs of planning, constructing, acquiring and equipping the Projects or any portion thereof; interest on the 2014 Bonds and any interim financing during the construction period and for a period of up to one year following the estimated date of completion; the costs of issuance of the 2014 Bonds and any interim financing; the repayment of temporary loans incurred with respect to the Projects; and the reimbursement of authorized costs previously expended by the City from other funds. Section 2. Terms of the Bonds. The 2014 Bonds shall be sold in one or more series to PNC Bank, National Association (the “Lender”) pursuant to a proposal dated August 20, 2014 (the “Commitment”) which is hereby approved by the City and the other terms and conditions to be contained in a Loan Agreement between the City and the Lender (the “Loan Agreement”). The new

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 19 money 2014 Bonds are anticipated to bear interest at a variable rate during the construction period and may be converted to a fixed rate at the end of the construction period or remain at variable rate. The refunding portion of the 2014 Bonds shall bear interest at a fixed rate not to exceed 0.90%. Section 3. Security for the Bonds. The full faith and credit of the City shall be pledged to pay principal and interest on the 2014 Bonds. Section 4. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligation. The Bond is hereby designated as a qualified tax-exempt obligation within the meaning of § 265(b)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). For purposes of § 265(b)(3) of the Code, the Issuer and all entities that issue on behalf of the issuer do not reasonably anticipate issuing more than $10,000,000, inclusive of the Bond, of tax-exempt obligations in calendar year 2014. Section 5. Details of the Bonds. The Mayor and City Treasurer are authorized to determine the details of the 2014 Bonds including the following: the date or dates of the 2014 Bonds; provisions for either serial or term bond; sinking fund or other reserve fund requirements; due dates of the interest thereon; the form of the 2014 Bonds; the denominations and designations of the 2014 Bonds; registration, conversion and transfer provisions; provisions for the receipt, deposit and investment of the proceeds of the 2014 Bonds; provisions for the replacement of a lost, stolen, mutilated or destroyed 2014 Bonds; and provisions for issuing uncertificated obligations and all procedures appropriate for the establishment of a system of issuing uncertificated debt. The 2014 Bonds shall be executed by the manual or facsimile signature of the Mayor and City Treasurer, shall contain an impression of the City Seal of a facsimile thereof and shall be attested by the manual signature of the City Clerk. Section 6. Further Action. Each of the Mayor, the President of the City Council, the City Treasurer, the City Manager and the City Clerk are authorized and directed to take such other action on behalf of the City, as may be necessary or desirable to effect the adoption of this Resolution and the issuance and sale of the 2014 Bonds and to provide for their security and to carry out the intent of this Resolution, including the publication of notices and advertisements and the execution and delivery of customary closing certificates. Section 7. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish once in a newspaper published in the City a notice in substantially the following form: “NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of The City of Dover, Delaware on October 13, 2014 pursuant to Chapter 130, Volume 77, Delaware Laws, as amended, adopted a resolution entitled as follows: “RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF UP TO [$4,135,000] GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE CITY OF DOVER TO REFINANCE CERTAIN PRIOR DEBT; FINANCE STREET AND STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE AT THE GARRISON OAK TECHNOLOGY PARK, RADIO EQUIPMENT FOR POLICE AND FIRE OPERATIONS AND SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS FOR FIREFIGHTERS; AND AUTHORIZING ALL NECESSARY ACTION IN CONNECTION THEREWITH”

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 20 “The purpose of the issuance and sale of said bonds is to provide funds (approximately $4,135,000) to pay a portion of the costs of certain projects including, but not limited to, (a) refinancing certain prior debt; (b) financing (1) street and storm water infrastructure at the Garrison Oak Technology Park, (2) radio equipment for Police and Fire operations, and (3) self-contained breathing apparatus for firefighters; and © pay costs of issuance of said bonds.” “Any action or proceeding to contest the validity of said resolution or any of its provisions must be commenced within thirty (30) days after publication of this notice. After expiration of such period of limitation, no right of action or defense founded upon the invalidity of said resolution or any of its provisions shall be asserted, nor shall the validity of said resolution or any of its provisions be open to question in any court upon any ground whatsoever, except in an action or proceeding commenced within such period.” By order of the City Council of the City of Dover. ADOPTED: OCTOBER 13, 2014 Proposed Ordinance #2014-22 - Budget Amendment Related to Capital Investment Plan - Fiscal Year 2014 (FY14) Carry-Forward Balances Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that the purpose of the proposed ordinance was to rebudget project carry-forward balances from Fiscal Year 2014 (FY 14) projects. Balances for those projects had been calculated, and the ordinance would incorporate those project balances in the FY 15 budget. She noted that placing these carry-forward balances into the budget by ordinance would save the Finance Department the time and trouble of having to manually place them in the financial systems and ensure that the projects do not go over budget, and that this matter was being moved along sooner than usual this year. Mrs. Mitchell reviewed the City of Dover - General Fund - Major Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Projects - Quarterly Report as of July 1, 2014. She explained that figures listed under the Total Project - Past, Current & Future Budgets (Original Project Budget, Latest Project Budget, Project To Date Expenses, Project Budget Balance, and % Budget Spent) provided information regarding the total project. She noted that the Original Project Budget column included amounts as adopted by Council in the original City budget in the individual CIP sheets. The Latest Project Budget section reflected new project amounts based on any budget revisions brought forth through Council or through staff changes. The columns under Current Fiscal Year (Current Fiscal Year Budget, Revised Fiscal Year Budget, Fiscal YTD Expenses, Budget Balance, and % Budget Spent) applied to the Current Fiscal Year. Mrs. Mitchell explained that rebudgeting the carry-forward balances would result in changes to the Current Fiscal Year Budget and the Revised Fiscal Year Budget columns. Referring to the City of Dover General Fund FY 15 Project Tracking Report As of July 1, 2014, Mrs. Mitchell explained that this document was an internal schedule used by the Finance Department to track projects to make sure that they stay on budget as approved by Council. She stated that amounts in the Addition (Reduction) column were based on action items brought to Council and were also included in the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 21 Revised Budget column. The Internal Revisions represented project revisions made internally within the budget amendment procedure, for example, savings that may need to be used in other projects. Mrs. Mitchell indicated that this information was provided to show how report numbers change from the original budget to the revised budget. Noting that projects appeared to be on budget, Mr. Anderson inquired if there were any “red flags” that members should be aware of. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that this process did not indicate that there were any problems at this time. She explained that any projects that were brought forth from July, such as Garrison Oak projects, had been folded into the budget ordinance and that Council was aware of such projects. The Committee recommended adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2014-22, as recommended by staff. By consent agenda, Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the Committee's recommendation, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). (The First Reading of the ordinance will take place during the latter part of the meeting.) Community Transportation Project - Third-Party Sponsorship - Solid Rock Baptist Church Community Outreach Center Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, informed members that staff had received a request from the Solid Rock Baptist Church for the City of Dover to become a third-party sponsor so that Community Transportation Funds (CTF) could be used on a portion of a parking lot to be constructed for the Community Outreach Center at 113 North West Street. He stated that staff met with members of the church, their contractor, Senator Brian Bushweller and members of the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) late last week to discuss whether this project would fit into the guidelines of the CTF program. It was agreed that the request from Solid Rock Baptist Church could be brought forward, if endorsed by the City of Dover to enter into a third-party sponsorship agreement, so that approximately $25,000 of CTF funds could be secured. Mr. Koenig stated that this would essentially pay for the paving component of the parking lot, and the church and their contractor would be responsible for the layout, and the stone and base preparation associated with the proposed parking lot. He explained that the church would sign a blanket public easement for the parking area to provide public parking for the next 20 years, as required by DelDOT. Provided that the church the agreed to the 20-year easement, the City, through the City Manager’s Office, would agree to put out a Request for Proposals (RFP) for paving, using prevailing wage to comply with all the components of CTF funds. Mr. Koenig stated that the contractor would be selected based on the lowest proposal submitted, and agreements would be put in place before the work could start. There would be no engineering requirements from City staff; however, some administrative time would be required from the City Manager’s Office to prepare the solicitation for quotes. Payment would be routed through the City’s billing system, as had been done for previous CTF projects, such as Wesley

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 22 College. Mr. Koenig indicated that he originally did not want to participate in this project; however, as the components were discussed with the DelDOT representative, he was assured that the City could maintain its status as an entity that diligently processes these funds by signing the agreements and funding a component of the project. The City could also keep the project on the timeline that had been identified. It was expected that all of the work could be completed by the end of the calendar year. Mr. Koenig stated that the request was for Council to authorize the City Manager to enter into a CTF agreement with DelDOT, process the funding as a third-party sponsor, work with members of the Solid Rock Baptist Church or their designee to get the correct narrative language for the bid document, and complete the project in a timely manner. Noting that the funding was expected to be $25,000, Mr. Shevock questioned where extra funds would come from if bids were received in excess of this amount. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that excessive bids would have to be rejected; however, he noted that the scope of work was very narrow and expectations had been discussed with some contractors. Knowing that the prevailing wage rates were considered when developing the project, staff was reasonably confident that bids would come in under $25,000 because the project had been tailored to meet this criteria. Mr. Shevock questioned if the use of community funds for this project would affect any other funds that come to the City from DelDOT. In response, Mr. Koenig stated that this project would not affect other DelDOT funds. He indicated that each legislator receives approximately $250,000 in discretionary funds to be used for sidewalk, lighting, and paving projects and that associated agreements are project specific. Mr. Hare indicated that he had no problem with this project. He noted that there was a section of West Street near the recycling facility that needed work and questioned if this project could be tied together with the proposed project. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that this was a separate project which would be addressed through the City’s Street Program and assured members that staff would get this project done. Mr. Sudler moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation to authorize the City Manager to enter into a Community Transportation Fund (CTF) agreement with DelDOT, process the funding as a third-party sponsor, work with members of the Solid Rock Baptist Church or their designee to get the correct narrative language for the bid document, and complete the project in a timely manner. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare. In response to Mr. Hutchison as to whether the City had entered into a third-party sponsorship with any other entities, Mr. Koenig indicated that the City had completed a handful of similar projects which were not the norm but were somewhat unique

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 23 public/private partnerships. He cited projects related to Wesley College, the Inner City Cultural League, and a public easement agreement regarding a portion of the brickwork in front of the Wesley United Methodist Church Fellowship Hall. Mr. Hutchison inquired if this project had been reviewed by the City Solicitor. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that this specific project had not been reviewed by the solicitor; however, the Wesley College project did go through the solicitor’s office. He reiterated that an easement would be developed to indicate that it is a public parking lot and would be signed by the property owner, recorded, and a copy would go to DelDOT. The City would solicit and review paving proposals and, once the paving was laid, maintenance and any associated agreement would be the responsibility of the property owner. In response to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Koenig stated that a 20-year agreement would be developed in relation to this project that would be binding between all parties. Mr. Anderson stated that he favored this project because it would be an effective way to leverage private money and would cost the City only some staff time. He indicated that this would help the community in the very near future without putting the City’s taxpayers “on the hook” for maintenance, building, or anything else. Mr. Anderson noted that the money set aside by the State legislators, if not taken, could end up anywhere else in the legislative district, and he felt that this project would benefit the youth in the community. Mr. Shevock questioned if any of the associated costs, such as advertising for bids, would come from the $25,000 in CTF funds. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that advertising had not typically been charged to these funds in the past; however, expressed his understanding that this could be done, noting that all project costs that qualified under the agreement would qualify for reimbursement. Pastor William Grimes, Solid Rock Baptist Church, thanked members for the opportunity to bring this matter forward. He stated that he met for over an hour with Mr. Koenig and, as stated previously, Mr. Koenig was not initially in favor of the project. However, Pastor Grimes indicated that he left with the opinion “there is someone in the City Manager’s Office who is about integrity,” because Mr. Koenig’s whole focus was to ensure that this approach was legal. He expressed his appreciation that Mr. Koenig took the time to hear the concerns of the church. Mr. Anderson questioned how much money the church had invested in the project. Responding, Mr. Grimes stated that more than $50,000 of the church’s funds had been allocated and that a loan had been secured through the National Association on Life and Labor Research (NCALL) for $625,000. Mr. Slavin questioned, by show of hands, how many of those attending were in support of the project and 10 members in the audience raised their hands.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 24 The Committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation to authorize the City Manager to enter into a Community Transportation Fund (CTF) agreement with DelDOT, process the funding as a third-party sponsor, work with members of the Solid Rock Baptist Church or their designee to get the correct narrative language for the bid document, and complete the project in a timely manner. By consent agenda, Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the Committee's recommendation, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). By consent agenda, Mr. Slavin moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). SPECIAL DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION REPORT - SEPTEMBER 23, 2014 WORKSHOP A Special Dover Human Relations Commission (DHRC) Workshop was held on September 23, 2014 at 5:30 p.m. with Chairman Wilson presiding. Presentation - Dover Public Library Changing America Exhibit Steering Committee Volunteers Ms. Michelle Hughes, Head of Adult Services, Dover Public Library, advised members that the Dover Public Library would be presenting a traveling exhibit, entitled “Changing America - The Emancipation Proclamation, 1863 and the March on Washington, 1963,” from January 7 - February 20, 2015 and provided members with an informational brochure. She stated that, as a grant requirement, the library would offer an opening event and at least two (2) adult programs related to the exhibit free of charge to the community. Ms. Hughes invited members to volunteer to be part of a steering committee to develop public programs around the exhibit. She explained that the exhibit would focus on the 100-year span between the Emancipation Proclamation and the March on Washington. She indicated that she had a number of programs planned that would target the 19th century; however, she requested support on programs focused on the 20th century and asked members to email her if they had any suggestions. In response to Mr. McGiffin’s request for clarification of the specific needs, Ms. Hughes stated that several scholars had agreed to attend and speak on the abolitionist movement in the 19th century, but there were not as many who could focus on the 1950s and 1960s. If members knew of local scholars that could address this time period, she said that she would gladly take contact information. Mr. McGiffin inquired if a presentation on desegregation of the Delaware schools would be relevant, and Ms. Hughes affirmed that tying in local history would draw in more people. Mr. McGiffin stated that his wife, Ms. Kathy Doyle, was an expert on the school desegregation issue, had written a book on this topic, and might be inclined to assist.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 25 Mr. Henderson questioned if Ms. Hughes had contacted Delaware State University (DSU) history teachers. Responding, Ms. Hughes stated that staff had worked with DSU teachers on the “Created Equal” film series held from July - September 2014, so she had some contacts from DSU; however, she wanted to reach out to members for other contacts who were not used previously in order to obtain different perspectives. Ms. Hughes provided her email address and invited members who were interested in serving on the steering committee to contact her, noting that all final program paperwork must be submitted by the end of November. She explained that serving on the committee would involve helping to provide contact information for members of the community who might be willing to give their time to help with the project, including publicity and marketing. Presentation - Re-Entry Opportunity Program Mr. Ken Abraham advised members that he was involved in a non-profit group, Citizens for Criminal Justice, but was attending on behalf of the Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing (DIMH). Mr. Abraham explained that he was working with DIMH in a new program assisting men with re-entry into society upon their release from prison, noting that DIMH was the recipient of a three (3) year grant for this purpose. He advised members that he had provided a presentation on this topic to City Council during their meeting held on September 8, 2014. He had requested Council to make a commitment to set an official policy to interview individuals who had been screened by DIMH for appropriate employment opportunities with the City, or to issue a proclamation or statement affirming that the City supported the hiring of qualified convicted felons for appropriate jobs. Mr. Abraham requested that the DHRC recommend that the City respond positively to this request. He also expressed his hope that the City would provide a letter to DIMH, signed by the Mayor, Council, and/or the DHRC Commissioners, to be presented to local major employers, stating that they and other members of the community were encouraged to hire qualified job applicants who may be convicted felons. Mr. Abraham expressed confidence that this would be a win/win situation for those who had made mistakes but paid their dues and for those who employ them in terms of getting good, qualified, responsible employees. Mr. Wilson stated that, as a Commissioner, he believed in this initiative and that he was glad to see that community support was being offered. He indicated that he, personally, would approve of recommending it to Council; however, his biggest concern was making sure that safeguards were there for the public. Mr. Henderson complimented Mr. Abraham on the “great” presentation that he provided previously to City Council and questioned if he could provide an example of a success story. Responding, Mr. Abraham stated that one (1) participant was working as a chef at Dover Downs and offered to follow up with other examples.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 26 Mr. Henderson inquired whether the individuals involved were heavily minority, and Mr. Abraham stated this was the case since the prison population was heavily minority; however, individuals were from every background. Responding to Mr. Wilson as to whether individuals involved were from the local community, Mr. Abraham stated that most were local and others came from Sussex and New Castle Counties, as well as Maryland. Mr. Ruane stated that he had researched House Bill 167, the so-called “ban the box” legislation which would prohibit public employers from asking applicants to indicate, typically by checking a box on an employment application, if they have been convicted of a crime until after an initial interview. Mr. Abraham felt that this legislation was “progress but very little,” stating his understanding that it would apply only to government entities and not private employers. In addition, it was his belief that the ban the box requirement would apply only to the initial employment inquiry. Noting that he had reviewed the City of Dover job application and that it did not include such a check box, Mr. Ruane felt that it appeared that the City of Dover had no choice but to give fair and equal opportunity and questioned, therefore, what would be gained from a supportive letter. He inquired if DIMH had spoken to the City of Dover Human Resources Department and whether the City was utilizing any practices that were detrimental to the clients being served by DIMH. Mr. Abraham stated that there were no such detrimental practices to his knowledge and that DIMH had steered individuals toward jobs with the City. He felt that the City’s relationship with DIMH was “good but could be a lot better” and reiterated his hope of obtaining a commitment from the City to interview qualified, responsible, dependable applicants after screening for technical or other job skills. Mr. Ruane stated that he agreed with the intent of the program and hoped for its success; however, that employers, including the City, were bound by other processes, including qualifying applicants before an interview. He stated that ensuring that a particular group would be granted interviews might result in challenges related to discrimination against other qualified applicants. Mr. Abraham explained that it was not desired that undue favoritism be given to these individuals and stated his expectation that they would go through the normal process. Mr. Nicholas Rodriguez, City Solicitor, stated that Dover had a city manager/council form of government and the City Manager was responsible for overseeing employment in the City; therefore, he felt that this matter would be up to the City Manager. Mr. Rodriguez advised members that he was not familiar with the City’s application process. He indicated that Mr. Abraham had given a very good presentation before Council and that he had told Mr. Abraham that perhaps feedback would be received from the City and staff regarding applications.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 27 Mr. Wilson expressed thanks to Mr. Abraham for his presentation. Discussion - DHRC Authority and Complaint Process/Formulation of Complaint Process and Form Mr. Nicholas Rodriguez, City Solicitor, advised members that Chapter 58 - Human Relations, Article II - Human Relations Commission, Sec. 58-32 states that the DHRC is an advisory commission rather than a decision-making commission. He indicated that, in the past, complaints had been submitted to the DHRC, and the Solicitor’s Office had stated that the DHRC should not hear such complaints because it is an advisory body that, in his opinion, was “way beyond the application and complaint process.” Mr. Rodriguez advised members that Sec. 58-33(e) Functions limited, of the Dover Code states that “the Commission shall not involve itself in activities or functions already assigned by law or decree to other governmental bodies,” such as the Department of Labor, the City, and the State. He indicated that the purpose of the Commission was to advise Council, obtain community input, discuss diversity and discrimination, and make recommendations. Simple complaints, in his opinion, were below the role of the Commission. Mr. Wilson questioned if the DHRC had the authority to develop a complaint form of any nature. Mr. Rodriguez recommended that a complaint form not be developed because this would result in the receipt of individual complaints that the DHRC could not hear, as had occurred in the past. He stated that he had reviewed the Draft DHRC Strategic Plan 2015-2018 prepared by Mr. Ruane (subsequent agenda item) which he felt looked “fantastic” and that this type of activity was what the City of Dover had wanted the Commission to do when it was enacted. Commissioner Gail Launay-Tarlecki, Vice Chair, State of Delaware Human Relations Commission (SHRC), advised members that the SHRC’s website states that the Commission strives to “promote amicable relationships among the various racial and cultural groups within the State of Delaware” and that the DHRC would attempt to perform this function within the City of Dover. She indicated that not having jurisdiction would not prevent complaints from coming before the DHRC so that the DHRC could look for avenues to assist people. It was her belief that a complaint process would be a legitimate method for logging issues and bringing them to the Commission to discuss and work on as a whole; however, she cautioned members to be careful regarding how such complaint forms are viewed, indicating that she did not have the impression that the DHRC was a hearing body. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki advised members that individuals bring concerns to the SHRC, sometimes repetitively, and although the SHRC does not have jurisdiction over some types of issues, they serve as a point of reference and note on the complaint form that an individual was referred to the appropriate place. This gives the appearance that the SHRC is an active, viable body that is doing work for the community. She questioned if Mr. Rodriguez was referring to legal complaints.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 28 Mr. Rodriguez stated that he was referencing individual complaints, as opposed to those brought forward from groups. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki explained that there was precedent in other cities for human relations commissions to have a complaint process that is not necessarily to hear cases, noting that the City of Philadelphia’s commission has such a complaint process and their commission sits under their state commission. Mr. McGiffin felt that the existence of a complaint form and acceptance of the form by the DHRC would imply that the Commission could offer some kind of redress, and stated that Mr. Rodriguez had indicated that this was not to be done. He agreed with the City Solicitor that the complaint form could be more trouble than it would be worth since it would suggest a promise that the DHRC could not deliver. However, Mr. McGiffin felt it would be a legitimate and valid function to be open to general information issues, not formal complaints that come to the DHRC’s attention, if the DHRC wanted to be an information and referral source. Mr. Henderson expressed confusion about the role and responsibilities of the DHRC. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki stated that a complaint form would allow members to learn why someone would be coming before the Commission before they do so, which would provide time to consider the issue so that it could be referred to the appropriate body. This referral could then be noted on the complaint form, even if the matter was out of the Commission’s jurisdiction. The complaint form would be an “action document” that showed the work of the Commission. She felt that this would be a way for the Commission to review issues to see if there is a way to provide amicable relations within the City. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki stated that she was not familiar with the DHRC’s empowering legislation; however, she indicated that State commissioners regularly receive such complaints and, through experience and the diversity within the SHRC, offer help, usually including a name and phone number of an appropriate agency. This information is recorded on the State form. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki stated that the SHRC had a sunset review by the General Assembly approximately a dozen years ago and, in the course of this review, the forms proved useful as a way of keeping a record of the SHRC’s activities and tracking issues. Mr. Wilson suggested that a draft DHRC complaint form be developed and submitted to the City Solicitor to determine if it would be legal and binding for the City. He stated his understanding that the form would help the public understand the identity of the DHRC and would validate the Commission’s existence, as well as the two (2) commissioners in each district who would be receiving complaints. He felt that it was necessary to have an avenue for complaints, even if it this would be just for referral to the State or other agencies that could provide help. Mr. Rodriguez stated that he did not recommend a complaint form, because this would lead to individual complaints, as had been received in the past, which would be referred to the City Solicitor, who would tell the Commission that it did not have

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 29 jurisdiction because the DHRC is an advisory body. By referring individuals elsewhere, perhaps suggesting a private attorney or the State, the DHRC would be giving advice, and this could create problems. He reiterated his opinion that the DHRC should not have a complaint process, noting that it had not worked in the past, and that the role of the DHRC was to go out into the community to find out where problems were occurring. Mr. Wilson suggested that this issue be further explored and that the DHRC develop a recommendation regarding the complaint process for City Council during the DHRC meeting scheduled for October 28, 2014. He questioned if the functions that the DHRC could and could not perform were already legally in place, and Mr. Rodriguez confirmed that this was the case. Mr. Rodriguez stated that he respectfully disagreed with the State, noting that the State had much more authority than the DHRC and it was his opinion that the DHRC was not created for the purpose of receiving and responding to individual complaints. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki stated that she had not seen the DHRC’s enabling documents; however, she questioned how members would record what they were hearing as the “ears” of their districts, what would be the point of hearing it, and what was desired to occur as a result. She stated her opinion that this is what the form should reflect. Mr. Rodriguez expressed his opinion that Commissioners would receive verbal complaints, and if individual commissioners received written complaints, Chairman Wilson would bring them before the Commission. He stated that it was desired to move the DHRC away from individual complaints that they have no jurisdiction over. Mr. Ruane concurred with Mr. Rodriguez that complaint forms should not be developed and the DHRC should not deal with individual discrimination cases. He noted that one (1) of the long-term objectives stated in the draft DHRC Strategic Plan 2015-2018 (subsequent agenda item) was “to define when a diversity, inclusion and or a human relations issue exists and specify the types of these issues that will be accepted by the Commission” and then develop a process for acceptance, which he stated may or may not include a form. He explained that the DHRC’s first responsibility was to make sure that the City of Dover administration, government, and Council were favoring and promoting diversity, had policies and programs that reflect that diversity, and did not have a practice, service, or program that had systemically become a human relations issue. If a form were needed to document issues, he felt that it would be a DHRC diversity issue statement and the DHRC would then make a recommendation to City Council to change this program. Mr. Ruane stated that once the focus was on diversity, the Commission would be considering much broader issues than anti-discrimination complaints. He indicated that the first focus would be on the City; then on engaging the community to try to get the same sense of diversity, openness, and inclusiveness in other places in the City; and then supporting and engaging with other groups that are trying to do the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 30 same thing, such as the Hispanic Council, and Inner-City Cultural League, and the Dover Public Library. He felt that there were great challenges in determining the status of diversity of the City of Dover, beginning with programs and government. Mr. Wilson mentioned that the City was in the process of distributing a Recreational Needs Assessment survey that may be a matter for consideration. Mr. Wilson thanked Mr. Rodriguez for attending. Mr. Rodriguez expressed concurrence with Mr. Ruane’s comments, stating that they articulated the purpose of the DHRC in his opinion. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki stated that she was not saying that the DHRC would have a court and hear cases; however, she stated that within the function of the Commission, a form or process for keeping track would be the right answer, reiterating that she was not familiar with the DHRC empowering laws. Mr. Ruane questioned if the State’s compliant form could be provided by the City; for example, if the City Clerk’s Office could be empowered to refer an individual with an employment discrimination complaint to the SHRC and provide an SHRC form without giving advice. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki stated that a SHRC business card could be provided and that the State’s complaint form was available online. Mr. Wilson stated that, in this event, he would like to meet with the City Clerk and make sure that the Clerk’s Office was on the same page as the DHRC and the Council President. Mr. McGiffin stated that Mr. Rodriguez had recommended against the DHRC providing information and referral, because by doing so the Commission would be accepting responsibility for sending people to the correct entity. He indicated that the City Solicitor had suggested that if the City Clerk’s Office were instructed by the DHRC to provide a complaint form but gave the wrong type of referral, this could cause problems. Mr. McGiffin stated that if the DHRC decided to provide information and referral, this would be decided knowing that Mr. Rodriguez would have an issue with it. Mr. Ruane withdrew his suggestion to provide referral in view of the legal advice provided. Mr. Wilson suggested that members come forward with their ideas regarding complaint forms at the meeting scheduled for October 28, 2014 and that a decision would be made at that time. He reminded members that the City Solicitor had spoken; however, members could discuss documenting Commission actions, as suggested by Ms. Launay-Tarlecki, and determine what could be developed that was in line with the City’s Solicitor’s recommendation.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 31 Mr. Henderson questioned where notes regarding complaints in the community should be referred, if the DHRC could not develop a form and did not have jurisdiction. Responding, Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, stated that when members take such notes and report comments and issues to the Commission in terms of City programs that the DHRC needs to look at, this would be reflected in the meeting minutes, which are the permanent, formal record on these matters. Review of Draft DHRC 2015-2018 Strategic Plan Mr. Ruane stated that developing the identity and function of the DHRC had been a problem for a long time and suggested that this be settled. He reviewed the Draft DHRC Strategic Plan 2015-2018 and requested that members agree to a mission statement and add to or subtract from the objectives included, emphasizing that the document was a draft. Mr. Ruane advised members that the start year for the Draft Plan was stated as 2015 to allow time to establish the plan and suggested that three (3) year, long-term strategic objectives be organized around the components of the DHRC’s mission, noting that performance measures or short-term action steps were not included at this time. Once objectives were agreed upon, he suggested that three (3) commissioners and/or citizens help flesh out each objective. Mr. Ruane explained that he had taken information from the DHRC legislation and placed it in three (3) concise mission components, as follows: 1. Work to ensure that the City of Dover has and utilizes policies, programs, ordinances, organizational practices, specialized resources and appropriately trained employees to support diversity, inclusiveness and cultural competency in its organization and services. 2. By involving all segments of the community, the Commission promotes an understanding and appreciation of the benefits of diversity, inclusion, and positive intergroup relations among residents of varying backgrounds in the city; and, advocates for an environment of fairness and respect. 3. Works with the City Council and the City Administration and other community organizations to strengthen inter-group relationships and to eliminate discrimination; and, to anticipate, prepare for and resolve incidents of intergroup conflicts and disputes within the city. Referring to the first mission component, Mr. Ruane stated that an example of this function would be for the DHRC to determine if the City’s recreation program is diverse.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 32 In reference to the third mission component, Mr. Ruane stated that incidents that had recently transpired in Ferguson, Missouri showed the need to have a plan in place for dealing with conflict at the neighborhood or City level. He proposed that the DHRC determine what type of role it would have in the case of community conflict, noting that training and experience would be necessary for Commissioners to serve in this role. Mr. Ruane suggested that the major goals of the DHRC be organized around its mission statement and reviewed the proposed vision statement, affirming that, “The Commission’s vision is a city whose government, organizations, groups and individual citizens value diversity, inclusion, respect and trust.” He recommended dividing members into four (4) committees, as follows: 1) Government Policy, Programs, and Practices Committee; 2) Community Engagement Committee; 3) Education Committee; and 4) Communications Committee. Mr. Ruane proposed that committee members meet and bring specifics, such as timetables and measurement tools for objectives, to the Commission. Mr. Wilson suggested that two (2) DHRC members serve on each of the committees and that the at-large commissioner and the DHRC Chair rotate among committees if desired. He requested that members review the committees and decide on which committee they would like to serve, noting that they could serve on more than one if they chose to. He stated that he had reviewed the plan, as well as the City’s related ordinances and code, and compared it with other cities and that Mr. Ruane had done extensive work on this. Mr. McGiffin noted that Mr. Ruane had done a great deal of work on the plan, to the DHRC’s benefit, and thanked him for his efforts. Ms. Smith stated that it was evident that Mr. Ruane had put a great deal of time and energy into the Draft Strategic Plan. Mr. Ruane stated his understanding that committees could assemble before the October 28, 2014 meeting, which could then be dedicated to hearing preliminary specifics on how the larger objectives could be realized during the three (3) year period. The Commission recommended adoption of the City of Dover Human Relations Commission Strategic Plan 2015-2018. By consent agenda, the City of Dover Human Relations Commission Strategic Plan 2015-2018 (Exhibit #2) was adopted by motion of Mr. Slavin, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). Mr. Wilson felt that holding meetings of the DHRC on a quarterly basis would not be often enough to accomplish what must be done, noting that the Commission had recently held additional special meetings.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 33 Referring to Exhibit #1 to the Draft DHRC Strategic Plan 2015-2018, Definition for Diversity CUNY Queensborough in New York City, Mr. Ruane pointed out that the section entitled, “A diversity issue exists when,” provided some language that might help members understand when the Commission would be activated. He explained that a diversity issue would not apply in an individual case; however, if a policy, business practice, or service had a different impact on a particular group in the City, the DHRC would go into action. Mr. Ruane stated that the DHRC goes beyond the individual and strives to change the system, based on an analysis of current practices and the development of better practices. If something on the street helps to educate a commissioner, this could be brought to the table when a particular program is being discussed. Ms. Smith stated her experience that complaints typically start with one (1) person and can lead a group to follow that individual, referencing the individual who was shot in Ferguson, Missouri, and questioned at what point the DHRC should become involved. In addition, she stated that the perception of a diversity issue may differ from one (1) person to another based on their varying experiences and questioned, as a commissioner, whether this determination should be based on the commissioner’s perceptions or those of the people being served. Mr. Henderson felt that all diversity issues start with an individual and expressed his fear that if an overly analytical approach were taken, the DHRC would end up “running after the problem trying to solve it.” He felt that the Commission must be proactive. Mr. McGiffin stated that Mr. Ruane had designed a strategic plan that would allow the DHRC to determine ahead of time whether the potential for an incident like Ferguson existed in Dover so that the Commission could encourage the City to address whatever “tinder was out there that might give rise to a Ferguson blaze before it goes on fire;” therefore, this type of action would be inherently proactive. However, the DHRC would only become aware of potential problems by hearing from the community. He indicated that if City policies were reviewed by the Government Policy, Programs, and Practices Committee and determined to be inadequate, then members would improve them so the City would be prepared should that situation arise. The DHRC would have done its job by advising the City that this was a potential problem and providing ideas on how to solve it. Mr. Wilson advised members that they would hear things in their communities and would be able to execute actions and advise Council on what to do. He recalled that during one (1) of his meetings with two (2) of the DHRC Commissioners and two (2) Council representatives, a Commissioner stated that they had never seen the Council members in the City districts before. Mr. Wilson asked members to consider how difficult it would be to obtain conflict resolution without a strategic plan, such as the one developed by Mr. Ruane, and if the entities involved did not know one another, it would result in a disservice to the entire City. Mr. Wilson stated his understanding that the City would be reviewing the 1988 Consent Decree that resulted from the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 34 NAACP vs. the City of Dover lawsuit, noting that the City was considering changing its existing type of government and that some would be in favor and others would not. He stated that developing a strategic plan would allow the DHRC to be structured in such a way that the elected officials could be involved in decision making that would advance everyone in the City. Mr. Wilson stated that the Strategic Plan would be on the agenda for October 28, 2014 for further discussion, and that he wished to hear from the State on the plan as well. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki stated that she had read the Draft Strategic Plan cursorily and that a lot of good work went into it. She still felt that members might find use for some type of form, although it might not be the complaint form initially envisioned. She thought that the form might convey information in addition to what was stated in the minutes, provide a way to communicate with and obtain contact information for individuals who approach members on the street with issues, and be helpful in recording and reporting. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki felt that the Strategic Plan was “fantastic” and expressed pride in the DHRC for moving quickly to adopt it. She stated that the SHRC had access to training resources through the University of Delaware conflict resolution and public policy programs, which provided education on mediation, negotiation, and hostages and terrorism. She indicated that these resources may be available to the DHRC members. Ms. Launay-Tarlecki felt that the DHRC Strategic Plan 2015-2018 would provide a good foundation for the Commission. Mr. Ruane questioned if Mr. Wilson intended for members to sign up for a particular committee and meet before the October meeting and provide a report. Responding, Mr. Wilson inquired if members had made choices in terms of committee assignments. The Commission recommended committee assignments, as follows: 1) Government Policies, Programs, and Practices Committee - Mr. Ruane (Chair) and Mr. McGiffin; 2) Community Engagement - Mr. Roach (Chair) and Ms. Hicks; 3) Education Committee - Mr. Henderson (Chair) and Mrs. Sadusky; and 4) Communications Committee - Ms. Smith (Chair) and Ms. Stewart. By consent agenda, Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the Commission’s recommendation, seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). Mr. Wilson stated that he would serve on all committees and help them as best he could. He advised members that it would be up to the committee chairs to decide when to meet prior to October 28, 2014 and requested that the City Clerk be informed so that emails could be sent regarding the date, time, and place.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 35 Commission Members’ Announcements Mr. Wilson reminded members that Diversity, Respect & Harassment Awareness Training for City of Dover employees was available on October 7, 2014 8:30 a.m. - 9:30 a.m.; 10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. and October 14, 2014 8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. Mr. Ruane advised members that a Hispanic Heritage Celebration was scheduled for October 4, 2014 from 10:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. and would conclude with a concert at the Schwartz Center for the Performing Arts at 4:00 p.m. He indicated that the Community Engagement Committee might want to touch base and partner with this group and perhaps the DHRC could partner in putting on this event in the future. UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - OCTOBER 13, 2014 The Utility Committee met on October 13, 2014 with Chairwoman Williams presiding. (Except for the following time sensitive issue, the Utility Committee Report of October 13, 2014 will be presented to Council during their Regular Meeting of October 27, 2014 for review and consideration.) Dedication of Rights-of-Way and Public Infrastructure - Village of Cannon Mill (Phases I, II, III, and IV) The Utility Committee met on October 13, 2014 with Chairwoman Williams presiding. Except for the following time sensitive item, the Committee Report from October 13, 2014 will be presented to Council during their Regular Meeting of October 27, 2014 for review and recommendation. Staff submitted a request that all public infrastructure improvements related to the Village of Cannon Mill (Phases I, II, III, and IV) be dedicated to the City of Dover for permanent ownership and maintenance. Members reviewed a list of the public improvements associated with each phase of the development, as well as a map showing the general location and configuration of the subject rights-of-way, broken into phases. The total construction value of the public improvements was $2,602,919. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, indicated that the original developer of the Village of Cannon Mill filed for bankruptcy, which resulted in work stoppage within the subdivision. The final wearing course and punch list items remained to be completed to meet the City of Dover standards and specifications for Public Works construction and had been outstanding for many years. He assured members that the City was prepared to complete the work required, pending rights-of-way and public infrastructure dedication, as well as acceptance of a paving improvements bid by City Council. Mr. Koenig reminded members that in 2013, staff had submitted a request for the dedication of a portion of the Village of Cannon Mill. It was his recollection that, although the Committee recommended acceptance, when the matter was presented to City Council for approval there were concerns regarding bonding and a failed letter of credit that needed to be addressed. As a result, the dedication was deferred. At

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 36 this time, he stated that staff was requesting the dedication of the entire subdivision’s incomplete infrastructure, explaining that the City had been working with legislators to secure funding from the Community Transportation Fund (CTF). Mr. Koenig informed members that Mr. Tony Ashburn, Ashburn Homes, Inc., and Artisans’ Bank had pledged funds, either through a letter of credit or letter of commitment, to complete the infrastructure in portions of the development in Phases III and IV; however, Mr. Koenig stated that the City had not been successful with action related to the original letter of credit with the First National Bank of Wyoming. He stated that the City had submitted a bank draft on the letter of credit and there was related correspondence between the attorneys. He noted that there had been several developers since the original developer, Moore Cannon Mill, and that the City did not secure the correct letters of credit to ensure that the protections would carry forward. As a result, the City was currently in the process of completing approximately $800,000 worth of infrastructure in the Village of Cannon Mill and, in order to obtain funding from the State CTF, the City needs to accept the dedication of the infrastructure and sign agreements to complete the infrastructure. Mr. Koenig stated that there was currently a gap of approximately $300,000 between what is necessary to complete all infrastructure and the funding available associated with the complete paving and concrete finishing for the development. Staff recommended acceptance of the dedication of rights-of-way and public infrastructure of the Village of Cannon Mill Subdivision, with the dedication to include all of the referenced public improvements. Mr. Koenig advised members that during the City Council meeting scheduled for later in the evening, members would consider a request for approval of a construction contract that would allow approximately $824,000 of work to complete the rights-of-way and public infrastructure. He explained that the caveat on the bids was that the City would complete only the work which could be done with the funds the City has available. Rather than utilizing City funds, he stated it may be necessary to delay some of the paving until additional CTF funding becomes available from the State. Mr. Koenig noted that approximately $550,000 in non-City funding was available for the project. Since some funding agreements were coming in under budget, he stated that it was the City’s intention to move those excess monies, provided the State legislators agree to the project. However, Mr. Koenig expressed the need to first accept the dedication of rights-of-way and public infrastructure of the Village of Cannon Mill Subdivision. He advised members that the subdivision was originally proposed to consist of 375 units and 250-275 units had been constructed, explaining that some residents had lived there since 2005, 2006, 2007, etc. Mr. Koenig explained the difficulty in providing services (snow removal, street sweeping, etc.) since the roads had not been completed. Responding to Mr. Perza, Mr. Koenig stated that the total value of all infrastructure was $2.6M; however, the only financial risk the City would have if funding were not received from the State would be the costs of paving the roadways, in the amount of $825,000. He explained that the City had received commitment letters from the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 37 legislators and letters of credit totaling $540,000; therefore, the maximum exposure for the City would be $285,000. However, he stated that the City would only complete the work for which the City had obtained funding and then return to legislators to request additional funds during their next funding of CTF projects. Although legislators are provided CTF funds on July 1st of each year, they do not always use all available funding. Mr. Koenig noted that Representative Darryl Scott had committed a large portion of the required funding, in the amount of $250,000, for this project; Senator Brian Bushweller had committed up to $65,000; and Senator Colin Bonini had committed approximately $5,000. Mr. Koenig stated that there may be additional funding available as a result of other agreements coming in under budget between the current time and when the work is actually completed. In response to Mrs. Williams’ question regarding why the letter of credit was not secured, Mr. Koenig explained that typical letters of credit are “evergreen”, renewing automatically unless returned by the City. In this instance, the original developer, Moore Cannon Mill, obtained a one (1) year letter of credit from the First National Bank of Wyoming which was very specific in the funding language that it would only be active for one (1) year. In addition, Mr. Koenig stated that Moore Cannon Mill sold the development to another LLC that was associated with the Robino Corporation. As a result, the City did not check the expiration date of the letter of credit since they typically automatically renew until given back. Therefore, although the City had the original letter of credit, it had an expiration date, and no additional letter of credit was provided for the project. Responding to additional questions of Mrs. Williams, Mr. Koenig stated that the new developer had made promises to complete the infrastructure and request the dedication by the City. However, when the economy declined, there were three (3) developments (Village of Westover, Nottingham Meadows, and Village of Cannon Mill) whose developers claimed bankruptcy. The Village of Cannon Mill was the only development for which the City was not provided protective documentation. He stated that the letter of credit provided to the City was issued by the First National Bank of Wyoming and was unfamiliar to staff, explaining that all other letters of credit were received from Wilmington Trust and had a very specific format that is familiar to staff. Mr. Koenig stated that, as a result, staff made an error in this regard and he took full responsibility for this oversight. He stated that the developers who currently hold property in the development, Artisans’ Bank and Mr. Ashburn, had committed funds to pave the roadway in front of their properties and that approximately $95,000 of the $540,000 related to these properties. Mr. Koenig stated that if the City were unable to obtain the $825,000 necessary to complete the projects and had only $540,000, it would leave approximately one quarter of the paving work incomplete until additional funds could be obtained. He advised members that the extension of Tribbett Street was currently under construction in association with the construction of Leander Lakes Apartments and that there had been several complaints and concerns regarding that connection opening, which was a condition of the Planning Commission approval of the construction of the new Dover High School. He noted that the legislators had quietly

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 38 questioned if the opening of this interconnection was best and he explained that any change would require approval from the Planning Commission. Mr. Koenig stated that, although there had been concerns with the possibility of a lot of “cut through” traffic in the Village of Cannon Mill, there had been no test done to make this determination. Mrs. Williams suggested, if the City does not obtain the necessary funds to complete Phase IV of the development, that the service road be closed to traffic until all roadways have been completed. Responding, Mr. Koenig felt that this was a matter that could be discussed in the future. The Committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation for the acceptance of the dedication of rights-of-way and public infrastructure for the Village of Cannon Mill, to include all of the referenced public improvements, and contingent upon the City obtaining third-party matching funds, as described by staff, being lines of credit and grants from the Community Transportation Fund; there being the understanding that if it becomes necessary at some point in the future, City Council can remove the contingency. During the City Council meeting, Mrs. Williams advised members that there were several sources of funding for this project and stressed the need to ensure that it did not affect the General Fund. Mrs. Williams moved for acceptance of the dedication of rights-of-way and public infrastructure for the Village of Cannon Mill, to include all of the referenced public improvements, and contingent upon the City obtaining third-party matching funds, as described by staff, being lines of credit and grants from the Community Transportation Fund; there being the understanding that if it becomes necessary at some point in the future, City Council can remove the contingency. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). Mrs. Williams moved for acceptance of the Utility Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Slavin and unanimously carried. MONTHLY REPORTS - AUGUST 2014 By motion of Mr. Slavin, seconded by Mrs. Williams, the following monthly reports were accepted by consent agenda: City Assessor's Report City Manager's Report City Planner's Report Controller/Treasurer's Budget Report (July and August) Economic Development Office Report Fire Chief's Report Police Chief's Report

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 39 EVALUATION OF BIDS - VILLAGE OF CANNON MILL PAVING IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised members that the original developer of the Village of Cannon Mill had filed for bankruptcy, which resulted in work stoppage within the subdivision. The final wearing course and punch list items remained to be completed to meet the City of Dover Standards and Specifications for Public Works Construction and had been outstanding for many years. As such, the current infrastructure within the subdivision was in disrepair. City Council accepted the Dedication of Rights-of-Way and Public Infrastructure for the Village of Cannon Mill earlier in the evening and the City was in the process of obtaining the funds to correct the infrastructure deficiencies by way of community transportation funds and bonds. Mr. Koenig advised members that staff had been working for more than a year on trying to get several of the unfinished developments through the process. Staff completed a detailed estimate of all four (4) phases of the Village of Cannon Mill for the bid package. Bids were received from George & Lynch, Inc., Daisy Construction, and A-Del Construction. Based on the evaluation of bids, George & Lynch, Inc., was the lowest responsive bidder at $824,740. This would be a unit price contract to complete the paving and miscellaneous concrete work. The available funding, as of October 2, 2014, was $540,069. It was proposed to award a unit price contract based on the bid documents and to allow staff to adjust unit prices up to the level available funding; therefore, if additional funding were secured, the City would be allowed to add to this up to the lowest bid of $824,740.75. If unable to secure this funding, work would be performed up to the funding secured and staff would return to this project at a later date, through Community Transportation Funds or some other source of funds, so that the General Fund would not subsidize this work. Staff recommended awarding a unit price contract, based on Bid #15-001PW, for the Village of Cannon Mill Paving Improvement Project to George & Lynch, In. The Public Works Director may add or delete from the contract, up to 35% based on available funding throughout the contract period and inform the City Manager of such additions and deletions. All work will be paid for at the unit prices bid for work completed and accepted by the City of Dover. Work to be authorized will not exceed available funding. Mr. Lynn stated his recollection that Council had directed that the letter of credit be called from the Village of Cannon Mill or Village of Westover from the First National Bank of Wyoming, now Wilmington Savings Fund Society, and stated that he had not received an update on this. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that there were two (2) separate letters of credit for these developments and the City had called a letter of credit with the Village of Westover and completed the work. Some funding was still available and would be used in Village of Cannon Mill. In the Village of Cannon Mill, an initial letter of credit was provided from the First National Bank of Wyoming which covered only Phases I and II; however, an expiration clause was included, which was not typical of other such letters of credit. When staff called the letter of credit, the attorney for the First National Bank of Wyoming indicated that they had notified the City of the expiration of the letter of credit. Mr. Koenig explained that this was sent certified versus registered mail, which became an issue. Mr. William Pepper, Deputy City Solicitor, asked staff to obtain hard numbers on all the bids, which was done in August of 2014; however, Mr. Pepper felt that too much time had lapsed and the distinction between registered and certified mail was not strong enough to initiate any proceeding beyond the transfer of correspondence.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 40 Mr. Lynn stated that this matter had not returned to Council after Council gave instructions to call the letter of credit, noting that this was not criticism of Mr. Koenig. He indicated that this matter had been discussed on the floor by himself, Mr. Perza, and others who knew the difference between registered and certified mail, and instructions were given to Mr. Pepper to file a lawsuit or do what needed to be done to ensure that this money would not come out of taxpayer pockets but from the bank. Mr. Lynn indicated that it was vexing to hear a year or two (2) later that Council’s instructions were not followed. Mr. Koenig stated that he understood Mr. Lynn’s frustration, however, unfortunately, his personal opinion was that he had made a mistake regarding this letter of credit, which would not happen again because staff had refined the process. He stated that 250 plus residents had been dealing with a difficult situation in this development since approximately 2009 and the legislators had been assisting staff with trying to get out of this problem. Staff was trying to finish the development and had been receiving complaints for the last three (3) years about not being able to provide service to the residents because the roads were unfinished and there were difficulties during the winter months. Mr. Koenig and Mrs. Townshend had talked to various people in regard to getting the homeowners association up and running so that the community could be brought back to where it needed to be so that property values could begin accelerating again versus declining. Mr. Koenig stated that this was the one (1) development where staff did not “have a good grip” on the letter of credit; however, the City was fortunate in that, to his recollection, when Council originally considered this matter a couple of years ago, exposure to the City at that time consisted of the Village of Westover Phase VI, Clearview Meadow, the Village of Cannon Mill, and Eden Hill. Since that time, the City had finished the Village of Westover, a developer had completed all of the work in Clearview Meadow for the City, and the City had an active letter of credit from a developer for Eden Hill. Mr. Lynn stated his opinion that it was not necessary for Mr. Koenig to take blame, indicating that Council knew many of the facts that he discussed and instructed staff to pursue the matter with the First National Bank of Wyoming and questioned why this did not occur. Mr. Koenig stated that after this meeting, a call letter on the letter of credit was sent. The attorney for First National Bank of Wyoming responded to Mr. Koenig and Mr. Pepper. Mr. Pepper requested additional cost estimates, which took quite a long time due to staff availability. When these were obtained earlier this summer, Mr. Pepper felt that the timeframe between the original action and now was substantial. The corporate entity had dissolved or had been transferred from First National Bank of Wyoming to Wilmington Savings Fund Society (WSFS) and it was believed that the issue of registered versus certified mail was not a very strong argument. Mr. Lynn stated that WSFS was the successor in interest to First National Bank of Wyoming and, therefore, beholden to their obligations. He expressed unhappiness that this was not done and did not feel that these decisions could be made behind closed doors without returning to Council to weigh in when Council specifically gave orders to pursue the matter with the bank. Mr. Lynn’s interpretation of that was that the bank should be sued and he was unhappy that this was not done, noting that cases had been won and lost on the distinction between registered and certified mail. Mr. Koenig stated that he was unsure if the City would be barred from doing the work and still filing an action.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 41 Mr. Perza expressed his opinion that Mr. Lynn’s points were all accurate and important in that there may be liabilities that had not yet been resolved; however, the needs of the community were being balanced on a local level. The residents of Cannon Mill and other developments in the area did not care what was happening with the bond, knowing that winter was coming with snow, other complications related to the new high school in the area, and traffic and did not want to be “held hostage” in this matter. Mr. Perza stated that Utility Committee went out of its way to ensure that the City would not be left “holding the bag” if something went wrong. The motions coming out of the Committee were all contingent upon making sure that parties other than City of Dover taxpayers would be supplying the funds to correct the problem, which would be a short-term fix. Mr. Perza did not believe that moving forward would close the book on looking at some of the old lines of credit and banks who defaulted on obligations in order to help the local community; however, for purposes of assisting the local community, he felt that the City had an interest in wrapping up this situation. Mr. Perza was comfortable moving forward as long as the City taxpayers were protected and the City reserved the right to examine whether the City could effectively have the State taxpayers reimburse for this, which is where much of the money would come from. He also stated that he was willing to address the legal issues that Mr. Lynn had mentioned with counsel. Mrs. Williams questioned whether the cost of litigation had been discussed with Mr. Pepper. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the cost of litigation had not been mentioned or determined; therefore, this had not been considered to be a deterrent to proceeding. Responding to Mr. Bonar regarding whether the funds that were expected from legislators were Community Transportation Funds, Mr. Koenig stated that there were several sources of funding, including approximately $320,000 in CTF funds, management fees associated with called letters of credit from other developments, and some partial letters of credit for Phases III and IV that the City did not have previously from both Artisan’s Bank (commitment letter) and from developer Tony Ashburn for some lots in Phase III or IV, noting that the banks had acquired these lots and were attempting to develop them now. Responding to Mr. Bonar’s concerns regarding the expected time frame for completion of the project in view of the impending winter, Mr. Koenig stated that he was hopeful that George & Lynch, Inc. could mobilize quickly and staff had been talking to them about beginning immediately; therefore, it was expected that at least a portion of the work would be completed before winter sets in. Mrs. Williams moved to award a unit price contract, based on Bid #15-001PW, for the Village of Cannon Mill Paving Improvement Project to George & Lynch, Inc. The Public Works Director may add or delete from the contract, up to 35% based on available funding throughout the contract period and inform the City Manager of such additions and deletions. All work will be paid for at the unit prices bid for work completed and accepted by the City of Dover. Work to be authorized will not exceed available funding. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dixon and unanimously carried (Hare absent). Mr. Lynn moved to seek compensation from the First National Bank of Wyoming or its successors in interest relative to the letter of credit that they issued on this project, seconded by Mrs. Williams.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 42 Mr. Perza questioned whether it was the intent to defer to legal counsel on this matter or whether Council was directing legal counsel to do this. Mr. Lynn stated his understanding that counsel had previously been directed to do so. The motion to seek compensation from the First National Bank of Wyoming or its successors in interest relative to the letter of credit that they issued on this project was carried by a roll call vote of seven (7) yes (Anderson, Dixon, Lynn, Slavin, Williams, Hutchison, and Bonar), one (1) no (Perza), and one (1) absent (Hare). Mr. Perza stated his opinion that Council had the right to do this whether Council voted to do so or not. EVALUATION OF BIDS - ARC-RATED FLAME RESISTANT CLOTHING PROGRAM Members were advised that, in accordance with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 1238 contract, the City agreed to set up a vendor which would allow the employee to purchase clothing directly from the vendor and the City would set up an allotment for each employee. The allotment for FY 15 is $1,200 and the contract covers 29 staff members; therefore, the contract total for FY2015 is $34,800. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, reminded members that when the City brought forward the IBEW contract many months ago, there was a discussion about clothing in the contract and the City and the union wished to improve the quality of the clothing, provide options for various clothing that was not in the old bid, and re-bid the services. Over the last few months, members from the IBEW, Electric Department management, and staff from the Finance Department and Procurement Division had met and prepared a Request for Proposals (RFP) for flame retardant clothing for Electric Department employees that was put into a bid package. Proposals were received from five (5) potential vendors; however, four (4) were rejected due to the vendors not meeting the minimum requirements set forth in the RFP. The remaining proposal was evaluated using the following minimum requirements: Sizing, delivering, returning/exchanging, purchasing/selling, and repairing flame retardant clothing. Upon review it was determined that Tyndale Company, Inc. was the only qualified vendor. The main requirement that was not met by the four (4) disqualified vendors was that they did not offer repairs to their garments if needed. The duration of the contract would be for one (1) year, with four (4) one-year extensions allowed at the option of the City dependent upon satisfactory performance. It was noted that Tyndale may have a price escalation based on price increases from the supplier, not to exceed 4% annually with supporting documentation. Staff recommended awarding the contract for ARC-rated flame resistant clothing to Tyndale Company, Inc. It was believed, in the long run, that this would be a cost-savings measure based on original proposals from the union. Although there would be a set-up cost in the first year, in subsequent years a cost savings would be realized. The recommendation was based on a performance specification rather than on a low bid, which was a different direction for the City for a clothing contract; however, staff was comfortable with the proposal and the union was also in favor of it.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 43 Mrs. Williams noted the accident that occurred several years ago involving Electric Department staff which resulted in many issues; however, the personnel from the City were not wearing fire protective equipment. She questioned if the proposed contract would enhance the probability that employees would wear the proper equipment. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that additional safety inspection measures had been put in place since the accident occurred. He noted that many employees saw the result of that accident and recognized this type of accident as being a very real possibility, which helped to improve safety. In addition, staff would be more willing to wear certain items provided through this proposal because they were more customized. Mr. Koenig felt that safety had improved for many different reasons and the contract being brought forward was an additional reason why this problem should never occur again. Mr. Perza noted that the requirement that the provider be able to take back damaged clothing had disqualified the other four bids and questioned how much extra this would cost and how often this occurs. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that if a garment is damaged, the other vendors would want the City to purchase a new garment, whereas this vendor, assuming that it could be done under the safety code, would repair the garment. He was unable to quantify the frequency of this occurring; however, he did not feel that the cost proposal was extravagantly higher than the current cost. Mr. Slavin moved to award the contract for ARC-rated flame resistant clothing to Tyndale Company, Inc., seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Hare absent). FIRST READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2014-22 Council President Bonar reminded the public that copies of the proposed ordinance are available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or can be obtained from the City Clerk's Office. Final action by Council on the proposed ordinances will take place during the Council Meeting of October 27, 2014. Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that the purpose of Proposed Ordinance #2014-22 was to adjust the budgets for the projects that were not completed during FY 2014. Budget balances had been calculated, and the ordinance would adjust the FY 2015 budget to bring those budget balances forward so that the projects could be completed with the budget in place. Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding the $104,000 transfer from the Parkland Reserve Fund, Mrs. Mitchell stated that she was unsure of the details of the transfer but offered to provide this information at a later date. [City Clerk’s Office Note: Subsequent to the meeting, Mrs. Mitchell advised members that the transfer from the Parkland Reserve of $104,000 was to carry forward $65,000 for the John W. Pitts Recreation Center HVAC project from FY 14 plus an additional $39,000 that was approved by Council in FY 14 after the project was re-bid to include both labor and equipment.] In accordance with Section 1-9 of the Dover Code, Council acknowledged the First Reading of the Ordinance Amendment as read by the City Clerk, by title only, as follows: PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2014-22 - BUDGET AMENDMENT RELATED TO CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN - FISCAL YEAR 2014 (FY14) CARRY-FORWARD BALANCES

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 44 COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Hutchison stated that he attended the Dover Police Department promotion ceremony during the previous week and noted that they should all be very proud of the men and women of the Police Department, both active duty and civilian. He stated that Mr. Mark Hall, Deputy Fire Chief and full-time 911 Dispatcher, was recognized as outstanding employee of the year. Mr. Hutchison recognized and congratulated Mr. Hall for his achievements, noting that he had gone well beyond the call of duty. Mr. Anderson advised that October 2014 was designated as Domestic Violence Awareness Month and thanked those who volunteer in the City and Kent County to help women, men, and children who are victims of domestic violence. He encouraged these individuals to continue to do their good work and encouraged all to support them. Mr. Dixon moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 9:05 P.M. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of October 13, 2014, are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Council-Minutes\2014\10-13-2014.wpd Exhibits Exhibit #1 - Delaware Downtown Development Districts - Application Process for Designation as a District Exhibit #2 - City of Dover Human Relations Commission Strategic Plan 2015-2018

EXHIBIT #1 Regular City Council Meeting of 10/13/2014 Delaware Downtown Development Districts EXHIBIT #1 Application Process for Designation as a District Regular City Council Meeting of 10/13/2014 1

Downtown Development Districts Act • Governor proposed in State of the State – Jan. 2013 • Senate Bill 191 – Introduced Apr. 2013 • Prime sponsors: Sens. Henry, Bushweller, Marshall; Reps. Keeley, Bolden, D. Scott • What the DDD Act did:  Authorized creation of Districts  Laid out the application process  Authorized DSHA to issue DDD Grants, subject to annual funding 2

Dual Purposes of DDD Program 1. Housing & Community Development: Help build stable community of long‐term residents in Districts and neighborhoods Improve housing for persons of all incomes and backgrounds Increase homeownership Reduce number of vacant houses 3

Dual Purposes of DDD Program 2. Economic Development: Improve commercial vitality of Districts and neighborhoods Stimulate job growth Help build diverse array of businesses Harness attraction of our downtowns 4

There are Three Processes • Application for Designation as a District – OSPC Responsibility – Local Governments are applicants – CCSPI makes recommendations to Governor – Governor designates • DDD Grants – DSHA responsibility • Neighborhood Building Blocks – DEDO responsibility 5

Goals of Application Process • Competitive process • Realizes that all local jurisdictions are different, and will have different revitalization strategies and plans • Flexibility in application to allow for creativity 6

Application for Designation • Local governments must identify proposed Downtown Development Districts in accordance with the Act. • Then they must complete the application – Size limits for Districts based on population – Application must include: • Need for District • District Plan • Local Incentives 7

Need for the District • Applicant must describe the need for economic incentives that are available for the District. • Need must be documented with relevant data and other methods • Examples of data include: – Homeownership – Poverty – Vacancy Rates – Abandoned Buildings 8

Need for District • What we are looking for: – Applicant must describe potential positive impacts if the District is designated – Greatest need based on data 9

District Plan • A plan used to guide redevelopment activities and revitalization efforts in the District. • A detailed strategy for the overall development of the District • Must be consistent with certified comprehensive plan and the State Strategies. • Must demonstrate coordination with other governmental, non‐governmental or quasi‐ governmental entities. 10

District Plan • We are looking for: – Overall Vision – Clarity of actions to be taken – Capacity and will to implement plan • Any changes to plan must be reviewed by CCSPI • District Designations may be rescinded if District Plan is not adhered to 11

Local Incentives • Local Government must implement an incentive package as described in their application. • Incentives may include such things as: – Reduction in fees or taxes – Special zoning – Regulatory reform • Should be targeted to the proposed DDD 12

Local Incentives • What we are looking for: – Incentives must be enacted within a reasonable time after DDD designation • Any changes to the Incentive Package must be reviewed by the CCSPI – Failure to enact or adhere to the approved Incentive Package is grounds for the District to be rescinded 13

Geographic Extents of District • Must make sense from and urban planning and revitalization perspective • Must include a Central Business District (CBD) • Geographic concentration of incentives is encouraged • Different size limits based on the population of the local government 14

Central Business District (CBD) • An area around the downtown portion of the city or town allowing for higher intensity residential uses as well as commercial, office, personal services, governmental and similar uses intended to serve the community and surrounding areas of the city or town. 15

What does a successful program look like? 1. Inclusive: Large and small developers Non‐profit and for‐profit businesses Residents/homeowners 16

What does a successful program look like? 2. Maximizes state resources (“multiplier effect”): Leverages private dollars Concentrates benefits in small area Meaningful local incentives Shows commitment of local government, residents, and businesses 17

What does a successful program look like? 3. Well‐ Coordinated:  User‐friendly Cuts (or at least minimizes) red tape  Clear lines of authority Accountable Measurable 18

Next Steps • Applications are received on or before Nov. 1 • OSCP Staff Review: Nov. / Dec. • Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues Meeting: Dec. / Jan. • Governor Designates Districts: Jan. / Feb. • All dates after Nov. 1 are tentative and subject to change 19

Thank You! • See our website for more information: http://stateplanning.delaware.gov/ddd/ 20

EXHIBIT #2 Regular City Council Meeting of 10/13/2014 City of Dover Human Relations Commission Strategic Plan 2015-2018 I. INTRODUCTION The establishment, purpose, powers and duties of the City of Dover Human Relations Commission (hereinafter, “the Commission”) are provided for in Part II of the Dover, Delaware Code of Ordinances, Chapter 58-Human Relations Article II Human Relations Commission. Broadly representative of racial, religious, gender and ethnic groups residing in Dover the nine volunteer members of the Commission are all residents of the City of Dover. They are appointed by the president of the Dover City Council, based upon recommendations from and subject to confirmation by the Council. The Commission has begun a strategic planning process to better define its strategy, focus, and direction over the next three years: 2015-2018. In developing the first phase of this planning process the Commission has organized its three-year long- term strategic objectives around the components of its mission and its commitment to competency, transparency, and public accountability. II. MISSION Committed to a philosophy of inclusion, intergroup cooperation and fair treatment, the City of Dover Human Relations Commission works to ensure that the City of Dover has and utilizes policies, programs, ordinances, organizational practices, specialized resources and appropriately trained employees to support diversityi, inclusion ii and cultural competencyiii in its organization and services. Additionally, by involving all segments of the community, the Commission promotes an understanding and appreciation of the benefits of diversity, inclusion, and positive intergroup relations among residents of varying backgrounds in the city; and, advocates for an environment of fairness and respect. The Commission works with the City Council and the City Administration and other community organizations to strengthen inter-group relationships and to eliminate discrimination; and, to anticipate, prepare for and resolve incidents of intergroup conflicts and disputes within the city. 1

City of Dover Human Relations Commission Strategic Plan 2015-2018 III. VISION The Commission’s vision is a city whose government, organizations, groups and individual citizens value diversity, inclusion, respect and trust. IV. LONG-TERM OBJECTIVES Mission component: A. Work to ensure that the City of Dover has and utilizes policies, programs, ordinances, organizational practices, specialized resources and appropriately trained employees to support diversity, inclusiveness and cultural competency in its organization and services. Long-term Objectives A.1 In cooperation with the City of Dover Manager and its Human Resources Department evaluate the current “state and climate of diversity and inclusion” and cultural competency within Dover’s government organization, services and vendor relationships; and, make recommendations to the City Manager and the Dover City Council which identify policies and best organizational practices which support diversity, inclusion and cultural competency within city government, its services; and, vendor relationships. A.2 Building on its partnership with the Dover Police Department, identify additional human relations approaches and lessons that can be integrated into the Dover Police Department’s ongoing Community Relations strategy. Mission Component: B. By involving all segments of the community, the Commission promotes an understanding and appreciation of the benefits of diversity, inclusion, and positive intergroup relations among residents of varying backgrounds in the city; and, advocates for an environment of fairness and respect. 2

City of Dover Human Relations Commission Strategic Plan 2015-2018 Long-term Objectives B.1 Assess how the community of Dover is organized and identify organizations, churches, fraternities, sororities and other organizations with whom the DHRC should establish partnerships; and, to enter into agreements with these organizations to more effectively carry out its mission. B.2 Provide a report to the Dover City Council and to the public which analyzes the current “state and climate of diversity and inclusion” and cultural competency within the Dover community and makes recommendations for programs, policies and practices that support diversity, inclusion and cultural competency. B.3 Identify, support and participate in programs and events within the city of Dover which celebrate its diversity or promote greater understanding of the issues, concerns and needs of our diverse population. (e.g., the African American and Hispanic Festivals and the Dover Public Library’s Created Equal Project) B.4 Create and implement an external education process and program that provides the pubic with a better understanding of diversity, inclusion; and, human relations issues; and, conflict management; and, that develops skills in effectively fostering greater understanding, inclusion and fairness in the city. Mission Component C. Works with the City Council and the City Administration and other community organizations to strengthen inter-group relationships and to eliminate discrimination; and, to anticipate, prepare for and resolve incidents of intergroup conflicts and disputes within the city Long-term Objectives C.1 Define when a diversity, inclusion and or a human relations issue iv exists and specify the types of these issues that will be accepted by the Commission; and, identify and implement a process for receiving and responding to such issues by taking action to correct or improve the situation. 3

City of Dover Human Relations Commission Strategic Plan 2015-2018 C.2 Develop an understanding with the State Human Relations Commission that will delineate the roles and procedures of the two Commissions in the solution of alleged discrimination complaints which fall within the jurisdiction of the State Human Relations Commission and identify and maintain specific ways the two Commissions will work together. C.3 Review the City of Dover’s Code of Ordinances and make recommendations to the Dover City Council that will improve the city’s efforts to eliminate discriminatory behavior. C.4 In cooperation and partnership with city officials, law enforcement, clergy, community organizations and public and private mediation services, assist in developing plans for monitoring sources of intergroup conflict and for responding to and managing community conflicts and disruptions in Dover; and, participate in managing community conflicts in accordance with these plans. COMPETENCY TRANSPARENCY and ACCOUNTABILITY D. The Commission is committed to acting with a high degree of competency, and transparency and accountability both to the Dover City Council and to the community. Long-term Objectives D.1 Regularly provide an update on the Commission’s activities, progress and accomplishments to the Dover City Council; and, provide opportunities for the Council to review and affirm the Commission’s Strategic Plan, including a process which encourages Council members to identify specific diversity, inclusion and human relations issues that may be particularly critical or relevant within each City Council District. D.2 Improve community awareness of the Commission and a better understanding of its role by developing, implementing; and, maintaining a comprehensive communications plan which creates a process for routine communications to the community, including supporting policies and procedures for managing communications and for using supporting tools, such as, a web-based hub of information and resources. 4

City of Dover Human Relations Commission Strategic Plan 2015-2018 D.3 Create and implement an internal education process and program that provides the Dover City Council, the City Administration and the members of the Commission with a better understanding of diversity, inclusion; and, human relations issues; and, conflict management; and, that strengthens their skills in effectively fostering greater understanding, inclusion and fairness in the city. D.4 Provide due notice and access to the public by conducting all meetings in accordance with the Delaware Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and City of Dover procedures. D.5 Identify and seek funding from other governmental, philanthropic or private organizations to more effectively carry out its responsibilities. V. IMPLEMENTATION AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE Once the Commission adopts these proposed long-term strategic objectives the Commission will develop and implement specific work plans for each long-term strategic objective within the assigned year or years. These work plans will include short-term goals/priorities/initiatives with specific performance measures and action items to be accomplished within shorter time periods. The Dover Code of Ordinances centralizes decision making at the Commission level. However, it is suggested that a functional committee structure be utilized to move these long-term strategic objections into actual performance. Each of these Committees shall consist of at least three members of the DHRC and may include outside advisors, citizens, and City staff members to more effectively develop and execute the work plans. Individual Commissioners may serve on one or more Committees. These functional Committees are advisory, not decision-making. They are transparent and accountable to the Commission and the community at large. They will meet on a regular basis to develop, implement and monitor work plans for the specific long-term strategic objectives assigned to the committee. Their work plans will be presented to and adopted by the full Commission prior to implementation. 5

City of Dover Human Relations Commission Strategic Plan 2015-2018 The Commission may assign one or more long term strategic objectives to the Commission “acting as a whole”. Additionally, in order to respond to an emergent human relations issue that may not be identified in this plan, the Commission may from time to time create an additional functional committee. Such committees are intended to convene, and make recommendations for action to the full Commission; and, then disband when they are no longer relevant or needed. Based on the set of proposed long-term objectives identified in this strategic plan, it is suggested that the following functional committees be established: Government Policy, Programs, and Practices Committee—to develop, implement and monitor work plans for Objectives A.1, A.2, C-3 and C.4 Community Engagement Committee—to develop, implement and monitor work plans for Objectives: B.1, B.2 and B.3. Education Committee—to develop and implement plans for Objectives: B.4, D.3. Communications Committee—to develop, implement and monitor work plans for Objectives D.1, and D.2. The Commission as a “whole” to develop implement and monitor work plans for Objectives: C.1, C.2, D.4 and D.5. Actions History 10/13/2014 - Approved by City Council 09/23/2014 - Introduced at Dover Human Relations Commission 09/08/2014 - Draft prepared by Eugene B. Ruane, City of Dover Human Relations Commissioner i It is critical that the Commission agree on a definition of diversity. Howard J. Ross, one of the nation’s recognized leaders on diversity and organizational change notes that “diversity has generally represented an acceptance of difference, a lack of discrimination due to difference, and a presence of different kinds of people in organizations”. However, he argues that in this narrow view, diversity “has been related to as a means to erase or fix problems” rather than as a “way to create a new future vision”. The focus of this limited understanding is “the level of challenges (or “illness”)” that some people face: “bias, discrimination, lack of access, oppression, physical and emotional violence, and soon.” The response was then on “passing laws and then instituting compliance measures to make it illegal to continue these practices.” The goal was to “create a 6

City of Dover Human Relations Commission Strategic Plan 2015-2018 state of social diversity, where people were not denied their rights, were more appropriately represented in organizations, and were not actively discriminated against.” He calls this approach “the health-care metaphor” focused on efforts to “create organizations in which people are no longer “sick”. (Howard J. Ross, ReInventing Diversity Transforming Organizational Community to Strengthen People, Purpose, and Performance ( Lanham, Maryland : Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. 2011, page 33) Mr. Ross promotes a broader understanding that goes beyond simply prohibiting discrimination and getting people in the door. He states that a diversity focus or program “means creating opportunities for people to be a part of the fundamental fabric of the way the organization functions---decision-making, responsibility, leadership—and then creating organizations that are culturally competent, culturally intelligent, and culturally flexible.” We have to “really develop a sense of inclusion” and “a certain level of competence in understanding the needs of various people we are working with and serving”. This requires a “systematic approach to incorporating an awareness of diversity and skills related to diversity into everything an organization does.” ( Ibid. 34) (Author’s Comment: A brief internet search of diversity programs has revealed that many organizations have adopted the broader approach that Mr. Ross has formulated. These programs reframe the conversation to focus on fair treatment and respect, and away from discrimination and “protected classes”. An example from CUNY Queensborough Community College in New York City is attached. See: Definition for Diversity in Exhibit 1.) ii Inclusion “is not simply a function of how fully involved people are in the structures of their organizations and societies”. It is “a function of connection”. “It is the ability of people to feel integrated into the cultural dynamics, leadership, and decision-making structures of the organization”. (Ibid., 38) iii Cultural competency is “the organizational ability to have and utilize the policies, appropriately trained and skilled employees, and specialized resources to systematically anticipate, recognize, and respond to the varying expectations (language, cultural, and religious) of customers, clients, patients, and co-workers of diverse backgrounds.” It requires a certain amount of “cultural intelligence” in that “people need to have knowledge of both distinctions of culture and of the specific traits of different cultures”. It requires a certain amount of “cultural humility “in that we need to be able to recognize that our cultural models may simply be different from , rather than better than, those of other people.” And, “people also require a degree of “cultural flexibility” “to facilitate interaction with others on their own terms.” (Ibid. 38) iv Queensborough Community College in New York has included a description of when “a diversity issue exists” in its Definition for Diversity. See Exhibit 1.) 7

Exhibit 1 City of Dover Human Relations Strategic Plan 2015-2018 Definition for Diversity CUNY Queensborough in New York City Definition for Diversity The concept of diversity encompasses acceptance and respect. It means understanding that each individual is unique, and recognizing our individual differences. These can be along the dimensions of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, age, physical abilities, religious beliefs, political beliefs, or other ideologies. It is the exploration of these differences in a safe, positive, and nurturing environment. It is about understanding each other and moving beyond simple tolerance to embracing and celebrating the rich dimensions of diversity contained within each individual. Diversity is a reality created by individuals and groups from a broad spectrum of demographic and philosophical differences. It is extremely important to support and protect diversity because by valuing individuals and groups free from prejudice, and by fostering a climate where equity and mutual respect are intrinsic. "Diversity" means more than just acknowledging and/or tolerating difference. Diversity is a set of conscious practices that involve:  Understanding and appreciating interdependence of humanity, cultures, and the natural environment.  Practicing mutual respect for qualities and experiences that are different from our own.  Understanding that diversity includes not only ways of being but also ways of knowing;  Recognizing that personal, cultural and institutionalized discrimination creates and sustains privileges for some while creating and sustaining disadvantages for others;  Building alliances across differences so that we can work together to eradicate all forms of discrimination.  Diversity includes, therefore, knowing how to relate to those qualities and conditions that are different from our own and outside the groups to which we belong, yet are present in other individuals and groups. These include but are not limited to age, ethnicity, class, gender, physical abilities/qualities, race, sexual orientation, as well as religious status, gender expression, educational background, geographical location, income, marital status, parental status, and work experiences. Finally, we acknowledge that categories of difference are not always fixed but also can be fluid, we respect individual rights to self-identification, and we recognize that no one culture is intrinsically superior to another. A diversity issue exists when An issue (policy or business practice - formal, informal, internal, or external) has a different impact on a particular group (i.e., impact on men vs. women, black vs. white, American vs. foreign, urban vs. rural, married vs. single, etc.)

Exhibit 1 City of Dover Human Relations Strategic Plan 2015-2018 Definition for Diversity CUNY Queensborough in New York City It happens more frequently to a particular group (i.e., different groups may have dramatically different "numbers" - turnover, terminations, promotions, discipline, few or no role models, etc.) It is more difficult for one group to overcome (i.e., upward mobility for a particular group within an organization - "glass ceilings") A diversity issue exists where the policy or business practice has an impact exclusive of difference (not inclusive of difference). Is there a trend or pattern (intentional or unintentional)? Having a diversity issue is not necessarily a bad thing. Doing nothing about it given you have knowledge of the issue is where organizations go wrong (negligence). Being in denial about these issues do not make them go away. Ignorance is not bliss inside or outside the courtroom. The real question is why do we have this issue and can we take action to correct it or improve the situation. Source: http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/diversity/definition.html Queensborurgh Community College in New York CUNY

CERTIFICATE OF CONGRATULATIONS In 1964, Kraft Foods opened its Dover plant and began producing a variety ofpopular household products, such as Jell-0 Kool-Aid, Stove Top ruffing, and hake 'N Bake, for national and international distribution. Over the year " Kraft Foods has become a cornerstone of our community, and on September 20, 2014, Kraft Food · celebrated its 50111 anniver my ofproduction in the City of Dover. Kraft Foods is the third largest employer in the Dover area, employing approximately 550 employees. Its economic impact to the area has been estimated at a minimum of$45 million annually in payroll, utilities, taxes, and local goods and ervices. Kraft Foods has also received multiple awards, including the 2013 Capital School District Partner ofthe Year Award, 2010 Delaware Department ofLabor Veteran's Hiring Award, 2010 Kraft Awardfor Safety Excellence, and 2009 Kraft Awardfor Environmental Excellence. Kraft Foods has invested in our community by supporting local organizations and events, such as the Special Olympics, African American Festival, Big Brothers Big Sisters ofDelaware, and the American Heart Walk. It has shown its commitment to fighting hunger and promoting healthy lifestyles by donating a Kraft Mobile Food Pantry to the Food Bank of Delaware and sponsoring the building of a KaBOOM! playground in Dover in 2010. THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, Congratulate Kraft Foods on its 5f!h Anniversary October 27, 2014 ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN DAVID L. BONAR MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT

FINAL READING CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2014-18 WITH STAFF AMENDMENT #1 (SA#1) (Staff Amendment #1 Indicated in Green Text) 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL 2 MET: 3 That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 3 - District Regulations, Section 24 - Planned Neighborhood Design 4 Option (PND), Subsection 24.62 - Buffers, of the Dover Code be amended by deleting it in its entirety and 5 re-designating the remaining Subsections accordingly. 6 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED 7 That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 4 - Zoning Bulk and Parking Regulations, Section 4.10 of the Dover 8 Code be amended by striking the text indicated in red, strikeout and inserting the bold, blue text, as follows: 9 Section 4.10. R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8, RM-1, RM-2 planned neighborhood design option and recreation 10 and open space zone (ROS). 11 Bulk and parking standards for PND within the following zones: R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8, RM-1, 12 RM-2, as well as Bulk and Parking Standards for the ROS zone are as follows: One-Family One-Family Detached Lot Line Duplex Multiplex Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings Dwellings 13 Minimum requirements per dwelling unit: 14 Lot area (sq. ft.) 7,500 6,000 4,500 4,000 15 Lot width (ft.) 70 65 40 16 Lot depth (ft.) 100 90 100 17 Off-street parking spaces 2 2 2 2 18 Minimum requirements per building: 19 Front yard (ft.) 25 15 20 25 15 30 20 Minimum side yard (ft.) 8 — — 10 21 Total side yards (ft.) 20 30 10 30 22 Rear yard (ft.) 30 20 40 30 20 20 23 Lot width (ft.) 80 24 Lot depth (ft.) 80 25 Maximum permitted: 26 Building height 27 Stories 2½ 2 2½ 3 28 Feet 35 24 35 35 29 Lot coverage 40% 45% 45% 50% 30 Number of dwelling units per building 1 1 2 5 31 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED 32 That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 4 - Zoning Bulk and Parking Regulations, Subsection 4.11 of the Dover 33 Code be amended by striking the text indicated in red, strikeout and inserting the bold, blue text, as follows:

Proposed Ordinance #2014-18 - Appendix B - Zoning - PND Page 2 34 Section 4.11. R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8, RM-1, RM-2 planned neighborhood design option and recreation 35 and open space zone (ROS). 36 Bulk and parking standards for PND within the following zones: R-20, R-15, R-10, R-8, RM-1 and RM- 37 2, as well as Bulk and Parking Standards for the ROS zone are as follows: Patio Houses Townhouses Garden Apts. 38 Minimum requirements per dwelling unit: Minimum average lot area (sq. ft.) 3,500 2,200 1,800 Minimum lot area (sq. ft.) 3,000 2,000 1,800 Lot width (ft.) 40 22 Lot depth (ft.) 70 80 Off-street parking spaces 2 2 2 39 Minimum requirements per building: Lot area 1 acre Lot width (ft.) 100 Lot depth (ft.) 125 Building setback 40 From street (ft.) 15 30 20 50 41 From property line (ft.) — 20 10 50 Building spacing — 30 50 Patio area 60% Patio dimension (ft.) 20 42 Maximum permitted: Building height 43 Feet 24 35 35 44 Stories 2 3 2 Lot coverage 60% 75% 60% Average No. of dwelling units per building 1 8 24 45 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED 46 That the provisions of this ordinance shall be retroactive to developments previously approved by the 47 Planning Commission that utilize the Planned Neighborhood Design Option (PND) provisions of Section 48 24. 49 ADOPTED: * 50 S:\ORDINANCES\2014\DRAFT\Ordinance #2014-18 w SA#1 Amending Appendix B - Zoning - PND-Final Reading-Rev. 10-20-2014.wpd 51 SYNOPSIS 52 The proposed ordinance amends the Planned Neighborhood Design to eliminate the 40-foot buffer 53 around the perimeter of the development and to reduce the front and rear setbacks. The amendment 54 also provides for retroactivity of the new provisions to previously approved developments. 55 (SPONSORS: HUTCHISON, WILLIAMS, AND TOWNSHEND) 56 Actions History 57 10/27/2014 - Public Hearing/Final Reading Scheduled at City Council 58 10/13/2014 - Public Hearing/Final Reading Deferred Until October 27, 2014 59 08/25/2014 - First Reading Held at City Council 60 08/11/2014 - Introduced at Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: City Council DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Planning & Inspections DATE SUBMITTED: October 17, 2014 PREPARED BY: Tim Taraila, Code Enforcement Supervisor; Ann Marie Townshend, AICP, Director of Planning and Community Development SUBJECT: 1370 College Rd, Dover, Delaware – Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance REFERENCE:Chapter 22, Article XI – Dangerous Buildings, Sec. 22-385 - Hearing before Council and Chapter 22, Article XI - Dangerous Buildings Case # 14-3147 & 13-3566 RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: N/A EXHIBITS: PowerPoint Presentation and File Photos to be presented at the Council meeting. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: Preliminary estimate is $10,000-$15,000. AMOUNT BUDGETED: $150,000 Budgeted for all demolitions Citywide in the FY-2015 Budget; As of October 17, 2014, there is $116,422.64 remaining in the line item. FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): 110-1600-534-30-33. TIMETABLE:As soon as possible. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous. 2. Order the property to be repaired or demolished by November 27, 2014 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk. 3. Order the Building Inspector to cause the demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council. 4. Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The property is owned by Sarah E. Jones. The property is a two-story wood-framed single family home. The structure was registered as a vacant building on November 8, 2013. On May 8, 2014 the property was found to be unsecured with numerous exterior and interior code violations. The owners were ordered to secure the property and compliance was made on May 27, 2014. On August 18, 2014, after several re-inspections of the property, with no corrections to the code violations being made, the structure was condemned as unfit for human occupancy. Currently the structure is still unoccupied, with no active utility services and in a serious state of disrepair.

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Meeting was held on October 13, 2014, at 3:30 p.m. with Chairman Dixon presiding. Members present were Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Anderson (arrived at 3:45 p.m.), Mr. Caldwell, and Mrs. Horsey. Mayor Christiansen was also present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Chairman Dixon requested that item #3, Update - Recreation Needs Assessment, be moved to be considered as item #1, with items #1 and #2 becoming items #2 and #3 respectively. Mr. Hutchison moved for approval of the agenda, as amended, seconded by Mrs. Horsey and unanimously carried. Update - Recreation Needs Assessment Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, provided members with the displays that were utilized during the public workshops. She advised members that three (3) public workshops were held for the Recreation Needs Assessment and that, although no one attended the first two (2) workshops, the third workshop was well attended. Mrs. Townshend reviewed the map on display that depicted the walk and bicycle zones in the larger parks and noted that the majority of the residential areas in the City of Dover, there are recreational resources situated in close proximity to residents. She reminded members that a survey was conducted and that to date, there have been 429 responses. She stated that Wednesday, October 15, 2014, is the last day the survey will be available for the public at which time, staff will gather the data from the survey and then develop recommendations based on that data. Mrs. Townshend stated it is her hope to have a solid draft in December to be presented to the Committee and that additional workshops be held in early January to allow for public feedback and then in February/March a final recommendation be presented for adoption. Mrs. Townshend relayed appreciation for the work provided by Ms. Carolyn Courtney, noting that she has been responsible for much of the work involved with his project, including all public relations, completion of survey, etc. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mrs. Townshend stated that the survey data will be combed through to determine those responses submitted by City of Dover residents and those who reside outside of the City limits. Mr. Hutchison requested that Staff provide a comprehensive breakdown of all recreation provided to include what is provided by the State of Delaware (in Kent County), Kent County, Boys and Girls Club, local churches, schools, etc.

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 2 Benchmarks Established for the Economic Development Office Mr. Bill Neaton, Economic Development Director, reviewed the benchmarks and results that were established for the Economic Development Office, which includes the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP), Downtown Dover Business Growth, and City-Wide Economic Development. Mr. Neaton announced that he was just recently elected the Executive Director of the DDP. At his request, Mr. Ed Perez, Downtown Coordinator, reviewed the benchmarks related to the DDP. Referring to the number of new businesses in the downtown target area, he noted that the report reflects four (4) new businesses; however, since its printing, there have been two (2) additional new businesses for a total of six (6) and eight (8) new jobs. Of the six (6) new businesses, four (4) are minority/women owned businesses. Mr. Perez referred to the strategic objective: Advance Initiatives of the Downtown Dover Partnership - Develop a recruitment strategy to attract new business to downtown with the assistance of the Recruitment Subcommittee of the Economic Development Committee. He stated that although this is an ongoing project, the DDP is a part of the Kent County “Open for Business”, which is a group of economic development network partners, such as the Small Business Administration, DDP, Economic Development Office, USDA, Delaware State University, Del Tech, Kent County Executive Director, Score, etc., with the Chamber of Commerce serving as the lead. This project gives an opportunity for individuals wishing to establish a business, to seek resources at a “one-stop shop”. To date, there have been 12 inquiries regarding a desire to open small businesses. He explained that although this does not necessarily mean that there will be 12 additional businesses, it does mean that meetings were held with 12 individuals who have a concept, and are either looking for space, financing, technical assistance in putting their business together, etc. In addition, he stated that the DDP is a part of the Kent County Network Group that established the Annual Summit. Mr. Perez stated that the DDP continues to update the marketing brochure which includes a current vacant property list and a map of the downtown district and is made available on the DDP Website. Mr. Neaton advised members that recently, he and the Mayor met with individuals interested in property in the downtown area. He had requested that the vacant property list be updated and was pleasantly surprised that there were only a few store fronts that remain available, noting that downtown Dover is beginning to revitalize. It was his feeling that this is the result of a very active Merchants Committee that is a part of the DDP. As a part of DDP’s support to NCALL, Mr. Perez assured members that information and support is continuously being provided to NCALL for the “Restoring Central Dover” initiative. The DDP is currently involved with the Positive Outcome and Strong Community Subcommittees and just completed the final phase of the plan that will be reviewed and submitted for a grant. Responding to Mr. Hutchison’s question to Mr. Perez regarding the Loockerman Exchange and the old Library location, Mayor Christiansen stated that there are two (2) possibilities for the use of the Loockerman Exchange, one (1) of which is contingent upon the State of Delaware awarding grant money to Main Street and the other is the development of upscale student housing, explaining that the owner of that property has met with individuals who are interested in such a concept.

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 3 In response to Mr. Hutchison regarding E-Z Pass, Mr. Neaton stated that he is in contact with Ms. Susan Forrester-Coates who is the TransCore Manager for E-Z Pass and reported that E-Z Pass is pleased with their facility in the downtown area. He noted that there are 85 employees and that there have been no parking problems. He noted that they have relayed some security concerns; however, he assured members that he, along with the Mayor and Police Chief, will be meeting with Ms. Forester-Coats to resolve these issues. Mr. Perez advised members that since E-Z Pass moved to downtown, other businesses have seen a spike in their sales volume. Mr. Caldwell relayed his pleasure with the business growth that has occurred in the downtown area over the past year and hopes that these efforts will continue in the future. In response to Mr. Anderson regarding the 2013-2014 results in the number of businesses opened in the Downtown Target Area, Mr. Perez explained that there were 15 new businesses that were open last year and that 24 jobs were created. Of those businesses, six (6) were minority owned and 11 were women owned, and seven (7) were of the service category, three (3) were of the retail category, and one (1) restaurant. During this same reporting period, he stated that there were ten (10) businesses that closed, which resulted in a net of five (5) additional businesses in the downtown target area. He explained that of those ten (10) businesses, there were over 27 employees and that some of these businesses were in operation for over 20 years (Simons, Delaware Made, Dreamer’s Gallery, and Smither’s). Mr. Neaton advised members that at the request of Mr. Hutchison, the Economic Development Office created a Development Incentives Awarded Report (Attachment #1). He stated that over the last five (5) years, there have been 45 incentive packages were issued varying from facade grants to tax abatements to impact fee waivers, etc. He noted that there was concern that incentive packages were being provided and then the business would close and there would be no return to the City for providing the incentives. As reflected in the report, he stated that none of those businesses that were provided an incentive have closed, which is an indication that the incentive packages are working as planned and as such, he urged their continuation. Review of Draft Downtown Development District Application and Proposed Resolution No. 2014-13 in Support of Application for Designation as a Downtown Development District Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that the Delaware General Assembly enacted the Downtown Development District Act in June 2014. She explained that under this law, the Governor will designate three (3) Downtown Development Districts in the first round of designations, one (1) from each county. Development projects within designated Districts will be eligible for a 20% rebate for project costs over $25,000. She noted that the City of Dover is well positioned to submit a successful application for Downtown Development District designation, since the City has several redevelopment incentives in place. In addition, the City has two (2) master plan documents: The Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book; and Restoring Central Dover, that complement each other in support of revitalizing the downtown.

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 4 Mrs. Townshend reminded members that staff had previously submitted the proposed District boundary and some proposed incentives that would be enacted if the City is designated as a Downtown Development District. She noted that the Downtown Development District application is due on November 1, 2014 and that although a draft application was provided to members for their review, staff will continue to refine the application prior to its presentation to City Council for approval during their Regular Meeting of October 27, 2014. Mrs. Townshend explained that there are three (3) components of the application for designation as a District, as follows: 1) the need and impact of the District designation, accounting for 50% of the consideration given to scoring each application; 2) the quality of the District Plan, accounting for 30% of the consideration given to scoring each application; and 3) the quality of the local incentives offered, accounting for 20% of the consideration given to scoring each application. Mrs. Townshend briefly reviewed the application as well as the numerous attachments that will be submitted. She distributed Attachment #2 of the application - Documentation of Need and Impact (Photographs) (Attachment #2) which was not included in the packet submitted to the committee, which will also be made a part of the Downtown Development District Application. Although Attachment #5 of the application - Letters of Support also was not included in the packet, she advised members that several letters have been received and that additional letters are anticipated, assuring members that they will be included in the presentation to City Council on October 27, 2014. Mrs. Townshend explained that once the application is submitted, the City will be bound to its contents. As an example, she explained that if the City includes an incentive that would provide a business license fee waiver for new businesses for three (3) years, the City cannot make any change to this incentive. She stated that if a Downtown Development District is designated for the City, and the City does not comply with the plan and does not follow through on incentives, the designation can be rescinded. Therefore, she stated that this application will result in a commitment from the City of Dover and require Code amendments. Members were provided Proposed Resolution No. 2014-13 for their review and recommendation. Mrs. Townshend advised members that such a Resolution is required to be submitted with the application that indicates the local government’s desire to apply for the designation as a District, and the local government’s willingness to adhere to the District Plan and the Local Incentives for the duration of the District designation. Staff recommended endorsement of the Draft Downtown Development District application, acknowledging that staff will continue to refine the application prior to final presentation to City Council, and adoption of Resolution No. 2014-13 as submitted. Mr. Hutchison relayed his support for the application and the desire to address home ownership, which he has been concerned for several years. He felt that the designation will help in this regard. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that there are partners that will also help such as Habitat for Humanity, Dover Housing Authority, etc. She also noted that with the CDBG Program, the proposed Consolidated Plan would allow, for purchases within the Downtown Development District, down

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 5 payment assistance and rehabilitation, explaining that a new property owner wishing to purchase property could obtain down payment assistance as well as rehabilitation funds from the City, noting that several properties in the area are in need of maintenance. Mr. Anderson thanked Staff for the work conducted on the project and Chairman Dixon for championing the Wells Fargo Grant, noting that the $90,000 has been helpful and an enormous value to the City. Noting that the designation will require the adoption of ordinances and that staff proposes their consideration in the Spring of 2015, he questioned if members would be committed to the language contained in the draft ordinances. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that the proposed Resolution is what is required to be adopted by City Council on October 27, 2014; however, in terms of any proposed ordinances, which are primarily related to the incentives, she stated that it is hoped to have them in place by the Spring of 2015. In order to do so, she stated that staff will begin drafting the proposed ordinances once the application is submitted and expects that they will be presented to members for their review and recommendation beginning in January 2015. In response to Mr. Anderson regarding the backlog in housing rehabilitation due to the decline in federal support, Mrs. Townshend stated that the City could provide some assistance in this matter through the rebates available through the Downtown Development District Program, although the first $25,000 would be out of pocket. She stated that other alternatives would be from the next phase of the Wells Fargo Foundation since housing rehabilitation is under funded. It is anticipated that the Steering Committee will continue under the leadership of NCALL and that the next grant application would provide funds for housing rehabilitation. She also noted that within the Restoring Central Dover Plan, there are different plans such as a volunteer based repair programs that have been successful in other locations and that Milford Housing has indicated an interest to work with the City on this a program. As a result, she felt confident that with the implementation of Restoring Central Dover, there will be other resources the City can investigate, explaining that the rebate provided under the Downtown Development District Program is only one of those resources. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Townshend stated that it is anticipated that the Restoring Central Dover Plan will be finalized within the next two (2) months, noting that a draft was just recently submitted. Mrs. Horsey noted that according to Map #2B - Downtown Development District with the Land Development Plan per the 2008 Comprehensive Plan, there is a lot of mixed use within those boundaries and questioned if it would be desirable. Responding, Mrs. Townshend explained that Map #2B reflects the adopted Comprehensive Plan. She stated that Staff anticipates some degree of flexibility in zoning so that the strong residential area does show as medium density residential and the areas where there are a mix of uses. She felt as more planning has been done in the downtown area and as the Comprehensive Plan is updated, this area will be reviewed to determine the best way to move forward. Mrs. Townshend relayed her appreciation for those employees who have assisted in bringing this matter forward, Mr. Bill Cook, Planner I, and Mr. Jeremy Gibb, GIS Technician, who have dedicated a lot of their time on this project.

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 6 Mr. Anderson moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation for the endorsement of the Draft Downtown Development District application, acknowledging that staff will continue to refine the application prior to its final presentation to City Council and adoption of Resolution No. 2014-13, as submitted (Attachment #3). The motion was seconded by Mrs. Horsey and unanimously carried. [Clerk’s Office Note: Subsequent to the meeting, Mrs. Townshend submitted a revised Downtown Development District application for presentation to City Council during the regular meeting of October 27, 2014 (Attachment #4).] Mr. Hutchison moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Caldwell and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Wallace R. Dixon Chairman WRD/JG/mk/js/dd/tm S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Committee-Minutes\2014\10-13-2014 PR&CE.wpd Attachments Attachment #1 - Development Incentives Awarded Report Attachment #2 - Downtown Development District Application Attachment #2 - Documentation of Need and Impact Attachment #3 - Proposed Resolution No. 2014-13 Attachment #4 - Revised Downtown Development District Application

ATTACHMENT #1 PR&CE Committee Meeting of 10/13/2014

ATTACHMENT #2 PR&CE Committee Meeting of 10/13/2014

ATTACHMENT #3 PR&CE Committee Meeting of 10/13/2014 City of Dover MAYOR AND COUNCIL 1 DRAFT PROPOSED COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2014-13 2 A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION AS A DOWNTOWN 3 DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 4 WHEREAS, under the Downtown Development Districts Act, 22 Del.C. §§ 1901 et seq. (the "Act"), 5 the State of Delaware may designate districts within Delaware's cities, towns, and unincorporated areas that 6 will qualify for significant development incentives and other State benefits; and 7 WHEREAS, these districts are known as Downtown Development Districts ("Districts"); and 8 WHEREAS, the State is accepting applications for the designation of the initial round of Districts, 9 with such applications being due on November 1, 2014; and 10 WHEREAS, under the Act, each applicant must submit a plan that includes the boundaries of, and 11 a detailed planning and development strategy for, the proposed District (the "District Plan"); and 12 WHEREAS, under the Act, each applicant must also propose incentives that address local economic 13 and community conditions, and that will help achieve the purposes set forth in the Act (the "Local 14 Incentives"); and 15 WHEREAS, if an application is successful and the City receives District designation, the District 16 Plan and Local Incentives proposed by an applicant shall be binding upon the applicant; and 17 WHEREAS, the incentives associated with designation as a Downtown Development District would 18 greatly benefit current and future residents, businesses, non-profit organizations, and others within the City 19 of Dover; and 20 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Dover strongly believes that it is in the best interest of 21 the City of Dover to apply for District designation. 22 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 23 1. The City Council supports the Application for Designation as a Downtown Development District 24 prepared by the Dover Planning Office and dated October 27, 2014 (the "Application"); and 25 2. The City of Dover is authorized to appoint a District administrator (the "Administrator") to file 26 the Application on behalf of the City, and to provide such other documents and information as 27 may be necessary or desirable in connection with the Application; and P.O. Box 475 ˜ Dover, Delaware ˜19903 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

DRAFT PROPOSED COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2014-13 PAGE 2 28 3. If the Application is successful and the City of Dover receives notice that it has been selected for 29 designation as a District: 30 a. The City shall adhere to the District Plan and the Local Incentives contained in the 31 Application for the duration of the District designation; and 32 b. The Administrator, or his or her designee(s), is authorized to execute such documents and 33 enter into such agreements as may be necessary or desirable in connection with the 34 Downtown Development Districts program and the rights and obligations of the City of 35 Dover thereunder; and 36 c. The Administrator, or his or her designee(s), is authorized to carry out all District 37 administrative and reporting requirements on behalf of the City of Dover for the duration of 38 the District. 39 ADOPTED: * 40 S:\RESOLUTIONS-PROCLAMATIONS-TRIBUTES\2014\Draft\Resolution No. 2014-13 In Support of the Application for Designation as a Downtown Development District.wpd 41 42 ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN DAVID L. BONAR 43 MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT 44 Actions History: 45 October 13, 2014 - Introduced at Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee

ATTACHMENT #4 PR&CE Committee Meeting of 10/13/2014

Downtown Development District Program How to Use this Application Form This application is a Microsoft Word document that has been modified. The text in the document is “locked” meaning that you can’t edit it. The fields where you are supposed to enter information are “open” allowing you to type or paste information into these fields. The fields that can be edited are in gray. First, we recommend that you save this document with a unique file name that includes the name of your jurisdiction. An example would be “DDD-Application-Dagsboro.” Then you can work on the document without fear of overwriting it, and when you send it to us we will know who it came from (and we won’t be in danger of overwriting it). Some of the fields are informational in nature, such as places to type in the name and address of your jurisdiction. It should be relatively straightforward to type this information in and save it. Some of the fields are check boxes, which are similarly straightforward. Many of the fields are questions that ask you to respond in either 100 or 750 words. You might find it helpful to write and edit your responses in a separate Word document and then paste them in to the application once they are complete. The 100 word statement is to be used internally for review and in printed materials where we need a concise description of each proposed District. Almost all other questions are suggested to be no more than 750 words, which is about a page and a half of text (using 12 point font). In these responses it is important to clearly and concisely answer each question. Your District Plan can go into much more detail about each topic, and it is appropriate and expected that you will reference your District Plan in these 750 word responses. There is no penalty for exceeding 750 words, but if you find that you are writing much more than 750 words please consider putting the additional information in your District Plan. There are numerous attachments mentioned throughout this application. The most obvious one will be the District Plan. The application also asks for various maps, spreadsheets, letters of support, resolutions and data to be attached associated with particular questions. Please compile all of the attachments into one Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) document. It would be wonderful if you could include a table of contents, and organize these attachments in the order of the questions. It is likely that when you are done with the application form (Word document) and the attachments (.pdf document) the combination of both documents will be larger than 15mb, which is the limit for external email in the State system. In these cases, we will arrange for you to have access to a sftp file transfer site to upload your documents. Email the OMB Application Team at OMB_APP_Team@state.de.us to request an account and a password to upload the file. You must include the following information in your email in order for the OMB Application Team to process your account access: Name, Company, Email Address, and Phone Number. OSPC will provide technical assistance with Census data and GIS mapping if requested by local governments that can demonstrate the need for the assistance. We will provide assistance to all local governments on the technical aspects of completing this application and transmitting / uploading finished applications. To request assistance or if you have questions about any part of this application or the program in general please contact your Circuit Rider Planner at the Office of State Planning Coordination, (302) 739-3090.

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Section I Completed applications will be General Guidelines considered by the Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues (the Committee). The Committee will make The Downtown Development Districts recommendations to the Governor, who Act of 2014 (the Act) was enacted by the will then designate between one and General Assembly in order to: three Downtown Development Districts in the current program year. Additional • Spur private capital investment in Districts may be designated in future commercial business districts and program years. The number of Districts other neighborhoods; is limited to 15 at any one time. District • Stimulate job growth and designations last for 10 years, and the improve the commercial vitality Committee can consider up to two five of such districts and year extensions. neighborhoods; • Help build a stable community of Selection as a Downtown Development long term residents by improving District will entitle private construction housing opportunities; and projects within the identified District to • Assist local governments in receive grants to offset 20% of their strengthening neighborhoods capital construction costs. There are a while harnessing the attraction host of other benefits that will be that vibrant downtowns hold for described in more detail in other talented people, innovative small materials. Grant funds will be businesses and residents from all administered by the Delaware State walks of life. Housing Authority (DSHA). Local governments1 that wish to take Applications must be addressed to the advantage of this program must identify Office of State Planning Coordination as a downtown district in their community follows: and apply for designation. To make an application for designation this form Mrs. Constance C. Holland, AICP must be completed, supporting materials Director must be attached, and the entire packet Office of State Planning Coordination submitted to the Office of State Planning 122 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, S. Coordination as detailed herein in order Dover, DE 19901 for the request to be considered. 1 Municipalities and counties are eligible to Application Due Date for apply for Downtown Development District FY15 Cycle: designation. Throughout this document, the terms “local government” and “applicant” refer November 1, 2014 to either the municipality or county that is presenting the application. Released: August 1, 2014 2

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District plan and land use regulations support the Section II application for the District. Specific Requirements The Act identifies three components of Local governments must identify the application for designation as a proposed Downtown Development District: Districts in accordance with the Act. Districts must include a traditional • The need and impact of the mixed-use downtown area, commonly District designation; known as a Central Business District • The quality of the District Plan (CBD)2. Districts must be no more than • The quality of the local 85 acres in area for jurisdictions with a incentives offered population under 9,0003 persons, no more than 170 acres in area for Each of these components will now be jurisdictions with a population between described in more detail. 9,000 and 30,000 persons, and no more than 225 acres in area for jurisdictions Need and Impact: The applicant must with a population over 30,001 persons. describe the need for the economic Applicants are encouraged to incentives that will be available in geographically concentrate the designated District. The need must be incentives to the greatest extent possible. documented through the use of relevant data and other methods. The conditions The size and shape of the proposed of the local economy, income, poverty, District must make sense from an urban homeownership rates, prevalence of planning and revitalization perspective. vacant or abandoned buildings and other The applicant must fully describe the metrics may be used to make the case rationale for choosing the boundaries as that the proposed District is in need of a part of this application. Guidelines for the incentives. preparing District boundaries are found elsewhere in this application. In addition, the applicant must describe the potential positive impacts that are A map of the District is required as a likely to accrue due to designation as a part of this application. Local District. Applicants are encouraged to governments must also supply maps describe the impacts using both data and showing the future land use and zoning other methods. of the district area, and discuss how the The Need and Impact section will 2 Central Business District: An area around the account for 50% of the consideration downtown portion of the city or town allowing given to scoring each application. for higher intensity residential uses as well as commercial, office, personal services, governmental, and similar uses intended to serve District Plan – The local government the community and surrounding areas of the city must present a District Plan that will be or town. used to guide development activities and 3 Population to be based on the 2010 US Census. Released: August 1, 2014 3

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District revitalization efforts in the District. The Local Incentives – The local District Plan is to be a detailed government must detail a package of description of the overall strategy for the local development incentives that will development of a proposed district. apply within the proposed District. These incentives may include, but are The applicant must demonstrate that the not limited to, a reduction in fees or District Plan is consistent with the local taxes; regulatory flexibility; permit government’s certified Comprehensive process and licensing reform; special Plan and the Strategies for State Policies zoning districts; or exemptions from and Spending and any other local local ordinances. These incentives may planning documents or studies that are either be currently in place and in use by applicable. Additionally, if other the municipality or county or they may governmental, non-governmental and/or be proposed for implementation upon quasi governmental organizations are designation as a District. involved with revitalization efforts in the downtown area they must be identified Upon designation as a District the local and it must be demonstrated that government is required to implement the coordination of all activities will be part incentive package as described and of the District Plan. proposed for the duration of the District designation. Grant funds will not be The District Plan should clearly and available to projects until the incentive concisely describe the key actions and package is adopted by the local strategies that are in place and / or will government and made available to the be used to guide growth and project developer. Changes to the revitalization efforts in the proposed incentive package must be approved by District. The overall vision of the plan, the Committee. The District designation the clarity of actions to be taken, and may be rescinded by the Committee if proof of the ability and the will of the these conditions are not adhered to. municipality or county and other partners to implement the plan will be The quality of the Local Incentives will key considerations when evaluating this account for 20% of the consideration section of the application. given to scoring each application. Changes to the District Plan must be Section III reviewed by the Committee. District Application Instructions designation may be rescinded if the District Plan is not adhered to. Check List - self-explanatory. The quality of the District Plan will account for 30% of the consideration Information Sheet - The local given to scoring each application. government must supply the jurisdiction's name, mailing address, and phone numbers. The applicant must provide the date of the last update of the Released: August 1, 2014 4

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District comprehensive plan and briefly describe form, along with any relevant supporting the District being proposed. documentation. Map of the Proposed District – The Written Documentation from local government must submit a map of Supporting Organizations – The local the proposed District in sufficient detail government must supply written to clearly identify the boundaries of the documentation from other organizations District and calculate its area. Maps that will be relied upon to implement the should be created with GIS software, District Plan. The documentation must and the associated computer files should be attached to the “Summary of District be made available to aid our review of Plan” form. the proposal. Districts must be contiguous, and be no more than 85 Summary of Local Incentives – The acres in area for local governments with local government must complete this a population under 9,000 persons, no form to summarize the local incentive more than 170 acres in area for package to be made available within the jurisdictions with a population between District upon designation. The local 9,000 and 30,000 persons, and no more ordinances (or other regulations or than 225 acres in area for jurisdictions documentation) enabling and governing with a population over 30,001 persons. these incentives must be attached to this There are guidelines detailed elsewhere form, along with any relevant supporting in this application that must be followed documentation. In the case of incentives when preparing the proposed District proposed upon designation, the draft boundaries. Applicants must also supply ordinances must be attached. maps showing the future land use and zoning of the district area, and discuss Legislative Body Resolution – The how the plan and land use regulations local government must attach an adopted support the application for the District. resolution from the jurisdiction’s legislative body that indicates the local Summary of Need and Impact – The government’s desire to apply for local government must complete this designation as a District, and the local form to summarize the need for District government’s willingness to adhere to designation and the potential positive the District Plan and the Local impact of the district. Supporting Incentives for the duration of the District documentation should be attached to this designation. form. Summary of District Plan – The local government must complete this form to summarize the District Plan for the proposed District. Copies of the District Plan or Plans must be attached to this Released: August 1, 2014 5

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Application Cover Sheet and Check List Jurisdiction Name: City of Dover Date of Application October 27, 2014 Date Received Check List for Application Materials Application Cover Sheet and Check List. Information Sheet. Map of the Proposed District (GIS files encouraged). Map of Future Land Use in Proposed District (GIS files encouraged) Map of Zoning in Proposed District (GIS files encouraged) Summary of Need and Impact (with attachments). Summary of District Plan (with attachments). Written Documentation from Supporting Organizations. Summary of Local Incentives (with attachments). Legislative Body Resolution. Released: August 1, 2014 6

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Information Sheet Municipality / County: City of Dover ______________________________________________ Contact Person for Application Proposed District Administrator (if different) Name: Ann Marie Townshend Name: Address: PO Box 475, Dover, DE 19903 Address: Phone: 302-736-7196 Phone: Email: atownshend@dover.de.us Email: Signature Date Signature Date Date of certified Comprehensive Plan Adopted February 9, 2009 - Certified April 24, 2009 Population of the municipality or county (as per 2010 US Census) 36,041 Population of proposed District (based on 2010 US Census Block data) 1,989 Area of proposed District in acres 220 Brief description of the proposed Downtown Development District (100 words or less) Note: this description will be used as a summary for internal review and in printed materials The proposed Downtown Development District encompasses the heart of Dover's downtown Central Business District and the adjoining residential neighborhoods. The proposed District is prime for redevelopment, but presents significant challenges as well. The proposed District includes the area generally bounded by Mary Street to the north, Water Street to the south, the railroad tracks to the west, and State Street/Governors Avenue to the east. It also includes the portion of Lincoln Park east of Cherry Street. Lincoln Park is a historically African-American middle class neighborhood immediately west of the railroad tracks. The east side of this neighborhood has experienced a deterioration of the housing stock in recent years due to high concentrations of rental properties. Released: August 1, 2014 7

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Map of the Proposed Downtown Development District Instructions: Prepare a map of the proposed Downtown Development District. The map must clearly show the boundaries of the District. The area of the proposed District, in acres, must be calculated from the boundaries designated on the map. The following guidelines must be adhered to when preparing the boundaries of the proposed District: • The maximum size of the District is 85 acres for local governments with populations below 9,000, 170 acres for local governments with a population between 9,000 and 30,000, and 225 acres for local governments with populations over 30,001 (population as per the 2010 US Census). • Districts must be contiguous. • Districts must include the streets and right-of-ways within it. These count towards the maximum acreage. • Enclaves within District boundaries are not acceptable. • Prioritizing, phasing and /or timing of redevelopment activities in different geographic areas of the District is acceptable, and will be considered favorably when it can be demonstrated that this will concentrate the incentives to achieve specific revitalization goals. • If any portion of the proposed District is in the floodplain, the FEMA floodplain map must be included as a layer on the map. Contact OSPC for technical assistance if needed. Attach the map of the proposed Downtown Development District Attach a map showing the future land use in the proposed District from the municipality’s or county’s certified Comprehensive Plan. Attach a map showing the zoning or land use regulations that apply to lands within the District. Discuss how the plan and land use regulations support the application for the District. It is encouraged that the map(s) be created using GIS software. If the municipality or county is able to use this software, please submit digital files to our office to supplement the application and aid us in our review. Please contact OSPC if you need assistance and / or to arrange to electronically transfer the files. District Boundaries Map Attached GIS data is available and will be electronically transferred to OSPC Name of person who created the map: Jeremy Gibb Phone 302-736-7025 Email jgibb@dover.de.us Released: August 1, 2014 8

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Map of the Proposed Downtown Development District - continued Describe the rationale for choosing the boundaries of the proposed District (please limit your response to 750 words or less). The proposed District was chosen based on a number of critical factors. The City's Downtown Redevelopment Target Area (Target Area) is defined in Dover Code. This Target Area is over 400 acres, so we knew that we needed to shrink the area for our District. In determining how to shrink the area, we focused primarily on Need and Impact. We removed areas where the need is not as great and where the beneficiaries would be institutional users. Areas that are within the City's Target Area defined by code but not within the proposed District boundary include the State of Delaware complex, the east side of The Green, Wesley College, and Bayhealth Medical Center. The proposed District includes the traditional Central Business District along Loockerman Street, the commercial and residential neighorhoods radiating from Loockerman Street, and the eastern portion of the Lincoln Park neighborhood. These areas include old buildings which have deteriorated over time, vacant land, and a variety of socioeconomic challenges. Attach a map showing the future land use of the District from the local government’s certified Comprehensive Plan. Map Attached GIS data is available and will be electronically transferred to OSCP Attach a map showing the zoning or land use regulations that apply to lands within the District Map Attached GIS data is available and will be electronically transferred to OSPC Released: August 1, 2014 9

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Map of the Proposed Downtown Development District - continued Discuss how the plan and land use regulations support the application for the District (Please limit your response to 750 words or less). The Land Development Plan (Map 12-1 from the 2008 Comprehensive Plan) shows most of the area within the proposed Downtown Development District as a Land Use Classification of "Mixed Use," which would allow for a variety of zoning designations. The eastern portion of the Lincoln Park neighborhood, just west of the railroad tracks, and the northwest residential area of the District are shown as "Residential Medium Density." The far northwest corner, principally the area where Teal Construction is located (West Street, south of Mary Street), is identified as "Industrial and Public Utilities." The Transit Center, located at the corner of Water and South Queen Streets, and properties owned by Wesley College in the northeast portion of the District are identified as "Institutional." All zoning in the District complies with the Land Use Classifications in the Land Development Plan. The proposed District includes a number of different zoning classifications. The commercial district surrounding Loockerman Street is principally C-2 (Central Commercial Zone), which allows for a mix of commercial and residential uses. There is no parking requirement associated with this zone, and properties can be built without building setbacks. This zone was developed with the intent of allowing for traditional downtown development and uses. The residential areas within the District are principally RG-1 (General Residence Zone). This zone allows primarily one-family detached residences. The bulk standards allow for smaller setbacks and greater lot coverage than the One-Family Residence zones. Many of the RG-1 properties within the proposed District are legal, non-conforming with respect to the current bulk standards. There is a provision within the RG-1 Zone that allows for administrative waivers of bulk standards for lots that do not conform with current minimum lot size and dimension requirements. This allows for many of the small lots to be developed without needing to apply to the Board of Adjustment for a variance. Within the RG-1 Zone, many single-family detached homes had previously been converted to roominghouses or apartments. In 2003 and 2006, the City of Dover changed the provisions of the zone to prohibit roominghouses and the conversion of single family homes to apartments. These amendments also to apply restrictions for student housing. There are still many legal-nonconforming apartment houses and student homes. There are also illegal roominghouses that the Department of Planning and Inspections identifies and addresses through routine housing inspections. The Restoring Central Dover Plan identifies the need to evaluate the RG-1 Zone to allow for a variety of housing types. The Planning Office has begun working on the development of infill standards and the ability to construct different housing styles within the RG-1 Zone; however, these amendments are not imminent. The area along State Street is largely RGO (General Residence and Office), which allows for a variety of residential and office uses. Other zones within the District include C-1A (Limited Released: August 1, 2014 10

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Commercial), C-2A (Limited Central Commercial), IO (Institutional and Office), C-3 (Service Commercial), and RG-4 (General Residence Zone for Multi-Story Apartments). The eastern portion of the District and the central portion of the District are also located within the Historic District Zone. This Zone is subject to the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone and also to oversight by the Historic District Commission for exterior improvements to buildings and properties. Within the Historic District Zone, exterior improvements are subject to an Architectural Review Certificate, which is approved by the City Planner, the Historic District Commission, or the Planning Commission, depending on the degree of the proposed improvement. The Standards and Guidelines help to protect the historic character of the downtown; however, the presence of the Historic District Zone also adds a layer of review for new construction that adds additional time to the review of new development. The Planning Office is evaluating options for amending the process to allow for a more streamlined review without sacrificing the integrity of the Historic District. The goals of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan, in several chapters and in the Land Development Plan, support the application for the Downtown Development District. A copy of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Goals is attached with the related goals highlighted. Are there other special overlays, districts, or areas that intersect the proposed District? Examples of such special areas include historic districts, BID taxing districts, etc. Please describe any of these special areas and how they will interact with the proposed Downtown Development District. Include maps, if applicable. (Please limit your response to 750 words or less). There are a number of special boundaries that intersect the proposed District. These include: the Downtown Redevelopment Target Area, the Business Improvement District, and the Historic District Zone. Maps are provided for each of these boundaries and how they relate to the proposed district. The Downtown Redevelopment Target Area is the geographic area defined in Dover Code of Ordinances (Appendix C) where the City offers redevelopment incentives. If successful in achieving the Downtown Development District designation, the City will review this boundary to determine how to incorporate the proposed District boundary. The boundary of the Business Improvement District includes three zones, where commercial property owners pay a Business Improvement District Tax that helps to support downtown revitalization efforts. The Business Improvement District Tax supports the operations of the Downtown Dover Partnership, which serves as Dover's Main Street organization. The Historic District Zone is the area of the City where specific guidelines and design standards are applied to ensure that the historic character of the area is preserved. There has been discussion about modifying the boundaries of the Historic District Zone, but even if modified there will always be a portion of the proposed Released: August 1, 2014 11

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District District within the Historic District Zone. The proposed District also includes two Historic Districts on the National Register of Historic Places, as well as sites and buildings individually listed on the National Register. A portion of the First State Heritage Park is also located within the proposed District, including a number of State museum sites. Released: August 1, 2014 12

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Summary of Need and Impact 50% Instructions: Complete this form to document the need for the District designation and its potential to positively impact your community. Attachments of data and other documentation are required. There is no specific page or word limit on the information that can be attached, however please be aware that applications that provide clear and concise documentation that is directly related to the need and impact of the District proposal will be scored the highest. Please describe the need for the Downtown Development District designation in your community (please limit your response to 750 words or less). Dover's downtown was once a thriving hub of activity, including bustling businesses and well- kept residences. Like many downtowns, suburbanization and the prominance of auto oriented strip malls of Route 13 have left the downtown underutilized and deteriorating in some areas. A lot of energy in the last two decades has focused on downtown revitalization. There have been a number of successes along the way, but success has been spotty and often centered east of Governors Avenue. A number of factors have created impediments to achieving real success in downtown revitalzation. The deterioration of existing building stock and costs associated with renovation of buildings that have been neglected for decades, along with the deterioration of the downtown neighborhoods due to neglected housing stock, low homeownership rates, and crime, have created signficant challenges to downtown revitalization. True downtown revitalization cannot be realized without addressing the deterioration of the downtown neighborhoods that abut the Central Business District. Failure to address this deterioration not only jeopardizes revitalization of the Central Business District, but it also jeopardizes the stability of other residential neighborhoods just outside of the downtown area. Because the challenges are so significant, the costs of revitalization are high. Developers, builders, and potential property owners are often deterred from investing in the downtown because the cost of renovating or building on a property often exceeds the value of the property with the improvements. Prospective businesses are often undercapitalized and cannot complete building renovations necessary to make their shops code compliant, purchase their equipment and inventory, and pay expenses until they are able to turn a profit. There is a sense that it is easier and less expensive to build new somewhere else. Prospective homeowners are deterred by perceptions of safety and crime, as well as a high residental rental rate, and the deteriorated condition of much of the housing stock. This leaves much of the housing inventory in the downtown area as marginally compliant rental properties, many of which are owned by absentee or unresponsive landlords. Released: August 1, 2014 13

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Since 2008, the City has taken a very strong stance on code enforcement and has demolished many deteriorated buildings both in the downtown area.While demolition eliminates the blight and safety issues associated with vacant, deteriorated buildings, it does little to revitalize the neighborhood, as it leaves vacant lots. To achieve success in revitalizing the downtown neighborhood, replacing demolished buildings with new, occupied homes or other structures is necessary. The Restoring Central Dover Plan identifies strategies to address both the deterioration in the downtown neighborhoods and the economic revitalization of the downtown business district. Released: August 1, 2014 14

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Summary of Need and Impact – continued 50% Attach relevant data to that demonstrates and documents the need for the Downtown Development District designation. The following table summarizes the required data from the US Census. Input the data into the summary spreadsheet provided, and attach any other written documentation that can summarize the data. Contact OSPC for assistance with the Census data, if needed. Required Data from the US Census The municipality or county as a whole Median Income Poverty Rate Age of Structures % Homeownership % Rental Vacancy Median Home Value The Census Tract(s) that contains the proposed District Median Income Poverty Rate Age of Structures % Homeownership % Rental Vacancy Median Home Value % Low / Mod Income The Census Block(s) that most closely correspond to the proposed District Total Population % Homeownership % Vacancy Summary spreadsheet and other documentation attached Please provide any other data that support the municipality’s application for the District. The following table contains some suggested data sources that can serve to supplement the required data. Please attach any that apply, and any other data that is relevant. Cite the source for each dataset. Suggested Data from a Variety of Sources Blight Condemned Properties Code Violations Crime Statistics Economic Analysis CDBG Program Statistics Market Studies Redevelopment Authority Activities Public Works Projects Education Data Infrastructure Condition or Need Other Additional data and documentation attached Released: August 1, 2014 15

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Summary of Need and Impact – continued 50% Describe how the attached data demonstrates the need for the Downtown Development District designation in your community (please limit your response to 750 words or less). The data provided demonstrate the need for the Downtown Development District in Dover, and specifically in the area chosen for the District. 1. Housing - Based on the data from the 2010 Decennial Census (by Census block), 15.3% of housing units in the blocks comprising the District were vacant. Of the occupied housing units, 84.4% were rental, and only 15.5% were owner occupied (with or without a mortgage). By comparison, the American Community Survey for 2008-2012 shows a homeownership rate within the City of 55.1%. 2. Vacant and Dangerous Buildings - The District includes 49 registered vacant buildings, 7 buildings that have been declared dangerous by staff or City Council, and 25 lots where buildings have been demolished by either the City or the owner since 2008 due to a dangerous building declaration. A disproportionate number of vacant and dangerous buildings and lots where buildings have been demolished are located within the District and areas immediately surrounding the District. The designated dangerous buildings only reflect the worst of Dover's building stock. Many other buildings are in marginal but habitable condition, as demonstrated by the number of active code enforcement cases within the proposed District (See Map #4, 5 and 6). 3. Crime - Map #7 shows crime density within the District. Additionally, the Restoring Central Dover Plan shows several crime density maps, broken down by violent crimes, property crimes, and drug crimes. The highest concentrations of these crimes are within the area bounded by Loockerman, Queen, Division, and State Streets. 4. Poverty and Income - Unfortunately, poverty and income data are not available by Census block so it cannot be directly correlated to the District boundary; however, anecdotally and by looking at the housing statistics and condition, the Downtown Development District includes high concentrations of poverty, homelessness, and low income population. In looking at the block groups comprising the District, which is geographically larger than the District, 56.7% of household are low to moderate income. By contrast, the Census block groups which encompass the City of Dover (although a larger area than the incorporated boundary) show that 44.4% of households are low to moderate income. 5. CDBG Investment - The City of Dover has invested Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to improve the downtown area through the housing rehabilitation, infrastructure rehabilitation, and support of the Dover Interfaith Men's Shelter over the past ten years. Street, sidewalk and curb rehabilitation was completed for areas of South New Street, South Queen Street, North West Street, North Kirkwood Street, and Mary Street between 2003 and 2006. Map #8 shows the locations and types of projects that the City has funded within the District using Released: August 1, 2014 16

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District CDBG funding. Describe the potential positive impacts of the proposed Downtown Development District designation in your community. Impacts can include economic, social and / or cultural impacts among others. Attach supporting documentation if applicable (please limit your response to 750 words or less). Downtown Development District designation has the potential to transform Downtown Dover. The City has struggled with downtown redevelopment for over two decades, and we have seen a number of successes. Unfortunately success has been hampered by the costs of downtown redevelopment and the challenges that face the residential neighborhoods of Central Dover, adjacent to the Central Business District. Designation as a Downtown Development District has the potential to address both of these challenges. As it relates to the costs of renovating deteriorated buildings, many of which were built before indoor plumbing and electric, the incentives that would be offered within the District by the State, Kent County, and the City of Dover significantly reduce the costs, allowing projects that would otherwise be infeasible to become feasible. In addition to incentives offered by the State, Kent County, and the City of Dover, the City will work with other partners, such as the Sustainable Energy Utility, NCALL, and the Kent County Association of Realtors to leverage additional resources. The Restoring Central Dover Plan is being developed with the assistance of a grant through the Wells Fargo Foundation. With the completion of the Plan and District designation, additional resources for Plan implementation may be available through the Wells Fargo Foundation. These funds would further leverage the public incentives and private investment. Through leveraging and pooling resources, projects that previously were infeasible may now be possible. The City of Dover and the Downtown Dover Partnership have developed a track record of success in transforming the vision of a vibrant downtown into a reality. With the plans in place and resources to support plan implementation and to leverage private investment, the City and the Downtown Dover Partnership are poised to seek out private sector development partners to bring the ideas identified in the District Plan to reality. Between November and March, the Downtown Dover Partnership and the City of Dover will hold a stakeholder/developer forum, and invite property owners, developers, and the real estate community, to share information about the Downtown Development District program and all of the potential resources and incentives available under the program, and to cultivate the partnerships necessary with the property owners and development community to encourage investment in their properties. As it relates to the residential neighborhoods that comprise the heart of Central Dover, the Released: August 1, 2014 17

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Restoring Central Dover Plan offers a variety of implementation measures that would address the physical, social and economic challenges that have contributed to the deterioration of these neighborhoods. By infusing resources with clear strategies to improve the housing stock and increase homeownership, the Downtown Development District Plan and designation provide momentum, strategies, and resources that were previously unavailable to the stakeholders in the area. Through partnerships with NCALL, Habitat for Humanity, the Kent County Association of Realtors, Milford Housing Development Corporation, Dover Housing Authority, and Delaware State Housing Authority, the City will be in a position to improve the housing stock and promote homeownership. In addition, the Restoring Central Dover Plan provides a series of economic and safety recommendations that can be implemented by the City of Dover Police Department and others to improve safety in the District. This comprehensive approach is necessary to achieve success. By providing the resources to implement the Plan strategies, a significant impact is not only possible but probable. Many resources will be pooled in the area of housing to achieve success in increasing homeownership. NCALL provides housing counseling and credit repair assistance to prospective homebuyers. Many of the funding sources available to low to moderate income homebuyers require housing counseling as a condition of the assistance (for example, the City of Dover's CDBG down payment assistance). NCALL will also be able to leverage their loan fund as a Treasury certified lending institution. Dover Housing Authority has agreed to use the Housing Choice Vouchers to support mortgage payments for low income homeowners. In addition, Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity and Milford Housing Development Corporation are enthusiastic about furthering the goal of homeownership in the District. As identified in Restoring Central Dover, the City of Dover will allow homebuyers in the District to obtain CDBG funds both for down payment assistance and for housing rehabilitation, so that a qualifying homebuyer can purchase a home within the District with down payment assistance and then use CDBG funds also to renovate the property to make it code compliant. With the current condition of many houses in Central Dover, this in conjunction with the State rebates will make purchasing a home in the District more attractive to prospective buyers. Kent County Association of Realtors will also be a key partner in furthering the goal of homeownership. The City of Dover and NCALL will bring all of the housing partners together to develop an even more cohesive strategy for successful homeownership growth in late 2014 to turn the implementation strategies into a clear action plan with performance measures. Released: August 1, 2014 18

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Summary of District Plan 30% Instructions: through this application the municipality or county will be presenting the District Plan that will guide future revitalization, growth and development activities in the District. Upon designation, the local government will be required to adhere to the District Plan in order to qualify for grants and other incentives. Attach the District Plan, and summarize the content, goals, and objectives in the space provided. The District Plan Checklist is provided as a separate document. The proposed District Plan must be prepared in accordance with the Checklist. Attach the District Plan. District Plan Attached. Summarize the content, goals and objectives of the District Plan. (please limit your response to 750 words or less). There have been a number of planning studies over the years that address redevelopment of Downtown Dover. The two principal and most recent plans include the Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book and the Restoring Central Dover Plan, which is currently still in draft form. These plans together comprise Dover's Downtown Development District Plan. The Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan is driven largely by design and the form of downtown redevelopment. By contrast, the Restoring Central Dover Plan addresses many of the social challenges that have been identified as obstacles to downtown redevelopment. This is the first plan in recent years that focuses on the social and economic issues that confront the downtown area. The following goals and objectives are addressed in both plans, although with slightly different focus. 1) Mixed use development 2) Retail uses within the Central Business District 3) Increase the number/percent of owner-occupied homes 4) Increase the density of development 5) Build on vacant lots 6) Bring buildings close to the street to line the sidewalk 7) Strategic location of open spaces, parks and gateways Both plans provide more detailed strategies for implementation, many of which require collaboration among the private, public and non-profit sectors. Over the next six months, the Released: August 1, 2014 19

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District City of Dover will work with stakeholders, including the Downtown Dover Partnership and the Restoring Central Dover Steering Committee, to develop clear performance measures based on the goals and implementation strategies articulated in the District Plan and to track and report on these performance measures so that we can evaluate the short-term and long-term success of our plan implementation. Released: August 1, 2014 20

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Summary of District Plan – continued 30% Please summarize how the local government envisions itself in a leadership role to guide the successful implementation of the District Plan (please limit your response to 750 words or less). The City of Dover envisions itself in a leadership role and as an active partner in the full implementation of the District Plan. Specifically, the City will provide leadership in the following three areas: 1) Leadership and Facilitation - As the City works with stakeholders across all sectors, the City is well-positioned to provide leadership among the stakeholders and to facilitate the various implementation activities. In this regard, the City will develop outreach materials and help prospective developer's to navigate the development and/or renovation process, including how to obtain the available incentives. The City will work in coordination with the Downtown Dover Partnership and the Restoring Central Dover Steering Committee to facilitate implementation of the District Plan and to develop and track performance measures to evaluate success in plan implementation. 2) Financial Incentives - The financial incentives offered by the City are important to the success of the Downtown Development District Plan in Dover. The cost associated with rehabilitation of deteriorated buildings and redevelopment in the downtown area is large. The combination of the State's rebate, Kent County's rebate, and the City's incentives significantly reduces the cost of downtown redevelopment projects. The City will administer the City's incentives associated with the District. 3) Regulatory Framework - Several of the implementation strategies relate to the City's regulatory framework, whether it is the issue of site lay-out, zoning changes, or streamlining the permitting/development process, modifications to the City's regulatory framework will be necessary for the success of the program. Many changes have been made to the City's Zoning Ordinance to streamline the development process, but there are additional changes specifically referenced within the Restoring Central Dover Plan. List key implementation strategies for the District Plan. Please also list any known projects or proposals that can be underway within six to twelve months of District designation. Key Priority Projects4 should be 4 Key Priority Projects are specific projects identified in the District Plan that are considered to be potential catalysts for other redevelopment activity and / or contribute to superior urban design or other benefits to the District. Released: August 1, 2014 21

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District identified, if applicable. See the Checklist for more details (please limit your response to 750 words or less). The planning documents that comprise the City of Dover's District Plan include a series of implementation strategies. The following are some of the key implementation strategies: - Reinforce key intersections with significant new buildings. (This could also include the renovation and re-use of existing buildings at key intersections.) - Encourage mixed use development that includes residential uses, as defined in the plan. - Encourage flexible design criteria based on the project's collective merits to the downtown area. - Phase structured parking replacement on existing or new surface parking lots to accommodate additional developmental density. - Develop overall downtown parking strategy. - Create expedited permitting process. - Work to re-establish Dover Police Department downtown foot and bike patrols. - Expand surveillance camera network. - Improve lighting in targeted areas. - Provide additional transitional housing. - Expand access to housing repair programs and establish rehabilitation revolving loan fund. - Initiate volunteer based neighborhood housing repair organization. - Strengthen code enforcement. - Explore ways to boost homeownership. - Encourage greater zoning flexibility to enable infill housing development. - Evaluate ways of providing financial incentives for development in the Central Dover areas. - Provide assistance in establishing upper-floor apartments along Loockerman Street. - Build and expand on marketing/branding efforts for the Loockerman Street Corridor and Central Dover. - Expand small business development programs for new and existing business owners. There are a number of projects and implementation strategies that can be started, and possibly completed, within six to twelve months of District designation. One of the Strategies is to "reinforce key intersections with significant new buildings." Unfortunately, there are several key intersections where anchor buildings sit vacant. Attracting viable businesses for these vacant buildings at key intersections is at least as important as new construction at key intersections. One building that is prime for a new tenant if the City receives the Downtown Development District designation is the Priscilla Block Building at the northwest corner of State and Loockerman Streets. A strong prospective business has approached the City with interest in the Downtown Development District Program, and has indicated that with the incentives and rebates available under the program, this site is likely to house a new business. Upper-floor apartments on Loockerman Street are also likely to be a short-term success of Downtown Development District designation. Many of the shops on Loockerman Street have active apartments above them. Others have the potential for apartments, but lack the capital Released: August 1, 2014 22

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District necessary for completing the renovations. The promise of the Downtown Development District designation has created interest in this area as well. The addition of new housing units in the Central Dover neighborhoods within the District is also highly likely within six to twelve months of District designation. With partners on-board, including Habitat for Humanity, Kent County Association of Realtors, Dover Housing Authority, and Milford Housing Development Corporation, as well as the availability of land for housing development, there is strong potential for new housing units to be constructed shortly after Downtown Development District designation. Other items that can be addressed in the short-term are: police foot and bike patrols, expansion of surveillance camera network, improvements to lighting, and amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to allow for greater flexibilty to spur downtown redevelopment. The Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book identifies some "key projects" that could be catalysts in spurring additional downtown redevelopment. These include redevelopment of the former "Acme Site", which is currently home to a daycare center and auto parts store. This property was purchased by the Downtown Dover Partnership and has the potential to be a mixed use redevelopment project that could lead to additional redevelopment. The Downtown Dover Partnership has been marketing the project and has completed some land planning for the site. Unfortunately, to date a development partner has not ben identified. The added incentives of the Downtown Development District Program could attract a development partner to the site and facilitate a large-scale mixed use redevelopment project that could spur additional redevelopment in the area. Another "key project" is the completion of a building at the Transit Center facility. This has been a subject of discussion since the Transit Center property was acquired. Unfortunately, the economic recession has created challenges with attracting a development partner to make this project feasible. Other "key projects", such as the consolidation of parking lots on North Street and the creation of a plaza at the former Collegian Site on Loockerman Street, have been completed. The construction of the Loockerman Way Plaza provides the opportunity for four building pads along the plaza's hardscape. The designation as a Downtown Development District may create an atmosphere where sale and development of these building pads is possible. With the North Street improvements that were undertaken over the last two years, the Downtown Dover Partnership and the City of Dover have demonstrated leadership and success in implementing the Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book. Not only were the improvements completed under budget, but the addition of a pocket park at the corner of South Governors Avenue and North Street is a welcome addition to the project. The pocket park revitalizes a corner that was once a deteriorated building that the City of Dover demolished. The City ultimately acquired the property, and together with the Downtown Dover Partnership, turned this former eyesore property into an asset to the downtown. Even with this addition, the Downtown Released: August 1, 2014 23

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Dover Partnership returned money to the State of Delaware that had been allocated the project but still unspent after the project was completed. Released: August 1, 2014 24

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Summary of District Plan – continued 30% List any other governmental, quasi-governmental or non-governmental organizations that will be involved in the creation and / or implementation of the District Plan. A Main Street organization would be an example of such an organization. For each organization, describe how the local government will coordinate their activities to encourage revitalization and economic development in the District. 1) Downtown Dover Partnership - The Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) is Dover's Main Street organization. The DDP works hand-in-hand with City staff, property owners, business owners, and others in the community to promote downtown redevelopment. The DDP also serves as the redevelopment corporation for downtown Dover and has overseen a number of successful redevelopment projects, including brownfield clean-ups and building renovations. The DDP has agreed to secure an architect and provide funding to assist new businesses with the architectural services needed to open a new business in an existing tenant space. The DDP will be a full partner with the City of Dover and other stakeholders in implementing the District Plan and will continue to play a strong leadership role in making downtown redevelopment a reality. 2) NCALL - NCALL is a Community Development Financial Institution certified by the U.S. Treasury. They provide housing counseling for prospective home buyers and lend money for affordable housing and community facilities. NCALL has been the convener of the Streering Committee and the leader for the Restoring Central Dover Plan. NCALL is a key partner in working with all stakeholders in implementing the Restoring Central Dover Plan and will continue to provide leadership in convening the Restoring Central Dover Steering Committee as we work on plan implementation. 3) Habitat for Humanity - Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity is a key partner in providing homeownership opportunities to low income families. They have worked closely with the City throughout their existence, and there are a number of successful Habitat houses in the downtown. Habitat has been a vital member of the Restoring Central Dover Steering Committee, and will be a key partner in implementing the plan and achieving the goal of homeownership in the downtown. 4) Milford Housing Development Corporation - Milford Housing Development Corporation (MHDC) is a non-profit housing developer who has worked in partnership with the City of Dover to improve housing opportunities through managing the City's housing rehabilitation and emergency repair programs which are funded through the Community Development Block Grant program. MHDC offers a variety of programs and products that will help to further the goal of Released: August 1, 2014 25

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District affordable homeownership opportunities in the downtown area and will be a partner in revitalizing the neighborhoods within the proposed District. 5) Dover Housing Authority - The Dover Housing Authority has long been a partner with the City in working to increase homeownership in the downtown area. They have been an active partner in the Restoring Central Dover Plan and will continue to work to further the goal of homeownership in central Dover. 6) Wesley College - Wesley College's primary campus is not physically located within the proposed District, but Wesley is a key stakeholer in the downtown and a key partner in achieving success in downtown redevelopment. The issues of safety and blight that have plagued downtown Dover impact Wesley's success in attracting quality students. Wesley has demonstrated commitment in helping improve the downtown with their commitment to the Schwartz Center for the Performing Arts and their new Health Sciences Building, both of which are in the heart of the City's proposed District. 7) Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing - Since their inception in 2007, the Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing has worked to provide emergency shelter for homeless men. They have worked with their clients to move them into permanent housing and provide them the resources they need to gain employment. 8) Kent County Association of Realtors - Kent County Association of Realtors is an instrumental partner in achieving the goal of increasing homeownership and getting information about incentives out to prospective homeowners. They are also a key link with the development community. 9) Sustainable Energy Utility - Restoring Central Dover includes recommendations to improve lighting in targeted area. The City will work with the Sustainable Energy Utility to address this through the use of energy efficient LED lighting in an effort to reduce energy use while improving lighting. This could include improving street lighting as well as porch lighting at private residences. Attach written documentation (in the form of letters of agreement, memorandums of understanding, board resolutions etc) from each of the above listed organizations indicating support for this application to be designated as a Downtown Development District and identifying a willingness to coordinate with the municipal government to implement the District Plan. Written documentation attached from all other organizations Released: August 1, 2014 26

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Released: August 1, 2014 27

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Summary of District Plan – continued 30% Describe any actions your local government has taken to ensure energy efficient and environmentally sensitive development, and to prepare for flooding and sea level rise, if applicable. How will these efforts be implemented in the proposed District? (please limit your response to 750 words or less). There is very little, if any, area within the proposed District that is affected by floodplains, wetlands, recharge areas, or other natural features. The City of Dover prohibits new construction within the 100-year floodplain, and the City's Zoning Ordinance protects wetlands and buffers around streams. While there is a small area in the Central Business District that is mapped as an excellent recharge area, this area is exempted from Source Water Protection Overlay Zone requirements due to environmental contamination underground from prior land uses. Specifically within the District, implementation of the District Plan will include clean-up and redevelopment of brownfield sites. We would also look to the Sustainable Energy Utility to provide incentives to include energy efficiency improvements with new development and redevelopment or renovation of existing buildings and sites. The City's Zoning Ordinance includes provisions to allow solar and wind energy as accessory uses on properties. The proposed District includes a network of sidewalks along streets and a number of transit stops throughout the District. The City has an active program for replacing sidewalks as they deteriorate. Downtown Dover has a wonderful canopy of street trees that the City has worked hard to maintain. As trees die or need to be removed, additional street trees are planted. The presence of tree canopy helps to reduce energy use through providing shade and also helps to improve air quality and overall quality of life. Through implementation of the District Plan, densification of land uses and improvements to bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure will help to reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled by having jobs and housing centrally located. Describe how the District Plan is consistent with your certified Comprehensive Plan and the Strategies for State Policies and Spending (please limit your response to 750 words or less). Released: August 1, 2014 28

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District http://stateplanning.delaware.gov/strategies/ The District Plan is consistent with the City of Dover's certified Comprehensive Plan in that it implements a number of goals and objectives related to downtown redevelopment, economic development and housing. The Comprehensive Plan specifically calls for creation of a downtown plan that will improve predictability in the process of downtown redevelopment. The proposed District is entirely within a Level 1 Investment Area as shown in the Strategies for State Policies and Spending. This is the highest priority area for State investment. Therefore, the proposed District and District Plan are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Strategies for State Policies and Spending. Released: August 1, 2014 29

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Summary of Local Incentives 20% Instructions: The municipality or county must complete this form to summarize the local incentive package to be made available within the District upon designation. The local ordinances (or other regulations or documentation) enabling and governing these incentives must be attached to this form, along with any relevant supporting documentation. In the case of incentives proposed upon designation, the draft ordinances must be attached. Attach the Local Incentives. The following table includes suggested local incentives. Please attach any that are relevant, and others that have not been listed. Suggested Local Incentives Fee or Tax Reductions Regulatory Flexibility Permit or Licensing Reform Special Zoning Districts Exemptions from Local Ordinances Streamlined Permitting Other Written documentation attached for all Local Incentives List the Local Incentives that are already in place. Please detail the geographic extent of each incentive (i.e. is the incentive available throughout the entire jurisdiction, or only in certain geographic areas?) Local Incentive In effect since (approx.) Geographic area covered City Impact Fee Waivers 2000/2008 Downtown Redevelopment Target Area Building Permit Fee Waivers 2000 Downtown Redevelopment Target Area Tax Abatement on Value of 2000 Downtown Redevelopment Improvements Target Area First Time Homebuyer Transfer 1996 Citywide Tax Exemption First Time Homebuyer Transfer 2000 Mary Street to Loockerman Tax Exemption for Seller Street & Governors Avenue to West Street Homeowner Property Tax 2000 Mary Street to Loockerman Abatement for Owner Occupied Street & Governors Avenue to Released: August 1, 2014 30

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District West Street Historic Preservation Tax Credit 1998/2000 Historic District Zone Released: August 1, 2014 31

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Summary of Local Incentives - continued 20% List any of the existing Local Incentives that will be modified to have specific benefits to properties in the proposed District. Local Incentive How modified? Geographic area covered Transfer Tax Abatement for Seller Modify boundary to DDD Only of House to First-Time match District boundary Homebuyer/owner occupied in area bounded by Mary Street, Governors Avenue, Loockerman Street & West Street Waiver of City Impact Fees (Water Expand beyond multi- DDD Only & Sewer) story, mixed use Tax Abatement for owner occupied Modify boundary to DDD Only housing in area bound by Mary match District boundary Street, Governors Avenue, Loockerman Street & West Street DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only List the Local Incentives that are new and will be available only in the proposed District. Local Incentive Date enacted (or Geographic area covered proposed date of adoption) Waiver of Business License fee for Spring 2015 DDD Only new businesses for three years Rebate of 50% of transfer tax for Spring 2015 DDD Only qualifying project upon issuance of Certificate of Occupancy Released: August 1, 2014 32

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Architectural services support up to Immediately upon DDD Only $5,000 for renovation for new designation business or business expansion DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only DDD Only Summary of Local Incentives - continued 20% Please describe how each local incentive will be funded. If the incentive involves a reduction or waiver of taxes or fees, or in-kind services (for example, expedited permitting utilizing existing staff resources) please note that here. Local Incentive Funding Source Tax abatement and fee waivers All waived income that the City does not receive due to incentives are a "cost" to the revenue into the General Fund, except the Impact Fee waivers, which are a "cost" to the Water/Wastewater Fund revenues. Architectural Services Support This will be funded through the Downtown Dover Partnership budget. In future fiscal years this may result in a transfer from the City's General Fund to the Downtown Dover Partnership in accordance with the City's approved budget. Released: August 1, 2014 33

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District For each Local Incentive to be provided, please describe the specifics of how the incentive works (details are needed), and how the incentive encourages economic development and revitalization in your community. For the Building Permit and Impact Fee waivers and the abatement of taxes on the value of the improvements, the Dover Code prescribes an application process. Applications are submitted to the Economic Development Office, who reviews the applications in accordance with criteria prescribed in the Dover Code and makes a recommendation to the City Manager. The City Manager issues a letter informing the applicant of the incentives for which they have been approved. The letter is copied to the Department of Planning and Inspections and the Tax Office so that the incentives can be appropriately implemented. For these incentives, the applicant pays 10 percent of the value of the incentive to the Downtown Dover Partnership. For the First Time Homebuyer tax incentives, there are forms that are signed by the buyer and seller at settlement and turned in to the Tax Office. In addition to these incentives, the City offers down payment assistance to low and moderate income homebuyers. Within the District boundary, the Planning Office will also recommend expansion of CDBG funding to include combining the down payment assistance with funds to rehabilitate an existing house. The process for the Historic Preservation Tax Credit is specified in Dover Code. Application is made to the Planning Office prior to the proposed rennovation and the credit is reviewed and approved by the Historic District Commission as a part of the approval of the Architectural Review Certificate. Released: August 1, 2014 34

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Summary of Local Incentives - continued 20% Summarize the package of Local Incentives, and describe how these incentives will work in concert with the Downtown Development District benefits to encourage revitalization and economic development in your proposed District (please limit your response to 750 words or less). If the City of Dover is selected for the Downtown Development District designation, the City will create a package of information about the various incentives available, including those at the City, County and State level. We will work with our partners in the housing and development community (such as the Kent County Association of Realtors and NCALL) to promote the incentives and inform the public. The Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) will work to recruit new businesses, using the incentives as a selling point. As an example of how this could work in Dover, if a prospective business owner had interest in opening in Dover, typically that person would contact the DDP. The DDP staff or volunteers would provide them with the packet of information describing the incentives available and would answer any questions the prospective business owner might have. If there is a tenant space chosen, the DDP staff would let the prospective business owner know of the architectural services available through the DDP. DDP staff would also refer the owner to the Department of Planning and Inspections for an intitial meeting with the Planning Staff, Building Inspector and Fire Marshal. The applicant would begin the process of applying for a Building Permit and would complete the incentive paperwork at that time. The combination of Building Permit fee waiver, Impact fee waiver, tax abatement on the value of the improvements, and waiver of Business License fees would be cost savings as the project goes through the process. Upon completion of the project, the applicant would submit the proper paperwork to receive the rebate from the State and Kent County, and if applicable the Transfer Tax rebate. While application for State and Kent County incentives would be completed directly with the appropriate State and County departments, City staff would provide technical assistance to applicants to assist in navigating the application and rebate processes. City staff will also track the value of the incentives available on each project. City staff would work with developers to help them leverage the various resources and incentives available to make their project feasible. Released: August 1, 2014 35

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Released: August 1, 2014 36

Downtown Development Districts Application for Designation as a District Legislative Body Resolution Instructions: Attach a resolution that has been adopted by the legislative body of your municipality or county. The resolution must affirmatively indicate that the legislative body supports the application for designation as a Downtown Development District and is willing to adhere to the District Plan and the Local Incentives for the duration of the District designation. Date of Resolution October 27, 2014 Resolution Number #2014-13 Resolution Attached. Released: August 1, 2014 37

City of Dover, Delaware Downtown Development District Application Index of Attachments Map Number Title Map #1 Downtown Development District Boundary Map #2A Downtown Development District with Existing Land Use per the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Map #2B Downtown Development District with the Land Development Plan per the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Map #3 Downtown Development District with Current Zoning Map #4 Downtown Development District with Dangerous Buildings Map #5 Downtown Development District with Vacant Buildings Map #6 Downtown Development District: Properties with Active Code Enforcement Map #7 Downtown Development District with Crime Density Map #8 Downtown Development District with CDBG Locations Map #9 Downtown Development District with Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan Boundary Map #10 Downtown Development District with Central Dover Study Area Map #11 Downtown Development District with Downtown Redevelopment Target Area Map #12 National Register Historic Districts Attachment Number Title Attachment #1 2008 Comprehensive Plan Goals Attachment #2 Documentation of Need and Impact – Photographs Attachment #3 Demographic Summary Attachment #4 Existing Incentives Attachment #5 Letters of Support Attachment #6 Resolution #2014-13 Attachment #7 Downtown Development District Plan

Downtown Development District Boundary St N Br th Smi rd S r Pea ad f o St v nsyl Mary N Am Pen St t NG N St n e ri c ania NQ over at e S ve Ave an A Ave t u ee C ec il St n St ors N Ki N Br rk w o St est S rd S on St Fult sion ad f o t E Di vi NW od S Rid t t y gel t on S Fult wy St Kings H St i v i sion W D S Br adfo ate S ed St W Re rd S t od S S St t SW r k wo S Ki Size: 220 Acres t tree laza est r man P St ock e For St Minor A ly Lo es t St Lincoln St at e S n St ve ocker ma h St ad A S St rt W Lo E No Davis Cir Cherry St ilro Ra S Qu S Go t Ave een S Ne en Gre ors The St ver n n w St Clare r St ghte h St k Ln Slau WN o rt B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa S ning ly B an St at er WW Legend t SW est Parcels St Proposed District th St ¯ Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: August 18, 2014 MAP #1 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\proposed_ddd Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Downtown Development District with Existing Land Use per the 2008 Comprehensive Plan N Br Smi th St rd S r Pea ad f o St v nsyl Mary N Am Pen St t NG N St n e ri c ania NQ over at e S ve Ave an A Ave t u ee C ec il St n St ors N Ki N Br rk w o St est S rd S on St Fult sion ad f o t E Di vi NW od S Rid t t y gel t on S Fult wy St Kings H St i v i sion W D S Br adfo ate S ed St W Re rd S t od S S St t SW r k wo S Ki t tree laza est r man P St ock e For St Minor A ly Lo es t St Lincoln St at e S n St ve ocker ma h St ad A S St rt W Lo E No Davis Cir Cherry St ilro Ra S Qu S Go t Ave een S Ne en Gre ors The St ver n n w St Clare r St ghte h St k Ln Slau WN o rt B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa Legend S ning Proposed District Institutional & Public Utilities ly B an St Parcels Mixed Use at er WW SW Current Land Use Office t Active Agriculture Open Space Commercial Residential est Vacant St Dover Air Force Base Industrial St ¯ th Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: September 9, 2014 MAP #2A File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\ddd_with_current_land_use Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Downtown Development District with the Land Development Plan per the 2008 Comprehensive PlanSmith St N Br rd S r Pea ad f o St v nsyl Mary N Am Pen St t NG N St n e ri c ania NQ over at e S ve Ave an A Ave t u ee C ec il St n St ors N Ki N Br rk w o St est S rd S on St Fult sion ad f o t E Di vi NW od S Rid t t y gel t on S Fult wy St Kings H St i v i sion W D S Br adfo ate S ed St W Re rd S t od S S St t SW r k wo S Ki t tree laza est r man P St ock e For St Minor A ly Lo es t St Lincoln St at e S n St ve ocker ma h St ad A S St rt W Lo E No Davis Cir Cherry St ilro Ra S Qu S Go t Ave een S Ne en Gre ors The St ver n n w St Clare r St ghte h St k Ln Slau WN o rt B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa Legend S ning Proposed District Mixed Use ly B an Parcels Office St at er Land Development Plan Open Space, Conservation, Recreation WW Active Agriculture Residential High Density t SW Commercial Residential Low Density est DoverAFB Residential Medium Density Train Track St Industrial and Public Utilities Institutional Water St ¯ th Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: September 9, 2014 MAP #2B File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\ddd_with_future_land_use Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Downtown Development District with Current R-8 Zoning a St Clar RG- IO RG- 1 th S t Smi N Br C-3 1 IO RG- r R- adfo 1 RG- r St 8 IO y St 1 Pea N Am Mar vani d St IO RG- nsyl M 3 n RG- NG IO N St erica RG-1 Pen RG-1 RG- over a te S Ave 1 IO e a Av 1 RG-1 NQ le nors Map t RG-1 IO S il St ueen C-1 Cec Ave Ln RG- IO M t IO RG- rkwo 1 RG-1 1 N Br N Ki RG- RGO RG- t RGO 1 on S r t 1 Fult adfo IO n St est S IPM t visio P en n od S E Di RG- IO NW d St Av e RG- S Am 1 RG- RG- 1 R-10 RGO gel ve C-3 1 1 Ri d an A St eric n RG- y St Fulto RG- RGO 1 wy RG-2 M 1 Kings H C- St sion C-1A C-3 1A W Divi RG- RG- C-3 1 C-2A 1 RG-1 S Br E Re ed S t IO C-2A C- r adfo 2A RG-1 C- t RG-1 e ed S 2A C-2A d St S St WR rkwo RG- ate S S Ki C-3 1 C-2 C-2 t est t tree laza SW od S C-3 RG-1 C-2 nP IO C-2 Aly rma RG-1 St Minor St oocke For RG-1 L est C-2 St C-2A Lincoln St IO C-2 an St ve C-2 Looc kerm S St rth S t ad A C- C-2 W E No Davis Cir ate S RG-1 C-3 ilro 3 IO Cherry St Ra C-2 C-2 een t vern C-2 sa Jeru S Qu IO S Go C-2 een IO Gr IO wS IO RGO The Way RG-1 RG-1 St S Ne RG-1 ors lem IO C-2A Clare er St ght Ave k Ln t Slau IO Ban t nce S RG-1 RGO C-3 C- RGO k Ln tgun Ban C- 2A RG-4 Sho 2A Al y ning RGO Ban IO t er S W Wat Legend St est SW Proposed District Zoning IO IO IO St TND Parcels IO Historic District t th S ¯ Sou RGO 1 inch = 500 feet St Date Printed: September 9, 2014 uee C-1A MAP #3 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds CPO IO \ddd_maps\ddd_with_current_zoning_2 n Department: Public Works GIS C-3 SQ C-3 City of Dover, Delaware

ZONING TYPES For complete text, refer to City of Dover, Code of Ordinances, Appendix B: Zoning Ordinance. RG-1 (General Residence Zone) permitting single family dwellings, off street parking with conditions. Permitted conditionally: Planned Senior Housing Developments, day cares, churches, schools, hospitals, funeral homes, philanthropic and charitable organizations, membership clubs, bed & breakfast inns, student homes, and multiple dwellings (but not allowing multiple dwellings as resulting from the conversion of a single family house to a multi- family dwelling). RG-3 (Group Housing Zone) permitting single family dwellings, townhouses, and row houses for single family group dwellings. Permitted conditionally: Planned Senior Housing Developments, day cares, churches, schools, hospitals, funeral homes, philanthropic and charitable organizations, and membership clubs. RG-4 (General Residence zone for Multi-Story Apartments) permitting single family dwellings and high-rise apartments. Permitted conditionally are day cares, the sale of commodities and services accessory to the apartments, churches, schools, hospitals, funeral homes, philanthropic and charitable organizations, and membership clubs. RGO (General Residence & Office Zone) permitting single family dwellings, single family lot line dwellings, duplex dwellings, multiplex dwellings, townhouses, rooming houses for 5 or less people, garden apartments, and offices. Permitted conditionally: Planned Senior Housing Developments, day cares, small retail business along S. State Street, bed & breakfast inns, churches, schools, hospitals, funeral homes, philanthropic and charitable organizations, and membership clubs. C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial Zone) permitting convenience retail stores; personal service establishments; service establishments; restaurants; one-family residences; and apartments and multi-family dwellings. The size of stores or establishments is limited to 2,500 S.F. of floor space. Conditionally permitting Planned Senior Housing Developments and day cares. C-1A (Limited Commercial Zone) permitting retail stores; personal service establishments; service establishments; restaurants; business, professional and governmental offices; one-family residences; and apartments and multi-family dwellings. Conditionally permitting drive-throughs accessory to a permitted use, day cares, and Planned Senior Housing Developments. C-2 (Central Commercial Zone) allowing retail stores; restaurants; hotels, including bed and breakfast inns; art galleries and studios; service establishments; personal service establishments; business, professional and government offices; and apartments and multi-family dwellings, provided that no dwelling units shall be permitted in the first floor on the street frontage of Loockerman Street. Conditionally permitting throughout the zone are parking lots and parking structures as a principal use; places of public assembly; manufacturing, assembling, converting, altering, finishing, cleaning, or any other processing of products where goods so produced or processed are to be sold at retail exclusively on the premises, day cares, and Planned Senior Housing Developments. City of Dover, Delaware: Zoning Descriptions in Downtown Development District Page 1 of 2

C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) permitting retail stores; business, professional and governmental offices; personal service establishments; restaurants; service establishments; hotels; places of public assembly; drive-throughs; one-family residences; apartments and multi- family dwellings. Conditionally permitting social service agencies, day cares, and Planned Senior Housing Developments. C-3 (Service Commercial Zone) permitting service establishments, personal service establishments; business, professional or governmental offices; retail uses accessory to a permitted use; drive-throughs accessory to a permitted use; wholesale, storage and warehousing establishments; indoor recreation and amusement establishments; motor vehicle, boat or farm equipment sales or service (subject to specific regulations); manufacturing with less than 25 employees, and mini-storage facilities. Conditionally permitting day cares and Planned Senior Housing Developments. IO (Institutional and Office Zone) permitting business, professional, and governmental offices; banks; research, design and development laboratories; public and institutional uses; day care centers; and emergency shelters and transitional housing. Conditionally permitting Planned Senior Housing Developments, fire arm ranges, correctional facilities, public incinerators, hotels and restaurants. M (Manufacturing Zone) permitting manufacturing, assembling, processing or storage of products/materials, laboratories, wholesale storage and warehousing, building contractors’ yards, public utility uses, and mini-storage facilities. H (Historic District Zone) requiring Architectural Review Certifications subject to compliance with the Design Standards & Guidelines for demolition, construction, reconstruction, alteration or restoration of any new or existing structure within the designated district. City of Dover, Delaware: Zoning Descriptions in Downtown Development District Page 2 of 2

Downtown Development District with Dangerous Buildings i th S t N Br N St at e S Sm rd S ad f o r NG t Pea ED05-076.08-02-40.00 ED05-068.17-02-05.00 n over St 238 N New St t 223 N Governors Ave Declared By Council Declared By Staff Ave ors N Am NQ e ri c u ee C ec il St ED05-076.08-02-58.00 ve 209 N New St n St an A Declared By Staff N Ki g el rk w o on St St Rid Fult sion t E Di vi yS od S t ED05-077.05-03-05.00 ED05-076.08-01-09.00 45 S New St 200 N West St Declared By Council Declared By Staff wy Kings H St v i sion S Br D i W adfo ED05-077.09-01-03.00 eed S t rd S 105 S Queen St WR t Declared By Staff ED05-077.09-01-31.00 110 S New St SW t od S Declared By Council laza est an P r k wo St er m For Minor Lo ock S Ki es St t St Lincoln St at e S Ra il rma n St ocke h St S St rt W Lo E No ve Davis Cir Cherry St dA roa S Qu S Go t ED05-076.12-02-70.00 ors 128 S Queen St een S Ne en Gr e ver n Declared By Staff St The n w St Clare r St ghte h St k Ln Slau WN o rt Ave B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa S ning ly B an St Legend at er WW Dangerous Buildings Building Abated by City t SW Proposed District Building Demolished by City est Parcels Building Demolished by Owner St Building Repaired by Owner th St ¯ Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: September 19, 2014 MAP #4 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\ddd_with_dangerous_buildings Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Downtown Development District with Vacant Buildings i th S t N Br Sm rd S r Pea ad f o St v nsyl Mary N Am Pen St t NG N St n e ri c ania NQ over at e S ve Ave an A Ave t u ee C ec il St n St ors N Ki N Br rk w o St est S rd S on St Fult sion ad f o t E Di vi NW od S Rid t t y gel t on S Fult wy St Kings H St i v i sion W D S Br adfo ate S ed St W Re rd S t od S S St t SW r k wo S Ki t tree laza est r man P St ock e For St Minor A ly Lo es t St Lincoln St at e S n St ve ocker ma h St ad A S St rt W Lo E No Davis Cir Cherry St ilro Ra S Qu S Go t Ave een S Ne en Gre ors The St ver n n w St Clare r St ghte h St k Ln Slau WN o rt B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa S ning ly Legend B an St at er WW Vacant Buildings t SW est Parcels St Proposed District th St ¯ Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: September 9, 2014 MAP #5 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\ddd_with_vacant_buildings Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Downtown Development District: Properties with Active Code Enforcement St N Br th Smi rd S r Pea ad f o St v nsyl Mary N Am Pen St t NG N St n e ri c ania NQ over at e S ve Ave an A Ave t u ee C ec il St n St ors N Ki N Br rk w o St est S rd S on St Fult sion ad f o t E Di vi NW od S gel t t R id t on S yS Fult wy t Kings H St i v i sion W D S Br adfo at e S t eed S t WR rd S od S S St t SW r k wo S Ki t tree laza est r man P St ock e For St Minor A ly Lo es t St Lincoln St at e S Ra il rma n St ocke h St S St rt W Lo E No ve Davis Cir Cherry St dA roa S Qu S Go t een S Ne ors en Gr e St ver n The n w St Clare r St ghte h St k Ln Slau WN o rt Ave B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa S ning ly Legend B an St at er WW Proposed District t SW est Code Enforcement Cases St Parcels th St ¯ Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: September 9, 2014 MAP #6 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\ddd_with_code_violations Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Downtown Development District with Crime Data: 2010-2014 i th S t N Br Sm rd S r Pea ad f o St v nsyl Mary N Am Pen St t NG N St n e ri c ania NQ over at e S ve Ave an A Ave t u ee C ec il St n St ors N Ki N Br rk w o St est S rd S on St Fult sion ad f o t E Di vi NW od S Rid t t y gel t on S Fult wy St Kings H St i v i sion W D S Br adfo ate S ed St W Re rd S t od S S St t SW r k wo S Ki t tree laza est r man P St ock e For St Minor A ly Lo es t St Lincoln St at e S n St ve ocker ma h St ad A S St rt W Lo E No Davis Cir Cherry St ilro Ra S Qu S Go t Ave een S Ne en Gre ors The St ver n n w St Clare r St ghte h St k Ln Slau WN o rt B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa S ning ly B an St at er WW Legend t SW Total Incidents 4-6 14-16 Proposed District est Within 200 Feet 6-8 16-18 Parcels St 0 8-10 18-22 1-4 10-14 22+ th St ¯ Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: October 3, 2014 MAP #7 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\crime_data Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Downtown Development District with CDBG Locations i th S t N Br Sm rd S r Pea ad f o St v nsyl Mary N Am Pen St t NG N St 207 N West St n e ri c ania ED05-076.08-02-01.00 over at e S ve Ave an A Year 2009 Ave t il St C ec ors NQ est S N Ki u ee NW rk w o n St St on St t Fult sion t E Di vi od S 38 N Kirkwood St 220 Fulton St ED05-076.08-04-12.00 ED05-076.08-05-41.00 Year 2009 Year 2009 t on S S Fult gely wy R id St 19 N Kirkwood St Kings H o n ED05-076.08-04-34.00 i vi si t WD S Br Year 2009 49 S Kirkwood St t adfo eed S ED05-076.08-06-23.00 WR rd S Year 2009 t SW t od S 217-219 W Reed St laza an P r k wo est er m ED05-077.05-03-03.00 ock S Ki For es St Lo t St Year 2009 Lincoln St at e S Ra il rma n St ocke h St S St rt W Lo E No ve Davis Cir Cherry St dA roa S Qu S Go t een S Ne ors en Gr e ver n 684 Forest St ED05-076.12-02-39.00 St The n w St Clare r St Year 2011,2012,2013,2014 ghte k Ln Slau Ave B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa S ning ly Legend B an St at er WW Proposed District CDBG Project Type SW Parcels 217-219 W Reed St Rental Rehab Rehab & Infrastructure Improvements tDover Interfaith Mission for Homeless 2003-2004 Homeowner Rehabilitation Program est 2005-2006 Homeownership Assistance Program St MHDC Emergency Home Repairs R C & D Emergency Home Repairs th St ¯ Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: September 9, 2014 MAP #8 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\ddd_with_cdbg Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Downtown Development District With Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan BoundarySmith St N Br Pea r rd S ad f o v nsyl St Mary N Am Pen St t Ave N St e ri c ania ors at e S v er n NQ ve Ave an A N Go t u ee C ec il St n St N Ki N Br rk w o on S t est S rd S Fult St sion ad f o t E Di vi NW od S Rid t t y gel on St Fult wy St Kings H St i vi sion WD S Br adfo S St t eed S t WR rd S od S tree t SW r k wo ate S S Ki za est a n Pla t A ly St ker m For St Minor Looc es t St Lincoln St at e S Ra rma n St t ocke rt h S S St ve W Lo E No Davis Cir ad A Cherry St ilro S Qu vern t een S Go S Ne en Gre The Ave St n w St Clare St ors g hter St k Ln Slau o rt h B an WN ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa S ning ly B an St Legend at er WW t SW Proposed District est Transit Center Neighborhood Plan Boundary St Parcels th St Sou ¯ 1 inch = 500 feet n St Date Printed: September 9, 2014 SQ MAP #9 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds ue e \ddd_maps\ddd_with_transit_center Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Downtown Development District with Central Dover Study i th S t Area N Br Sm rd S r Pea ad f o St v nsyl Mary N Am Pen St t NG N St n e ri c ania NQ over at e S ve Ave an A Ave t u ee C ec il St n St ors N Ki N Br rk w o St est S rd S on St Fult sion ad f o t E Di vi NW od S Rid t t y gel t on S Fult wy St Kings H St i v i sion W D S Br adfo ate S ed St W Re rd S t od S S St t SW r k wo S Ki t tree laza est r man P St ock e For St Minor A ly Lo es t St Lincoln St at e S n St ve ocker ma h St ad A S St rt W Lo E No Davis Cir Cherry St ilro Ra S Qu S Go t Ave een S Ne en Gre ors The St ver n n w St Clare r St ghte h St k Ln Slau WN o rt B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa S ning ly Legend B an St at er WW Proposed District t SW est Central Dover Study Area (REVISED) St Parcels th St ¯ Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: September 9, 2014 MAP #10 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\ddd_with_study_area Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Downtown Development District with Downtown Redevelopment Target Area St N Br th Smi rd S r Pea ad f o St v nsyl Mary N Am Pen St t NG N St n e ri c ania NQ over at e S ve Ave an A Ave t u ee C ec il St n St ors N Ki N Br rk w o St est S rd S on St Fult sion ad f o t E Di vi NW od S Rid t t y gel t on S Fult wy St Kings H St i v i sion W D S Br adfo ate S ed St W Re rd S t od S S St t SW r k wo S Ki t tree laza est r man P St ock e For St Minor A ly Lo es t St Lincoln St at e S n St ve ocker ma h St ad A S St rt W Lo E No Davis Cir Cherry St ilro Ra S Qu S Go t Ave een S Ne en Gre ors The St ver n n w St Clare r St ghte h St k Ln Slau WN o rt B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa S ning ly B an Legend St at er WW Downtown Redevelopment Target Area t SW est Proposed District St Parcels th St ¯ Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: September 9, 2014 MAP #11 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\ddd_with_target_area Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

National Register Historic Districts St N Br th Smi rd S r Pea ad f o St v nsyl Mary N Am Pen St t NG N St e ri c ania NQ nors at e S ve over an A Ave t u ee C ec il St n St Ave N Ki N Br rk w o St est S rd S on St Fult sion ad f o t E Di vi NW od S Rid t t y gel t on S Fult wy St Kings H St i v i sion W D S Br adfo at e S t eed S t WR rd S od S S St t SW r k wo S Ki t tree laza est r man P St ock e For St Minor A ly Lo es t St Lincoln St at e S Ra il rma n St ocke h St S St rt W Lo E No ve Davis Cir Cherry St dA roa S Qu S Go t een S Ne ors en Gr e St ver n The n w St Clare r St ghte h St k Ln Slau WN o rt Ave B an ce St k Ln A tgun B an t Sho te r S E Wa Legend S ning ly B an Proposed District St at er WW Dover Green Historic District t SW est Victorian Dover Historic District St Parcels th St ¯ Sou 1 inch = 500 feet Date Printed: October 23, 2014 MAP #12 File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds \ddd_maps\ddd_with_n_h_districts Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware

Attachment #1 – 2008 Comprehensive Plan Goals

Table 1-1: Plan Chapter Goals: Natural Resources Goal 1: Protect the Natural Environment and Environmental Goal 2: Improve Watershed Quality Protection Goal 3: Encourage Green Development and Sustainable Energy Practices Goal 1: Preserve and Protect Historic Resources Historic Goal 2: Provide and Promote Incentives for Preservation Activities Preservation Goal 3: Increase Public Information on Historic Resources Goal 4: Collaborate with Diverse Groups and Governments Goal 1: Proactively Maintain Existing Infrastructure and Expand Public Utilities and Infrastructure When Beneficial Community Goal 2: Enhance Infrastructure to Meet Community Needs Infrastructure Goal 3: Meet or exceed the State and Federal requirements of the NPDES permit and Stormwater Management Plan Goal 1: Provide a System of Interconnected Open Space Areas and Recreational Opportunities Goal 2: The City must be prepared to face and quickly address potential Community disasters both natural and man-made. Services and Goal 3: The City should provide and Maintain high quality police, fire, and ambulance services to all residents, properties, and visitors within Dover. Facilities Goal 4: The City should work to ensure the protection and preservation of its own resources ranging from natural, historic, and cultural including the physical facilities containing these resources. Goal 5: Protect and Preserve the City Owned Resources Goal 1: Preserve and Maintain the Existing Transportation System Goal 2: Increase Coordination with Agencies Goal 3: Develop and Expand Alternate Modes of Transportation Transportation Goal 4: Create Recommendations and Policies for Roadways and Development Goal 5: Air Quality: The Ozone Challenge Goal 1: Attract and Retain High-Paying Quality Jobs by Targeting Large Firms and Businesses to Major Growth Areas in the City Goal 2: Revitalize Downtown Dover as a Vibrant Town Center Integrating the Hospital, the Colleges & Universities, the State and City Governments Economic with Business (Retail and Professional), Housing and Tourism Development Goal 3: Ensure that Zoning Requirements Encourage the Uses Desired and Do Not Create Impediments to Desired Business Growth Goal 4: Create an Environment for Long Term Economic Investment in Dover Focusing on Green Technology and Entrepreneurial Businesses Goal 5: Actively Market Garrison Oak 2008 Comprehensive Plan February 2, 2009 Chapter 1: Introduction Page 7

Goal 1: Encourage Balanced Housing Opportunities for All Income Levels Housing & and Phases in Life Community Goal 2: Preserve Existing Housing Stock Development Goal 3: Provide Safe Livable Neighborhoods Goal 4: Provide Homeownership Opportunities for Low/Moderate Income Source: The 2008 Dover Comprehensive Plan Table 1-2: Land Development Plan Goals To develop and maintain an adequate supply of housing of varying type, size, Residential Land and densities that are aesthetically pleasing and located within neighborhoods designed or redesigned to promote convenience, conservation, and access to Uses the greater community, but which are properly buffered through distance and landscaping from incompatible land uses. Enhance the role of Downtown Dover as a major employment, residential and commercial center as well as the symbolic and cultural heart of the Downtown Dover community, and recognize its unique heritage and historic resources. Provide for mixed use development allowing greatest variation of uses. • Continue to facilitate project development processes for construction in accordance with approved Master Plan Pattern Book and TND concept. • Support efforts to implement the road and walking trail connections linking Eden Hill Farm TND to the existing circulation network. Mixed Use • Encourage quality architecture within the development in accordance with the Pattern Book and intent of the TND Ordinance. • Participate in the planning for the project’s open space areas including the area of the historic farm complex, alleys, and southern portion of the project near Puncheon Run. Maintain and improve the City’s position as a regional commercial center, Commercial Land while providing its citizens convenient access to needed goods and services through well designed and spaced community and neighborhood commercial Uses centers. Maintain and improve the City’s position as a center of government, Government and education, and medicine through support of existing institutions and Institutional Land encouraging well designed campuses that are integrated into the community Uses and have room to expand. Create a more vibrant, growing economy with a broader range of job Employment opportunities through an increase in office and industrial development in Centers appropriate and designated areas. Dover Air Force Create a favorable and compatible environment for Dover Air Force Base Base through a resolute commitment to provide all reasonable planning 2008 Comprehensive Plan February 2, 2009 Chapter 1: Introduction Page 8

Attachment #2 – Documentation of Need and Impact (Photographs)

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact The Central Business District West Loockerman Street is the spine of Dover’s Central Business District. The block of West Loockerman Street between State Street and Governors Avenue is mostly occupied with busi- nesses. However, the Priscilla Block Building at the northwest corner of State and Loockerman Street has been vacant for many years. Also, the amount of vacancy increases and the quality of the building stock declines as you travel west on Loockerman Street, particularly west of Gover- nors Avenue. City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 1

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact New buildings, such as the Family Dollar and Bayard Plaza, have helped to move the business energy fur- ther west on Loockerman Street. These new buildings pose a stark contrast to some of the neighboring vacant buildings. City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 2

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact The areas of South Bradford Street and South Governors Avenue just off of Loockerman Street experience the same challenges with building vacancy and condition. City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 3

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact The Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book recommends transforming the former Acme site on Governors Avenue (above left) to a multi-story, mixed use building (above right). The Downtown Dover Partnership owns the property, but the economy has made it difficult to find a develop- ment partner. The Residential Neighborhoods These buildings are located on the north corners of Bradford and Mary Streets. Moving southwest the quality of the building stock begins to decline. City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 4

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 5

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 6

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 7

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact Division Street Delaware Route 8, or Division Street, is Dover’s principal east/west route. This road serves as a gateway to Dover, and the first impression of the State Capital, for visitors from points west, including Washing- ton, D.C. and Baltimore. Unfortunately, visitors’ first impression of the City of Dover is the view of di- lapidated buildings, litter, utility lines, and deteriorating curbing and sidewalks. Coming east, immediately after crossing the railroad tracks, the above landscapes welcome visitors to the downtown. City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 8

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 9

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact The Restoring Central Dover Plan demon- strates both the need and the opportunity cre- ated by vacant land and buildings throughout the downtown. The Plan also shows the high poverty rate in the downtown area. City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 10

City of Dover Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact The Restoring Central Dover Plan shows the perceived and actual crime hot spots, the community-identified areas with trash and illegal dumping, the high rate of rental housing, and the low percentage of people who live and work in the downtown area. The Downtown Development District designation could help to turn around these trends through an increased investment in the downtown area. City of Dover—Downtown Development District Application Documentation of Need and Impact 11

Attachment #3 – Demographic Summary

City of Dover Housing and Population DDD Total of Blocks Percentage POPULATION Total 1,989 HOUSING UNITS Total 873 Occupied 739 84.7% Vacant 134 15.3% OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS, BY TENURE Total Occupied Housing Units 739 Owner-Occupied w/ Mortgage or Loan 75 10.1% Owner-Occupied, free & clear 40 5.4% Renter-Occupied 624 84.4% Source: 2010 Decennial Census, SF-1, total of all Census blocks in proposed DDD.

City of Dover Summary Demographic Data & Geographic Comparison City of Dover Kent County Delaware Tract 409 Tract 413 Tract 414 Tract 433 DDD (1) Total Population 36,259 162,785 900,131 2,540 2,077 3,283 6,060 1,989 Median Household Income $48,117 $55,786 $60,119 $25,774 $33,500 $35,083 $46,719 Poverty Rate, All People 16.9% 12.4% 11.5% 16.5% 41.9% 26.2% 15.3% % Housing Built 1949 or earlier 10.3% 9.5% 14.4% 40.5% 33.9% 8.5% 15.0% Total Units Built 1949 or earlier 1,476 6,203 58,479 451 344 137 256 Total Units Built 14,338 65,394 405,883 1,113 1,014 1,620 1,709 873 % Homeownership 55.1% 72.9% 72.7% 39.3% 36.1% 38.6% 46.5% 13.2% % Rental 44.9% 27.1% 27.3% 60.7% 63.9% 61.4% 53.5% 71.5% % Vacant Housing Units 13.0% 11.6% 17.7% 20.3% 12.6% 22.5% 16.6% 15.3% Median Home Value $187,500 $205,100 $241,100 $223,400 $162,500 $186,400 $180,100 Source: ACS-2012 5-Year Data (1) Downtown Development District, sum of 2010 Decennial Census data, by Census block

City of Dover Population Below Low/Moderate Income Threshold (FY2014) Census Geography Population Block % <Low/Mod # <Low/Mod Total Tract Group 5-BLOCK GROUP AREA 409 1 52.3% 910 1,739 413 1 56.5% 1,080 1,911 414 1 41.2% 775 1,881 414 2 82.6% 1,115 1,349 433 3 57.9% 825 1,424 Total Area 56.7% 4,705 8,304 20-BLOCK GROUP AREA 405 1 49.0% 1,155 2,357 405 2 75.5% 2,125 2,814 405 2 39.4% 475 1,205 407 1 12.3% 255 2,073 407 2 65.1% 940 1,443 407 3 33.3% 475 1,426 409 1 52.3% 910 1,739 410 1 41.8% 875 2,093 410 2 40.3% 1,400 3,473 411 2 53.9% 345 640 412 1 30.1% 620 2,059 413 1 56.5% 1,080 1,911 414 1 41.2% 775 1,881 414 2 82.6% 1,115 1,349 415 1 33.3% 785 2,357 418 3 22.1% 835 3,778 418 1 37.2% 1,160 3,118 433 1 52.3% 675 1,290 433 2 57.6% 965 1,675 433 3 57.9% 825 1,424 Total Area 44.4% 17,790 40,105 Source: PolicyMap and HUD, 2014 HUD FY CDBG income limit data using 2010 Census geographies

Walk er Downtown Ross St Development District with Census Tracts Rd Ln Colu m bia A ve N k nt Oa po Du l St C a ro ve bia A Hw lu m Tract est S Co y St ison NW N Br 409 Mad Rd n ey L ak St Rod rd S t r Willi am n St i ew Pea NG ngto ad f o Le w s h i ev Wa St n N St i Dr over s l Rd at e S t M e il l Dr t H az ra S Ave Cla t ors v nsyl N Qu N Ne Pen N Am Clar a Ex t Tract 433 een w St ania e ri c St M ap il St ve Ave N Ki an A C ec wy E D iv le L n sH isi on St King est S N Br rk w o on St ad f o sion St g Fult NW i Rid iv t rd S t ED ely t od S Park Dr Carver Rd Dr St ton i vi sion St S Br Tract Wes WD d St adfo E Re e od S t S S ta 413 ckerman St r k wo o SW rd S te S E Lo S Ki Fore s t laza Gibb s Dr St tre e an P is Leg t est ke rm Bertrand Dr L ooc St Minor t A ly St Mart in Lu d lativ th er King Jr Blv Lincoln St Ra e t v ad A Fed Reese St S Qu Cherry S Paul St ilro Je ru s a le e Av S Ne e ra l S Ea s t e een Gr e e n m Wa e Ave w St Th t Si St St k Ln R ees B an y r ghte S la u m on r t h St g t er St W No k Ln Sh ot E Wa C ir e St B an S un A ning vern at e S S Go ly B an Elm Ter Tract S St SW Ave t ls t Sau est 414 St ors l Ter S cu l bury Sch ool nS s Ele men tary Rd t Hol y Cros Rd yss Wem d u ee Llyo S New St Legend SQ Ruth Hope St St Ave n Proposed DistrictWay a racki Sack Census Tract Dover St S Bradford St Parcels d Westview Ter R Sunset Ter Monroe Ter n ¯ rto t u S Pine ar 1 inch = 900 feet Orch B Date Printed: October 23, 2014 Janeka Ln File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds Ne w Shank Rd d Ave \ddd_maps\ddd_with_census_tracts s St Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware Lotu

Downtown BG 2 Development R os s St District with Census Block Groups Ln BG C olu m bia A ve k 2 Oa C a ro e mb ia Av l St Colu est S St ison NW N Br BG 1 Ma d R d t R od n ey BG 1 L ak ad fo am S t r St ev Pea Willi gt on NG Was hin Le w ie w St rd S N St i Dr n or s s l Rd ate S t ov e r M il l Dr e t H az Cla ra S t Ave n Pen N Qu N Ne N Am t Clar a Ex syl v BG 3 een w St e ri c ania St M ap il St ve Av e N Ki an A C ec s Hw y E Div le L n isi on St King est S N Br rk w o t on S ad fo n St Ri d Ful t vi si o NW E Di od S rd S t Park y St g el t t Dr Carver Rd to Wes S Br St i vi sion WD BG 2 d St a df o E Ree n Dr t r kwo an S S S ta rm oc k e S Ki rd S E Lo SW te S F o re s t laza Gibb s Dr St tre e an P Le g t est ke rm Bertrand Dr t St t A ly L ooc od S Minor i sl a Mart St in Lu th er King Jr Blv d Lincoln St Ra Fe d tive Ch erry S a ilr o Reese St d Av Je ru s a le S Qu Paul St e ra l Ave een S Ne Gre e Ea s t e n m Wa e St Av e t w St Si t Th ter S St R ees y gh S la u m on rth St ter St W No k Ln Sh o t E Wa C ir e St B an gun B an S Go t r th S ate S W No A ly ni ng Elm Ter S St ve rn SW St ls or s t Sau est St Ave l Ter S cu l b ury Sch ool nS s Ele men tary Rd t Hol y Cros d y ss R Lly o Wem u ee S New St Legend Ruth BG 1 SQ d St Hope St Ave n Proposed DistrictWay a racki Sack Block Group Dover St S Bradfo rd St Parcels d BG 1 Westview Ter R Sunset Ter Monroe Ter n ¯ to ur S t Pine ar 1 inch = 900 feet Orch B Date Printed: October 23, 2014 Janeka Ln w File: m:\gis_data\projects\tech_mxds Ne Sh an k Rd d Ave s St \ddd_maps\ddd_with_census_blocks Department: Public Works GIS City of Dover, Delaware Lot u

Attachment #4 – Existing Incentives A. Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix C – Downtown Redevelopment B. Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 102 – Taxation, Article III – Realty Transfer Tax (excerpts) C. Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 102 – Taxation, Article IV – Abatement of Real Estate Taxes (excerpts) D. Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 102 – Taxation, Article V – Tax Credits for Historic Properties

Who we Are... The Downtown Dover Partnership is a nonprofit organization dedicated to revitalizing our Historic Downtown Business Dis- trict. The DDP works hand in hand with the National Trust for Histor- ic Preservation’s National Downtown Main Street Center and the Downtown Delaware Dover Main Street Initiative to create a variety of programs that serve to Development improve our district. Incentives DDP EVENTS  First Fridays  Second Saturdays  Capital Holiday 101 W Loockerman St, Suite 1A Celebration Dover, DE 19904  Home for the Holidays www.downtowndoverpartnership.com  St Patrick’s Day Parade  Loockerman Way Farmers Market William E. Neaton, Interim Executive Director Phone: 302-678-2940 Fax: 302-678-2132 E-mail: wneaton@dover.de.us Tel 302-678-2940

Downtown Dover Development Incentives WHAT PROJECTS ARE WHAT ARE THE INCENTIVES? DDP INCENTIVES ELIGIBLE? Waiver of Permit Fees Facade Improvement Grant  New construction or renovation  Building, plumbing, mechanical & fire protec-  Matching grants from $250 to projects tion $2500  Located within the target area Impact Fee Waiver These grants are subject to the review and  Fair market value of the materials  Requires multiple story new construction or approval of the DDP Design Committee and to be used and the labor to be per- renovation on one lot the availability of funds. formed on the project exceeds the www.downtowndoverpartnership.com sum of $15,000  Combination of retail, office, residential or commercial services (at least two)  Is for commercial, office or a residential use  Waiver of City sewer and water impact fees DDP PROGRAMS Property Tax Waiver WHAT IS THE TARGET ♦ A variety of financial incentives  10-year waiver of property tax on ♦ Small Business Development AREA? improvements Workshops ♦ Small Business Loans in conjunction  The geographic boundaries of the  10-year period begins with building permit with the US SBA downtown redevelopment area are issuance ♦ Express Technical Assistance defined in the Dover Code and Program include the Business Improvement Contribution to Downtown Dover ♦ Facade Grants to downtown property District. Partnership owners for exterior improvements to  The Dover Code can be accessed at their buildings  10 % of the value of incentives must be http:// www.cityofdover.com ♦ Special events and activities to engage contributed to the DDP Select Quick Links—Municipal the community at large Code A detailed description of these incentives and the redevelopment target area can be found in the A map of the target area is provided Dover Code, Appendix C on rear panel of this brochure.

CITY OF DOVER DOWNTOWN DOVER PARTNERSHIP PO BOX 475 APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT DOVER DE 19903 INCENTIVES PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT I. APPLICANT(S) INFORMATION II. INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR BUSINESS: Name: Name of Business: Address: Address: Phone No.: Soc. Sec. No.: Phone No.: Type of Business: Date Established: # of Empls: FT______PT__________ Empl. Tax ID No.: III. SUBJECT PROPERTY DATA: Location/Address: Street/P.O. Box City State Zip Current Usage: _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Current Zoning: _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Owner's Name: ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Owner's Address: Street/P.O. Box City State Zip IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION (Use additional sheet if necessary): Provide a description of the proposed project, including its physical features; any land and/or building acquisition and development; the status and timing of land control, zoning and permits; and the estimated cost and timing of construction and captial improvements.

City of Dover Page 2 Application for Development Incentives V. ASSURANCES: All information in the application is complete and true to the best of my/our knowledge. I/We also have read and understand the Development Incentive Ordinance and agree to contribute ten percent (10%) of the total value of the incentives received to the Downtown Dover Partnership for investment in downtown Dover. I/We further understand that if I/we do not comply with the provisions of the development incentives program, the City may terminate the incentives. ____________________ _______________________________________________ Date Signature of Applicant VI. STAFF ACTION Approved Denied Building Permit __________________ Date Approved Denied Tax Waiver ___________________ Date City Impact Fees Approved Denied ___________________ Date _________________________________________________________ Signature of City Manager

CITY OF DOVER RESIDENTIAL FIRST-TIME HOME BUYER AFFIDAVIT OF EXEMPTION BUYER/SELLER This form must be accompanied by the State of Delaware Realty Transfer Tax Return and Affidavit of Gain and Value form 5402. Only properties classified as residential on form 5402, Part C are eligible for exemption consideration. NAMES OF ALL BUYERS ___________________________________ _____________________________ ___________________________________ _____________________________ ADDRESS OF PROPERTY BEING PURCHASED * ________________________________________________ I/We swear/affirm under penalty of law, that the following statements are true and correct. I/We, either jointly or individually, have NEVER had an ownership interest in any real estate, wherever located, which has been occupied as my/our principal residence. The above purchased property is my current principal residence or i/we intend to make it my/our principal residence within 90 days following recordation. ______________________________________ ________________________________ ______________________________________ ________________________________ Buyer’s Signature Buyer’s Signature *Property must be situated in the area from Mary St. to Loockerman St. and Governors Ave. to West St. to be eligible. (Full ordinance may be viewed at www.cityofdover.com Sec102-71(a)(3))

Message from the Transfer Tax City of Dover Congratulations on the purchase of your first home! City of Dover We are proud to offer this First Time Incentive Program to our first time homeowners in Homeowner the City of Dover. Exemption If you have any questions do not hesitate to contact one of our Tax Assessor’s Office employees who are more than willing to aid you in the process and to answer any questions you may have. CITY OF DOVER Tax Assessor's Office PO Box 7100 Dover, DE 19903 Phone: 302-736-7022

Requirements Requirements Information To receive this First Time Home Buyer Exemp on, a First Time Persons who have Home Buyer form must be filled out and submi ed to the tax never owned property, This exemp on shall office at the me of payment of anywhere, have the the Realty Transfer Tax to the right to benefit from an apply to the Seller of the City of Dover. exemp on with the property that qualifies Pursuant to City of Dover City of Dover Realty for the first me buyer [Ordinance]; no refunds for a First Time Home Buyer Transfer Tax. exemp on, but only for Exemp on can be given a er the The person(s) must live property situated in the recording of the deed has been made. in the dwelling within area from Mary Street to ninety (90) days of Loockerman Street and If, however, the a orney or the buyer realizes that the their se lement day Governor’s Avenue to exemp on was not given, and and must use this West Street. the deed has not been recorded than a refund can be property as their given for the excess transfer tax principal dwelling. paid to the City of Dover. We apologize, however no other excep ons can be made.

Attachment #5 – Letters of Support

October 22, 2014 Ann Marie Townshend, AICP Director of Planning & Community Development Planning and Inspections / Parks and Recreation P.O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19901 Dear Ann Marie Congratulations on the City of Dover’s efforts to revitalize its downtown. I understand that through the leadership of NCALL and the generosity of the Wells Fargo Foundation, the Restoring Central Dover: Our Vision for Vitality represents a broad-based planning effort that identifies the challenges facing central Dover and presents strategies to address the challenges. I understand that the concerns voiced by many stakeholders through the planning process center around safety and that the Restoring Central Dover makes recommendations to improve lighting in targeted areas, both through public street lighting and residential porch lighting. The Delaware Sustainable Energy Utility is a 501(c)3 nonprofit corporation founded by the State of Delaware for the purpose of provided energy efficiency and clean energy programs to Delawareans. The Delaware Sustainable Energy Utility would welcome the opportunity to participate with the City of Dover to improve lighting and energy efficiency through programs to replace and supplement existing street lights with LED lights. We would also be willing to work with homeowners to improve porch lighting by helping to support the cost of conversion of porch lights to LED. I look forward to speaking to you further about this important project. Sincerely, Anthony J. DePrima Executive Director 109 S. State Street, Dover DE 19901 Office: 302-883-3048 I Fax: 302-736-9717 Tony.deprima@deseu.org I Energizedelaware.org

Attachment #6 – Resolution #2014-13

City of Dover MAYOR AND COUNCIL 1 DRAFT PROPOSED COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2014-13 2 A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION AS A DOWNTOWN 3 DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 4 WHEREAS, under the Downtown Development Districts Act, 22 Del.C. §§ 1901 et seq. (the "Act"), 5 the State of Delaware may designate districts within Delaware's cities, towns, and unincorporated areas that 6 will qualify for significant development incentives and other State benefits; and 7 WHEREAS, these districts are known as Downtown Development Districts ("Districts"); and 8 WHEREAS, the State is accepting applications for the designation of the initial round of Districts, 9 with such applications being due on November 1, 2014; and 10 WHEREAS, under the Act, each applicant must submit a plan that includes the boundaries of, and 11 a detailed planning and development strategy for, the proposed District (the "District Plan"); and 12 WHEREAS, under the Act, each applicant must also propose incentives that address local economic 13 and community conditions, and that will help achieve the purposes set forth in the Act (the "Local 14 Incentives"); and 15 WHEREAS, if an application is successful and the City receives District designation, the District 16 Plan and Local Incentives proposed by an applicant shall be binding upon the applicant; and 17 WHEREAS, the incentives associated with designation as a Downtown Development District would 18 greatly benefit current and future residents, businesses, non-profit organizations, and others within the City 19 of Dover; and 20 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Dover strongly believes that it is in the best interest of 21 the City of Dover to apply for District designation. 22 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 23 1. The City Council supports the Application for Designation as a Downtown Development District 24 prepared by the Dover Planning Office and dated October 27, 2014 (the "Application"); and 25 2. The City of Dover is authorized to appoint a District administrator (the "Administrator") to file 26 the Application on behalf of the City, and to provide such other documents and information as 27 may be necessary or desirable in connection with the Application; and P.O. Box 475 ˜ Dover, Delaware ˜19903 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

DRAFT PROPOSED COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2014-13 PAGE 2 28 3. If the Application is successful and the City of Dover receives notice that it has been selected for 29 designation as a District: 30 a. The City shall adhere to the District Plan and the Local Incentives contained in the 31 Application for the duration of the District designation; and 32 b. The Administrator, or his or her designee(s), is authorized to execute such documents and 33 enter into such agreements as may be necessary or desirable in connection with the 34 Downtown Development Districts program and the rights and obligations of the City of 35 Dover thereunder; and 36 c. The Administrator, or his or her designee(s), is authorized to carry out all District 37 administrative and reporting requirements on behalf of the City of Dover for the duration of 38 the District. 39 ADOPTED: * 40 S:\RESOLUTIONS-PROCLAMATIONS-TRIBUTES\2014\Draft\Resolution No. 2014-13 In Support of the Application for Designation as a Downtown Development District.wpd 41 42 ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN DAVID L. BONAR 43 MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT 44 Actions History: 45 October 13, 2014 - Introduced at Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee

Attachment #7 – Downtown Development District Plan A. Downtown Development District Plan Summary B. Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book C. Restoring Central Dover: Our Vision for Vitality (10/7/2014 Draft)

Downtown Development District Plan Summary There are a number of planning documents developed in recent years that the City of Dover uses to guide downtown redevelopment. The two principal and most recent plans include the Dover Transit Neighborhood Plan and Design Book and the Restoring Central Dover Plan, which is currently still in draft form. These documents identify a series of clear strategies for the City and other partner organizations to take in support of revitalizing the downtown commercial district and neighboring residential community. The support for these documents is found in the City of Dover 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Together, these documents provide vision, goals, strategies, and specific implementation measures to revitalize Dover’s downtown core. The Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book is driven largely by design and the form of downtown redevelopment, focusing on buildings that address the sidewalk, open space and gateways, and pedestrian scale of development. The Restoring Central Dover Plan addresses many of the social challenges that have been identified as obstacles to downtown redevelopment. Each of the plans encompasses a slightly different geographic area of the downtown. Maps are included that show the overlap between the areas addressed in each of the plans and the Downtown Development District Boundary. A summary of each of the plans is provided. Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book The purpose of the Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book is “to use the new transit center as an impetus for redevelopment that will transform and energize the surrounding area.” The plan was developed through a partnership between the Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and the Downtown Dover Partnership. The project included two phases: a five-day charrette where the public was invited in to discuss issues and identify ideas and solutions; and the creation of visual design guidelines that graphically represent the findings and recommendations of the charrette. The plan analyzed existing development patterns and presented concepts for infill development that would introduce the density, scale and urban aesthetic found in the historic area to other areas of the study area. Active buildings would front the street and parking would be located behind the buildings. The plan identifies the need for increased density surrounding the Dover Transit Center, as well as additional residential development in the downtown area. The plan provides recommendations to address building placement and form, parking location, downtown gateways, plazas and parks. The plan also provides a series of implementation strategies, some of which have been implemented and others which have not yet been implemented. The plan also engendered the North Street Improvements implemented by the Downtown Dover Partnership, with support of funding through the State of Delaware. The North Street Improvements include streetscape and pavement improvement to North Street between State Street and Governors Avenue, consolidation of several parking lots on North Street to improve layout and gain spaces, and the conversion of property known as the Collegian site to a plaza area. These improvements have introduced a new energy to the downtown, and the Loockerman Way Plaza now serves as the location for the Dover Farmer’s Market on Wednesday afternoons during the summer, as well as other downtown events.

The Implementation Strategies section of the Plan (found on page 46-47), include a series of goal statements, under which each of the implementation items is listed. These include: • Establish a business development and retention strategy to promote and enhance overall business and economic vitality in the study area and downtown. • Improve the gateways and entrance corridors of the study area with buildings, coordinated signage and streetscapes that frame views, and provide a sense of arrival. • Strengthen key North-South and East-West road connections to area activity centers, such as Wesley College, St. Jones River, Eden Hill Farm and Bayhealth Medical Center Campus. • Coordinate streetscape and road improvements to provide a better connection between Wesley College and the southern part of the study area. • Reinforce the study area with land use and additional mixed use, housing, retail and cultural/civic uses. • Establish a coordinated signage and streetscape program to capture and present a consistent image in the Downtown area. Restoring Central Dover The Restoring Central Dover Plan came out of a safety task force convened by the Greater Dover Committee (now the Greater Kent Committee). The stakeholders convened by the Greater Dover Committee identified a number of issues that culminated in safety concerns in the downtown area. The Dover Police Department conducted a resident survey, which identified the concerns of downtown residents. These concerns included crime, condition of housing, responsiveness of landlords, and other related challenges. The task force submitted an application to the Wells Fargo Foundation, with NCALL as the lead agency on the grant, to complete a planning study of the downtown so that we can begin to develop strategies that will improve the quality of life and safety in the downtown area. The process was led by the consultant and a Steering Committee representing stakeholder groups throughout the downtown community. There was a detailed survey that included door-to-door questionnaires administered by local stakeholders trained by the consulting team. The consulting team also completed a detailed land use survey and building condition survey. With the results of these surveys, the Steering Committee and consulting team hosted a week-long open house, where members of the public could participate in interactive processes to provide input on the challenges and potential solutions facing central Dover. Once the consulting team compiled the results from the Open House, they presented preliminary recommendations in a public workshop. Then members of the Steering Committee provided feedback on the recommendations and strategies to ensure that the recommendations in the plan met the local need. The plan is nearing completion and still in draft form, but the recommendation section has been released in draft form and addresses strategies for improving redevelopment opportunities in the downtown area. As with the Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book, and other downtown studies before it, Restoring Central Dover addresses the need to improve housing, attract residents, and increase homeownership. This plan goes further with its recommendations relating to housing than

prior planning studies and includes a series of implementation strategies directly related to improving the housing stock, redevelopment of vacant residential land, and improving the homeownership rate. The Restoring Central Dover Plan compares demographic information for the plan study area with the City as a whole, and identifies some of the significant demographics that create challenges in Central Dover. As it relates to the 2010 U.S. Census, Central Dover has a higher rate of vacant housing units (14% vs. 8%), a much higher rate of rental versus owner-occupied housing units (75% vs. 48%), a higher percentage of non-family households (53% vs. 42%), and higher concentrations of crime. Restoring Central Dover is the first of the plans for Downtown Dover that includes strategies to address the complex social challenges facing Central Dover. Other studies have identified that perceptions of safety pose challenges to downtown redevelopment, but Restoring Central Dover goes further in analyzing these social challenges and developing community-based strategies to address them. Restoring Central Dover identifies a number of goals, grouped by three categories, each with specific recommendations: • A Strong Community o Build Community Capital o Prevent Crime and Increase Public Safety o Engage Youth in Community o Expand Adult and Family Services • Positive Development o Strengthen Existing Housing Stock o Support New Housing and Mixed Use Development o Encourage Reinvestment in Commercial Corridors o Focus on Economic Development and Inclusion • An Integrated Public Realm and Infrastructure o Improve Transportation Infrastructure o Enhance Open Spaces and Expand Green Infrastructure The housing strategies included under “Positive Development” provide the structure and partnerships needed to successfully increase the homeownership rate. Through housing counseling provided through NCALL, leveraging a variety of financial resources, and support through many partner providers, we can work collectively to renovate deteriorated housing stock, construct new housing, and bolster homeownership. Through leveraging such resources as Housing Development Fund, NCALL’s Loan Fund, City CDBG funds, Housing Choice Vouchers administered through Dover Housing Authority, NCALL’s housing counseling services, and the expertise of partners such as the Kent County Association of Realtors, Milford Housing Development Corporation, and Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity, central Dover’s residential neighborhoods can be successfully revived. NCALL will submit an application for implementation funding to the Wells Fargo Foundation in fall 2014. If successful, up to $750,000 would be available for implementation of the Restoring Central Dover Plan.

This funding would further leverage the investment of State dollars through the Downtown Development District. Bringing Together the Plans and the Downtown Development District When taken together, the Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book and the Restoring Central Dover Plan provide a roadmap for downtown redevelopment in Dover that addresses the physical issues of building design and placement, gateways and open space, the transportation network, business retention and recruitment, the mix of land uses, and a housing strategy. Both plans were developed with significant stakeholder involvement and complement each other in terms of how they address downtown redevelopment. The geographic study area for each of the plans is slightly different, but there is significant overlap. Dover’s defined Downtown Development District boundary includes an area that overlaps with both study areas but places priority on areas with the greatest need. The Downtown Development District includes the area immediately surrounding the new Transit Center, the Loockerman Street corridor, and the residential neighborhoods abutting the downtown business district. Goals and recommendations presented in both plans provide a strategy for implementation of the Downtown Development District that balances the need for reinvestment in distressed commercial properties with revitalization of residential neighborhoods and the growth of homeownership. Success in both of these realms has shown to be costly and frequently economically infeasible. The added resources of the State’s incentives with the Downtown Development District, Kent County’s match to this investment, private investment, and Dover’s existing and added incentives will make redevelopment of Dover’s commercial and residential core economically feasible. In the coming months, the City of Dover will work with the Downtown Dover Partnership and the Restoring Central Dover Steering Committee to develop performance measures to track success of the plan implementation. Such performance measures will likely include measures such as: number of new homes constructed within the District, number of houses rehabilitated within the District, number of owner-occupied homes within the District, number of permanent jobs within the District, number of previously-vacant commercial buildings occupied, assessed value of property within the District, and other similar measures that would document the impact. Once developed, these measures will be submitted to the Office of State Planning Coordination and reported on regularly.

Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan

OUR VISION FOR VITALITY 10.23.2014 DRAFT

RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER LEADERSHIP STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS The Restoring Central Dover Plan was made possible by generous funding Debbie Armstrong, United Way from the Wells Fargo Regional Foundation, SPEER Trust, the City of Dover, Paul Bernat, Dover Police Chief NeighborWorks America, Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh, and Dianne Bogle, Capital School District NCALL Research, Inc. The plan process was led by NCALL Research, Shelly Cecchett, Greater Kent Committee Inc. and a commited Steering Committee comprised of local stakeholders, David Clendaniel, Dover Federal Credit Union elected officials, residents, and service providers. Susan Cooper, Dover Presbyterian Church Elizabeth Daniels, Neighborhood Representative PLANNING TEAM Wallace Dixon, Dover City Council Tenish Gregory, CenDel Foundation INTERFACE STUDIO LLC V LAMAR WILSON ASSOCIATES Pastor Will Grimes, Solid Rock Baptist Church Scott Page, Principal Lamar Wilson, Principal Tracey Harvey, City of Dover, Planning and CDBG Leah Murphy, Principal Clay Hammond, Delmarva Black Chamber of Commerce Rapheal Randall, Urban Designer Kent Hurst, Wesley College Chanda Jackson, Neighborhood Representative ABOUT NCALL Jeanine Kleimo, Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing Herb Konowitz, Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing The National Council on Agricultural Life and Labor Research Fund, Inc. Bishop Marion Lott, House of Pride (NCALL), based in Dover, Delaware, was incorporated in 1955 and began Mike Metzing, Bayhealth providing housing development services in 1976; added homeownership Joe Myer, NCALL education and counseling in 1989; became a U.S. Treasury-certified Bill Neaton, City of Dover, Economic Development Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) in 2004 in order to Ed Perez, Downtown Dover Partnership provide housing and community facility lending; launched financial literacy Maggie Pleasant, NCALL training in 2005; added default & foreclosure prevention counseling at Delcina Ramsey, Public Ally the end of 2007; and was selected as the Kent County partner for the Mary Reed, Dover Presbyterian Church $tand by ME® financial coaching initiative in 2012 and became lead Ida Rios, Neighborhood Representative organization for the Restoring Central Dover planning initiative in 2013. Michael Rogers, Interdenominational Ministerial Association NCALL has become a leader in affordable housing development and Reuben Salters, Inner City Cultural League services in Delaware, creating affordable housing alternatives and helping Ami Sebastian-Hauer, Dover Housing Authority families statewide to access and maintain homeownership. Pauline Smith, Neighborhood Representative Karen Speakman, NCALL Roy Sudler, Neighborhood Representative Jocelyn Tice, Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity Ann Marie Townshend, City of Dover, Planning and CDBG Amy Yarnell, Wesley United Methodist Church RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

Restoring Central Dover, “Our Vision for Vitality,”is an initiative that grew out of the CenDel Foundation’s Safety Task Force and broadened into a community wide effort to work at revitalization planning for central Dover. The planning process has been amazing and very engaging. Thank you to Steering Committee members who invested so much time, energy, and enthusiasm throughout the past year and worked through the thoughtful and exciting recommendations herein. Thank you to Interface Studio for your expertise and guidance in crafting this creative blueprint. Thank you to residents who assisted with the community survey, attended the Community Leadership Institute, helped organize block parties, and put their heart into this effort. This plan looks at affordable housing, business development, strong community, and infrastructure needs for central Dover to become a vibrant business corridor and community as our State Capital. The plan is meant to be a living document that guides our implementation steps both now and years to come. No doubt there will be changes and modifications as efforts evolve, as new partnerships and collaboration takes place, and as new funding becomes available. The recommendations within this plan will be evaluated regularly with the goal of making them even more applicable and achievable. With the completion of this plan, Restoring Central Dover will transition into the implementation phase. Central Dover has a wealth of assets and some very real needs. We believe this plan will enable central Dover to become even a more wonderful place to live, work and play. As you view this plan and its vision, please think about what role you might play to make it a reality, whether it be your leadership, support, or funding. Sincerely, Joe L. Myer, Chair Restoring Central Dover OUR VISION FOR VITALITY

TABLE OF CONTENTS RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER IN CONTEXT 1 PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS 15 INTRODUCTION 2 ONE A STRONG COMMUNITY 17 Purpose of the plan............................................................................................................2 1. Build community capital........................................................................19 Planning context.................................................................................................................3 2. Increase public safety.............................................................................23 Planning process................................................................................................................4 3. Engage youth in community............................................................27 Putting the plan together.............................................................................................6 4. Expand adult and family services.................................................29 A SNAPSHOT OF CENTRAL DOVER 9 TWO POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 31 Welcome to Central Dover.......................................................................................9 5. Strengthen existing housing..............................................................33 Existing conditions take-aways..........................................................................10 6. Support new development...................................................................37 7. Reinvest in commercial corridors................................................41 OUR VISION FOR VITALITY 14 8. Ensure equitable economic development............................45 THREE AN INTEGRATED PUBLIC REALM AND INFRASTRUCTURE 47 9. Improve transportation infrastructure.........................................49 10. Enhance open spaces and expand green infrastructure..57 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

APPENDICES 61 APPENDIX A: IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH 61 Capacity to implement: challenges and opportunities....................62 Priority action items......................................................................................................62 Implementation matrices..........................................................................................65 APPENDIX B: EXISTING CONDITIONS 73 Census data.......................................................................................................................74 Other data sources.....................................................................................................83 Physical survey................................................................................................................95 Neighborworks resident survey......................................................................101 Open house public input.....................................................................................107

RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER IN CONTEXT OUR VISION FOR VITALITY

INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF THE PLAN In 2013, a “Central Dover Neighborhood Planning” collaboration was convened between NCALL, the CenDel Foundation/Greater Kent Committee, Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing, and the City of Dover (including the Downtown Dover Partnership and Dover Police Department) to address the high-priority needs of low-income Central Dover residents with the goal of achieving long-term benefits by way of affordable housing, neighborhood safety and desirability, opportunities for economic growth, and essential services for children and families. With generous support from the Wells Fargo Regional Foundation and other sources, NCALL and its partners initiated the Restoring Central Dover planning process and recruited a steering committee comprised of local stakeholders, elected officials, residents, and service providers to lead a community-driven vision with the goal of ultimately establishing a solid community infrastructure that will result in long-term and successful revitalization and meaningful opportunities for residents. Over the course of the year-long process, concerned residents, community groups, neighborhood-based institutions, city representatives, and local businesses were engaged in generating ideas for a better community and the ways in which we can all help to achieve that vision together. As this vision began to take shape, plan leadership recognized the need for this initiative to focus on where efforts should be placed within the next five years to establish a foundation for longer-term positive change. With an eye towards truly Restoring Central Dover, this plan is centered on short- term incremental strategies founded on the idea that revitalization is about 01 Restoring Central Dover planning area reinvesting in both people and in place. This plan is intended to: > Empower community members as agents of change in Central Dover > Bring resources to support the needs of disadvantaged residents and > Strengthen neighborhood streets and expand affordable housing families options > Revitalize Loockerman as a vibrant commercial corridor and asset to > Raise the profile of Central Dover to attract new residents, businesses, adjacent neighborhoods and investment > Coordinate the efforts of the city, nonprofit organizations, churches > Expand economic opportunity and ensure that the revitalization of and residents to make the most of resources Central Dover benefits all residents > Assure informed funding decisions and secure resources for neighborhood investments 2 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

This document represents extensive hours of work volunteered by the in the target area have been brought up to housing code through the many residents, stakeholders, and local leaders dedicated to envisioning homeowner rehabilitation program. a path towards Restoring Central Dover. The planning process itself was a critical step towards plan implementation, as the members of the The City of Dover’s Comprehensive Plan and annual CDBG Action plan’s leadership recognize that they will be agents of change in Central Plan have led to an increased emphasis on building codes and Dover and will continue to collaborate in realizing the goals and objectives their enforcement, resulting in the demolition of several dilapidated outlined in this plan. properties, the construction of some new buildings (including affordable apartments) in the business district, and the upgrading or renovation PLANNING CONTEXT of other properties. To a great extent, the success of Restoring Central Dover will rely upon close coordination with the City’s own ongoing A number of planning initiatives have been completed or are currently planning initiatives and allocation of resources. underway in and around Central Dover that have helped and will continue to help guide the City and local partners in bringing about positive change. > ECONOMIC INCLUSION STUDY OF DOVER This plan seeks to reinforce and incorporate the results of these prior Commissioned by the DelMarVa Black Chamber of Commerce planning efforts while providing an overarching vision for Central Dover (DBCC), the City-funded Economic Inclusion Study of Dover is coordinated with ongoing planning processes. Each of the following currently underway and is is modeled off of a similar analysis of plans provided valuable insight and direction to the development of these Pittsburgh, PA concluding that, among other contributing factors, recommendations. racial equity and inclusion are cornerstones of sustained development and successful, healthy economies for that particular region. The COORDINATION WITH ONGOING INITIATIVES: Restoring Central Dover plan and the prospects of it leveraging public It is important to realize that Restoring Central Dover is one among and private resources present a unique opportunity to advance both multiple initiatives currently underway that will bear great relevance to agendas by linking economic inclusion as a policy and practice with implementation efforts emerging from this process. Part of the mandate community revitalization as a goal. for this plan is to ensure active coordination with these other activities: FOUNDATIONAL DOCUMENTS > CITY OF DOVER BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLANS As demonstrated above, there is a lot of ongoing planning work intended During the Restoring Central Dover planning process, the City of Dover, to bring local partners together and improve Central Dover. To be truly the Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization, and the effective, this work must also build upon the foundation set by the plans Delaware Department of Transportation released drafts of updates and strategies that have come before. These include: to the City’s bicycle and pedestrian plans. The community expressed great interest in addressing a range of mobility issues as a part of > DOVER TRANSIT CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND Restoring Central Dover, and the feedback and recommendations put DESIGN BOOK [JAN 2011] forth in this document are intended to serve to further inform the City’s The Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and Design Book efforts to plan for improving alternative transportation in Central Dover. provided the City of Dover with a design and planning strategy to guide development around the new Dover Transit Center and to improve > CITY OF DOVER CDBG ACTION PLAN transportation infrastructure in Central Dover. The planning area Since the City of Dover became an entitlement community to receive included a portion of the Restoring Central Dover boundary south of CDBG funding in 1995 to present, there has always been an emphasis Loockerman to South Street. The plan was focused primarily on long- in the city’s annual plan to address the needs in the Downtown Target term physical development scenarios and is considered an important Area. The top priorities that were determined by the stakeholders companion piece to Restoring Central Dover, which is centered on in the community were: housing needs, infrastructure needs, public what needs to happen in the short term in order to position Central service needs, homeless needs and public facility needs. As a result of Dover for longer-term investment and positive change. the needs determined in the city by the stakeholders, several homes RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER IN CONTEXT 3

The Dover Community Partnership PLANNING PROCESS The planning process was designed to be both data-driven and people- driven. This required us to both: LISTEN through a variety of Community Outreach & Engagement activities—a key component of the plan and the basis for the THE DOVER COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP recommendations REVITALIZATION PLAN JANUARY, 2009 COLLECT & ANALYZE DATA to provide a comprehensive picture of the challenges Central Dover faces today. > DOVER COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP REVITALIZATION COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT PLAN [JAN 2009] Restoring Central Dover: Our Vision for Vitality was conceived as a The Dover Housing Authority formed the Dover Community true, community-driven plan that will serve as a unified voice for local Partnership in 2003 to address concentrated poverty and housing residents, business owners, institutions, youth, community leaders, and issues. The general consensus was that the homeownership rate political representatives, among others. As such, the planning process was and economic opportunities in the area were poor and an initiative designed to not only engage the public, but also help to build a sense of was needed to address the issues. The resulting Dover Community community among the area’s diverse constituency. Partnership Revitalization Plan [covering a 20-block area now within the Restoring Central Dover boundary and comprising about 12% of To create a plan grounded in the realities of Central Dover requires an this effort’s planning area] set forth a set of strategies geared toward: open and ongoing public dialog. The process informed and brainstormed with residents and stakeholders using a range of outreach tools including: - Creating a safe environment for current and future residents to live, work, and play. Monthly Steering Committee meetings conducted throughout the - Providing a range of housing opportunities that address the process brought together to guide all aspects of the project. The Steering needs of the homeless to homeowners. Special care will be Committee is comprised of local residents, community leaders, elected taken to ensure that housing initiatives do not displace current officials, and representatives from local institutions. residents but instead enhance their living conditions. - Supporting the efforts of the Downtown Dover Partnership to Ten confidential one-on-one interviews with a sample of residents, promote the public welfare of the residents of the City of Dover community leaders, business owners, service providers, and City officials. via the development of the economic, cultural and historic resources of the downtown area. Three focus groups to discuss unique concerns and perspectives regarding the future of Central Dover. The focus groups brought together These objectives were considered a jumping off point for Restoring Central leaders of the faith-based community, social service providers, and Dover, the outcomes of which harmonize well with this previous effort. The representatives of the business community to discuss their perspectives overlap in leadership between the Dover Community Partnership and the and ideas for Central Dover. Restoring Central Dover steering committee, as well as the synergies between the two efforts, should capitalize on opportunities to collaborate An interactive open house to publicly launch the plan and invite in bringing needed resources to the Central Dover community. community members into provide their opinions on the community. At the beginning of May 2014, the open house utilized the 1st floor community room of Bayard Plaza on Loockerman and was open seven times over 4 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

the course of nine days. The planning team created temporary window installations on both sides of Loockerman to draw attention to the open house and filled the interior with information, a photo suggestion booth and other exercises designed to get residents thinking creatively. At least 177 residents participated in this event. The input provided by residents at the open house led to many of the strategies in this plan. A number of collaborative maps were used to help residents pinpoint specifically where they had concerns about their community. A large-scale collaborative map was used in the Open House that asked residents to identify mode-specific transportation issues. Residents were also engaged in public realm mapping to identify hotspots for crime, illegal dumping, poor lighting and flooding. A “do-it-yourself” budget exercise at the open house allowed participants to allocate play money in multiple denominations to piggy banks representing general budget categories, such as “transportation networks” and “housing and neighborhoods.” Community members wrote their big ideas for Central Dover on a dry erase board, which they posed next to for a snapshot in the “photo suggestion booth” at the open house. A resident perception survey to collect the perceptions and concerns of residents across all of the Central Dover neighborhoods. Community volunteers that administered the survey received 224 completed surveys representing 18% of households in Central Dover. Following the open house, a final public meeting was held in July 2014 to allow the community to review preliminary recommendations and participate in an exercise designed to set priorities among the range of ideas presented to determine where limited funds and resources should be directed. RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER IN CONTEXT 5

PUTTING THE PLAN TOGETHER To understand the underlying trends and socio-economic characteristics of Central Dover, the planning team utilized The Reinvestment Fund’s [TRF] Policy Map data sets. This data on population, race, income, housing and other aspects of the community was augmented where necessary with other US Census information, parcel data provided by the City of Dover, Dover Police Department crime data, and other datasets. In addition to the base data described above, the planning team conducted a parcel by parcel survey of every property in the Central Dover study area. The survey collected detailed information on each property, including land use and condition but also recorded physical observations regarding housing, businesses, parks, roads, maintenance, safety , and so on. The planning process consisted of three phases: 1. RESEARCH & EXISTING CONDITIONS During the first phase of work, which was defined by research and data collection, the planning team explored and documented the physical and economic conditions in Central Dover through: > A GIS parcel by parcel mapping of land use, building condition and vacancy data to create an up-to-date land use map > An in-depth examination of the physical environment to assess the existing commercial and retail mix, the quality of the natural environment, local traffic and circulation patterns, the transit system, and pedestrian / bicycling amenities > Research using Policy Map and the Census to evaluate demographic and socioeconomic changes within the community over time > A review of existing planning documents whose boundaries overlap with those of the study area > The launch of a public outreach initiative beginning with the door-to- door resident survey and followed by the public open house designed to get a handle on the qualitative aspects of the neighborhood > The facilitated discussion of specific concerns raised during the process to date over a series of three focus groups > A series of one-on-one interviews to review our work and discuss possible solutions with key stakeholders and funders > Processing the information collected during the analysis to identify opportunities and challenges for the future of Central Dover > Review of this information by the Steering Committee 02 Land use survey map and breakdown Existing land use was one of the data points collected during the parcel-by-parcel physical survey conducted during Phase I of Restoring Central Dover. SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 6 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

2. PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS 3. FINAL MASTER PLAN During the second phase of the process, the planning team worked closely During the third phase of work, the planning team refined the with community partners to develop well-tailored recommendations in recommendations, incorporating the input collected from members of response to the research findings and community input collected in Phase the Steering Committee and the general public at the end of Phase II. I. Phase II resulted in: The analysis and revised recommendations are packaged together in this report, along with an implementation strategy to guide the next steps in > A list of goals and objectives based upon public input coming weeks, months, and years. > A series of preliminary recommendations for achieving such goals and balancing observed trends and projections with desired outcomes The Central Dover area, its network of involved neighborhood institutions > Presenting the preliminary recommendations to the community for and leaders, and all interested community members will assume feedback and critique at a public meeting, along with a prioritizing responsibility for the revitalization plan, its acceptance by the City of Dover, exercise and its implementation. RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER IN CONTEXT 7

03 Central Dover landmarks SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 8 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

A SNAPSHOT OF CENTRAL DOVER WELCOME TO CENTRAL DOVER and below average building conditions [E]. This area has been targeted by the city in recent years to bring housing up to code and demolish Dover, the capital city of the first state, is centered on the area referred hazardous structures. to as Central Dover, comprised of a number of distinct areas clustered around the historic Loockerman Street commercial corridor. Let’s start off The Norfolk Southern rail line divides the Dover Housing Authority’s Simon by getting our bearings in Central Dover: Circle neighborhood and surrounding primarily residential streets to the west. Loockerman, once a thriving traditional main street [A], is anchored by Dover City Hall and the Dover Library on the east end and a recent The Green, a historic park located in the old downtown Dover area, was commercial development at the west end, where Loockerman connects to during colonial times a center of civic life and activity, and is now used for Route 8 (an important gateway to Central Dover) via Forrest Street. The large scale events. 79 historic buildings contribute to the Dover Green corridor features primarily two and three-story historic buildings [B], some Historic District—many of these buildings are now being used for law, with active ground floor commercial uses, but some with vacant storefronts. finance, and other professional offices [F]. The Wesley College campus [C], which serves about 2,500 students, is The Southern portion of the study area is defined by a number of large located just north of the Loockerman corridor. The campus is surrounded footprint public, government and medical uses such as Bayhealth [G], as by residential blocks featuring larger houses (some which have been well as senior housing and commercial offices. The block structure results converted to office uses) with predominantly well maintained historic in a much looser urban fabric, in contrast to the more pedestrian-friendly architecture [D]. scale found north of Loockerman. This area is a significant center of employment in Dover, but feels physically disconnected from Loockerman Just north of Loockerman between Governors Avenue and West Street lay and adjacent neighborhoods. a few blocks of distressed residential streets with concentrated vacancy [A] [B] [C] [D] [E] [F] [G] RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER IN CONTEXT 9

EXISTING CONDITIONS TAKE-AWAYS The analysis of existing conditions conducted in Phase I of Restoring relative to the rates in other areas in the City and County. As long-term Central Dover led to some important conclusions that formed the basis, vitality relies on short-term stabilization of deteriorated blocks, strategies along with community input, for the drafting of recommendations. The to retain existing residents as well as attract new neighbors broad stroke highlights of the opportunities and challenges among these should be a priority of Restoring Central Dover. follow, with additional more specific references to the analysis threaded through the recommendations chapter. The existing conditions appendix VACANCY includes any remaining elements of research and public input not included There has been comparatively modest population growth and vacancy elsewhere in the document. remains a challenge in Central Dover. As an overall percentage of parcel area, vacant land and buildings comprise 13% of Central Dover. POPULATION DYNAMICS IN CONTEXT The aggregated area of vacant land in Central Dover is equal to 25 Central Dover is predominantly African American (59%), with the number football fields. The effects of vacancy impact perception and can hinder of African American residents increasing by 6% between 2000 and 2010. reinvestment, especially when concentrated on individual blocks [Fig 05]. The 12% increase in population overall in Central Dover [Fig 04] is on par At the same time, these clusters of vacancy are also opportunities for with the City of Dover’s 14% increase; but the population of Kent County infill development. increased 28% over the same period, far outpacing local growth. The rate of population growth in the Central Dover area continues to decline 04 Change in population and racial breakdown, 2000-2010 05 Map of vacant land and buildings SOURCE: 2000 & 2010 US Census SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 10 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

BUILDING CONDITIONS The parcel survey included rating buildings on a scale according to their apparent condition as observed from the street, with an “A” rating given to buildings in “Excellent” condition, through an “F” rating given to buildings in “Very Poor” condition [Fig 07]. Some patterns emerge in concentrations of buildings in below average condition relative to the study area overall [Fig 06], which coincide with concentrations of vacant buildings and land. These distressed residential streets speak to the need not only for infill development, but targeted home repair assistance to preserve exisiting housing stock where possible. COMMERCIAL SERVICES Though the land use survey counted a number of commerical uses in the study area, most of them are concentrated in the southern end of the study area and are offices and other commercial typologies that don’t serve the daily needs of Central Dover’s residents. Local residents typically travel outside of Central Dover to more suburban/auto-oriented commercial developments situated along Route 13 or Route 8. For existing residents without a car, this is a significant distance to travel to access services and goods or retail jobs. The Loockerman commercial corridor is an opportunity to bring commercial services within walking distance of Central Dover residential neighborhoods,. However, the challenges to overcome in 06 Surveyed building conditions It should be noted that because the building condition survey typically relies on judgments based only on revitalizing the corridor include perception of safety, high vacancy what is visible from the street, it is fair to say that the survey results overestimate the condition of buildings, as defects on the sides and rears of buildings are often not visible. SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 Bayard Plaza, a recent mixed use development on Loockerman Street 07 Building condition ratings criteria SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER IN CONTEXT 11

and tenant turnover rates, and a lack of readily leasable spaces due to 08], compared to one in three families with single female householders deferred maintenance and lack of property owner resources to rehabilitate city-wide. Many Central Dover residents face considerable housing cost properties. burdens, with a significant portion of the study area showing 81% or more of renters paying more than 30% of their income towards gross rent [Fig Capitalizing on housing development opportunities on or within walking 09]. The preservation of and increased access to affordable distance of Loockerman would help change perception of this struggling housing will be key to providing housing opportunities to Central Dover commercial corridor, as well as bring a denser customer base to support residents. commercial revitalization. Recent developments along Loockerman, such as the large new office building at the west Loockerman gateway, the mixed Add to those factors a high unemployment rate [10% in 2010] and lower use development at Bayard Plaza, and the recruitment of The Delaware educational attainment levels, and it becomes clear that many members of EZ-Pass Customer Service Center and Division of Motor Vehicles Call the Central Dover community face a number of challenges that will require Center, can be leveraged to continue to build momentum and critical the continued expansion of local services to meet the needs of mass along Loockerman. of residents. SOCIOECONOMIC CHALLENGES Some Central Dover residents have faced disadvantages in life that have placed them at the margins. The area’s weighted average median income, $34,730 is 27% lower than the City of Dover’s $47,754. More than half of families in Central Dover are headed by a single female householder [Fig 08 Household characteristics 09 Household characteristics The concentrated college student population is classified in the “non-family” group by the Percent of renter households for whom gross rent is 30% or more of household income. Census, which likely explains why the non-family share in Central Dover is 11% higher Gross rent is the contract rent plus the estimated average monthly cost of utilities. than that of the City of Dover. The rate of 53% of families being headed by single female SOURCE: American Community Survey, 2007-2011 householders refers only to the 47% of households that are considered a “family” and does not include students. SOURCE: 2010 US Census 12 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

CRIME AND PERCEPTION OF SAFETY One of the most prominent major quality of life issues that arose in community discussions during the Restoring Central Dover process—and one that impacts efforts to retain residents and businesses as well as attract new ones—was crime and perception of safety. When asked what they liked least about Central Dover, 42% of resident survey participants identified “Safety in the community,” which received the greatest number of “least liked” responses by a margin of 12%. Crime data from the Dover Police Department shows that the number of violent crimes per 1,000 persons in the Central Dover area rose from 6.16 per person in 2011, to 22.76 per person in 2013, a nearly 400% increase over a three year period [Fig 10]. In 2013 alone, nearly all forms of reported crimes in the plan were 3- to 5-times that of Dover overall [Fig 11]. These figures were alarming to the Central Dover community and plan leadership, and indicates a clear need to bring more resources to ensure the safety of the Central Dover community. 10 Change in violent crime rates, 2011-2013 SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 11 2013 Crime rate breakdown: Central Dover and City-wide SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER IN CONTEXT 13

OUR VISION FOR VITALITY This plan represents our community’s vision for restoring the vitality of Central Dover. It offers a range of achievable strategies, implemented over a five year period, designed to lay the foundation for future opportunities to fully realize Central Dover’s potential as a place to live, work, and play. GOAL AREAS A range of strategies towards achieving our vision for vitality are organized in three goal areas designed to achieve: 1. A STRONG COMMUNITY 2. POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 3. AN INTEGRATED PUBLIC REALM AND INFRASTRUCTURE 14 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS OUR VISION FOR VITALITY I. A STRONG COMMUNITY 15

16 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

1 A STRONG COMMUNITY

18 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

BUILD COMMUNITY CAPITAL Community support is critical to implementing the goals of this plan. Working to strengthen community cohesion through the cultivation of neighborhood groups will not only provide spaces for residents to enjoy each other’s company as well as address issues collectively; it will also encourage them to root themselves in Central Dover, as well as attract new residents looking for a deeper sense of community. ESTABLISH RESIDENT-LED CIVIC GROUPS In order to effect change in their community, residents have to work together. This means collectively developing an organizational model of neighborhood representation and community stewardship. By developing neighborhood groups, those wishing to take part in helping restore Central Dover will be better able to pursue resources to improve their neighborhood, create necessary dialogue about ways forward, and develop programming focused on engaging residents in the pursuit of positive change for their community. The resident survey led by the Central Dover Steering Committee asked neighbors how likely they think other people in the community would provide assistance in a variety of situations [Fig 12]. Roughly half of the responses indicated that Central Dover residents don’t necessarily feel they can rely on their neighbors. There is an opportunity to improve the bonds between neighbors, which could be fostered by individual involvement in neighborhood groups and resident-led initiatives. In Central Dover, there are a number of churches and religious institutions who currently conduct a number of outreach services; and these 12 Resident expectation of assistance from neighbors For a variety of hypothetical situations, surveyees generally felt they would likely receive institutions could be helpful in initiating the establishment of neighborhood help from a neighbor half the time. groups in Central Dover. Utilizing this religious network will also help lay SOURCE: NeighborWorks resident survey the groundwork for a collaborative set of neighborhood groups, working toward similar aims, as well as provide facilities in the interim while these grassroots groups get off the ground. area to determine what established networks can be built on. Existing neighborhood boundaries or affinity areas, such as Lincoln Park, Simon As a first step, develop a list of local neighborhood leaders that will help Circle, Kirkwood/Queen/New Streets, and so on, can serve as jumping to organize and map out existing groups in and adjacent to the plan off points for structuring neighborhood group facilitation and organization. I. A STRONG COMMUNITY 19

DEVELOP COMMUNITY BUILDING the campus and most visible to the general community so as to build excitement and encourage others to want to participate. Such projects PARTNERSHIP WITH ANCHOR INSTITUTIONS could include targeted beautification projects on residential blocks, Historically, Wesley College has been a good neighbor engaged with the garden tours, and public recognitions of particularly well-presented community and it is a goal of this effort to see that continue. Community flower and produce gardens and exterior home renovations. These engagement is an area of focus of the college’s strategic planning process activities would serve as initial steps for creating and sustaining model currently underway. There may be some short-term and longer-term blocks throughout Central Dover. opportunities to connect Wesley with the Restoring Central Dover plan implementation. Local partners can begin laying the groundwork for and Use experiences with Wesley to open up communication channels of with opening formal channels of communication between the Wesley College other anchor institutions located in or serving Central Dover to recruit administration, other anchor institutions, and community residents to workers from Central Dover. These companies include but are not limited connect and work on common issues affecting Central Dover. Determine to: Bayhealth, Energizer, Playtex , Kraft, the State of Delaware, other area where existing resources are available and where new ones are needed colleges and universities (DelTech and Del State), and public schools to address community building priorities that emerged from the Restoring serving the community. In addition to exploring workforce development Central Dover Plan, including: opportunities, the conversations with managers of these businesses should explore, among other objectives, student internships, summer youth > Encourage community residents and Wesley College students employment, career exploration and vocational programs, and work-study to become “We Care” team members as part of the proposed and scholarships. Neighborhood Watch Network to enhance safety and security on a block-by-block basis. Partnerships with local anchor institutions Coordinate and align these activities with the public schools and the new could also be helpful in cultivating neighborhood watch groups and community centers under construction and where the programming is coordinating communication between campus security, Dover Police already underway. Department patrols, and neighborhood watch activities. > Provide more opportunities for residents to engage with one another CREATE ANNUAL “CELEBRATING CENTRAL in social and cultural settings, informal and formal. > Build effective working relationships among neighbors to address DOVER” BLOCK PARTY safety and maintenance issues at the block level. Central Dover is perceived by some as a section of the city that should be, > Educational, vocational, and mentoring programs for children and for the most part, avoided by those from outside. However, when Central youth working with the schools serving the neighborhood and parents Dover residents were asked how likely they would be to recommend the of those students. community as a good place to live, 67% stated they would recommend it. > Community improvement projects focused initially in areas closest to This highlights a disparity between outside perception of Central Dover, and the view of those living in the neighborhood. If not addressed, this could inhibit reinvestment and revitalization efforts. While efforts should be made to continue and build on the existing events such as First Fridays and the farmer’s market on the Plaza to bring people downtown, one way to improve the view of those living outside Central Dover would be to host an annual celebratory block party showcasing the very best Central Dover has to offer. With an annual block party, residents could show what they love so much about living in here. There are opportunities to hold talent shows, market wares made by the community’s ambitious makers and entrepreneurs, 20 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

allow businesses and social services agencies to talk to residents about what they offer, and so on. Organizers could consider a multiple-location event to encourage unity across different neighborhoods within Central Dover. EXPAND ON “COMMUNITY CLEAN-UP DAYS” In recent years, the Dover Housing Authority, Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity, Wesley College, the Office of Senator Carper, and the City of Dover have organized a “123 = ABC” Community Event. During this event, 500 incoming students, along with faculty, staff, student athletes, and community members, have worked to improve the curb appeal and streetscape”of 20 blocks situated within the City of Dover/Carper Homeownership Program Target Area (bounded by Loockerman, West, Mary, and Governors). Volunteers clean the blocks of trash, plant flowers and shrubbery, and paint curbs. However, resources are not currently available to continue this effort. Wesley and local partners should engage in coordination efforts to resume this event, which could help kick start similar projects led by residents. Recently formed neighborhood groups and established church groups could hold similar events monthly, with the help of sponsors who support the 123=ABC event. DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE COMMUNITY CALENDAR OF ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS Produce a regularly updated and distributed listing of information/events/ activities in Central Dover to keep the community informed of what’s going on in Central Dover in general and, in particular, to highlight efforts towards 13 Community-identified illegal dumping/trash hot spots achieving the goals of Restoring Central Dover. The updates could be SOURCE: Public open house input coordinated with local press, distributed through mass email to subscribers, and have a constant presence online and through social media. EVALUATE LEVEL OF ACCESS TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES FOR SERVICES Two community facilities—Inner City Cultural League’s cultural arts center and Solid Rock Baptist Church’s community center—are presently under construction to provide a variety of services to Central Dover. Following the establishment of these new facilities, the City and local partners should evaluate Central Dover’s inventory of community facilities and access to social services to determine whether there is need for additional facilities to improve access within the community to these important services. I. A STRONG COMMUNITY 21

14 Aspects of Central Dover least liked by residents Residents identified crime and safety as the least liked aspect of living in Central Dover. SOURCE: Neighborworks resident survey 22 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

INCREASE PUBLIC SAFETY Developing a collaborative/community policing strategy which makes an at-risk community safe is imperative for any neighborhood revitalization initiative. Without a viable plan for reducing crime, attempts to attract investment, businesses, and new residents can be inhibited or even rendered impossible. For a neighborhood like Central Dover, reducing illicit activities in the area will greatly improve quality of life for current residents and improve efforts to attract potential developers, businesses and new residents. As it stands, both residents and visitors have the perception that Central Dover has a serious crime issue. According the resident survey, 42% said crime and safety issues are what they liked least about living in the community [Fig 15]. This sense of Central Dover being a high crime area is also backed by Dover Police Department crime data, indicating that the plan area has the largest concentrations of crime and illicit behavior citywide and that concentration has intensified by almost 400% from 2011 to 2013 [Fig 10 and 11]. In short, Central Dover is an area in dire need of innovative community-oriented approaches to crime prevention. What follows are a series of recommendations that can help begin reducing criminal activity and help develop better communication between the 15 Resident support for a neighborhood watch program community and public safety officials. SOURCE: NeighborWorks resident survey ESTABLISH COLLABORATIVE/COMMUNITY and improve safety in Central Dover. Residents in the plan areas are ready to take an active role in helping restore safe conditions POLICING throughout the neighborhood. A number of current residents believe Building a stronger relationship between the Dover Police Department establishing a neighborhood watch could deter criminal behavior. and the residents of Central Dover will go a long way in helping improve 60% of all resident surveyees would like to see a neighborhood public safety. Relationship-building can be aided by creating opportunities watch formed in Central Dover; and 42% of those respondents would for the community to not just report criminal activity taking place in the volunteer if it is created. With the help of the Dover Police Department community; but to take part in the decision-making in regards to the type as well as local institutions and church groups, organizers could begin of community policing initiated in the neighborhood. recruiting members for neighborhood watch groups, and educate members as to the role the neighborhood watch should play; how > CREATE NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH NETWORK best to communicate with the police department; what neighborhood- With residents using their relationships to hold each other accountable, specific crime patterns to look out for; and how to patrol the streets neighborhood watch programs have great potential to prevent crime safely. I. A STRONG COMMUNITY 23

> FORM A CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE Creating a citizen advisory committee will establish that the Dover Police Department is deeply committed to addressing the concerns of the community, and is open to hearing its ideas in regards to how it could adjust policing practices and procedure. Selecting a set of community leaders to review issues will help bring more residents forward to participate in collaborative efforts to help diminish crime in the plan area. Creating more dialogue between the community and police will also serve to educate residents and police alike about the community, improve awareness of policing and crime prevention procedures, and build mutual trust, among other benefits. DEPLOY POLICE FOOT AND BIKE PATROLS Foot and bike patrols are not only recognized as great methods to deploy officers through a neighborhood to prevent crime; they also provide opportunities for officers to build relationships with residents and business owners, which enables information sharing that also supports crime prevention. The Dover Police Department has conducted foot patrols along Loockerman Street in the past, but these were eliminated due to the budget constraints incurred due to the recent economic downturn and dwindling federal and state funding. However, residents and local business owners are calling for a re-establishment of the foot patrols to reduce loitering along Loockerman and drug activity in the Queen/New Street portion of plan area. Officers would be encouraged to check in to each business, and record 16 Known and perceived crime hotspots their visit in a ledger retained by each business owner—a technique used At the public open house, community members identified locations in Central Dover they by some other commercial corridor foot patrons to support face-to-face see as hotspots for crime and illicit behavior [shown in orange dots above]. For the most engagement between police and businesses. Community members also part, perceived hotspots coincide with Dover Police Department crime data hotspots strongly support the establishment of bike patrols along streets identified [generalized and shown in darker areas above]. Perception of high crime rates at The Green and Simon Circle are not necessarily reinforced by reported crime incidents, which as high drug and illicit activity areas in the Central Dover area. could be a factor of lack of crime reporting or simply a perception issue. SOURCE: Dover Police Department & public open house input EXPAND SURVEILLANCE CAMERA NETWORK Since the onset of the economic downturn, police departments around the country have had to expand their capacity with fewer resources to support As a first step, the Restoring Central Dover Steering Committee them. In order to address this issue, the Dover Police Department worked will meet with Dover Police to discuss an implementation strategy, with Advantech, a security camera firm based in Dover, Delaware, to put including mapping out existing neighborhood watch areas in or in place a 24-hour surveillance platform operating primarily in downtown adjacent to the plan area and determining whether existing adjacent Dover. The police department can now monitor crimes as they take place, watch areas could be expanded to include Central Dover or if new and relay real-time information to responding officers about the occurring groups should be established. incidents. 24 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

Department officials report that this has greatly improved capacity to fight crime and they are looking to expand the surveillance camera network to other sections of the city. Currently, the department has a plan to add 21 cameras throughout the city and better integrate the existing camera network into an improved single-user interface located at the Dover Police Departments Dispatch Center. Working with both the City of Dover and the police department to secure more funding for the network expansion will improve public safety in Central Dover. IMPROVE LIGHTING IN TARGETED AREAS Public safety can be greatly improved by the installation of better lighting in areas known for high criminal activity. Pedestrian-scale lighting along commercial corridors and throughout residential areas can enhance traffic for businesses and increase the number of residents willing to walk at night through their neighborhoods; while simultaneously deterring illicit activity. During the planning process, residents expressed concern about the lack of proper lighting and its connection to criminal activity and vagrancy. Areas identified by residents in serious need of more lighting were Simon Circle, Wesley College, the New/Queen Street section, and portions of South State Street [Fig 17]. Other areas where extra lighting could improve the pedestrian and cycling experience would be along the southern portion of Forest Street to Loockerman, and all of Division Street. > CREATE RESIDENT-ASSISTED PORCH/FAÇADE 17 Community-identified areas in need of improved lighting SOURCE: Public open house input LIGHTING PROGRAM Installing low-cost porch/façade lighting in areas with high concentrations of illicit activity will reduce crime and increase safety for neighborhood residents. Identifying funding sources would be UC BRITE PROGRAM the first step in developing a program which will assist residents with The UC BRITE program provided matching funds for property owners the purchase of motion-detecting or solar power lighting that can be around the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia to purchase affixed to their porches or business façades. and install exterior lighting. The popular program offered assistance to 114 property owners on 58 blocks in the University City area, contributing to a significant improvement in street lighting. The program > INSTALL PEDESTRIAN-SCALE LIGHTING was started in the late 1990s as a collaboration between the energy The typical cobra-style street lamps seen posted along main company and the University of Pennsylvania to improve safety in the thoroughfares in the plan area do not provide sufficient lighting to neighborhood, and later handed over to the University City District [UCD]. deter illegal behavior or enhance the streetscape. Installing pedestrian- Following the success of UC BRITE, in 2009 UCD installed 71 pedestrian lights scale street lighting will better illuminate walkways and public spaces on Baltimore Avenue from 45th to 50th Streets and the University launched while eliminating the gaps between lit areas. a Neighborhood Lighting Initiative to partner with landlords to install new pedestrian lights between Walnut and Spruce and 40th and 43rd Streets. I. A STRONG COMMUNITY 25

18 Community do-it-yourself budget results SOURCE: Public open house input 26 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

ENGAGE YOUTH IN COMMUNITY Finding ways to involve youth in the revitalization and stewardship of Central Dover will not only provide activities for young people to take part in or simply provide employment opportunities; this will help reinforce the need for their active participation in shaping their community and keep them accountable to sustaining it and protecting Central Dover’s vitality. Though youth of ages 17 and under make up only 15% of the Central SUSTAIN AND EXPAND YOUTH Dover population, this figure belies the actual density of youth living in Central Dover compared to the City of Dover. The share of minors is PROGRAMMING skewed by the density of the college student population aged 18 to 24, Involve local elementary and middle schools and the Capital School which comprises 32% of Central Dover’s population. However, there are District, along with youth activity service providers, to comprehensively over 1,000 residents under 18 per square mile living in Central Dover, review after school programming and GED classes available to Central which is much more concentrated than the city-wide youth density figure, Dover’s children and youth to determine where there might be areas of 330 residents under 18 per square mile. Though the youth population is improvement. In the near term, steps should be taken to ensure that youth concentrated here, there are very limited opportunities and spaces readily programming continues at Simon Circle after the Boys & Girls Club leaves accessible to them, and many residents expressed concern about how this the facility. Local partners should approach other youth-oriented nonprofits could push neighborhood youth to engaging in negative behaviors. to determine whether they have the capacity and resources to fill the gap. Feedback heard during the planning process indicated that there is a The residents of Central Dover want more opportunities available to their specific need for services addressing the needs of youth aging out of youth; the neighborhood youth deserve a chance to grow and thrive. This foster care, including housing. was evident during the “do-it-yourself” budget community engagement exercise held at the public open house in May 2014. Participants were RE-ESTABLISH POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE being asked how they would distribute budget resources for City of Dover amongst nine different programmatic categories. Out of the nine Building relationships between local police and neighborhood youth categories, “Youth Programs & Education” ranked as the top priority [Fig through friendly sports competition is an approach to crime prevention and 18]. Also, throughout numerous interviews and stakeholder focus groups, community building that could have a great impact on the levels of illicit many asserted the need for more youth-oriented programming and activity taking place in Central Dover. Re-establishing the Police Athletic services. Therefore, engaging youth has to become an integral component League in Central Dover in partnership with Delaware State University of plan implementation. (who will provide the necessary recreational space), will begin the process of bridging the gap in a positive way between officers and kids in the Ensuring youth have safe and positive ways to learn, socialize, and stay community. healthy will help prepare them for a productive adulthood and strengthen the community as a whole. The following efforts should be pursued, among others, to support and expand youth programming in Central Dover. I. A STRONG COMMUNITY 27

CREATE YOUTH OUTREACH AND EDUCATIONAL SUPPORT CENTER A number of residents are concerned about the lack of readily-accessible spaces or facilities where youth can congregate and take part in positive activities. To remedy this, Solid Rock Baptist Church plans to open a 4,200-square-foot Community Outreach Center on West Street. The center will offer recreational programs, as well as classrooms featuring advanced technology that tutors will utilize to provide a different and enhanced learning experience for youth. The new outreach center is scheduled to open in 2015. PROVIDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT VOCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUTH The experience of taking an active role in neighborhood revitalization can have immeasurable impact on a young person’s sense of both self and purpose. Helping rehabilitate housing, as well as reclaiming vacant lots and transforming them into pocket parks, teaches youth transferrable skills and shows them the importance of investing energy in their community. YOUTHBUILD USA YouthBuild USA is one example of a program that seeks to merge community development work with vocational training for at-risk youth. Eligible students learn building construction skills and the process of thorough on-site training while working to complete their high school studies. Currently, there are 264 YouthBuild programs across the country engaging approximately 10,000 young adults per year; and since 1994, over 120,000 YouthBuild students have built over 22,000 units of affordable housing. 28 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

EXPAND ADULT AND FAMILY SERVICES Restoring Central Dover must include strengthening support for residents who live on the margins by providing opportunities for them to actively pursue improving their employment situations. According to the American Community Survey, approximately 46% of Central Dover residents earn less than $30,000 annually. Working to reduce barriers of entry inhibiting access to the formal economy as well as providing vocational education opportunities can improve the living conditions of struggling individuals and families, as well as cultivate deeper trust between the neighborhood residents and the social service agencies identifying them as constituents. STRENGTHEN AND EXPAND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND RELATED SERVICES Establish and strengthen networking and coordination of housing and family support services among all local providers. This strengthened communication will facilitate broader access to information on available services and eligibility requirements through different media, including informed word-of-mouth, print and broadcast advertising and promotion, and computer/web-based/smart phone technologies. It is critical to support emerging service centers, such as Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing, to help program the space and ensure full access to services by residents. Link community residents to educational, employment and financial services that support their healthy growth. Additional transitional housing units in the Central Dover area should avoid geographic concentration, integrate appropriate programming and services targeting children and families, and seek a variety of housing types designed for families of all sizes. 19 Change in median household income SOURCE: 2000 U.S. Census, American Community Survey, 2007 - 2011 I. A STRONG COMMUNITY 29

ESTABLISH A FAMILY SERVICES responsibilities for ensuring quality services and service delivery. > Host community fairs and partner with churches to get the word out COLLABORATIVE about existing and new services Establish a formal Family Services Collaborative comprised of the providers > Sponsor and facilitate continuing education classes and life skills representing social/human service agencies and programs serving training, especially to enhance life-long learning and skill development Central Dover. The central goal of the collaborative should be to enhance abilities of residents previously incarcerated. communications and coordination among community service providers in > Create more opportunities for peer-to-peer learning through which order to better connect Central Dover residents to available services. The parents, caregivers, and enablers coordinate the support of childhood, services collaborative would: youth and family development. > Link and advertise their services and eliminate any gaps in scope EXPAND FINANCIAL EDUCATION SERVICES and delivery. (Note: the existing 2-1-1 service provides information about available services; however, more advertising of these services Involve local financial institutions such as NCALL in providing educational is needed to get the word out.) resources and training for Central Dover residents in the areas of financial > Promote their services, eligibility, performance and outcomes to management and credit repair, housing counseling and financial coaching residents services, tax preparation, and savings programs such as Individual > Assess program outcomes and impacts, and use those findings to Development Accounts. advocate for resources to fill any existing gaps. > As an intermediate term strategy where service gaps exist locally, provide transportation options for Central Dover residents to access services outside the area. > Facilitate networking and collaborations among neighborhood service providers to: better coordinate inter-agency services and service delivery; support one another in identifying, competing for and securing capital to finance their programs; and facilitate interagency collection of program data, tracking of performance and measurement of outcomes over time. > Sponsor and hold inter-organizational meetings to discuss roles and WEST PHILADELPHIA SKILLS INITIATIVE The West Philadelphia Skills Initiative [WPSI] provides workforce development for both youth and adults throughout the University City District. Employers include the Children’s Hospital Of Philadelphia, Drexel University, Mercy Philadelphia Hospital, the National Board of Medical Examiners, Penn Medicine, the University of the Sciences, and the University of Pennsylvania. WPSI’s youth program prepares local high school students for career opportunities with real world work experience through its summer jobs program, professional internships program, small business after school program, and service learning program. The service learning program encourages young people to design and implement projects in their own community. A past project included a Lancaster Avenue Corridor Management Project in which students surveyed and analyzed local businesses and corridor activity. Adult programs are based on an ‘earn while you learn’ model, where individuals develop skills and transition to full time employment after training. Career paths include certified medical assistance, health information technology, and animal care. These opportunities provide benefits, offer wages that can support a family, and sometimes include subsidized tuition. WPSI also provides career coaching, apprenticeships, and professional development for high school graduates. 30 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

2 POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT

20 Building condition ratings criteria 21 Surveyed building conditions of residential properties It should be noted that because the building condition survey typically relies on judgments based only on what is visible from the street, it is fair to say that the survey results overestimate the condition of buildings, as defects on the sides and rears of buildings are often not visible. SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 32 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

STRENGTHEN EXISTING HOUSING Neighborhood building conditions shape perception of neighborhood character and potential. Distressed buildings falling into disrepair, especially when concentrated, can make streets appear unsafe, deterring new residents and investors. Developing strategies to help maintain and improve housing stock is essential to ensuring long-term neighborhood vitality and encouraging reinvestment in Central Dover. The Central Dover building conditions survey conducted as a part of this planning process indicated that over a third of properties in the study area were found to be in “Fair” condition, meaning that there are highly visible cosmetic defects as well as visible indications of minor structural issues present. Property owners have maintained their buildings fairly well in the majority of the study area, but the map of building conditions reveals concentrations of housing that is in need of repairs and potentially substantial renovations. EXPAND ACCESS TO HOUSING REPAIR PROGRAMS Housing repairs are currently available to a limited number of lower income homeowners annually through the City of Dover’s CDBG program. Help existing residents, particularly low- to moderate-income households preserve the affordability of their homes through the establishment of an expanded housing repair program. Set as a housing priority the preservation of existing and development of more affordable housing for affordable. As repayments are made, the principal is lent out again to new low- to moderate-income residents, focusing on homeownership to enable borrowers, thus the revolving nature of the loan pool to sustain it over time. families to have a stake in their community. Provide educational resources and training for homeowners in the areas of: INITIATE VOLUNTEER-BASED NEIGHBORHOOD > Repair and rehabilitation techniques HOUSING REPAIR ORGANIZATION > Homeownership and financial responsibilities 42% of Central Dover’s housing stock is in either “C” or “D” (Fair or Poor) > Financial management and credit repair condition. With a little professional guidance, resources, and elbow grease, these properties could be restored and improve block perception, helping Establish a rehabilitation revolving loan fund capitalized by CDBG funds at to stabilize residential streets in the area. Central Delaware Habitat for a low interest rate (in the neighborhood of 1%) and attract a foundation, Humanity is interested in bringing their minor repair program currently bank or CDFI to match the initial amount at a low rate of interest so it is operating in Frederica to Dover in late 2015. The program encompasses II. POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 33

exterior painting/minor exterior repairs per home in which volunteers from STRENGTHEN CODE ENFORCEMENT business, industry and the community pitch in with the owners to take One of the issues residents raised repeatedly as a major concern by on home repair and beautification projects in the neighborhood. There Central Dover stakeholders was the lack of accountability displayed by are also similar mission-based groups active in Central Dover that could some property owners, particularly absentee rental property owners. be partnered with to help restore existing housing. Additionally, MHDC Holding property owners responsible for derelict housing by strengthening currently provides emergency housing repairs and First State CAA operates code enforcement in areas with high concentrations of renters and safety a weatherization / repair program which could be targeted to the area. code violations is essential to ongoing neighborhood revitalization efforts in Central Dover. These recommendations provide for an opportunity for Central Dover to link this kind of investment with the proposed model block concept and > Initiate a third party needs assessment to determine whether staffing related community building activities described in the previous chapter. To or technology solutions (such as a web-based permitting and that end, a task force should be created to: development resource center) would help improve code enforcement efficiency. > Identify the nature and extent of any incentives—financial and > Provide educational resources and training to homeowners and technical—needed to bring such a program to the community. landlords to help them make better decisions about their properties. > Bring it to scale over time and ensure that it targets strategic locations > Explore with City and state programs to provide financing incentives consistent with the Restoring Central Dover Plan. for code compliance for rental properties. > Leverage other investments in the blocks targeted and in other > Begin notification to the City of Dover by the Dover Housing Authority initiatives that are priorities and spelled out in the Plan. (DHA) and the Delaware State Housing Authority when Vouchers and > Improve and/or extend partnerships with local government agencies, Section 8 Rental Payments are suspended for a rental housing unit and technical and financial intermediaries to work closer together to due to a failed DHA or DSHA inspection. avoid any duplication of effort in fashioning the program. LANDLORD TRAINING The nationally recognized Landlord Training Program in Portland, OR has been adopted by over 400 cities and counties across the nation, and includes a separate focus on Section 8 housing. The training workshop focuses on keeping rental properties safe and free of illegal activity by training landlords in effective property management and techniques for dealing with illegal activities by tenants. LEARN MORE portlandonline.com/BDS/index The Good Landlord Program in Ogden City, Utah provides incentives for landlords and apartment managers who go through training and implement the lessons on eliminating code violations, illegal activity and public nuisances through discounts on business permits and disproportionate impact fees. Creating a web-based permitting and development resource center could make information more accessible than it currently is in pamphlet form at City Hall. LEARN MORE ogdencity.com/en/doing_business/ 34 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

EXPLORE WAYS TO BOOST HOMEOWNERSHIP From the existing tenant population of Central Dover and from workers regularly commuting to Central Dover, recruit potentially interested first- The 25% homeownership rate in Central Dover stands in stark contrast time home-buyers by introducing them to counseling programs and to the City of Dover’s 52% homeownership rate. Explore the potential financial incentives available through NCALL as well as from Delaware for employer-assisted homeownership programs modeled off programs State Housing Authority (DSHA) programs and the City of Dover. These such as Delaware’s Live Near Your Work, the University of Pennsylvania’s include: Enhanced Forgivable Loan Program, and Philadelphia’s “Home-Buy-Now” program that provide down-payment and closing costs assistance to NCALL company employees towards the purchase of a home in Central Dover. > Homeownership counseling helps households become mortgage- Start with major institutions and employers such as Bayhealth Medical ready for conventional financing and special federal financing Center, Wesley College, State of Delaware, Kraft Foods, etc. programs, such as FHA and VA mortgage loans. Explore with the City allowing qualified first-time home buyers in Central DSHA Dover to use CDBG home repair program funds to complete basic repairs > Homeownership Loan Program that provides first mortgage financing when purchasing their new home. This, along with other home repair at below-market interest rates to qualified homebuyers. programs and down payment assistance will help boost homeownership > Delaware First-Time Homebuyer Tax Credit federal income tax credit rates in the neighborhood. designed to help make homeownership more affordable to qualified homebuyers. Homebuyers who elect to use the federal tax credit are Initiate discussions with the City regarding waiving impact fees and/or eligible to claim a portion of the annual interest paid on their mortgage discounting permit fees to incentivize affordable and market rate housing as a special tax credit. in Central Dover primarily for homeownership. > Second Mortgage Assistance Loan (SMAL) assists income qualified borrowers in the purchase of their own home by providing down- payment and closing cost assistance in the form of second mortgages. > Advantage 3 grant program assists qualified borrowers in the purchase of their own home by providing down payment and closing costs assistance in the form of a grant equal to three percent (3%) of the first mortgage loan amount. CITY OF DOVER > Dover First Start provides down payment and settlement assistance to low and moderate income families who purchase eligible properties in the City of Dover. 22 Housing occupancy and tenure SOURCE: 2010 U.S. Census, 2007-2011 American Community Survey II. POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 35

23 Resident priority uses for vacant land Residents identified new housing development as a top priority among ways to reuse the plan area’s vacant lots. SOURCE: Neighborworks resident survey. 36 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

SUPPORT NEW DEVELOPMENT The Central Dover area has enough vacant land to comprise 25 football fields. Opportunities for residential and commercial development in the plan area are considerable. Removing certain regulatory and property acquisition barriers to development may encourage infill construction. Encouraging more affordable and market rate housing and mixed use development can help better unify the urban fabric by eliminating vacant lots, as well as bring in new residents and businesses. ENCOURAGE GREATER ZONING FLEXIBILITY TO ENABLE INFILL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT The City of Dover is in the process of revisiting the zoning code to make redevelopment projects easier to get off the ground. This will require a new framework that will steer infill development with new guidelines and standards about acceptable building typologies and uses. Development of duplexes and townhouses—residential typologies that would be appropriate for the urban character of Central Dover—are currently not allowed within the zoning regulations. Developing a zoning overlay covering the Downtown Redevelopment District that identifies townhouse and duplex developments as acceptable conditional uses could speed up the approval process and encourage residential development. There could 24 Aggregated vacant land area SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 also be allowances made as part of the Planned Neighborhood Design code, which would provide more flexibility in terms of setbacks and other block standards in exchange for architectural elements that complement the character of the area. Encourage neighborhood residents to be part of setting the neighborhood and infill standards. properties hold can be challenging. 10% of all currently vacant lots are owned by the City of Dover, meaning the majority of properties are held FACILITATE PARCEL ASSEMBLY AND privately, and in some cases, property owners are resistant to selling their holdings because of a perceived or anticipated investment and building REDEVELOPMENT boom in downtown Dover. In order to encourage investment in the plan Though there are 207 vacant properties in the Central Dover plan area area, the City should explore the following innovative mechanisms, among (73 vacant buildings and 134 vacant lots), realizing the potential these others, to facilitate parcel assembly and redevelopment. II. POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 37

LAND BANK A land bank is “a public authority created to efficiently hold, manage and develop tax-foreclosure property” and can be utilized as a planning tool for long-term community development. Land banks use legal and financial tools to put vacant, abandoned, and/or tax delinquent properties back into the market for productive uses; and in most cases, because vacant, abandoned, and/or tax delinquent properties are found within older/economically depressed communities, the land bank encourages redevelopment in these blighted areas. Across the country, municipalities are establishing or reviewing the potential of land banks to reclaim blighted areas. A land bank can also be established by a private organization in coordination with the City of Dover. Central Dover could follow suit and create a land bank as part of its revitalization efforts. LAND TRUST A community land trust is a non-profit, community-based organization that works to provide perpetually affordable home ownership opportunities. The land trust acquires land and removes it from the speculative, for-profit, real estate market. The land trust then holds the land it owns “in trust” forever for the benefit of the community by ensuring that it will always remain affordable for homebuyers. The land trust provides permanently affordable housing by owning the land of a particular property but selling the home on the land to an income-qualified buyer. The homeowner then leases the land from the land trust through a 99-year, renewable ground lease. Local housing advocates and other partners should open dialogue with the City, potentially consulting the Diamond State Community Land Trust, about whether or not this approach would serve Central Dover well. 25 Infill development opportunity sites From a the full inventory of vacant buildings, vacant land, and parking lots in the Central Dover study area (above left), clusters of development opportunity sites within walking distance of Loockerman are identified in orange (below left). Prioritizing development close to Loockerman will reinforce commercial corridor revitalization efforts. Proposed development typologies include infill housing, mixed use campus development, and potential longer-term transit-oriented development, pending establishment of regional rail connections discussed in the following chapter. SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 38 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

EVALUATE WAYS OF PROVIDING FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT Property acquisition and construction costs are higher in Dover than in neighboring areas—without commensurately higher rents or sales prices. In order to attract developers to the Central Dover area, the City should consider waiving City impact fees and/or discount permit fees and real estate taxes to incentivize housing in general and affordable housing in particular. EXPAND ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING Recruit and select housing developers such as NCALL, MHDC, Central Delaware Habitat and others to develop affordable and market rate housing for homeowners in Central Dover. For example, Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity serves Kent County targeting families with incomes at and below 60% of area-wide median income. Their program holds and services all the mortgages on completed homes sold to first-time homebuyers. Habitat for Humanity is currently pursuing financing and other needed resources to build homes in Central Dover and NCALL has executed support letters indicating the project is consistent with the ongoing planning process. The targeted properties are located on Kirkwood and Queen Street. 26 Barriers to homeownership 63% of surveyed residents report that they would not consider buying a house in Central Dover. Highlighting the need for more affordable housing in Central Dover, slightly more than half of renters identified their personal financial situation as the primary reason why they have not yet bought a home. SOURCE: Neighborworks resident survey II. POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 39

PROVIDE ASSISTANCE IN ACTIVATING UPPER STORIES ALONG LOOCKERMAN STREET There have been a number of initiatives aimed at filling vacant commercial spaces along Loockerman Street. Though businesses along Loockerman have strengthened in recent years, Loockerman still has the potential to become a vibrant commercial district. One way to push it in that direction would be to encourage residents to live along the corridor in upper story apartments so they can be at the center of momentum building in Central Dover. Property owners should be supported in their efforts to create high quality housing with good tenants. Assistance can come in the form of permitting and design assitance to convert upper stories, as well as potentially relaxed regulations to facilitate conversion, as long as such flexibility does not compromise safety standards. Coordinating with the Downtown Dover Partnership, local partners should seek to establish financial assistance programs for basic systems repair and façade improvements for owners who cannot afford them on their own. Such improvements lower utility costs and enhance security for tenants, while also lowering operating costs and enhancing the property value for landlords. The upper buildings of some buildings more readily lend themselves to other uses, especially where a second means of egress cannot be created to support residential units above the first floor. Upper story artist studios, small offices, and coworking spaces would bring increased activity to Loockerman, as well as support existing businesses along the corridor. EXPLORE OPPORTUNITIES TO CREATE STUDENT HOUSING OPTIONS OFF CAMPUS Wesley College is an anchor educational institution with 2,100 students situated in the northeastern section of the plan area. The college has been looking for ways to deepen its relationship within the community it is embedded in. Neighborhood residents would like Wesley to take a bigger role in helping revitalize the neighborhood and encourage students to become a part of the community fabric. One way to do this would be to expand off-campus mixed use student housing offerings linking the campus to Loockerman. Mixed use development with ground floor retail in this area would also make it more pedestrian-friendly and encourage students to frequent stores on the Loockerman commercial corridor. 40 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

REINVEST IN COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS Loockerman Street is home to the main commercial corridor of Central Dover. Currently, Loockerman is made up primarily of small, locally-owned boutique or specialty shops; only one retail chain occupies space along the strip, which gives the corridor a unique character and identity. However, the turnover rate is high and there are a number of vacant commercial spaces and lots that could provide ground for new forms of retail and entertainment. Presently, there are 16 vacant build- ings, 6 partially vacant commercial spaces, and 2 vacant lots on Loock- erman alone that can be repurposed and re-imagined. The vacancy rate changes monthly as two new retail shops plan to open in September 2014. Developing a strategy to not only fill vacancy in commercial areas, but also recast corridors like Loockerman as vibrant and bustling consumer attrac- tions, will not only improve the revenue streams of existing businesses, but will also draw visitors from all over Delaware and the tri-state area to ex- perience the newly restored Central Dover and its small business-oriented retail corridor. BUILD AND EXPAND ON MARKETING/ BRANDING EFFORTS FOR THE LOOCKERMAN STREET CORRIDOR AND CENTRAL DOVER Marketing will play a big role in helping change the perception of the Loockerman Street Corridor. A review and potential revision of the current marketing tag line, “Historically Happening,” as well as the Downtown Market Plan should be completed in the near term. Identifying who the various customer groups and business types Central Dover should be targeting will help shape the type of marketing and branding plan necessary to draw- in the retail and entertainment that will position Loockerman to become a vibrant and lively commercial district. Recruitment of the needed retail and businesses will need to occur as well. Marketing materials and social 27 Vacancy and utilization of areas zoned for commercial uses media efforts tailored to potential residents, investors, and businesses SOURCE: Field survey, Nov 2013 - Jan 2014 should be developed to promote reinvestment in the area. II. POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 41

ACTIVATE VACANT STOREFRONTS Though there a number of new businesses popping up along Loockerman Street, high vacancy and turn-over rates are persistent issues. With downtown revitalization efforts already underway, one approach to quickly turn around the negative effects of vacancy along commercial corridors is to develop an interim strategy that transforms empty commercial spaces into temporary gallery spaces showcasing the creative work of youth living in Central Dover or displays about area nonprofit organizations. Many of the commercial spaces along Loockerman have large display windows, providing an opportunity to brand the corridor as a creative place, add color and interest to the streetscape, and establish exhibition venues for emerging artists. Temporary storefront installations could also be an opportunity to merge commercial corridor revitalization with social services through an art therapy program such as the Creative Vision Factory in Wilmington, Delaware. In addition, the City and its partners should encourage “pop- up” stores and incubator businesses for a three month trial with three months free rent, which would serve to both activate gaps in the corridor and create opportunities for entrepreneurs and small retailers to establish themselves in Central Dover. 28 Conceptual visualization of temporary vacant storefront installation ADDRESS CONCENTRATED LOITERING The vitality of Central Dover’s commercial corridors relies on perception of the area. Some businesses in the vicinity of Loockerman are generating activities that deter customers and new businesses. Though such operations generate revenue for the City, in Central Dover they contribute CREATIVE VISION FACTORY to loitering and exacerbate vagrancy in the area. The perception is that the loitering and vagrancy leads to high crime incidents. Revisiting licensing The mission of the Creative Vision requirements, zoning restrictions, and potential ordinances regarding Factory in Wilmington, Delaware, is nuisance businesses as well direct approaches to such business owners to support artistic endeavors of those with behavioral health disorders and about how to change their business’ image and patronage, will be useful encourage their participation in the in protecting the commercial viability of Central Dover, and will ensure that local artistic community through the negative impact of nuisance businesses will be minimized over time. exhibitions and workshops. The factory recognizes the value of creativity and expression in assisting in the promotion EXPAND SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT of recovery. Michael Kalmbach, who developed the Factory, feels it can PROGRAMS FOR NEW AND EXISTING BUSINESS serve as a path to employment. The OWNERS communal workspace is free to those with behavioral health disorders Small business owners like those who own the boutiques and specialty and open to the community for a shops along Loockerman are entrepreneurs who have taken a risk to minimal monthly membership fee. open an enterprise to sell a product or service they believe the community wants or needs. Sustaining new and existing small businesses can be a LEARN MORE thecreativevisionfactory.org 42 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

difficult task in today’s fast paced economy. There are opportunities to RECRUIT MAJOR LOCAL EMPLOYERS TO help prepare burgeoning entrepreneurs and long-time business owners for the constant fluctuation of the market and consumer taste. Currently, ESTABLISH SATELLITE OFFICES ON the Downtown Dover Partnership offers some business assistance in the COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS form of information on “loan programs, available incentives and grants, and Dover is home to several notable private corporations and institutions. Kraft, available spaces” in the downtown area. A network exists among the Playtex, Proctor and Gamble, Wesley College, and Bayhealth-Kent General small business assistance providers to coordinate efforts; this collaboration are some of the major local employers within city boundaries. Encouraging should continue and an expansion of the services offered will improve the these major employers to relocate their smaller operations and/or divisions stability of Central Dover’s commercial base and broaden its diversity and to unoccupied commercial spaces within the plan area such as the new offerings. E-ZPass location on Loockerman Street will bring more employees into the downtown areas to shop and eat, which will strengthen Loockerman as a commercial corridor and encourage continued revitalization in surrounding areas. II. POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 43

29 Top employers in Dover SOURCE: Kent Economic Partnership, Inc 44 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

ENSURE EQUITABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The racial and ethnic composition of Central Dover has grown more diverse over the past decade. From 2000 to 2010, the plan area saw a 12% increase in total population, from 3,323 to 3,735 residents. During that period, the percentage of those identifying as persons of color increased by 6%, with the European American cohort dropping from 41% to 34%. While the plan area’s population has grown more diverse, it appears employment opportunities have not. In 2010, the unemployment rate for Central Dover was approximately 10%; and while over 3,500 employees work within the plan area, only 1% actually resides and works in Central Dover. Truly restoring Central Dover must involve community and business leaders working together to confront the lack of access and disparity Central Dover’s people of color are currently facing. DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Linking Central Dover residents with the skills they need to compete for quality jobs will support both regional economic strength and local vitality. Equalizing economic opportunity requires the cooperation of private, public, and nonprofit sectors. The nature of this collaboration and partnership brings benefits to all participants: local residents secure family wage jobs and employers’ participation in building a skilled workforce ensures their own success. A critical part of this effort will be to leverage existing major employers to drive growth and boost local employment. Invite local business and industry to help address the unemployment and underemployment issue in Central Dover. Among the ideas and initiatives to explore include: > Mechanisms that promote job growth and better enable African 30 Worker inflow & outflow SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics Americans and other disenfranchised individuals to overcome systemic barriers to living wage employment > Development of industry partnership programs between employers and workforce representatives with targeted recruitment efforts in II. POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 45

Central Dover > Investments in: - Prisoner and ex-offender education programs as part of workforce development. - Youth workforce and internship programs. - Entrepreneurship and capacity building programs for minority- and women-owned business enterprises. > Corporate and institutional policies that increase workforce diversity (especially at management levels), and the hiring of ex-offenders. Explore potential pilot programs with the DelMarVa Black Chamber of Commerce modeled after Incubator Without Walls and the Ice House Entrepreneurship Program. Incubator Without Walls (IWOW) is a program for developing a skilled workforce to help power economic growth and the Ice House Entrepreneurship Program promotes entrepreneurship working with young adults to achieve learning objectives. COMPLETE ECONOMIC INCLUSION STUDY As a first step towards ensuring diversity within business opportunities, complete and publish the City-funded Economic Inclusion Study of Dover – commissioned by the DelMarVa Black Chamber of Commerce (DBCC) that is modeled off of a similar analysis of Pittsburgh, PA concluding that, among other contributing factors, racial equity and inclusion are cornerstones of sustained development and successful, healthy economies for that particular region. The lack of minority participation in a number of high- profile and large construction projects (in the Central Dover community and the Dover region in general) recently and over time prompted DBCC to bring the need for such an analysis to light publicly and to seek partners to help sponsor and fund it. The Restoring Central Dover plan and the prospects of it leveraging public and private resources present a unique opportunity to advance both agendas by linking economic inclusion as a policy and practice with community revitalization as a goal. 46 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

3 AN INTEGRATED PUBLIC REALM AND INFRASTRUCTURE

31 Mode of travel to work: Central Dover versus City of Dover SOURCE: 2007-2011 American Community Survey 48 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE Aside from the largely institutional areas south of Loockerman, the Central Dover area is a fairly walkable urban fabric. However, the contextual land use patterns and low-density development standard in the region result in a pervasive reliance on cars for personal transportation. The worker inflow and outflow, as well as travel mode to work data also suggest the same. More than 3,500 workers come into the Central Dover area from areas outside and 84% of workers living in Central Dover use a personal vehicle to get to work. There are a number of reasons to make a concerted effort to improve and expand levels of service for alternative transportation options in Central Dover, including: > As costs of owning and maintaining a car continue to trend upward, improving public transportation infrastructure will expand access to the city and provide stability for Central Dover’s low-income residents looking to broaden their opportunities. > Enhanced public transportation and more balanced streets will improve quality of life for Central Dover’s senior population and those with physical disabilities. > Investing in alternative transportation can help boost economic development efforts by attracting new residents and businesses who are attracted to these amenities. > Promoting walking and biking can help fight the childhood obesity epidemic and encourage healthier lifestyles in general. The following recommendations seek to improve mobility and establish more balanced streets in the Central Dover area. EXPAND AND ENHANCE TRANSIT SERVICES Central Dover residents and stakeholders were vocal about the need for expanded DART bus services. Though only 3% of Dover residents use public transit, this may be due to the limited routes and times of operation provided. According to residents who participated in the May Open House, 32 Community-identified public transit issues the bus is simply not an option for individuals working late shifts, with SOURCE: Public open house input services ending at 9 p.m. and no buses running on the weekends. Also, there are no regional routes for workers who are employed in surrounding suburbs or towns. For these reasons, city officials and neighborhood civic III. AN INTEGRATED PUBLIC REALM AND INFRASTRUCTURE 49

groups should be advocating for more routes and better times of operations to ensure all workers who need public transit have a way to their jobs. As a first step, an in-depth transportation accessibility study specifically for Central Dover should be completed focusing on the needs of existing and potential transit users, as well as evaluating current levels of service. This information should be used to form the foundation of decision-making on the part of city officials and transit authorities to improve alternative transportation options and accessibility for Central Dover residents, workers, and visitors. Feedback generated as a part of this process suggested this study should explore: > Establishing a bus line with frequent service along Route 13 and 113 through all three counties > Linking Central Dover residents to employment centers outside the neighborhood to increase access to job opportunities > Feasibility of extending hours of operations on nights and weekends Dover transit depot to better accommodate workers > Potential demand for mid-day routes targeting the elderly and those accessing child care > Whether or not the renaming of lines using place names would help Bus shelters should be equipped with clear route maps and schedules, improve the user experience by boosting awareness of which lines which could also serve as opportunities to raise awareness of locations of serve which locations. For instance, the route 109 service line could arts, cultural, and historic destinations and events in the area. be renamed the “Central Dover – Dover Mall” line to readily indicate the two endpoints of the route. A comprehensive assessment of existing bus stop infrastructure in Central Dover should be coordinated with above mentioned transit access study The process for this study should include in-depth public outreach and and completed in the near term to determine: community engagement to ensure that transit service decisions are informed by local demand and feedback. > Which bus stops need to be improved to meet accessibility standards > Whether there are locations along existing routes that should become IMPROVE BUS STOPS AND TRANSIT DEPOT new bus stops In many cases, waiting for the bus in Central Dover can be a trying experience. The lack of proper bus shelters make for very uncomfortable In addition to bus shelters, other community members highlighted the conditions for residents waiting on buses. Some residents have witnessed need for improvements to the Dover Transit Center located along W. Water “people waiting in ditches…in the rain or extreme weather without cover.” Street. Proposed improvements called for included seating, shelter, public Providing covered bus shelters for frequently used locations would not only rest rooms, and real-time schedule displays. Original plans for the Transit improve the public transportation experience, they would also increase the Center called for a second building that would house bathrooms, stores, visibility and awareness of the bus stop locations, which can in turn boost eateries, and office space. These amenities would serve to activate the ridership. Attractive bus shelters also serve well as streetscape amenities Transit Center and improve perception of the area. DelDOT, the State that have the potential to raise the image and perception of Central Dover. of Delaware, and City of Dover should resume conversations about the feasibility of moving forward with completion of this plan. 50 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

ADVOCATE FOR A REGIONAL TRANSIT CONNECTION STUDY Though it is the State capital and is centrally located in Delaware, Dover has no regional rail transit connecting it to Wilmington or other cities along the eastern seaboard. Community leaders and residents in Central Dover see great potential in leveraging Central Dover’s proximity to beaches along the coastline, Dover Downs, and other major destinations by linking Wilmington to the mid-Atlantic passenger rail network. There is the sense that Central Dover is perceived as a “pass-through” or “pass-around” place for the visitors coming through the region. Locating a regional train station and multi-modal hub here would bring visitors to Central Dover itself, which could have great impacts on job development and reinvestment. A central component of DelDOT’s 2011 Delaware State Rail Plan was to provide an implementation framework for both passenger and freight rail improvement initiatives in Delaware. Named as a “High” priority among the proposed studies to initiate in order to continue to explore the feasibility of potential rail improvement projects, a commuter rail link between Kent County and New Castle County could be established along the Norfolk Southern rail alignment [Fig 33]. A passenger rail service along this line would bring travelers to the threshold of the Loockerman corridor, while also providing a regional connection within walking distance of Dover’s cluster of government and justice system buildings. Local partners should push for the completion of this study and advocate for the passenger rail link. Improved east-west regional bus transit connections would better link Dover to beach destinations along the shore less than 20 minutes away, as well as Washington, DC, 2 hours west. These routes would most likely be served by private intercity bus common carriers and a demand study demonstrating sufficient need may be necessary to recruit companies. The scope of this study could be folded into the DART study referenced above. 33 Potential regional rail connection SOURCE: DelDOT, 2011 Delaware State Rail Plan WORK TO SUBSIDIZE YOUTH AND FAMILY TRANSIT ACCESS 46% of Central Dover households make less than $30,000 a year. In model may be found in San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation Agency, many cases, low-income families living in the plan area are likely to spend which currently allows low-income youth to ride public transit for free. The a sizeable portion of their earnings on transportation to work and school. State Social Service Department should explore whether they may be able To help lighten their load, DART and the City of Dover should consider to integrate this subsidy as part of the benefits provided to the families and subsidizing transit costs for low-income families and the elderly. A useful individuals qualifying for specific social services. III. AN INTEGRATED PUBLIC REALM AND INFRASTRUCTURE 51

34 Community-identified bicycle network issues SOURCE: Public open house BUILD ON EXISTING BIKE INFRASTRUCTURE Parallel to the Restoring Central Dover planning process, the City of Dover conducted its own city-wide comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian planning process. The ideas related to bicycle and pedestrian improvements as a part of this study are intended to supplement this work with accessibility and public realm improvement ideas specific to the Central Dover area. The map in Fig 35 shows a network of existing and proposed improvements to the bicycle network in the Central Dover area. The network intends to link existing and potential off-street bike trails along Silver Lake Park and Capital Green to the Dover Transit Center and Wesley campus, while also providing enhanced through-access on Division/Route 8 and Loockerman. 35 Proposed bicycle network improvements 52 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

> The generous right-of-way width of Forest Street/Route 8 allows for opportunities to install separated bicycle infrastructure that would both improve bikeability and elevate the image and perception of this main gateway into Central Dover. The existing and proposed typical street sections demonstrate that bike trails separated from the vehicle travel lanes by a 5-foot landscaped buffer could be established without sacrificing level of service for vehicles. Rebranding the corridor as part of a major streetscaping effort such as this, “Forest Street Parkway” or “Forest Street Bikeway,” for example, could promote and highlight it as a local amenity. 36 Existing and proposed Forest Street/Route 8 right of way con- figuration III. AN INTEGRATED PUBLIC REALM AND INFRASTRUCTURE 53

> As a main thoroughfare and secondary commercial corridor, there is much room to improve the streetscape along Division Street and make it safer for bikers and pedestrians. While some blocks have been recently repaved, there are some stretches of sidewalks along Division that have eroded entirely. Reconsidering intersection circulation along Division Street could allow for more pedestrian-oriented provisions. Division Street currently requires through-traffic to continually jog over to the right outer edge of intersections, where otherwise there are mid-block on-street parking aisles except at corners. Traffic turning left is given sole access to the left travel lane. This pattern currently precludes the creation of bump-outs, which would make pedestrians more visible and reduce crossing distances. Traffic levels may not necessitate the dedication of the travel lane to left turns only. Local partners should work with DelDOT to explore other alternatives that are more equitable across modes. IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE For Central Dover’s seniors, getting around on the neighborhood’s sidewalks can be difficult—not just as a result of the mobility challenges of aging, but because many sidewalks are in need of repair. These issues are problematic for other users as well, including physically challenged individuals, and pedestrians pushing strollers or shopping caddies. Many property owners may not be aware of their responsibility to keep adjacent sidewalks in good shape. One result of this has been that the City has taken on the task of repairing or replacing sidewalks in need. A marketing and awareness campaign is needed to encourage property owners to repair their sidewalks. It would be more effective if this campaign included financial assistance to help with making repairs. However, the pervasiveness of broken and eroded sidewalks alongside vacant lots and buildings requires other solutions, as attempts to encourage owners of abandoned properties will likely prove fruitless. The City should be supported with increased resources for sidewalk repair to handle cases where property owners cannot be held accountable for sidewalk condition. In some cases trees may need to be removed and replaced where roots have created hazardous conditions for pedestrians. In addition to keeping Central Dover’s sidewalks in good shape, community 37 Existing and proposed Division Street right of way members highlighted the need for more signage and streetscape configuration improvements to increase visibility of pedestrians and remind motorists 54 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

when pedestrians have the right of way. Specifically mentioned was the CONDUCT A COMPREHENSIVE PARKING need to protect pedestrians in crosswalks from motorists, especially when they are making left turns through an intersection. In addition to STUDY FOR CENTRAL DOVER targeted enforcement of traffic laws, bumpouts, signage, and striping Parking became a somewhat contentious issue close to the completion enhancements can help improve pedestrian safety. The City and DelDOT of the planning process. Throughout the majority of conversations related should be supported in their efforts to implement improvements resulting to parking, stakeholders reported that parking is only perceived to be a from the City of Dover’s Pedestrian Plan, developed concurrently with the problem, and that only larger-scale events can present issues for those Restoring Central Dover plan. who arrive to the greater Loockerman corridor looking for parking. Some felt that many have the expectation that they or their customers should be able to park on the same block as their destination, but that this is not a realistic expectation. Some offered criticism of public parking spaces being dedicated to particular entities, which reduces their utility overall. Another facet to this is that while there is available parking in the Governors Avenue parking lot, perceptions of safety in this area make this an undesirable location for many to park. Local partners should seek resources to conduct a comprehensive parking inventory and analysis to determine what strategies might be most appropriate for a range of development scenarios along the greater Loockerman corridor area, as well as what improvements can be made to improve perception of safety in existing parking lots. Central Dover is fortunate to have had city leaders with the good sense to situate parking lots behind buildings fronting the Loockerman, rather than creating activity gaps in the commercial corridor by placing parking directly adjacent to the street. However, it can be difficult to judge from the street whether there are parking spaces available in these lots, and, if so, whether they are public or dedicated parking spaces. The parking study should explore the feasibility and desirability of developing of a smart phone app that provides real-time map information identifying parking spaces available nearby. Parking lots could also feature electronic signs near the entrance displaying the number of parking spaces publicly available at any given time. An interim solution would be to produce a printed map handout showing locations of parking lots in the Loockerman area and distribute them to local businesses. This would be an easy way for business owners to help their customers find parking available nearby if on-street spaces are not The lack of pedestrian connectivity from Simon Circle to Saulsbury Road Park and Gateway West Shopping Center [above] has forced residents to create their own path. Division available. Street at the rail line [below] is well-traveled by students walking to or from Booker T Washington Elementary, William Henry Middle School, Academy of Dover Charter School, and other schools located off of Forest Street west of the rail line. However, the sidewalk along this busy street is impassable, as it has significantly deteriorated and infrastructure has been located in the middle of the path, leaving little room for pedestrians. III. AN INTEGRATED PUBLIC REALM AND INFRASTRUCTURE 55

56 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

ENHANCE OPEN SPACES AND EXPAND GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOP PROGRAMMED RECREATION SPACES Central Dover community members were vocal about the need to program existing open spaces with equipment and activities to keep neighborhood youth active. Local partners should consider pursuing resources to refresh local parks and play spaces not only to improve them as community amenities, but as a venue for continued community building among residents and neighborhood dialogue. Public input should be a key component of decision making around redesigning and investing in Central Dover’s parks and open spaces. Resources for community-driven design initiatives should be secured to re-envision these community assets. STRATEGICALLY DEVELOP POCKET PARKS ON VACANT LOTS When asked what types of new uses should be prioritized in the reuse of vacant lots in Central Dover, a combined 69% of the responses identified new housing as their top or second priority. 70% identified park and recreation space as their top two priorities, with still others identifying community gardens and open spaces. Temporary improvements to vacant lots could go a long way towards improving perception of the area, especially along and near main thoroughfares like Loockerman and Division. Priority should be placed on residential and mixed use infill development on vacant lots within walking distance of the Loockerman corridor in order to promote the residential density needed to revitalize and sustain this struggling commercial corridor. That said, this study identifies clusters of vacant land at the edge of this quarter mile catchment area that should be explored as opportunities for new open space amenities, including pocket 38 Potential pocket park opportunity sites parks, community gardens, tot lots, playgrounds, and so on. III. AN INTEGRATED PUBLIC REALM AND INFRASTRUCTURE 57

CREATE A WEST LOOCKERMAN GATEWAY PARK The recent commercial real estate development at the western gateway to Loockerman at Forest Street retained a large vacant lot for a future phase development. Given the perception issues impacting Loockerman and the need to improve the image of the corridor, this vacant lot is strategically positioned to serve as a temporary gateway park amenity. Low-cost improvements including branding and plantings could go a long way towards making a positive impression for those entering Loockerman from the west. The City and local partners should explore potential improvement scenarios for this lot and surrounding streetscape. This location should also be considered for a bus shelter. ENABLE PLAY STREET DESIGNATION Playstreets are temporary street closings established during the summer months by municipal order to allow kids to play without the interruption of car traffic. This is a very low to no cost way to add safe places for kids to play where parents and neighbors can keep watch over them. Typically, residents can suggest when and where they would like a playstreet created, subject to City approval. The City of Dover should consider establishing 39 Location of potential Loockerman gateway park a playstreets policy and program to enable resident groups to establish playstreets to give neighborhood kids more accessible spaces for play. To establish a playstreet in Philadelphia, for example, an application with signatures from 75% of block residents must be filed with the Department of Recreation by the end of May. These streets can be programmed with equipment such as wading pools and sprinklers, volleyball nets, or basketball hoops, or they can be left for spontaneous play. There are several small residential streets in Central Dover that would be good candidates for playstreets—especially those that are only a block or two long and do not carry heavy through traffic. Establishing play streets could be a component of early initiatives to cultivate neighborhood groups in Central Dover. 58 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

INTEGRATE GREEN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ON WATER STREET Community members identified Water Street as a problematic flooding hotspot during rain events. The City is addressing this issue through underground stormwater infrastructure improvements to increase capacity. There may also be some value in using green stormwater infrastructure at street level to retain excess runoff on Water Street and adjacent streets that drain towards Water Street. Thinking of this infrastructure as an amenity that can be designed into the street along with a stretch of the proposed bike network would allow the City to generate increased community benefits from the public investment. The rain gardens and retention beds would also serve to create a buffer between Water Street vehicular traffic and bicycle lanes. 40 Community-identified flooding areas 41 Existing and proposed Water Street right of way configuration SOURCE: Public open house III. AN INTEGRATED PUBLIC REALM AND INFRASTRUCTURE 59

APPENDIX A: IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH

IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH The Restoring Central Dover plan outlines paths for the community to Taking a first step towards that end, as a more formal structure to guide continue to guide change over the next five years. The preceding plan the plan’s implementation, NCALL should create an Implementation narrative describes multiple strategies for the plan’s leadership and Committee that is accountable for tracking the status of initiatives set forth partners to pursue, each recommendation requiring a different set of in the plan and the progress of the different individuals / committees that partners, which enables many proposals to be addressed concurrently. In are overseeing each component. The Implementation Committee should addition, many of the recommendations are tailored to low-cost solutions meet monthly to coordinate and report on implementation achievements. that can be implemented by volunteer efforts and through the existing Each sub-committee / individual must take responsibility for their part of capacity of local organizations. Looking at the range of recommendations implementation, set aggressive schedules and monitor progress. through the lens of phasing, responsibilities, costs, and sources of funds organizes the plan into actionable steps, giving guidance on how and when each initiative should be taken on. PRIORITY ACTION ITEMS The first action item for NCALL is to present this plan to city leadership for The following implementation matrix tables should be actively used, review. The intent is to get the plan recognized by these representatives as updated, and changed to track the implementation progress. It should the designated plan for the Central Dover area and to raise awareness that be noted that the costs are preliminary and will need to be refined as significant strides have been made to improve the community. This should efforts move forward with each recommendation item. Similarly, although occur immediately following the plan’s finalization in October 2014. Further a number of potential funding sources are identified for some items, it is priority actions related to transitioning the plan into the implementation the responsibility of the plan’s leadership to determine the most attainable phase are: source of funds at the time fundraising efforts are underway. > Present the Restoring Central Dover plan to the City of Dover for approval CAPACITY TO IMPLEMENT: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES > Present the plan to the Wells Fargo Regional Foundation and submit The implementation of many of these recommendations will require for a Neighborhood Implementation Grant strong local capacity to guide actions, raise funds, organize community members and groups, and coordinate activities. NCALL has demonstrated > Organize a committee structure for implementation its capacity to implement a range of programs, bring resources to the community, and provide community leadership in Central Dover. In taking Committees should be organized at two levels. An Implementation steps toward implementation, this leadership role must be shared with Committee should be set up to provide oversight to a series of city agencies, community nonprofits, and local institutions with which sub-committees tasked with implementing recommendations that NCALL has fostered strategic partnerships. Ideally, in developing roles and fall within the five recommendations areas. The Implementation structure among the community leaders and community based nonprofits Committee should pull from the staff and Board of NCALL, the of Central Dover, these groups will recognize that this plan is just as much Steering Committee that oversaw the plan’s development, and Board theirs to implement as NCALL’s. members from other local partners and institutions. 62 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

The sub-committees should welcome broader participation from residents and stakeholders regardless of their affliations with any one organization. There should be one sub-committee that corresponds with each of the recommendation areas, ideally built upon the Steering Committee working groups assembled during plan development: A Strong Community, Positive Development, and An Integrated Public Realm and Infrastructure. Each sub-committee should be chaired by a member of the Implementation Committee. > Market the Plan & Expand the Local Base of Volunteers; Share the Plan with Local Partner Organizations and Foundations > Hand-deliver notice of the Plan’s completion along with printed copies of the Executive Summary and a digital copy of the full plan to adjacent neighborhood organizations, local partners, city agencies, and foundations. Leave miniature versions of the Executive Summary in local stores, churches, etc. to raise awareness among residents. > Post a digital copy of the plan and executive summary on NCALL’s and the City of Dover’s website and encourage partner organizations to do the same. Ideally, the web page should enable individuals to be able to get in touch with the plan’s leadership if they are interested in learning more or getting involved in implementation initiatives. > Write an op-ed column for the local newspaper and blogs dedicated solely to the need for volunteer assistance with the Plan’s implementation. > Seek Downtown District Designation to facilitate and fund affordable housing and business development activities The Downtown Development District Act of 2014 was enacted by the Delaware Legislature to spur private capital investment in commercial business districts; stimulate job growth and commercial vitality; help build stable communities of long term residents by improving housing opportunities; and assist local governments in strengthening neighborhoods and downtowns to be vibrant and attractive to residents from all walks of life. The City of Dover plans to apply for this designation during the first round in 2014. Selection as a Downtown Development District will entitle private construction projects with the identified District to receive grants to offset 20% of their capital construction costs as well as other benefits. IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH 63

> Explore applying for a HUD Choice Neighborhood Grant Use the “Restoring Central Dover Plan” when completed to set context for Dover Housing Authority’s potential application to HUD for a Choice Neighborhood Implementation grant. The grant would be used to support the revitalization of Authority-owned and publicly assisted housing in the 20-square block area of Loockerman to Mary, from State to West. Choice Neighborhoods Implementation Grants support those communities that have undergone a comprehensive local planning process and are ready to implement their “Transformation Plan” to redevelop the neighborhood. A successful Wells Fargo Regional Foundation grant would serve as part of the required matching funds required by HUD to be considered. Among the key partners that the Dover Housing Authority should include to strengthen its application are: the City of Dover, Wesley College Bayhealth, Dover Community Partnership, Inc., NCALL, and Capital School District. The following implementation matrix tables are sequenced according to the same chapter / recommendation areas that organized the plan itself. It is critical to anticipate that this plan can—and should—be updated in five to ten years. Funding sources, political representatives, community leaders and even some local priorities will change in ways that are impossible to fully predict. This plan serves as a beginning. As different recommendations move forward, priorities should be re-evaluated, and, if necessary, new recommendations should be considered that reinforce the principles set forth during this process. 64 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

1 A STRONG COMMUNITY u 1 BUILD COMMUNITY CAPITAL Estimated Non- Estimated Capital Recommendation Timeframe Responsibility / Partners Source of Funds Source of Funds Total Costs Capital Cost Cost Steering Committee / NeighborWorks ESTABLISH RESIDENT-LED CIVIC GROUPS Short Term NCALL/ CDHfH/ Dover $5,000 $0 $5,000 America Housing Authority Initial Action Steps - Determine existing groups, organize leadership, hold meetings, and develop leadership DEVELOP COMMUNITY BUILDING Wesley / Steering Wesley / Steering PARTNERSHIP WITH ANCHOR Short Term Committee / NCALL / $2,500 Committee / $0 $2,500 INSTITUTIONS BayHealth NCALL / BayHealth Initial Action Steps - Overtures to Wesley and Bayhealth Discussions with Wesley about their Strategic Plan and BayHealth on their Community Impact Plan Implement community building partnership NeighborWorks CREATE ANNUAL “CELEBRATING CENTRAL Short Term / Steering Committee / DIMH $25,000 America and $0 $25,000 DOVER” BLOCK PARTY annually / NCALL Sponsors Initial Action Steps - Develop timeframe fall or spring Assemble partners ans sponsors Plan and hold event EXPAND ON “COMMUNITY CLEAN-UP Wesley / CDHfH / DHA / WFRF/Partners Short Term $25,000 $0 $25,000 DAYS” City of Dover and Sponsors Initial Action Steps - Convene prior partners Envision new plan going forward and hold events DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE COMMUNITY Short Term DDP/ Steering Committee $12,500 DDP $0 $12,500 CALENDAR OF ACTIVITES AND EVENTS Initial Action Steps - Assemble dates, publish and distribute EVALUATE LEVEL OF ACCESS TO Intermediate Family Services $5,000 WFRF $0 $5,000 COMMUNITY FACILITES FOR SERVICES Term Collaborative 2 PREVENT CRIME AND INCREASE PUBLIC SAFETY Estimated Non- Estimated Capital Recommendation Timeframe Responsibility / Partners Source of Funds Source of Funds Total Costs Capital Cost Cost Dover PD / City of Dover ESTABLISH COLLABORATIVE/COMMUNITY Human Relations WFRF / Dover Short Term $25,000 $0 $25,000 POLICING Commission / Police Dept. Neighborhood Leaders Initial Action Steps - Form citizen oversight committee on community policing Create neighborhood watch network IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH 65

Dover PD / Downtown DDP / City of Dover Short Term / On- DEPLOY POLICE FOOT AND BIKE PATROLS Dover Partnership / City of $500,000 / Law Enforcement $0 $500,000 going Dover grants Initial Action Steps - Convene meeting to discuss options with partners Develop action plan and seek funding and deploy DDP / City of Dover EXPAND SURVEILLANCE CAMERA Intermediate Dover PD / DDP / $0 $100,000 / Law Enforcement $100,000 NETWORK Term Community Leaders grants Initial Action Steps - Cost estimate for expanded system Seek community buy-in Seek funding for expanded surveillance cameras Intermediate City of Dover / DDP / WFRF/ SEU / City IMPROVE LIGHTING IN TARGETED AREAS $25,000 $2,500,000 City of Dover/SEU $2,525,000 Term SEU/Community Leaders of Dover Initial Action Steps - Research and develop scenarios for resident assisted porch lighting program Work with Sustainable Energy Utilities and install street lighting in poorly lit areas 3 ENGAGE YOUTH IN COMMUNITY Estimated Non- Estimated Capital Recommendation Timeframe Responsibility / Partners Source of Funds Source of Funds Total Costs Capital Cost Cost Steering Committee / SUSTAIN AND EXPAND YOUTH PROGRAMMING Short Term Coordinator's time WFRF NCALL Dover PD / Faith Dover PD / Faith SUPPORT EFFORTS TO EXPAND YOUTH ACTIVITY Short Term Dover Police Department $25,000 Communities/ $25,000 Communities/ $50,000 PROGRAMMING - Restablish Police Athletic League Volunteers Sponsors Initial Action Steps - Dover Police Department is planning to establish PAL Market PAL to community Implement the program WFRF / Short Term / CREATE YOUTH OUTREACH AND EDUCATIONAL Solid Rock Baptist Church / Foundations / Faith Events/ Banks/ Intermediate $250,000 $50,000 $300,000 SUPPORT CENTER Inner City Cultural League Communities/ Foundations Term Events Initial Action Steps - Complete construction of facilities Develop programming and curriculum Examine access to broader community recreational assets and improve transportation to these assets for youth in Central Dover PROVIDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT VOCATIONAL Intermediate CDHfH / Dover Housing Depts. of Labor and $225,000 $0 $225,000 OPPORTUNITIES Term Authority / DDP/ Polytech Education Initial Action Steps - Examine Youth Build or similar programs for feasibility Develop intern and mentoring opportunities in year 3, 4 and 5. 4 EXPAND ADULT AND FAMILY SERVICES Estimated Non- Estimated Capital Recommendation Timeframe Responsibility / Partners Source of Funds Source of Funds Total Costs Capital Cost Cost 66 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

Examine access to broader community recreational assets and improve transportation to these assets for youth in Central Dover PROVIDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT VOCATIONAL Intermediate CDHfH / Dover Housing Depts. of Labor and $225,000 $0 $225,000 OPPORTUNITIES Term Authority / DDP/ Polytech Education Initial Action Steps - Examine Youth Build or similar programs for feasibility Develop intern and mentoring opportunities in year 3, 4 and 5. 4 EXPAND ADULT AND FAMILY SERVICES Estimated Non- Estimated Capital Recommendation Timeframe Responsibility / Partners Source of Funds Source of Funds Total Costs Capital Cost Cost Dover Interfaith / DHA / STRENGTHEN AND EXPAND TRANSITIONAL Intermediate Potter Trust/ TD Shepherd's Place / People's $150,000 $2,000,000 HDF/ FHLB/CDFIs $2,150,000 HOUSING AND RELATED SERVICES Term Bank Place Initial Action Steps - Target housing towards families with children Convene partners and develop plan Develop housing Steering Committee / Social ESTABLISH A FAMILY SERVICES COLLABORATIVE Short Term $25,000 WFRF $0 $25,000 Service Agencies Initial Action Steps - Steering Committee facilitate initial meetings Collaborative then establishes its ongoing agenda WRFR/ PROVIDE FINANCIAL EDUCATION AND HOUSING Short Term/ On- NCALL/ Credit Unions $100,000 NeighborWorks $0 $100,000 COUNSELING SERVICES going /Banks Initial Action Steps - Strategize ways to enagage the community residents Identify site for workshops in the plan area Refer to NCALL's on-going programs TOTAL COSTS $6,075,000 IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH 67

2 POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT u 5. STRENGTHEN EXISTING HOUSING STOCK Estimated Non - Recommendation Timeframe Responsibility / Partners Source of Funds Estimated Capital Costs Source of Funds Total Costs Capital Costs Short Term / Intermediate City of Dover /CDHfH / MHDC / CDBG / City of Dover / EXPAND ACCESS TO HOUSING REPAIR PROGRAMS $125,000 WFRF / Banks $1,875,000 $2,000,000 Term NCALL Coordinator DSHA / DDD Initial Action Steps - Examine recent repair program statistics to assess impact program is making in Central Dover and expand outreach to homeowners Meet with partners to determine plan to serve Central Dover and implement Provide educational resources and training for homeowners in rehabilitation techniques, homeownership responsibliites, and financial management Consider allowing first time buyers to utilize repair funds when purchasing in Central Dover INITIATE VOLUNTEER-BASED NEIGHBORHOOD CDHfH / MHDC / Catholic Intermediate Term $40,000 Sponsor Organizations $200,000 DSHA / DOE $240,000 HOUSING REPAIR PROGRAM Charities Initial Action Steps Meet with potential partners to determine plan for going forward and implement City of Dover / Independent STRENGTHEN CODE ENFORCEMENT Short Term $5,000 City of Dover $0 $5,000 Consultant Initial Action Steps Work with city to engage an independent consulting firm to assess department efficiency and identify areas for improvement Work with homeowners and landlords to provide education and financial incentives to maintain housing units City will be notified by DHA and DSHA when a housing unit or property fails a Section 8/Voucher housing inspection Short Term / Intermediate City of Dover / NCALL / DSHA / EXPLORE WAYS TO BOOST HOMEOWNERSHIP $25,000 City of Dover $250,000 $275,000 Term Employers Initial Action Steps Bringing together all parties to brainstorm on methods of boosting homeowneship such as employer assisted housing, incentives, and education and come up with an implementation plan. Recruit from existing renters and workers commuting to Central Dover and provide homebuying education and financial incentives. 6. SUPPORT NEW HOUSING AND MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT Estimated Non - Recommendation Timeframe Responsibility / Partners Source of Funds Estimated Capital Costs Source of Funds Total Costs Capital Costs ENCOURAGE GREATER ZONING FLEXIBILITY TO City of Dover / Planning / DDP / Short Term $5,000 City of Dover $0 $5,000 ENABLE INFILL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT NCALL Initial Action Steps Develop zoning overlay for Downtown Redevelopment District to allow condominiums and townhouse styles Allow some flexibility in setbacks and block standards for architectural and design elements that compliment area Engage neighborhood residents to share ideas for design and neighborhood standards in Central Dover FACILITATE PARCEL ASSEMBLY AND City of Dover / Planning / DDP / City Of Dover/DSHA/ Intermediate Term $40,000 $500,000 HDF/FHLB/Foundations $540,000 REDEVELOPMENT NCALL DDD Initial Action Steps Explore land banking and land trust options for assembling parcels and redevelopment efforts Meet with Diamond State Community Land Trust to explore what is possible Establish a parcel assembly process and make lots available for development EVALUATE WAYS OF PROVIDING FINANCIAL City of Dover / Planning / DDP / Short Term $5,000 City of Dover/ DDP $0 $5,000 INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT NCALL Initial Action Steps City consider waiving impact fees, lowering permitting fees, and real estate taxes (PILOT) for developers of new housing and especially affordable housing 68 RESTORING CENTRAL DOVER

UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee Meeting was held on October 13, 2014 at 5:15 p.m. with Chairwoman Williams presiding. Members present were Mr. Perza, Mr. Blakeman, and Mr. Snaman. Mr. Slavin was absent. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson and Mr. Dixon. Mayor Christiansen was also present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Blakeman moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Snaman and unanimously carried. Dedication of Rights-of-Way and Public Infrastructure - Village of Cannon Mill (Phases I, II, III, and IV) Staff submitted a request that all public infrastructure improvements related to the Village of Cannon Mill (Phases I, II, III, and IV) be dedicated to the City of Dover for permanent ownership and maintenance. Members reviewed a list of the public improvements associated with each phase of the development, as well as a map showing the general location and configuration of the subject rights-of-way, broken into phases. The total construction value of the public improvements was $2,602,919. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, indicated that the original developer of the Village of Cannon Mill filed for bankruptcy, which resulted in work stoppage within the subdivision. The final wearing course and punch list items remained to be completed to meet the City of Dover standards and specifications for Public Works construction and had been outstanding for many years. He assured members that the City was prepared to complete the work required, pending rights-of-way and public infrastructure dedication, as well as acceptance of a paving improvements bid by City Council. Mr. Koenig reminded members that in 2013, staff had submitted a request for the dedication of a portion of the Village of Cannon Mill. It was his recollection that, although the Committee recommended acceptance, when the matter was presented to City Council for approval there were concerns regarding bonding and a failed letter of credit that needed to be addressed. As a result, the dedication was deferred. At this time, he stated that staff was requesting the dedication of the entire subdivision’s incomplete infrastructure, explaining that the City had been working with legislators to secure funding from the Community Transportation Fund (CTF). Mr. Koenig informed members that Mr. Tony Ashburn, Ashburn Homes, Inc., and Artisans’ Bank had pledged funds, either through a letter of credit or letter of commitment, to complete the infrastructure in portions of the development in Phases III and IV; however, Mr. Koenig stated that the City had not been successful with action related to the original letter of credit with the First National Bank of Wyoming. He stated that the City had submitted a bank draft on the letter of credit and there was related correspondence between the attorneys. He noted that there had been several developers since the original developer, Moore Cannon Mill, and that the City did not secure the correct letters of credit to ensure that the protections would carry forward. As a result, the City was currently in the process of completing approximately $800,000 worth of infrastructure in the Village of Cannon Mill and, in order to obtain funding from the State CTF, the City needs to accept the dedication of the infrastructure and sign agreements to complete the infrastructure.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 2 Mr. Koenig stated that there was currently a gap of approximately $300,000 between what is necessary to complete all infrastructure and the funding available associated with the complete paving and concrete finishing for the development. Staff recommended acceptance of the dedication of rights-of-way and public infrastructure of the Village of Cannon Mill Subdivision, with the dedication to include all of the referenced public improvements. Mr. Koenig advised members that during the City Council meeting scheduled for later in the evening, members would consider a request for approval of a construction contract that would allow approximately $824,000 of work to complete the rights-of-way and public infrastructure. He explained that the caveat on the bids was that the City would complete only the work which could be done with the funds the City has available. Rather than utilizing City funds, he stated it may be necessary to delay some of the paving until additional CTF funding becomes available from the State. He noted that approximately $550,000 in non-City funding was available for the project. Since some funding agreements were coming in under budget, he stated that it was the City’s intention to move those excess monies, provided the State legislators agree to the project. However, he expressed the need to first accept the dedication of rights-of-way and public infrastructure of the Village of Cannon Mill Subdivision. He advised members that the subdivision was originally proposed to consist of 375 units and 250-275 units had been constructed, explaining that some residents had lived there since 2005, 2006, 2007, etc. He explained the difficulty in providing services (snow removal, street sweeping, etc.) since the roads had not been completed. Responding to Mr. Perza, Mr. Koenig stated that the total value of all infrastructure was $2.6M; however, the only financial risk the City would have if funding were not received from the State would be the costs of paving the roadways, in the amount of $825,000. He explained that the City had received commitment letters from the legislators and letters of credit totaling $540,000; therefore, the maximum exposure for the City would be $285,000. However, he stated that the City would only complete the work for which the City had obtained funding and then return to legislators to request additional funds during their next funding of CTF projects. Although legislators are provided CTF funds on July 1st of each year, they do not always use all available funding. Mr. Koenig noted that Representative Darryl Scott had committed a large portion of the required funding, in the amount of $250,000, for this project; Senator Brian Bushweller had committed up to $65,000; and Senator Colin Bonini had committed approximately $5,000. Mr. Koenig stated that there may be additional funding available as a result of other agreements coming in under budget between the current time and when the work is actually completed. In response to Mrs. Williams’ question regarding why the letter of credit was not secured, Mr. Koenig explained that typical letters of credit are “evergreen”, renewing automatically unless returned by the City. In this instance, the original developer, Moore Cannon Mill, obtained a one (1) year letter of credit from the First National Bank of Wyoming which was very specific in the funding language that it would only be active for one (1) year. In addition, Mr. Koenig stated that Moore Cannon Mill sold the development to another LLC that was associated with the Robino Corporation. As a result, the City did not check the expiration date of the letter of credit since they typically automatically renew until given back. Therefore, although the City had the original letter of credit, it had an expiration date, and no additional letter of credit was provided for the project.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 3 Responding to additional questions of Mrs. Williams, Mr. Koenig stated that the new developer had made promises to complete the infrastructure and request the dedication by the City. However, when the economy declined, there were three (3) developments (Village of Westover, Nottingham Meadows, and Village of Cannon Mill) whose developers claimed bankruptcy. The Village of Cannon Mill was the only development for which the City was not provided protective documentation. He stated that the letter of credit provided to the City was issued by the First National Bank of Wyoming and was unfamiliar to staff, explaining that all other letters of credit were received from Wilmington Trust and had a very specific format that is familiar to staff. Mr. Koenig stated that, as a result, staff made an error in this regard and he took full responsibility for this oversight. He stated that the developers who currently hold property in the development, Artisans’ Bank and Mr. Ashburn, had committed funds to pave the roadway in front of their properties and that approximately $95,000 of the $540,000 related to these properties. Mr. Koenig stated that if the City were unable to obtain the $825,000 necessary to complete the projects and had only $540,000, it would leave approximately one quarter of the paving work incomplete until additional funds could be obtained. He advised members that the extension of Tribbett Street was currently under construction in association with the construction of Leander Lakes Apartments and that there had been several complaints and concerns regarding that connection opening, which was a condition of the Planning Commission approval of the construction of the new Dover High School. He noted that the legislators had quietly questioned if the opening of this interconnection was best and he explained that any change would require approval from the Planning Commission. Mr. Koenig stated that, although there had been concerns with the possibility of a lot of “cut through” traffic in the Village of Cannon Mill, there had been no test done to make this determination. Mrs. Williams suggested, if the City does not obtain the necessary funds to complete Phase IV of the development, that the service road be closed to traffic until all roadways have been completed. Responding, Mr. Koenig felt that this was a matter that could be discussed in the future. Mr. Perza moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation for the acceptance of the dedication of rights-of-way and public infrastructure for the Village of Cannon Mill, to include all of the referenced public improvements, and contingent upon the City obtaining third-party matching funds, as described by staff, being lines of credit and grants from the Community Transportation Fund; there being the understanding that if it becomes necessary at some point in the future, City Council can remove the contingency. The motion was seconded by Mr. Blakeman and unanimously carried. (City Clerk’s Office Note: Due to time constraints, this item was placed on the Council agenda for the meeting being held later in the evening.) Tudor Pump Station - Acceptance and Dedication of Infrastructure Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, reminded members that the Tudor Industrial Park was constructed during the 1990s. Since that time, all City Managers (including James O'Connor, Anthony DePrima and Scott Koenig) were willing to present the associated private wastewater pump station to City Council for dedication as long as minimum upgrades were made by the owner to meet current City of Dover requirements. Mr. Koenig informed members that the owner completed the upgrade requirements to the subject station, which provides wastewater service for multiple buildings within and immediately adjacent to the Tudor Industrial Park.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 4 Mr. Koenig advised members that the current station was not compatible with the City of Dover's Wastewater System Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system, which notifies the City’s 24/7 Systems Operations Center when problems with a station arise. Instead, he explained, this pump station had a beacon light which flashes when there is a problem with the station. If the light is on, anyone from the neighboring communities can contact the Systems Operations Center and report the situation. This same protocol exists at another pump station located on Maureen Place in the Wild Meadows development. He stated that an easement had been drafted, as well as a good faith agreement with the property owners to contact the City if they observe the beacon light flashing. Mr. Koenig indicated that the estimated value of the pump station was $43,000 and it would become a part of the City’s inventory upon its acceptance and dedication. Staff recommended that City Council accept the dedication of the Tudor Pump Station to allow the City of Dover Department of Public Works to take on all operation and maintenance responsibilities in an effort to protect and maintain the safety, health, and welfare of the public in this area. However, Mr. Koenig stated that the City of Dover would not accept responsibility of the gravity wastewater system internal to the site, as that infrastructure would remain the responsibility of the property owner. Responding to Mr. Perza, Mr. Koenig assured members that the City had conducted an inspection of the pump station and found it to be adequate for dedication. Mr. Perza moved to recommend the acceptance and dedication of the Tudor Pump Station to allow the City of Dover Department of Public Works to take on all operation and maintenance responsibilities (excluding the gravity wastewater system internal to the site, as that infrastructure will remain the responsibility of the property owner) in an effort to protect and maintain the safety, health, and welfare of the public in this area, as recommended by staff, seconded by Mr. Blakeman and unanimously carried. TEA/NAES Report (July and August) The TEA/NAES Monthly Reports for July and August 2014 were provided to members to enable them to monitor electric sales and revenues received, which will provide a better understanding of any fluctuations that occur and allow the opportunity to make improvements if deemed necessary. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, referred to Page 12 of the August report, and noted that it provided a year-to-date summary. Thus far, he stated that the City was $1M positive for operations. He explained that the load had been lower since it had been a cool year, resulting in lower costs as well as lower revenues. During the summer, there were several opportunities for Units 1, 2, and 3 to run; therefore, the generation revenues were higher than budgeted. As a result of the cool weather this year, he stressed the importance of monitoring revenues, explaining that although the City’s expenses were reduced, a certain amount of revenues is necessary to maintain percentages and budgets. Referring to Pages 8 and 9 of the August Report, Mr. Blakeman noted the City wrote off $13,825 of Solar Renewable Energy Credits (SREC) by retiring them and that there is only one (1) viable market located in Philadelphia. He questioned if it was required for the credits to be sold at the

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2014 PAGE 5 current rate or if they could be sold at a discount. Responding, Mr. Koenig indicated that, although he did not know the answer to that specific question, the City was acting on the advice of both The Energy Authority (TEA) and Mr. Harry Maloney, City of Dover Electric Director. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Koenig stated that although the City had generated more electricity than planned, there had not been any associated increase in maintenance costs; however, it had been necessary to buy fuel oil. Mr. Koenig explained that as a result of the previous severe winter, PJM had issued new requirements and the City had to increase the fuel oil levels at McKee Run, at a cost of approximately $750,000, to meet reserve requirements for running on fuel oil. He stated that staff had concerns and, after discussions with TEA, the offer price of Units 1, 2, and 3 had been changed earlier in the year with the intent they would run more often, with the assurance that this would not cause higher maintenance costs. Mr. Koenig advised members that this had held true to date and the City was still anticipating the retirement of Units 1 and 2. He noted that staff was very conscious of those units running due to potential concerns of any expenses that would result from unplanned required maintenance, or taking the risk of not doing the maintenance. He stated that these issues are discussed monthly at the staff level and include discussions with TEA. Mr. Koenig reminded members that a decision was made to take Units 1 and 2 out in Power Year 2018, which would result in 34 megawatts of capacity that must be replaced, and it had not yet been determined how this would occur. The power purchase agreement being discussed with Calpine, if it comes to fruition as intended, could replace the 34 megawatts and provide additional capacity. He advised members that other options were being evaluated, such as building some type of combustion turbine that would replace that power or potentially partnering with the Delaware Municipal Electric Corporation (DEMEC) or others to build generation. Mr. Blakeman requested that an asterisk be placed next to those items on the PJM invoice that make up the PJM credit or that these items be somehow highlighted, noting that he was having difficulty determining this. By unanimous consent, members recommended acceptance of the TEA/NAES Monthly Reports for July and August 2014. Mr. Snaman moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Blakeman and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 5:53 p.m. Beverly C. Williams Chairwoman BCW/TM/js/dd/jg S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Committee-Minutes\2014\10-13-2014 UTILITY.wpd

CITY OF DOVER City Council Meeting October 27, 2015 FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2014 TO JUNE 30, 2015 1 of 2 QUARTERLY REVENUE REPORT As of September 2014 25.0% FY15 YTD % BUDGET FY14 FY15 FY14 FY13 GENERAL FUND BUDGET REVENUES RECEIVED PROJ'D BUDGET COMMENTS REVENUES REVENUES 1 Property Taxes $ 10,782,200 $ 10,745,500 99.7% $ 10,778,300 $ 10,782,200 $ 10,777,800 $ 10,768,815 2 Payment In Lieu of Taxes 317,000 43,200 13.6% 317,200 317,000 Luther Towers 316,700 357,580 3 Transfer from Electric Fund 10,000,000 500,000 6.3% 8,000,000 10,000,000 Timing of cash requirements 8,000,000 8,000,000 4 Intrafund Service Receipts Electric 3,508,100 752,500 21.1% 3,487,200 3,508,100 3,442,100 3,195,818 5 Transfer from Transfer Tax Fund 1,250,000 329,200 23.6% 1,393,000 1,250,000 Thru September 1,543,700 1,107,959 6 Business Licenses 1,460,000 1,371,400 93.9% 1,460,000 1,460,000 1,487,400 1,462,503 7 Intrafund Service Receipts Water/Wastewater 1,354,900 288,300 21.2% 1,350,000 1,354,900 1,219,100 1,046,492 8 Sanitation Fees 2,595,600 645,500 24.9% 2,595,600 2,595,600 2,595,600 2,624,877 9 Permits & Other Licenses 1,354,200 380,300 28.5% 1,300,500 1,354,200 1,604,200 1,162,765 10 Transfer from Municipal Street Aid Fund 663,900 - 0.0% 663,900 663,900 663,900 531,121 11 Fines & Police Revenue 629,300 237,300 41.3% 573,900 629,300 646,600 612,193 12 Police Extra Duty Fees 659,500 26,400 4.1% 650,000 659,500 562,900 703,575 13 Transfer from Police Grant Funds 124,000 3,100 2.4% 126,800 124,000 80,200 113,980 14 Court of Chancery Fees 1,023,000 262,100 26.2% 1,002,200 1,023,000 Thru September 945,300 917,700 15 Transfer from Water/Wastewater Fund 500,000 125,000 25.0% 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 16 Transfer from Civil Traffic Penalties Fund 500,000 59,900 16.3% 368,400 500,000 August 2014; Still waiting on July/Sept. 320,500 299,828 17 Library Revenues & County Reciprocal Pymt 521,600 57,200 10.8% 530,500 521,600 498,600 471,065 18 Franchise Fees 636,000 - 0.0% 636,000 636,000 Due in Sept/Oct; 563,800 618,347 19 General Fund Grant Receipts 623,500 - 0.0% 623,500 623,500 571,000 777,987 20 Recreation Revenue 148,800 27,200 18.3% 148,800 148,800 151,900 144,490 21 Other Miscellaneous Receipts 159,300 58,700 28.8% 203,600 159,300 482,750 228,729 22 Interest Income 40,000 4,300 10.8% 40,000 40,000 21,400 93,173 TOTALS $ 38,850,900 $ 15,917,100 42.9% $36,749,400 $ 38,850,900 $ 36,995,450 $ 35,738,997 Final Budget $ 37,127,200 $ 35,569,000

CITY OF DOVER City Council Meeting October 27, 2015 FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2014 TO JUNE 30, 2015 2 of 2 QUARTERLY REVENUE REPORT As of September 2014 25.0% FY15 YTD % BUDGET FY14 FY15 FY14 FY13 WATER/WASTEWATER FUND BUDGET REVENUES RECEIVED PROJ'D BUDGET COMMENTS REVENUES REVENUES 1 Water Fees $ 4,616,400 $ 1,347,200 30.6% $ 4,396,000 $ 4,616,400 $ 4,459,800 $ 4,551,840 2 Wastewater Fees 3,706,800 1,013,300 28.7% 3,529,000 3,706,800 3,562,400 3,564,615 3 Wastewater Adjustment Fees - County Trtmt 2,902,600 828,900 28.6% 2,900,000 2,902,600 2,930,300 2,926,616 4 Groundwater Inflow Adjustment 1,862,500 468,700 36.0% 1,302,300 1,862,500 1,316,200 1,314,033 5 Water Impact Fees 472,700 90,300 34.4% 262,700 472,700 252,200 220,362 6 Wastewater Impact Fees 427,900 81,700 34.3% 237,900 427,900 230,200 385,986 7 Water Tank Space Leasing 331,900 27,200 8.5% 321,200 331,900 360,300 300,067 8 Interest Income 23,000 - 0.0% 10,000 23,000 - 13,507 9 Other Miscellaneous Revenues 156,600 17,700 27.5% 64,400 156,600 65,900 73,312 10 Grant Receipts - - 0.0% - - - 50,876 TOTALS $ 14,500,400 $ 3,875,000 29.8% $13,023,500 $ 14,500,400 $ 13,177,300 $ 13,401,214 Final Budget $ 13,023,500 $ 13,822,200 25.0% FY15 YTD % BUDGET FY14 FY15 FY14 FY13 ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND BUDGET REVENUES RECEIVED PROJ'D BUDGET COMMENTS REVENUES REVENUES 1 Sales to Customers $ 78,043,000 $ 21,709,400 27.5% $ 78,792,300 $ 78,043,000 $ 76,928,300 $ 86,887,345 2 Purchased Power Adjustment - - 0.0% - - - - 3 Utility Tax 1,296,900 355,200 27.1% 1,309,300 1,296,900 1,259,000 1,443,852 4 Transfer from Rate Stabilization Reserve 2,000,000 - 0.0% 7,000,000 2,000,000 7,000,000 5,400,000 5 Miscellaneous Revenue 954,600 255,300 28.7% 889,100 954,600 906,300 2,026,127 6 Interest Income 12,000 1,800 15.0% 12,000 12,000 (5,000) 137,718 7 Intrafund Service Fees - Water/Wastewater - - 0.0% 98,500 - 94,200 136,413 TOTALS $ 82,306,500 $ 22,321,700 25.3% $88,101,200 $ 82,306,500 $ 86,182,800 $ 96,031,455 Final Budget $ 88,283,600 $ 95,971,700

Memorandum Office of the City Manager PO Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Phone: (302) 736-7005 Fax: (302) 736-7002 E-mail: skoenig@dover.de.us To: Mayor and City Council From: Scott D. Koenig, P.E., City Manager Date: October 20, 2014 Subject: Semi Annual Inspection – Robbins Hose Company In accordance with Section 46-43 of the City Code, I performed the required semi-annual inspection of the Dover Fire Department on Friday, October 17, 2014 at 1:30 p.m. with Chief Matthew Carey. This inspection was held at Robbins Hose Station No. 1. The following items were discussed: 1) As a follow up to the last inspection of Station #1 in October 2013, the Chief indicated there were no problems to report related to the asphalt parking lot, the building structure or vehicles associated with Station #1. There was some minor discussion about private vehicles parking in the lot area adjacent to Bradford Street for extended periods of time; however, no action is necessary as this time. 2) The Chief and City Manager reviewed the various types of response calls identified on the monthly report so the City Manager has a better understanding of the types of calls to which personnel are responding. 3) The City Manager reiterated the request to create electronic files of the maintenance records for each vehicle in the inventory and store those files and the associated summary spreadsheets in the Fortis system so they can be reviewed by city staff and are readily available for future considerations of vehicle replacements. The City Manager spoke with the Fire Chief’s Assistant, Mr. Patrick Smith, several days prior to the inspection regarding the same request. 4) The Fire Chief will include a summary report regarding type of alarm and attendance in future monthly reports. A copy of the type of information being requested is attached for reference purposes. As of the writing of this report, an offer for employment has been extended for the vacant Fire Dispatcher position. The Robbins Hose Company continues to provide an outstanding level of service to the City of Dover and the unincorporated areas of the fire district. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. SDK/yml Attachment cc: Matthew Carey, Fire Chief Donna Mitchell, Controller Patrick Smith, Fire Chief’s Assistant P.O. Box 475, Dover, DE 19903-0475 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

PETITION TO AMEND THE ZONING DISTRICT First Reading before the Dover City Council October 27, 2014 Applicants/Owners: West Division Holdings LLC Address: 603 West Division Street Location: North side of West Division Street, immediately west of the railroad tracks Tax Parcel ID #: ED05-076.08-01-19.00-000 ED05-076.08-01-19.01-000 Size: 31,003 SF +/- Present Use: Vacant Proposed Use: Car Dealership Comprehensive Plan Designation: Industrial and Public Utilities Present Zoning: M (Manufacturing Zone)/COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) Proposed Zoning: C-3 (Service Commercial Zone)/COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) Reason for Request: To allow for auto dealership File Number: Z-14-03 Ordinance Number: 2014-23

City of Dover Application No.: Z-14-03 Department of Planning & Inspections RG-1 RG-1 St C ecil RG-1 RG-1 RG-1 RG-1 Rid M RG-1 gely IPM St n Fulto St RG-1 RG-1 C-3 RG-1 RG-1 en RG-1 Que RG-1 St RG-1 RG-1 C- C-1A M C- 2 1A C-1A C-3 C-1A Site Kirkw C-1A C-3 We s M ood t St to St Wes t ion S C-2A Divis n Dr RG-1 IO C-2A RG-3 RG-1 C-1A C-3 Fore C-3 C-1 st St d St Ree IO RG-1 RG-1 C-3 C-2A Lincoln St Railro Cherry St IO Davis Cir RG-1 C-3 R-8 R-8 RG-1 C-3 Av e ad IO Plan Title: 603 West Division Street Location: West Division Street, west of railroad tracks Legend Plan Type: Rezoning Tax Parcels: ED-05-076.08-01-19.00-000 & ED-05-076.08-01-19.01-000 Dover Parcels Current Zoning: M and COZ-1 Zoning Proposed Zoning: C-3 and COZ-1 Owners: West Division Holdings, LLC Subject Parcels Date: 10/21/14 « 0 165 330 660 Feet

FIRST READING CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2014-23 1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE 2 CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF TWO (2) PARCELS 3 OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 603 WEST DIVISION STREET 4 5 WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property within 6 the limits of the City of Dover; and 7 WHEREAS, it is deemed in the best interest of zoning and planning to change the permitted use of 8 two (2) parcels of property described below from M (Manufacturing Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 9 (Corridor Overlay Zone) to C-3 (Service Commercial Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor 10 Overlay Zone). 11 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY 12 OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 13 1. That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning 14 Ordinance of the City of Dover have been amended by changing the zoning designation from 15 M (Manufacturing Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) to C-3 (Service 16 Commercial Zone) and subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone) on two (2) parcels of 17 property located at 603 West Division Street, on the north side of West Division Street just 18 west of the railroad tracks, consisting of 16,538 S.F.+/- and 14,465 S.F.+/-, owned by West 19 Division Holdings, LLC. 20 (Tax Parcel: ED-05-076.08-01-19.00-000 and ED-05-076.08-01-19.01-000; Planning Reference Z-14-03) 21 22 ADOPTED: * 23 S:\ORDINANCES\2014\DRAFT\Ordinance #2014-23 Rezoning - 603 West Division Street-First Reading.wpd 24 Actions History 25 10-27-2014 - Scheduled for First Reading by Council

FINAL READING 1 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2014 - 22 2 2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - FIRST AMENDMENT 3 GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 4 REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 5 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 6 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eight Million, Seven Hundred Fifty Four Thousand, Nine Hundred 7 Dollars ($8,754,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and 8 other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning 9 July 1,2014 and ending June 30, 2015: 10 REVENUES 11 ORIGINAL REVISED 12 2014/15 2014/15 13 BUDGET BUDGET 14 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 117,100 $ 2,323,100 15 BEGINNING BALANCE - LIBRARY PROJECT - 330,500 16 REVENUES 17 STATE GRANTS - OTHER 153,000 208,000 18 PROPOSED BOND/BANK PROCEEDS - Street 2,661,100 2,675,000 19 LEASE PURCHASE OF FIRE AND POLICE EQUIPMENT 918,300 918,300 20 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND FOR PROJECTS 2,196,000 2,196,000 21 TRANSFER FROM PARKLAND RESERVE - 104,000 22 TOTAL REVENUES 5,928,400 6,101,300 23 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE AND REVENUES $ 6,045,500 $ 8,754,900 24 EXPENSE SUMMARY 25 ORIGINAL REVISED 26 2014/15 2014/15 27 DEPARTMENT EXPENSES BUDGET BUDGET 28 FIRE $ 827,300 $ 827,300 29 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 68,100 86,700 30 RECREATION 146,000 364,400 31 POLICE 499,100 499,100 32 STREETS 1,370,300 1,793,800 33 STREETS - GARRISON FARM INFRASTRUCTURE 2,600,000 4,226,700 34 SANITATION 256,500 256,500 35 CENTRAL SERVICES - 55,000 36 BOND/LOAN ISSUANCE COST 61,100 61,100 37 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTAL 5,828,400 8,170,600 38 TRANSFERS & MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES 39 TRANSFER TO PARKLAND RESERVE 100,000 100,000 40 TRANSFER TO CAPITAL PROJECT RESERVE - 330,500 41 TRANSFERS & MISCELLANEOUS SUBTOTAL 100,000 430,500 42 TOTAL EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS 5,928,400 8,601,100 43 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 117,100 153,800 44 TOTALS $ 6,045,500 $ 8,754,900 45 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 46 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 47 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 48 ADOPTED: 1

49 2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - FIRST AMENDMENT CONTINUED 50 WATER/WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND 51 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 52 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 53 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Seventeen Million, Four Hundred Twenty Eight Thousand, One Hundred 54 dollars ($17,428,100) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 55 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning 56 July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: 57 CASH RECEIPTS 58 ORIGINAL REVISED 59 2014/15 2014/15 60 BUDGET BUDGET 61 PRIOR YEAR BALANCE - WATER $ 1,021,200 $ 7,490,100 62 PRIOR YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 1,060,000 5,597,400 63 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 2,081,200 13,087,500 64 RECEIPTS 65 TRANS FROM OPERATING FUND FOR WATER 1,200,000 1,200,000 66 TRANS FROM OPERATING FUND FOR WASTEWATER 1,800,000 1,800,000 67 TRANSFER FROM WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE 1,315,600 1,315,600 68 INTEREST INCOME 25,000 25,000 69 TOTAL RECEIPTS 4,340,600 4,340,600 70 TOTALS $ 6,421,800 $ 17,428,100 71 EXPENSE SUMMARY 72 ORIGINAL REVISED 73 2014/15 2014/15 74 EXPENSES BUDGET BUDGET 75 WATER $ 1,336,900 $ 7,526,500 76 WASTEWATER 3,273,200 7,757,300 77 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 38,100 38,100 78 TOTAL EXPENSES 4,648,200 15,321,900 79 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER 858,700 1,138,000 80 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 914,900 968,200 81 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,773,600 2,106,200 82 TOTALS $ 6,421,800 $ 17,428,100 83 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 84 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 85 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 86 ADOPTED: 2

87 2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - FIRST AMENDMENT CONTINUED 88 ELECTRIC UTILITY IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION FUND 89 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 90 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 91 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Ten Million, Nine Hundred Eighty Seven Thousand Nine 92 Hundred Dollars ($10,987,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from 93 current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for 94 the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: 95 CASH RECEIPTS 96 ORIGINAL REVISED 97 2014/15 2014/15 98 BUDGET BUDGET 99 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 3,362,200 $ 5,963,100 100 RECEIPTS 101 TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC 4,750,000 4,750,000 102 GENERAL SERVICE BILLING 250,000 250,000 103 INTEREST EARNINGS 24,800 24,800 104 TOTAL RECEIPTS 5,024,800 5,024,800 105 TOTALS $ 8,387,000 $ 10,987,900 106 EXPENSE SUMMARY 107 ORIGINAL REVISED 108 2014/15 2014/15 109 EXPENSES BUDGET BUDGET 110 ELECTRIC GENERATION $ 2,240,000 $ 2,739,300 111 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION 1,033,000 1,574,100 112 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,663,100 3,030,300 113 TOTAL EXPENSES 4,936,100 7,343,700 114 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 3,450,900 3,644,200 115 TOTALS $ 8,387,000 $ 10,987,900 116 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 117 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 118 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 119 ADOPTED: 3

120 2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - FIRST AMENDMENT CONTINUED 121 COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FUND 122 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 123 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 124 The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million, Eight Hundred Twenty One Thousand 125 Eight Hundred Dollars ($1,821,800) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from 126 current revenues and other funds for the use by se