SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING

The Special Council Meeting was held on March 18, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. with Council President Christiansen presiding. Members present were Councilmen Lambert, Daisey, Levitt, Pitts, Salters, Lynn, and Weyandt. Councilman Hare was absent.

Council staff members present were Mr. Worley, Mr. DePrima and Mrs. Boaman.

AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS

Mr. Lynn requested the addition of an executive session to discuss legal matters. Mr. Lynn moved for approval of the agenda as amended, seconded by Mr. Levitt and unanimously approved.

Council President Christiansen explained that the Special Council Meeting was held specifically to hold a public hearing and take action on the proposed zoning code amendments for the Route #8/McKee/Saulsbury Road Corridor Study. The first reading of the proposed ordinances was accomplished during the Council meeting of February 24, 1992.

City Planner DePrima gave an overview of the history of the Corridor Study and basic conclusions and recommendations of the Study as prepared by LDR Associates. This study was initiated in 1990 because of the enormous pressure to rezone property along Route #8 to commercial zones. It was felt that the commercial development and rezonings were happening in a piecemeal fashion and there was concern on the part of the residents and Council that the Route #8/McKee Road area would develop in a strip fashion that would be detrimental to the residents and to the City. There was a need to provide the residents with commercial services but at the same time there was a need to protect the quality of roads and properties in this area.

In April 1991 a workshop was held to receive input from the residents of the area so that their contributions could be incorporated into the planning process of the study. Subsequent public hearings were held and on December 9, 1991, City Council adopted the land use portion of the study as a formal amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Staff then developed ordinances to implement the findings and recommendations of the study. The proposed ordinance amendments are now before Council for final action.

Mr. Mike Petit de Mange, Assistant Planner, utilized maps to review in detail the area encompassed in the study and the effect on those areas by acceptance of the recommendations of the study.

Among other things, the study revealed that pedestrian space was minimized in commercial areas; that a weak relationship exists where commercial and residential development adjoin one another; that landscaping is inadequate; and signage is excessive.

Mr. DePrima explained that the proposal is an overlay zone and will overlay the existing zoning maps. The areas within this overlay zone will maintain the current zoning classifications but will have additional regulations to adhere to. Mr. DePrima reviewed each section of the proposed ordinances.

Council President Christiansen declared the public hearing open.

Richard Reynolds - Dover Elks Lodge

Mr. Richard Reynolds, representing the Dover Elks Lodge on Route #8, relayed support for the ordinances but questioned how they could affect the Elks Lodge when they add onto their facility. Mr. DePrima stated that each property would need specific review by staff. In the case of the Elks Lodge, they would be required to follow the new regulations but if certain aspects of the ordinances are impossible, due to the configuration of existing lots, then the Planning Commission has the right to waive certain requirements.

George Chabbott - Board of Realtors

Mr. George Chabbott, Executive Chairman of the Board of Realtors, spoke in favor of the proposed ordinances. When the original draft of the ordinances was presented, the Board of Realtors found many aspects of it that they did not support. However, after meeting with the Planning Staff, compromises were reached and have resulted in much better ordinances. Mr. Chabbott voiced his objection to the 9' sign requirement, feeling that this section should be written to allow approval by conditional use so that the requirement is locked in with no opportunity for adjustment. Referring to page seven, paragraph (d), Mr. Chabbott brought attention to a typographical error where it reads "30%" but should read "25%".

Robert George - Kent Eight Place

Mr. Robert George voiced his objections to the sign restrictions in the proposed ordinances. He stated that stores need adequate advertising and a 9' sign is no way near adequate, especially if there are several stores in the shopping center.

Barry Anstein - Greentree Shopping Center

Mr. Barry Anstein of Greentree Shopping Center voiced his support of the ordinances, but questioned the prohibition of parking in front of a facility. He cited the allowable exception of service stations, properties in a shopping center zone, or in cases where site constraints make it impossible when the Planning Commission may permit up to 20% of the parking between the building and roadway. In situations where parking is to the rear of the property, customers would have to enter through rear service areas and could result in developers building the structure so that the back faces the road and the front faces the rear parking. He suggested more flexibility to the Planning Commission in making exceptions when warranted.

Dave Yankovich - 1233 N. Farmview Drive

Mr. Dave Yankovich reminded those present that the purpose of the ordinances is to protect the residential properties in this area. He stated that large signs are not needed since businesses in this area are there to serve the local residents of residential communities. This area is not like Route #13 where large signs are needed to attract the attention of those travelling through major traffic areas.

Bob Hartnett - 1227 N. Farmview Drive

Mr. Bob Hartnett stated his support for the ordinances but felt that there is not enough protection for the residents. On page six, section (vi), second sentence, he felt that it should be reworded to read "Free standing signs shall be a minimum of 50' from the property line of residentially zoned property." He felt that the term "a property line" is ambiguous and needs clarification.

Mr. Hartnett also voiced objections to the Planning Commission lowering the minimum dedicated landscaped open space from 30% to 25%. Mr. DePrima stated that in reviewing many of the current lots in the area, the Planning Commission felt that many would find it difficult to meet the parking requirements and the open space requirement of 30% and suggested a 5% reduction.

Mr. Lynn reminded those present that the green space should be strategically located to buffer adjoining development to protect the residential property, enhance the roadway and protect the pedestrian environment. Regardless of the percentage of open space required, these three criteria should be met.

In any circumstance when the Planning Commission or Council is giving consideration to lowering requirements, Mr. Hartnett felt that residents of the area should be notified and given the right to speak on the subject. Mr. DePrima stated that he is currently reviewing ordinances for possible amendments to require public hearings/notices on various amendments.

Mr. Hartnett reiterated his support for the ordinances but urged Council to not dilute them any further.

Sam Schlegel - 1153 Woodstock Court

Mr. Sam Schlegel urged members of Council to not increase the 9' sign height requirement. His property is currently next to a commercial property and for several months all he could see when he looked out his family room window was a large sign for the commercial property. This establishment has since lowered its sign and it is now much better for his family. Although the developers want more flexibility for their commercial properties, Mr. Schlegel reminded Council that these developers do not live in this area like the residential property owners.

Tom Burns - Burns & Ellis Realtors

Mr. Tom Burns commended Council, the Planning Commission and Planning Staff for their efforts in this study. He stated that the local realtors have, on many occasions, offered to assist the City in endeavors of this nature. This type of ordinance allows the local realtors to know what the City wants for specific areas and permits everyone to work toward the same goal. He suggested that the City be proactive in other areas and again offered the services of the local realtors.

Council President Christiansen declared the hearing closed.

Referring to parking in the rear of buildings, Mr. Weyandt questioned the safety of rear parking. Mr. DePrima stated that the issue of safety is very important and staff will be watching this very closely.

It was agreed that the following changes are to be made to the proposed ordinances:

    A.  Page Six - Section 27.55, paragraph (a), subsection (vi), second sentence, to read as follows:

"A minimum setback of 50 feet shall be required from a property line of an existing setback of residentially zoned property."

    B.  Page Seven - Section 27.57, paragraph (d), changing the minimum open space area from 30% to 25%.

Mr. Weyandt moved to accept the final reading of the proposed ordinances, as amended, by title only. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried.

By motion of Mr. Weyandt, seconded by Mr. Lynn, Council adopted the following ordinances by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Hare absent):

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:

Amend the Dover Code, Appendix B, Article 3, by adding a new section to be designated Section 27, to read as follows:

SECTION 27. Corridor Overlay Zone 1 (COZ - 1)

27.1Purpose. The Corridor Overlay Zone (COZ) is established for the following reasons:

    a)  To promote superior urban corridor development and the highest quality built environment; and

    b)  to foster coordination and linkage among corridor properties and with adjacent lands; and

    c)  to preserve the functionality and efficiency of the roadway for traffic movement; and

    d)  to achieve a visually balanced streetscape environment which is friendly to the pedestrian and motorist alike.

27.2Zone Boundaries. The COZ encompasses the lands adjacent to the following roadways as outlined on the City of Dover Zoning Map as set forth in Article 2, Section 2 of this Ordinance:

    a)  Delaware Route 8 (Forrest & Division Streets) from the Conrail Railroad tracks in a westerly direction to the City Limit Line.

    b)  McKee/Saulsbury Road (Co.Rd. 156) from the intersection at Dennys Road (Co.Rd. 100) in a southerly direction to the terminal intersection with West North Street (Co.Rd. 73).

27.3Permitted Uses. Land use shall be governed by those provisions of this Ordinance related to the specific Zoning District designations of each property as depicted on the Zoning Map.

27.4Site Development Plan Approval. Site development plan approval in accordance with Article 10, Section 2 shall be required prior to the issuance of building permits for the erection or enlargement of all structures and prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for any change in use. When the Zoning District regulations specify that a particular use requires Conditional Use approval in accordance with Article 10, Section 1, the provisions of that Article shall apply. Site Development Plans and Conditional Use Site Plans for properties within the COZ shall reflect compliance with the development guidelines of this Article in addition to all other applicable Codes and Regulations.

27.5Development Guidelines

    27.51Setbacks

         a.  Front Yards

                                   Residential   Non-Residential

Min Max Min Max

         McKee/Saulsbury         60' to 80'   40' to 50'

Route 8

Artis Drive

to Mifflin Road 60' to 80' None

Mifflin Road

to Saulsbury Road 40' to 60' 40' to 60'

Saulsbury Road

to R.R. line 20' to 30' 20' to 30'

         Subdivision Streets     (Setback provisions of Article 4 shall apply)

    27.52Building Placement. Buildings shall be situated on the property so as to maximize the use of the frontage along the roadway and shall have the longest side of the building arranged parallel and square to the roadway. When it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission that, due to specific constraints related to lot configuration or the orientation of existing buildings on adjacent lots, alternative building placements may be permitted.

    27.53Parking

         a)  Location. Parking shall not be permitted to be situated within the font yard nor between the right-of-way line and the building except in the following instances:

              I)  automobile service stations;

              ii) properties in a Shopping Center (SC) Zoning District, in which case parking may be permitted between the building and the roadway provided that such parking be limited to five (5) rows of single parking spaces between the road and the storefront;

              iii)when it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission through the Site Plan Review process that, due to specific constraints related to existing lot configuration and the orientation of existing buildings, parking may be permitted between the building and the street provided that such parking within this area be limited to no more than 20% of the total parking required for the proposed use and that such parking be adequately landscaped and screened from the roadway.

         b)  Required Number of Spaces. See specific district requirements in Article 4.

         c)  Layout 

              I)  Parking lots shall be arranged in such a manner so that not more than 20 parking spaces in a row shall be permitted without a landscaped island. No more than six (6) rows of 20 spaces shall be provided without provision for a landscaped median. Parking islands shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and planting medians shall be no less than 8 feet wide.

              ii) There shall be a landscaped buffer area of at least 12 feet in width between building and parking lot and drive areas. The buffer area shall include provisions for a sidewalk of at least 6 feet and no greater than 8 feet in width. The buffer area and sidewalk shall be grade separated from the parking lot by concrete curbing of at least 6 inches in height.

         d)  Landscaping. Design shall be simple and easy to maintain and shall consist of a combination of hardy canopy trees, low evergreen shrubs and turf grass and shall be designed in accordance with Landscape Guidelines set forth in Article 5, Section 15 of this Ordinance and as follows:

              I)  Interior Landscaping. A minimum of 5% of the interior

area of a parking lot shall be reserved for landscape purposes. This provision shall include the landscaping of all required parking islands and medians. Shade trees shall be incorporated within the landscaped islands when ever and where ever practicable.

              ii) Parking Lot Screening Adjacent to Public Right-of-Way. Low profile screening shall be required when parking spaces would result in vehicles facing onto the roadway. Screening may consist of a low wall, evergreen hedge with minimum height of 2 feet at time of planting planted 3 feet apart on center and a maximum height of 3 feet at maturity, or earth berm. Should a low wall be used, such wall shall be accompanied by evergreen shrub plantings on the roadway side of the wall and spaced 10 feet apart on center.

              iii)Parking Lot Screening Adjacent to Other Properties. Visual and sound screening shall be provided on a non-residential property when abutting a residential use. Screening shall consist of a durable and continuous evergreen planted screen of at least 4 feet in height at time of construction and a masonry wall, solid fence, or earth berm of at least 5 feet in height. Such screening shall occur in the area between the common property line and vehicular use area of the non-residential property. The masonry, solid fencing or berm shall be accompanied by shrubbery plantings or vine vegetation to integrate the structure into the landscape and to soften its' image on both sides. Earth berms shall not have a slope greater than 3:1 ratio. In the case of contiguous non-residential properties within non-residential zoning districts, only the tree planting provisions of this subsection shall apply for side and rear property lines.

    27.54Site Access.

         a)  Entrance Width and Radii. Site entrances shall have a minimum width of 24 feet. Entrances involving a median divider shall be at least 35 feet in width. Entrance radii shall be a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 25 feet.

         b)  Number of Entrances and Curb Cut Spacing. One curb cut shall be permitted for each street which abuts a site. For sites with street frontage in excess of 300 linear feet, one (1) additional curb cut may be permitted. For sites with street frontage in excess of 600 linear feet, two (2) additional curb cuts may be permitted.

Multiple Curb cuts on a property shall have a minimum spacing distance in accordance with the following schedule:

SPEED

                             LIMIT         Minimum Spacing (Ft.)

                              25                  105

30 125

                              35        150

                              40                  185

                              45                 230

                              50                  275

         c)  Shared access shall be provided whenever possible for entrances to adjoining uses, including residential driveways.

         d)  Cross access shall be provided among abutting uses of similar use categories, whenever possible, to provide linkage between properties as an alternative to re-entering the corridor to access both existing and future neighboring properties.

         e)  Entrance Locations for adjoining properties. Commercial site entrances shall be no closer than 25 feet to an adjoining property which is zoned residential and no closer than 10 feet to an adjoining property which is in a non-residential zoning category.

    27.55Signage. This section sets forth specific regulations governing signage for all properties within the Corridor Overlay District. (See also Article 5, Section IV, Supplementary Sign Regulations).

         a)  Free-Standing Signs on Non Residential Properties.

              I)  A maximum of one (1) free-standing sign shall be permitted per lot, except that on lots with aggregate linear frontage in excess of 500 feet, one (1) additional free-standing sign shall be permitted. No Free-Standing signs shall be permitted on lots with less than 100 feet of road frontage.

              ii) The Area of a free-standing sign shall be limited to 63 Sq.Ft. per side.

              iii)Maximum sign height from grade to the top of the sign structure shall not exceed 9 feet.

              iv) No Free-standing sign shall exceed 7 feet in horizontal length nor 18 inches in thickness.

              v)  At retail centers of at least 10 Acres in area, a free-standing sign shall be limited to 100 Sq.Ft. of sign area per side and shall be limited in height to 12 feet.

              vi) Free-standing signs shall be setback from all property lines a minimum of 10 feet. A minimum setback of 50 feet shall be required from a property line of an existing setback of residentially zoned property. Free standing signs shall not be situated on top of any earthen mound or berm.

         b)  Wall-Mounted Sign.

              I)  A maximum of one (1) wall-mounted sign shall be permitted per establishment on each wall facing a street.

              ii) Wall-mounted signs shall not be permitted above the eave of the building for single-story buildings and shall not exceed a total height equivalent to 75% of the height of the building for two story buildings.

              iii)Sign area for wall mounted signs shall not exceed 10% of the area of the wall.

              iv) Wall-mounted signs shall not project more than 12 inches beyond the face of the wall to which they are mounted. Roof mounted signs are prohibited.

         c)  Residential Community Entrance Identification Signs.

              I)  Such sign proposals shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval through the Site Development Plan Review Process as set forth in Article 10, Section 2 of this Ordinance.

              ii) The applicant for such approval shall establish an entity that shall be responsible for ownership and maintenance of such signs, in perpetuity, to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission.

    27.56Building Height

         a)  Buildings shall be limited in overall height to 35 feet and shall not exceed 2 stories.

    27.57Open Space and Landscaping

         a)  Lot Coverage. Each lot shall have a minimum of 25% of the lot area dedicated to be landscaped open space. A lesser amount of landscaped open space may be permitted when it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission through the site plan review process that due to lot configuration and existing built conditions the required minimum is impractical.

         b)  Frontage. Each lot shall have a landscape open space of at least 25 feet in width measured from the back of curb along the entire frontage of the lot, except at points of site access. Trees shall be provided along the frontage perimeter at a minimum rate of one (1) tree for each 50 linear feet of frontage.

         c)  Side and Rear Yards. A minimum of 15 feet of landscaped open space shall be provided along all side and rear lot lines when abutting a residential use and a minimum of 5 feet when abutting a non-residential use. Tree plantings shall be provided along all non-frontage perimeters at a minimum rate of one (1) tree for each 75 linear feet.

         d)  Stormwater detention ponds. Detention ponds may be counted toward the minimum 25% open space area, provided that such ponds are designed to emulate natural features by incorporating irregular outline, gradual slopes (no greater than 1:4), and appropriate landscape plantings.

         e)  Landscaping. Landscaped open spaces shall be designed in accordance with the provisions of this Section as well as the Landscaping Guidelines as set forth in Article 5, Section 9 of this Ordinance.

         f)  Screening. The following items shall be located so as to minimize visibility from the roadway, adjacent properties and other public areas and shall be screened from public view:

                        1)  Service Bays

                        2)  Loading docks & platforms

                        3)  Roof Top utilities

                        4)  Satellite dishes

                        5)  Dumpsters

                        6)  Storage Areas

         g)  Standard for Tree Plantings. Trees shall be of a high canopy variety and shall be limbed to a minimum height of 12 feet above grade at maturity.

         h)  Standards for Shrubbery. Shrubbery shall be of a low evergreen variety and shall be limited to use as foundation plantings and for screening purposes.

         I)  Standards for Ground Cover. Ground cover shall be limited to turf and ornamental grasses and ornamental evergreen ground cover plantings within required landscape areas.

    27.58Lot Configuration. All lots within the Corridor Overlay District created after the enactment of this Section shall conform to the following:

              1)  Minimum lot area - 10,000 Sq.Ft.

Service Stations - 20,000 Sq.Ft.

              2)  Minimum lot depth shall be 100 feet. In the C-3 (Service Commercial) District the minimum lot depth shall be 150 feet.

              3)  Minimum road frontage shall be at least 100 feet. In the C-3 (Service Commercial) District the minimum road frontage shall be 150 feet.

ADOPTED: March 18, 1992

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:

Amend the Dover Code, Appendix B, Article 5, by adding a new section to be designated Section 15, to read as follows:

SECTION 15. Landscape Guidelines.

    The following guidelines shall be used in the design of site landscape as required in other Sections of this Ordinance and shall be followed unless it can be demonstrated through the Site Plan Review process that such features would be impractical or incompatible with a particular land use or site development proposal. Failure to maintain required landscaping shall constitute a violation of this ordinance and is subject to, as specified in Article 8, Section 4, "Violations and Penalties":

15.1Trees of substantial size should be provided to create a sense of scale and an overhead canopy. Where trees are set in paving, flush tree grates or open planters should be used to protect root zones without interrupting the ground plane.

15.2Large shrubs, small trees and evergreens are most effective for foundation planting around buildings, emphasizing major vehicular entrances and areas requiring visual screening. Avoid using large dense plant material where maximum visibility is imperative.

15.3Security and visibility are important considerations in landscape design along commercial corridors. Understory plant materials should be confined to 36 inches or lower and trees should be limbed to above 12 feet at maturity to allow for visual surveillance.

15.4Color and specimen material should be targeted to a few key locations. A few highly visible masses of color will be more effective than numerous small patches dispersed over the entire site.

15.5Massing of plant material, or large groupings of a single species, is preferred over planting a large area with numerous species. Trees and shrubbery should be used in scale with corridor development and large open spaces to create visual balance.

15.6Grading should be level, except to allow for necessary surface drainage and earth berms used for screening purposes.

15.7Lawn areas should be contained and separated from landscaped beds with defined edging such as concrete walks, steel edging or curbing.

15.8Entrances should be provided with landscaping to define the entrance location and to establish the site entrance as part of the overall landscape.

ADOPTED: March 18, 1992

Mr. Lambert commended the Planning Staff and Planning Commission for their hard work in preparing and presenting the proposed ordinances.

Mr. Pitts moved to adjourn into executive session to discuss legal matters, seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried.

Meeting Adjourned at 8:30 P.M.

                                  DEBRAH J. BOAMAN

                                  CITY CLERK

All orders, ordinances and resolutions adopted by City Council during their meeting of March 18, 1992, are hereby approved.