COUNCIL COMMITTEES
The Council Committees Meeting was held on March 24, 1992, at 7:00 p.m., with Council President Christiansen presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Weyandt, Mr. Daisey, Mr. Levitt, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Salters, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Lambert. Mr. Pitts arrived at 7:35 p.m.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. Weyandt requested that a letter from Mayor Richter concerning the SCT Contract be added to the Legislative and Finance Committee agenda as item #5.
Mr. Hare moved to accept the agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Lynn and unanimously carried.
LEGISLATIVE AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
The Legislative and Finance Committee met with Chairman Weyandt presiding. Members present were Councilmen Lynn and Hare and Mr. Leary.
REVIEW OF MAYOR/COUNCIL NOMINATING PETITIONS (COUNCIL PRESIDENT CHRISTIANSEN)
Members considered a letter submitted by Council President Christiansen requesting that the City establish requirements for filing petitions for Office of Mayor or City Council for the City of Dover and provided several suggestions (Attachment #1).
Since he recently filed a petition for Councilman in the third district, Mr. Leary stated that he was amazed at how easy it was to become a candidate for office in the City. As one suggestion, he felt that additional signatures should be required on the petitions.
Mr. Levitt recommended that the Election Board review the suggestions of Council President Christiansen and consider other recommendations for a report back to the committee. He suggested that several public hearings be held to assist in developing criteria for petitioning for office. Although Mr. Levitt felt that the City should establish requirements for petitioning for office, it was his feeling that no citizen should be inhibited from running for office.
Mr. Daisey requested that the Election Board also consider reviewing the entire election process.
Mr. Hare stated that he agrees with the concept in theory. He suggested that there only be a one-time filing fee and background check required. Mr. Hare felt that the background checks should be kept confidential and if something was discovered, it should be presented to the candidate to be given the option to withdraw or for the information to become public.
Referring to item #1 of the letter, it was Mr. Weyandt's feeling that the City should not require any more than what is required to become a registered voter. He suggested that item #2 be handled by attaching a form to the petition being submitted. Mr. Weyandt stated that he does not support item #3 in its entirety; however, if a background check was required, it was his feeling that the City should be responsible for the cost.
Mr. Lynn moved to recommend that the suggestions of establishing requirements for petitioning for office in the City of Dover be referred to the Election Board and that their final recommendations be submitted to the City Solicitor for preparation of a draft ordinance to be presented to the Legislative and Finance Committee for their review. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried.
CUSTODIAL SERVICES - 5 EAST REED STREET
During the Legislative and Finance Committee meeting of January 28, 1992, staff submitted information regarding various proposals for maintenance of the recently purchased building at 5 East Reed Street. The committee tabled the matter until all local firms were contacted.
Copies of the specifications were mailed to all firms shown in the telephone book, and the project was publicly advertised. The low bid was received from Premium Building Services in the amount of $18,720. Mr. Worley stated that the City's cost to do the work for one year would be $22,429.52. Staff recommended awarding the contract to the low bidder.
Mr. Leary moved to recommend acceptance of staff's recommendation and award the contract for Custodial Services at 5 East Reed Street to Premium Building Services in the amount of $18,720, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried.
CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATIONS (COUNCILMAN LAMBERT
In accordance with Article 10, Section 1 of the Zoning Code of Ordinances, the Planning Commission has the authority to approve conditional use applications. Mr. Lambert explained that he is concerned with City Council being held responsible for the decisions made by the Planning Commission for Conditional Use and Site Plan Approvals. It was his feeling that the Planning Commission should not be authorized to approve Conditional Uses and that such requests should be presented to Council for final approval.
As a solution, Council President Christiansen suggested that the City establish an appeal process that would provide residents who object to the action taken by the Planning Commission a means to appeal to City Council.
Mr. Levitt suggested that the Planning Commission be given the opportunity to solve this problem by including the concerns of all residents when considering such approvals. If the problem cannot be resolved at the Planning Commission's level, then the City should consider a change in policy.
Mr. Daisey stated that in the past there have been instances when it was Council's desire to vote against the Planning Commission's recommendation on a matter and was advised that they could not do so. Mr. Daisey requested that the legal aspects also be reviewed.
Mr. Tony DePrima, City Planner, stated that due to the lengthy hearings held by the Planning Commission, Council cannot reverse a decision of the Planning Commission unless stringent reasons are noted. He explained that it would be necessary for Council to have heard the entire hearing to understand the Planning Commission's decision. It was Mr. DePrima's feeling that an appeal process could benefit the residents and developers and in some instances, keep the matter out of court. Mr. DePrima stated that the Planning Commission makes sure that developers adhere to the rules provided in the Zoning Code of Ordinances and that Council is the only body that has the authority to waive the Zoning Code requirements.
Mr. Lynn moved to recommend that, within a three month period, the City Planner submit possible alternatives regarding the matter as recommended by the committee, after consulting the public, members of the Planning Commission and other involved parties. The motion was seconded by Mr. Leary and unanimously carried.
CITY MANAGER'S MONTHLY REPORT
Members of the Committee reviewed several sections of the City Manager's Monthly Report for February 1992. No action was taken.
APPOINTMENT OF AD HOC COMMITTEE - DATA PROCESSING PROFESSIONALS
Mr. Weyandt requested that the Assistant City Clerk, Mrs. Janice Green, read a memo from Mayor Richter into the record (Attachment #2).
Council President Christiansen requested that Councilmen Hare and Salters also serve on the committee.
Mr. Lynn moved to recommend that Council create an ad hoc committee of data processing professionals as recommended by Mayor Richter, with the addition of Councilmen Hare and Salters, and any others who wish to serve on this committee to form a recommendation to Council on the best use of the computer system at the least possible cost for City taxpayers. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried.
Mr. Lynn moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 8:15 P.M.
SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The Safety Advisory Committee met with Chairman Salters presiding. Members present were Councilmen Hare, Pitts, and Lambert.
PETITION - EAST LOOCKERMAN STREET TRAFFIC
A petition consisting of 52 signatures was received from residents of East Loockerman Street requesting that the street be made accessible to local traffic only. They advised members that the street is 24' wide which has a bad curve and was not made to accommodate the amount of traffic currently utilizing the street. Residents of the area relayed their concern for safety on their street, stating that several homes have been damaged by speeding and out-of-control vehicles. Their lawns, bushes and trees have also been destroyed, street lights knocked over and they are constantly picking up garbage from the fast food establishments.
A letter was received from Mr. and Mrs. Edward L. Cox, Jr., of 798 East Loockerman Street, urging Council's immediate attention to the residents' concerns. In order to achieve a positive and effective one-time solution to the problem, they suggested that the street surface, between the intersection of South Edgehill Avenue and the access road to the rear of the Burger King Restaurant, be destroyed and replaced with sod.
Mr. Worley reminded members that this matter has been considered by Council in the past. Should Council wish to revisit blocking East Loockerman Street, he recommended that the matter be referred back to staff for a report.
Council President Christiansen stated that he has observed the traffic on East Loockerman Street and concurs with the residents' concerns. He advised members that the Robbins Hose Company would have no problem with closing the street since the response routes have been altered and Division Street is now utilized to respond to that section of town.
Since the traffic flow on this street has changed drastically, Chief Hutchison stated that he would support the residents' proposed solution to the problem.
Spokesperson for the signers of the petition, Mrs. Mary Belle Hayes of 860 East Loockerman Street, stated that in February 1986 and January 1992 her home was hit by speeding vehicles and that other homes have also been hit in the area.
Mr. Donald Culver, 748 East Loockerman Street, requested that the neighbors who are present stand to show that there is a vast majority that are in favor of closing the street (several residents stood).
Mr. Michael Welch, 731 East Loockerman Street, advised members that in 1971, 5,000 vehicles were counted utilizing the street on a daily basis at which time a temporary barrier was placed on the street. One week after the barrier was taken down, he advised members that his daughter, then in the 5th grade, was hit by a car that had passed a school bus that had been stopped for four minutes in front of their home. Mr. Welch stated that his daughter was taken to the hospital where she was unconscious for six hours. He advised members that he recently took a survey and found that 15 vehicles had utilized the street in a five minute time period. Mr. Welch stated that the problem has increased significantly over the last 21 years and requested that Council take immediate action to resolve this problem.
Mr. Rod Hill, 801 East Loockerman Street, stated that there was not as many developments in this section of the City when this neighborhood was first developed. He stated that the residents of nearby developments such as Towne Point, White Oak, and Bay Tree are utilizing this street as a short-cut to and from their work and homes.
As a resident of White Oak Road, Ms. Ruth Tee stated that she can sympathize with the residents of East Loockerman Street. She stated that Edgehill is being utilized as a thoroughfare and that several accidents also occur on White Oak Road near the new shopping center.
Responding to Mr. James Johnson of 790 East Loockerman Street, Mr. Weyandt explained that committee cannot take official action. He stated that the procedure requires committees to make recommendations to the full Council for official action. Noting that all members of Council are present, it was Mr. Weyandt's feeling that when the matter is presented to Council, their action will be supportive of the residents' request.
Mr. Hare moved to recommend that staff place a temporary barricade on East Loockerman Street as requested by residents until staff has the opportunity to complete an evaluation to design a permanent solution. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lambert and unanimously carried.
Responding to Mr. Hare, Council President Christiansen stated that although formal action cannot take place until the Council Meeting of April 13, 1992, a consensus of Council can be given for staff to proceed immediately.
Mr. Worley advised members that there are legal requirements for closing a street.
By a unanimous roll call vote of Council taken by Council President Christiansen, staff was authorized to proceed immediately with the temporary closing of East Loockerman Street until a permanent solution is designed.
DOWNTOWN PARKING RESTRICTIONS
During their meeting of March 10, 1992, the committee considered a request from Ms. Chris Donkin to extend the two hour parking limitations on South Bradford Street as well as a request from Mr. Tony Galla to remove all parking restrictions one Friday afternoon each month in the downtown area. The committee referred the requests to the Central Dover Business Association (CDBA) for their review and recommendation.
Mr. Thomas G. Smith, President of the CDBA, advised members that the Association feels that the proposals have merit. Noting that on Saturday, parking enforcement is done curb side but not in the Parking Authority lots, CDBA suggested that unlimited parking be permitted for curb side and city lots all day Saturday.
Mr. Lambert moved to recommend that, on a 60-day trial basis, the parking restrictions be removed on Saturdays for curb side and city lots in the downtown area, seconded by Mr. Pitts.
Since the CDBA has requested the above change, Mr. Hare felt that the restrictions should remain until the CDBA should request otherwise.
On a call for the question by Mr. Salters, the motion was unanimously carried.
In order to accommodate Mrs. Donkin's request to extend the two hour parking limitation on Bradford Street, the CDBA suggested an experimental three (3) hour parking voucher program be established.
Chief Hutchison stated the he would support an experimental three hour parking voucher pilot program in certain areas of downtown. He explained that a three (3) hour parking voucher would be given to merchants for their customers to be placed in the vehicle windshields.
Since the parking restrictions are placed to accommodate the varying needs of those customers of downtown merchants, Mr. Levitt suggested that the Chief of Police be authorized to work directly with the CDBA in assigning on-street parking restrictions downtown.
Mr. Lambert moved to recommend that the Chief of Police be authorized to work with the CDBA in establishing downtown parking restrictions, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 8:58 P.M.
UTILITY COMMITTEE
The Utility Committee met with Chairman Levitt presiding. Members present were Councilmen Salters and Daisey and Mr. Carey.
MUDSTONE BRANCH SEWER LINE
Over the past year, the City has held several meetings relative to the Mudstone Branch Sewer Line. Mayor Richter submitted a memo advising members that a recent permit hearing was held before DNREC. Although the City has taken the position that they could engineer a location in the stream wetlands with sufficient safeguards and detail to make the proposal environmentally acceptable, DNREC has indicated that the solution within the wetlands is unacceptable and that the City must move to an upland solution. The environmental impacts of this proposal exceed the cost benefits. Mayor Richter recommended that staff rework the project to an upland solution, continuing to minimize construction and maintenance costs.
Mr. Daisey moved to recommend that staff further review possible solutions for the Mudstone Branch Sewer Line by working with City residents and DNREC, to develop the most economical and feasible solution for a report back to the committee, seconded by Mr. Salters.
Mr. Weyandt suggested that staff contact the City Solicitor to investigate the possibility of establishing sewer and water districts within the City of Dover.
It was Mr. Levitt's feeling that Mr. Weyandt's comments are ancillary to the motion, since staff is being charged with reviewing the most cost effective way to resolve this issue. Mr. Levitt stated that establishing sewer districts is an alternative to financing this particular project.
Mr. Russell Larson, 51 Pine Valley Road, stated that the residents who objected to the proposed Mudstone Branch Sewer Line appreciate the City researching alternatives. It is their belief that the sewer line should be located in the uplands. Mr. Larson cautioned members on establishing sewer districts, feeling that the consequences could be detrimental to the citizens of Dover.
Mr. Mike Mercer, 17 Medinah Court, volunteered to serve on a committee to review the possible solutions for the Mudstone Branch Sewer Line.
On a call for the question by Mr. Levitt, the motion was unanimously carried.
WATER/SEWER BILLING PROCEDURE - INDUSTRIAL USERS
During their meeting of February 25, 1992, the committee considered a proposed ordinance amending Section 22-133 and 22-253 that will allow monthly water/sewer billings for industrial users and quarterly for all other users. The committee tabled the matter to allow staff the opportunity to meet with the industrial users to advise them of the change.
Mr. Braun assured members that all affected users have been notified of the proposed change and that no comments or questions have been received.
Mr. Salters moved to recommend approval of the amendments to Sections 22-133 and 22-253 of the Dover Code (Attachment #3), seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
ONE YEAR MAINTENANCE INSPECTION - MILLCREEK PHASE I
During discussions regarding the acceptance of the streets and utilities in Phase I of Millcreek last May, it was requested that staff submit a report to Council after nine months to explain the condition of the streets at the time.
Staff has completed its normal one-year maintenance inspection and found that everything is in good order. There are a few sections of curb that have cracks, which formed the first few months the concrete was in place. These cracks have not worsened over time and they pose no structural problems to the curb.
No action was taken by the committee.
ADVANCE SCHEDULE FOR SUBURBAN STREET AID PROJECTS
Each year, local state legislators contribute funds to the City for street related projects. These funds represent a suburban street aid allocation that the legislators receive. The City has nine such projects in various stages of development, representing a total of $868,000 (Attachment #4).
Mr. Worley advised members that Mayor Richter has requested staff to accelerate these projects in an effort to stimulate the local economy. In reviewing the request, Mr. Worley stated that items #7 and #9 may present problems. He advised members that item #7 may require additional funds for outside engineering and item #9 will require approximately $260,000 in water/sewer funds that are not currently budgeted.
Mr. Carey moved to authorize staff to proceed in advancing the projects for a report back to the committee, seconded by Mr. Daisey and unanimously carried.
Mr. Salters moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Carey and unanimously carried.
Meeting Adjourned at 9:35 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Robin R. Christiansen
Council President
RRC/jg