REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
The Regular Council Meeting was held on September 27, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Williams presiding. Council members present were Mr. Carey, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Sadusky, Mr. Ritter, Mr. Hogan, Mr. Salters, and Mr. Ruane. Mr. Slavin was absent.
Council staff members present were Police Chief Horvath, Mr. Cooper, Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. Galvin, Fire Chief Bashista, 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. Sadusky and unanimously carried.
Mr. Salters moved for approval of the consent agenda, seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent).
ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 13, 2004
The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of September 13, 2004 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Salters, seconded by Mr. Carey and bore the written approval of Mayor Speed.
PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Speed read the following Proclamations into the record:
Fire Prevention Week (October 3-9, 2004)
Whereas, a fire can spread rapidly and a quick escape from the home increases the chances of survival; and
Whereas, smoke alarms have been proven an effective lifesaver, having helped to cut the home fire death rate by one half since their introduction to the general public; and
Whereas, working smoke alarms are essential in every household and should be installed on every level of home, including the basement and outside of each separate sleeping area; and
Whereas, The City of Dover is joining the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) in reaching out to its citizens with a message of fire safety during Fire Prevention Week 2004; and
Whereas, the Fire Prevention Week 2004 theme, “It’s Fire Prevention Week: Test Your Smoke Alarms” is an important message for all citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, STEPHEN R. SPEED, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER do hereby proclaim the week of October 3-9, 2004, as “Fire Prevention Week”. I call upon the people of Dover to remember the Fire Prevention Week 2004 reminder, “It’s Fire Prevention Week: Test Your Smoke Alarms” and urge all citizens to heed the advice to install and maintain smoke alarms.
Halloween Trick-or-Treat (October 30, 2004)
WHEREAS, the children of the City of Dover enjoy the fun and festivities associated with the observance of the Halloween Trick-or-Treat custom of traveling with friends and family going from door to door in their neighborhood, displaying their costumes, and gathering treats; and
WHEREAS, parents are urged to join in the festivities by accompanying their children throughout their journeys in celebrating Halloween Trick-or-Treat; and
WHEREAS, residents are requested to indicate their willingness to welcome children by keeping their porch or exterior lights on and that youngsters call only on homes so lighted; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor of the City of Dover has deemed it advisable to observe the celebration of Halloween Trick-or-Treat on Saturday, October 30, 2004 between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, STEPHEN R. SPEED, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, do hereby proclaim that the Halloween Trick-or-Treat observance be held on the 30th day of October 2004, between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 8:00 P.M. in the City of Dover and urge all residents, both young and old, to make this a happy and safe occasion for our children.
RECOGNITION OF AWARDS (Presented by The Delaware League of Local Governments)
Mayor Speed was joined by Mr. George Wright, Executive Director of the Delaware League of Local Government, and Police Chief Horvath in recognition of awards presented by the League, as follows: Pfc. Gregory Hopkins of the Dover Police Department’s K-9 Unit - 2004 Officer of the Year; and Mrs. Janice C. Green, City Clerk, 2004 Municipal Clerk of the Year.
Mrs. Green thanked the League for the recognition, Mayor and Council for their support and confidence, City staff for their cooperation, employees of the Clerk’s Office for their hard work, and relayed her heartfelt gratitude to Ms. Traci McDowell, Assistant City Clerk, for her loyalty, commitment and dedication to the Office of the City Clerk.
Pfc. Hopkins thanked the League for the recognition, and the Mayor and Council, Dover Police Force, and the citizens for their assistance to the Police Department.
LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - SEPTEMBER 13, 2004
The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on September 13, 2004 with Chairman Salters presiding.
Disposition of City Owned Land - Property Located off of Water Street
The Delaware Department of Administrative Services is in the process of renovating the Armory. The renovation project requires that the existing trash compactor on the Armory property be relocated. In their search for a new location, staff found a desirable area that proved to be owned by the City of Dover. The site, 136 East Water Street, (Tax ID# 2-05-07709-05-5600) is a 100’ x 350’ parcel located east of and adjacent to the Delaware State Education Association building. Members were advised that the property appears to be a remnant lot from the sale or transfer of a portion of the old PW2 property to the State of Delaware/Kent County for a sewer station. The property contains a driveway leading to a Kent County sewer station, a Kent County sewer station line easement transecting the property, and an electric transformer.
The City was originally approached for an easement on the property to allow the placement of the trash compactor. The City Manager, Mr. DePrima, recommended that the State make an offer to purchase the property, since it proved to be surplus property. In accordance with the simple appraisal that was conducted by the State, the value of the property was determined to be between $2,500 and $5,000. The low value is due to the majority of the property being located in a flood plain and, because it is transected by a sewer easement, construction of a building on the lot is precluded.
Although the City of Dover Procedure for Sale and Disposition of Real Property encourages the sale of surplus land through auctions or sealed bids, in accordance with Exception C (Conveyance of Odd Shaped and/or Unbuildable Lots), the City may sell property to an adjacent property owner based on an unbiased fee appraisal. The City Manager has evaluated the property and determined that no City departments have a need for it. Staff recommended authorizing the City Manager to sell the property on East Water Street to the State of Delaware for $5,000. Mr. DePrima assured members that the City Solicitor will be requested to review the sale of the property to ensure that all easements and legalities are in order.
The committee recommended authorizing the City Manager to negotiate the sale of property located on East Water Street to the State of Delaware for a value between $2,500 and $5,000.
By consent agenda, Mr. Salters moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent).
Acceptance of the Dedication of Property - 18 S. Queen Street
Members reviewed a request from Mrs. Juanita G. Carter for the City to consider the possibility of assuming ownership of property she owns at 18 S. Queen Street to fulfill all outstanding obligations owed to the City involving this property, totaling $6,582.75. Members were advised that the property has a $6,450 City lien on it because the City had a building on the property demolished. In addition, the current City tax on the property is $132.75.
After receiving Mrs. Carter’s proposal, the City Manager contacted the newly established “Dover Community Partnership, Inc.” to determine if they would be interested in developing the property. The Partnership, in which the City is a participating member, is dedicated to the redevelopment of Downtown Dover through promoting homeownership. The Partnership was initiated through the efforts of Senator Carper and is being managed by the Dover Housing Authority. The Partnership has received 501(c)3 non-profit tax status. The Partnership sent a letter expressing interest in the property and indicated that a three or four bedroom owner-occupancy home would be constructed on the property, placing it back on the tax rolls.
Although the City of Dover Procedure for Sale and Disposition of Real Property encourages the sale of surplus land through auctions or sealed bids, in accordance with Exception D (Donation of Land to Non-Profit Organizations), the City may donate the property to a non-profit organization when it determines that it would be in the best interest of the City. The City Manager has evaluated the property and determined that no City department have a need for the 25’ x 152’ vacant residential lot. Profit Organizations. Mr. DePrima reminded members that the redevelopment of the residential areas of Downtown Dover through encouraging homeownership is expressed in the City Comprehensive Plan and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Action Plan. It was also noted that acquiring the land in this manner is more cost effective than acquiring it through tax sale. Staff recommended authorizing the City Manager to acquire the property at 18 S. Queen Street in exchange for forgiving existing City liens and tax debt, and transfer ownership to The Dover Community Partnership.
The committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation.
By consent agenda, Mr. Salters moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation to authorize the City Manager to acquire the property at 18 S. Queen Street in exchange for forgiving existing City liens and tax debt, and transfer ownership to The Dover Community Partnership. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent).
CIP Amendments - Vehicle Purchases - Robbins Hose Company
The City Manager was approached by Fire Chief Bashista regarding a long-range vehicle replacement plan for the Robbins Hose Company that would entail the City of Dover providing funds for the Company’s major apparatus equipment replacement. In addition, the City would continue to provide $60,000 per year toward the mortgage payment of Station #1. Under this proposal, the Robbins Hose Company would fund the $2.5 million improvement to the Headquarters/Station #1 without City assistance and assume the funding of command and utility vehicles. A letter from Chief Bashista that fully explains the proposal, along with tables to compare the proposal with current vehicle replacements, as embodied in the CIP, was provided to members for their review. It was noted that neither table includes the City’s $60,000 per year funding for Station #2.
During the committee meeting, Fire Chief Bashista advised members that if the City had a paid fire department, 102 firefighters would be needed to provide 21 firefighters per shift, at a cost of approximately $7 million per year. Mr. DePrima stated that he has discussed this topic with other City Managers and they have indicated that the cost to a municipality for a fire department is approximately the same as a police department, which confirms Chief Bashista’s estimate. Chief Bashista assured members that enrollment of volunteers is good and that he did not foresee a need in the future for career firefighters.
Mr. DePrima requested that members keep in mind that, except for the larger increase for next year, which is due to accelerating the replacement of Engine #4, this proposal is for approximately the same as the $250,000 payments, plus the replacement of some vehicles that have been done in the past. Mr. Hogan responded that this proposal stabilizes the amount of money the City contributes each year. Responding to Mr. Hogan, Chief Bashista stated that about 9% of his budget is derived from donations.
The committee recommended adoption of the revised Capital Investments Plan (CIP), as outlined in the attached exhibits (Exhibit #1), which reflect the request of the Robbins Hose Company to adopt a payment plan that transfers funds over the next ten years to the Robbins Hose Company for major apparatus replacement and mortgage payments for Station #2, with the condition that the Robbins Hose Company agrees to assume all payments for improvement to Station #1 currently estimated at $2.5 million and all auxiliary vehicle and equipment costs; it is further understood that this contingency be reflected in minutes of the meeting, certified by the City Clerk and sent to the Robbins Hose Company, and that the Robbins Hose Company shall send certified minutes of its meeting at which the payment plans for major and auxiliary apparatus and fire station were agreed to; it is further understood that both the City of Dover and the Robbins Hose Company will, to the best of their abilities, adhere to this plan, that the improvements to Station #1 will preclude any need for a third station in the foreseeable future, and that Robbins Hose Company will, because of the lead time necessary for ordering major fire apparatus, need to order equipment in the fiscal year prior to the first payment.
By consent agenda, Mr. Salters moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation (see Exhibit #1), seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent).
Charter Review “Blue Ribbon Committee” (Councilman Hogan)
It was noted that, earlier this year, members of City Council and the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee reviewed the City Charter and Code for possible changes. This review was requested as a result of several comments and concerns relayed by members of Council as well as the recent PAS Study.
Mr. Hogan stated that although the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee began the review process, due to time constraints, the committee was unable to complete the review. He recommended that a “Blue Ribbon Committee” be formed, utilizing talent available in the community, to spend six (6) months reviewing the Charter in order to make recommendations to Council.
Mr. Salters and Mayor Speed stated that the review performed previously by the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee was almost complete and they would like to present those recommendations. Mayor Speed and Mr. Salters advised members that they would try to have the information available by the next Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting.
Mr. Carey recommended that the Charter review be done during a workshop, not a regular meeting. Mr. Ruane reminded members that the City is in the process of having the Charter reincorporated and suggested that a review be conducted once the reincorporation is finalized.
There was no further action taken by Council.
By consent agenda, Mr. Salters moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent).
SPECIAL LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - SEPTEMBER 21, 2004
A Special Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting was held on September 27, 2004 with Chairman Salters presiding.
Information on Pension Plan Investment Strategy/process
During the Civilian and Police Pension Board Meeting of June 28, 2004, Councilman Slavin requested that the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee be provided an informational presentation on the pension plan investment strategy and process related to the recent Request for Proposals (RFP) for asset managers. Chairman Salters advised members that the meeting was being held to provide information and clarify the RFP process. He stated that the committee did not intend to challenge the action taken by the Pension Boards and there would be no debate or inquisition.
Mr. Slavin stated that the efficacy of the investment decision by the Pension Boards and the process they used needed to be clarified. He stated that he believes that the Pension Boards have the authority to make their own decisions and Council has no role in that authority and they were not attempting to vacate, reopen, or otherwise undo the decision of the Pension Boards, only to review the information presented.
Mr. Slavin noted that the City Solicitor, Mr. Rodriguez, was requested to provide an opinion regarding members of Council who may have investments with some of the firms that responded to the RFP. He noted that he has a conflict in that he has investments with both Merrill Lynch and Fidelity. Mr. Slavin stated that if discussion led to any of those issues, he would recuse himself from voting.
Mrs. Mitchell, Finance Director, provided an informational presentation of the Pension Plan Investment Strategy/Process (as on file in the Office of the City Clerk). She explained that Mr. Michael Shone of the Peirce Park Group provided a presentation of all of the proposals and reviewed each with the Pension Boards. Mrs. Mitchell noted that Mr. Shone was also requested to provide a customized proposal for review. A sub-committee was formed to further evaluate each fund in order to make a recommendation to both Boards.
Mr. Ruane advised members that, as a member of the Pension Boards, he was asking similar questions throughout the process and was assured that everything was being done according to policy. He noted that the members acted with due diligence and the motion to proceed with the commingled funds approach was unanimously carried by both the Civilian and Police Pension Boards. Mr. Ruane advised members that there was nothing in the Investment Policy which prohibited investments in mutual funds. Referring to Mr. Shevock's concerns regarding Mr. Shone being a licensed broker, Mr. Ruane noted that members were provided a letter from Mr. Shone clarifying that there was no conflict of interest.
During the committee meeting, there was public testimony from retirees and employees, as well as Mr. Charlie Paradee of Edward Jones who submitted two (2) proposals for the opportunity to manage the pension plan and Mr. Sherman Townsend of Merrill Lynch, the City’s current fund manager.
There was no further action taken by Council.
By consent agenda, Mr. Salters moved for acceptance of the Special Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent).
SPECIAL SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT - SEPTEMBER 22, 2004
A Special Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee Meeting was held on September 22, 2004 with Chairman Ritter presiding.
Proposed Ordinance - Chapter 13, Motor Vehicles and Traffic - Section 13-17, Failure to Stop for Red Traffic Signal; Traffic Light Signal Violation Monitoring Program; Penalties
Members were provided a proposed ordinance which would amend Chapter 13, Motor Vehicles and Traffic, by adding a new subsection 13-17 - Failure to stop for a red traffic signal; traffic light signal violation monitoring program; penalties. Deputy City Solicitor Pepper advised members that the City is entitled to local options with regard to the red light photo enforcement system at Webbs Lane and US Route 13, including setting the civil or administrative monetary assessment for failing to stop at the red light, the process for payment of voluntary assessment, and the procedure to contest the violation. Mr. Pepper advised members that the proposed ordinance mirrors the State law with regard to fine amount, additional assessments, and length of time for payment. He also noted that unless local governments adopt an ordinance, they will forego the ability to assess additional fines for failure to pay on time.
The committee recommended adoption of the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 13, Motor Vehicles and Traffic.
By consent agenda, Mr. Salters moved for approval of the committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent). The First Reading will take place during the latter part of the meeting.
By consent agenda, Mr. Salters moved for acceptance of the Special Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent).
MONTHLY REPORTS - AUGUST 2004
By motion of Mr. Salters, seconded by Mr. Carey, the following monthly reports were accepted by consent agenda:
Budget Report (July 2004); Chief of Police Report; City Assessor Report; City Clerk/Alderman Report (Fines); City Manager's Report; Mayor's Report; Planning and Inspections Report; and Robbins Hose Company No. 1 Report
CONCEPTUAL PLAN - BAY VILLAGE - PLANNED NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN
The Planning Office has received a proposal to establish a Planned Neighborhood Development (PND) on 224+/- acres of land located on the north side of White Oak Road extending from Route 1 east to Long Point Road and being adjacent to the Oak Shadows log home development. The proposed project site is located east of Route 1 and north of North Little Creek Road. The development is currently known as Bay Village. The property is currently zoned A (Agricultural). The owner of record is L.D. Shank III and the project sponsor is Bay Village of Dover, LLC.
Members were reminded that in accordance with Article 3, Section 24.1.a of the Zoning Code, City Council must determine whether the proposed project is of such a design and type that it warrants further review by the Planning Commission. If it is determined that further review is warranted, then the project shall proceed to the more detailed Conditional Use Site Plan review and public hearings before the Planning Commission. The Zoning Ordinance allows the opportunity for a Planned Neighborhood Development: Senior Citizen Housing Option (PND:Senior) on lands with agricultural zoning.
Mr. Galvin explained the proposed project and provided details and sketches depicting the project and its features (Exhibit #2). The applicant is requesting a PND:Senior development consisting of up to 700 dwelling units, including a continuing care residential community composed of a congregate care building and related cottages, single family homes, small service commercial uses and places of worship.
Mr. Galvin noted that there are elements of the Bay Village proposal that may be supported, allowed or be contrary to the Comprehensive Plan. There are elements of the Garrison Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that seem to be contrary to the project; however, that, in fact, may not apply to this proposal. He stated that the development of this site may have some negative impacts, explaining that a development immediately across White Oak Road from the Industrial land may create a new source of complaints about truck traffic or industrial noises. Most significantly, for the State, its development may set a precedent for development east of Route 1.
Mr. Galvin also noted that there are positive impacts of the development. The development team has presented an estimate of value of the properties and the potential income that may be generated. The development would be utilizing soils that have minor value for agriculture and would protect the wetlands identified by the State, more so than an agricultural use. The developer has cited the concepts of a quality project that exemplifies the concepts in Livable Delaware and it appears to include concepts that the City requires for projects that go through discretionary review.
Mr. Galvin advised members that this may be an opportunity to determine the way the City approaches development and advised them to weigh the merits of the proposal. Based on the balance, this proposal will have a positive impact and has merit; therefor, staff recommended referring the proposal to the Planning Commission for detailed analysis and consideration.
It was noted that if Council chooses to forward the proposed project to the Planning Commission, the applicant has been advised of the requirement of preparing the Conditional Use Site Plan in accordance with the requirements set forth in Article 3, Section 24 and Article 10, Section 1 of the Zoning Code. The act of forwarding a proposal to the Planning Commission for further review is not intended to represent, nor shall it be construed to mean that the project is approved. The approval authority over Conditional Use applications rests with the Planning Commission.
Mr. Salters moved to refer the proposed Bay Village of Dover PND to the Planning Commission for further review, seconded by Mr. Carey.
Relaying concern with the proposal, Mr. Ruane stated his opinion that Council action is a matter of “good faith” and suggested that members consider that when the MOU with the State and County was approved, it was agreed that the City would abide by its Comprehensive Plan. He noted that Chapter 4 of the City’s Comprehensive Plan states that “the City has had an official policy of considering SR1 an urban boundary by keeping the lands east of SR1 for agricultural uses, except around Dover Air Force Base”. He also felt that the State’s comments are significant that they will not support any infrastructure in this area, including ingress and egress. Mr. Ruane suggested that the application jeopardizes the Garrison Tract’s feasibility as the City’s economic base, a much more significant economic opportunity than the proposed PND project. His opposition is not with the project but rather the location of the project, and should not be evaluated based on what it is but rather where it is. It was his opinion that the proposed project violates guiding principles, including Livable Delaware, preservation of farmland and open space, protection of quality of life while slowing sprawl, etc. In accordance with the PLUS report, Mr. Ruane stated that no infrastructure will be supported by any State agency, no mitigation provided by the State for traffic, wetlands, etc. It was also his opinion that the proposal violates the City’s Comprehensive Plan, which is the law, and that approval of the project may place the City in the position of being non-compliant with the Delaware Code. He reiterated that throughout the Comprehensive Plan, it is stated that the City supports the concept of limiting development east of SR1.
Mr. Ruane advised members that the criteria to be used in assessing a PND is that the proposed use shall be in such location, size, and character, that it will be in harmony with the appropriate and orderly development of the zone in which it is proposed to be situated and will not be detrimental to the orderly development of adjacent properties in accordance with the zoning classification of such properties. He reminded members that such a project must be in accordance with other goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, such as availability of public transit services, which will not be available to this area.
Mr. Salters reminded members that those involved in the PLUS process and making decisions to limit growth east of SR1 are politicians. As politicians change, ideas and plans change. He relayed concern with not allowing property owners the privilege to develop their property and allowing them the opportunity for due process. It was his feeling that if this matter is not referred to the Planning Commission, then Council would be taking this right away from the owner.
Mr. Hogan stated that although he is very much in support of the preservation of farmland, he is very interested in the City growing. He noted that this property was located within the City limits before SR1 was constructed. He realizes that the proposal has both pros and cons and the importance of this decision. Mr. Hogan indicated that his decision will be based on what is best for the City.
Responding, Mr. Ruane advised members that the City chose SR1 as a boundary. If Council no longer agrees with this boundary, then he suggested that the City consider making this change. The Comprehensive Plan was reviewed with the policy statement that the City’s official policy is to keep SR1 as the urban boundary. He suggested that Council reject the proposed project and open negotiations with the State and the County to have the boundary changed and then such an application could be considered.
The motion to refer the Bay Village of Dover Planned Neighborhood Design Proposal to the Planning Commission for further detailed analysis and consideration, as recommended by staff, was carried by a roll call vote of seven (7) yes, and one (1) no (Mr. Ruane) (Mr. Slavin absent).
ANNEXATION/REZONING REQUEST - FIRST READING - NORTHWEST CORNER OF KENTON ROAD AT FOX HALL DRIVE (OWNED BY CLIFTON A. AND MARIE F. HUTTON)
A request was received for annexation and rezoning of property located on the northwest corner of Kenton Road at Fox Hall Drive, owned by Clifton A. and Marie F. Hutton. The present zoning classification is RS-1 - Residential (Kent County) and the proposed zoning classification is C/PO - Commercial/Professional Office (City of Dover). Staff recommended that the request be referred to the Planning Commission on October 18, 2004, the Utility Committee on October 25, 2004, that an Annexation Referendum be set for October 28, 2004 and that a Public Hearing be set for November 8, 2004.
Mr. Carey moved for adoption of the following Annexation Resolution, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent):
A RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE INCLUSION OF AN AREA WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF DOVER AND CALLING FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE SAID AREA.
WHEREAS, the Charter of the City of Dover authorizes Council to extend the boundaries of the said City after a special election of the qualified voters and real estate owners of the territory proposed to be annexed, and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover deem it in the best interest of the City of Dover to include an area located at Kenton Road at Fox Hall Drive (northwest corner), which is contiguous to the present City limits, into the limits of the City of Dover and within a zoning classification as recommended by the City of Dover Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1. That a special election be held for an area located at Kenton Road at Fox Hall Drive, situated in East Dover Hundred, Kent County, State of Delaware.
2. That the election be held on the 28th day of October, 2004 commencing at the hours of 11:00 a.m. in the City Hall Annex, 15 E. Loockerman Street, Dover, Delaware, for the purpose of submitting the question of annexation of the above area to those persons entitled to vote thereon.
3. That the election be held and conducted pursuant to the provisions of the Charter of the City of Dover as amended.
4. That this resolution be published in accordance with the City of Dover Charter.
ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 27, 2004
Mr. Salters moved to refer the annexation/rezoning request to the Planning Commission on October 18, 2004, the Utility Committee on October 25, 2004, and set a public hearing before City Council for November 8, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent).
In accordance with Section 1-6 of the Dover Code, Council acknowledged the First Reading of the rezoning ordinance as read by the City Clerk, by title only, as follows:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF KENTON ROAD AT FOX HALL DRIVE.
ANNEXATION/REZONING REQUEST - FIRS READING - 1076 FORREST AVENUE (OWNED BY LEONARD AND CATHERINE MOORE)
A request was received for annexation and rezoning of property located at 1076 Forrest Avenue, owned by Leonard and Catherine Moore. The present zoning classification is RS-1 - Residential (Kent County) and the proposed zoning classification is C-2A - Limited Central Commercial and COZ-1 - Commercial Overlay (City of Dover). Staff recommended that the request be referred to the Planning Commission on October 18, 2004, the Utility Committee on October 25, 2004, that an Annexation Referendum be set for October 28, 2004 and that a Public Hearing be set for November 8, 2004.
Mr. Carey moved for adoption of the following Annexation Resolution, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent):
A RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE INCLUSION OF AN AREA WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF DOVER AND CALLING FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE SAID AREA.
WHEREAS, the Charter of the City of Dover authorizes Council to extend the boundaries of the said City after a special election of the qualified voters and real estate owners of the territory proposed to be annexed, and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover deem it in the best interest of the City of Dover to include an area located at 1076 Forrest Avenue, which is contiguous to the present City limits, into the limits of the City of Dover and within a zoning classification as recommended by the City of Dover Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1. That a special election be held for an area located at 1076 Forrest Avenue, situated in East Dover Hundred, Kent County, State of Delaware.
2. That the election be held on the 28th day of October, 2004 commencing at the hours of 11:00 a.m. in the City Hall Annex, 15 E. Loockerman Street, Dover, Delaware, for the purpose of submitting the question of annexation of the above area to those persons entitled to vote thereon.
3. That the election be held and conducted pursuant to the provisions of the Charter of the City of Dover as amended.
4. That this resolution be published in accordance with the City of Dover Charter.
ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 27, 2004
Mr. Salters moved to refer the annexation/rezoning request to the Planning Commission on October 18, 2004, the Utility Committee on October 25, 2004, and set a public hearing before City Council for November 8, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carey and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Slavin absent).
In accordance with Section 1-6 of the Dover Code, Council acknowledged the First Reading of the rezoning ordinance as read by the City Clerk, by title only, as follows:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1076 FORREST AVENUE.
FIRST READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE
Council President Williams reminded the public that copies of the proposed ordinance are available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or can be obtained from the City Clerk's Office. Final action by Council on the proposed ordinances will take place during the Council Meeting of October 13, 2004.
In accordance with Section 1-6 of the Dover Code, Council acknowledged the First Reading of the rezoning ordinance as read by the City Clerk, by title only, as follows:
CHAPTER 13, MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC - SECTION 13-17, FAILURE TO STOP FOR A RED TRAFFIC SIGNAL; TRAFFIC LIGHT SIGNAL VIOLATION MONITORING PROGRAM; PENALTIES
COUNCIL MEMBERS COMMENTS
Mr. Ruane congratulated Mr. Salters on the receipt of the Governor’s Arts and Drug Prevention Awards. Mr. Salters stated that the awards ceremony will be held on October 6, 2004 at the Community Center on Kirkwood Street and invited members to attend.
Mr. Carey moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 8:45 P.M.
JANICE C. GREEN
CITY CLERK
All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of September 27, 2004, are hereby approved.
STEPHEN R. SPEED
MAYOR
/JG
S:ClerksOfficeAgendas&MinutesCouncil-Minutes20049-27-2004.wpd
Exhibits Attached to Original Minutes and File Copy
Exhibit #1 - Revised Capital Investments Plan - Robbins Hose Company
Exhibit #2 - Planning Staff Report - Bay Village Planned Neighborhood Design - Conceptual Plan