PC Minutes 2-22-22

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 The Meeting of the City of Dover Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 7:00 PM as a Virtual Meeting using the phone/videoconferencing system WebEx due to Delaware’s Declaration of the State of Emergency for COVID-19. The Meeting Session was conducted with Chair Mrs. Maucher presiding. Members present were Mrs. Denney (New appointed Planning Commission member), Mr. Hartman, Mr. Baldwin, Mrs. Welsh, Mrs. Malone and Mrs. Maucher. Mr. Cooper, Mr. Roach and Dr. Jones were absent. Staff members present were Mrs. Dawn Melson-Williams, Mr. Julian Swierczek, Ms. Samantha Bulkilvish, Mr. Jason Lyon and Mrs. Kristen Mullaney. Also present were Mr. Robert Neely, Mr. Raul Juarez, Mr. Eric Dowell, Mr. Chris Lazenby, Mr. Brett Jarrett & Ms. LeeAnn Gudorp. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Conditional Use Application C-22-02 Apartments at 773 South Queen Street will not be heard by the Planning Commission on February 22, 2022. The Applicant has chosen to withdraw their application. Mrs. Welsh moved to approve the revised agenda, seconded by Mrs. Malone and the motion was unanimously carried 6-0 with Mr. Roach, Mr. Cooper and Dr. Jones absent APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 18, 2022 Mrs. Welsh moved to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of January 18, 2022, seconded by Mr. Baldwin and the motion was unanimously carried 6-0 with Mr. Cooper, Mr. Roach and Dr. Jones absent. COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the next Planning Commission regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, March 21, 2022 at 7:00PM. It is anticipated that this meeting with return to In- person with the virtual option available for those who may still require that. So, we will be moving back to that hybrid format for our meetings and look forward to seeing everyone in Council Chambers. Mrs. Melson-Williams provided an update on the regular City Council and various Committee meetings held on January 24 & 25, 2022 and February 14 & 15, 2022. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that as of February 11, 2022 City Council appointed Mr. Dave Hugg as the City Manager. At that same time, they indicated that I would continue as the Interim City Planner for the time being. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that masks are no longer required in City buildings but are encouraged. The Office in general over the last month, has been busy. The couple of snow events that we had kept our Code Enforcement Office busy with violations related to uncleared sidewalks. The City has an ordinance that within a certain time period of the ceasing of snow, you have to clear your sidewalks. We are also in the timeframe for renewals of Rental Dwelling 1

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 Permits and Public Occupancy Permits. Our Front Office Staff has been managing intake of those renewals. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that if any Commissioners are interested in attending one of these trainings, please reach out to Planning Staff to get registered. These are events that are presented by the University of Delaware’s Institute for Public Administration. The next one happens to be Friday, February 25, 2022; it is an “Introduction to Land-Use Law, the Constitution and Takings.” The next one is being held on March 10, 2022 and it is “Introduction to Land Use Administration.” These are presented virtually. You get an email link to the event once you are registered. The Planning Department does have training money to allow for Commission members to attend these events. OPENING REMARKS CONCERNING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS Mrs. Melson-Williams presented the audience information on policies and procedures for the Virtual Meeting using the WebEx system. OLD BUSINESS 1) Requests for Extensions of Planning Commission Approval: None NEW APPLICATIONS AX-22-01 – Lands of Ernestine F. Huff at 166 Mifflin Road – Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation to City Council of an Annexation Request and Rezoning Request for a parcel of land totaling 25,000 SF located at 166 Mifflin Road, Dover. The property is currently zoned RS-1 (Residential Single Family Zone) in Kent County. The proposed zoning is R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) and SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located on the west side of Mifflin Road approximately 300 ft south of Woodmill Drive. The annexation category according to Dover’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan is Category 1: High Priority Annexation Areas and the land use designation is Residential Low Density. The owner is Ernestine F. Hugg. Property Address: 166 Mifflin Road. Tax Parcel: ED-05-076.14-01-02.00-000. Proposed Council District 1. Ordinance #2022-01. The First Reading of this Annexation Request was completed on January 10, 2022. Public Hearing before the Planning Commission is scheduled for February 22, 2022 and a Public Hearing at City Council on March 14, 2022. Representatives: None Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that Mrs. Huff is not in attendance tonight so we can either continue with the application or defer it to see if the applicant joins the meeting. (The application was delayed until later in the meeting.) SB-22-02 Lands of Juarez at 508 Acorn Lane: Minor Subdivision Plan - Public Hearing and Review of a Minor Subdivision Plan to subdivide one (1) property (on two (2) tracts of land) consisting of 2.455 acres +/- into three (3) parcels (Lots 1, 2 and 3). Lot 1 (Residual) is to be 0.67 acres+/- and encompasses the bulk of the primary tract of land east of Acorn Lane and containing the one-family detached dwelling unit (single-family home). Lot 2 is to be 0.47 acres+/- and is 2

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 the smaller portion of the tract of land east of Acorn Lane and contains no development. Lot 3 is the western portion of the existing tract of land west of Acorn Lane and is proposed to be 1.315 acres+/- and is currently undeveloped. The subject property is located on the east side of Acorn Lane with a tract of land on the west side of Acorn Lane. The property is zoned R-8 (One-Family Residence Zone). The owner of record is Raul M. Juarez. Property Address: 508 Acorn Lane. Tax Parcel Number: ED-05-068.15-01-10.00-000. Council District 3. This address was most recently the subject to Annexation Application AX-13-02 which was approved by the City Council in December 2013. Representatives: Mr. Robert Neely, Neely Engineering LLC; Mr. Raul Juarez, property owner Mr. Swierczek stated that this is a Minor Subdivision Application for a property at 508 Acorn Lane. It is a single property on two tracts of land. There is one tract that is east of Acorn Lane and one that is west. The property overall is just under 2.5 acres. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the property into three new parcels. Lot 1 would be the bulk of the property east of Acorn Lane and that is 0.67 acres and contains the existing single-family home on that property. The proposed Lot 2 would be just under a half an acre and that would also be on the east side of Acorn Lane. It is currently vacant and they are not proposing any development. The proposed Lot 3 would be the plot of land that is west of Acorn Lane that is a largely wooded lot. Again, the applicant is not proposing any development at this time. This was most recently subject of an Annexation application back in 2013. As noted, the applicant is not proposing any development at this time; this is simply a Minor Subdivision. Any new development that may come in the future will go through whatever review process is required at that point. Mr. Neely stated that he is with Mr. and Mrs. Juarez. The meeting minutes that they got previously from the City of Dover outlined a lot of things about City of Dover Electric if the property was developed; and, he was kind of concerned that it didn’t say anything about them not having any objection to the Minor Subdivision Plan. Responding to Mr. Neely, Mr. Swierczek stated that the comments that he referenced were from the Electric Department. Those would be just more advisory comments for the potential development of the property. They wouldn’t necessarily pertain to the Subdivision Application. He doesn’t think that would be an impediment to the application this evening. Mr. Neely asked if there were any other comments from the Commission that they need them to do to satisfy the application. Mrs. Maucher opened a public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public hearing. Mrs. Denney stated that her only comment is that you are just creating what she considers to be “awkward” shaped lots but that tends to be what happens here. The lots are so narrow at the end and obviously you get into trying to do something with them and it becomes difficult in the depth. Mrs. Welsh moved to approve application SB-22-01 Lands of Juarez at 508 Acorn Lane: Minor Subdivision to accept the change in the lot size, seconded by Mrs. Malone and the motion was 3

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 carried 6-0 by roll call vote with Mr.Cooper, Mr. Roach and Dr. Jones absent. Mrs. Denney voting yes; based on the fact that at this point, the maker of the motion and the person who seconded it have been doing this for a long time and seem to feel as though it is okay. Again, she has a little bit of an issue with the particular shape of these lots but she feels as though as she is reading the information that was provided it seems to be passing the scrutiny of others. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; it is in keeping with plans for the City and it seems to be a good use of the lots. Mr. Hartman voting yes; based on the fact that they will remain compliant with our R-8 (One Family Residence Zone). Mr. Baldwin voting yes. Mrs. Malone voting yes; based on the City and Planning Staff’s recommendations and for other reasons stated. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; based on the continuation of the R-8 (One Family Residence Zone). S-22-01 Caliber Car Wash at 280 Cowgill Street – Public Hearing and Review of a Site Development Plan Application for the construction of a 3,500 SF Self-Service Car Wash facility and associated site improvements including two (2) pay stations and nineteen (19) vacuum spaces. This redevelopment includes demolition of the existing auto repair shop building. The property is zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial Zone). The property consists of 0.78 acres (33,976.8 SF) and is located on the south side of Cowgill Street and Court Street near the corner of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and S. DuPont Highway. The owner of record is Neaton’s Tire Service of Delaware. The Equitable Owner (Developer) is MPV Properties c/o John Bradley Murr. Property Address: 280 Cowgill Street. Tax Parcel Number: ED-05-077.10-01-17.00. Council District 4. Waiver Request – Elimination of Sidewalk on Street Frontages for Alternative. Representatives: Mr. Eric Dowell, MPV Properties; Mr. Chris Lazenby, Timmons Group; Mr. Brett Jarett, MPV Properties; Ms. LeeAnn Gudorp, Timmons Group Ms. Bulkilvish stated that this application is for a Car Wash located at 280 Cowgill Street. Currently, there is a tire service station there. The new proposed Car Wash is about 3,500 SF and will contain nineteen (19) vacuum stations and two (2) pay stations. The property is zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial Zone) and it is about 0.78 acres or 33,976.8 SF. According to the parking requirements, there are twelve (12) spaces required and they are showing twenty-two (22) spaces. That is nineteen (19) vacuum spaces and three (3) employee spaces. They are asking for a waiver for the elimination of frontage sidewalk in lieu of what they show. In their exhibit. they are showing a connection which is not shown on this plan but it is a connection from the multi- use path that goes along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard connecting onto the site. That would then go across an exit aisle from the Car Wash and connect to the sidewalk that they are showing in front of the Car Wash building. They are providing a dumpster. They have assured us that the dumpster enclosure will match the architecture of the building and be a white brick face with an opaque gate. They also explained during our Applicant DAC Meeting that they would be providing the opaque barrier requirements as they are adjacent to a residential property. That includes an opaque fence or a masonry wall or some kind of opaque barrier as well as landscaping including some kind of hedgerow that will reach a height of six (6) feet. The plans do not show any bicycle parking; however, the applicant has agreed that they will provide the two (2) bicycle parking spaces that are required by providing a bike rack near the entrance of the building. Access to the Car Wash is shown as two entrance points and two exit points. The entrance furthest to the south on this drawing is for the cue to the Car Wash. Patrons would come 4

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 through the Car Wash lane, pay at one of the two pay stations and then enter through the car wash building. If they were to leave their wallet or something at home and need to bail out, they have also provided a bail out lane onto Cowgill Street. Once exiting the Car Wash, the thought is that all of the patrons would then come into the vacuum stations. The two-way entrance is basically just for their employees to get into and out of the employee parking. It is intended that all patrons would enter through Car Wash cue and not come in just to use the vacuums. They are also providing landscaping on the entire site. Again, it is not shown here but they will be adjusting the drive aisle in order to accommodate that hedgerow along the residential property line. They are also providing landscaping along the street frontages and some larger shade trees along that entrance into the Car Wash. Ms. Gudorp stated that they are happy to answer any questions that the Commissioners may have. Mr. Hartman questioned what their expected traffic would be on week days and weekends. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Dowell stated that the only thing that they have in terms of projected volumes and this question comes up sometimes in relation to water usage, is 300 cars per day. You have to keep in mind that on rainy days, they may not have anybody come through the Car Wash but on average you are probably looking at somewhere to 150 to 200 cars. That would be a reasonable guestimate. Mrs. Maucher asked if that was per day. Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Dowell stated yes. With that region that we are in as far as weather, after a snow event or something obviously a Car Wash is going to have more volume than an “average day”. So there are days that you would see above average and you could see as much as 300 cars in a day versus if the weather has been stable and it is just average customers, you are probably back down to that 150-200 cars per day. Mr. Hartman asked if he had looked at the traffic there from the Wawa that is right across the street. He imagines that the cross traffic from that Wawa coming down Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard is going to compete with the traffic going into your site. How much have you looked at that as a problem? Will there be a Traffic Study? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Dowell stated that Ms. Bulkilvish may be able to speak to this better than him. As a part of their DAC Meeting, it was referenced that they may need to look at a TIA Study but they have not to date actually done a study. Ms. Bulkilvish stated that as part of the DAC Meeting, our DelDOT representative has requested that the applicants submit for a Pre-Submittal Meeting in which they will be submitting their traffic counts and then from that, they will determine whether or not a Traffic Study will need to take place. Mr. Hartman questioned when they would have enough information from that to make a better decision. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Ms. Gudorp stated that they have not but that was going to be their next step after this meeting. Ms. Bulkilvish stated that she is not sure what the timeframe is with the DelDOT Pre-Submittal Meeting and what the timeframe is, but before we can give them any kind of Final Plan Approval, we would have to have that signed off by DelDOT. 5

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 Mr. Hartman asked if DelDOT will actually come up with a decision that says this is not a good idea to put this Car Wash here. In the event that the Commission approves this and DelDOT has recommendations that this is going to create a problem, what happens then? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Ms. Bulkilvish stated that most likely DelDOT will provide them with other traffic implementation changes that need to happen within the area. So, whether that be a change in a traffic pattern on Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard or putting in an extra stop sign there or something like that or maybe an additional turn lane. That would be something that DelDOT would require depending on what the traffic looks like in that area. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that she also wants to allow Mr. Jason Lyon with the Public Works Office and Department of Water and Wastewater to speak to some of these street questions as well. This is somewhat of a unique area when it comes to right-of-way for roads. Mr. Lyon asked if she wanted him to speak about the ownership of the streets. Responding to Mr. Lyon, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated yes, because this is kind of going to be a joint effort when it comes to dealing with traffic planning for the area. Mr. Lyon stated that the road Cowgill Street is kind of carved out in right-of-way and it is recognized as a City owned street and maintained through the City. In other words, it is part of our inventory of streets that we maintain in the City of Dover and that contributes to the Municipal Street Aid calculation that the State provides to the City. Court Street; however, is a different animal. This is within the State right-of-way. The City has maintained this road in the State right-of-way for many years as far as anyone can remember. The tricky thing is who owns the rights to the road and who is going to dictate the design requirements and maintenance responsibilities. At this point, the City is in concert with DelDOT to create a Memorandum of Understanding and they are negotiating that out right now. At this point in time, the City will provide guidance on the design parameters with the understanding that DelDOT can kind of oversee things and require this Traffic Study that we have been talking about at some level. He believes that once the developer meets with DelDOT and goes through the process of looking into this and how it’s going to impact the traffic, as Ms. Bulkilvish said, they will probably be some potential maintenance of traffic upgrades, but he doesn’t believe that the project cannot go forward. Mr. Hartman stated that it just looks like it would be very challenging with the space that they have there on Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and the cross traffic from Wawa, it would be very challenging to come up with a traffic flow pattern that would accommodate the heavy traffic in that area. Responding to Mr. Hartman, Mr. Lyon stated that his guess is that what is going to happen is coming onto Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard as a right only and you won’t be able to go across the street into Wawa. But that is just his guess at this point; he can’t speak for DelDOT. Mr. Hartman stated that you will have people coming from the highway. Most of the customers will be coming from the highway and you will have cross traffic coming out of Wawa to get to the other side to get back to the highway. You are going to have people lined up on the left side of Martin Luther King Jr Boulevard waiting to make that left turn into their site. Responding to 6

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 Mr. Hartman, Mr. Lyon stated that he understands and it is certainly an issue. Mr. Hartman stated that with that concern and there is a neighborhood right there and there is existing business that could be impacted, he is not sure it’s fair to ask the Commission to make a decision without more information on the traffic for this site. Everything else looks great and he agrees with the sidewalk waiver. He thinks that it could be a great Car Wash but the traffic is the concern here and we simply don’t have enough information to make a decision to protect the surrounding neighbors. Mrs. Malone stated that she does agree with Mr. Hartman about the traffic issue. It reminds her a lot of what happened on Route 8 (for the Dunkin Donuts) and there were cars lined up all the way down Route 8 in the right-hand lane trying to get in there at the busiest time of the day when people were going to work. Thank goodness that they have moved now but when she first saw this application, that was the first thing that came to mind. The second thing, is this Car Wash all self-service? Will there be any employees? Responding to Mrs. Malone, Mr. Dowell stated that the tunnel itself is automated so it will be a conveyor that will direct your car through the tunnel. Then once you exit into the vacuum area, those vacuums are self-service and there will be three (3) employees on-site managing the flow of traffic and customers who need help, but they are not there to specifically do anything with cleaning. The cleaning is fully automated and then the vacuuming is self-service. Mrs. Welsh stated that she heard Ms. Bulkilvish say that the two-way entrance is for employees to come in and out. Are there any provisions to have signage of some sort to direct cars that are coming into the lane for the Car Wash not to use that? She can see someone coming in there and thinking that they are going to use the vacuums first and then go get in the Car Wash lane. It could be an issue with U-turns in that area. Responding to Mrs. Welsh, Ms. Gudorp stated that there will be a signage package, it is just not shown on this plan, to make it very clear where the entrance for the Car Wash lanes are. Mrs. Denney stated that she certainly agrees with Mr. Hartman and she thinks that there needs to be a little bit more information. Of course these are things that are more left up to DelDOT but she does think that there needs to be some more input with some regard to the ingress/egress situation. She also agrees that there is a Wawa there and it’s kind of complicated. She uses the Wawa from time to time for gas and she has seen more than one near collision and now we are going to have the same thing across the street. She is a little hesitant to agree with any of this until we have a little more information from DelDOT. The other thing that she is troubled by and everyone else seems to think it is okay she guesses is sidewalks. She is a believer in sidewalks. She happens to live on State Street and Dover seems to be a community where a lot of people walk and we have the parks. She really thinks there should be continuation of sidewalk. She thinks the sidewalk should be on Court Street because we certainly don’t want people who go so far down and have to cross over to reach sidewalk. Mr. Hartman stated that it is his understanding that the multi-use pathway can be connected to this business and Cowgill Street is a very narrow street and has no sidewalks. That’s where it fronts and there is a multi-use pathway there. Is that correct? Responding to Mr. Hartman, Ms. Bulkilvish stated that is correct. The multi-use path goes along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard 7

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 and then wraps around that kind of peninsula to go down South DuPont Highway. There is no sidewalk currently on Cowgill Street but the applicant is proposing connection from that multi- use path along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard to the site. There is also no sidewalk on the Court Street section on the same side of the street that the development is proposed as well. Ms. Gudorp asked if Planning Staff had the aerial exhibit that shows the reasoning behind the waiver. She thinks that would help to get a better picture of the sidewalk connectivity. The trail is lost on the black and white rendering. Responding to Ms. Gudorp (by showing an aerial map on screen), Ms. Bulkilvish stated that you can see the multi-use path does wrap around the corner at Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and South DuPont Highway. There is no sidewalk on either side of Court Street or Cowgill Street currently. Ms. Gudorp stated that they were just trying to figure out what made the most sense. You already have the trail around the whole perimeter and they thought that making this connection would help the people that wanted to walk over to the Car Wash. Mrs. Maucher asked if this was a 24 hours a day operation or what will the hours be. Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Dowell stated that typically the hours are either 7AM-7PM or 7AM-9PM Mrs. Maucher questioned how long it takes to get through the actual car wash? Is there any concern about backup on roadways to get in there and through the Car Wash? Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Dowell stated that it is roughly a 2.5 to 3 minute process from the entrance of the tunnel to the end. Mrs. Maucher asked if they knew how many cars in a line the site could hold without spilling back onto the roadway. Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Dowell stated that if you start at the cue from the entrance to the Car Wash, he is not sure that they have an exhibit that shows it, but he would think that there is a minimum of twenty (20) to twenty-five (25) cars. Mrs. Maucher asked if the lighting would be illuminated all night or dimmed down after closing. Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Mr. Dowell stated that after hours would be just enough for security purposes. They do not have any stores open currently in the State of Delaware but he has looked at stores that they are operating in Florida and the Carolinas. They typically run on Monday through Saturday 7AM-8PM and then on Sunday from 8AM-6PM. Mrs. Maucher stated that there were a number of recommendations from Staff regarding dumpsters, site access, sidewalks and the opaque barrier. Did you have any comments on those additional recommendations by Planning Staff? Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Ms. Gudorp stated that as Ms. Bulkilvish stated earlier, they are going to be reducing the drive aisle widths to twelve (12) feet so that they can allow more space for the growth of shrubs as well as the opaque fence barrier. That will be updated in their next plan. Regarding the dumpster location, the site is bounded by a twenty (20) foot front yard setback and a thirty (30) foot rear yard setback. As you can see, they don’t have much room to locate the dumpster properly. So, they have placed it here to try and fit it with the best access for the trash truck. Regarding the site access, the explanation of signage and the question on if people would be confused trying to enter the Car Wash to the pay station lanes versus that other entrance; so, they will be making sure that the signage is clear 8

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 so that there isn’t any confusion. Mr. Jarrett stated that they have gone through the process as it has been laid out and he doesn’t want anyone to think that they have tried to circumvent anything. They do plan on have the appropriate meeting with DelDOT. They thought that they were going through this process as it has been laid out before us. So, he just wanted to make sure that the Commission was aware that they were not trying to circumvent anything. Mrs. Maucher opened the public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public hearing. Mrs. Malone moved to table application S-22-01 Caliber Car Wash at 280 Cowgill Street until we have a more defined traffic agreement between the City and State, seconded by Mrs. Denney; she agrees whole heartedly with the need for a traffic study in that particular area before she is willing to make any motions or movements on it. Ms. Bulkilvish asked if the Commission could give more information on a timeframe as she thought this was a long-term thing that was happening. Mr. Lyon stated that if you are waiting on the Memorandum of Understanding to be completed between the City and the State, that’s not going to tell you anything about the traffic. That is really just about long-term maintenance of the road and any sort of tradeoffs that they are doing with the State. It is nothing to do specifically with this project. He would advise that if you are going to make a motion, you would say that it be tabled until the traffic recommendations are brought forth from DelDOT. Mrs. Malone accepted the amendment to the motion and the motion was carried 6-0 by roll call vote with Mr. Cooper, Mr. Roach and Dr. Jones absent. Mrs. Malone voting yes; for reasons stated. Mrs. Denney voting yes; she does think that there is a significant amount of traffic there as well as pedestrian traffic. She thinks that they really need to hear from DelDOT specifically as to what they think about this. They have so much squeezed in there that they had a hard time finding a location for a trash dumpster. So, overall, maybe we shouldn’t be in such a hurry to just get this all sorted out with that traffic issue. Mr. Hartman voting yes; because of the concern of the impact to the adjacent business and the impact to the adjacent neighborhood and he doesn’t believe that they have enough information to make a decision. Speaking to Mr. Jarrett’s concerns about trying to circumvent the process; nobody thinks that. They just want the process to catch up with you and they hope that you have a successful project here. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; until they get enough information about the Traffic Impact Study. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; for all of the reasons previously stated. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; it will be interesting because she knows that Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard is a main access road into the State Office Complex so she thinks that morning and afternoon traffic would be an issue that needs to be looked at. AX-22-01 – Lands of Ernestine F. Huff at 166 Mifflin Road – Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation to City Council of an Annexation Request and Rezoning Request for a parcel of land totaling 25,000 SF located at 166 Mifflin Road, Dover. The property is currently zoned RS-1 9

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 (Residential Single Family Zone) in Kent County. The proposed zoning is R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) and SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located on the west side of Mifflin Road approximately 300 ft south of Woodmill Drive. The annexation category according to Dover’s 2019 Comprehensive Plan is Category 1: High Priority Annexation Areas and the land use designation is Residential Low Density. The owner is Ernestine F. Huff. Property Address: 166 Mifflin Road. Tax Parcel: ED-05-076.14-01-02.00-000. Proposed Council District 1. Ordinance #2022-01. The First Reading of this Annexation Request was completed on January 10, 2022. Public Hearing before the Planning Commission is scheduled for February 22, 2022 and a Public Hearing at City Council on March 14, 2022. Representatives: None Ms. Bulkilvish stated that this is an Annexation Application for 166 Mifflin Road for the Lands of Ernestine Huff. The property is about 0.75 acres or 25,000 SF. It is a small enclave on Mifflin Road. Slowly but surely we are gobbling these up. The property is currently zoned RS-1 (Residential Single Family Zone). The proposed zoning is R-8 (One Family Residence Zone). The back corner is also subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). It is a Tier 3 – Excellent Recharge Area. The property is a Category 1: High Priority Annexation Area in our Comprehensive Plan. That means that it is an enclave and easily brought into the city limits. The proposed Land Use Designation in the Comprehensive Plan is Residential Low Density; therefore, the R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) is appropriate. The present use is a single family dwelling. The proposed use would also be that. Currently, the property is on septic and well water. This is the main reason why Mrs. Huff has requested the Annexation because she wishes to connect to the City sewer and water. The property is not served by the City’s Electric Department; however, it would be on the applicant to make contact with the City’s Electric Department if they were to chose to change that. We have also submitted the Plan of Services to the Office of State Planning Coordination; and they have, as of last Thursday, given us a letter of approval for our Plan of Services. Mrs. Malone questioned how many other parcels along Mifflin Road are still out of the city limits? Responding to Mrs. Malone, Ms. Bulkilvish stated that it is just a hand-full. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this property is one of the last ones that is in the middle of Mifflin Road. There are a number of properties still at the north end and then numerous properties towards the corner of Mifflin Road and North Street or Hazlettville Road. Mrs. Malone asked if they also want to hook into City electric or are they were really doing it for the water and sewer. Responding to Mrs. Malone, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that she believes that most are seeking annexation related to sewer or water issues and predominately sewer. With the City’s Comprehensive Plan, if a property is in a Category 1 Annexation Area, it requires that they annex into the City of Dover in order to be provided with City water and sewer service. Mrs. Bulkilvish has an image up and it shows where the pink lines are (indicating properties not in the City). There is an area to the north of the small traffic circle that is there where lots are not in the city limits and then also down at the south end of Mifflin Road as you make that turn onto North Street/Hazlettville Road. 10

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 Mrs. Maucher opened a public hearing and after seeing no one wishing to speak, closed the public hearing. Mrs. Welsh moved to recommend approval to City Council for application AX-22-01 Lands of Ernestine Huff at 166 Mifflin Road inclusive of the rezoning request (to R-8 with SWPOZ), seconded by Mrs. Malone and the motion was carried 6-0 with Mr. Cooper, Mr. Roach and Dr. Jones absent. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; it's definitely something that is needed for the City as evidence of the comments by the DAC and it is a good thing for both the City and the owner of the property. Mrs. Denney voting yes; obviously in what she has read since she was appointed, both the Comprehensive Plan and developmentally it is a High Priority Annexation Area. We have a homeowner who is willing to annex into the City and she thinks that for those reasons she agrees that we should vote for it. She has no issues with the R-8 (One Family Residence Zone). Mr. Hartman voting yes; the subject property is in the 2019 Comprehensive Plan as a Category 1: High Priority Annexation Area and the R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) is consistent with the surrounding areas. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; based on all of the reasons previously stated. Mrs. Malone voting yes; for reasons stated. Mrs. Maucher voting yes; for reasons previously stated. NEW BUSINESS Report on 2021 Applications Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that in the packet was a listing of all of the Applications for 2021 by application type. Last month Staff had given the Commission a summary of applications on their tally chart that showed across the board to all of their Boards and Commission and the administrative processes showing that there were 59 applications in calendar year 2021. This listing is applications by type so it goes through anything from Conditional Uses through Rezoning Applications. It also includes their Board of Adjustment and Historic District Commission applications. It gives the file number, the plan name, the location, some information about what they were proposing and then the action date for the Planning Commission or if it was a recommendation from the Planning Commission and then the City Council actions that transpired. Just because they are on this list, doesn’t mean that they are fully approved and ready to roll. Some of them have completed that Final Plan Approval process that occurs after Planning Commission and others are still working through that. She would be happy to answer any questions about a particular application type or application. Mr. Hartman stated that it was a great project and he thanks Planning Staff for providing it. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that they do have a log book database that tracks these and this set of charts is made part of the City Department’s Annual Report which they are in the final steps of preparing for City Council. They have nice tables like this that date back a number of years. Since 1990, they have been assigning application file numbers and there is some semblance of a chart for each of the years since that point in time or a listing at least. 2020 Census Data 11

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the Planning Office happens to be one of the key departments working with demographics and population numbers. They help represent the City on the Delaware Population Consortium which releases its own annual population projections. Of course we are coming off of the 2020 Decennial Census so some of this information is pulled from that. And there will eventually be more and more information coming from that 2020 Census but they have some basic information here. Ms. Bulkilvish is our participant in the Population Consortium for the City and she has a little bit better sense of some of these population numbers since she put this together for us. Ms. Bulkilvish stated that like Mrs. Melson-Williams said, we are just coming off of the 2020 Decennial Census. We do only have some of the tables; its whatever was released with the redistricting data which they are also participating in currently. Basically, that gives us the breakdown of the total population by race, the number of voting people by race, as well as some housing information and some group quarters information which was new this year and was kind of interesting. She put a flyer together to show people that we did grow as a city. The 2010 population was recorded at 36,047 and the 2020 population as of April 1, 2020 was 39,403. What is not shown on here, which she found kind of fascinating, is that we kind of did a little flip in that the current majority of the population is black. In the 2010 Census, the majority of the population was white. With this new Census, there were more options to record race so there are options to record two or more races and up to six different races. As you can see by the population breakdown, this is actually data projected out to 2020 from the 2019 ACS that shows you the age breakdown. It is pretty even throughout male and female for each age group recorded until you get to the later years and then the women start outnumbering the men. Also from the 2019 ACS data, they estimated that the number of occupied housing units was 14,098. Of those, 48.31% were owner occupied and 51.69% were renter occupied. We are definitely a renter city; there are a lot of rental units out there. The percentage of the population that are 16 years and older that are in the labor force is 60%. That is a pretty interesting number and she thought that it would be a little higher but that is what it is. Mrs. Malone asked if she had any numbers on the owner occupied and renter occupied previously? Has that flipped also? She was kind of taken back by the number of rentals. Mrs. Maucher asked if the occupied housing inclusive of apartments or is that just single family? Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Ms. Bulkilvish stated that this is for all housing units so it could be apartments or single family. Mrs. Maucher asked if there was a breakdown between single family and multi-family? Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Ms. Bulkilvish stated that she doesn’t think there is. The answer to Mrs. Malone’s question, she could pull up some previous ACS data to see if there was a flip, but she just hasn’t done that before. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that with housing units, you have to remember that an apartment unit or other multi-family building types, that they count as dwelling units. So within the City of Dover we have a significant number of multi-family type housing units citywide. We can certainly look to see if there is any kind of further breakdown based on unit type and details about that. 12

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 2022 Mrs. Maucher asked if base housing is considered City of Dover? Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Ms. Bulkilvish stated that the Base housing is in city limits of Dover. There is a lot of housing associated with the Air Base that is not in the City limits but we can count whatever is on Base. Unfortunately, 2020 was in the middle of a pandemic and the Air Force actually to thin out the population, sent people home and to other locations so it may not be the most accurate reporting of what a normal population looks like on the barracks. Mrs. Maucher stated that for the population for the labor force, is that like working years? Is it just 16 and older or is it 16 to 65? Responding to Mrs. Maucher, Ms. Bulkilvish stated that she thinks it is 16 to 65. Meeting adjourned at 8:44 PM. Sincerely, Kristen Mullaney Secretary 13