COUNCIL COMMITTEES
The Council Committees Meeting was held on June 14, 1999, at 7:00 p.m., with Council President Christiansen presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Lambert, Mr. Leary, Mr. Truitt, Mr. Carey, Mr. Salters, Mr. Weller and Mayor Hutchison. Mr. Pitts and Mrs. Malone were absent.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
At the request of Mr. O’Connor, Council President Christiansen requested the deletion of item #3-D, Fence Contract, from the Legislative and Finance Committee agenda. Mr. Weller moved for approval of the agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
UTILITY COMMITTEE
The Utility Committee met with Chairman Lambert presiding. Members present were Councilmen Carey and Weller. Due to the vacancy of an appointed civilian member and the absence of Mr. Kramedas, Mr. Truitt and Mr. Leary were deputized to serve as members.
Report - East Loockerman Street Study
During their Regular Meeting of February 22, 1999, Council considered the Utility Committee’s Report regarding the request for closure of East Loockerman Street. It was noted that a letter was received from DelDOT indicating that the US 13/113 Corridor had been selected for an intensive study in this year’s 1999 Highway Safety Improvement Program, with an anticipated completion date of May 1999. Since the Planning Commission formulated a recommendation, DelDOT felt that it would be an excellent opportunity to integrate the significant analysis the City had performed into the broader traffic analysis of the corridor. The City Planner was directed to forward a letter to DelDOT requesting that they incorporate, along with their study, the options that the City is considering and any further action by the City would be postponed until the completion of a DelDOT Report.
Mr. DePrima reminded members that it was staff’s recommendation, along with the Planning Commission and the Transportation Review Committee, to downgrade that portion of East Loockerman Street between South Edgehill Avenue and the Edgehill Avenue Alley to an 11 to 12 foot wide, one-way, eastbound alley, with appropriate warning signs. It was the Transportation Review Committee’s recommendation that the construction be of a temporary nature until further monitoring proved that there would be no discernable adverse impact on Division Street.
Members received the DelDOT Traffic Study, dated April 6, 1999, prepared by Whitman, Requardt and Associates, LLP. Mr. DePrima noted that the conclusion of the DelDOT Report indicates that “based on field observations and traffic analyses, the implementation of the one-way eastbound alternative on a temporary basis, as recommended by the City of Dover Planning staff, will not negatively affect traffic operations or safety”. Therefore, at this time, he stated that there is no reason to alter the original recommendation presented to members in February 1999. Mr. DePrima noted other interesting facts contained in the report, as follows:
►Field observations during peak time found only one car during each period cutting through the Edgehill Shopping Center to avoid lights.
►Travel Time Runs between using Division Street or East Loockerman Street were done. On average, westbound Division Street motorist destined for southbound US Route 13 save approximately one minutes of travel time by using East Loockerman Street. Time going northbound had a lesser average difference, but varied more widely depending on the time of the lights.
►Capacity Analysis showed that implementing the eastbound one-way alternative would increase average delay by 12 seconds (40% increase) to westbound Division Street traffic. Overall, levels of service do not change.
►A right turn bay exists on the northbound route at Loockerman Street, but not at Division Street. This makes it much easier to turn eastbound on East Loockerman Street, which encourages cutting through the neighborhood. They recommend installing a right turn bay northbound at Route #13 and Division Street.
►Field observations found that the light timing during the lunch peak does not provide enough clear time. They recommend increasing the green time. They also think the detectors may not be operating properly.
►The Report does not indicate that reduced speed limits without strict enforcement will have any affect on traffic volume or speed.
►The entrances to the Shell Gas Station cause problems when eastbound East Loockerman Street vehicles want to make a left into the station. They often cause traffic to back up on Route 13 while waiting for a break in traffic. They recommend closing the entrances.
Mr. Leary referred to the DelDOT Report regarding the partial closing of East Loockerman Street one-way, eastbound and stated that, although it indicated that it would not negatively affect traffic operations or safety, it did not specifically indicate endorsement of the recommendation.
Responding to Mr. Truitt, Mr. DePrima explained that there are many different degrees available for making this a temporary, partial closure, which could range from the placement of barriers to actually replacing the asphalt with grass, shrubs, and trees. He felt that although a more aesthetically pleasing remedy should be considered, the degree would depend upon the expenses involved and suggested that staff be authorized to determine how the partial closure will be accomplished considering costs and effectiveness. He also recommended that the closure be monitored for at least one year. He assured members that neither the Police nor Fire Departments object to the recommendation for a partial closing.
Mr. O’Connor explained that the decision making process should include defining the length of time for the temporary, partial closure. Should the temporary change be made for any length of time, he recommended that it be accomplished by removing the asphalt and planting some type of vegetation. Although this would involve additional expenses as compared to the placement of jersey barriers, they would be minimal. He also felt it would eliminate the potential for traffic to go around such temporary structures.
Mr. DePrima advised members that he has met with the Public Works Director regarding the costs involved in constructing the temporary structure in a permanent way (removing asphalt, etc.). He had indicated that the costs would not be excessive, with the exception of the installation of rolled curb.
In addition to the comments regarding the proposal for the partial closing of East Loockerman Street provided in the report submitted by DelDOT, several members provided their opinions on the additional comments and recommendations contained in the report. Mr. DePrima suggested that the City review those issues separately for consideration of support to be presented to DelDOT in a letter.
Responding to Mr. Salters, Mr. DePrima stated that the table included in the DelDOT Report that provides percentages of those in favor, opposed, and unsure of the recommendation for partial closing, were from a survey of those that attended the public workshops. He explained that at the time, the residents of the area were opposed to the partial closing simply because it was their desire to have the street completely closed. Many of those in attendance were not residents of the area and were opposed to the partial closing because they wanted the street to remain totally open. Since the survey was taken, Mr. DePrima stated that, as a compromise, the residents of East Loockerman Street have indicated their support for the partial closing since it would provide some relief.
In response to Mr. Salters’ concerns of setting a precedence, Mr. DePrima stated that to his knowledge there are no other similar situations with a confluence of several factors, such as: street width, no sidewalks, close proximity to Route #13, and volume of traffic. This does not eliminate the fact that there are other streets being used as short-cuts or that have traffic problems. Should requests of this nature be made in the future, Mr. DePrima suggested that they be considered on a case by case basis.
Chief Faulkner reminded members that in February 1999, police enforcement for traffic violations was increased in the area. It was his feeling that it provided relief in the area from traffic violators and advised members that they intend to return to the area to continue this type of enforcement.
Mr. Robert Tudor, 706 E. Division Street, questioned the need to consider the recommendation of a partial closing of East Loockerman Street at this time, since stricter enforcement has resolved the situation. He cautioned members against creating a one-way area on East Loockerman Street, noting that, historically, one-way streets actually promote speeding. Mr. Tudor also relayed concern with regards to the additional traffic that will be created on surrounding streets and other issues that could emerge, should East Loockerman Street be made one-way.
Responding, Mr. Bill Murray of 745 East Loockerman Street stated that the high volume of traffic, excessive speeding, and associated noises returned once the police presence was removed. With regards to the survey, he explained that initially the residents’ main objective was to have East Loockerman Street closed; however, a partial closing as recommended would help alleviate the traffic problems in the area.
Mr. Lambert advised members that he has already received another request for the closing of a street and relayed concern with the precedence that would be set if the street is partially closed. He also reminded members of previous action taken by Council in 1992, whereby staff was directed to temporarily close off the western end of East Loockerman Street only to have it reopened upon receipt of many complaints received from residents of the surrounding area. (City Clerk’s Office Note: City authorized the street to be closed on March 24, 1992 and reopened effective May 26, 1992 at 8:00 a.m.)
Responding, Mr. Ellis Rath of 797 E. Loockerman Street indicated his feeling that East Loockerman Street has unique circumstances that would justify the partial closing, such as the high volume of traffic (2,944 cars per day), traffic entering and exiting onto Route #13 from/onto a 22 foot wide street, no sidewalks, etc.
Mr. Vito DiFonzio, 761 E. Loockerman Street, urged members to take action to support the recommendation for the partial closing of the street.
Mr. Ed Cox, 798 E. Loockerman Street, referred to the previous action taken to close off the western end of East Loockerman Street and questioned any adverse occurrences relative to traffic and safety as a result of the closure. He reminded members that the complaints made on the closure were not made by those that reside on East Loockerman Street.
With regards to the term temporary, Mr. DePrima felt that some members were referring to it in terms of construction and others in terms of the length of time for the study. He requested that in terms of construction, members authorize staff to evaluate the alternatives available while taking into consideration those concerns of expending funds for a temporary structure. He advised members that it may not cost much more to have the asphalt removed and vegetation planted than it would to install some type of temporary barricade and that it could prove to be beneficial for the City to spend a little more for aesthetic reasons. Mr. DePrima requested that staff be given the authority to make the decision based on cost-effectiveness.
Mr. Weller moved to recommend acceptance of the DelDOT Report on the East Loockerman Street Study and approval of the recommendation to make that portion of East Loockerman Street between South Edgehill Avenue and the Edgehill Avenue Alley one-way, eastbound, to be constructed in a temporary manner, based on cost-effectiveness as determined by staff, and to be observed for one year, at which time this matter will be reconsidered for the possibility of constructing a more permanent, aesthetic configuration. The motion was seconded by Mr. Leary.
Responding to Council President Christiansen, Mr. Lambert felt that it was not the intent of the committee to direct staff on how to accomplish this task. He noted that the motion emphasizes that it would be accomplished on a temporary basis, keeping in mind that it could be “undone” at some point in time; therefore, any funds expended for this project should be done with this in mind.
Mr. Truitt referred to the results of the vote taken during the workshops as noted in table 4 in the DelDOT Report. He indicated hesitance in making a decision at this time without acquiring input from residents regarding their feelings today. He suggested that a survey of the residents be accomplished to determine the desires of the majority of the residents.
Concurring, Mr. Salters suggested that staff conduct a more recent survey of the residents and that in the meantime, the Police Department provide additional enforcement in the area. He noted that although some residents are in attendance this evening in favor of the recommendation, he felt that there could be many residents opposed to the recommendation that for whatever reason, are not at the meeting to relay their opposition.
Mr. Leary reminded members that as elected officials, decisions must be made that may not necessarily be popular by making a judgement as to what is best for the City, and in this case, the neighborhood. It was his opinion that more than enough information has been provided to make the necessary judgement decision regarding this issue.
Feeling that several members were undecided at the time, Mr. Truitt moved to table the matter until the committee meeting on June 28, 1999. The motion failed for the lack of a second.
On a call for the question by Mr. Leary, the original motion failed by a vote of one (1) yes (Mr. Weller), four (4) no (Mr. Lambert, Mr. Leary, Mr. Truitt and Mr. Carey).
Mr. Carey moved to recommend acceptance of the DelDOT Report on the East Loockerman Street Study and approval of the recommendation to make that portion of East Loockerman Street between South Edgehill Avenue and the Edgehill Avenue Alley one-way, eastbound to be properly installed; that the timing of the lights be adjusted as recommended by DelDOT and request the adjustment to the right-hand turn bay onto Division Street as recommended by DelDOT. The motion failed for the lack of a second.
Mr. Leary moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Carey and carried with Mr. Weller voting no.
Meeting Adjourned at 7:00 P.M.
LEGISLATIVE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
The Legislative and Finance Committee met with Chairman Salters presiding. Members present were Councilman Leary, Mr. Gorman and Mr. Merritt. Councilman Weller was deputized to serve in the absence of Councilwoman Malone.
Request of Evelyn Barker - Review of Animal Control Ordinance
A letter was submitted by Ms. Evelyn Barker, 912 Buck Drive, requesting that members consider an amendment to the animal control ordinance that would exclude cats from the restraining requirement. She also suggested that the animal control ordinance be widely disseminated throughout the City to provide animal owners information regarding restraining requirements.
Addressing members, Ms. Barker stated that she has been a resident of the City of Dover for over 35 years and was not aware of any type of animal control ordinance. She became aware of the restraining requirement when a neighbor had contacted the Animal Control Officer and traps were set in the neighbor’s yard. After discussing this situation with the Animal Control Officer, she contacted the Police Department and on three (3) different occasions, she was told that there was no restraining requirement for cats. Should the current ordinance remain in effect and cats be required to be kept under restraint, Ms. Barker urged members to clarify this information with City employees and residents.
Mr. Salters suggested that staff place notices in local newspapers that contains the information and requirements contained in the animal control ordinance.
No further action was taken regarding this matter.
Engineering Services Agreement - Landmark Engineering - New Burton Road-Schutte Park Bikeway/Pedestrian Crossover Study
Members considered a request of the City Planner, Mr. DePrima, to enter into a planning and engineering services contract with Landmark Engineering for the preparation of a New Burton Road-Schutte Park Bicycle Path Study. He reminded members that the City of Dover was recently awarded a DelDOT Transportation Enhancement Grant to perform this study. The total project cost was estimated at $25,000, of which DelDOT would pay $20,000 and the remaining $5,000 would be contributed by the City of Dover.
Mr. DePrima explained that the project will complete a preliminary study of how best to cross the Conrail Railroad Track at New Burton Road in the general vicinity of Blue Beach Drive. The purpose of the crossing is to give the residents of south Dover direct access to Schutte Park via an existing easement along an unimproved road. This pathway would be a critical part of the proposed “Capital Bikebelt” which links several parks, schools, and neighborhoods in the Dover area. This portion of the Bikebelt would connect Schutte Park with Brecknock Park in Camden.
A Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was advertised in accordance with City guidelines. Landmark Engineering was the only firm that submitted qualifications and expressed an interest in the project. They propose a four (4) phase study that includes Data Gathering and Base Mapping, Preliminary Scoping, Conceptual Planning, and a Final Report. They will coordinate meetings with all the affected parties including Conrail/CSX, DelDOT, Parks and Recreation, and landowners. Mr. DePrima stated that it is not unusual that only one proposal was received for this study due to its small size and narrow focus. Landmark Engineering has an interest in this project since they worked on the Dover Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan that called for this connection.
Mr. Leary moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Weller and unanimously carried. 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.
Bid - Environmental Affairs Contract Services
The three-year contract with Compliance Environmental to provide all environmental-related services expired on April 30, 1999. The firm has extended the service rates for the months of May and June. Mr. O’Connor explained that the Electric and Public Works Departments are the main users of this service and that, periodically, the Inspections and Police Departments also need environmental service. Bids were solicited with the sole bid received from Compliance Environmental, Inc.
Mr. O’Connor stated that Environmental Compliance has worked with the City for several years and is familiar with the City’s electric system and overall operations. In addition, they have offered the same rates for the next three (3) years as they had offered for the past three (3) years. Funding for these services is available in the Electric Revenue Fund and General Fund. The current annual expenses are estimated at $88,000 in the Electric Fund and $30,000 in the General Fund. The contract is for a “not to exceed” amount, since the services are used on an as-needed basis, with the following amounts budgeted:
Fund FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002
General $30,000 $30,000 $30,000
Electric $88,043 $89,588 $98,618
Mr. O’Connor assured members that they will be kept abreast should a major project arise or if these amounts are exceeded. The new three-year contract will commence July 1, 1999 and end on June 30, 2002. Staff recommended awarding the three-year contract to Compliance Environmental, Inc., in accordance with the various rates provided (as on file in the Office of the City Clerk).
Mr. Salters moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
Bid - Office Supplies
The City has a blanket bid with Capitol Office Products of Dover, which expires June 30, 1999. Mr. O’Connor explained that the City receives unit prices on specified office supply quantities through bids. These are “delivered” prices, with the vendors delivering the items to the City Warehouse. The Warehouse personnel then distributes the items to departments as needed and allocates the costs accordingly. Bids were solicited and received, as follows:
Name Location Amount
Capitol Office Products Dover $39,774.99
Corporate Express Salisbury $25,078.08
Office Basics Wilmington $26,837.46
Since receipt of the bids, Capitol Office Products has announced the closing of their business. The City has had favorable experience with Corporate Express. Staff recommended awarding the office supplies bid to Corporate Express of Salisbury, Maryland, in the amount of $25,078.08, for the period of July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2002.
Mr. Salters moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
Bid - Refurbish 1989 Digger Truck - Electric Department
The Electric Department currently has a 1989 International Digger Truck which is used continuously to set poles throughout the City. Due to its age and continuous usage, maintenance problems are being experienced. The cost of a new truck would be approximately $120,000. To refurbish the truck would cost approximately $60,000 and could extend the life by three (3) to four (4) years. Bids for refurbishing the truck were solicited and received, as follows:
Company Total Bid
Altec Industries, Inc. No Bid
Baker Equipment Engineering Company $39,373.00
Crest Truck Equipment Company $49,604.00
Lift All East, Inc. $42,255.80
Morse Manufacturing, Inc. No Bid
*Telelect East $21,000.00
*(did not meet City specifications and requirements)
Funding for refurbishment of this vehicle is available in the Transmission and Distribution Budget. Mr. O’Connor advised members that the funds will not actually be spent this fiscal year but carried to next fiscal year since the work is not expected to be completed until September. Staff recommended approval of the bid for $39,373 to Baker Equipment for the refurbishment of the 1989 International Digger Truck (Vehicle #718).
Mr. Salters moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried (Mr. Weller absent).
Bid - Lighting System for Schutte Park Softball Complex
In accordance with the Schutte Park Master Plan, four (4) softball fields have been constructed at Schutte Park, with lighting to be provided in order to increase the usage of these fields. Funding for this project will come from the Parkland Reserve Account. The City will purchase the lights and be reimbursed for 50% of the costs from the Delaware Land and Water Conservation Trust Fund (State Grant).
Bids were solicited for the purchase of the lights, with the low bid received from United Electric Supply, in the amount of $80,055. Mr. O’Connor advised members that installation of the lights will be done by the City and that the project is expected to be completed by September 1999.
Staff recommended awarding the contract to the low bidder, United Electric Supply, in the amount of $80,055 to provide the materials as outlined in the bid specifications.
Mr. Salters moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Weller and unanimously carried.
Downtown Dover Business Improvement District - Assessment (Tax) Rate for FY 1999-2000
In accordance with Appendix D, Article III, Section 9(f) of the Dover Code (Downtown Dover Business Improvement District Ordinance), an annual budget and assessment rate must be adopted each year. Staff recommended approval of the proposed budget ordinance for the Downtown Dover BID for FY 1999-2000 and the Assessment (Tax) Rate for FY 1999-2000, as follows:
ZONE 1 ZONE 2 ZONE 3 TOTAL
Assessment Tax Rate
Per $100 Assessment 0.145 0.1025 0.035 -----
Revenue Raised $20,265 $15,920 $3,983 $40,168
% Revenue Raised 50% 40% 10% -----
Number of Parcels 136 129 58 323
Average Assessment $151 $115 $135 $134
For informational purposes, staff also provided members with the total revenues and expenses of Main Street Dover, Inc. for 1998-1999 Revised and for 1999-2000 Proposed. It was noted that there is no proposed change in the Assessment (Tax) Rate for FY 1999-2000.
Mr. Salters moved to recommend approval of the proposed budget ordinance for the Downtown Dover BID (Attachment #1) and Assessment (Tax) Rate for FY 1999-2000, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
Signatures Authorization
The City invests its working capital and other funds in Certificate of Deposits, U.S. Government Securities, Agency Securities, and State Investment Pools. The City also sells, assigns, or transfers the securities received from companies in reorganization or liquidation. These securities are received for their outstanding bills.
The Finance Director/Treasurer, Mr. Karia, advised members that a Resolution was previously adopted which authorized signatures on various financial documents; however, it does not include the language for transferring, assigning, and handling securities with trust companies. Therefore, staff recommended adoption of a new Resolution to include the required language. Mr. Karia advised members that although three (3) officials sign the documents, there will be no change in the City’s procedure requiring only one signature.
Mr. Leary moved to recommend adoption of the proposed Resolution (Attachment #2), seconded by Mr. Weller and unanimously carried.
Mr. Truitt moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Weller and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 7:19 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Robin R. Christiansen
Council President
JG/lcg