Attachment

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION AGENDA THURSDAY, July 21, 2011- 3:00 P.M. City Hall – Conference Room ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MEETING on May 19, 2011 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MEETING on June 16, 2011 COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS 1. Summary of Applications 2009-2011 2. Summary of Architectural Review Certifications for 2011 OLD BUSINESS 1. HI-09-01 Dover Public Library – Update and Review of the selected exterior finish materials for the Dover Public Library. Previously, the Architectural Review Certification for the project was issued upon recommendation of the Historic District Commission on June 17, 2009 and action by the Planning Commission March 15, 2010. Construction of a two story library building of 46,000 S.F with the associated parking, walkways, landscaping, and stormwater management facilities is underway. The project area consists of 4.67 acres ± of land zoned I-O (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The property site is located on the north side of Loockerman Plaza between South State Street and Legislative Avenue. The owner of record is the City of Dover. The property address is 35 Loockerman Plaza. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.05-04-55.00-000. 2. HI-05-03 State Street Commons – Update and Review of Request for use of alternative material for building entrance railings at porches and porticos. Previously, the Architectural Review Certification for the project was issued upon recommendation of the Historic District Commission on March 16, 2006 and action by the Planning Commission on June 20, 2006 for the project known as State Street Commons. Construction commenced on two connected 2 ½ story office buildings of 12,000 S.F. each for a total of 24,000 S.F with a two level parking garage. The existing brick office building at 502 South State Street consisting of 3,222 S.F. will remain. The property consists 35,061 square feet ± of land zoned RG-O (General Residence and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The property is located at the southwest corner of South State Street and Water Street. The owner of record is YOZIMA, LLC; request received from Onix-Z, LLC. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.09-03-70.00-000. NEW BUSINESS 1. Application for Architectural Review Certification: a. HI-11-04 Acme Site Redevelopment Master Plan: Architectural Review Certification - Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation to the City of Dover Planning Commission on the Architectural Review Certificate for Site Development Plan for

City of Dover Historic District Commission Agenda Meeting of July 21, 2011 Page 2 of 2 the redevelopment of the property at 120 South Governors Avenue (commonly referred to as the Acme Site). This application consists of project that is to include a retail/apartment building and a second apartment building along with the demolition of the existing mid-to-late twentieth century commercial building. The project also includes the associated parking, streetscape improvements, landscaping, and stormwater management facilities. The project area consists of one parcel of land totaling 1.7653 acres ± of land zoned C-2 (Central Commercial Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The property site spans the block between South Governors Avenue and South New Street located north of but not adjacent to West Loockerman Street. The owner of record is the Downtown Dover Partnership. The property address is 120 South Governors Avenue. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.09-01- 44.00-000. 2. Certified Local Government (CLG) program ONGOING PROJECTS 1. Update on Draft Zoning Text Amendment (MI-11-06) Updates to Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §3. Historic District Commission and Architectural Review 2. Discussion of the Project to Evaluate and Update the “Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone” ADJOURN THE AGENDA ITEMS MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSION.

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MAY 19, 2011 The Regular Meeting of the City of Dover Historic District Commission was held on Thursday, May 19, 2011 at 3:10 PM with Chairman Scrafford presiding. Members present were Col. Scrafford, Mr. McDaniel, (arriving at 3:10 PM) and Mr. Fisher. Mr. Salkin and Mr. Jackson were absent. Staff members present were Mrs. Melson-Williams, Ms. Cornwell, and Ms. Metsch. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. McDaniel moved for approval of the agenda as submitted, seconded by Mr. Fisher and the motion was unanimously carried 3-0 with Mr. Salkin and Mr. Jackson absent. ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 21, 2011 Mr. McDaniel moved to approve the minutes of April 21, 2011 as submitted, seconded by Mr. Fisher and the motion was unanimously carried 3-0 with Mr. Salkin and Mr. Jackson absent. COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS Ms. Melson-Williams stated that the Planning Staff put in your packet what are the most recent adopted amendments to the 2008 Comprehensive Plan to place in your notebook. The map enclosed will replace Map 12-1. These updates were adopted in March/April of this year. Mrs. Melson-Williams further stated that updates on activities from Preservation Delaware include Staff passing on the contact information for members of the Historic District Commission to Preservation Delaware. You may have received an invitation regarding an event that will be held on Saturday, June 18, 2011. Preservation Delaware is kicking off an initiative to work with Historic District Commissions to bring their Staff and members of these Commission across the state together for some activities that will be held in Odessa, Delaware. Mr. McDaniel stated that for next month’s meeting he will be out of the State and Mr. Fisher will be out of the country. Responding to Mr. McDaniel, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that Staff would check on a quorum as there may be something coming forward for that month. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to discuss. Mr. McDaniel questioned if the Bayard Hotel had taken out a Demolition and Building Permit? Responding to Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Cornwell stated that they have received a Demolition Permit; however, not a Building Permit. They do have plans to fence and stabilize the site within two (2) weeks of the building coming down. Mr. Fisher questioned if this appears to be the case of not commencing with a Building Permit immediately after demolition? Responding to Mr. Fisher, Ms. Cornwell stated that it would depend on how long it takes to get the building down. They are working through that process as they just received additional comments from DelDOT and she received a revised plan.

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MAY 19, 2011 NEW BUSINESS There was no new business to discuss. ON-GOING PROJECTS Draft Zoning Text Amendment MI-11-06 Updates to Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §3. Historic District Commission and Architectural Review Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that there was nothing on this provided in your packets this month. Staff just wanted to update you on where we are. Staff is in the process of doing some outreach and collecting information. You looked specifically at the Historic District Commission section and we have gathered those comments. In the meantime, Staff has been working on organization of the new Ordinance to deal with the numbering and getting all of that to work. Staff held a meeting on May 3, 2011 with the development community, engineers that have recently had applications, and the Realtors association to introduce them to this proposed new/change/updated ordinance. Mrs. Melson-Williams further stated that she, Mrs. Townshend, and Mr. Scott Koenig attended an ACEC meeting which is a consulting engineer’s professional group. They use this process on a regular basis with clients bringing them through the development process here in the City to get some feedback from them. At this point, the plan is to present the Ordinance to the appropriate City Council committee which is the Legislative, Finance and Administrative Committee. That Committee’s new membership will be appointed on Monday evening in the City Council meeting. Coming out of that Committee, it will move onto City Council for First Reading in late June with a hearing before the Planning Commission scheduled for July and final action by City Council in August. Discussion of the Project to Evaluate and Update the “Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone” Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that we talked briefly about this at the end of the last meeting and at that point we had lost quorum. What Staff has done is create two (2) versions of one of the element sections that would be in the Chapter that presents the Design Guidelines for exterior changes which is currently Chapter 3 in the existing document. Mrs. Melson-Williams further stated that in Sample Version #1 it is a new page layout; however, it utilizes the same approach that the current document has in that it has an introduction paragraph and then list things that are “recommended,” things that are “not recommended,” and then things that are “inappropriate.” Mrs. Melson-Williams further stated that in Sample Version #2 it is a new page layout with a new approach to presenting the information about that specific element. What it anticipates doing is an introduction paragraph regarding roofs with some history then information regarding things to consider for maintenance and best practices. The second page of it would go through the Guidelines for the roofs with the Guidelines written more in the positive of what you should be doing rather than broken into “recommended,” “not recommended,” and “inappropriate.” Hopefully by using this approach, it will be friendlier to the person who has to use it. Mrs. Melson-Williams further stated that the examples that we have seen from other jurisdictions 2

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MAY 19, 2011 especially Raleigh follows the type #2 format of presenting the bullet point list or a numbered list of things that are “appropriate.” At this point, Staff worked a little on the text; however, not extensively. Mr. Fisher stated that he feels that there is a lot of negative impression that people have when they have to go through any application process. He feels that Sample #2 takes some of that negativity out because it does not use a negative approach and does not compound the issue for the applicant. He likes Sample #2 better. Mr. Scrafford stated that he feels that the way Sample #2 presents itself is good. For instance, and this is not to be construed just for this particular item, it states that “asphalt, fiberglass, composition shingles are not recommended for existing historic buildings.” The next sentence says “when used.” It needs to say “where approved for use.” Responding to Mr. Scrafford, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that what Staff would do is go through with this concept in where in some cases it may be appropriate to use it or it may be okay to use asphalt and if you do, this is how you do it. Mr. Fisher stated that some of the asphalt is as good looking if not better looking than some of the old material. Mr. McDaniel stated that the consensus is that we all like this as it reads as well as the tone of it. Mr. Scrafford questioned who would use this other than this Commission that you could ask and is this a logical thing to do? Responding to Mr. Scrafford, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that Staff could look back at our recent applicants as she knows that there are a couple of architects that have had to use it and we could test it with them. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that what Staff will do is start bringing this document to you in groups to look at and then ultimately there will be a final document that we will have to address on how you want to consider public outreach for it. Mr. Scrafford stated that he would like to change the title difference between “roofing” and “roofs.” Responding to Mr. Scrafford, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the hope is that everything ends up on two (2) pages and can be handed out if someone is only doing a window project. It would allow us to incorporate photographs so on one page there will be a blank area for that. Mr. McDaniel moved for adjournment of the meeting at 3:38 PM, seconded by Mr. Fisher and the motion was unanimously carried 3-0 with Mr. Salkin and Mr. Jackson absent. Meeting adjourned at 3:38 PM Sincerely, Diane Metsch Secretary 3

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION JUNE 16, 2011 The Regular Meeting of the City of Dover Historic District Commission was held on Thursday, June 16, 2011 at 3:00 PM with Chairman Scrafford presiding. Members present were Col. Scrafford and Mr. Salkin. Mr. Jackson, Mr. McDaniel and Mr. Fisher were absent. Staff members present were Mrs. Melson-Williams, Ms. Cornwell, and Ms. Metsch. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that typical quorum for a meeting is three (3) members. We will progress with the meeting today; however, will not take action on any items. The meeting minutes should be deferred until July. She would ask that the Commission recognize and follow the agenda that was posted since you cannot formally adopt it. ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 19, 2011 The May 19, 2011 meeting minutes were deferred for adoption action until the July 21, 2011 meeting. COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS Ms. Melson-Williams stated that as a reminder for Saturday, June 18, 2011, Preservation Delaware is hosting the first of what will be several events that bring together Historic District Commissions from across the State and their Staff. This event is being held in Odessa, Delaware. There will be no Staff attending due to other commitments. She advised Preservation Delaware not to expect anyone from Dover; however, we will work to keep you informed of upcoming events in the future. Mr. Salkin stated that he received an email a few days ago as a reminder of the event; however, never received anything announcing the event. It would be helpful in the future if they could contact us as early as they schedule it. Responding to Mr. Salkin, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that she thinks that this event has only been scheduled within the last month. Mrs. Melson-Williams further stated that there are a number of Scenic By-ways that have been designated in the State. Specifically, the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad By-way is one that runs through Dover. This is a designated By-way as this was achieved in the past year. They are starting what is the next step in that process which is the development of a Corridor Management Plan. The Scenic By-way extends from the Maryland line and continues north up through the state with different segments. Dover is within the first segment and is shown on the map she provided for you. The reason she brings it to your attention is that on June 21, 2011 they are hosting a public workshop at the Camden Friends Meeting from 6:00 PM to 7:30 PM to present information and gather comments and information regarding the corridor and about their planning for the corridor. Mr. Salkin questioned if this is a DelDOT program? Responding to Mr. Salkin, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that Delaware Scenic By-ways is a DelDOT Program and Preservation Delaware is on one of their planning teams.

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION JUNE 16, 2011 OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to discuss. NEW BUSINESS Kirk-Short Buildings at 15 and 21 The Green – Presentation of Information on Exterior Building Improvements to the existing buildings at 15 and 21 The Green. This proposed Restoration and Repair project involves brick and stone masonry, woodwork, windows, roof, and exterior painting. The project is considered eligible for administrative review of the Architectural Review Certification during Building Permit process. Representatives: Mr. Kevin Rychlicki, Bernardon, Haber & Holloway Architects; and Mrs. Carol Quigley, Frens and Frens, LLC. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that Staff has looked at their proposal in the way of recommendation of what type of review process they would go through. It currently indicates that they would be eligible for an administrative review which means at the time of filing a Building Permit; Staff could review and issue the Architectural Review Certification. However, given the prominent location on The Green, Staff felt that it would be helpful for them to appear before you and present information on the project. Mr. Rychlicki stated that he would go over some history of the building. The property currently serves as the main office for the Division of Historical and Cultural Affairs and the State Historic Preservation Office. Previously, the building had been maintained and operated by the Division of Facilities Management. In the past year, the Division of Historical and Cultural Affairs has taken over complete control of the building. Mr. Rychlicki further stated to give you a little history of the building; it was built in 1859 by Henry Todd who was a surveyor. One half of the building served as a residence and the other half was a business. In the 1870’s, Mr. Todd had to sell the property to settle some debts and at that time, the property became offices. The State acquired the property in the 1940’s and it served the Bank Commission and Insurance Commission. The Historical and Cultural Affairs took over the building in the late 1980’s. The address of 15 The Green retains a lot of its historical fabric especially in the interior and exterior. The address of 21 The Green has seen better days. It has had a couple of renovations over the last couple of years that began with the 21 The Green side on the first level. The floor windows were removed and the larger windows installed. The first floor brick was also removed and a more contemporary brick pattern of the period was applied in the 1950’s. The east and north side of the building were vinyl clad on the 21 The Green side of the building. The basement windows also on that side of the building were changed to metal windows just about the same time the Historical and Cultural Affairs took over the building in the 1980’s. A fire escape was added around the same time that the State took over the building. Mr. Rychlicki further stated that last year the Division of Facilities Management, under a different architectural firm, submitted documents to the City of Dover for improvements for the building which consisted of woodwork repairs, pointing, selective window repairs, shutter repairs, and major reconstruction of the east wall of the 21 The Green side of the building and replacement of windows. The contractor started work and they were experiencing a lot of difficulties. The 2

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION JUNE 16, 2011 contractor did not know how to deal with historic restoration and we had to keep pulling scope because they were causing more damage to the building and is the reason the building is in the state that it is in now. Our company was then brought in to do some remedial repairs to the building through the winter months that was mainly window repairs and priming of the exposed woodwork. We did not have time to get the project out to bid so we wanted to get the building through the winter and make it comfortable for the Staff that was in the building. Mrs. Quigley stated that she would review the scope of work. The bulk of the work is falling into a couple general areas: masonry restoration, architectural woodwork restoration, and restoration of the wood windows. Their focus has also been for the most part, the south and front sides of the building. As you will see, the balance of the building has not suffered as much and we will not go to the extent of full restoration of the exterior. It would be nice to remove all of the vinyl siding on the north and east facades; however, the preservation of the primary façade is what we will be doing for this particular project. We are looking at a large amount of brick pointing on the south façade and there are a number of spalled bricks that need to be patched. The previous contractor had very little success finding appropriate brick replacements for that façade. It is a tight butter joint that is difficult to match and rather than having the same problems with the next contractor, we decided to do more patching of the bricks rather than trying to risk sacrificing or damaging any more of the surrounding bricks. The marble base on the bottom will all be repointed and both facades will be cleaned. Tests were conducted with the chemical that will be used to clean the 15 The Green side of the building with success. Mrs. Quigley further stated that the windows are not in horrible condition; however, the most disturbing component of them now is that they are unfinished because of the excessive stripping that took place over the last year. They look really rough and we do need to take it back to a smooth finish and correct the damage that has been done. The individual components of the windows are stable and we do have a number of sash replacements. The only major architectural change that is occurring is the large windows on 21 The Green that are picture-like windows. There were a lot of masonry alterations done to the first floor and the horizontal brick bands installed in perhaps the 1950’s. We will not go to the extent where we are completely refacing the entire first floor of the building; however, felt it more appropriate if we just changed out the windows to match the balance of what is on the building. The cornice also suffered as it was stripped rather drastically and all the wood has a very rough base at the moment. We do require a number of replicate brackets in areas that are completely rotten and where there are a couple missing on the back side of the building on the north side of 15 The Green. Mrs. Quigley further stated that there is a structural issue that is more of a preventative item. On 21 The Green with the horizontal brick bands that were installed in the 1950’s, if you stand and look at the building, you can see that this brick band was intended to stand proud of the elevation by about an inch or inch and a half. In the center of the building the wall is buckling so that it becomes flush in the middle and then returns to the inch and a half plane on the east end. We are requesting for a number of anchors to be installed right and left of the center bay of those windows to make a more solid connection between the face brick and the balance of the wall. There is built in gutter on both the buildings; however, we will install new downspouts. 3

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION JUNE 16, 2011 Mr. Scrafford questioned in their submittal letter where you say “replacement” of anything is the intent in-kind? Responding to Mr. Scrafford, Mrs. Quigley stated that yes with the exception of the windows. Mrs. Quigley stated that there is one more architectural change on the rear elevation. We will be decreasing the size of the windows what would be in the north façade of 21 The Green. There are also water issues with these windows. On the third floor the windows dip down below both the flashing and sometimes the roof line with the addition that was added in the turn of the century in the late 1800’s. We are recommending shorter windows be installed in this area; however, they could be constructed as the balance of the windows are with the wood plank frames. This same issue also occurs along the west façade where the windows sit right on the walkway that goes in between 15 The Green and the Ridgely property. They are rotted because for the most part they are sitting in standing water. Mr. Scrafford further stated that his concern is to ensure that when you talk about replacement those are the things that get replaced with material that is not commensurable with what was there. The term “replacement” means you will replace in-kind. Responding to Mr. Scrafford, Mr. Rychlicki stated that he should have clarified this to state that they are “replacing but replicating” the windows. Mr. Scrafford further questioned to Staff if they submit for permit, how far they intend to “replicate?” Responding to Mr. Scrafford, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that there are details in the overall plan package of items such as that for windows. If they are having to “replicate” a window Staff is looking at if it is the same lite pattern and does it function the same way. Mr. Rychlicki stated that they will be using Spanish cedar. Mrs. Quigley stated that the woodwork is of a better quality; however, we are not doing what was most recently done. There were Pella windows installed on the east façade and that is not what we will be doing. Some will say that these would “replicate” the front windows and we do not agree with that. Other than adding weather stripping it is the exact details. Mr. Scrafford further questioned with regards to new box gutters and downspouts what material will they be of? Responding to Mr. Scrafford, Mrs. Quigley stated that there are no new box gutters. There is a box gutter that exists on 21 The Green and there are some components of that looking gutter that are being replaced. Mr. Scrafford further stated to explain to you (the applicant) why you are here, in The Green area those of us who sit on the Committee have a feeling that we needed to protect the Staff. Staff can make decisions and we do not have a problem with that; however, when they make decision on The Green that have not been reviewed by this Commission, then people get nervous about it. Mr. Salkin questioned with regards to the new front windows on the Plan that look very nice, is this based on historical photographs or assumptions? Responding to Mr. Salkin, Mr. Rychlicki stated that they could not find any historical photographs on this building. We have searched archives everywhere and cannot find anything on this building. For some reason, it is invisible and 4

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION JUNE 16, 2011 unusual being located right next to the State House; you would think that this building would be photographed. Mr. Scrafford questioned if they were able to determine what might have been left structurally internally? Responding to Mr. Scrafford, Mrs. Quigley stated that they have not taken the windows apart. It will not tell us the lighting configuration. Mr. Salkin questioned with regards to the two basement window grates; one of them is original cast iron and the other one is a more modern style. He wonders if the modern one could be replaced as part of this project. Responding to Mr. Salkin, Mrs. Quigley stated that she thinks that would be lovely. Mr. Rychlicki stated that when they started this project, they had a nice budget. Then the State hit the budget crisis and it was determined that they would do just the south façade. We have hope that there may be additional funding available and will run the suggestion of this basement grate by the State. He agrees that they should both mimic each other. Mrs. Melson-Williams questioned if they would like to talk about painting and what their strategy would be now that it is down to wood and what colors would be reappearing? Responding to Mrs. Melson-Williams, Mr. Rychlicki stated that we have proposed to the State a two color scheme that is very subtle with a Victorian approach. The State has not responded back on what direction they would like to go. Our feeling is that we do not want to see the building white as it is a Victorian structure and should reflect some of that history. We are hoping to pick up some of the coloring that is on the State House and contrast that with another color. Mr. Salkin questioned whether the two color schemes would be on all of the architecture of both buildings or would it be just for the windows and roof line? Responding to Mr. Salkin, Mrs. Quigley stated that it would be a different color for the sash and the window frame and then for the brackets stand out. Mr. Scrafford questioned if we did the handrails? Responding to Mr. Scrafford, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the handrails throughout the Capital Complex were a project a number of years ago and she is unsure if this building was a part of that project. Mr. Rychlicki stated that one of the things that they would hope to do on this building that is not a part of this phase; however, part of a future phase that is not yet funded, is the requirement for handicap accessibility for the building. Our approach would be that because it is going to be very difficult to do any handicap accessibility in the front of the building, they are looking to go down the sidewalk between the Biggs Museum and 21 The Green properties and come off with a level walkway that comes into the side of the building. It is a steep incline; however, if you start at The Green level we would not have that much further to go up to get a slight ramp into the building. If we get the handicap ramp in, we would also like to revise the steps to raise them up so that they are level with the floor and then put in a landing at that door. 5

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION JUNE 16, 2011 ON-GOING PROJECTS Update on Draft Zoning Text Amendment (MI-11-06) Updates to Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §3. Historic District Commission and Architectural Review Due to lack of quorum this item was deferred to the July 21, 2011 Historic District Commission meeting. Draft Zoning Text Amendment MI-11-06 Updates to Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §3. Historic District Commission and Architectural Review Due to lack of quorum this item was deferred to the July 21, 2011 Historic District Commission meeting. Mr. Scrafford moved for adjournment of the meeting at 3:35 PM. Meeting adjourned at 3:35 PM Sincerely, Diane Metsch Secretary 6

City of Dover Historic District Commission Summary of Applications 2011 Updated as of July 7, 2011 FILE# PLAN NAME LOCATION TYPE ACTION STATUS HI-11-01 Building at 326 West 326 West Loockerman Demolition of Commercial 2/17/2011 HDC Approval of ArchRevCert No Action Taken to date. Demolition Loockerman Street: Building Street Building with conditions for Demolition Permit Application must be filed. Demolition HI-11-02 Building at 43 East Division 43 East Division Street Consideration of Demolition 3/17/2011 HDC Determination of Demolition Dangerous Building procedures Street by Neglect by Neglect and outlined actions to be taken. underway. Permits for repair or HDC Recommends Building Inspector seek demolition must be filed. restoration or repair prior to beginning Dangerous Building proceedings. City Council declared it a Dangerous Building on 6/13/2011. HI-11-03 Sign Permit #11-414 48 The Green Placement of a third 4/21/2011 HDC Approval of ArchRevCert Sign Permit issued and sign installed. Referral projecting sign on the front with Conditions on the location of the third façade of building sign and its format HI-11-04 Acme Site Redevelopment 120 South Governors 4 story retail/apartment Scheduled for HDC review on 7/21/2011. Requires HDC review and Master Plan (Lands of Avenue building and four story recommendation on ArchRevCert. Downtown Dover apartment building; Requires Site Plan review by Planning Partnership) demolition of existing Commission - application filed S-11- commercial building 11 for August 2011 review.

City of Dover Historic District Commission Summary of Applications 2009-2010 Updated as of July 7, 2011 FILE# PLAN NAME LOCATION TYPE ACTION STATUS HI-09-01 Dover 'Anchor' Public 35 Loockerman Plaza: 2 story 46,000 S.F. library 6/17/2009 HDC Recommendation of Final Plan Approval for Bid Pack A S-10-06 Library Adjacent to 15 East building with site Approval with Conditions for ArchRevCert; (Access Road to Innovation Way) Loockerman Plaza improvements 3/15/2010 PC Approval of Site Plan and 8/27/2010; Bid Pack A under ArchRevCert with Conditions construction December 2010 and completed May 2011 (Building Permit #11-444). Final Site Plan approval 3/18/2011. Ground Breaking Ceremony held 4/5/2011. Building Permit #10-1904 issued 4/26/2011. Construction underway; as of 7/1/11 the building foundation is in place. HI-09-02 Fence Permit #09-1634 at 132 West Loockerman Fence Construction along 10/6/09 Permit #09-1634 referred to HDC Fence Project Complete. new Golden Fleece Tavern Street east property line at rear of by City Planner for Architectural Review building Certification; 10/15/2009 HDC Approval of ArchRevCert; Other building renovation activities covered under Permits #09-1420 for Exterior Finishes of East Elevation and #09-1388 Rear Patio. Permit #09-1634 issued 1/25/2010. HI-09-03 Mitten & Winters Offices 117-119 West Loockerman Front façade renovations: 11/19/2009 HDC Approval with Conditions Permit #09-2056 issued for Front Street removal of buff brick and of ArchRevCert; Window Replacement Façade Renovations. Project replacement of brick; pent ARC approval under Permit #09-1800 Complete. roof; soffit; doors; window issued 10/27/09; Other building renovation replacement activities covered under Permits #09-1592 issued 10/8/09 for Interior Renovation -CO issued and #09-1801 issued 10/27/09 for Rear Elevation. HI-09-04 Bayard Hotel 200-216 West Loockerman Consideration of Demolition 1/21/2010 HDC Determination of Documentation of Building is Street by Neglect Demolition by Neglect and outlined required underway by consultant hired by steps; 6/10/2010 HDC discussion on status, applicant; Redevelopment application request return at July meeting; 7/15/2010 HI-10-08 filed. Building Update on status Documentation package of plans, elevations, photos received March 2011. HI-10-01 Building at 301 South 301 South Governors Consideration of Demolition 6/10/2010 HDC Determination of Building Inspections for asbestos Governors Avenue Avenue (southeast corner by Neglect Demolition by Neglect and outlined action completed -- requires asbestos of North Street and S. to be taken within 90 days; 9/16/2010 removal. Building Demolished by Governors Ave.) Status Update indicates no action taken, order of City Council as a Dangerous HDC Recommends Building Inspector Building. Demo Permit #11-143 begin Dangerous Building proceedings with issued 2/07/2011. Demolition recommendation of repair. City Council complete. declared it a Dangerous Building on 10/25/2010.

City of Dover Historic District Commission Summary of Applications 2009-2010 Updated as of July 7, 2011 HI-10-02 Law Enforcement Officers South side of Legislative Memorial of brick plaza, Information Item presented to HDC on Project Complete. Memorial Mall and north of William inscribed wall and bronze 2/18/2010; Building Permit #10-245 issued. Penn Street statue HI-10-03 Woodburn: Solar Panels 151 Kings Highway Installation of Solar Panels 3/18/2010 HDC Approval with Conditions. No Action Taken to date. Permit on south facing gable roof of 3/17/2011 HDC granted extension of Application must be filed. Potential main house approval and heard presentation on revised revisions to placement are eligible for project concept and change in location to Staff review of ArchRevCert during roof of addition. Building Permit review. HI-10-04 Wesley United Methodist 209 South State Street Addition of elevator tower 4/15/2010 Inadequate Public Notice; Final Plan Approval 1/14/2011. Church: Elevator and and canopy on south side of 5/20/2010 HDC Review and Building Permit #11-113 issued Canopy Addition sanctuary to improve Recommendation of Approval of 4/29/2011. Construction underway. accessibility; construct ArchRevCert with Conditions vehicular exit only onto S. State Street HI-10-05 Duncan Plaza 600 Forest Street 4 story 31,710 S.F. office 6/10/2010 HDC Review, action to approve Project must submit Check Prints of S-10-17 (Intersection of building with coffeeshop setbacks, direct applicant to address Staff Site Plan for review and Final Plan Loockerman, Kirkwood, Recommendations and reappear for review Approval. No Action to date. and Slaughter Streets) of revisions; 7/15/2010 Revised Architecture presented to HDC, HDC Recommendation of Approval of ArchRevCert with Conditions; 9/20/2010 Planning Commission approval of Site Plan and ArchRevCert with conditions. HI-10-06 Delaware Public Archives: 121 Duke of York Street Placement of six 8/19/2010 HDC Approval of ArchRevCert First set of Banners installed January Banner Program changeable banners using with conditions; Sign Permit #10-1912 2011 (total of 5 banners) frame attachment system issued 1/7/2011. HI-10-07 Building Permit #10-1263 408 South State Street Replacement of Metal Roof 8/19/2010 HDC Approval of ArchRevCert Building Permit #10-1263 issued on Referral with Conditions on the type of roof: wood 11/15/2010. Wood shingle roof shingle recommended for front installed; Project complete. HI-10-08 Bayard Plaza 200-216 West Loockerman 5 story 54,998 S.F. mixed 10/21/2010 and 11/4/2010 HDC Review; Plan progressing through Check Print S-10-30 Street and 208 South use building with 5012 S.F. 11/4/2010 HDC Recommendation of process for agency approvals. Check Governors Avenue retail space and 48 Approval with Conditions for Print Comments issued on. Demo residential apartments; ArchRevCert;11/15/2010 Planning Permit #11-579 issued 5/12/2011 but requires demolition of Commission approval of ArchRevCert with no action as of 7/1/2011 beyond existing buildings on Conditions; also BOA Application V-10-15 asbestos abatement to demolish yet. property for parking setback and Active Rec Area Building Permit #11-656 under review. reduction HI-10-09 Biggs Museum: Façade 406 Federal Street Renovations to east 11/18/2010 HDC Approval of ArchRevCert Building Permit reviewed for Phase 1- Renovations elevation: moving glass with Conditions Interior Renovations only. curtain wall system and renovations to connector element HI-10-10 Building Permit #10-1672 New Jerusalem Baptist Siding Replacement on 10/21/2010 HDC Approval of ArchRevCert Project complete. Siding, new Referral Church at 25 Slaughter second floor levels of north with Conditions requiring vinyl siding to be gutters/downspouts installed, and Street and south elevations horizontal and other trimwork and gutter some painting completed. recommendations; Building Permit #10- 1672 issued 11/2/2010.

City of Dover Historic District Commission Summary of Applications 2009-2010 Updated as of July 7, 2011 HI-10-11 Parking Lot on West Water 101 West Water Street and Renovations to existing 12/16/2010 HDC Recommendation of Final Plan approval 5/24/2011. S-11-03 Street: Renovation and 439 South Governors parking lot and expansion of Approval of ArchRevCert with conditions; Building Permits #11-768 issued Addition Avenue lot to total of 152 parking Planning Commission approval of 6/21/2011 and #11-812 issued spaces ArchRevCert with conditions. 6/27/2011.

Summary of Permit Applications with Architectural Review Certification Updated as of 7-7-2011 DATE PERMIT # LOCATION TYPE ACTION ON ARCHITECTURAL NOTES REVIEW CERTIFICATE 1/7/2011 10-912 121 Duke of York St, Sign Permit - Banner program Approval per HI-10-06 Delaware Set of Banners are in place Delaware Public Archives Public Archives Changeable Banner program 2/7/2011 11-055 410-414 Federal Street, Building Permit - Installation of Staff Approval Solar Panels installed New Kent County Solar Panels, roof mounted Courthouse 2/7/2011 11-143 301 South Governors Demo Permit - demolition of Approval per HI-10-01 Demolition by Building Demolished Avenue building Neglect determination by HDC and declared Dangerous Building by City Council 3/16/2011 11-296 27 West Loockerman Street Sign Permit - Hunter House Staff Approval Signs Installed restaurant 3/15/2011 11-300 313 West Loockerman St Temporary Sign Permit Staff Approval 3/21/2011 11-324 140 West Loockerman St Roof Permit Not reviewed by Planning Staff. Later review of permit showed Issued by Admin Staff. no specific detailed info on roof project. Building does have a flat roof that is not visible from the public way. 4/26/2011 10-01904 35 Loockerman Plaza Building Permit - Library Approval per HI-09-01 Dover Public Construction underway. Library 4/29/2011 11-113 209 South State Street, Building Permit - Elevator & Approval per HI-10-04 Wesley Construction underway. Wesley UM Church Canopy Addition Church: Elevator & Canopy Addition 4/12/2011 11-413 424 South State Street Sign Permit - Computers Fixed Staff Approval Sign Installed Today 4/11/2011 11-437 140 West Loockerman St Admin Permit - new retail Staff Approval New tenant occupying building. tenant 4/12/2011 11-440 48 The Green Sign Permit Approval per HDC action on permit Sign Installed referred for consultation 4/14/2011 11-460 209 South State Street, Temporary Sign Permit Staff Approval Temporary Sign installed and Wesley UM Church now removed.

Summary of Permit Applications with Architectural Review Certification Updated as of 7-7-2011 DATE PERMIT # LOCATION TYPE ACTION ON ARCHITECTURAL NOTES REVIEW CERTIFICATE 4/21/2011 11-491 146 South State Street Sign Permit - The News Journal Staff Approval Signs to be installed. 5/24/2011 11-306 209 West Loockerman St Building Permit - Repairs to Staff Approval Permit Issued Block Foundation Wall 5/11/2011 11-444 35 Loockerman Plaza Building Permit - Access Drive Approval per HI-09-01 Dover Public Access Drive is complete. for Library Library 5/10/2011 11-558 410 Federal Street, Kent Sign Permit Staff Approval Sign Installed County Courthouse 5/16/2011 11-563 22 The Green Building Permit - Replace Staff Approval Permit Issued porch column due to accident damage 5/12/2011 11-567 501 South State Street, Temporary Sign Permit Staff Approval Temporary Sign installed and to Christ Church (VBS/Welcome Banners) be removed. 5/12/2011 11-579 200 West Loockerman St, Demolition Permit Approval per HI-09-04 and HI-10-08 Demolition pending. Bayard Hotel property and due to safety concerns 5/13/2011 11-612 136 West Loockerman St Sign Permit - Beehive Beauty Staff Approval Signs Installed Shop 5/24/2011 11-644 54 South State Street, Window Permit - replace two Staff Approval with conditions on the Permit issued Presbyterian Church sets of windows format of new windows 5/25/2011 11-659 30 Loockerman Plaza, Temporary Sign Permit (VBS Staff Approval Temporary Sign installed and Wesley Education Building Banner) removed. 6/21/2011 11-636 406 Federal Street, Biggs Building Permit - Interior Staff Approval, phase of project Permit Issued Museum Renovations associated with HI-10-09 6/6/2011 11-723 54 South State Street, Temporary Sign Permit (VBS Staff Approval Temporary Sign installed and to be removed. Presbyterian Church Banner) 6/21/2011 11-768 101 West Water Street Building Permit - Parking Lot Approval per HI-10-11 Construction underway. 6/27/2011 11-812 101 West Water Street Building Permit - Fence Approval per HI-10-11 Construction underway.

City of Dover ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW REPORT Update and Review of Exterior Finish Materials For Consideration by Dover Historic District Commission Meeting of July 21, 2011 Application: Dover Public Library, HI-09-01 and S-10-06 Location: 35 Loockerman Plaza Current Request for Review: As part of the ongoing project for the construction of the new Dover Public Library, some design revisions to the exterior finish materials are proposed as a result of design work, construction bidding, and value engineering initiatives. The Historic District Commission was alerted to the potential for changes in materials by the City Manager at their February 17, 2011 meeting; it was noted that a submission would be forthcoming once a revised proposal was determined. The project is now actively under construction (at the foundation phase). In the approval for Architectural Review Certification for the Library project, it was noted that any changes to identified exterior materials could require additional review by the Commission. A letter with attached documentation (dated 7/6/2011) showing revisions to several exterior finish materials is presented for Review and Recommendation on the Architectural Review Certification by the Historic District Commission. See attached documents. The changes to exterior finish materials focus on three areas specifically: Brick at library “bookends”: The ends of the building were originally proposed as an ashlar stone pattern. The new material is a dark brown utility size brick. Metal standing seam roof: The surface material for the main roof was originally shown as a slate roof in a variety of gray tones. The new material is a metal standing seam roof in a gray color. Light Monitors with slate shingles: The surface material was originally shown as slate shingles but consideration was being given to using other materials such as a metal panel system. The new material selected is slate shingles. The Historic District Commission is to review the selected exterior finish materials for the end walls, roof, and light monitors and then make a recommendation in regards to the Architectural Review Certification. This Recommendation will be forwarded to the Planning Commission for the final action on the revised Architectural Review Certification. The following information provides additional information on the project and request. Project History: On June 17, 2009, the Historic District Commission conducted a public hearing and took action to make a recommendation on the Architectural Review Certificate for the Dover “Anchor” P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

HI-09-01 Dover Public Library Architectural Review Report: Update & Review of Exterior Finish Materials July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 2 of 3 Public Library project. The application consisted of the construction of a two story library building of 46,000 S.F with the associated parking, walkways, landscaping, and stormwater management facilities. The project area consists of several parcels of land totaling 4.67 acres ± of land zoned I-O (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The property site is located on the north side of East Loockerman Street between South State Street and Legislative Avenue/Innovation Way in an area also known as The Plaza. The owner of record is the City of Dover. As presented in June 2009 (proposal 4/15/2009), the proposed library building was described as follows in the Architectural Review Report: The brick building consists of two main forms: a rectilinear “bar-like” form with a side gable roof and an oval form of predominately glass with a flat roof/green roof system. The ends of the building are „bookended‟ by a wide bay clad in ashlar stone with a large chimneylike form extending through the roof line. The predominant exterior finish materials for the library building are brick and ashlar stone veneer with the wall detailing provided through the use of brick patterning and sawn stone elements. Brick detailing and changes in the stone veneer mark the watertable on the building with a similar pattern noting the transition to the second floor. A heavy cornice line indicates the transition to the gable roof which is clad in slate shingles. The window openings use clear glass with aluminum framed curtain wall systems construction for the large openings and aluminum double hung windows and single windows for the smaller openings. At the roof level, four sets of paired light monitors bring northern light into the building. These light monitors are also to be clad with slate shingles. Staff notes that at the time of the original review the cladding and detailing of the roof light monitors was still in design with several material options under consideration. Architectural Review Certification Review and Action: Following a presentation on the project, the discussion at the Historic District Commission meeting of June 2009 also included questions pertaining to exterior finish materials of the roof, light monitors, use of ashlar stone, color choices, and the „bookend‟ forms. The Historic District Commission recommended approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the Dover “Anchor” Public Library project finding the overall building to be of a contemporary design yet compatible with the buildings of the Capitol Square context of the Historic District. The Commission accepted the design presented with the conservations/comments from the meeting on exterior finish materials. The Commission noted the compliance of the project with regards to the Design Standards & Guidelines and recognized the Staff comments and recommendations (Items #1-12) as conditions. (See the attached copies of the Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report and Meeting Minutes.) On March 15, 2010, after a public hearing and review the Planning Commission granted approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the Dover Public Library project following the recommendations of the Historic District Commission. (See attached excerpt of Meeting Minutes.) The Final Site Development Plan approval was granted on March 18, 2011 and the Building Permit #10-1904 was then issued for construction. 2

HI-09-01 Dover Public Library Architectural Review Report: Update & Review of Exterior Finish Materials July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 3 of 3 Review of DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES Location within the Dover Historic District Zone requires proposals for demolition, new construction, additions, and certain renovation or rehabilitation activities to existing buildings to receive an Architectural Review Certificate. As stated in the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone, an Architectural Review Certificate will be granted “if it is found that the architectural style, general design, height, bulk and setbacks, arrangement location and materials affecting the exterior appearance are generally in harmony with neighboring structures and complementary to the traditional architectural standards of the historic district.” In accordance with Article 10 §3.2, the Historic District Commission will provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission regarding the revised project‟s compliance with the architectural review standards. This revised proposal must be reviewed for conformity with the design criteria guidelines found in Chapter 4: New Construction, Additions, Demolition and Relocation. For the new library building, the applicable review considerations are the design criteria and development guidelines associated with “New Construction” (Chapter 4: pages 4-1 through 4-8). “Materials” is one of the guidelines for new construction to be considered in the review by the Historic District Commission (and Planning Commission) of the project for Architectural Review Certification. Other guidelines focus on style, scale, elevation of the first floor, floor-to-floor heights, bays, windows and doors, absolute size, massing, orientation, proportions, forms, siting and high density/large scale construction. STAFF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following are Staff comments and recommendations for this submission regarding the revised exterior finish materials for the project and Architectural Review Certification. 1. Staff recommends conditional approval of the revised Architectural Review Certificate pertaining to the selection of revised exterior finish materials for the “bookend” walls, roof, and light monitors of library building project finding the materials selected to be compatible with character of the historic district and appropriate materials as recommended in the Design Standards and Guidelines. 2. Any revisions or changes in the identified materials may be subject to further review by the Historic District Commission. 3. For building construction, the requirements of the building code or fire code must be complied with. Consult with the Chief Building Inspector and Office of the Fire Marshal for these requirements and any necessary addendums to the Building Permit as issued which may be necessary with this change in materials. 4. In the event, that major changes and revisions to the building design and materials or site plan occur in the finalization of the site plan contact the Department of Planning and Inspections. These changes may require resubmittal for review by the Historic District Commission. 3

City of Dover ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW STAFF REPORT Before Dover Historic District Commission June 17, 2009 Application: Dover “Anchor” Public Library Location: North side of East Loockerman Street on The Plaza Tax Parcels: ED-05-077.05-04-51.01-000 ED-05-077.05-04-53.00-000 ED-05-077.05-04-54.00-000 ED-05-077.05-04-55.00-000 ED-05-077.05-04-56.00-000 Owner: City of Dover Present Zoning: I-O - Institutional and Office Zone H- Historic District Zone SWPOZ – Source Water Protection Overlay Zone* (*Exempt from Tier 3 provisions due to Downtown Redevelopment Target Area location. Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §29.79) Present Use: City Hall and municipal parking lot Proposed Use: Public Library, City Hall, and municipal parking lot File Number: HI-09-01 Project Description: The Historic District Commission will act on a recommendation to the City of Dover Planning Commission for an Architectural Review Certificate for the Dover “Anchor” Public Library project. This application consists of the construction of a two story library building of 46,000 S.F with the associated parking, walkways, landscaping, and stormwater management facilities. The project area consists of several parcels of land totaling 4.67 acres ± of land zoned I-O (Institutional and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The property site is located on the north side of East Loockerman Street between South State Street and Legislative Avenue/Innovation Way in an area also known as The Plaza. The owner of record is the City of Dover. The property address is 15 East Loockerman Street. Tax Parcels: ED-05-077.05-04- 51.01-000, ED-05-077.05-04-53.00-000, ED-05-077.05-04-54.00-000, ED-05-077.05-04-55.00- 000, and ED-05-077.05-04-56.00-000. P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

HI-09-01 Dover “Anchor” Public Library Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission June 17, 2009 Meeting Page 2 of 6 Property Information: The subject site consists of several parcels of land predominately currently utilized as the municipal parking lot between the City Hall and the U.S. Post Office. As part of the improvements to site access and circulation for the project, several adjoining parking lots will also be reconfigured. The adjoining property to the north known historically as the Richardson & Robbins Building (occupied by DNREC) is the southeastern boundary of the National Register of Historic Places listed Victorian Dover Historic District (K-396). The properties along the East Loockerman Street segment (The Plaza) including the existing City Hall, parking lot, and U.S. Post Office are not within the Victorian Dover Historic District of the National Register. The entire project site is located with the local Historic District Zone (H) and subject to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §21 and referenced sections. PROJECT PROPOSAL (Drawings dated 4/15/2009): This proposal involves the construction of a two (2) story public library building of 46,000 S.F. on the site of an existing parking lot. The brick building consists of two main forms: a rectilinear “bar-like” form with a side gable roof and an oval form of predominately glass with a flat roof/green roof system. The ends of the building are ‘bookended’ by a wide bay clad in ashlar stone with a large chimneylike form extending through the roof line. The space between the library building and East Loockerman Street includes a Reading Garden with lawn area, retaining wall, tree plantings and an access ramp. The main entrance to the new library building is on the south side of the building facing East Loockerman Street. This same entrance lobby is also accessible on the north side of the building from the large parking lot. The entrances are highlighted with the use of a flat aluminum awning and precast stone covered columns supporting a sawn stone lintel. Also on the south elevation, the two tiered oval form portion of the building consists mainly of glass broken by a series of brick piers. The predominant exterior finish materials for the library building are brick and ashlar stone veneer with the wall detailing provided through the use of brick patterning and sawn stone elements. Brick detailing and changes in the stone veneer mark the watertable on the building with a similar pattern noting the transition to the second floor. A heavy cornice line indicates the transition to the gable roof which is clad in slate shingles. The window openings use clear glass with aluminum framed curtain wall systems construction for the large openings and aluminum double hung windows and single windows for the smaller openings. At the roof level, four sets of paired light monitors bring northern light into the building. These light monitors are also to be clad with slate shingles. The height is almost 52 feet from the finished first floor to the ridge peak of the roof with the bookend elements and light monitors reaching an overall height of just over 58 feet. Per the Zoning Ordinance the height would be calculated as 41 feet 9¼ inches (average between the eave and roof ridge). A series of elevation drawings place this building in comparison with 2

HI-09-01 Dover “Anchor” Public Library Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission June 17, 2009 Meeting Page 3 of 6 existing buildings in the immediate area i.e. the City Hall Building and Post Office Building. Most notable is that the cornice line of the new library building is held relatively as the same height as its neighboring buildings. The location of mechanical equipment for the library appears to be within the building with some below grade exterior equipment. The project also includes site improvements ranging from parking lot reconfiguration to landscaping. The parking lot improvements include landscaped islands planted with trees or shrubs. The Reading Garden on the south side of the building introduces a patterning of surface materials and landscape plantings (trees and shrubs) with opportunities for outdoor seating. Several existing tress will be retained between City Hall and the new library building. New street trees are also proposed along East Loockerman Street. See attached elevation drawings, site plan drawings, and project overview booklet for detailed information on building dimensions, locations, and material choices. Review of DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES The subject project site is located in the Dover Historic District Zone within Capitol Square historic context. The Capitol Square historic context is described on pages 2-8 through 2-9. Location within the Dover Historic District Zone requires proposals for demolition, new construction, additions, and certain renovation or rehabilitation activities to existing buildings to receive an Architectural Review Certificate. As stated in the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone, an Architectural Review Certificate will be granted “if it is found that the architectural style, general design, height, bulk and setbacks, arrangement location and materials affecting the exterior appearance are generally in harmony with neighboring structures and complementary to the traditional architectural standards of the historic district.” In accordance with Article 10 §3.2, the Historic District Commission will provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission regarding the project’s compliance with the architectural review standards. This proposal must be reviewed for conformity with the design criteria guidelines found in Chapter 4: New Construction, Additions, Demolition and Relocation. For the new library building, the applicable review considerations are those associated with “New Construction.” Information on the proposed project and the review considerations is given below. New Construction The Design Standards and Guidelines for New Construction (Chapter 4: pages 4-1 through 4-8) provide the design criteria and development guidelines. The guidelines specify the following individual considerations for new construction to be considered in the review by the Historic District Commission (and Planning Commission) of the project for Architectural Review Certification: • Style • Scale (building to reflect dominant cornice and roof height of adjacent buildings) 3

HI-09-01 Dover “Anchor” Public Library Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission June 17, 2009 Meeting Page 4 of 6 • Elevation of the First Floor • Floor-to-Floor heights • Bays, windows and doors (size, relationship, spacing of) • Absolute Size (compare overall size of new building) • Massing (relationship of solid-to-void) • Orientation (location of primary façade) • Proportions (comparison of height to width of building and elements) • Materials • Forms (shape of building and roof to be complementary) • Siting (location of building on lot and in relation to street) • High density/ large-scale construction The proposed project must also be reviewed for compliance with the standards established by the Zoning Ordinance. The standards include items such as setbacks from property lines, lot coverage, height, etc. This Proposal for the new library building appears to conform to the bulk requirements of the I-O Zoning District including setbacks, building height, floor area ratio, and lot coverage. The City of Dover Zoning Ordinance authorizes the Historic District Commission to waive certain bulk standards when issuing its recommendation to the Planning Commission for an Architectural Review Certificate if necessary. STAFF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following are Staff comments and recommendations for this application regarding project activities and Architectural Review Certification. 1. Staff recommends conditional approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the construction of the library building project finding the overall building to be of a contemporary design yet compatible with the buildings of the Capitol Square context of the Historic District. 2. These conditions are recommended by Staff to improve the project’s compliance with the recommended guidelines of the Design Standards and Guidelines. The following are recommended conditions: a. Any revisions or changes in the identified materials may be subject to further review by the Historic District Commission. b. The selected brick choices should be compatible to the brick of other existing buildings in the area. c. Consider options for the cladding and detailing of the roof light monitors. d. Signage identifying the library should be integrated into the building and site design. Consideration of any free standing signage may require additional review. e. Light fixtures/poles should continue style of the lighting used in the Capitol Square area or Downtown Loockerman Street areas. A taller two-light style fixture may be more appropriate within the parking lot areas. f. Identify the landscaping for the improved parking lot reconfiguration and its entrance from King’s Highway. 4

HI-09-01 Dover “Anchor” Public Library Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission June 17, 2009 Meeting Page 5 of 6 3. The following items should be clarified regarding the building design. a. Clarify the type of system proposed for gutters and down sprouts. b. Identify the material of the cornice line on the south and north elevations. c. Clarify if there is a color patterning to the slate shingles (as depicted in the color renderings). 4. Some of the site improvements/amenities were not specifically described with the application information. Please provide information for consideration. a. Identify the materials for the Reading Garden area including surface pavement, wall detailing, benches or other seating, bicycle parking rack, etc. b. Identify the design and materials of the retaining wall along the drive aisle entrance from Innovation Way. Due to the size and scale of the wall, the materials selected must be appropriate for use within the Historic District. This location may be an opportunity for a public art project. c. Identify areas where the sidewalks or portions of the sidewalks will be constructed of brick. The use of brick paving materials for sidewalk construction is a key feature found throughout the Historic District area. It appears that several existing brick sidewalk areas will be removed or reconfigured as part of this project. 5. The proposed future development of a building addition and redevelopment of the corner property at East Loockerman Street and Innovation Way (current U.S. Post Office site) is not part of this project review or approval (concept shown on plan sheet A-100A). It will be the subject of a future application review. 6. For building construction, the requirements of the building code or fire code must be complied with. Consult with the Chief Building Inspector and Office of the Fire Marshal for these requirements. The resolution of these items can impact the site design in some instances. 7. The proposed landscaping including tree plantings should be completed with species appropriate to the site conditions including plantings within the bio-retention areas. Consultation with the City’s arborist regarding the tree species selected is recommended especially regarding the street trees. 8. The applicant should be aware of the potential for historic archaeological resources which may include previous building locations, wells, privies, etc. on these properties. The State Division of Historical & Cultural Affairs can provide technical assistance when dealing with archaeological resources including previous studies at the subject location. 9. In the event, that major changes and revisions to the building design and materials or site plan occur in the finalization of the site plan contact the Department of Planning and Inspections. These changes may require resubmittal for review by the Historic District Commission. 10. This site development plan for this project is also subject to the application and review 5

HI-09-01 Dover “Anchor” Public Library Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission June 17, 2009 Meeting Page 6 of 6 process for Site Development Plan (Article 10 §2 of the Zoning Ordinance) before the Planning Commission. Note: Additional technical items for compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and other regulations may be identified during the Site Plan Process. Review comments pertaining specifically to the Site Plan set will be issued at that time. 11. The applicant shall be aware that Building Permits are required to proceed with any construction activities on the property. The permit application must comply with the approvals granted through the Architectural Review Certification process. 12. The applicant shall be aware that a Sign Permit is required to proceed with the placement of signage on the property. Historic District Commission Action Required The Historic District Commission shall consider the proposal and provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission in regards to the Architectural Review Certification for the project site development plan. The recommendation should reflect consideration of the Design Standards and Guidelines. 6

City of Dover ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW REPORT Review of Alternative Materials Request For Consideration by Dover Historic District Commission Meeting of July 21, 2011 Application: State Street Commons, HI-05-03 and S-06-19 Location: Southwest corner of South State Street and Water Street, Dover 502 South State Street, 508-518 South State Street, and Water Street Current Request for Review: A request from the Onix Group has been received regarding the State Street Commons project. Their request is for the use of an alternative material for the building entrance railings at the porches and porticos on the new building. They are seeking approval to allow the use of a white vinyl (PVC) handrail system for the entrance railings as installed by the project developer. A letter dated July 7, 2011 is presented for Review and Recommendation on the Architectural Review Certification by the Historic District Commission. See attached documents. The Historic District Commission is to review the request for use of alternative materials and then make a recommendation in regards to the Architectural Review Certification. This Recommendation will be forwarded to the Planning Commission for the final action on the revised Architectural Review Certification. The following information provides additional information on the project and request. Project History: In March 2006, the Historic District Commission conducted a public hearing and took action in order to make a recommendation on the Architectural Review Certificate for the State Street Commons project. Construction later commenced on two connected 2 ½ story office buildings of 12,000 S.F. each for a total of 24,000 S.F with a two level parking garage. The existing brick office building at 502 South State Street consisting of 3,222 S.F. also remains. The property consists 35,061 square feet ± of land zoned RG-O (General Residence and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The property is located at the southwest corner of South State Street and Water Street. The owner of record is YOZIMA, LLC; request received from Onix-Z, LLC. As presented in March 2006 (drawings dated 10/14/05 and 1/10/06), the proposed new buildings were shown with elevated first floor entries which necessitated a railing system for the steps and associated porch or portico areas. The specific material is not listed on the elevation drawings presented to the Historic District Commission. Metal railings are specifically shown on the drawings and discussed for the parking garage wall. There were no exterior changes proposed for the existing brick building at 502 South State Street; it has metal railings at its front entrance. No changes are proposed with this request for the P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

HI-05-03 State Street Commons Architectural Review Report: Update & Request for Use of Alternative Materials July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 2 of 4 building at 502 South State Street. Architectural Review Certification Review and Action: Following a presentation on the project, the discussion at the Historic District Commission meeting of March 16, 2006 also included questions pertaining parking garage access, siding material choices, finish floor height of the first floor, and the requested waivers for the project. The Historic District Commission recommended approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the State Street Commons project including the setback and floor area ratio waivers and recognized a series of comments and recommendations (Items #1-12) as conditions. (See the attached copies of the Architectural Review Certification Recommendation Report and Meeting Minutes.) On June 20, 2006, after a public hearing and review the Planning Commission granted approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the State Street Commons project following the recommendations of the Historic District Commission. (See attached excerpt of Meeting Minutes.) The Final Site Development Plan approval was granted on June 17, 2008 and the Building Permit #08-1193 was then issued for construction of the building shell (no interior fit- out). The construction plans submitted and approved as part of the Building Permit identifies the railing system for the building entrances as a metal stair railing with the larger columns (one entry with round columns and second entry in square columns) in a molded woodwork product (Fibertech). The railing at the top of the mansard roof on the end units (trim system #1) was identified to be constructed of a molded woodwork product and the railing on the brick wall of the garage was identified as a metal railing. To date the building has not completed construction and a Certificate of Occupancy has not been issued. The applicant has also has other site compliance issues to address. Review of DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES Location within the Dover Historic District Zone requires proposals for demolition, new construction, additions, and certain renovation or rehabilitation activities to existing buildings to receive an Architectural Review Certificate. As stated in the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone, an Architectural Review Certificate will be granted “if it is found that the architectural style, general design, height, bulk and setbacks, arrangement location and materials affecting the exterior appearance are generally in harmony with neighboring structures and complementary to the traditional architectural standards of the historic district.” In accordance with Article 10 §3.2, the Historic District Commission will provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission regarding the alternative materials request and its compliance with the architectural review standards. This request for alternative materials must be reviewed for conformity with the design criteria guidelines found in Chapter 4: New Construction, Additions, Demolition and Relocation. For the new buildings, the applicable review considerations are the design criteria and development guidelines associated with “New Construction” (Chapter 4: pages 4-1 through 4-8). “Materials” is one of the guidelines for new construction to be considered in the review by the Historic District Commission (and Planning Commission) of the project for Architectural Review 2

HI-05-03 State Street Commons Architectural Review Report: Update & Request for Use of Alternative Materials July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 3 of 4 Certification. Other guidelines focus on style, scale, elevation of the first floor, floor-to-floor heights, bays, windows and doors, absolute size, massing, orientation, proportions, forms, siting, and high density/large scale construction. Porches and Steps are discussed on pages 3-16 through 3-20.Staff notes that the Design Standards and Guidelines do not specifically discuss the use of vinyl (PVC) materials and other similar composite materials to replicate features traditionally made of wood. STAFF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following are Staff comments and recommendations for this submission requesting the use of alternative materials for the project and Architectural Review Certification. 1. Staff recommends conditional approval of the revised Architectural Review Certificate pertaining to the use of alternative materials (white PVC Railing System). While the vinyl materials can replicate the form of railings (handrail and balustrade elements) for porches and porticos, the material may not be appropriate for use in all areas of the Historic District and therefore must be evaluated for each project and property location. This project is located on the edge of the Historic District and is proposed for use on a new, modern building construction project. The following conditions on the use of vinyl materials for this project are suggested: a. The existing white PVC railing system may remain for those units where the railing system is integrated with and connected to a column system supporting a porch roof. b. The „free-standing‟ railing system on the two end units of the buildings (on each frontage) is recommended to be changed to the black metal railing system. c. Require the establishment of landscape plantings minimize the visual impact of the vinyl railing system. Careful selection of the plantings will be necessary due to space limitations and to avoid conflicts with utilities and stormwater facilities. On-going care and maintenance trimming will be necessary of any plantings. d. The design detail information on the railing system and the landscape plantings proposal must be submitted to the Planning Office for review. 2. Any revisions or changes in the identified materials may be subject to further review by the Historic District Commission. 3. In utilizing the alternative materials, the requirements of applicable the building code or fire code must be complied with. Consult with the Chief Building Inspector and Office of the Fire Marshal for these requirements and any requirements for the submission and review and approval process for addendums to the Building Permit which may be necessary with this change in materials. Proper installation of the materials is also important. 4. In the event, that major changes and revisions to the building design and materials or site plan are proposed contact the Department of Planning and Inspections. These changes may require resubmittal for review by the Historic District Commission. 3

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW REPORT Recommendation Report of the Dover Historic District Commission From Meeting of March 16, 2006 Location: 502, 508, 512 and 516-518 South State Street Tax Parcels: ED-05-077.09-03-70.00-000 ED-05-077.09-03-71.00-000 ED-05-077.09-03-72.00-000 ED-05-077.09-03-73.00-000 Owner: YOZIMA, LLC Present Zoning: RGO- General Residence and Office Zone H- Historic District Overlay Zone Present Use: 502 – Office Building (508, 512, and 516-518 Residential dwellings demolished in July 2005) Proposed Use: 502 – Office Building Two Office Buildings (new construction) and associated two-level parking garage File Number: HI-05-03 Project Description: The Historic District Commission will act on a recommendation to the City of Dover Planning Commission for Architectural Review Certificate for the project known as State Street Commons. This application consists of the construction of two 2 ½ story office buildings of 12,000 S.F. each for a total of 24,000 S.F. The application also includes a two level parking garage providing 73 parking spaces on the site. The existing brick office building at 502 South State Street consisting of 3,222 S.F. will remain. The property consists of four parcels of land totaling 35,061 square feet ± of land zoned RG-O (General Residence and Office Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The property is located at the southwest corner of South State Street and Water Street. The owner of record is YOZIMA, LLC. The property addresses are 502 South State Street, 508 South State Street, 512 South State Street, and 516-518 South State Street. RECOMMENDATION OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION: This petition was considered at the March 16, 2006 meeting of the Historic District Commission. The following members were present: Chairman Terry Jackson, Mr. Dick Scrafford, Mr. Robertson, and Mr. Jim McNair. The application was represented by Doug Liberman of Larson Engineering and Gregg Moore of the Becker Morgan Group. Public testimony was received from Joe McDaniel on behalf of the Friends of Old Dover and Ann Baker Horsey.

HI-05-03 State Street Commons Historic District Commission Recommendation Report March 16, 2006 Meeting Action Taken by Historic District Commission: The motion to recommend approval passed 4-0 of those members present. The Historic District Commission recommends approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the State Street Commons project with a series of conditions including the changes found in the recommendations and comments (listed below) and the approval of the requested waivers. The following are adopted comments and recommendations for this application regarding project activities and Architectural Review Certification. 1. These conditions are the recommended conditions to improve the project’s compliance with the recommended guidelines of the Design Standards and Guidelines. a. Clarify the building footprint versus the building front elevations and entrance door/stairs. The Site Plan indicates an indention in the building façade which does not appear to follow the elevation drawings and there differences in the location of the entry doors to each unit. b. Clarify the roof pitch on each unit of the proposed building. c. Windows are recommended to be double hung windows with true divided light panes or stimulated divided light system (not snap-in grills). Clarify the window specifications. d. The porch-like area (shed roof, columns, and railing) on the east end of the Water Street Building (unit 6) should be extended south to fully cover the access stairs down to the parking garage lower level. e. Add details such as engaged columns/pilasters to divide the exposed south wall of the parking garage to avoid the large expanse of blank wall. These column elements could be extended higher to become part of the metal railing system. f. The material choice and details of the metal railing system must be provided. It is recommended to divide it intermittently with a larger support posts inserted at sections of the metal railing and to use a black colored/painted metal railing. g. The applicant is encouraged to contact the adjacent property owner to the south to discuss removal of the existing chainlink fence with white slats and the opportunity to provide additional landscaping in this area. It is anticipated that site construction activities for the parking garage and wall along this location will affect the fence; therefore, necessitating a construction easement. h. The west wall of the parking garage should also include greater detail. Additional detailing or ornamentation is recommended in the form of a column, engaged pilaster, etc. to define and provide added protection at the entrance corners. The header across to top of the lower level garage entrance should be detailed. i. Size and material details must be provided for the Dumpster enclosure on the upper level of the parking garage. Access to this location may be a concern. 2

HI-05-03 State Street Commons Historic District Commission Recommendation Report March 16, 2006 Meeting 2. The Project Engineer should re-calculate the total lot coverage for this project to confirm the 84.7%. The plan appears to have greater impervious lot coverage with the buildings, sidewalks, and parking garage areas. If the lot coverage is greater than 85% a waiver is required. 3. For building construction, the separation distances and other requirements of the building code or fire code must be complied with. Consult with the Chief Building Inspector for these requirements. The resolution of these items may impact the site design including such items as building setbacks from property line, building dimensions and height, building openings, and fire protection needs, etc. 4. The proposed landscaping including tree plantings should be completed with species appropriate to the site conditions especially the planter locations on the upper level of the parking garage and consideration of the impact to the lower level parking garage. 5. The location of mechanical equipment should be identified. The mechanical equipment should be enclosed with appropriate screening devices such as appropriately scaled walls, landscaping, roof mounting, or other similar treatments to screen it from the public right-of-way. 6. The applicant should be aware of the potential for historic archaeological resources which may include previous building locations, wells, privies, etc. on these properties. The State Division of Historical & Cultural Affairs can provide technical assistance when dealing with archaeological resources. 7. Documentation of the cross access easement with the adjacent property owner must be provided for the proposed sharing of the driveway access from Water Street to access to this site and its parking garage. 8. The request for a reduction in the required number of parking spaces must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. The Site Plan must comply with the Code requirements unless a waiver is specifically granted. 9. In the event, that major changes and revisions to the site plan occur in the finalization of the site plan contact the Department of Planning and Inspections. These changes may require resubmittal for review by the Historic District Commission. 10. This site development plan for this project is also subject to the application and review process for Site Development Plan (Article 10 §2 of the Zoning Ordinance) before the Planning Commission. Note: Additional technical items for compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and other regulations may be identified during the Site Plan Process. 3

HI-05-03 State Street Commons Historic District Commission Recommendation Report March 16, 2006 Meeting 11. The applicant shall be aware that Building Permits are required to proceed with any construction activities on the property. The permit application must comply with the approvals granted through the Architectural Review Certification process. 12. The applicant shall be aware that a Sign Permit is required to proceed with the placement of signage on the property. The following waivers were approved by recommendation of the Historic District Commission for the project State Street Commons: Request Bulk Standard Ordinance Approved Building requirements 1 Front Yard 30 feet 5 feet S. State St. Building Setback Water St. Building 2 Side Yard/ 15ft < 3 feet Parking Garage Rear Yard 20ft setback 3 Floor Area Ratio 0.50 0.091 Existing building Entire site 0.684 Proposed buildings 0.78 Site total The following information was considered by the Historic District Commission in making their recommendation including the initial recommendations made by Planning Staff in regards to the application. Discussion at the Historic District Commission meeting also included questions pertaining to exterior finish materials, garage access, and first floor elevation. Property Information: A series of four buildings was located on the west side of South State Street south of the intersection of South State Street and Water Street. The first building (502 South State Street) at the corner currently serves as an office building. The building at 502 South State Street is listed in the National Register of Historic Places as a contributing resource of the Dover Green Historic District (K-394.95 and K-219). The building description from the nomination is provided below. 502 State Street-James Bellach House/Christ Church Rectory - 1771; brick-Flemish bond, 2 1/2 story, 5 bay. This Federal dwelling has a gable roof. The cornice has scroll-like modillions. There is a double interior gable end chimney on the south side. The structure has a wide belt course between the first and second floors. The doorway is very elaborate. The door and rising sun fanlight, with curved tracery, are recessed. The frontispiece has fluted columns with elongated capitals and a dental gable with cornice return. Above the fanlight is a rounded arch with a keystone. The other three residential dwellings buildings fronting on State Street were demolished in July 2005 without the proper permits. A report entitled “Historic Documentation of 508, 512, 516-518 South State Street” dated August12, 2005 is available for review at the Department of Planning & Inspections. It provides information on the ownership, history, floor plans, photographs, etc. of these three buildings. These buildings 508, 512, and 516-518 South State Street were also contributing resources of the National Register Historic District (K-394.96, K-394.97, and K- 394.98). 4

HI-05-03 State Street Commons Historic District Commission Recommendation Report March 16, 2006 Meeting This entire project site is located with the local Historic District Zone (H). This 35,061 S.F. site (total of four parcels) was the subject of a previous application known as HI-02-06 Water Street Office Plaza II and also Site Plan S-03-09 Water Street Office Plaza II. PROJECT PROPOSAL (Drawings dated 10/14/05 and 1/10/06): This proposal involves the construction of two 2 ½ story office buildings of 12,000 S.F. each for a total of 24,000 S.F. One building fronts on South State Street and consists of five units. The units are attached in the appearance of townhouses. Each unit has a first floor entry elevated about four feet above the sidewalk. The exterior finishes consist of brick to a watertable height with either brick, stucco, or horizontal wood siding above and topped with a standing seam metal roof. Details include window trimwork, shutters, door trimwork surrounds, covered entries by pitched roof supported by columns, dormers, etc. The second building fronts on Water Street and also consists of five units following the same exterior material choices and detailing. This application also includes a two level parking garage providing seventy-three (73) parking spaces on the site. The garage is screened from State Street and Water Street by the buildings. Along the west property line, this project is proposed to share a driveway with the adjacent property for access. The parking garage has a lower level and an upper level each with its own entry point. The upper level of the parking garage is elevated about four feet above the level of the South State Street. This difference in height results in a brick wall along the south property line. This wall is clad in brick with no detail elements or surface changes. It is topped with a metal railing. The existing brick office building at 502 South State Street consisting of 3,222 S.F. will remain. A sidewalk connection from each street is provided between this existing building and the proposed buildings. See attached elevation and section drawings and site plan drawings for detailed information on building dimensions, locations, and material choices. Review of DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES The subject property is located in the Dover Historic District Zone within The Green historic context. The historic context is described on pages 2-3 through 2-5. Location within the Dover Historic District Zone requires proposals for demolition, new construction, additions, and certain renovation or rehabilitation activities to existing buildings to receive an Architectural Review Certificate. As stated in the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone, an Architectural Review Certificate will be granted “if it is found that the architectural style, general design, height, bulk and setbacks, arrangement location and materials affecting the exterior appearance are generally in harmony with neighboring structures and complementary to the traditional architectural standards of the historic district.” In accordance with Article 10 §3.2, 5

HI-05-03 State Street Commons Historic District Commission Recommendation Report March 16, 2006 Meeting the Historic District Commission will provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission regarding the project’s compliance with the architectural review standards. This proposal must be reviewed for conformity with the design criteria guidelines found in Chapter 4: New Construction, Additions, Demolition and Relocation. Information on the proposed project and the review considerations is given below. New Construction The Design Standards and Guidelines for New Construction (Chapter 4: pages 4-1 thru 4-8) provide the design criteria and development guidelines. The guidelines specify the following individual considerations for new construction to be considered in the review by the Historic District Commission (and Planning Commission) of the project for Architectural Review Certification: Style Scale (building to reflect dominant cornice and roof height of adjacent buildings) Elevation of the First Floor Floor-to-Floor heights Bays, windows and doors (size, relationship, spacing of) Absolute Size (compare overall size of new building) Massing (relationship of solid-to-void) Orientation (location of primary façade) Proportions (comparison of height to width of building and elements) Materials Forms (shape of building and roof to be complementary) Siting (location of building on lot and in relation to street) High density/ large-scale construction The proposed project must also be reviewed for compliance with the standards established by the Zoning Ordinance. The standards include items such as setbacks from property lines, lot coverage, height, etc. This Proposal for the new office buildings does not conform to several of the bulk requirements of the RG-O Zoning District and requires waivers from the Historic District Commission. The City of Dover Zoning Ordinance authorizes the Historic District Commission to waive certain bulk standards when issuing its recommendation to the Planning Commission for an Architectural Review Certificate. The waivers* requested by the project: Request Bulk Standard Ordinance Applicant proposal Building requirements 1 Front Yard 30 feet 5 feet S. State St. Building Setback Water St. Building 2 Side Yard/ 15ft < 3 feet Parking Garage Rear Yard setback 20ft 3 Floor Area Ratio 0.50 0.091 Existing building Entire site 0.684 Proposed buildings 0.78 Site total 6

HI-05-03 State Street Commons Historic District Commission Recommendation Report March 16, 2006 Meeting *Note: The overall lot coverage of the site within the RGO Zoning district is limited to 85%. This Site Plan indicates a lot coverage of 84.7%. STAFF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following are Staff comments and recommendations for this application regarding project activities and Architectural Review Certification. 1. Staff recommends conditional approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the construction of the project. These conditions are recommended by Staff to improve the project’s compliance with the recommended guidelines of the Design Standards and Guidelines. The following are recommended conditions: a. Clarify the building footprint versus the building front elevations and entrance door/stairs. The Site Plan indicates an indention in the building façade which does not appear to follow the elevation drawings and there differences in the location of the entry doors to each unit. b. Clarify the roof pitch on each unit of the proposed building. c. Windows are recommended to be double hung windows with true divided light panes or stimulated divided light system (not snap-in grills). Clarify the window specifications. d. The porch-like area (shed roof, columns, and railing) on the east end of the Water Street Building (unit 6) should be extended south to fully cover the access stairs down to the parking garage lower level. e. Add details such as engaged columns/pilasters to divide the exposed south wall of the parking garage to avoid the large expanse of blank wall. These column elements could be extended higher to become part of the metal railing system. f. The material choice and details of the metal railing system must be provided. It is recommended to divide it intermittently with a larger support posts inserted at sections of the metal railing and to use a black colored/painted metal railing. g. The applicant is encouraged to contact the adjacent property owner to the south to discuss removal of the existing chainlink fence with white slats and the opportunity to provide additional landscaping in this area. It is anticipated that site construction activities for the parking garage and wall along this location will affect the fence; therefore, necessitating a construction easement. h. The west wall of the parking garage should also include greater detail. Additional detailing or ornamentation is recommended in the form of a column, engaged pilaster, etc. to define and provide added protection at the entrance corners. The header across to top of the lower level garage entrance should be detailed. i. Size and material details must be provided for the Dumpster enclosure on the upper level of the parking garage. Access to this location may be a concern. 2. Staff requests the Project Engineer to re-calculate the total lot coverage for this project to confirm the 84.7%. The plan appears to have greater impervious lot coverage with the buildings, sidewalks, and parking garage areas. If the lot coverage is greater than 85% a waiver is required. 7

HI-05-03 State Street Commons Historic District Commission Recommendation Report March 16, 2006 Meeting 3. For building construction, the separation distances and other requirements of the building code or fire code must be complied with. Consult with the Chief Building Inspector for these requirements. The resolution of these items may impact the site design including such items as building setbacks from property line, building dimensions and height, building openings, and fire protection needs, etc. 4. The proposed landscaping including tree plantings should be completed with species appropriate to the site conditions especially the planter locations on the upper level of the parking garage and consideration of the impact to the lower level parking garage. 5. The location of mechanical equipment should be identified. The mechanical equipment should be enclosed with appropriate screening devices such as appropriately scaled walls, landscaping, roof mounting, or other similar treatments to screen it from the public right- of-way. 6. The applicant should be aware of the potential for historic archaeological resources which may include previous building locations, wells, privies, etc. on these properties. The State Division of Historical & Cultural Affairs can provide technical assistance when dealing with archaeological resources. 7. Documentation of the cross access easement with the adjacent property owner must be provided for the proposed sharing of the driveway access from Water Street to access to this site and its parking garage. 8. The request for a reduction in the required number of parking spaces must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. The Site Plan must comply with the Code requirements unless a waiver is specifically granted. 9. In the event, that major changes and revisions to the site plan occur in the finalization of the site plan contact the Department of Planning and Inspections. These changes may require resubmittal for review by the Historic District Commission. 10. This site development plan for this project is also subject to the application and review process for Site Development Plan (Article 10 §2 of the Zoning Ordinance) before the Planning Commission. Note: Additional technical items for compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and other regulations may be identified during the Site Plan Process. 11. The applicant shall be aware that Building Permits are required to proceed with any construction activities on the property. The permit application must comply with the approvals granted through the Architectural Review Certification process. 12. The applicant shall be aware that a Sign Permit is required to proceed with the placement of signage on the property. Historic District Commission Action on March 16, 2006 8

HI-05-03 State Street Commons Historic District Commission Recommendation Report March 16, 2006 Meeting The Historic District Commission considered the proposal and provided a recommendation to the Planning Commission in regards to the Architectural Review Certification for the office buildings, parking garage, and site improvements. The recommendation involved consideration of the Design Standards and Guidelines. The specific conditions of the recommendation are noted in the report under the heading “Recommendation of the Historic District Commission.” 9

City of Dover ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW STAFF REPORT Before Dover Historic District Commission July 21, 2011 Application: Acme Site Redevelopment Master Plan Location: West side of South Governors Avenue over to South New Street, north of West Loockerman Street Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.09-01-44.00-000 Owner: Downtown Dover Partnership (previously known as Downtown Dover Development Corporation) Present Zoning: C-2 - Central Commercial District Zone H - Historic District Zone Present Use: Commercial building with a retail tenant and a day care center tenant with a parking lot Proposed Use: Retail/Apartment Building #1: 11,874 SF commercial/retail space and 27 apartments Apartment Building #2: 24 apartments with ground level parking in building File Number: HI-11-04 Project Description: The Historic District Commission will act on a recommendation to the City of Dover Planning Commission for an Architectural Review Certificate for the Acme Site Redevelopment Master Plan project. This application consists of a phased project that is to include a retail/apartment building and second apartment building with the demolition of the existing mid-to-late twentieth century commercial building. The project also includes the associated parking, streetscape improvements, landscaping, and stormwater management facilities. The project area consists of one parcel of land totaling 1.7653 acres ± and zoned C-2 (Central Commercial Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The property site spans the block between South Governors Avenue and South New Street located north of, but not adjacent to, West Loockerman Street. The owner of record is the Downtown Dover Partnership. The property address is 120 South Governors Avenue. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.09-01-44.00-000. Property Information: The subject site consists a twentieth century commercial building currently divided into two tenant spaces: a retail tenant and a day care center facility. A portion of the existing parking is managed by the Downtown Dover Partnership as a permit parking lot. P. O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Community Excellence Through Quality Service

HI-11-04 Acme Site Redevelopment Master Plan Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 2 of 8 The property is located within the boundaries of the National Register of Historic Places listed Victorian Dover Historic District (K-396) but the existing commercial building is considered a non-contributing building. The description of the building from the district nomination describes it as a one story masonry food chain establishment circa 1970. Historically, this block of Downtown was part of an area known as the Comegy’s Lots laid out in the 1850s with development occurring 1859-1885. The 1868 Beers Map shows the subject site primarily vacant with one building owned by L. Geiser and a school building. By 1885, a series of residential dwelling fronting on both Governors Avenue and New Street are in existence. The subject site is just north of the original building location of the Robbins Hose Fire Company building. The 1887 Map of Dover published by W.B. Roe continues to show a public school in the southern portion of the site with dwellings to the north. Review of the Sanborn Fire Insurance Map Series from 1885 – 1944 with updates also documents the history of buildings on the subject site. The 1885 Map shows a two story school building and a Sunday School & Meeting House building with a series of two story residential dwellings with accessory buildings (garages, sheds). By 1897 the school building is replaced by a Methodist Protestant Church building with the residential dwellings remaining. These uses for the subject site continue through the early twentieth century. By mid-twentieth century, the church building is replaced by a one story cinderblock store building adjacent to Governors Avenue. In the late 1960s, the subject site is redeveloped with the existing masonry commercial building setback in the middle of the block; its construction appears to have eliminated approximately nine residential dwellings. The entire project site is located with the local Historic District Zone (H) and subject to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §21 and referenced sections. PROJECT PROPOSAL (Drawings dated 6/14/2011): This proposal involves the construction of two buildings each addressing one of the street frontages of the subject site. The project has the potential to be developed in phases. The existing multi-tenant commercial building will be demolished. The first building is the Retail/Apartment Building #1 fronting on South Governors Avenue. This is four story masonry building. The building overall has three main sections: first section giving the appearance of one building; section two as the main entry to the apartment building is setback and utilizes an alternative material pattern and taller roof line; and then the third section which mimics the commercial first floor of section one but has an alternative design of the upper floors which step back and provide a difference format to the balcony placements for the apartment units. The east/front façade of the commercial retail on the first floor consists of display windows in a glass storefront window system with the glass entry doors for each tenant space. A series of awnings are placed on the building to shade each space. The upper floors, where the apartments are to be located, have grouped sets of windows and balcony areas. The balconies on the top floor are shaded by awnings. On the north and south elevations of Building #1, the first floor storefront windows are continued for part of the side. There are single windows in the stair tower elements as well. These elevations are also divided by changes in the exterior finish and selected 2

HI-11-04 Acme Site Redevelopment Master Plan Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 3 of 8 detail elements. The west elevation of Building #1 faces the interior of the block and is designed in a similar fashion as the east/front façade. On the first floor smaller awnings shade rear entries to the commercial units and the upper floors continue the window and balcony systems. The predominant exterior finish materials for the building are brick, a stucco treatment, and Hardie-board (a fiber-cement product). Variation in the wall detailing is provided through the use of multiple brick colors, use of different materials for different sections of the building, and multiple colors of Hardie-board. Brick detailing and changes in the veneer mark the foundation/base on the building and the transitions between the floors with banding. A multi-part cornice line indicates the transition to the flat roof. The storefront window openings appear to use clear glass. At the apartment level, the windows are matched to transom windows above and are divided light windows set in groupings of three to five windows. The second building is the Apartment Building #2 fronting on South New Street. It is also considered a four story building (not three story as labeled on the plan drawings). The first floor or ground level is a parking garage of twenty-three spaces. Then there are three floors of apartment units. The first floor of Building #2 is clad in brick with decorative grillwork in the window-like openings which allow light and air into the parking level. On the west elevation (façade facing South New Street) the main entry is centered under a covered area with a gable front roof. Also on this façade are two sets of false garage doors in a double carriage style door design .The upper floors are clad in Hardie-board laid in a horizontal pattern with some banding details. The windows are paired in sets of two with matching transoms above. The balconies are accessed by sets of double doors and a located in the four bays of the building which step out towards South New Street. Overall, Building #2 is topped with a large turned gable roof with a single ridge running the length of the building. Four smaller gable roof topping the balcony bays punctuate the large roof at its eaveline. Standing seam metal roofing is utilized for these smaller roof structures. The north and south elevations on the sides of this building continue the exterior finish pattern of brick on the first floor with Hardie-board above but with single windows. The rear elevation facing the interior of the parcel uses the same exterior finish pattern; however, the window and balcony pattern is slightly different. For this elevation, the projecting bays include windows only and the balconies are located in the plane of the main building wall. Again a gable roofed entry is centered on the elevation and is flanked by the larger parking garage entry openings (two-way traffic). The project also includes site improvements ranging from parking lot reconfiguration to landscaping. The mid-block space between the two buildings is designed to serve as the parking lot for the buildings and includes several islands planted with trees. The parking area is accessible from both South Governors Avenue and South New Street. There are two areas of landscaping and hardscape which serve as recreation areas for the apartments. The area near South New Street includes a fence parallel to the street. The gazebo shown in this submission has been removed from the project due to lack of compliance with setback requirements for such structures as associated with recreation areas. The location of mechanical equipment to serve the buildings is not shown on the plans/drawings. 3

HI-11-04 Acme Site Redevelopment Master Plan Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 4 of 8 See attached concept site plan drawing and series of color renderings of each proposed building, detailed information on building forms, locations, and material choices. Review of DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES The subject project site is located in the Dover Historic District Zone within the Loockerman historic context. The Loockerman historic context is described on pages 2-7 through 2-8 . Location within the Dover Historic District Zone requires proposals for demolition, new construction, additions, and certain renovation or rehabilitation activities to existing buildings to receive an Architectural Review Certificate. As stated in the Design Standards and Guidelines for the City of Dover Historic District Zone, an Architectural Review Certificate will be granted “if it is found that the architectural style, general design, height, bulk and setbacks, arrangement location and materials affecting the exterior appearance are generally in harmony with neighboring structures and complementary to the traditional architectural standards of the historic district.” In accordance with Article 10 §3.2, the Historic District Commission will provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission regarding the project’s compliance with the architectural review standards. This proposal must be reviewed for conformity with the design criteria guidelines found in Chapter 4: New Construction, Additions, Demolition and Relocation. For the demolition of the existing mid-late twentieth century building on the site, the review considerations are those associated with “Demolition.” For the new retail/ apartment building and the apartment building, the applicable review considerations are those associated with “New Construction.” Information on the proposed project and the review considerations is given below. Demolition The Design Standards and Guidelines gives guidance to the Historic District Commission by listing specific criteria to be evaluated when considering applications for the demolition of buildings (or portions of buildings) in the historic district. (Chapter 4: pages 4-10 to 4-12) These guidelines are summarized below (see Design Standards and Guidelines for the complete text). 1. Determine the financial implications of maintaining a property versus demolition. 2. Regardless of economic issues the relative significance of the individual buildings slated for demolition should be evaluated. 3. In development related applications the City should review the schematic plans for the new structures to weigh the virtues of the new structure versus what exists. 4. Determine the extent of adequate recordation of a property the applicant would be required to complete if demolition were approved. 5. Lots left vacant by demolition should be treated in a manner that is sympathetic to the historic context. 4

HI-11-04 Acme Site Redevelopment Master Plan Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 5 of 8 New Construction The Design Standards and Guidelines for New Construction (Chapter 4: pages 4-1 through 4-8) provide the design criteria and development guidelines. The guidelines specify the following individual considerations for new construction to be considered in the review by the Historic District Commission (and Planning Commission) of the project for Architectural Review Certification: Style Scale (building to reflect dominant cornice and roof height of adjacent buildings) Elevation of the First Floor Floor-to-Floor heights Bays, windows and doors (size, relationship, spacing of) Absolute Size (compare overall size of new building) Massing (relationship of solid-to-void) Orientation (location of primary façade) Proportions (comparison of height to width of building and elements) Materials Forms (shape of building and roof to be complementary) Siting (location of building on lot and in relation to street) High density/ large-scale construction The proposed project must also be reviewed for compliance with the standards established by the Zoning Ordinance. The standards include items such as setbacks from property lines, lot coverage, height, etc. This proposal for Building #1 and Building #2 appears to conform to the bulk requirements of the C-2 Zoning District including setbacks, building height, floor area ratio, and lot coverage. The City of Dover Zoning Ordinance authorizes the Historic District Commission to waive certain bulk standards when issuing its recommendation to the Planning Commission for an Architectural Review Certificate if necessary to achieve architectural compatibility in the Historic District. STAFF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following are Staff comments and recommendations for this application regarding project activities and Architectural Review Certification. 1. Staff recommends approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the demolition of the existing commercial building on the property finding that the building is not significant as it is a modern intrusion into the historic area. a. As the building has a Cultural Resource Survey record (K-396.203) from the survey completed associated with the National Register nomination for the Victorian Dover Historic District, the appropriate survey forms should be completed to record its demolition (when it occurs). b. The building footprint will need to be appropriately stabilized if project site construction is not progressing at the time of its demolition. 5

HI-11-04 Acme Site Redevelopment Master Plan Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 6 of 8 2. Staff recommends conditional approval of the Architectural Review Certificate for the construction of the Retail/Apartment Building #1 finding the overall building to be of a contemporary design yet compatible with the buildings of this block of the Historic District which includes larger multi-story commercial buildings, the Dover Fire Department building (across Governors Avenue), and existing parking lots. 3. These conditions are recommended by Staff to improve Retail/Apartment Building #1 project’s compliance with the recommended guidelines of the Design Standards and Guidelines. The following are recommended conditions: a. The actual height measurements of the building should be confirmed to ensure compliance with the height (in feet) limitations for the zoning district. b. Signage identifying the commercial tenants and the apartment building main entry should be integrated into/attached the building. c. Confirm materials and design of the balcony railing system as a black metal system compliant with the requirements of the Building Code. d. Confirm the materials for the awnings and their compliance with the clear height provisions. e. Any revisions or changes in the identified materials or refinement of the building design may be subject to further review by the Historic District Commission. 4. Staff recommends that action on the Architectural Review Certificate for the construction of the Apartment Building #2 be deferred to allow additional information and an alternative design to be submitted. This multi-unit residential building with its contemporary design must strive to be compatible with the nearby single family detached dwellings and duplex dwellings of predominately two story buildings. The current design appears to be very large in overall form, scale, and proportion. a. The submission does not provide information on the proposed building heights (eave, ridge, mean) or streetscape views to assess its compatibility with nearby residential dwellings and other nearby buildings. b. While the building design attempts to address the pedestrian level scale with the choices of materials and detailing of the first floor, the overall massing of the building is a concern. The main roof design appears to add significant additional height to the building which may only cover a large attic space. c. The building has a very suburban design feel and not one that is responsive to the neighborhood around it other than its placement close to the street. d. See also the statements in Comment #5. 5. These conditions are recommended by Staff to improve and achieve the Apartment Building #2 project’s compliance with the recommended guidelines of the Design Standards and Guidelines. The following are recommended conditions: a. This is a four story building with the first floor occupied by the ground level parking area then floors 2-4 as apartments. b. Recommend an alternative design of the building roof form to divide into smaller areas (multiple ridgelines) to look more residential than commercial. This could also provide an opportunity for mechanical equipment areas. 6

HI-11-04 Acme Site Redevelopment Master Plan Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 7 of 8 c. Recommend additional design changes to present a building of small parts such as setbacks of upper two floors, greater stepping of the building front façade wall planes, etc. d. Recommend the use of architectural shingles for the main roof surface. e. Signage identifying the apartment building main entry should be integrated into the building. It currently appears to be located as a projecting sign over the gable roof of the entry which may be difficult to see. f. Confirm materials and design of the balcony railing system as a black metal system compliant with the requirements of the Building Code. g. Any revisions or changes in the identified materials or refinement of the building design may be subject to further review by the Historic District Commission. 6. The following items should be clarified regarding the Building #1 and Building #2 design in order to confirm compliance. a. Clarify the type of system proposed for gutters and downspouts. b. Clarify the size of the balcony areas to ensure they are sized for usable space. c. Clarify the installation format of the Hardie-board siding i.e. exposure width, etc. d. The applicant should be aware of the implications regarding the type of construction for the building. e. With the building design, the height of the finished floor elevation in relation to the sidewalk and parking lot must be considered in order to achieve accessibility into the building. If additional building elements are required to achieve accessibility, they may require further review by the Historic District Commission. 7. Some of the site improvements/amenities were not specifically described with the application information. Please provide information for consideration and discussion. a. Light fixtures/poles utilized along the streetscape should continue style of the lighting used in the Downtown Loockerman Street areas. A taller two-light style fixture may be more appropriate within the parking lot areas. b. Identify the materials for the open space areas including surface pavement, benches or other seating, bicycle parking rack, etc. c. Identify the design and materials of the fence including pillars along South New Street. The materials selected must be appropriate for use within the Historic District. Staff recommends the use of a black metal picket style fencing with a maximum height of four feet. d. Identify areas where the sidewalks or portions of the sidewalks will be constructed of brick or a grass landscape strip will be implemented. The use of brick paving materials for sidewalk construction is a key feature found throughout the Historic District area. i. The grass strip should be implemented in the areas of South New Street were the existing curb cut will be removed. ii. The City’s standards for sidewalk format must be met. e. Any unused curb cuts along the two street frontages must be removed. 7

HI-11-04 Acme Site Redevelopment Master Plan Architectural Review Staff Report for Historic District Commission July 21, 2011 Meeting Page 8 of 8 8. Since the gazebo originally proposed for the area north of Building #2 is to be removed from the plan, Staff recommends consideration of a design for a pergola attached to the north wall of building which could provide a shaded area in proximity of the open space/recreation area. 9. For building construction, the requirements of the building code or fire code must be complied with. Consult with the Chief Building Inspector and Office of the Fire Marshal for these requirements. The resolution of these items can impact the site design or building exterior finishes or design in some instances. 10. The proposed landscaping including tree plantings should be completed with species appropriate to the site conditions of an urban area. Consultation with the City’s arborist regarding the tree species selected is recommended especially regarding any new street trees. 11. The applicant should be aware of the potential for historic archaeological resources which may include previous building locations, wells, privies, etc. on these properties. The State Division of Historical & Cultural Affairs can provide technical assistance when dealing with archaeological resources including previous studies at the subject location. 12. In the event, that major changes and revisions to the building design and materials or site plan occur in the finalization of the site plan and/or construction drawings contact the Department of Planning and Inspections. These changes may require resubmittal for review by the Historic District Commission. 13. This site development plan for this project is also subject to the application and review process for Site Development Plan or Site Development Master Plan (Article 10 §2 of the Zoning Ordinance) before the Planning Commission. Note: Additional technical items for compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and other regulations may be identified during the Site Plan Process. Review comments pertaining specifically to the Site Plan set will be issued at that time. 14. The applicant shall be aware that Building Permits and Demolition Permits are required to proceed with any demolition or construction activities on the property. The permit applications must comply with the approvals granted through the Architectural Review Certification process. 15. The applicant shall be aware that a Sign Permit is required to proceed with the placement of signage on the property. Historic District Commission Action Required The Historic District Commission shall consider the proposal and provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission in regards to the Architectural Review Certification for the project site development plan. The recommendation should reflect consideration of the Design Standards and Guidelines. 8