HDC Minutes 10-20-22 FINAL

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 The Meeting of the City of Dover Historic District Commission was held on Thursday, October 20, 2022, at 3:30 PM as an In-Person meeting in the City Hall Conference Room (anchor location) and virtually using the videoconferencing system WebEx. With Chairman Czerwinski presiding, the other members present were Ms. Horsey and Mrs. Mason (virtual). Mr. Street was absent. (Note: The fifth Historic District Commission member has not been appointed following the completion of the term of Mr. McDaniel in 2020). Planning Office Staff members present were Mrs. Melson-Williams, Mr. Eddie Kopp, Mrs. Mary Ellen Gray and Mrs. Maretta Savage-Purnell. Others present include Patrick Rock. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ms. Horsey moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Ms. Mason and the motion was unanimously carried 3-0. Mr. Street was absent. Voice Vote • Ms. Horsey -Yes • Ms. Mason - Yes • Mr. Czerwinski - Yes ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 19, 2022 Mrs. Mason moved for approval of the meeting minutes of May 19, 2022, as presented, seconded by Ms. Horsey and the motion was unanimously carried 3-0. Mr. Street was absent. Voice Vote • Ms. Horsey -Yes • Ms. Mason - Yes • Mr. Czerwinski – Yes ADOPTION OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 18, 2022 Ms. Horsey moved for approval of the meeting minutes of August 18, 2022, as presented, seconded by Mrs. Mason and the motion was unanimously carried 3-0. Mr. Street was absent. Voice Vote • Ms. Horsey -Yes • Ms. Mason - Yes • Mr. Czerwinski – Yes

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 COMMUNICATIONS & REPORTS Summary of Applications for 2021 and 2022 Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned that you will be looking at your seventh Application of the year today. Most significantly, the Application that you looked at for the New Kent County Family Courthouse and Parking Garage project, that was granted by the Planning Commission conditional approval of the Site Plan and the associated Architectural Review Certification at the Planning Commission June meeting. In 2021, we had a series of six (6) applications throughout the calendar year and most of them have made some progress towards either completion or getting started. There is one that is related to the parking lot improvement on an adjacent site to the Courthouse project which we should see get underway. It is at the location to the rear of 30 The Green; that is a project from 2021. Summary of Architectural Review Certifications for 2022 Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that this is the listing of Building Permit activity within the boundary of the Historic District. There has been a total of twenty-one (21) applications through the end of September. Three of those had very specific direct workings here with the Historic District Commission. The other ones were either projects that were interior renovations only that do not require Architectural Review Certification, or they are a mix of building exterior, a number of fence projects, and some other sign projects. Also included are Permits that have been issued in recent months including the series of Demolition Permits associated with the Courthouse project. One of those very specifically came through the Historic District Commission. The demolition activities are progressing and much of the buildings have been demolished at this point. They will be moving on to any kind of site cleanup activities. They are the four in a series of properties in the 400 block of South Governors Avenue. Department of Planning & Inspections Updates Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned that she did provide to the members here in the room an information flyer from the City’s Department of Water and Wastewater about an upcoming water main replacement project in the area of North State Street. Basically, north of Division Street leading up towards the Lakeside Cemetery is where that project will be getting started shortly. I had highlighted it at your last meeting and noted it would be forthcoming. If you have questions about it, there are contact numbers for the project team related to that. It is a long multi month process where they will be replacing the water main in North State Street. Part of that area does fall within the Historic District, but I believe the water main is in the roadway itself. There will be obviously some detours as necessary with that project. She mentioned that from the Planning Office we continue to have an opening for a Planner position and there are a number of other city jobs that are open. If you know anyone certainly point them to the City's website for more information about job opportunities here with the City of Dover. Education & Training Opportunities Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that included in your packet was the conference schedule for Preservation Delaware’s Annual Conference and Meeting. It began this morning, and it is called “Preservation and Progress”. It is a free virtual event. If you are interested, you could still catch a series of the items tomorrow. I have been participating in it today. Some of the sessions today included a discussion about “Is there such a thing as Delaware Architecture?” which was given by Barksdale Maynard who actually is the author of a guidebook on Buildings of Delaware that 2

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 was done a number of years ago. His presentation had a lot of pictures of buildings that are no longer extent on the land, including what was the Post Office that later became the City Hall building. This was one of the examples of an architectural style that came and went through Delaware. There were some interesting presentations about the number of Delaware cemeteries that have efforts of care and maintenance and research going on. This afternoon was a session history of the Flats neighborhood, which is part of Wilmington and the efforts of the Bancroft family and ultimately the creation of the Woodlawn Trustees group which is a very interesting land planning effort dating to the early 1900s. They have sessions ongoing right now through 6:00 PM tonight and then sessions starting at 8:30 tomorrow if you want to participate. There is a registration and then they send you the e-mail link to the Zoom activity. They are planning a Historic District Commission training session on “Design Review” and then “Law and Procedures” that is a collaboration of Preservation Delaware and the State Historic Preservation Office. They were looking at scheduling dates in early November. I have not heard of the exact date but will inform you when I have the date. Review of Permits Referred to Commission HI-22-07 Referral of Demolition Activities for 233-239 W. Loockerman Street Referral by the City Planner to the Historic District Commission for Determination of Demolition by Neglect and Review of Architectural Review Certification for Demolition Activities for existing fire damaged commercial/residential building. The property was declared a Dangerous Building by City Council on August 15, 2022. The property is zoned C-2 (Central Commercial Zone) and subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The property is located at the northeast corner of West Loockerman Street and South New Street. The owner of record is SAG Holdings, LLC. Property Addresses: 233-239 West Loockerman Street and 149 S. New Street. Tax Parcel: ED-05- 077.09-01-50.00-000. Council District 4. Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned that for the record there were two Historic District Commission members located within the meeting room and one member (Mrs. Mason) has joined us virtually. Mrs. Melson-Williams gave a summary and presented information on Application HI-22-07. This is a Referral of demolition activities related to a building located and address as 233-239 W. Loockerman Street. It also has a secondary address of 149 S. New Street as some of the apartments are accessed off a doorway from that street. It is a corner location that is here in Downtown Dover: the corner of West Loockerman Street and South New Street. The Referral is brought to the Historic District Commission for consideration for a determination of Demolition by Neglect and for Review of Architectural Review Certification for Demolition. There are demolition activities that are pending with this fire damaged commercial/residential building. Historically, I have included in the Report an image of the building that dates to the 1960’s. It is a three-story brick building with the first floor being commercial in nature and the upper floors being apartment units. There is an apartment entry door kind of if you are looking at the image behind the Bug (VW Beatle car) and then there is also another entry to the upper floor apartments off New Street. The property is located within the City's Historic District zone. It is also listed on the National Register 3

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 of Historic Places as part of the Victorian Dover Historic District. The District nomination inventory notes that it is basically a circa 1920’s building with a flat roof and then the brick pilasters and kind of a bold cornice line as details on the building. Historically, Staff did take a look at a series of historic maps for you. Not much action on the property on the 1868 Beers Map but by the late 1800s we are seeing this corner be a series of what appear to be residential buildings in form. The Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps that cover the period from 1885 to 1919 show various commercial activity likely on the first floor with upper floors being residential in nature. However, by 1929 those early residential style buildings are gone and in its place is what I believe probably to be the eastern half of the building. It shows that it is a three-story commercial building which by 1951 has been expanded to continue all the way to the corner, again commercial in nature, with some reference to residential on the upper floors. From a Historic District Commission perspective, I noted that this is a determination of Demolition by Neglect which is defined in the Zoning Ordinance. This gives some responsibilities for reporting of that and Dangerous Buildings from the city planner to report to the Historic District Commission. Also, the review of an Architectural Review Certification for Demolition is required because it is activity in the Historic District Zone and that requires review under our Design Standards and Guidelines document. There are some excerpts of it that are specific to demolition activities that give a series of criteria to be evaluated. I do have copies of those sections of our Design Standards to provide to you if you did not look them up in in your copy of the book. At this point, I am going to turn it over to other City Staff to specifically present what they have brought to you today. Code Enforcement Officer Mr. Eddie Kopp for the City of Dover spoke noting he is currently charged with the duties of demolitions. I have presented to City Council with the finding of the facts in regard to the building and the current state of the building. After the determination from City Council, I have hired the asbestos contractors to assess for asbestos which was included in the packet. They checked the area for asbestos. We have sent out bids for the asbestos abatement. We have presented it back to City Council for the Bid Review. Since then, the Bid has been awarded and the asbestos abatement is continuing with this interesting project. As of today, asbestos abatement is underway and taking place mostly happening in the morning hours between 7:40 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. In addition, the City hired a structural engineer to conduct a survey of the property. This was a Recommendation from City Council. I reached out on behalf of the City and had it completed. This also impacted one of the things noted from the structure was the immediate safety concerns of the building potentially collapsing towards South New Street. I do not know if you have seen the building recently, but we had the side secured off with the barriers from anyone parking there and safety fencing. As of right now the asbestos dumpster is out there kind of blocking parking spots due to if the building was to collapse (fall). We have secured the building with wood. This is not something that we usually do. We usually do not secure second and third story windows, but it had to be done at this location due to the nuisance in the area. People were smashing out the windows with rocks. This is the reason the windows were secured the way they were. In addition, after having all the windows boarded and doors screwed shut there was forced entry into the front door that we did not secure. We had it screwed shut, but they actually kicked that door in. I went out and checked it on a Sunday evening because we were worried about the storm (hurricane). Between the time I checked it on Sunday evening until Monday morning somebody had went in and caused another problem. They also broke into 4

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 the apartments which is the door all the way to the right side, so that door was also kicked in, screws were ripped out and it was damaged pretty significantly. We had to have our contractor go back out and secure that building. It has been a nuisance as far as people are constantly breaking into that building. No matter what we do to try to secure it, they're getting in. We found evidence it looks like up on the third story somebody repelled up to the roof and came down from the ceiling. I do not know why, I do not know how, but you can see where somebody literally crawled in through the ceiling to get into the building. For what reason I do not know. Some of these pictures show rapid mold growth. The growth of mold throughout the building is getting worse. At this point, we cannot enter the building without respirators because it is bad. In addition, I was on site today just for an update and noticed the weakening of the floor. Over the last couple of months, the contractors have discussed this abatement topic. There are more areas of the building where the asbestos cannot be removed due to the deterioration of the building. On Monday when the contractors actually started to fall through the floor on the second story, they immediately ceased operations to remove some sites that were out there. It is going to be one of the things they did make me aware of. They will be identifying hot spots with asbestos with spray painting that cannot be identified or that cannot be removed at this moment to prevent safety concerns. So, there you see markings that for safety reasons they cannot actually access it. They're going through there trying to do things safely as possible in compliance with the federal regulations. No one should be walking in the building unless they are professionals. Any questions for me? Ms. Mason noted that she was having a hard time hearing because she had to call in by my phone. But she’s looking at the pictures here. She lives just a couple blocks from Loockerman Street and does walk by and look at it. She stated that she was hoping that they would be able to save the basic structure of the brick building and not just have to just level the whole property. It’s such an important building. Had it been taken care of; it obviously wouldn't have gotten to this state; if they had insurance and if they had a good landlord. She feels like we can't totally give up and not find some way that we can salvage part of this historic building. Mr. Kopp noted that one of the concerns we have and the concerns the engineers had is with the walls of the building and the floors. The floor joists that are supporting the floors are also supporting walls of the building. So due to the deterioration of the floor joists, it is an immediate danger that the building could potentially collapse. Our concern is we don't want the building to collapse especially with the location. It is very close to the sidewalk and street. Our concern is that the immediate threat to the public safety. Ms. Mason noted that she understood and asked if it is demolished what will be the next step. Is it just going to be an empty space? Do you think that anyone else is going to want to develop that site? Mr. Kopp responded that as of right now we will require it to be backfilled and seeded. Then it will be hopefully redeveloped at some point but as far as is there any potential candidates as of right now I am not aware of anybody who wanted to develop the site. 5

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 Ms. Horsey asked how many years has this building not been in compliance with city code as far as not being in a condition to house people? How far back does that record go? Mr. Kopp noted that it had occupants inside until the fire occurred in March of 2022. Part of the major issue here is that the entire roof of the building is exposed. It was completely burned through which has caused the water and obviously due to the natural elements to just deteriorate the building. Usually when there is a hole in the roof, it is easier and manageable to cover it. This would take a lot to try to preserve that without repair. Ms. Horsey mentioned that they did it with Central Middle School with no problem. She understood the problem with this building. Ms. Horsey asked again about how many years this building has not been in compliance with basic human occupation. It's got to be more than just this last year. Why wasn't the property owner held accountable to fix the repairs at the time instead of allowing this building to come down by neglect? That's what all of Dover has been allowed to be demolished by absentee landowners. For property owners, it's time to stop. I don't know how we're going to do it. I want to also know does anybody know where the owner actually lives: it's not in Delaware. Do they even know where Dover is on the map? We have the right to know where this property owner lives. Mrs. Gray stated that we can answer the first question and there's a legal representative for the property owner here also. For the first question, the building was in compliance until the fire. Mr. Kopp stated that was correct. It was habitable up until the fire. Due to the extensive amount of the fire damage, that's why it's in the condition now. The fire started on the first floor at the bottom left corner of the building and rapidly spread through a pipe chase through all the floors which has us to the point we are now. The fire is what did the condition. It does not seem like it as you at the pictures from the outside, but the inside is completely burned through with partial collapse inside that building. Sometimes it is hard to get that full picture of it. Mr. Kopp noted that he’s been in this building quite a bit and have seen the deterioration of it. Up until then, the building was habitable, and it was occupied. Mr. Czerwinski noted his issue with this property and he’s not sure we have the same problem with other properties, is there a legal requirement for the owner to have insurance on the commercial property? Mr. Kopp responded not at this time. Mrs. Gray responded that as of right now at this point there is no requirement for an owner that actually has tenants or for commercial entities to have insurance on the property. However, moving forward we have an ordinance that went to City Council on this. We were asked to make some revisions to the rental property ordinance to have that requirement in there. It’s going back to City Council and actually was just posted on the October 25th Council Committee Meeting. It will require property owners that rent property to have property insurance. Mr. Czerwinski was also wondering about the ordinances about the sprinkler systems in these buildings. If they had sprinklers, this would have probably avoided the vast majority of the damage with this property. He stated that he did not want this to happen again. We’ve got precious few remaining buildings on Loockerman. When this comes down, it's going to be another missing tooth. Mr. Czerwinski noted that he was raised in Washington. When you see these beautiful buildings that disappear, it's like somebody got their mouth punched and they're 6

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 missing teeth. This is going to be another missing tooth. I think this is a lost opportunity. We had an owner that should have had insurance to do the repairs in the timely manner to have stabilized the building and save the building. Here we had absolutely no chance at doing so because the man simply wasn't there. I don't understand how it is actually legally possible for somebody to actually have tenants. There has got to be liability; there's got to be something where they are obligated for now and then with the building itself. Ms. Horsey asked another question for clarification. Our family does own a property Downtown that they rent to tenants both as apartments and as commercial space. She noted as commercial space we are required to have smoke detectors were tied directly into the fire department. Why wasn't this building required and maybe it was? I need to know that. Mr. Kopp noted that this building did have fire alarms and did have fire alarm system in there; it didn't activate. The problem with this building was actually a pipe chase. There's a small hole through the floor that basically pipes go from one floor to another. That little space, that little pipe chase is what caused the fire to rapidly spread. That's why fire code is the way it is now. I don't believe this building was renovated that would have required that to be correct. There has to be a certain amount of property that's being renovated so that it would have to be brought up to standard code. I think because they were in the building and the use of the building has remained the same throughout. It was just a small hole (it's very, very small) that caused the fire to spread the way it did. Had that not been the case, we would probably not be sitting here. Ms. Horsey asked if that was going to be placed in the Code. Mr. Kopp responded it is something that is now the Code for fire blocks whether it is caulking or whether it is a specific board. Sprinklers are today's Code; and it covers all of that to prevent this in the future. Ms. Mason noted she heard part of how the fire got bigger and asked if was there any truth that it was arson or that somebody actually threw a pipe bomb in the building? Mr. Kopp stated that at this time there still is an active investigation into the fire. We cannot comment on the cause. He can tell you where the fire started that's about the extent of it due to the active investigation. Ms. Mason asked if since this happened have there been cameras outside that have been watching of all this sort of vandalism that's been going on since the fire. Do we know who's doing all this? Mr. Kopp responded that due to the fire, the camera and light pole that was in the area was destroyed. It’s been a week or two since Advantech has stalled a new camera on the corner of New Street and Loockerman Street. Also, when he was out there today and a little bit further down back behind the building in the parking lot, they were actually replacing the camera to make it operational in that parking lot. On the street directly behind the building, those cameras have since been replaced and are operational. Ms. Mason hopes that there's going to be more preventative actions because we're going to have more. We're going to be continuing to lose more buildings down there because it doesn't seem like there's much presence of people watching what's going on down there. It's just a shame; we just have our hands tied behind our backs and just keep watching this stuff go on. It's just a real shame that we can't be more proactive about it. Where the Dover Hardware Store was, it's just 7

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 been a park there for how many years now. It's a sad thing to see what's happening to the downtown. Mr. Czerwinski called upon the representative of the property owner to speak. Representative: Mr. Patrick Rock of Heckler & Frabizzio as Representative of property owner. Mr. Patrick Rock introduced himself as a representative of the owners of the building. He stated that this is a great tragedy what's happening with the fire. The owners had a manager on site who would report back whenever there's a problem for repairs. They repair it and they pay him, so it wasn't exactly like they were absent. They had somebody on-site who was actually a tenant and a manager. They had two roles there; they were managing the building. If there was a problem with any lighting and/or electricity issues they would report it. Mr. Rock noted there was a contract to buy the building. They have no insurance. What's not evident to everybody is that they are at a loss. It’s significant loss not as bad as the tenants who live there, but they have a significant loss here. There is no money they have to renovate it so they're trying to sell the building. They had a contract in August. They had a letter of intent from an owner who apparently owns other properties in Dover and does this kind of thing of buying these buildings and refurbishes them. But they had said well, if there's a condemnation and the building is going to be knocked down, they don't want to walk but they only want the building if the building is going to be a shell and they can rebuild it. So, the problem that they have is not to enter into a contract if the building is going to be knocked down the next day. They are sort of stuck. He understands that the building is deteriorating. It is unfortunate that this could have been handled differently. In August, he requested a delay from the city. They said the mayor said no. He explained why there was an interest in trying to have a delay and that was sort of in a holding pattern. There is one other buyer in addition to the one who was interested in August who might want to take on the project but again not if we are knocked down. It's an unfortunate situation. Right now, we are waiting to see what the city does and the Historic District Commission decision before the buyer wants to come forward and commit to redoing the building. Mr. Czerwinski mentioned that it would put them in a peculiar situation because the building is deteriorating; and we have this evaluation. Mr. Czerwinski noted that when Century Engineering did the evaluation, they are doing the evaluation based on demolition and not on saving the building. He understands the various situations of the building itself. In this case now we're stuck because if those offers are still being tendered, wouldn't it be in our best interest to do another evaluation to see whether or not the shell itself is salvageable or whether not with walls are actually still intact? We're not talking about wood structure; we're talking about brick structure which puts it in a different classification altogether. It's very easy for a brick structure to support itself without the interior walls. There's an example of this if you look at Salem, New Jersey. There was a building that had been terribly destroyed; they kept the side and the building frame intact and it’s still there to this day. They didn't want tear it down because it was going to be an open hole on the street. 8

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 Mr. Czerwinski stated that maybe we need to do a motion that you evaluate. It might cost a little bit more money, but if there is a sincere interest in saving the building (and I'm not sure if that interest is still there) it probably would be in their best interest to go ahead and have a reevaluation of the walls and whether or not it's possible to reconstruct the building as it is versus just writing it off. Mr. Rock stated that the broker told me that if the building structure is there, then the buyer wants to buy it. If it's not, then he doesn't want it. That's last conversation he had with their broker. Mr. Czerwinski mentioned that it kind of puts a little spin on things here for this building. This might not come to nod, and we still got the possibility of a collapse. Again, we kind of wrote this thing off as a demolition, like no money, we are going to demolish it. However, there is a possibility of doing so. I would think it might be in our best interest to have them do another evaluation of the wall structure. They don't have to go in and turn on very much to evaluate the integrity of the outer shell structure and whether or not they could save the building. Then we need to reevaluate if there is a serious interest in redeveloping this building. It is in our best interest to try to save the building. Again, there was nothing in our paperwork as far as forwarding bids to possibly save this building. Now, we have to seriously consider that as being a possibility. At this point , what do our fellow members think about that? Do we just go ahead and vote on a motion for the passage of Demolition by Neglect and then follow up with another motion possibly of stating that we would like to pass a motion to reevaluate the structure as a viable potential for saving the structure? He understands the mold and asbestos; that is soft material. He is talking about the structure of the building itself. Mr. Kopp stated that the structural engineer’s Report about demolition was actually requested by City Council. The order of demolition was by City Council. Everything we have done has been based off the order of City Council. We initially were unable to save the building. Mr. Czerwinski stated that he understands Mr. Kopp’s position because you had your orders. Mr. Kopp mentioned in order to get the structural report it was specifically for demolition. Mr. Czerwinski mentioned that is why I noticed right away that nothing was ever forwarded to the contray. This is a possibility, somebody beyond the shadow of this structure saying we have had it and we cannot save the structure. How can we safely demolish the building? This case specifically comes forward to this Board to determine whether or not this structure is going to be Demolished by Neglect and whether or not we proceed with the demolition activity. They are saying okay we are going to demolish this, but yet it goes before the Historic District Commission for determination. At this point, I am trying to figure out how we can phrase this in order to make a motion. He asked if he could forward the motion for demolition to vote against it. Then forward another motion to evaluate the structure as a possible save with the condition that we have possible investors in the building. I know it is not what we came here for, but then we got new information that we didn't have before we came. The total write-off, the money could be invested in, there is nothing that is going to happen and then all of a sudden, we have a potential buyer 9

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 that might be option. He doesn’t know all of the ins and outs of that, but if we have the potential of saving the structure can and we get about 30 days for evaluation before the next meeting to reevaluate? Mr. Kopp asked who would be responsible for the cost? The City has invested almost $200,000. Mr. Czerwinski asked who will pay for the demolition. Mr. Kopp replied that the City will pay for the demolition and then we will put a lien against the property. Ms. Horsey mentioned, so the owner doesn't have to pay a cent. Mr. Kopp replied that there will be a lien against the property. Mrs. Gray stated that when the property is sold then the new owner (the buyer) would have to pay back the cost. Mr. Kopp stated that his concern is because they have already got the structural engineer’s report for the demolition of the building. We cannot justify putting a lien against the property for another survey to save the building because we have already gotten a structural engineer’s Report. We have to justify why we do what we do. If he was to get another structural engineer’s report, he couldn't necessarily justify against property for this at the city or taxpayers’ expense. We have to justify the money that was spent. He would also be concerned about the dollar amount and the approval process. Ms. Horsey mentioned that what the Chairman is trying to say is exactly what I think my other colleague and I believe. I think it was assumed that this building would just be torn down, so let's do the report, and that there was no chance to talk about how to save it in the structural engineer Report. So, you've got it backwards here and now we the Historic District Commission is supposed to bail the city out of this dilemma, this rush to a decision. You know that's not fair to the Historic District Commission; think about it, it's not. We are all frustrated. If there's a possibility that this building can be saved, and money might be there for the investor to take it over then I think we need to make the motion that this happen. Why are we in such a rush to always demolish? She doesn’t get it and never have for the last 40 years of living here. Mr. Czerwinski mentioned that there is a story behind this. Obviously, there is either a lack of communication in what was forwarded to the city. I don't know because I wasn't there for all these meetings. That's what makes that business an inaccurate situation because there's obviously maybe information, we are not privy to we don't know. But then we have a potential to save the structure and from the information we have here. I think the only way forward here is to then get somebody to forward a motion for the approval of the Demolition by Neglect for 233- 239 W. Loockerman Street. Mr. Czerwinski asked if we do both motions, do we do a single motion or can we break this up into two different motions? Mrs. Melson-Williams responded that staff would advise that you could make multiple motions. There are really two questions before you. First, that is a determination of Demolition by Neglect and you can make that or agree to that determination and give guidance for a path forward. Then the second component of what was brought to you 10

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 today was the need for an Architectural Review Certification for demolition. With a Demolition Bid out there, we realized that a Demolition Permit is likely in the near future. That's why that second component is before you today for the demolition activities that we expect are currently in the path right now due to the property’s declaration as a Dangerous Building and the steps taken under those provisions of the city ordinances. Mr. Czerwinski stated that his recommendation to the Board here is break this down into two motions. He asked Mrs. Mason if she agreed. Mr. Czerwinski stated that we can have two different motions: one for demolished by neglect and second one for its actual review for Architectural Review Certification for the demolition for demolition activities as outlined by the staff notes. As he looks through this, he thinks there is going to have to be a recommendation from the Historic District Commission that there be a review for the potential for saving the structure with possible investors be looked at either by the City Planning Staff and evaluated. I'm going to leave that to you because you know again, I am the Chairman and it is up to you to make that motion. Again, we will break it down to those two motions. If somebody wants to forward the first motion. Mrs. Mason asked Ms. Horsey if she could make the motion and she would second it if possible. Mrs. Melson-Williams noted that part of your Bylaws state that even though the Chair is the presiding officer of the hearing and meeting here with the Historic District Commission, you (the Chair) continue to and I'll quote “can exercise the prerogatives of an individual member of the Commission while performing the duties of a presiding officer.” Therefore, you (the Chair) could make the motion yourself. Eric can make a motion just like he was an individual member of the Commission. Mr. Czerwinski moved to approve the building at 233 to 239 W. Loockerman Street, Dover, Delaware to be identified as Demolition by Neglect as set forward and as an outlined in the Staff notes in this Report. The motion was seconded by Ms. Horsey. The vote was 2-1. Mr. Street was absent. Mr. Czerwinski announced that we will vote on the motion to approve the identification of the building at 233-239 W. Loockerman Street as Demolition by Neglect as identified in the Staff notes. Voice Vote • Ms. Horsey -yes • Ms. Mason – no • Mr. Czerwinski -yes Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that by the vote of two to one I believe that motion carries. It approves the determination of the building location at (and I'll correct the address for you) 233- to 239 W. Loockerman Street and the associated New Street address of 149 S. New Street as being determined to be Demolition by Neglect. 11

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 Mr. Czerwinski made a motion to approve the second part which is going to be the approval of the Architectural Review Certification for the building at 233 to 239 W. Loockerman Street, Dover, Delaware for the demolition of the structure as outlined in the Staff notes. Now remember, this is for the approval of the demolition of the structure with the follow-up notes of the asbestos remediation and the remediation of the property afterwards. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Mason. The vote was 1-2; then the corrected vote was 0-3. Mr. Street was absent. Mr. Czerwinski repeating the motion, mentioned that those in approval, remember listen carefully, those are for the approval for the demolition of this structure. This second motion is for the approval of the demolition of the structure at 233-239 W. Loockerman Street Dover, Delaware as outlined in the notes for remediation of asbestos and of course the remediation of the property afterwards. Voice Vote • Ms. Horsey - no • Ms. Mason – yes • Mr. Czerwinski -no Mrs. Mason asked if she did something wrong. She did not realize that she did the wrong thing (in voting). Mrs. Melson-Williams noted the motion would fail because the motion was to approve demolition of the structure and basically to grant the Architectural Review Certification. So a vote of yes is a vote of yes to issue the Architectural Review Certification for demolition. A vote of no is a vote against that. Mrs. Mason stated I'm sorry, I vote no. Is it too late, of course I vote no. The Corrected Voice Vote • Ms. Horsey - no • Ms. Mason – no • Mr. Czerwinski -no Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that Mrs. Mason's vote is corrected. The result of the vote on that motion is zero to three; so that motion fails. Mr. Czerwinski would like to follow with the third motion if I may. I would like to forward a motion for the property at 233-239 W. Loockerman Street that the disposition of this property be evaluated for possible reconstruction and with the idea of returning it back to the City Planning Staff and with prospective investors to save the structure prior to the evaluation of the demolition (request)for the property. This is based on testimony here at this Historic District Commission meeting. That's an adequate question. I like to get that seconded. Mrs. Mason seconded the motion. The vote was 3-0. Mr. Street was absent. 12

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 Voice Vote • Ms. Horsey - yes • Ms. Mason – yes • Mr. Czerwinski -yes Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that the vote result of that vote is three to zero in favor of the motion for the disposition of the building for its continued evaluation saving the structure. Basically, referring that back to the City Planning Staff based on the testimony of the meeting and with the acknowledgement of potential buyers that are interested in a building for purchase. Mr. Czerwinski said thank you very much for talking with us. He appreciates your patience. Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that she will note that there was another attendee who has been listening in and that is Nate Attard. He did forward an e-mail letter statement that was actually distributed by himself to all of the Historic District Commission members. I do have it of record. If you wish, you waive some rules so that Mr. Attard can speak. (Consensus of members to allow). Mr. Nate Attard stated that he lives at 452 E. Loockerman Street. If you know my comments from what I said in the message that I sent to you all, I appreciate the motion today rejecting the demolition and sending it back for evaluation. It is just frustrating I think watching the City administer historic preservation recently with the number of the different things we've been through. I appreciate the Commission standing up for itself; so thank you all. OLD BUSINESS Certified Local Government (CLG) Program Mrs. Melson-Williams noted a forthcoming training initiative that the State Historic Preservation Office and Preservation Delaware are putting forth is to target training with the Certified Local Governments. The Certified Local Government program, if you remember, has that grant opportunity. The Historic Preservation Office has let us know that with the previous grant that we applied for a number of years ago, those monies are still available for our use. Staff is going to try to work through moving forward with that project. That was good news from them. It's a couple of grant years old and there had to be some logistics at the federal level. They've extended a number of grant years use of the money predominantly I think in response to COVID. That's good news for us. We do have available match so hopefully we can take the steps to bring a consultant on board to look at the opportunities for modern materials in the Historic District. I can tell you I'm not sure when that's going to happen given the current workload on my desk, but I'll keep you posted. Implementation of 2019 Comprehensive Plan Mrs. Melson-Williams mentioned that there were no specific updates happening related to the Historic District Commission at the moment, but implementation of the Plan is a citywide effort. Even things like that N. State Street water replacement line project certainly goes to the goals and visions of the Comprehensive Plan related to things like water service in the city. There are a number of things that way across the board in various departments that have the vision and goals of the Comprehensive Plan in mind as we move forward with the specialized projects citywide. 13

CITY OF DOVER HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2022 Ms. Horsey moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Mrs. Mason, and unanimously carried 3-0. Meeting adjourned at 4:46 PM Sincerely, Maretta Savage-Purnell Secretary 14