UTILITY COMMITTEE
The Utility Committee Meeting was held on October 25, 2004, at 5:30 p.m. with Chairman Carey presiding. Members present were Councilmen Ruane and Sadusky, Mr. Cregar, and Mr. Snaman. Members of Council present were Mr. Pitts, Mr. Slavin, Mr. Ritter (arrived at 5:40 p.m.), Mr. Hogan, Mr. Salters, and Council President Williams. Mayor Speed was also present.
Agenda Additions/Deletions
Mr. Cregar moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried.
Annexation Request - Northwest Corner of Kenton Road and Fox Hall Drive (owned by Clifton A. and Marie F. Hutton)
Members were provided the Petition to Annex and Zone Property, the Findings and Recommendations of the Dover Planning Commission, a Cost/Revenue Analysis Summary, and Plan of Services Report for property located on the northwest corner of Kenton Road and Fox Hall Drive (As on File in the Office of the City Clerk). Mr. Galvin, City Planner, advised members that the application requires an Annexation Plan Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003. The amendment proposes to change the land use type identified on the Annexation Plan Map from Residential to Office for this property.
Mr. Galvin noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Annexation Plan Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003 to identify this parcel with the land use type of Office; and that this request for annexation be approved and that the property be zoned C-PO (Commercial Professional Office Zone) upon annexation.
Responding to Mr. Cregar, Mr. Galvin stated that there are surrounding properties that have a more intensive use than residential, explaining that directly across the street is the Kent Swim Club and further north is the Robbins Hose Company Fire Station #2. It was his opinion that there is significant justification for zoning the property C-PO, noting that the potential use of the property could not be intensive due to the size of the parcel and the building that would be permitted.
In response to Mr. Snaman, Mr. Galvin stated that any development would require site plan approval by the Planning Commission. In regard to the process, Mr. Galvin explained that City Council will be considering the annexation plan amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Update 2003 before taking action on the annexation and rezoning request for this parcel.
Mr. Ruane relayed concerns regarding the proposed commercial zoning classification, noting that an overwhelming majority of the surrounding properties are residential. He also noted that the commentary from DelDOT indicates that access to the site will be from Fox Hall Drive. He felt that members should be cautious to have substantial findings and reasons when making decisions in conflict with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Ruane questioned what has changed in the area since the development of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. He also relayed concern that the proposed zoning classification could set a precedent for the area.
Concurring, Mr. Cregar questioned what the City’s position would be if the property was already in the City and a request was received to rezone the property from residential to commercial. He suspected that there would be opposition to such a request.
Mr. Galvin assured members that the request was reviewed thoroughly by staff and the Planning Commission. It was his feeling that when the Annexation Plan of the Comprehensive Plan was developed, the gross area was considered rather than identifying the opportunity this area could provide.
Mr. Hutton stated that his residence is located on the southwest corner, across from the property proposed to be annexed. He explained that his intention is to sell the property and he feels that it would be to his advantage to sell the property with a C-PO zoning classification. He noted that the property is a part of an enclave of property that is surrounded by incorporated areas of the City. Mr. Hutton stated that other property owners in this enclave are not yet willing to be annexed. It was his feeling that the annexation of this property is the first step in bringing the enclave into the City.
Responding to Mr. Ruane, Mr. Hutton stated that although he was confident that the property could be sold with a residential zoning classification, to sell the property with a low commercial zoning classification would increase its value. It was his feeling that the C-PO zoning classification would protect and maintain the quality of the neighborhood.
Mayor Speed reminded members that the purpose of the review by the Utility Committee is to determine if it would be feasible for the City to annex the property and to assure sufficient utilities. The zoning issue is to be determined by the Planning Commission and City Council. He advised members that: 1) it is strictly not pertinent whether the property is saleable as residential or not; 2) traffic issues are not relevant to the annexation because the traffic entering and exiting the property would do so via Fox Hall Drive, and not passing any residential properties along Fox Hall Drive; and 3) During the past year, Council has discovered that the City’s Comprehensive Plan has a defect, that being that there are several areas depicted for potential annexation with the entire area listed as one zone. It was his opinion that this is a defect in the Comprehensive Plan that needs to be addressed. It is the City’s desire to create scenarios in our City where we are not just adding additional traffic; in other words, just because a parcel is located in a predominantly residential area does not mean that the City would not want another use for the parcel. He reminded members that one of the ideas for considering the Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone is to promote the placement of businesses to attract residents from nearby neighborhoods to work at these sites and to walk or ride bicycles to work. Mayor Speed also noted that further south on Kenton Road there is a major commercial area and that Kenton Road itself is not a residential roadway.
Responding to Mr. Ritter, Mr. Hutton stated that there is so much animosity among the neighboring properties regarding annexation; therefore, at this time, consideration of annexation is for only one (1) parcel.
Mr. Ruane questioned the role of the Utility Committee, feeling that it is their responsibility to consider the rezoning request as well as the annexation application. Responding, Mrs. Green, City Clerk, stated that a legal opinion would be obtained in this regard and explained that the procedure refers the annexation of property to the Utility Committee to determine if the infrastructure is available to serve the property and/or determine the costs that would be involved in making them available. The annexation issue is considered by the Utility Committee for their review and recommendation to City Council and the rezoning issue is considered by the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation to City Council.
Mr. Snaman moved to recommend approval of the Planning Commission’s recommendation for annexation of property located on the northwest corner of Kenton Road at Fox Hall Drive, based on the determination that there are adequate utilities to serve the property. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried with Mr. Ruane voting no and Mr. Cregar abstaining. City Clerk’s Office Note: It should be noted that consideration of an annexation request by the committee is to consider infrastructure issues and the ability to provide city services; therefore, approval of the committee’s recommendation does not annex said property. During their Regular Meeting of September 27, 2004, City Council set an Annexation Referendum for October 28, 2004 for property located on the northwest corner of Kenton Road at Fox Hall Drive. Final action on this annexation request will take place during the Council Meeting of November 8, 2004.
Annexation Request - 1076 Forrest Avenue (owned by Leonard and Catherine Moore)
Members were provided the Petition to Annex and Zone Property, the Findings and Recommendations of the Dover Planning Commission, a Cost/Revenue Analysis Summary, and Plan of Services Report for property located at 1076 Forrest Avenue (As on File in the Office of the City Clerk). Mr. Galvin advised members that the Planning Commission recommended that this request for annexation be approved and that the property be zoned C-PO (Commercial Professional Office Zone) and COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone-1) upon annexation. He noted that the applicant had originally requested a zoning classification of C-2A (Limited Central Commercial) and COZ-1.
Mr. Koenig, Public Works Director, assured members that utilities are or can be made available for the site; however, the developer will be responsible for all costs associated with extending sanitary sewer and water service and capacity to the proposed development. In addition, when the site is developed, the owner will be required to provide a 50' wide public access and utility easement along the rear of the parcel.
Mr. Snaman moved to recommend approval of the Planning Commission’s recommendation for annexation of property located at 1076 Forrest Avenue, based on the determination that there are adequate utilities to serve the property, with the stipulation that the owners of the property will meet the requirements as indicated by the Public Works Department. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried. City Clerk’s Office Note: It should be noted that consideration of an annexation request by the committee is to consider infrastructure issues and the ability of providing city services; therefore, approval of the committee’s recommendation does not annex said property. During their Regular Meeting of September 27, 2004, City Council set an Annexation Referendum for October 28, 2004 for property located at 1076 Forrest Avenue. Final action on this annexation request will take place during the Council Meeting of November 8, 2004.
FCC Comcast Filing
On August 1, 2004, Comcast filed FCC Form 1240 related to the cost of service for basic cable service and Form 1205 related to cost of equipment installation and service charges. These forms were filed with the City on July 28, 2004 and the City has ninety (90) days to act on these forms. Mrs. Mitchell, Treasurer/Finance Director, provided information regarding the filings. The City currently relies on the Public Service Commission audits. The formulas and forms for the calculated rates are provided by the FCC. She stated that the City has no recourse to stop a rate increase when these formulas are followed by the cable company. Staff recommended acceptance of the Comcast FCC Filing, Forms 1240 and 1205. It was noted that, due to time constraints, staff requested that this matter be considered during the Council Meeting later this evening for final approval.
Mr. Ruane moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Snaman and unanimously carried.
Mr. Snaman moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 6:17 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Carleton E. Carey, Sr.
Chairman
CEC/jg
S:ClerksOfficeAgendas&MinutesCommittee-Minutes200410-25-2004-Utility.wpd