This text was pulled from the PDF automatically and may contain mistakes. The PDF is the official record, so check it before relying on this.
5 pages have little or no readable text here, often scans or drawings. See the PDF for those.
Page 1
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
April 11, 2005 - 7:30 P.M. - Council Chambers - City Hall - City of Dover
OPEN FORUM - 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO OFFICIAL MEETING (7:15 P.M.)
INVOCATION BY CHAPLAIN WALLACE DIXON
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
* CONSENT AGENDA
Those items on the Council Agenda which are considered routine and non-controversial shall be marked
with an asterisk (*) and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the Council. There will be no
separate discussion of these items unless a member of Council so requests, in which event the matter shall
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered a separate item.
* 1. Adoption of Minutes - Regular Council Meeting of March 28, 2005
2. Certificate of Recognition - Geoffrey “Rocky” Myers
3. Certificate of Commendation - Members of the Dover Fire Department
4. Presentation to Councilman Salters - GFWC Federation Guild - Mrs. Trisha Rodriguez
5. Public Hearing/Final Reading - Rezoning
Property located on the north side of Forest Street between South West Street and South
Kirkwood Street, being 585 Forest Street, 111 South West Street, and 122 South Kirkwood
Street, owned by Robert M. Duncan. These properties are currently zoned C-3 (Service
Commercial) and C-2 (Central Commercial) and the proposed zoning is C-1A (Limited
Commercial). The First Reading of the proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of
February 28, 2005.
* 6. Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report - March 28, 2005
A. City Assessment Update - Cole Layer Trumble Company
7. Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Report - March 29, 2005
A. Discussion - Vacant Building Ordinance
* 8. Proposals/Bids
A. IT Help Desk Tracking and Network Security/Performance Monitoring
B. Agenda and Legislative Management Software
C. Radio Console Furniture Purchase - Police Department
D. Replacement of Heating and Cooling Units - Dover Parks and Recreation Building
(considered during the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Meeting earlier in the evening)
Page 2
Council Agenda
April 11, 2005 Page 2
9. Final Reading - Proposed Ordinances
The First Reading of the following proposed ordinances was accomplished during the Council Meeting
of March 28, 2005. Copies of the proposed ordinances are available at the entrance of the Council
Chambers.
A. Revised Budgets for Fiscal Year 2004/2005
B. Building, Residential, Mechanical, Plumbing, and Property Maintenance Codes:
b-1. Chapter 5 - Building and Building Regulations
b-2. Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention, Protection
b-3. Chapter 10 - Housing and Property Maintenance
C. Chapter 4.5 - Bicycles
10. Council Members Comments
/jg
S:\ClerksOffice\Agendas&Minutes\Council-Agendas\2005\04-11-2005.wpd
THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE
TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.
Page 3
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
The Regular Council Meeting was held on March 28, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President
Williams presiding. Council members present were Mr. Carey, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Sadusky, Mr. Slavin,
Mr. Ritter, Mr. Hogan, Mr. Salters, and Mr. Ruane.
Council staff members present were Police Chief Horvath, Mr. Cooper, Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. Galvin,
Assistant Fire Chief Carey, Mr. Koenig (Public W orks Director serving in the absence of the City Manager,
Mr. DePrima) , City Solicitor Rodriguez, Mrs. Green, and Mayor Speed.
OPEN FORUM
The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting.
Council President Williams declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that
Council is not in official session and cannot take formal action.
There was no one present wishing to speak during the Open Forum
The invocation was given by Chaplain Dixon, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. Carey moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously
carried.
Council President Williams requested that item #8A be removed from the consent agenda.
Mr. Ritter requested that items #8B and #8C be removed from the consent agenda.
Mr. Carey moved for approval of the consent agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Sadusky
and unanimously carried.
ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 14, 2005
The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of March 14, 2005 were unanimously approved
by motion of Mr. Carey, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and bore the written approval of Mayor
Speed.
RESOLUTIONS: PRESENTATION OF CITY OF DOVER MEDALS - TIMOTHY PORTER
(BRONZE MEDAL) AND DAVID HISER (SILVER MEDAL)
The City Clerk read the following Resolutions into the record:
WHEREAS, on December 3, 2004 , Mr. David A. Hiser and Mr. Timothy A. Porter, linemen for the
City of Dover Electric Department, were working in the vicinity of Lakeland Mobile Home Park
when they observed that a mobile home on Pugh Avenue was on fire; and
WHEREAS, once Mr. Hiser and Mr. Porter notified the Fire Department of the situation, Mr. Porter
disconnected the electric source, a common practice of the Fire Department, and Mr. Hiser entered
the mobile home to search for trapped occupants; and
Page 4
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 2
WHEREAS, the courageous actions of these men were acts of heroism which deserve special
recognition by the governing body of this City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1. That the Mayor and Council recognize that Mr. Porter’s quick response in disconnecting the
electric was a meritorious act and that Mr. Hiser risked his life by entering the burning mobile
home to search for occupants who may have been trapped inside .
2. In recognition of their heroic actions, the Mayor and Council award Mr. Timothy A. Porter with
a City of Dover Bronze Medal and Mr. David A. Hiser with a City of Dover Silver Medal and
direct the City Clerk to make this Resolution a part of the permanent records of the City of
Dover.
ADOPTED: MARCH 28, 2005
Mayor Speed presented Mr. Timothy Porter with a City of Dover Bronze Medal and
Mr. David Hiser with a City of Dover Silver Medal.
PROCLAMATION - FAIR HOUSING MONTH
The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record:
WHEREAS, fair housing issues are of concern to all citizens; and
WHEREAS, discrimination continues against minorities in several areas of housing, including
lending practices, areas of ownership & restrictive covenants dealing with the sale of homes; and
WHEREAS, the members of Dover’s City Council have pledged to commit thousands of dollars in
Community Block Grant Funds to support efforts to increase home ownership within the City of
Dover; and
WHEREAS, many groups in Delaware remain committed to fair housing for all citizens, including
the Delaware State Housing Authority, Delaware Housing Coalition, Housing Opportunities of
Northern Delaware, and the Statewide Association of Tenants; and
WHEREAS, the Dover Human Relations Commission is concerned with all elements of fair
treatment of City residents, including fair housing practices; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dover has partnered with other groups to facilitate and advance housing
issues.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Stephen R. Speed, Mayor of the City of Dover, do hereby proclaim the
Month of April 2005 as Fair Housing Month and commend this observance to all of our citizens.
Page 5
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 3
PRESENTATION OF AWARDS BY MAIN STREET DOVER - ST. PATRICK’S DAY
PARADE
Mr. Ed Perez, Main Street Director, Mr. Bill Malone, Governmental Relations for Comcast (sponsor
of the St. Patrick’s Day Parade) , and Ms. Jennifer Allen, Committee Chair, presented awards for the
12th Annual St. Patrick’s Day Parade, as follows:
Category Recipient
Pot O’ Gold - Anything with W heels Delaware Jeep Association
Leprechaun Award - Best Brigade/Marching Unit Dover Air Force Base
The Blarney Award - Best Mascot Delaware State News Newshound
The Green Machine - Best Float Eastern Shore Natural Gas
The Aran Award - Best Animal Robert & Tally Bodner (2 Pomeranian Dogs)
The Harp Award - Best Music Group Bagpiper W illiam Frantz
Shamrock Award - Most Authentic Irish Theme Molly Malone Brigade sponsored by W T Smithers
Mary Fitzpatrick Award - Best Overall South Dover Elementary PTA
Certificate of Appreciation - 12th Annual St. Patrick’s Day Committee
The City Clerk read the following Certificate into the record:
Be It Hereby Known to All That
The Mayor and Council Commend
Jen Allen, Chair Mary Fitzpatrick Carol Lettieri
Bill Bauer Carole Gallagher Cathy Marker
Barbara Burkert Fred Gallagher Jeff Reed
Anne Casey Dr. Dan Houghtaling Steve Welde
Leslie Corello Dan Lettieri Connie Welde
For Promoting the Revitalization of Downtown Dover by
Volunteering Their Time to Bring Families to the Downtown Area
for Main Street’s St. Patrick’s Day Parade
by
Serving as a Member of
The 12th Annual St. Patrick’s Day Committee
Presented this 28th Day of March 2005
On behalf of Main Street, Mr. Perez relayed appreciation to those who served on the Committee for
their dedication.
PRESENTATION - POLICE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT
Chief Horvath gave a power point presentation of the Police Department Annual Report for the Year
2004. The Report was presented and accepted by Council during their Regular Meeting of
March 14, 2005 (as on file in the Office of the City Clerk).
Concurring with Mr. Ritter, Chief Horvath explained that there are problems with tracking homeless
sex offenders and those who have moved from their registered home address.
Page 6
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 4
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Chief Horvath stated that one of the number one complaints received
from neighborhood surveys is traffic violations in the neighborhood. When complaints are received,
he stated that attempts are made to schedule resources for those areas. He urged citizens to contact
the Police Department to relay their concerns about their neighborhood immediately so that
appropriate action can be taken.
UPDATE (325 DAY) - BROWN WATER
Mr. Koenig, Public Works Director, provided a Power Point Presentation on the 325-day update for
Brown Water (Exhibit #1). He advised members that staff is currently evaluating various funding
options for the water system, developing different strategies to address every option available, and
has made preliminary presentations to the City Manager. The presentations will be further
developed over the next few months and will be part of the Water Utility Budget and Capital
Investments Plan.
PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT -
MARCH 1, 2005
The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee met on March 1, 2005 with
Chairman Pitts presiding. City Clerk’s Office Note: During the March 14, 2005 Council Meeting,
members deferred action on the committee’s recommendations regarding the Ideas of Mayor Speed
for Neighborhood Improvements contained in the committee’s report.
Discussion - Ideas of Mayor Speed for Neighborhood Improvements
During the Council Retreat held on January 21, 2005, Mayor Speed proposed consideration of a
Homeownership Initiative for the Downtown area, including: monetary incentives; zoning changes
to include a new, mixed-use Downtown Zone as specified in the Comprehensive Plan; nuisance
property enforcement; transfer tax elimination for first time home buyers; real estate tax abatement
in the target area; and, elimination of conversion from Single to Multi-family homes.
Mayor Speed provided a map of the targeted area, from Mary Street to Loockerman Street and
Governor’s Avenue to West Street, which he suggested should be concentrated on at this time, and
provided information on the following:
A. Monetary Incentives:
1. Extend 1st Time Home Buyer Transfer Tax Exemption to the Seller
Mayor Speed stated that most municipalities currently have a first time home buyer
transfer tax exemption in place for the seller and he would like to implement a
similar exemption, initially in the target area and then extended Citywide, for the
following reasons: 1) the City of Dover is below the national average Citywide in
home ownership; and 2) it would prevent problem areas from surfacing in other
areas of the City. Had this program been in place in June 2004, the approximate cost
would have been $122,000. Mr. Ruane stated tax exemption for the seller seems like
a reward for moving out of the City. Responding, Mayor Speed stated that the loss
of revenue assumes a static situation and assumes that the process has no effect. An
increase in home ownership within the City will result in increased property values,
Page 7
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 5
which will increase tax revenues every three (3) years when the reassessment is
completed.
The committee recommended extending the first time home buyer transfer tax
exemption to the seller in the target area, defined as Mary Street to Loockerman
Street and Governors Avenue to West Street.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation,
seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. It is noted that the
recommendation requires the development of an ordinance which will be reviewed by the Legislative,
Finance, and Administration Committee.
2. Real Estate Tax Abatement for Home Purchasers in the Target Area
Mayor Speed proposed implementing a real estate tax abatement program for anyone
purchasing homes in the target area. This could be accomplished by waiving the
property taxes the first year and gradually increasing the percentage of the tax due
until the property owner is paying 100% of their tax bill. Responding to Mr. Hogan,
Mayor Speed stated that this would include the purchase of homes in the target area
and would not be limited to rental properties.
The committee recommended that staff prepare an ordinance which would phase in
tax abatement over a period of time, as follows: No taxes in the first year; 25% in
the second year; 50% in the third year; 75% in the fourth year; and 100% the fifth
year, with the stipulation that the program only be open for five years, after which
time it will automatically expire; it was also stipulated that the homeowner would be
required to occupy the home until they are paying 100% of the taxes or that they
rebate any taxes that they were exempt from and that the area of exemption be
defined as being from Mary Street to Loockerman Street and Governors Avenue to
West Street.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation,
seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
3. Partnership to Create Reduced Cost Mortgages in Target Area
Mayor Speed advised members that a partnership was created with the Downtown
Dover Development Corporation to create reduced cost mortgages in the target area
in an effort to reduce barriers to home ownership, such as qualifying for mortgages.
No further action was taken by the committee at this time.
4. Increase Community Development Downpayment Assistance
Mayor Speed stated that the increase in Community Development downpayment
assistance has been implemented.
The committee recommended that Council support priority use of the Community
Block Development Grant (CDBG) money in its five year goal plan with the focus
Page 8
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 6
being: 1) the Community Development Downpayment Assistance Program; and 2)
Rehabilitation.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation,
seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
B. Zoning Changes:
1. New Mixed Use Zone
Mayor Speed explained that the City’s Comprehensive Plan, which was originally
adopted in 1996 and updated in 2003, states that the City of Dover will have a mixed
use zone. The idea of this is to deconcentrate rental properties.
It was noted that the Planning and Inspections Department is planning to include the
new zoning classification in the Implementation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan
and will be considered by City Council at that time.
2. Eliminate Single to Multi-Family Conversions in RG-1
Mayor Speed stated that the City’s largest concentration of RG-1 zoning, where
conversion from single family homes to multi-family homes is permitted, is located
in the downtown area. He suggested eliminating conversion in RG-1 only, not RG-2,
in order to prevent correcting a problem in one area only to have it move to another
area.
The committee recommended that staff prepare an ordinance to eliminate single-
family to multi-family conversion in the RG-1 area.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation,
seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
C. Nuisance Property Enforcement:
Mayor Speed advised members that staff is researching State legislation regarding
the handling of nuisance properties, such as those with repeated or continued drug,
violence, gambling and prostitution activity.
No further action was taken by the committee at this time.
Community Report - Chairman Pitts
Mr. Pitts provided members some history of downtown Dover, explaining that although the City has
made great improvements over the years, there are still more improvements to be made.
During the committee meeting, Ms. Lori James, representing Senator Thomas Carper, advised
members that approximately two (2) years ago Senator Carper initiated a pilot housing initiative
program, which is managed by the Dover Housing Authority. She noted that although Delaware has
a very good home ownership rate nationwide, Kent County has a 52% home ownership rate.
Page 9
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 7
Mr. Pitts noted that there are approximately twenty (20) lots, some vacant and some with houses,
in the target area that will either be rehabilitated or demolished.
It was noted that the Downtown Merchant’s Association recently submitted a request that the City
consider the adoption of an ordinance to address vacant buildings in the downtown area. Members
felt that vacant buildings are a problem throughout the City.
The committee recommended that during the next committee meeting, members have a discussion
regarding vacant buildings and that the Downtown Merchants Association be invited to participate.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation,
seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for acceptance of the Parks, Recreation, and
Community Enhancement Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a
unanimous roll call vote.
LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT -
MARCH 14, 2005
The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on March 14, 2005 with Chairman
Salters presiding.
Charter Review of the Reincorporation and Conflict with State Law and/or City Policies and
Procedures - Adoption of Resolution Requesting General Assembly to Amend City Charter
(Amendment to Section 52 of City Charter - Alderman; and Section 53 of City Charter -
Police)
During their Regular Meeting of March 7, 2005 (rescheduled from February 28, 2005), City Council
reviewed the committee’s recommendation for approval of the proposed Charter changes for the
Reincorporation of the City Charter with the stipulation that Section 52, Alderman, remain intact.
After much discussion regarding Section 52, Alderman, of the City Charter, members of Council
referred the matter back to the committee and requested that Deputy City Solicitor Pepper attend the
meeting to allow for due diligence in understanding this issue.
Deputy City Solicitor Pepper referred to his letter, dated February 1, 2005, that was previously
submitted providing an explanation of his position on the elimination of the Alderman’s Court.
Although it was his opinion that the Alderman’s Court should be retained and made active, in light
of the recent legislation, he indicated that Section 52 would require an amendment to provide for
the appointment of the Alderman to be accomplished by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate
rather than City Council.
It was Mr. Hogan opinion that the few cases that have been cited when the Justice of the Peace Court
did not support the City of Dover would not warrant the need to resurrect the Alderman Court;
therefore, he suggested that Section 52 of the Charter be eliminated.
Concurring with Mr. Hogan, Mr. Ruane also noted the additional expenses that would be incurred
by the City if the Alderman Court was re-activated. He alluded to copies of Alderman Court Task
Page 10
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 8
Force Reports that he provided to members and explained that it is evident that the majority of the
Alderman Courts that are active are not self-supporting. Mr. Ruane reiterated the grave concern and
interest of Representative Wagner regarding the constitutionality and legitimacy of the Alderman
Courts and reminded members that Representative Wagner has offered to convene a meeting with
the Assistant Chief Magistrate and in the future to assure an understanding of each jurisdiction. She
even suggested the possibility of the Magistrates participating in training sessions and conversations
with the City Solicitor’s Office as well as the City’s Inspectors so that the City can be assured of an
effective, fair, just, and swift justice from the J.P. Courts. Mr. Ruane urged members to consider
this as an alternative in lieu of re-establishing the Alderman Court.
In response to Mr. Salters, Mrs. Green stated that there would be no change in her position or current
responsibilities if she were no longer appointed to serve as Alderman, explaining that areas of the
Charter which refer to the Alderman would be changed to City Clerk.
The committee recommended that Section 52, Alderman, of the City Charter be deleted and that the
Council President meet with local representatives to discuss this issue prior to the Regular Council
Meeting scheduled for March 28, 2005.
Members also considered a proposal submitted by Police Chief Horvath to amend Section 53,
Police, of the City Charter. The proposed amendments would address conflicts with State Law
and/or City policies and procedures.
The committee recommended that the changes proposed in the first sentence of Section 53 (lines 962
and 963) not be made, and approval of the changes proposed in the remainder of Section 53 (lines
964 through 976).
The committee recommended adoption of the Resolution requesting the General Assembly to
Amend the City Charter as presented and amended.
Council President Williams advised members that as requested, she, along with Mayor Speed, met
with Senator Still to review the proposed reincorporation of the City Charter. As a result, he
suggested additional amendments, as follows:
1) he - his - him; change throughout to be gender generic
2) change the words “salary” and/or “compensation” where mentioned for
elected and appointed officials to “emoluments”
3) 3rd paragraph of Section 3, include the words “or as amended by State law”
after (1.5%)
4) at the end of Section 32 add the words “as amended”
Responding to Mr. Hogan, Mayor Speed explained that the suggestion for changing the words
“salary” and/or “compensation” to “emoluments” would allow for reimbursement of expenses. He
also advised members that the definition of emoluments includes both words.
Page 11
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 9
Mr. Salters moved to approve the committee’s recommendation to include the changes as
recommended by Senator Still and, by a unanimous roll call vote, Council adopted the
following Resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN
COUNCIL MET:
That the General Assembly of the State of Delaware is hereby requested that the Charter of the City
of Dover be consolidated into one complete Act and in certain respects further amended and revised
Subpart A, Charter, Sections 1 through 61, and Subpart B, Related Laws, Sections 1 through 3.
ADOPTED: MARCH 28, 2005
Revised Revenue Manual
Members reviewed the City of Dover 2005-2006 Revenue Manual, which included the top revenue
sources, revenue guidelines, inventory of revenue sources, and future potential revenue sources.
During the committee meeting, Mrs. Tieman, Administrative Services Director, explained that the
Revenue Manual is an inventory of all the City’s revenues to assist Council, staff, and the public an
understanding and ability to track all of the various revenue sources to the City. The manual
includes: 1) a list of the top revenue sources over the past three (3) years; 2) guidelines for how often
the manual should be updated and different revenues should be reviewed; 3) an inventory of all
revenue sources with detailed information on rates, dates established and last reviewed, projection
method, collection method, and benchmarks; 4) a list of potential new revenue sources; and 5)
indexes for the revenue sources. Based on the established guidelines, she stated that staff has been
requested to review certain revenues for updating. If a department wishes to change any of the fees,
Mrs. Tieman assured members that they will be presented to Council in advance and then
incorporated into the 2006 budget. She welcomed any other ideas that members may have regarding
potential revenue sources.
The committee recommended acceptance of the Revised Revenue Manual for 2005-2006.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation,
seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
State of the City Budget - Mid-Year Review and Proposed Budget Revision Ordinances
Staff presented the State of the City Budget - Mid-Year Review of the 2004/2005 Budget (as on file
in the Office of the City Clerk), and proposed budget revision ordinances for the committee’s review.
The purpose of the report is to give Council a mid-year depiction of the City’s operating expenses
and revenues for all City budgets.
During the committee meeting, Mrs. Tieman, Director of Administrative Services, advised members
that it is projected that the General Fund Budget balance will decrease by $11,403 to $2,192,963.
This is due to lower than projected revenues in the beginning balance, permits and other licenses,
and civil traffic penalties. She assured members that the 8% fund balance requirement will be met.
The Water/Wastewater Fund Budget balance is projected to decrease by $853,823 to $1,276,972,
Page 12
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 10
which is primarily due to revenue estimates being revised downward to reflect actual results. The
Electric Fund Budget balance will decrease by $55,200 to $3,466,290, which is the result of
increased costs associated with the need to install infrastructure due to new construction in the City.
In reviewing the revised budgets this year, Mrs. Tieman stated that it has been necessary to increase
gasoline expenses budgets to reflect actual expenses throughout the City’s department budgets,
totaling an additional $71,463. Because of the lower than anticipated revenues in the General Fund
and the Water/Wastewater Fund, staff did not recommend the sweeping of the salary accounts into
the post-retirement benefits reserve at this time. If additional revenues are realized or expenses are
reduced in the remainder of the year, the sweeping of the salary accounts would occur at that time.
Mrs. Mitchell, Finance Director/Treasurer, submitted proposed budget revision ordinances that
would incorporate the recommended adjustments to the budget balances into the fiscal year 2005
Budget. She noted that the ordinances only reflect changes to affected budgets and does not include
all budgets. Staff recommended adoption of the proposed budget revision ordinances as presented.
The committee recommended adoption of the budget revision ordinances as recommended by staff.
Mr. Hogan moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Carey
and unanimously carried. (The First Reading of the ordinance will take place during the latter
part of the meeting).
Revised Hospitality Policy
Mrs. Mitchell, Finance Director/Treasurer, submitted a revised Hospitality and Civic Function
Policy for the committee’s review. She explained that the revisions simplify the policy, eliminate
ambiguity, and will help resolve interpretation issues.
The committee recommended adoption of the Revised Hospitality Policy.
Mr. Ritter relayed concern with the revised Hospitality Policy, noting that the Policy was just
developed last year, that a lot of effort was put into its development, and that it has been reduced to
a one (1) page document. It was his feeling that if Council approves the revised policy, they will
be losing control and responsibility for their constituents’ money.
Mr. Carey moved for adoption of the Revised Hospitality Policy (Exhibit #1), as recommended
by the committee, seconded by Mr. Pitts and carried by a roll call vote of seven (7) yes, and
two (2) no (Mr. Ritter and Mr. Ruane).
Proposed Resolution - Investment Post-Retirement Medical Benefits
Mrs. Mitchell, Finance Director/Treasurer, indicated that the City currently has appropriated $2.3
million for post-retirement medical benefits in preparation for the upcoming accounting requirement
(GASB 43). These funds are currently invested in the City’s fixed income investment portfolio with
Wilmington Trust Company with a current average annual yield of 3.3%.
Mrs. Mitchell advised members that the State of Delaware created an investment pool for local
governments (DELRIP) and that the State Public Employment Retirement System (PERS)
annualized total returns for FY2004 was 15.9%. Relative to other public pension funds, the ranking
Page 13
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 11
of the System’s performance is above the median for the latest fiscal year, in the top 25% over the
last five (5) years, and in the top 10% over the last ten (10) years. In order to attain a more favorable
return and growth of the fund, Mrs. Mitchell recommended transferring the invested assets and
adoption of a Resolution authorizing the investment of the City’s Post-Retirement Medical funds
in the State of Delaware Local Government Retirement Investment Pool.
The committee recommended adoption of the Resolution as recommended by staff.
Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Salters
and by a unanimous roll call vote, Council adopted the following Resolution:
WHEREAS, in 1996 the Delaware General Assembly approved the creation of an investment pool
for the local governments of the state; and
WHEREAS, authorized by Title 29, Chapter 83 of the Delaware Code, the Delaware Local
Retirement Investment Pool establishes an investment program tailored to the needs of such
organizations; and
WHEREAS, it would be in the best interest of this organization to deposit funds in the investment
pool when deemed advisable by those responsible for such decisions; and
WHEREAS, the State Board of Pension Trustees is committed to using and sharing their resources
to provide the best possible financial support and services to all local governments throughout the
State of Delaware.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET that on this 28th day of March in the year 2005, the Mayor and
Council of the City of Dover agree to authorize the investment of funds in the Delaware Local
Government Retirement Investment Pool; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the authorization to participate in this program does not
obligate this local government to participate, but it allows participation in the pool voluntarily as
deemed appropriate for the best interest of this local government.
ADOPTED: MARCH 28, 2005
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and
Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll
call vote.
UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - MARCH 14, 2005
The Utility Committee met on March 14, 2005 with Chairman Carey presiding.
Maximizing Dover’s Connectivity Infrastructure
In June 2004, the City's Information Technology Long-Range Plan recommended that the City
investigate leveraging its fiber optic network. It also recommended that Dover leverage that
Page 14
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 12
network to deploy a Citywide voiceover Internet telephone system provider and use of wireless,
which is not currently available. There are 30 miles of fiber optic cable that has been installed in
the City, but only two (2) City departments are taking advantage of this tremendous bandwidth
capacity. It is staff’s belief that the City is utilizing this network at about ten percent (10%) of its
capacity. Other cities across the country have taken advantage of their fiber optic networks to
reduce telecommunication expense and increase work force efficiency.
Mrs. Tieman, Director of Administrative Services, advised members that staff would like to
re-examine the City’s franchise fee agreement due to the expanded cable service offerings in our
area. Specifically, Verizon has expressed its intentions about offering cable in our area. Staff would
also like to examine the opportunity of collecting additional franchise fees from non-participating
utilities that are doing business within the City's limits, such as Conectiv and Delaware Electric
Cooperative, which is becoming an issue as the City annexes property. In light of the 1996
Telecommunication Act, which created new standards for joint use of utility poles, staff would like
to revisit the City’s pole attachment fees and attachments for all users. Mrs. Tieman reviewed and
explained the goals for the studies.
As a result of the recent City Council Retreat, she assured members that staff is not proposing the
study of broadband options such as cable television or Internet service that would compete with
private providers. Staff recommended that the City Manager be authorized to issue an RFP for
professional services to assist the City in maximizing the use of its fiber optic system, voice over
Internet telephone system provider, franchise fee review, and pole attachment agreement.
The committee recommended that the City Manager be authorized to issue an RFP as recommended
by staff.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation,
seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for acceptance of the Utility Committee Report,
seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT -
MARCH 15, 2005
The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee met on March 15, 2005 with
Chairman Pitts presiding.
Proposed Ordinance Amendments - Update of Codes - Chapter 5, Building and Building
Regulations and Chapter 10, Housing and Property Maintenance
At the request of staff, members reviewed various proposed ordinance amendments to the Dover
Code pertaining to Building, Building Regulations, Housing, and Property Maintenance. Mr. Grant
Pritchard, Chief Building Inspector, advised members that staff also recommended adoption of the
latest edition of The International Property Maintenance Code, 2003 (IBC), with slight
modifications. Mr. Pritchard noted that the IBC is a complete set of codes used to regulate the built
environment. He also noted that the City is currently using the 1999 IBC and it is referenced
throughout the Dover Code.
Page 15
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 13
Mr. Ruane suggested that Section R114 - Stop Work Order - be amended to read “and no less than
$1000.00 and no more than $10,000.00 . . .". and that Section 108.5 - Stop Work Order - be
amended by striking “to perform” to read “. . . except such work as that person is directed to remove
a violation or unsafe condition, . . .”.
The committee recommended approval of the proposed ordinance amendments to the Dover Code
pertaining to Building, Building Regulations, Housing, and Property Maintenance, as amended.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation,
seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. (The First Reading of the
ordinance will take place during the latter part of the meeting).
Discussion - Vacant Buildings
The Downtown Dover Merchants Association requested consideration of amendments to Chapter 5
of the Dover Code with regard to vacant buildings to include the following: 1) Vacant Buildings
in the BID District be subject to the same code as occupied buildings; 2) A vacant building in the
BID Tax District be subject to “Vacancy Registration Fees”. There is precedent for this in
Wilmington DE (Annual Registration and Vacant Building Fees, Wilmington Ordinance 03-019).
Properties are deemed vacant if “No person or persons actually, currently conducts a lawfully
licensed business, or lawfully resides or lives in any part of the building (Wilmington City, Chapter
Four, City Code Section 4-27,125.0(b)(1)(F); and, 3) This ordinance would be enforced by the City
of Dover Planning and Inspections. Registration fees and fines could be used to fund additional
inspectors for enforcement and therefore be virtually self supporting.
As a result, staff provided members with a draft outline of a possible Vacant Building ordinance
modeled on the City’s existing ordinance and several ordinances obtained from other communities.
Mr. Galvin advised members that once the framework is determined, the City Solicitor would be
requested to prepare the draft ordinance. Mr. DePrima requested feedback on the following items
for consideration when preparing the ordinance: a range of penalties, a time frame in which a
building would be considered vacant, monitoring permits and fees, and property exemptions.
Mr. Slavin suggested that members carefully consider what the definition of “vacant” will be so that
they do not alienate good property owners who have done everything possible to rent their
properties. He also reminded members that many buildings with first floor vacancies have fully
functional and occupied apartments on the floors above them. Mr. Hogan stated that he liked the
examples from California and Wilmington. He noted that the ordinance would need to have
penalties in order for it to be enforceable; however, it should also take into consideration those
owners that are actively trying to rent their buildings. Mr. Anderson reminded members that there
could be situations beyond the owners’ control, such as the property being in probate, a military
owner which has been deployed, or a property which is on the market for sale. He did not feel that
penalties or fees should be applicable in those situations.
Page 16
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 14
The committee deferred this matter for further consideration during a meeting which is dedicated
to this item in order to allow time for interested parties, such as the Downtown Dover Merchants
Association to participate.
No further action was taken by Council.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for acceptance of the Parks, Recreation, and
Community Enhancement Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a
unanimous roll call vote.
SAFETY ADVISORY & TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT - MARCH 16, 2005
The Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee met on March 16, 2005 with Chairman Ritter
presiding.
Update - DelDOT Projects (Gary Laing)
Due to the absence of Mr. Gary Laing, DelDOT Municipal Liaison, the Update on DelDOT Projects
was not provided.
Proposed Ordinance Amendments - Chapter 4.5 - Bicycles
During the review of the Dover Code, Chief Horvath and Major Harding suggested that Chapter 4.5,
Bicycles, be amended to bring it up-to-date and have it be more realistic as far as enforcement issues
are concerned. Members reviewed the proposed ordinance amendments and, although there was not
a quorum, it was the consensus of members present that the proposed ordinance amendments be
forwarded to Council for consideration.
There was no further action taken by Council at this time. (The First Reading of the ordinance will
take place during the latter part of the meeting).
Review of Existing Common Street Names
At the request of Councilman Ritter, Fire Chief Bashista composed a list of street, development, and
apartment names that could be confusing to dispatchers and first responders during an emergency.
Although staff did not suggest changing any of the current names, they recommended that more
attention be paid to these concerns in the future.
Members reviewed the list and it was the consensus of members present that more attention should
be paid to the naming of streets, developments, and apartments in the future. No further action was
recommended.
By consent agenda, Mr. Carey moved for acceptance of the Safety Advisory and
Transportation Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll
call vote.
MONTHLY REPORTS - FEBRUARY 2005
By motion of Mr. Carey, seconded by Mr. Sadusky, the following monthly reports were
accepted by consent agenda:
Page 17
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 15
Budget Report
Chief of Police Report
City Assessor Report
City Clerk/Alderman Report (Fines)
City Manager's Report
Mayor's Report
Planning and Inspections Report
Robbins Hose Company No. 1 Report
REZONING REQUEST/FIRST READING - BAY ROAD, OWNED BY DELAWARE
INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES
A request was received to rezone property located on the east side of Bay Road (intersectin of Route
113 and Puncheon Run Connector), consisting of 38.12 acres. The property is currently owned by
Delaware Industrial Enterprises (Equitable Owner is Stover Homes, Inc.). The property is currently
zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial) for 3.80+/- acres and IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing) for 34.32+/-
acres and the proposed zoning is C-4 (Highway Commercial) for 5.30+/- acres and IPM (Industrial Park
Manufacturing) for 32.82+/- acres.
Prior to amending the zoning ordinances and zoning map of the City of Dover, a public hearing is
required.
By motion of Mr. Salters, seconded by Mr. Sadusky, Council referred the request to the
Planning Commission on April 18, 2005 and set a public hearing for May 23, 2005 at 7:30 p.m.
(Mr. Ruane not voting). The first reading of the following proposed ordinance was accomplished
by title only:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE
CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED
ON THE EST SIDE OF BAY ROAD (INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 113 AND PUNCHEON RUN
CONNECTOR), CONSISTING OF 38.12 ACRES.
COMPREHENSIVE REZONING (PROJECT 2005) REQUEST/FIRST READING
In September 2003, City Council adopted the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003, The Dover Plan:
From the People - For the People, which has been certified by the State of Delaware. Mr. Galvin
advised members that a series of Plan Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003 have
been prepared which includes a Comprehensive Rezoning Project 2005.
Prior to amending the zoning ordinances and zoning map of the City of Dover, a public hearing is
required.
By motion of Mr. Carey, seconded by Mr. Pitts, Council unanimously referred the request to
the Planning Commission (May 2, 2005 at 7:00 p.m., Special Planning Commission Meeting)
and set a public hearing for Tuesday, May 17, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at a Special City Council
Meeting. The first reading of the following proposed ordinance was accomplished by title only:
Page 18
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 16
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE
CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING ZONING DESIGNATIONS TO CONFORM WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE 2003.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS - SETTING OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
In September 2003, City Council adopted the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003, The Dover Plan:
From the People - For the People, which has been certified by the State of Delaware. Mr. Galvin
explained that a series of Plan Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003 have been
prepared which includes Land Development Plan Revisions, Annexation Plan Revisions, and
Implementation Plan Revisions, as follows:
Land Development Plan Revisions (Map 11-1 and Chapter 11)
Chapter 11: The Land Development Plan discusses the future land development and land uses for
properties with the City. It includes the Land Development Plan Map (Map 11-1) which outlines
the future development of land in the City be depicting a land use type category for each parcel of
land. These land use categories include Residential, Mixed Use, Commercial, Institutional, Office
Parks, Industrial, Open Space, Agriculture, etc. During the review process for the Comprehensive
Rezoning Project 2005, items in the Land Development Plan were identified as needing to be
addressed, which has resulted in recommended changes to the Land Development Plan Map. These
changes occur for many reasons, including the following: the results of approved rezoning
applications including minor variations, perceived mapping errors, the ability for zoning
classifications to comply in multiple land use type categories, updated data in specific areas, and
planning visions for specific areas. For this amendment, the recommended changes will be depicted
on a map and listed in a summary table. A narrative will also provide information on the review
process.
Annexation Plan Revisions (Map 12-1 and Chapter 12)
Chapter 12: The Annexation Plan, as approved in the adopted Comprehensive Plan Update 2003,
anticipated an amendment to include the results of the Cost/Revenue Analysis Study for the potential
annexation parcels and any changes to the Plan based on the results. The consultants hired by the
City developed a methodology for assessing the costs and revenues for a series of properties
depicted on the Annexation Plan Map. The revisions to the Annexation Plan will describe the
Cost/Revenue Analysis Study project and its results. A narrative will also provide guidance as to
the items to be considered during the Annexation review process. The Annexation Plan Map also
currently places lands into categories, as follows: Category 1: Lands Identified for Annexation;
Category 2: Lands Desirable for Annexation; and Category 3: Lands to be Evaluated for Annexation
and Areas of Concern. In addition, a potential land use type is identified for lands in Category 1 and
Category 2. The Amendment will propose re-categorization of potential annexation areas and
revisions to the potential land use designation for identified annexation areas.
Implementation Plan Revisions (Chapter 14)
Chapter 14: The Implementation Plan outlines the timeframe (Phases I-IV) for actions to be
completed to implement elements of the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003. These actions include
project activities such as ordinance review and development, studies on specific topics, and special
plans. It is recognized that some changes are necessary to the Implementation Plan to be able to
achieve resolution to the projects identified. For some project activities, the amount of consultation
and documentation may not allow the City and staff to bring them to fruition within the current
Page 19
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 17
timeframe given. Other changes are to reflect recent initiatives by the City and other agencies, such
as Kent County’s Transfer of Development Rights Program. For this Amendment, a narrative will
reflect revisions to the timeframe for project activities and the addition of project activities as
necessary.
Mr. Galvin advised members that the review process will begin with the review of these Plan
Amendments by the Preliminary Land Use Services (PLUS). A meeting has been scheduled for
April 6, 2005. The Planning Staff will conduct Information Workshops on the series of
Comprehensive Plan Amendments, along with the Comprehensive Rezoning Project 2005. These
workshops have been scheduled for April 5, 2005, from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., with a presentation
at 3:00 p.m., and from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., with a presentation at 7:00 p.m.
Staff recommended that a Public Hearing before the Planning Commission be set for Monday,
May 2, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at a Special Planning Commission Meeting and that a Public Hearing
before City Council be set for Tuesday, May 17, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at a Special City Council
Meeting.
Mr. Hogan moved for approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Carey and
unanimously carried.
FIRST READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCES
In accordance with Section 1-6 of the Dover Code, Council acknowledged the First Reading of the
Rezoning Ordinances as read by the City Clerk, by title only, as follows:
• REVISED BUDGETS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005
• BUILDING, RESIDENTIAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, AND PROPERTY
MAINTENANCE CODES:
N CHAPTER 5 - BUILDING AND BUILDING REGULATIONS
N CHAPTER 7 - FIRE PREVENTION, PROTECTION
N CHAPTER 10 - HOUSING AND PROPERTY MAINTENANCE
• CHAPTER 4.5 - BICYCLES
DISTRIBUTION OF PACKET MATERIAL - SETTING OF ITEMS ON COUNCIL DESKS
(COUNCILMAN HOGAN)
Mr. Hogan relayed concern regarding packet material being distributed to members immediately
prior to the meetings, which he felt does not provide members ample time for review prior to having
to take action. He also relayed concern with there being no indication as to who was providing
members the material. He suggested that this practice be discontinued and when absolutely
necessary, that the information contain who it is being provided by.
COUNCIL MEMBERS COMMENTS
Mr. Salters announced that a DelDOT public hearing has been scheduled for April 18, 2005 from
4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at Booker T. Washington School to discuss the work scheduled for Division
and Forrest Streets.
Mr. Carey moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Sadusky, and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 9:08 P.M.
Page 20
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 18
JANICE C. GREEN
CITY CLERK
All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of
March 28, 2005, are hereby approved.
STEPHEN R. SPEED
MAYOR
Exhibits Attached to Original Minutes and File Copy
Exhibit #1 - Update (325 Day) Brown W ater
/JG
S:\ClerksOffice\Agendas&Minutes\Council-Minutes\2005\03-28-2005.wpd
Page 21
Certificate of Recognition
WHEREAS, Geoffrey R. Myers is a Dover native and student at Wesley College
with a perfect 4.0 grade point average; and
WHEREAS, Geoffrey R. Myers has received the prestigious Gagliardi Trophy for
being the top Division III football player in the nation; and
WHEREAS, Geoffrey R. Myers has volunteered at St. Thomas More’s Youth
Basketball Camp, as a math tutor for high school students, in the Guidance Office
at Central Middle School and at various other youth oriented programs; and
WHEREAS, Geoffrey R. Myers has received a host of institutional scholarships
and awards for outstanding academic performance; and
WHEREAS, Geoffrey R. Myers is an exceptional young man who has been a
tremendous help to others at Wesley College and in the Dover community.
NOW THEREFORE I, STEPHEN R. SPEED, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF
DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby award this Certificate of Recognition to
Geoffrey “Rocky” Myers
on this 11th day of April 2005, and commend him for his commitment to the youth
of Dover and extend best wishes on all future endeavors.
Stephen R. Speed
Mayor
Page 22
CERTIFICATE OF COMMENDATION
WHEREAS, on Saturday, January 1, 2005 the Robbins Hose Fire Company was alerted for a motor
vehicle accident at Scarborough and McKee Roads; and
WHEREAS, upon arrival, members observed three cars involved in the accident, one of which had fire
coming through the back window impinging on the unconscious patient who was trapped in the vehicle and
inhaling smoke and heated gases from the burning vehicle; and
WHEREAS, the patient was removed from the vehicle, under extremely dangerous conditions to the
firefighters involved, within 13 minutes from time of dispatch; and
WHEREAS, while crews worked on the priority vehicle, additional crews worked on the second vehicle
which had two patients severely trapped, both of whom were extricated within 21 minutes from time of dispatch;
and
WHEREAS, due to the quick response, training, and leadership of the Dover Fire Department, lives were
saved by those volunteers who assisted in this rescue, and who are deserving of special recognition.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, are
honored to present this
Certificate of Commendation to
EDWIN BAKER, III REED JONES RAYMOND OSIKA
BRIAN BASHISTA DAVID KNIGHT STEPHEN SAPP
CHARLES BOYER VALERIE KNIGHT JOSEPH SIMMONS
DAVID CAREY DEREK LARSON SHARON SIMPKISS
MATTHEW CAREY JOHN LECOMPTE, II TREY SMALL
CARLETON CAREY, JR. NICOLE MARK BENJAMIN SMETANA
CARLETON CAREY, SR. SHADRACK MINOR RICK THOMAS
SEAN CHRISTIANSEN ALLEN MOORE, JR. MICHAEL THOMPSON
ALAN FARLING TIMOTHY MULLANEY TERRY WHITHAM
JACK FORTNEY JOHN OLIVER, III JOHN WILLSON
GLENN GILLESPIE JASON OSIKA ROGER WOLFGANG
MARK HALL JONATHAN OSIKA JASON ZIEGLER
on this 11th Day of April 2005
STEPHEN R. SPEED BEVERLY C. WILLIAMS
MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT
Page 23
PETITON TO AMEND ZONING DISTRICT
Before the Dover City Council
April 11, 2005
Applicants/Owners Robert M. Duncan
111 South West Street, Suite 1
Dover, DE 19904
Location: North side of Forest Street fronting on both South West Street and South Kirkwood
Street.
Property Addresses 585 Forest Street
111 South West Street
122 S. Kirkwood Street
Tax Parcel ID #: ED-05-076.12-02-46.00/000 & ED-05-076.12-02-51.00/000
Size: 1.2177 acres ±
Present Zoning: C-3 (Service Commercial Zone)
C-2 (Central Commercial Zone)
H (Historic District Zone)
Proposed Zoning: C-1A (Limited Commercial Zone) permitting: Convenience retail stores; personal
service stores, including but not limited to, barber shops, beauty shops, and tailors;
service establishment furnishing services other than of a personal nature; residences
in conformance with Article 3 §2 General Residential Zone; Banks or business,
professional, or governmental offices; and other retail and service establishments but
excluding the following: gasoline filing stations and motor vehicle storage, repair or
service except that gasoline pumps shall be permitted as an accessory use (subject to
conditional use approval; wholesaling, warehousing or storage; manufacturing,
printing, assembling, converting, altering, finishing, cleaning or any other
processing of goods on premises except as permitted in C-1; and excessive traffic
generating uses such as theaters, drive-ins, bowling alleys, and other commercial,
recreation, restaurants, etc.
H (Historic District Zone)
Present Use: Commercial (Service establishments, offices)
Proposed Use: Commercial (Service establishments, offices, and retail)
File Number: Z-05-01
Comprehensive Plan: Mixed Use
Findings and Recommendations of the Dover Planning Commission
Page 24
Z-05-01Lands of Robert M. Duncan: Rezoning C-3/C-2 and H to C-1A and H
Planning Commission Recommendation Report to City Council for April 11, 2005
Page 2
This petition was considered at the March 21, 2005 meeting of the Planning Commission. The
following members were present: Vice Chairman Mr. DiMondi, Mr. Nichols, Mrs. Young, Mr.
Tolbert, Mr. Holt, Mr. Winsley, and Col. Welsh. Mr. Friedman and Mr. vonReider were absent.
The Planning Commission recommends that this request (Application Z-05-01 Lands of
Robert Duncan at 585 Forest Street, 111 South West Street, and 122 South Kirkwood
Street) for rezoning from C-3 (Service Commercial zone)/C-2 (Central Commercial Zone)
and subject to H (Historic District Zone) to C-1A (Limited Commercial Zone) with H
(Historic District Zone) be denied. The motion for denial of the rezoning passed 7-0 of
those members present.
The following information was considered by the Planning Commission in addition to the
guidance provided in the Zoning Ordinance, Article 10 §5.111 for rezonings:
Application Summary Subject parcels
This application is to rezone the properties at
585 Forest Street, 111 South West Street and
122 South Kirkwood Street more commonly
known as the Duncan Depot Complex. The
subject area is located on the north side of
Forest Street, fronting on both South West
Street and South Kirkwood Street. The subject
area consists of two parcels of land totaling
1.2177 acres +/-. A majority of the property
currently zoned C-3 (Service Commercial Zone). A small portion of the subject area fronting on
South Kirkwood Street is zoned C-2 (Central Commercial Zone). Both properties are subject to
the H (Historic District Zone). The proposed zoning classification is C-1A (Limited Commercial
Zone) with the property remaining subject to the H (Historic District Zone). The owner of record
is Robert Duncan.
Existing Property
The Duncan Depot Complex was developed in its
present form with applications MI-98-03 and S-98-02.
The property consists of two existing buildings, a
gasoline service island with canopy, and associated
site improvements such as parking. The existing
buildings are occupied with service establishments on
the first floor and offices on the upper floors. The
convenience store is allowed as accessory to the gas
pumps. There have been retail stores in the smaller
building on the corner of Kirkwood and Forest,
including the jewelry/pawn store.
Page 25
Z-05-01Lands of Robert M. Duncan: Rezoning C-3/C-2 and H to C-1A and H
Planning Commission Recommendation Report to City Council for April 11, 2005
Page 3
Surrounding Land Uses:
This property is located on the northwestern edge of the
Downtown commercial area just west of the terminus of
Loockerman Street as it transitions to Forrest Street. The
Duncan Depot property encompasses a majority of the
city block bounded by Forrest Street, South West Street,
Reed Street, and South Kirkwood Street. A portion of the
block fronting on South Kirkwood Street is proposed as a
parking lot with application S-04-03 Duncan Depot
Parking Lot Addition. South of this property across
Loockerman Street/ Forest Street is the train station
rehabilitated as State office space and the Office
Building currently under construction at 500 West
Loockerman Street known as the Duncan Center
(Applications S-02-11 and S-03-30). Immediately to
the west of this property are the railroad tracks. To
the northeast on the opposite side of Kirkwood Street
are one small retail property, several residential
properties, and a vacant lot (previously part of a
lumber company) proposed for development with
application S-04-10 Building (Storage, Office, and
Apartment) at 135 S. Kirkwood Street.
Comprehensive Plan:
In the 2003 Comprehensive Plan Update, the Land Development Plan recommends that this
property be used for Mixed Uses. The 1996 Comprehensive Plan recommended the property be
part of the Downtown Mixed Use Development Area.
Request for C-1A (Limited Commercial Zoning)
The types of permitted uses in the C-1A (Limited Commercial Zone) are outlined in Article 3
§12.
Article 3 §12.11 All uses permitted in the Neighborhood Commercial C-1 Zone,
(11.11 Convenience retail stores such as drug stores, grocery stores,
luncheonettes, variety stores or combinations thereof. 11.12 Personal service
stores such as, but not limited to, barber shops, beauty parlors, and tailors,
provided that where steam pressure is used in clothes pressing it shall not
exceed 60 pounds per square inch. 11.13 Service establishments, furnishings,
services other than of a personal nature, but excluding gasoline filling stations
and motor vehicle storage, repair, or service.) with no limitation on size of
establishments.
12.12 Residences conforming to the regulations set forth in Article 3, Section 2.
12.13 Banks or businesses, professional or governmental offices.
12.14 Other retail and service establishments but excluding:
12.141 Gasoline filling stations and motor vehicle storage, repair, or service,
except that gasoline pumps shall be permitted as an accessory use subject to
conditional use approval by the planning commission pursuant to Article 10,
Section 1.
12.142 Wholesaling, warehousing or storage.
Page 26
Z-05-01Lands of Robert M. Duncan: Rezoning C-3/C-2 and H to C-1A and H
Planning Commission Recommendation Report to City Council for April 11, 2005
Page 4
12.143 The manufacturing, printing, assembling, converting, altering, finishing,
cleaning or any other processing of goods on the premises except as
permitted in the C-1 Zone.
12.144 Excessive traffic generating uses, such as theaters, "drive-ins,"
bowling alleys and other commercial, recreation, restaurants, etc.
Recommendation of the Planning Staff:
The Zoning Map presents a thoughtful approach to the specific zoning districts in this area that
has been somewhat muddled by recent rezonings. There was a clear attempt to protect the
integrity of the historically retail district along West Loockerman Street. From Kirkwood Street
to the east along Loockerman Street the zoning preference is for retail establishments with upper
floor residences and with offices permitted only after conditional approval of the Planning
Commission. The zoning protected the corridor from de-concentration of a retail core area by
not allowing retail beyond the historically retail area. Retail uses would be concentrated on
West Loockerman Street and not diffuse onto Forest Street. This transition area is a natural
segregation point for zoning purposes. The surrounding zoning, uses and proposals all are for
office and service type uses or the residential neighborhoods. The existing retail convenience
store on the subject site is accessory to the gas pumps (motor vehicle service station) that are
allowed under the C-3 zoning classification.
The applicant had requested a Zoning Verification letter for a liquor store in the smaller building
on the subject site. The C-3 Zoning does not allow retail and would, therefore, preclude the
liquor store. There was a liquor store across the street on Kirkwood Street and a club down the
block approximately 15 years ago along with associated customer loitering. Through a
neighborhood and community effort the store was closed. There is a package store on New
Street two blocks away. The now empty store fronts in the small building on the subject site
were occupied. The previous tenants vacated more than one year ago.
Staff recommends that the zoning for this parcel remain service and office related (C-3 Service
Commercial zone and C-2 Central Commercial zone) and that a recommendation be forwarded
to City Council to deny the request for rezoning of the property to C-1A (Limited Commercial
Zone). The recommendation is a rational response to the request based on the location of the
property and the surrounding land uses. An alternative considered would have been to make no
recommendation and allow the Commission to hear testimony from the applicant and neighbors
to determine the appropriate course of action during the meeting.
Advisory Comments to the Applicant:
1) The following corrections should be made to the rezoning plan sheet so that accurate
information may be provided for Planning Commission review.
a) Correctly identify the subject site on the soils map and two location maps.
b) Add property addresses.
c) Add H (Historic District Zone) to existing and proposed zoning within the data column.
d) The existing use is service commercial and the proposed use is service commercial with
retail.
2) Staff requests the completion of a Minor Lot Line Adjustment Plan to consolidate the two
subject parcels into one parcel of land.
Page 27
Z-05-01Lands of Robert M. Duncan: Rezoning C-3/C-2 and H to C-1A and H
Planning Commission Recommendation Report to City Council for April 11, 2005
Page 5
3) The applicant shall be aware that approval of any rezoning application does not represent
Site Development Plan approval. A separate Site Development Plan must be submitted and
approved if additional development activities are proposed on the property.
4) The applicant shall be aware that approval of any rezoning application does not represent a
Building Permit or other construction activity permit approval. A separate application
submission showing all improvements is required before issuance of permits by the City of
Dover.
5) Each business entity must maintain a current City of Dover business license in accordance
with the permitted uses of the property’s zoning classification and as outlined in Dover Code
of Ordinances.
Public Comments:
The application was represented by property owner, Robert M. Duncan who spoke in favor of
the rezoning.
The following individual appeared and spoke in regards to the rezoning application:
• Bishop Marion Lott, 218 Reed Street
• Mr. Theodore Henderson, 506 Wyoming Avenue
• Mr. David Rowland, 25 Slaughter Street
• Mr. L.T. Blackshear, 996 Boggs Drive
• Mrs. Brigett Evant (owns property on Kirkwood Street)
• Mr. Richard Evant
• Mrs. Terry Stone (owns properties on Queen Street)
• Ms. Sophia Russell, 20 N. New Street
• Mr. Jack Wallace, 630 Forest Street
With a large audience present, those people in opposed to the rezoning application were asked to
stand (to be counted). Twenty-six (26) people stood to express their opposition to the rezoning
application.
Provided with this report is a Draft Copy of the Planning Commission meeting minutes for this
application, reflecting the discussion and testimony of the March 21, 2005 public hearing.
Agency Comments from DAC Report:
• Department of Public Works has no comments regarding this application.
• The City Electric Department has no comments on the rezoning application.
Attachments to the Report:
• Development Advisory Committee Application Review Commentary (comment sheets)
from the following:
Department of Public Works
City Electric Department
Page 28
Z-05-01Lands of Robert M. Duncan: Rezoning C-3/C-2 and H to C-1A and H
Planning Commission Recommendation Report to City Council for April 11, 2005
Page 6
• Exhibit Location Map
• Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 21, 2005
Page 29
C
CITY OF DOVER I P
T U
Y B
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE L
O I
APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY F C
APPLICANT D.A.C. MEETING DATE: March 3, 2005 D W
O O
V R
======================================================================= E K
R S
APPLICATION: Lands of Robert Duncan at 585 Forest Street, 111 South West Street, and 122
South Kirkwood Street - Rezoning from C-3/C-2 and H to C-1A and H
FILE#: Z-05-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Public Works
CONTACT PERSON: Scott Koenig or Andrew Riggi PHONE#: 736-7025
THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE.
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT:
CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS:
1. Our office has no comment regarding this application.
RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE
OBJECTIVES:
ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT:
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED TO DISCUSS ANY OF THE ABOVE COMMENTS, PLEASE CALL THE
ABOVE CONTACT PERSON AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Page 30
DD
O E
CITY OF DOVER V L
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING E E
APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY R C
T
MARCH 3, 2005 - 10:00 A.M. - CAUCUS ROOM R
I
C
APPLICATION: LANDS OF Robert Duncan – 585 FOREST ST, 111 S. WEST ST., 122 S.
KIRKWOOD STREET
FILE NO.: Z-05-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: CITY OF DOVER ELECTRIC
CONTACT PERSON: STEPHEN A. ENSS PHONE #: 736-7091
THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN
CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S
AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE.
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE
ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT:
CITY & STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS:
The Electric Department reviewed the application and has no comments.
RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED FOR AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE
OBJECTIVES:
ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT:
If you should have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please contact Stephen Enss at 736-
7091 or contact the Planning Department at 736-7010 as soon as possible.
Page 32
CITY OF DOVER
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING OF MARCH 21, 2005
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
Z-05-01 Lands of Robert Duncan at 585 Forest Street, 111 South West Street and 122
South Kirkwood Street - Rezoning from C-3/C-2 and H to C-1A and H - Public Hearing and
Recommendation regarding a rezoning application for two parcels consisting of 1.2177 acres +/-
of land. The properties are currently zoned C-2 (Central Commercial) and C-3 (Service
Commercial), both located in the Historic District (H). The proposed zoning classification is C-
1A (Limited Commercial) zoning classification. The subject area is located on the north side of
Forest Street, fronting on both South West Street and South Kirkwood Street. The owner of
record is Robert Duncan.
Representative: Mr. Robert Duncan, Property Owner.
Ms. Melson stated that the action that the Planning Commission will be taking this evening is a
formulation of a recommendation and that recommendation along with the application materials
will be forwarded to City Council for final action. The project consists of two parcels of land,
the larger one is zoned C-3 (Service Commercial) zone and there is a small portion of the
parking lot area adjacent to Kirkwood Street that has a C-2 zoning. The project also falls within
the City of Dover Historic District zone currently and will maintain that Historic District zone
classification. The applicant has proposed a zoning classification of C-1A which is a Limited
Commercial zone. The Limited Commercial zone has a list of uses that would be permitted
within it which include the opportunities for retail, personal service stores such as a beauty shop,
and types of service establishments as well as the use as offices and other types of services, some
of which are subject to Conditional Use approval.
Ms. Melson further stated that as mentioned previously a majority of the property is zoned C-3
(Service Commercial) zone which allows for personal service stores and service establishments,
which the initiative is providing of a service rather than a product. Our Code recognizes that
retail is providing a product. The surrounding land uses in this area are adjacent residential
areas, and properties across Forest Street in the area of the train station and the multi-story office
building that are in the Institution and Office zoning.
Ms. Melson further stated that the report from the Development Advisory Committee
specifically lists all the uses that would be permitted in the commercial zoning district which also
includes what is the recommendation of the Planning Staff with regards to this application. In
making its recommendation, the Planning Staff notes that there are specific reasons for zoning
properties the way we do in the City of Dover. In this area, we recognize the current zoning and
what is termed “an attempt to protect the integrity of the historic retail district” which is located
along Loockerman Street to the east of this property. At this area at the intersection of what is
Forest Street, South West Street, and Kirkwood Street, the Staff sees it as more of a transitional
area for the purposes of zoning. At this point, there is a change from what is the focused retail
area to what is residential to the north and then more industrial type activity right along the
Page 33
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
railroad track in that area. Staff feels that the C-3 zoning existing on the property is appropriate
for the property. Staff is recommending that the existing zoning of C-3 and the small area of C-2
be maintained and that a recommendation for denial of the rezoning request be considered.
Ms. Melson further stated as part of the project, Staff is also recommending that a Minor Lot
Line Adjustment Plan be completed to consolidate what are these two parcels of land into one
parcel of land. This is an administrative process that helps to clarify property ownership in that
area. The two other City Departments that provided comments include the Department of Public
Works and the Electric Department who each reviewed the application and had no specific
comments related to the rezoning of the property.
Mr. Duncan stated that he came here with no notes on how he was going to present his case. He
did pick up two ideas while waiting and they are “to stimulate your memory” and “vested
interest.” He is extremely disappointed with Staff's position. If you can jog your memories as to
what it was like before we developed this area and think of what it was like to what it is now.
When we completed the Depot this changed the west end of town significantly.
Mr. Duncan further stated that it was two years before they finally rented the second floor of the
Depot which was obviously a huge investment and strain on he and his wife. We were fighting
the stigma of this area as it is very hard to combat and we are still fighting it. Then we built the
other building across the street, which we would have been far better off financially if we would
have built a two story building; however, we felt that the area needed more than that.
Mr. Duncan further stated that he had no problems with the Planning Commission or City
Council when they reviewed all the things that he has been working for; however, he has an
extremely difficult time dealing with the Planning Department. When he read their
recommendation he feels that it is back to the same old thing. C-3 zoning went out 30 years ago
when self service gasoline came along; service stations are gone and this is an antiquated zoning
to begin with. With regards to the Historic District if you go into the City of Dover down State
Street there are signs entering the Historic zone and there are buildings in this area that are
registered with the National Register. There are no signs located on the west end that you are
entering the Historic District because there isn't any. The only thing that the DAC came up with
in the hearing was that the railroad track area was the historic district and that is the reason the
Historic District is there. The train left the station many years ago. When you build things such
as this that will change the neighborhood. You have to have something there that will bring
people there. Retail is the only way you are going to get people to build your business and
change the neighborhood.
Mr. Duncan further stated that he read in the Dover Post where Mr. Zimmerman would be
putting up another building for Wesley College and stated that the first floor would be for retail.
Of course it has to be for retail because this is what draws. He is always hammered with C-3 and
Historic District and it does not apply to this particular case. The Depot that currently houses the
convenience store is nothing but a large retail establishment. If you want to have empty stores
then keep it the way it is as it won't help the neighborhood or me, it won't help anyone. This is
really out of the context of where we should be as he is not the applicant requesting a liquor
license, they came to me. It is when they went to get the letter of zoning verification that they
2
Page 34
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
realized they had a problem, he always assumed that it was possible.
Mr. Duncan further stated that in the Staff's recommendations they state that it was the applicant
who requested rezoning. I did not request the rezoning, the people who want the liquor store did.
Furthermore, it is not this Commission or the Planning Department to say if a liquor store goes
there, this is not their business. If people don't want a liquor store you have to go to the Alcohol
and Beverage Control Commission. They are the ones that approve or disapprove liquor licenses
not the Planning Commission and certainly not the Department of Planning who have blown
things way out of proportion. Nothing should have been addressed as far as a liquor store in this
particular case. If he stated that he wanted to put in a dress shop or a candy store there would be
no person behind him. But, because it is a liquor store there is no license as it has to go before
the ABC, which has nothing to do with this here tonight.
Mr. Duncan stated that he feels you have to take what they have done in this area and say retail
for where it is at which will help the area. Whatever goes in there is fine, if it is liquor, this
application has nothing to do with that. We have made major strides in this area and to deny
retail is wrong. If you want to have someone invest in this area, you will never get anyone to
invest in this area if they have to fight for approval every time. The City of Dover spent a good
deal of money preparing the property across from the Depot to sell the property. This property
has been for sale for a very long time because who would want to invest the money and have to
fight through this process.
Mr. Nichols stated that Mr. Duncan is the applicant according to the paperwork. It says that the
applicant had requested a zoning verification letter for a liquor store in the smaller building on
the subject site. Responding to Mr. Nichols, Mr. Duncan stated that this is wrong, Staff falsified
these documents. A zoning change has nothing to do with the liquor license.
Mr. Holt questioned if we approve the zoning, does this necessarily mean that they would be
approved for a liquor store, is this correct. Responding to Mr. Holt, Mr. DiMondi stated that by
approving the rezoning to C-1A you would be approving any of the permitted uses and a retail
environment as Mr. Duncan has indicated. Those uses are listed on the cover of the DAC
comments that you have before you. Any and all of those uses would be permitted subject to
those intended uses which would require further regulatory review involving other state agencies
such as the Delaware Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission. Any and all permitted uses
should be considered by this Commission in taking this matter under advisement.
Mr. Holt further stated that what the Commission is afraid of is the kind of traffic that is going to
be generated for a liquor store. To clean the area up there has been a lot of time and money
invested in getting the street cleaned up from a bad element. They do not want to see it go back
to the way it was. He is aware that the ABC has regulations on the number of liquor stores in a
certain area and other things that they could not do.
Mr. Winsley stated that he agrees that the West Side in the past few years has improved in
service and appearance. It has changed the area and when he read Planning Staff’s
recommendation, the information that was provided to him was that the C-1A asked for is so that
a liquor store can be established. It took them approximately ten to fifteen years to remove a
3
Page 35
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
liquor store which was within proximity of this site. He understands that once it is rezoned to
this zoning you would have the option of putting whatever retail store that answers to retailing.
According to the information he has, it cites the Historic District zone, he would think that the
Historic District Commission should also be privy to information that he has so that they can also
make a determination to say whether this would be complimentary to the historic zone.
Mr. Winsley further stated that in the past we have stated that the Historic District does or does
not exist in terms of what we think of as preservation. There is a Historic District Commission
that stands as we do and in the past, we have had some oversights in which we have been put on
notice in terms of legalities of overlooking the suggestions of the Historic District Commission.
This puts us in a competitive form of overlooking what they stand for. He is concerned with
what their reaction would be to this area in terms of the information that he has.
Responding to Mr. Winsley, Ms. Melson stated that the Historic District Commission focuses on
construction activities. A rezoning application is not required to go before that body to receive
their recommendation. Their charge in our Zoning Ordinance is more related to construction
activities and Design Standards and Guidelines that are established for items such as choice of
materials, placement of the building, and form of the building. The Zoning Ordinance does not
charge them in focusing on the types of uses that are occurring within the said building on the
property. Those responsibilities related to the types of uses and zoning of the property rely upon
the Planning Commission and their recommendation to City Council. The Historic District Zone
is an overlay which focuses on design elements such as the AEOZ zone which is tied to
provisions for flight activities in those areas or the Corridor Overlay Zone which focuses on
landscape and building placement related to a specific corridor.
Mr. Winsley further stated that through a neighborhood community effort the store was closed in
referring to the liquor store. Should we repeat that? I know that they say this is not for the liquor
store; however, that information was presented. Responding to Mr. Winsley, Mr. DiMondi
stated that for those who have served on the Planning Commission for a number of years you
will recall that the Commission has been faced with situations where individual applicants
seeking a rezoning are not required by our ordinance to disclose the intended use or occupancies
for the property that is sought to be rezoned. The only legal issue properly before the
Commission essentially revolves around the permitted uses of the proposed zoning classification
and its compatibility with the adjacent zoning districts and in particular, the adjacent land uses.
Before any formal action is taken, he will read to you the charge as expressed in the ordinance
itself which identifies the elements that should be of great concern in expressing and articulating
the burden that an applicant like Mr. Duncan would have in order to prevail in a setting like this
on a recommendation to City Council.
Mr. Winsley further stated that the community was up in arms and they had to come afterwards
to rectify a situation that was probably overlooked because of what the zoning could have been
or may not have been. Now it comes to his understanding that we can prevent something from
happening in the future. This is what he understands from the information that was submitted.
Mr. DiMondi stated that they need to determine what their legal obligation for consideration this
evening is. He would like Ms. Melson to read an excerpt from the Zoning Ordinance that should
4
Page 36
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
give and provide us with guidance in determining this matter as well as guidance for those
individuals expecting to offer their opinions in the context of the public hearing that will be
opened.
Ms. Melson stated that what she is reading from is part of the Zoning Ordinance: Appendix B of
the City of Dover Code of Ordinances specifically Article 10, Section 5.1 "Report of Planning
Commission." "In making such a report after a public hearing on the proposed amendment the
Planning Commission shall make inquiry and determination concerning the items listed below."
In this case, this type of amendment, as there are various types of amendments, is a change to the
zoning map and is focused on in Article 10, Section 5.111 and continues reading as such:
"Concerning a proposed amendment involving a change in the zoning map by way of a petition
to rezone property or by way of annexation: (then there is a list of items:) item A: whether the
uses permitted by the proposed change would be appropriate in the area concerned; Item B:
whether adequate proposed public school facilities and other public services exist or can be
created to serve the needs of any additional residences likely to be constructed as a result of such
change; Item C: whether the proposed zoning is in accord with any existing or proposed plans in
the vicinity; Item D: the affect of the proposed amendment upon the growth of the City as
envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan; and Item E: whether the proposed amendment is likely
to result in an increase or decrease in the total zoned residential capacity of the City and the
probable affect thereof." This is the information and guidance that is given to the Planning
Commission and ultimately to City Council in considering a rezoning action.
Mr. Winsley further questioned that the paragraph that states "Staff recommends the zoning for
the parcel to remain Service and Office related C-3” and then in the next paragraph it says "the
alternative considered would have been to make no recommendation and allow the commission
to hear testimony from the applicant.” When he read Staff’s recommendation that the zoning
remain as C-3 he would like to know what the conditions were that they made that
recommendation from? Responding to Mr. Winsley, Ms. Melson stated that the items of
consideration are best reflected if Planning Commission members are following along in the
Development Advisory Committee report. The first paragraph under the recommendation of the
Planning Staff reflects that in considering the proposed change is the change appropriate for the
area? Our feeling was that there is a concentrated area of retail along West Loockerman Street;
however, this area is an area of transition where retail is perhaps not the appropriate use to be
happening there. The zoning in the area, as it exists, would protect what we have termed as the
“de-concentration of retail” from a retail core area. This retail core area being the first
immediate blocks of the Loockerman Street corridor moving from South State Street through to
the next three to four blocks. It is a very specific retail area that is zoned C-2 and allows for
retail uses on the first floor with residential activities above.
Ms. Melson further stated that these are the reasoning’s for the Staff recommendation of keeping
this as C-3. C-3 zoning is best given the location of this subject parcel and its surrounding
zoning elements and existing uses. This also reflects other criteria that would have to be
considered such as whether it is in accord with the existing plans that are proposed in this area
and the Comprehensive Plan. The downtown area calls for a mixed use approach and certainly
the existing zoning would comply with a mixed use approach to land use activities in this area as
would the proposed zoning classification of the applicant.
5
Page 37
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
Colonel Welsh stated with regards to Section 5.111, Item A states that one of the considerations
is whether the permitted uses are appropriate for the neighborhood. He would assume that this
would be all inclusive and the answer in this case is not all obviously from the people in the
audience. He has spent his life dealing with regulations and regulations were always the least
restrictive. In other words, you could require no less then what the regulations were. You could
be more restrictive, in other words, you could impose additional restrictions on those regulations.
Can the approval be granted with a specific restriction for a liquor store?
Responding to Colonel Welsh, Ms. Melson stated that in this instance the proposal as you have
noted to specifically eliminate a potential use by name of a liquor store would constitute what in
the planning realm she believes is referred to as a contract zoning. It would not be permitted
under our Code that this additional restriction be placed on the application. A rezoning
application is very different than a Conditional Use application for Site Plan development
activities where our Code includes provisions for additional conditions to be placed on the
project or the development activity in the best interest of health, safety, and welfare concerns as
evaluated by you as the Planning Commission. In this instance, you cannot specifically
eliminate one of the uses on the permitted use list. It is either all or nothing.
Mr. DiMondi opened a public hearing
Bishop Marion Lott - 218 Reed Street - Stated that he was here as a homeowner. He is here to
make sure that all voices are heard and that we do not want a rezoning because we do not want to
re-create the opportunity for a liquor store. There has been a process going on now for sixteen
(16) years to improve the quality of living in our community. There has been a joint effort with
the City Council, Police Department, and with programs that have been established within the
community and with other organizations to improve the quality of living. If we would permit a
rezoning and create an opportunity for a liquor store to come into our community it would be just
as devastating as permitting a crack house to be established in our community. We would like
for the Commission to take into consideration as homeowners and the City of Dover who is
encouraging homeownership in Downtown Dover that we have a lot of concerns about whether
there is a possibility of a liquor store being in our community. Mr. Duncan did not say and he
cannot say that there will not be a liquor store in the community providing that the rezoning is
permitted. We would like the Commission to know that as homeowners we support a denial of
rezoning.
Mr. Theodore Henderson - 506 Wyoming Avenue - Stated that he is currently the Pastor of the
Dover Christian Church. He grew up in two communities that were both intercity communities
in Washington D.C. and Columbus, OH. What was prominent in both of those communities was
liquor stores. What he knows about retail is that retail cares nothing except profit and profit upon
the lives of people. The gentleman made a very accurate statement that if it were a dress shop or
a candy store none of "us" people would be here. You are right, it is a no brainer, had you been
raised in intercity areas like he was where he has seen the affect of alcohol and what it can do to
a family. Dover does not have an intercity yet, but it can develop one. He has no problem with
6
Page 38
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
the area being rezoned if he could be assured beyond a doubt that there would be no liquor
stores. If we were talking about Wild Quail or Pennwood, we also would not be having this
discussion. In the name of God we need to consider what we are doing and consider the area
itself which is a high risk sensitive area. There is already prostitution, drugs, and other types of
things that are going on in this area; it is already there. If you could assure me without a doubt
that there would not be another liquor establishment. Retail only cares about profit, they care
nothing about lives, or about morality. We as a community need to be responsible for the
community and the lives of our children.
Mr. David C Roland - 25 Slaughter Street - Stated that he was here in behalf of New
Jerusalem Baptist Church which is located at 25 Slaughter Street. His home is not in this area;
however, his church is. Earlier we talked about whose business is this that this plot of land be
rezoned. He thinks it is the community’s business as to what goes in it and what is allowed in it.
We have a transitional area there as most of us in this room well know. We know what a liquor
store will do. Surely Mr. Duncan is not requesting that he establish a liquor store. He is saying
that there will be a business put there; however, we already have the news that there will be a
liquor store involved. The parishioners at New Jerusalem Church do not want that. Slaughter
Street, as you know, is directly located next to these streets that we are talking about here. He
certainly hopes that Mr. Duncan and the Planning Commission would hear our plea; we do not
want a liquor store adjacent to our church. The area in which they live in has already been
stigmatized and they do not want it get any worse. It has been cleaned up fairly good at this
point. A liquor store would not help the community. We are banded together in unity stating
that we do not want a liquor store in our area.
Mr. L.T. Blackshear - 996 Boggs Drive - Stated that he concurs with the previous two
speakers. He differs that this is not a historical area. The Historic District does not make those
kind of mistakes. For those of us who have lived in the area and received help, he feels that this
Commission and Staff deserves recognition for their service to the community. When we came
to Kirkwood Street it was the worst area in Dover and most people already know that. With help
from the Police Department, they cleaned up the area. We have improved Kirkwood Street so
that it is a safe street now and there are plans to make it better. We are not in accordance with
the rezoning at this time. We feel that this will make opportunities for us to go back into
conditions that we have already come out of. We are in the process of doing other things along
with the City to make it a better place for our citizens. When we first came to Kirkwood Street
there were people drawing guns in the street and we have come a long way to rectify these
situations. We are against this rezoning for the permitted uses. We are concerned with
improving the living conditions and beautification of our City.
Mr. DiMondi asked for those people who were in agreement with those comments already given
during public testimony to please stand so that Staff could take a count. There were twenty-six
(26) people who were in attendance in support of denial of this rezoning.
Mrs. Bridgett Evant - Stated that she owns property on Kirkwood Street and her family owns
five pieces of property between West Street and Fulton Street. She appreciates all that the City
has done in rehabbing the properties themselves and the Police with helping our properties
become better as a community. She appreciates Mr. Duncan for what he has done for the
7
Page 39
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
community; however, she believes as a homeowner and a citizen that the rezoning should stay as
is.
Mr. Richard Evant - Stated that he is the Pastor of the Calvary Baptist Church located on
Queen and Fulton Street, which is next to Kirkwood Street as well as another Church located on
Route 8 off of Forest Avenue. He is also the President of their Inter-denominational Ministerial
Alliance where they have fifteen (15) churches that are represented in that alliance. On Saturday,
they had a meeting where this issue came up and he is here to represent them in asking the
Planning Commission not to change the zoning in that area. In 1989, he worked with then
Mayor Hutchison to clean up Kirkwood Street and he feels that they have done a fairly good job.
We do not want to see regress as this is near and dear to their hearts. They are concerned about
their community and those that live there and want to keep improving it. One other thing that
Mr. Duncan said was that it was a mistake that the liquor store was placed in the request for
zoning. It is also pointed out to us that you can't select what retail store would go there; we can
only vote it up or down. For that reason, we are requesting that the zoning request be denied.
Mrs. Terry Stone - Stated that she owns five properties on Queen Street: 41, 47, 49, 51 & 53 S.
Queen Street. We are asking that you do not put any more new businesses up. We have a
Downtown that has several empty stores that if people want to have retail then they could go to
one of the empty stores Downtown instead of building new buildings that can in years become
problem places. We are trying to clean up Downtown Dover and things are slowly moving
towards one direction. We are trying to clean it up for people to raise their children and not have
more places for crime, places going out of business, and buildings run down. If things are not
kept up it becomes more of a problem. We would ask that you deny the request.
Ms. Sophia Russell - 20 N. New Street - Stated that she is a property owner on New Street and
is here on behalf of the New Street Civic Association. Her request is that the Planning
Commission take the consideration under their authority and deny the request to rezone it as a
liquor store.
Mr. Jack Wallace - 630 Forest Street - Stated that he has counted at least twelve churches that
are in the neighborhood within about a two or three block radius. This is not a place where we
would want to have alcohol sold in this area. Some people can be enticed simply because they
see it. If it were not there, then they would not be involved with it. In looking at it in that
respect, we would say no, we do not want it in that area. The House of Pride houses former
alcoholics and he feels that they are getting good treatment there with the advice and prayers that
they are receiving which has changed their lives in a positive manner.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. DiMondi closed the public hearing.
Mr. Duncan stated that there are two key items that he is hearing. He stated that Mr. Holt stated
that it is up to the Liquor Commission to decide not the Planning Commission. If we have the
zoning approval we can put anything in there that we want but a business containing liquor has
to go before the ABC.
Mr. Duncan further stated that Mr. Winsley hit it right on the head when he stated that if you
8
Page 40
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
read the Staff’s report it zeroed right in on liquor that should never have been done. You did me
a huge injustice to put this in the report and he really resents this. Every comment here tonight
has been because of liquor and that is not an issue here. When he hears someone say that they do
not want the zoning changed, that is fine; however, what about a reason. He never heard any
reasons why. He also heard that they do not want any new businesses. How are you going to
change the area if you do not want any new businesses, this is unbelievable.
Mr. Duncan further stated with regards to “vested interest,” they feel they should dictate what he
puts in these various stores. They have no vested interest as they have not one cent invested in
his projects; this is wrong. If you try and decipher the answer given by Staff, he does not know
how you would find an answer as it was a bunch of mismatch. It is just not fair what he has been
subjected to. He has vehemently lost a lot of respect for what took place here tonight. He
understands the people’s position 100% here tonight. Do you think that he is going to invest all
of this money and then have someone come in and downgrade his investment; you have got to be
crazy. Busy stores you have no problems with. He has fifteen (15) stores located in Maryland
that are convenience stores with liquor with no problems because busy stores do not have
problems. The Depot is a very busy store and it does not have problems. He is extremely
disappointed that this turned into a liquor hearing which it never should have done in the first
place.
Mr. Tolbert questioned what Mr. Duncan’s role is with regards to the types of businesses that
would come into the area? Responding to Mr. Tolbert, Mr. Duncan stated that he is the landlord
and would be responsible for what comes in. There have been people who have come to him
wanting to bring in a business. He has turned them down if he does not feel that they are best for
the area or for the property. Why would you lower your standard; that does not make any sense?
Ms. Young stated that Mr. Duncan has really turned around this side of town and she feels that
he has done a wonderful job. What kind of businesses would you target for your store if this
type of zoning were changed? Responding to Ms. Young, Mr. Duncan stated that the way it is
now, he is very restricted. When you open up for retail you put whatever retail store would
compliment the area.
Ms. Young further questioned, do you solicit for businesses? Responding to Ms. Young, Mr.
Duncan stated that no, he does not. Anyone in business knows what would fit in any particular
location.
Ms. Young further questioned as it stands right now, what type of businesses would you be
attracting? Responding to Ms. Young, Mr. Duncan stated that a pizza shop would do extremely
good; however, there are a lot of good businesses coming on stream all the time. He feels that an
ice cream store would do very well there; however, he is not in the business of putting in a store
and trying to rent it.
Mr. Tolbert stated that you still have the responsibility to determine what businesses will come
in. No matter who wants to come in, it is up to you whether you lease it to them. Mr. Duncan
was in agreement with this statement.
9
Page 41
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
Mr. DiMondi stated before any further questions are asked, upon the Commissioner’s approval,
he would like to go over what is permitted under the present zoning. C-2 zoning includes retail
stores, financial institutions, theaters and restaurants, photo copy and film processing, formal
wear rental shops, travel agencies, personal service stores including but not limited to barber
shops, beauty shops, tailors and other similar establishments, professional governmental offices
and other businesses related to professional occupancy, and apartments. C-3 zoning includes all
service establishments including dry cleaning and laundry plants, wholesale storage and
warehousing establishments, bowling alleys, animal hospitals, motor vehicle, boat or farm
equipment sales or service would be appropriate under this current zoning category. Motor
vehicle service stations are subject to a series of seven (7) different conditions and regulations as
a proposed use. Newspaper, job printing, manufacturing assembling, altering, cleaning and
processing products for sale on or off the premises and mini storage facilities are permitted as
well. This is a summary of those uses that are currently permitted under the present zoning
conditions applied to the several lots that we are considering this evening.
Mr. Duncan stated that the ones that you just referred to under C-3 almost all of them do not
apply to his location. We are only talking about a couple little stores. If it were zoned retail you
could put a lot of things here. If you leave it as is, you are going to have empty stores. Do you
want an empty store or would you prefer something in there.
Mr. Tolbert stated that Mr. Duncan made mention that the decision is spinning around the liquor
store issue. The Planning Commission he feels has to make their decision predicated on what the
Code says. Although a liquor store would be allowed under the revised code, we will still make
our decision predicated on what the regulations say; it is not just the liquor store issue.
Mr. Winsley stated that his concern is how and where did the concept of the liquor store come
from in relationship to the Zoning Code change that is requested? The community has been
informed and the Planning Commission has been informed and it was according to what he is
reading, the basis for the change of zoning.
Responding to Mr. Winsley, Mr. DiMondi stated that in connection specifically with this
application, there is the intent of a third party, who is not even here this evening, who could
potentially be the real party interested with regard to the potential occupancy of a storefront for
use as a liquor store is in and of itself a red Herring. What we all need to consider as
Commissioner’s this evening is a much broader template against which all permitted uses as we
discussed earlier identified by a thorough reading of C-1A and whether those meet the five (5)
enunciated areas of a much broader perspective in terms of compatibility, the existing
neighborhood, available services, (public and private), compatibility with proposed and existing
uses, and whether it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. To the extent that we continue
to dwell deeper and deeper into exploring one out of probably hundreds of potential uses
permitted under C-1A is not serving any particular and fruitful purpose. You need to consider
the broader template that we are charged with, take it under advisement, and render a decision
with recommendation to City Council.
Mr. Winsley stated that he knows that it was not a request; however, he has a recollection of one
10
Page 42
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
of the items that we had approved which the Historical Society challenged us legally in that we
over stepped our bounds. He is concerned that the Historic Commission may or may not have
comments regarding this application. Can we submit this to the Historic District Commission by
referring this to them for their approval with the information that we were presented with?
Responding to Mr. Winsley, Ms. Melson stated that Mr. Winsley’s comments are making two
statements. The first is the question of can the Planning Commission refer this to the Historic
District Commission, which is another appointed body of the City, for their recommendation.
The answer is no, because this is not a review responsibility of the Historic District Commission.
That appointed body deals with Design Standards and Guidelines not the type of use that is
occurring in the building. Those responsibilities fall to the Planning Commission and City
Council related to use.
Ms. Melson further stated that the second question is regarding knowledge of this one type of use
in particular, the liquor store. The liquor store would be considered a type of retail
establishment.
Mr. Winsley stated that he is concerned about what is behind the Planning Staff recommending
that this property remain zoned as it is and what was the reasoning of providing the liquor store
information if not to influence or to give us information.
Responding to Mr. Winsley, Mr. DiMondi stated that whenever Staff is induced to go out on a
limb and make a recommendation he as a Commissioner invites Staff. Staff has seen so much
more than we have as we are only educated in the process and much more in the concept of a
public hearing than we are in any way of transmitting information to us. It is just one more item
of guidance and one more item that represents an information flow in the exchange of ideas.
This was a Staff recommendation and we have now had the benefit of hearing from many
members of the public. It is now a matter of how we integrate what we have heard this evening
and what we have heard from Staff into these issues. We are charged by the ordinance of
making specific findings in the context of a motion this evening.
Colonel Welsh stated that he would like to commend Mr. Duncan on what he has done for the
City of Dover and that part of town. You mentioned that you have a “vested interest” in that area
and certainly you do a strong financial investment. You also stated that the people sitting behind
you don’t have a vested interest in this and I disagree with you, I think they do. He feels they
have a very strong vested interest in it because for sixteen (16) years they have invested their
heart and souls into cleaning up this neighborhood. He is very impressed with what has taken
place in this area, not only in this specific area but on Kirkwood Street and along the other side
streets. He sees people taking pride in their homes. There is a lot of cleanup and painting to fix
up the homes and he feels that they have done a great job.
Colonel Welsh further stated that twenty-six (26) people are here tonight in the audience. Nine
of them spoke against the proposed rezoning and when asked for a show of hands all twenty-six
(26) stood as opposed to your proposed rezoning. In looking at Section 5.111, specifically item
11
Page 43
CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2005
A, it states that we are charged with looking at the proposed rezoning and determining whether
the permitted uses are appropriate for the neighborhood. Well, the neighborhood has answered
and the neighborhood has said no. Not all the permitted uses are appropriate, not to mention that
it does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. (Staff note: zoning complies with the
Comprehensive Plan under the mixed use land use category.)
Colonel Welsh moved to recommend forwarding a motion to City Council for denial of
Application Z-05-01 Lands of Robert Duncan at 585 Forest Street, 111 South West Street and
122 South Kirkwood Street, seconded by Mr. Tolbert and the motion was unanimously carried.
12
Page 48
FINAL READING
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE
CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 585 FOREST STREET, 111 SOUTH WEST STREET, AND 122 SOUTH KIRKWOOD
STREET
WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property within
the limits of the City of Dover; and
WHEREAS, it is deemed in the best interest of zoning and planning to change the permitted use of
property described below from C-3 (Service Commercial) and C-2 (Central Commercial) to C-1A
(Limited Commercial).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1. That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Dover have been amended by changing the zoning designation from
C-3 and C-2 to C-1A, on that property located at 585 Forest Street, 111 South West Street,
and 122 South Kirkwood Street, owned by Robert M. Duncan.
ADOPTED: *
S:\ClerksOffice\Rezonings\2005\585 Forest St - 111 S West St - 122 S Kirkwood St\Ordinance - Final Rdg.wpd
Page 49
LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting was held on March 28, 2005, at
6:30 p.m. with Chairman Salters presiding. Members present were Mr. Hogan, Mr. Slavin,
Mr. Shelton, and Mr. Shevock. Members of Council present were Mr. Carey, Mr. Pitts,
Mr. Sadusky, Mr. Ritter, Mr. Ruane, and Council President Williams. Mayor Speed was also
present.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Hogan and
unanimously carried.
City Assessment Update - Cole Layer Trumble Company
The City Assessor’s Office has been conducting a reassessment of properties throughout the City of
Dover during the past year, to be effective with the tax billings for May 1, 2005. Mr. Joe Pizzoli of
Cole Layer Trumble Company provided members with details of the commercial valuations for the
reassessment. For the top 50 properties, there will be a significant percentage increase from the old
to the new assessment, from a value of $434M to $593M. He stated that a few areas of concern were
with the industrial properties that have decreased in value. One specific property is that of Kraft
Foods, who appealed their old assessment, which decreased from $31.4M to $20.6M. Collectively,
the value for the major industrial properties has decreased approximately $30M. Fortunately, with
the increase in value of other properties, that decrease has been off-set, providing a 37% increase
overall. He reminded members that this is for the top 50 commercial properties only.
Mr. Pizzoli stated that the new appraisal for the Dover Mall is $86.5M. He noted that this property,
which has four (4) major anchors, sold for $75.2M in January 2003. However, he advised members
that Boscov’s (was appraised at $7.6M and is now appraised at $15.9M) and Penneys (was appraised
at $7M and is now appraised at $11M) were not included in the sale and that by adding those two
(2) properties to the new appraisal, the total value would be $113.5M.
With reference to the downtown area along Loockerman Street, Mr. Pizzoli stated that there has been
no increase. Since the few sales that have recently occurred were in line with the old assessments,
there is no justification for a change in their value. Mr. Pizzoli assured members that an adequate
amount of information has been obtained for the commercial values and that the reassessments are
supportable and defendable in any court.
In response to Mr. Ruane, Mr. Pizzoli stated that the methodology used for the reassessment included
a cost value, market value, and income value. In developing the reassessment for the commercial
properties, he stated that the income value was predominantly used; however, details of each value
will be provided for each property. In assessing property, Mr. Pizzoli stated that once all the facts
are collected on a specific property, the appraiser determines what the cost value indicates, what the
income value indicates and if there is a wide disparity in these values, the information is re-reviewed.
Many times the income value will be much greater than the cost due to location of the property.
Unfortunately, he stated that there were not many comparable transactions for considering market
values for commercial properties; however, those that occurred are definitely considered “arms
length” transactions.
Page 50
LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
MEETING OF MARCH 28, 2005 PAGE 2
Mr. Pizzoli stated that of the highest 50 commercial properties, the lowest property on the list was
previously appraised at $3.8M, and that this property has been reassessed at $8.8M. The highest
property on the list was previously appraised at $48.8M, which was the old assessment for Dover
Downs.
Responding to Mr. Sadusky, Mr. Pizzoli explained that the major reason for the decrease in value
of the industrial properties is because they are functionally obsolete.
Mr. Rob Engel, Project Manager with Cole Layer Trumble Company, advised members that there
has been a significant increase in residential values in the City of Dover. Unfortunately, he stated
that he has not yet finalized the total reassessment. Unlike commercial properties, he explained that
the income approach is not considered in the appraisal of residential properties; however, the cost
and market value approach is used. With a revaluation, areas that have increased dramatically in
value will have an increase in their property assessment and will pay accordingly. Mr. Engel
explained that the same is true for those areas where there has not been an increase, and property
owners have essentially been paying too much. He stated that the effective date of value of the
property reassessment is as of January 1, 2005.
In response to Mr. Ruane, Mr. Engel stated that he was aware of the troubles the City experienced
during the last reassessment with regards to neighborhood delineation and that a complete
reorganization was done. The team completely reviewed each neighborhood based upon sales and
re-developed new land values and compared sales for each of the neighborhoods to derive new
market values. Mr. Engel stated that there was a significant difference in land values from the last
reassessment. He explained that it does not cost any more to build a house today than it did three
to five (3-5) years ago; however, land value has increased significantly. As an example, he stated
that if the market value of a property five (5) years ago was $100,000 and today, the market value
is $200,000, it is likely that the land value increased 50%, not the building.
Mr. Hogan moved to recommend acceptance of the report on the City Assessment Update
provided by Cole Layer Trumble Company. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shelton and
unanimously carried.
Mr. Hogan moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Slavin and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 7:02 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Reuben Salters
Chairman
RS/jg
S:\ClerksOffice\Agendas&Minutes\Committee-Minutes\2005\03-28-2005 LF&A.wpd
Page 51
PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT
The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee meeting was held on
March 29, 2005, at 5:34 p.m. with Chairman Pitts presiding. Members present were Mr. Ruane,
Mr. Hogan, and Mr. Truitt. Mr. Anderson was absent. Mr. Carey (left at 6:08 p.m.) and Mayor Speed
(arrived at 5:43 p.m., left at 6:23 p.m.) were also present.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. Hogan moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Truitt and unanimously
carried.
Discussion - Drafting of a Vacant Building Ordinance
The Downtown Dover Merchants Association requested consideration of amendments to Chapter 5
of the Dover Code with regard to vacant buildings to include the following: 1) Vacant Buildings in
the Business Improvement District (BID) be subject to the same code as occupied buildings; 2) A
vacant building in the BID Tax District be subject to “Vacancy Registration Fees”, similar to
Wilmington’s Annual Registration and Vacant Building Fees (Wilmington Ordinance 03-019).
Properties are deemed vacant if “No person or persons actually currently conducts a lawfully
licensed business, or lawfully resides or lives in any part of the building” (Wilmington City, Chapter
Four, City Code Section 4-27,125.0(b)(1)(F); and, 3) This ordinance would be enforced by the City
of Dover Department of Planning and Inspections. Registration fees and fines could be used to fund
additional inspectors for enforcement and, therefore, would be virtually self supporting.
During the committee meeting of March 15, 2005, staff provided members with a draft outline of
a possible Vacant Building ordinance modeled on the City’s existing ordinance and several
ordinances obtained from other communities (Attachment #1). However, discussion on the concept
was deferred.
Ms. Diana Welch, co-owner with Helen Haughey of 115 West Loockerman Street and 233 West
Loockerman Street, expressed concern about the many vacant buildings downtown. She believes
that something should be done to make the current property owners of vacant buildings responsible
for bringing their buildings up to code. She believes they have vacated their property and are not
earnestly seeking renters. The current problem of vacant buildings is that owners do not have to
meet the same code as they would if someone was occupying the space. She felt this was
problematic and that these situations need to be resolved.
Ms. Helen Haughey stated that she was part of the revitalization of the Wilmington Riverfront in the
1990's, which is now a beautiful area, and they are asking that the same opportunity to be given to
people in Downtown Dover. A great example of revitalization that has come about in Downtown
Dover is the Schwartz Center, where the building was sold to people who cared about it and fixed
it up. The same thing could be beneficial to the homeowners and businesses on Loockerman Street,
if they are provided the opportunity.
Mr. Tom Smith, 214 South State Street and president of the Downtown Merchants Association,
stated that there has been a great deal of effort through the City of Dover, Main Street Dover, and
the Downtown Dover Development Corporation to revitalize the downtown area; however,
Downtown Dover is still not vibrant or thriving. It is still an area with problems which call out for
Page 52
PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT
COMMITTEE MEETING OF MARCH 29, 2005 PAGE 2
solutions. The first noticeable problem is the many vacant buildings. If this problem of vacant
buildings can be solved, it will go a long way to solving the other long term problems.
Ms. Elizabeth Smith of Books on Loockerman Street stated that she does not know a lot about this
problem; however, she feels that small towns everywhere are experiencing the same problems.
Replying to Ms. Smith, Ms. Haughey stated that she has driven from Maryland to California, going
through many small towns, and could see that the ones that were thriving were the unique stores that
have done a lot of facade and road work.
Mr. Ed Perez of Main Street Dover stated that the revitalization of Dover was started over two (2)
years ago. Meetings were held with many of the vacant property owners and there was not much
progress. Mr. Perez added that attracting new investors is hard with all the vacant properties.
After much discussion, Mr. Galvin advised members that any ordinance considered would apply
Citywide and there would be other attributes that would have to be taken into account. Mayor Speed
and Mr. Galvin suggested that members get an endorsement from Council to move forward with the
creation of a vacant building ordinance before the committee spends too much time defining the
specifics of the ordinance. Mayor Speed also stated that the merchants present were only a small
group of people, however; the proposed ordinance would have an impact on a much larger group;
therefore, by getting Council’s endorsement it will be presented to the public and would give others
an opportunity to provide input.
Mr. Hogan moved to recommend that the City move forward with the development of a vacant
building and lot ordinance, covering residential, commercial, and industrial properties and
that this process involve the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee
holding public evening meetings, along with the Planning Department. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Ruane and unanimously carried. The committee requested Council’s
concurrence that this is a project worthy of the Planning staff and committee’s further consideration.
Mr. Ruane suggested that the Planning and Inspections Department be encouraged to invite all the
owners of these properties to these meetings, perhaps even by registered letter, so that it is on the
record that there was public input.
Mr. Hogan moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Ruane and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
John W. Pitts
Chairman
JWP/tm
S:\ClerksOffice\Agendas&Minutes\Committee-Minutes\2005\03-29-2005 PR&CE.wpd
Attachments
Attachment #1 - Vacant Building Ordinance Outline
Page 53
ACTION FORM
PROCEEDING: Council AGENDA ITEM NO: 4/11/05 – 8A
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Information Technology Department DATE SUBMITTED: 3/29/05
PREPARED BY: Mark Callan, Information Technology Director
SUBJECT: Information Technology Help Desk Tracking and Network Security/Performance Monitoring
REFERENCE: N/A
RELATED PROJECT: Long Range Strategic Information Technology Plan Approved by Council 2/2/04
APPROVALS: City Manager, Finance Director
EXHIBITS: N/A
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $31,316.25 AMOUNT BUDGETED: $35,600.00
FUNDING SOURCE (Dept/Page in CIP): Information Technology General Fund Acct # 110-2200-516-40-27
2005-2009 CIP pages 164 & 165
TIMETABLE: Contract must be awarded by April 22, 2005
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award contract for Help Desk Tracking System and Network Security/
Performance Monitoring to low bidder, Intuit Information Technology Solutions.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
The City currently uses a variety of in-house developed methods to track IT related work orders and assets. By
utilizing one common commercial tool for tracking all IT service requests, central records would be more timely,
comprehensive, and accurate. In addition, a knowledge base would begin to form which would assist personnel
in identifying patterns or recurrences of problems. As a part of the approved IT plan, BDMP recommended that
we also purchase a software package that would allow us to monitor server and network security as well as
monitor our network hardware and bandwidth utilization.
We combined the two projects because we were able to find vendors who could provide an integrated solution.
RFPs were sent to eight vendors. Seven responses were received.
Vendor Name Bid Price Comments
Intuit Information Technology $31,316.25 Projected Annual Maintenance for next 4 fiscal
Solutions years - $4493.75
Right Star Systems $32,812.50 Missing several necessary modules
Oak Tree $58,780.54 Annual Maintenance - $4723.00
Front Range $59,755.00 Annual Maintenance – 20% of software cost
Touch Paper $63,813.00 Annual Maintenance – Not stated
BOSSdev Inc. $93,000.00 Did not respond with a solution that met our
request specifications.
Annual Maintenance - $6,500.00 per month
Infra Wise $115,000.00 Annual Maintenance - $23,000.00
Upon review of the proposals, Intuit Information Technology Solutions was chosen based on its price,
experience, references, and RFP compliance.
Page 54
ACTION FORM
TITLE: Agenda and Legislative Management Software AGENDA ITEM: 04-11-2005 - 8B
PROCEEDING: City Council
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: City Clerk’s Office
PREPARED BY: Janice C. Green, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Proposal - Agenda & Legislative Management Software DATE SUBMITTED: 4-4-2005
(RFP #05-0053CC)
RELATED PROJECT: Paperless Packet
APPROVALS: Finance Director/Treasurer
EXHIBITS: n/a
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $28,500 AMOUNT BUDGETED: $64,000
FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): City Clerk/CIP Page 155; Budget Page 278
TIMETABLE: Approval by Council on 4/11/2005; implementation 20-30 days thereafter.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Recommend authorizing the purchase of Agenda and Legislative Management
Software (NovusAGENDA) from Novusolutions in the amount of $28,500.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Agenda and Legislative Management Software is a legislative work flow and document management
system that manages drafting, tracking, indexing, attachments and exhibits, and reporting for the City,
including the posting of agendas, minutes, and packets to the City’s Website. The purchase of this software
will provide the consistency of one program for all aspects of legislative documents and eliminate the need
to manually track pending items, such as citizen requests, staff directives, etc. that do not require
committee/council review. This project will improve our ability to generate legislative type of reports
quickly and efficiently, improve communications with city staff, provide exceptional benefits for the
Paperless Packet Project and improve community relations.
/jg
S:\ClerksOffice\CAFS\Legislative&Management Software - Council-04-11-2005.wpd
Page 55
ACTION FORM
PROCEEDING: Council AGENDA ITEM NO.: 04/11/05 – 8C
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Police DATE SUBMITTED: 03/31/05
PREPARED BY: Captain Ray M. Sammons III / Administrative Division Commander
SUBJECT: Radio Console Furniture Purchase
REFERENCE: WMD FY 2004 Funding
RELATED
N/A
PROJECT:
APPROVALS: City Manager, Finance Director
EXHIBITS: Memo from Chief Horvath dated March 31, 2005 – Sole Vendor Justification
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $62.966.00 AMOUNT BUDGETED: N/A
FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & WMD FY 2004 Funding (Grant Fund)
Budget):
TIMETABLE: Should Council approve this purchase, the Police Department will notify DEMA that
the Purchasing Policy for the City of Dover was followed, and the purchase was
approved by Council. At that time, the consoles will be ordered in accordance with
the City’s Purchasing Policy; but when the invoice is received, the funds will be
obtained from DEMA to pay said invoice.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council approve project as requested.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
The Police Department is in the process of upgrading its current 800 mhz radio system in its dispatch
area, which includes radio consoles (radio computers) and radio console furniture. The money for this
upgrade has been secured through the FY 2004 Weapons of Mass Destruction funding through the Law
Enforcement funds.
The radio console furniture, which the Department is requesting to purchase through the City’s
Purchasing Policy, is Xybix Systems consoles. The Department has researched different consoles and
believes these consoles fit our current and future requirements adequately. The sole source
documentation for this request is attached to this Action Form.
The purchase of this radio console furniture (five positions) will not cost the City of Dover any money.
The funds are secured and currently at DEMA awaiting disbursement. We are requesting to purchase
specific radio console furniture from Xybix Systems. The purchase of specific items (sole sourcing) is
more expedient through the City of Dover’s process than the State of Delaware’s; and due to the time
constraints on the funding, we are requesting permission to purchase these radio console furniture
positions through the City of Dover’s Purchasing Policy.
If approved by Council, the Police Department will place the order with assistance from DEMA. The
invoice will be paid by DEMA with the WMD monies which have been secured for this project.
Page 56
Memorandum
To: Council President
Council Members
From: Captain Ray M. Sammons III
Administrative Division Commander
Thru: Chief Jeffrey Horvath
Re: Sole Vendor Justification for Xybix Systems
Date: March 31, 2005
The sole vendor justification for purchasing radio console furniture from Xybix Systems is as follows:
1. The Xybix Systems offers a three (3) year unlimited warranty with a purchase of their product. Other systems do
not offer such a complete warranty.
2. The Xybix Systems offers the only radio console furniture on the market which offers the feature “I-fit”. This
feature is unique to this company. They are currently in the process of obtaining a U.S. patent as well as an
international patent, just for this specific feature.
The “I-fit” feature works in conjunction with existing computer network systems, which the Dover Police
Department currently has in place. The software is loaded onto the network and can automatically adjust
workstations to individual optimum ergonomically correct settings for seated or standing working positions for
each individual dispatcher with a simple click of the mouse.
During initial set up of the consoles, a representative from the company will determine the optimum ergonomically
correct position for a console for each dispatcher. These settings will be based on the national standards and
studies from the American National Standard for Human Factors Engineering of Visual Display Terminal
Workstations for what is considered to be the best ergonomically correct positions for each dispatcher based
upon their physical characteristics. Once these settings are determined and entered into the computer system,
the dispatcher will be able to work at any console utilizing their optimum settings by simply clicking the mouse on
an icon.
(Other vendors’ consoles do not offer this feature and the user pushes buttons to move the console to any
position they desire)
The software for this feature records console usage by each individual user based on the log-on name and
password. This provides a comprehensive record of the individual activities on a time scale basis. Management
control over use of EROPOWER adjustable ergonomic workstations means the potential exists for 100% of users
to be positioned correctly whenever they are logged on the network.
3. Administrators can retrieve reports regarding the usage of the consoles by their people. Exception reports,
Historical usage reports and Real time on screen reports.
4. Other consoles by different vendors are unable to track data regarding usage for their consoles.
5. Monitors are rack mounted onto a system called “Roller Vision” so the dispatcher can place the monitors at the
optimum viewing position.
6. Consoles consist of modular components which can be added to if growth or remodeling is required. A whole
new console is not required.
7. Frame work constructed of 14 and 18 gauge powder coated steel.
Page 57
ACTION FORM
PROCEEDING: Legislative, Finance & Administration Committee AGENDA ITEM: 4/11/05 – 1
DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Parks, Recreation & Library DATE SUBMITTED: 4/1/05
PREPARED BY: Zachery C. Carter
SUBJECT: Replacement of Heating and Cooling Units – Dover Parks and Recreation Building
REFERENCE: N/A
RELATED PROJECT: N/A
APPROVALS: City Manager and Finance Director
EXHIBITS: N/A
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $38,000 AMOUNT BUDGETED: $12,485
FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): General Fund #110-1500-525 (40-25)
TIMETABLE: Within 30 days of J. Grilli quote dated March 23, 2005
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve an increase of $25,515 in funds for this expenditure to ensure
efficient and proper heating and cooling of the Recreation Center. Money is to be re-appropriated by the City
Manager from within the FY05 Budget.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
In FY05, the Parks and Recreation Department requested $11,980 for replacement of the cooling unit for the
Dover Park building. This figure was based on a cost estimate provided by the Facilities Management Division.
During FY05, Facilities Management received a quote of $12,485 for replacing the cooling unit. Based on this,
Parks and Recreation did a budget adjustment (November 24, 2004); and the line item 40-25 was increased to
$12,485. At that time, Parks and Recreation notified Facilities Management to proceed with the project.
During March 2005 after a complete re-evaluation with our heating contractor, Facilities Management
recommended that the heating unit along with the cooling unit be replaced in the Dover Park building. This was
due to the age of the heating equipment along with the fact that the heater company is no longer in business.
The existing heating unit is located inside the building; with the installation of a new unit, it will be moved to
the outside of the building.
Cost breakdown: Heating / AC Unit Replacement $35,980
Concrete Pad and Fence $ 2,020
$38,000
Our analysis indicates that the price for the project will only continue to grow. The current AC unit must be
replaced at this time. It would be cost efficient to replace the aging heating unit at the same time. We
recommend approval to increase the line item 110-1500-525 (40-25) by $25,515 (total line item amount would
then be $38,000) to replace the heating and cooling units at the Dover Parks and Recreation building.
Due to time constraints, it is being requested that this be placed on the April 11 City Council agenda.
Page 58
FINAL READING
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That the amounts hereinafter named in various City funds are changed from the currently approved revenues/receipts
and appropriations to the revised revenues/receipts and revised appropriations for use by the various departments
of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2004 and ending June 30, 2005:
A. GENERAL FUND
Current Additions Revised
RECEIPTS Budgets (Reductions) Budgets
Beginning Balance $2,917,154 $(141,107) $2,776,047
Business Licenses 1,214,793 15,207 1,230,000
Permits & Other Licenses 1,040,580 (100,000) 940,580
Transfer Tax 1,400,000 300,000 1,700,000
DSWA-Trash Fee Rebate 162,000 13,583 175,583
Court of Chancery Fees 480,000 40,000 520,000
Internet Service Revenue 26,460 (6,460) 20,000
Sale of Land --- 16,750 16,750
Intrafund Service Receipts Water/Wastewater 1,025,270 (18,982) 1,006,288
Intrafund Service Receipts Electric 3,873,593 (66,663) 3,806,930
Grants:
Recreation 130,000 (110,000) 20,000
State Grant- Trail Maintenance --- 1,200 1,200
Tree Planting Grant --- 13,000 13,000
Transfer from Municipal Street Aid 780,000 12,000 792,000
Transfer from Civic Traffic Penalties 800,000 (300,000) 500,000
Net Adjustments (331,472)
Current Additions Revised
EXPENSES Budgets (Reductions) Budgets
Council 148,387 (6,550) 141,837
Tax Assessor 251,212 (16,429) 234,783
Fire 924,434 900 925,334
Grounds 991,020 13,150 1,004,170
Library 953,388 (52,512) 900,876
Recreation 768,379 (105,778) 662,601
Planning 228,391 (27,249) 201,142
Public Inspections 953,251 (21,989) 931,262
Police 9,865,086 24,697 9,889,783
Streets 1,234,130 (1,953) 1,232,177
Sanitation 1,992,928 (317) 1,992,611
City Manager 435,772 (28,820) 406,952
Information Technology 889,017 (54,017) 835,000
Finance 648,362 (35,292) 613,070
PW Administration 302,373 1,460 303,833
Facilities Management 1,083,532 (6,882) 1,076,650
Engineering 256,686 (1,062) 255,624
Central Services 788,146 (15,005) 773,141
Vehicle Maintenance 614,578 1,640 616,218
Page 59
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Budget Revisions Page 2
Administrative Services 1,059,118 24,957 1,084,075
Human Resources 327,208 (37,134) 290,074
Mayor 102,568 (1,884) 100,684
Provision for Uncollectibles --- 10,000 10,000
Transfer to Workers Compensation Fund --- 16,000 16,000
Budget Balance - Working Capital 2,254,366 (11,403) 2,242,963
Net Adjustments (331,472)
B. WATER/WASTEWATER FUND
Current Additions Revised
REVENUES Budgets (Reductions) Budgets
Beginning Bal - Water $1,634,541 $(7,000) $1,627,541
Beginning Bal - Wastewater 644,223 (31,956) 612,267
Water Fees 3,962,500 (226,432) 3,736,068
Wastewater Fees 2,931,810 (594,691) 2,337,119
Wastewater Adjustment Fees 2,788,875 185,639 2,974,514
Impact Fees 665,000 335,000 1,000,000
Net Adjustments ($339,440)
Current Additions Revised
EXPENSES Budgets (Reductions) Budgets
Construction $495,136 $637 $495,773
Water 880,103 (82,569) 797,534
Water Treatment Plant 639,106 (7,850) 631,256
Wastewater 758,196 (45,268) 712,928
Water Meter Reading 57,685 (2,604) 55,081
Intrafund Service Fees 1,025,270 (18,982) 1,006,288
Transfer to Water I/E 227,151 147,776 374,927
Transfer to Wastewater I/E --- 105,595 105,595
Transfer to Impact Fee Reserve 147,860 417,648 565,508
Budget Balance - Water 2,293,963 (279,627) 2,014,336
Budget Balance - WW 1,344,727 (370,675) 974,052
Budget Balance - Kent County Fees (1,507,895) (203,521) (1,711,416)
Net Adjustments ($339,440)
C. WATER/WASTEWATER I & E FUND
Current Additions Revised
REVENUES Budgets (Reductions) Budgets
Beginning Balance - Wastewater 499,917 119,661 619,578
Bond Issue Proceeds Series 2005 1,175,000 (1,175,000) ---
Miscellaneous --- 50,000 50,000
Transfer from Water WW for Water 227,151 147,776 374,927
Transfer from Water WW for Wastewater --- 105,595 105,595
Transfer from Impact Fee Reserve 460,000 (185,000) 275,000
Net Adjustments (936,968)
Page 60
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Budget Revisions Page 3
Current Additions Revised
EXPENSES Budgets (Reductions) Budgets
Water $1,048,453 $77,391 $1,125,844
Wastewater 2,460,624 (1,010,590) 1,450,034
Water Construction 107,364 (101) 107,263
Budget Balance - Water- Working Capital 10,160 120,435 130,595
Budget Balance - Wastewater - Working Capital 24,066 375,897 399,963
Budget Balance - Bond Proceeds - 2005 500,000 (500,000) ---
Net Adjustments (936,968)
D. ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND
Current Additions Revised
REVENUES Budgets (Reductions) Budgets
Beginning Balance $3,842,665 $(6,286) $3,836,379
Duke Contract Revenue --- 1,072,000 1,072,000
Net Adjustments 1,065,714
Current Additions Revised
EXPENSES Budgets (Reductions) Budgets
Transmission/Distribution 2,963,771 5,750 2,969,521
Electrical Engineering 1,668,692 16,708 1,685,400
Administration 806,659 63,890 870,549
Meter Reading 281,577 (8,732) 272,845
Transfer to Workers Compensation Fund --- 8,000 8,000
Interest on Deposits 15,000 10,000 25,000
Intrafund Service Fees 3,873,593 (66,663) 3,806,930
Other Appropriations:
Improvement/Extension --- 600,000 600,000
Debt Service 2,170,213 494,961 2,665,174
Debt Service - Arbitrage Compliance 50,000 (50,000) ---
Inventory Reserve 125,000 (125,000) ---
Rate Stabilization Reserve 500,000 572,000 1,072,000
Budget Balance - Working Capital 3,921,490 (455,200) 3,466,290
Net Adjustments 1,065,714
E. ELECTRIC I & E FUND
Current Additions Revised
REVENUES Budgets (Reductions) Budgets
Beginning Balance $5,795,917 $(650,000) $5,145,917
Trsfr from Electric Rev Fund --- 600,000 600,000
Net Adjustments (50,000)
Page 61
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Budget Revisions Page 4
Current Additions Revised
EXPENSES Budgets (Reductions) Budgets
Transmission/Distribution $981,114 $651,952 $1,633,066
Electrical Engineering 3,106,604 (51,952) 3,054,652
Budget Balance - Working Capital 872,375 (650,000) 222,375
Net Adjustments (50,000)
ADOPTED: *
Page 62
FINAL READING
ITEM 10 b-1
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN
COUNCIL MET:
That Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations, Article II - Section 5-16 (a) BOCA
National Building Code adopted, and (b) International One- and Two-Family Dwelling Code
adopted, be amended to read:
ARTICLE II. BUILDING CODE
Sec. 5-16. Adopted.
(a) International Building Code adopted. That certain documents, three (3) copies of which are
on file in the department of planning and inspections of the City of Dover being marked and
designated as “The International Building Code, 2003 Edition” as published by the International
Code Council be and is hereby adopted as the Building Code of the City of Dover in the State of
Delaware; for the control of buildings and structures as herein provided; and each and all of the
regulations, provisions, penalties, conditions and terms of said International Building Code, are
hereby referred to, adopted and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this section, with the
additions, insertions, deletions and changes as follows:
Section 101.1 Title. Insert “City of Dover, DE” in place of “[NAME OF JURISDICTION]”
Section 105.2. Work exempt from permit. Delete Section in its entirety.
SECTION 106 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
Section 106.1. Insert: “for new construction, alterations, repairs, expansion, additions or
modifications of buildings or structures, which involve the practice of architecture or
engineering, as defined by the professional registration laws of the State of Delaware shall be
prepared by a registered design professional consistent with the professional registration laws of
the State of Delaware. Construction documents shall include the name, address and license or
registration number of the registered design professional and shall be signed, sealed and dated by
the registered design professional in accordance with the professional registration or licensing
laws, statutes, regulations or administration provisions of the State of Delaware.”, in place of,
“shall be prepared by a registered design professional where required by the statues of the
jurisdiction in which the project is to be constructed.”
Section 108.3. Insert: “see Section 5-21 Fees for permits” in place of, “in accordance with the
schedule as established by the applicable governing authority”.
Section 112 BOARD OF APPEALS, Delete Section in its entirety.
Page 63
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Chapter 5 - Buildings & Building Regulations, Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention & Protection
Chapter 10 - Housing & Property Maintenance Page 2
Section 113.4 Violation Penalties. Insert: “Any person who violates a provision of this code or
fails to comply with any of the requirements thereof or who erects, constructs, places, alters,
repairs, a building or structure in violation of the approved construction documents or directive
of the building inspector, or of a permit or certificate issued under the provisions of this code
shall be charged with a violation of this code and be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a
fine of not less than $100.00 or more than $10,000.00, or by imprisonment thirty (30) days, or
both such fine and imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues shall be deemed a separate
offense. In place of: “Any person who violates a provision of this code or fails to comply with
any of the requirements thereof or who erects, constructs, places, alters, repairs, a building or
structure in violation of the approved construction documents or directive of the building
inspector, or of a permit or certificate issued under the provisions of this code, shall be subject
to penalties as prescribed by law.
Section 114.3 Unlawful continuance. Insert: “Any person who shall continue any work after
having been served with a stop work order, except such work as that person is directed to
perform to remove a violation or unsafe condition, shall be charged with a violation of this
section and shall be fined according to the following schedule: $100.00 for any first offense;
$250.00 for any second offense; $500 for any third offense; and no less than $1000.00 or more
than $10,000.00 for any fourth and subsequent offense. Repeat offenders shall not receive
warnings and shall instead be subject to progressively increasing fines according to the foregoing
schedule. Each day that a violation continues shall be deemed a separate offense., in place of:
“Any person who shall continue any work after having been served with a stop work order,
except such work as that person is directed to perform a violation or unsafe condition, shall be
subject to penalties as prescribed by law.”
Section 1612.3. Insert: “Kent County” in place of, “[INSERT NAME OF JURISDICTION]”
Section 1612.3 Insert: “May 5, 2003”,in place of, “[INSERT DATE OF ISSUANCE]”
Section 3410.2. Insert: April 4, 1984 in place of [DATE TO BE INSERTED BY THE
JURISDICTION. NOTE: IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS DATE COINCIDE WITH THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF BUILDING CODES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION].
(b) International Residential Code Adopted. That certain documents, three (3) copies of which
are on file in the Department of Planning and Inspections in the City of Dover, being marked and
designated as the International Residential Code, as published by the International Code Council,
be and is hereby adopted as the code of the City of Dover for regulating the design, construction,
quality of materials, erection, installation, alteration, repair, location, relocation, replacement,
addition to, use or maintenance of building, mechanical, plumbing and electrical systems in the
City of Dover and providing for the issuance of permits and collection of fees therefore; and
each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions and terms of such International Residential
Code, as referenced in the Building Code adopted in 5-16 (a), published by the International
Code Council, on file in the office of the City of Dover are hereby referred to, adopted and made
a part hereof as if fully set out in this section. The following sections of the International
Residential Code are hereby revised:
Page 64
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Chapter 5 - Buildings & Building Regulations, Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention & Protection
Chapter 10 - Housing & Property Maintenance Page 3
Section 101.1 Title. Insert “City of Dover, DE” in place of “[NAME OF JURISDICTION]”
Section 105.2. Work exempt from permit. Modify as follows:
Building:
1. One story detached accessory structures, provided the floor area does not exceed 200 24
square feet (18.58 2.23 m²).
2. Fences not over 6 feet (1829mm) high.
3. Retaining walls that are not over 4 feet (1219mm) in height measured from the bottom of
the footing to the top of the wall, unless supporting a surcharge.
1. Water tanks supported directly on grade if the capacity does not exceed 5,000 gallons
(18927 L) and the ratio of height to diameter or width does not exceed 2 to 1.
5. 2. Sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches (762 mm) above adjacent grade and
not over any basement or story below.
6. 3. Painting, papering, tiling, carpeting, cabinets, countertops and similar finish work.
7. 4. Prefabricated swimming pools that are less than 24 inches (610 mm) deep.
8. 5. Swings and other playground equipment accessory to a one or two-family dwelling.
9. 6. Window awnings supported by an exterior wall which do not project more than 54
inches (1372 mm) from the exterior wall and do not require additional support.
SECTION R106 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
R106.1 Submittal documents. Construction documents, special inspection and structural
observation programs, and other data shall be submitted in one or more two sets, with each
application for a permit. The construction documents shall be prepared by a registered design
professional where required by the statues of the jurisdiction in which the project is to be
constructed. Where special conditions exist, the building official is authorized to require
additional construction documents to be prepared by a registered design professional.
SECTION R108 FEES
R108.2 Schedule of permit fees. Insert: “see Section 5-21 Fees for permits”, in place of, “in
accordance with the schedule as established by the applicable governing authority”.
SECTION R112 BOARD OF APPEALS Delete Section in its entirety.
SECTION R113 VIOLATIONS
Section R113.4 Violation Penalties. Insert: “See Section 5-16 (a) Section 113.4 Violation
Penalties In place of: “Any person who violates a provision of this code or fails to comply with
any of the requirements thereof or who erects, constructs, places, alters, repairs, a building or
structure in violation of the approved construction documents or directive of the building
inspector, or of a permit or certificate issued under the provisions of this code, shall be subject
to penalties as prescribed by law.
Page 65
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Chapter 5 - Buildings & Building Regulations, Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention & Protection
Chapter 10 - Housing & Property Maintenance Page 4
SECTION R114 STOP WORK ORDER
Section R114.3 Unlawful continuance. Insert: See Section 5-16 (a) International Building Code,
Section 114.3 Unlawful continuance, in place of: “Any person who shall continue any work after
having been served with a stop work order, except such work as that person is directed to
perform a violation or unsafe condition, shall be subject to penalties as prescribed by law.”
TABLE R301.2(1) CLIMATIC AND GEOGRAPHIC DESIGN CRITERIA
ICE
SEISM IC SU BJECT TO D AM AGE FRO M SH IELD
GRO U ND W IN D DESIGN Frost W IN TER UN DER- AIR M EAN
SN O W SPEED CATEGO R line DESIGN LAY M EN T FLO O D FREEZIN G ANN UAL
LOAD (m ph) Y W eathering depth Term ite D ecay TEM P REQ U IRED H AZARD S IN D EX TEM P
95 Gust
77 M oderate Slight to M ay 5,
25 Fastest A Severe 24” to H eavy M oderate 14º NO 2003 450 55º
CHAPTER 4 FOUNDATIONS
SECTION R403 FOOTINGS
R403.1.1 Minimum size. Minimum sizes for concrete and masonry footings shall be as set forth
in Table R403.1 and Figure R403.1(1). The footing width, W, shall be based on the load-bearing
value of the soil in accordance with Table 401.4.1. Spread footings shall be at least 6 inches in
thickness. Footing projections, P, shall be at least 2 inches and shall not exceed the thickness of
the footing. The minimum thickness of a footing shall be the nominal width of the wall but not
less than 8 inches. The nominal width of the footings shall be twice the nominal thickness of the
wall. Two story sections of a building shall have a minimum footing width of 24 inches and a
minimum footing depth of 10 inches. The size of footings supporting piers and columns shall be
based on the tributary load and allowable pressure in accordance with Table 401.4.1.,but in all
cases shall be a minimum of 24 inches x 24 inches x 12 inches deep. Footings for wood
foundations shall be in accordance with the details set forth in Section R403.2, and Figures
R403.1(2) and R403.1(3).
R403.1.2 Continuous footings in Seismic Design Categories D1 and D2. Delete in its entirety
and Insert:
R403.1.2 Footing reinforcement. Footings shall be reinforced with a minimum of two #4 rebar
wired together with a minimum 15” overlap; pier footings with a minimum of two #4 rebar
wired together in two directions, and column footings with three #4 rebar wired together in two
directions.
R403.1.3 Seismic reinforcing. Delete in its entirety
R403.1.4 Minimum Depth. All exterior footings shall be placed at least 12 24 inches below the
undisturbed ground. Where applicable, the depth of the footings shall also conform to Sections
R403.1.4.1 through R403.1.4.2.
Page 66
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Chapter 5 - Buildings & Building Regulations, Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention & Protection
Chapter 10 - Housing & Property Maintenance Page 5
403.1.4.1 Frost protection.
Exceptions:
2. Freestanding residential accessory structures with an area of 400 240 square feet or less
and an eave height of 10 feet or less, except for pole buildings and garages, shall not be
required to be protected provided that they are leveled and secured with tie-downs or
equivalent manufactured home fastening devices on each corner. Structures 20 feet or
more in length shall have additional anchors attached in the center of each side.
3. Decks not supported by a dwelling need not be provided with footings that extend below
the frost line. Single story supported in part by a dwelling and with 4” x 4” posts shall
have footings that are a minimum of 8 inches in diameter; with 6” x 6” posts a minimum
of 12” diameter is required; the bottom of all such footings shall be a minimum of 24”
below finished grade and be at least 6” deep.
ADOPTED: *
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations, Article III -
Electrical Installations, Section 5-31 - Electrical Code Adopted, be amended by striking "being
particularly the 1990 edition thereof, of which not less than three (3) copies have been and
now are filed in the office of the building inspector."
ADOPTED: *
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations, Article IV
- Mechanical Code, Section 5-56 - Adopted, be amended to read as follows:
ARTICLE IV. MECHANICAL CODE
Sec. 5-56. Adopted.
(a) That certain documents, three (3) copies of which are on file in the office of the
department of inspections and the City of Dover, being marked and designated as the
International Mechanical Code, including Appendix Chapter "A", as referenced in the Building
Code adopted in 5-16 (a), published by the International Code Council, be and is hereby adopted
as the code of the City of Dover for regulating the design, construction, quality of materials,
erection, installation, alteration, repair, location, relocation, replacement, addition to, use or
maintenance of mechanical systems in the City of Dover and providing for the issuance of
permits and collection of fees therefore; and each and all of the regulations, provisions,
conditions and terms of such International Mechanical Code, as referenced in the Building Code
adopted in 5-16 (a), published by the International Code Council, on file in the office of the City
of Dover are hereby referred to, adopted and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this section.
The following sections of the International Mechanical Code are hereby revised:
Page 67
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Chapter 5 - Buildings & Building Regulations, Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention & Protection
Chapter 10 - Housing & Property Maintenance Page 6
Section 101.1 Title. Insert "City of Dover, DE" in place of "[NAME OF JURISDICTION]"
106.5.2 Fee Schedule. Insert: "See Section 5.61 Heating, air conditioning, and heat pump permit
fees", in place of, The fees for all mechanical work shall be as indicated in the following
schedule:
[JURISDICTION TO INSERT APPROPRIATE SCHEDULE]".
Section 106.5.3 Fee refunds. Delete in its entirety.
SECTION 108 VIOLATIONS
Section 108.4 Violation Penalties. Insert: "See Section 5-16 (a) International Building Code
Section 113.4, Violation Penalties" In place of: Any person who shall violate a provision of this
code or shall fail to comply with any of the requirements thereof or who shall erect, install,
alters, or repair, a plumbing work in violation of the approved construction documents or
directive of the code official, or of a permit or certificate issued under the provisions of this
code, shall be guilty of a [SPECIFY OFFENSE], punishable by a fine of not more than
[AMOUNT], or by imprisonment not exceeding thirty (30) days, or both such fine and
imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues after due notice has been served shall be
deemed a separate offense.
Section 108.5 Stop work orders. Insert: "See Section 5-16 (a) International Building Code,
Section 114.3 Unlawful continuance", in place of: Upon notice from the code official that
mechanical work is being done contrary to the provisions of this code or in a dangerous and
unsafe manner such work shall immediately cease. Such notice shall be in writing and shall be
given to the owner of the property, or to the owner's agent, or to the person doing the work. The
notice shall state the conditions under which work is authorized to resume. Where an emergency
exists, the code official shall not be required to give a written notice prior to stopping work. Any
person who shall continue any work in or about the structure after having been served with a
stop work order, except such work as that person is directed to perform to remove a violation or
unsafe condition, shall be charged with a violation of this section and shall be liable to a fine of
not less than [AMOUNT] dollars or more than [AMOUNT] dollars
SECTION 109 MEANS OF APPEAL Delete Section in its entirety.
(b) If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this section is, for any reason, held
to be unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
section. The city council hereby declares that it would have passed the ordinance from which
this section derives, and each section, subsection, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the
fact that any one (1) or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses and phrases be declared
unconstitutional.
ADOPTED: *
Page 68
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Chapter 5 - Buildings & Building Regulations, Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention & Protection
Chapter 10 - Housing & Property Maintenance Page 7
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations, Article V -
Plumbing Code, Section 5-71 - Adopted, be amended to read as follows:
ARTICLE V. PLUMBING CODE
Sec. 5-71. Adopted.
(a) That certain documents, three (3) copies of which are on file in the office of the department
of planning and inspections in the City of Dover, being marked and designated as International
Plumbing Code, including Appendix Chapters B, C, D, E, F, G, as referenced in the Building
Code adopted in 5-16 (a), published by the International Code Council, be and is hereby adopted
as the code of the City of Dover for regulating the design, construction, quality of materials,
erection, installation, alteration, repair, location, relocation, replacement, addition to, use or
maintenance of plumbing systems in the City of Dover and providing for the issuance of permits
and collection of fees therefore; and each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions and
terms of such International Plumbing Code, as referenced in the Building Code adopted in 5-16
(a), published by the International Code Council, on file in the office of the City of Dover are
hereby referred to, adopted and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this section. The
following sections are hereby revised:
Section 101.1 Title. Insert “City of Dover, DE” in place of “[NAME OF JURISDICTION]”
Section 106.6.2 Fee Schedule. Insert: “See Section 5.75 Permit Fees”, in place of, “The fees for
all plumbing work shall be as indicated in the following schedule:
[JURISDICTION TO INSERT APPROPRIATE SCHEDULE]”.
Section 106.6.3 Fee refunds. Delete in its entirety.
Section 108.4 Violation Penalties. Insert: “See Section 5-16 (a) International Building Code
Section 113.4, Violation Penalties”, In place of: Any person who shall violate a provision of this
code or shall fail to comply with any of the requirements thereof or who shall erect, install,
alters, or repair, a plumbing work in violation of the approved construction documents or
directive of the code official, or of a permit or certificate issued under the provisions of this
code, shall be guilty of a [SPECIFY OFFENSE], punishable by a fine of not more than
[AMOUNT] dollars or by imprisonment not exceeding [NUMBER OF DAYS], or both such fine
and imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues after due notice has been served shall be
deemed a separate offense.
Section 108.5 Stop work orders. Insert: “See Section 5-16 (a) International Building Code,
Section 114.3 Unlawful continuance”, in place of: Upon notice from the code official, work on
any plumbing system that is being done contrary to the provisions of this code or in a dangerous
and unsafe manner shall immediately cease. Such notice shall be in writing and shall be given
to the owner of the property, or to the owner’s agent, or to the person doing the work. The
notice shall state the conditions under which work is authorized to resume. Where an emergency
Page 69
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Chapter 5 - Buildings & Building Regulations, Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention & Protection
Chapter 10 - Housing & Property Maintenance Page 8
exists, the code official shall not be required to give a written notice prior to stopping work. Any
person who shall continue any work in or about the structure after having been served with a
stop work order, except such work as that person is directed to perform to remove a violation or
unsafe condition, shall be charged with a violation of this section and shall be liable to a fine of
not less than [AMOUNT] dollars or more than [AMOUNT] dollars
(b) That if any section, subsection, sentences, clause or phrase of this section is, for any
reason, held to be unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this section. The city council hereby declares that it would have passed the ordinance
from which this section derives, and each section, subsection, clause and phrase therefore,
irrespective of the fact that any one (1) or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses and
phrases be declared unconstitutional.
ADOPTED: *
ITEM 10 b-2
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN
COUNCIL MET:
That Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention and Protection, Article III - Fire Prevention Code, Section 7-56
- Adopted, be amended to read as follows:
Sec-7-56 Adopted
(a) International Fire Code adopted. A certain document, three (3) copies of which are on file
in the office of the department of planning of the City of Dover, being marked and designated as
"International Fire Code, 2003 Edition," as published by the International Code Council, be and
is hereby adopted as the Fire Prevention Code of the City of Dover in the State of Delaware; for
the control of buildings, structures and premises as herein provided; and each and all of the
regulations, provisions, penalties, conditions and terms of said International Fire Code, are
hereby referred to, adopted and made part hereof as if fully set out in this section, with additions,
insertions, deletions and changes as follows:
Section 101.1 Insert "City of Dover", in place of [NAME OF JURIDICTION].
Delete in their entirety: Sections 105.6 Required operational permits., through 105.7.12
Temporary membrane structures, tents, and canopies.
(b) National Fire Codes adopted. There is hereby adopted the most recently published edition
of the National Fire Prevention Association's (NFPA) National Fire Codes (excluding NFPA
Codes 11C, 13E, 402M, -41s, 422, 424M-473, 901-906, 1001-1041, 1201-1410, 1452-1999,
5000), three (3) copies of which are on file in the office of the fire marshal.
Page 70
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Chapter 5 - Buildings & Building Regulations, Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention & Protection
Chapter 10 - Housing & Property Maintenance Page 9
(c) The more restrictive provisions of the International Fire Codes as set forth in subsection (a)
above or the National Fire Codes as set forth in subsection (b) above shall apply whenever they
may be in conflict.
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any of the provisions of the publications
adopted in subsection (a) or (b).
ADOPTED: *
ITEM 10 b-3
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN
COUNCIL MET:
That Chapter 10 - Housing and Property Maintenance, Article I - In General, Section 10-1
Property Maintenance Code adopted, be amended to read as follows:
ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL*
Sec. 10-1. Property maintenance code adopted.
(a) That a certain document, three (3) copies of which are on file in the office of the
department of planning and inspections of the City of Dover, being marked and designated as
"The International Property Maintenance Code, 2003" as published by the International Code
Council, be and is hereby adopted as the Property Maintenance Code of the City of Dover, in the
State of Delaware; for the control of buildings and structures as herein provided; and each and
all of the regulations, provisions, penalties, conditions and terms of said property maintenance
code are hereby referred to, adopted, and made a part hereof, as if fully set out in this section,
with the following additions, insertions, deletions and changes:
Section 101.1 Title. Insert “City of Dover, DE” in place of “[NAME OF JURISDICTION]”
SECTION 111 MEANS OF APPEAL Delete Section in its entirety.
Section 304.14 Insect screens. Insert: "March 1st to November 30th" in place of "[date] to
[date]".
Section 602.3 Heat supply. Insert: "September 15th to May 1st" in place of "[date] to [date]".
Section 602.4. Occupiable work spaces. Insert: "September 15th to May 1st" in place of "[date]
to [date]".
Page 71
Final Reading - April 11, 2005
Chapter 5 - Buildings & Building Regulations, Chapter 7 - Fire Prevention & Protection
Chapter 10 - Housing & Property Maintenance Page 10
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any of the provisions of the publication
adopted in subsection (a).
ADOPTED: *
Page 72
FINAL READING - REVISED
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That the Dover Code be amended by deleting Chapter 4.5 in its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof the
following:
Chapter 4.5
BICYCLES AND OTHER SIMILAR HUMAN-POWERED VEHICLES
Sec. 4.5-1. Regulations.
The operation and use of bicycles and other similar human-powered vehicles (including, but not limited
to bicycles, scooters, skateboards, rollerblades, rollerskates, and the like) - excluding wheel chairs and other
devices used for handicapped transportation - will be governed by this Chapter and the motor vehicle laws
of the State of Delaware {Title 21, Chapter 41, Subchapter XII}.
Sec. 4.5-2. Bicycle Registration.
The police department is hereby authorized to register bicycles upon written application. Such
registration is encouraged and will be maintained by the police department for identification purposes. Such
registration shall also entitle the operation of the bicycle in the city.
Sec. 4.5-3. Impoundment of unlicensed Abandoned bicycles.
The police force may impound any bicycle operated in violation of section 4.5-1 and retain possession
thereof until a license is obtained by the owner of the bicycle. Should the police force retain possession for
more than sixty (60) days of a bicycle that has been stolen, abandoned, unclaimed, used in the commission
of a crime, or in cases where the operator has been arrested, it the police force may dispose of said the
bicycle. (Ord. of 2-22-82)
Sec. 4.5-4. Bicycles and skateboards on sidewalks.
The use and operation of bicycles and other similar human-power vehicles (including, but not limited
to bicycles, scooters, skateboards, rollerblades, rollerskates, and the like) - excluding wheel chairs and other
devices used for handicapped transportation - on sidewalks in the downtown shopping area is hereby
prohibited. This section shall be enforced by the erection of appropriate signs in the downtown shopping area
designating the areas where bicycles and other similar human-power vehicles may not be used. (Ord. of
10-22-79)
Sec. 4.5-5. Penalties for violation.
Any person who shall violate any of the sections of this chapter, or who shall fail to comply therewith,
or with any of the requirements thereof, shall be subject to a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars
($100.00) and not less than ten dollars ($10.00). Fines not paid within fourteen (14) days of the day the fine
was issued, including the day the fine was issued, shall be automatically doubled in amount. (Ord. of
7-28-86; Ord. of 9-22-03)
/jg
S:\ClerksOffice\Ordinances\2005\Draft Ordinances\Bicycles - Section 4.5 Final Reading 04-11-05-REVISED.wpd