REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
The Regular Council Meeting was held on November 26, 1990 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Christiansen presiding. Members present were Councilmen Hall, Daisey, Levitt, Pitts, Salters, Lynn, Weyandt and VanSant.
Council staff members present were Chief Hutchison, Mr. Lucas, Mr. Worley. Mr. Cregar, Mrs. Boaman and Mr. Pepper. Fire Chief Whitham was absent.
The invocation was given by Councilman VanSant, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
By motion of Mr. Lynn, seconded by Mr. Weyandt, the agenda was unanimously approved.
ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 12, 1990
The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting or November 12, 1990 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. VanSant, seconded by Mr. Lynn and bore the written approval of Mayor Richter.
FIRST READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCES
Mr. Salters moved to waive the reading of the two proposed ordinances before Council, seconded by Mr. Lynn and unanimously carried. Council President Christiansen reminded the public that copies of the proposed ordinances 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 December 10, 1990.
Mr. Salters moved for acknowledgment of the first reading of the following proposed ordinances, by title only, seconded by Mr. Daisey and unanimously carried:
A. Sec. 5-77 - Water Conservation Performance Standards
B. 1990 Sidewalk Assessment
FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCES
The first reading of the proposed ordinances was accomplished during the Council Meeting of November 12, 1990. Mr. VanSant moved to waive the reading of the ordinances and that they be considered by title only. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weyandt and unanimously carried.
Mr. VanSant moved for adoption of the following ordinances, seconded by Mr. Salters and carried by a unanimous roll call vote:
Section 8 - Election Board
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER IN COUNCIL MET, THAT COUNCIL REQUESTS THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE AMEND THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF DOVER, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 8 of the Charter is amended by striking the first sentence in-paragraph 2 and by inserting the following sentence in its place:
“All elections shall be held by an Election Board which shall consist of the Alderman and the necessary number of Election Board members as determined and designated by the Election Board.”
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 9 Meetings of Mayor and Council - Generally
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER IN COUNCIL MET, THAT COUNCIL REQUESTS THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE AMEND THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF DOVER, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 9 of the Charter is amended by striking the last sentence in the last paragraph thereof and by inserting the following sentence in its place:
“The Mayor, upon recommendation from the Council President, will present Council appointments for Council approval.”
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 2-70 (4) and (5) - Compensation
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 2-70 of the Dover Code is amended by striking subsections (4) and (5) and by inserting in their place the following subsections:
“(4) For each person, not a City employee, appointed to serve as an Election Judge for any municipal election for per diem reimbursement for expenses for each election attended - Fifty Dollars ($50.00). For each person chosen to serve as a clerical assistant for any municipal election for per them reimbursement for each election attended - Thirty-Five Dollars ($35.00).
(5) For employees of the City appointed to serve as Election Judges or officials for any municipal election for per them reimbursement for expenses for each municipal election attended in addition to their regular salary - Thirty-Five Dollars ($35.00).”
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 2-26 - Voter Registration - Generally
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 2-26 of the Dover Code is amended by adding the following sentence to this section:
“The City Clerk shall close the registration records at the close of the business day on the last working day of March of each year before the annual election and only those voters properly registered as of that time shall be entitled to vote at the following annual election and the registration records of the City shall remain closed until the first working day in May.”
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 2-44 and 2-45 - Request for Ballot
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1. That Section 2-44 of the Dover Code is deleted in its entirety and a new section to read as follows is inserted in its place:
“Sec. 2-44. Request for Ballot.
Any voter who is qualified under Sec. 2-42 to vote by absentee ballot and who desires to do so, shall, not later than the close of business of the last working day prior to any such election, request the election official for an official ballot to be voted at such election.”
2. That Section 2-45 of the Dover Code is amended by deleting the last sentence and inserting a new sentence to read as follows:
“Nothing contained in this section shall prevent the issuance of an absentee ballot to those lawfully entitled thereto not later than the close of business of the last working day prior to any such election when the request is made less than three (3) days prior to the general election.”
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 18-1 - Police Force Generally
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 18-1 of the Dover Code is amended by deleting the second paragraph thereof in its entirety and by inserting the following paragraph in its place:
“The City Council shall, upon adoption of the annual budget, designate the number and salaries of the individual policemen who shall comprise the police force. The Mayor shall choose and appoint the policemen.”
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 2-77 - Legislative and Finance Committee - Members
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 2-77 is amended by striking the Mayor as the Person appointing the members and by inserting in his place the name “Council President” as the person making the appointments.
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 2-87 - Safety Advisory Committee - Members
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 2-87 is amended by striking the Mayor as the person appointing the members and by inserting in his place the name “Council President” as the person making the appointments.
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 2-157 - Parks and Recreation Committee - Members
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 2-157 is amended by striking the Mayor as the person appointing the members and by inserting in his place the name “Council President” as the person making the appointments.
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 2-167 - Utility Committee - Members
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 2-167 is amended by striking the Mayor as the person appointing the members and by inserting in his place the name “Council President” as the person making the appointments.
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 5-20 - Building Code Board of Appeals
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 5-20 is amended by striking the Mayor as the person appointing the members and by inserting in his place the name “Council President” as the person making the appointments.
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 2-207 - Board of Trustees - Composition
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 2-207 is amended by striking the Mayor as the person appointing the members and by inserting in his place the name “Council President” as the person making the appointments.
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 18-47 - Retirement Committee - Members Generally
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 18-47 is amended by striking the Mayor as the person appointing the members and by inserting in his place the name “Council President” as the person making the appointments.
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Section 2-1 - Board of Revision and Appeals
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
That Section 2-1 is amended by striking the Mayor as the person appointing the members and by inserting in his place the name “Council President” as the person making the appointments.
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Appendix C - Development Incentives
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
ARTICLE I: INTENT
The City Council of the City of Dover has deemed it to be in the best interests of the residents of the City of Dover and in furtherance of their health, safety and welfare to promote the redevelopment of downtown Dover. In order to promote the redevelopment, Council has determined that incentives in the forms of tax abatement, impact fee waivers, and building permit caps should be offered.
ARTICLE II: DEFINITIONS
Section 1. “Eligible project” shall mean a new construction or renovation which: (a) is located within the target area; (b) the fair market value of the materials to be used in and the labor to be performed on the project exceeds the sum of fifteen thousand ($15,000.00) dollars; (c) is for commercial, office, or residential use; and (d) conforms to the intent of this ordinance. In order for a residential use to be an eligible project, the object of the construction or renovation must be a dwelling unit as defined in Article 12 of the City of Dover Zoning Ordinance. Construction or renovation of accessory buildings as defined in Article 12 of the City of Dover Zoning Ordinance shall not be eligible for development incentives. Construction or renovation which constitutes ordinary replacement or routine maintenance shall not qualify as an eligible project.
Section 2. “Eligibility period” shall mean the period between January 1, 1991, and December 31, 1994.
Section 3. “Target area” shall mean that part of the City of Dover more particularly described as follows:
“Beginning at a point at the intersection of the centerlines Cecil and North State Streets, then continuing on the centerline of North State Street in a southerly direction to the intersection of the centerlines of State and Division Streets, then continuing on the centerline of Division Street in an easterly direction to the point of intersection of Division Street and the St. Jones River, then following the centerline of the St. Jones River in a southerly direction to the point of intersection of the center line of the St. Jones River and the southerly property line of lands now or formerly of the Catholic Diocese of Wilmington being the site of Holy Cross Roman Catholic Church, then proceeding in a westerly direction along said property line to the easterly right-of-way line of South State Street (U.S. Route 13-A), then crossing the right-of-way line of South State Street in a westerly direction and joining the centerline of Hope Street and proceeding in a westerly direction to the intersection of the centerlines of Hope Street and South Governors Avenue, then proceeding in a southerly direction along the centerline of South Governors Avenue to the point of intersection of the centerlines of South Governors Avenue and Dover Street, then proceeding in a westerly direction along the centerline, of Dover Street to the point of intersection of the centerlines of Dover Street and Westview Terrace, then continuing in a northerly direction on the centerline of Westview Terrace to the point of intersection of the centerline of Westview Terrace and New Burton Road, then proceeding in a northeasterly direction on the centerline of New Burton Road to the point of intersection of New burton Road and West Street, then continuing in a northerly direction along the westerly right-of-way line of West Street to the point of intersection of the westerly side of the right-of-way of West Street and the northerly property line of lands now or formerly of Dover Rent-All, Inc., then continuing in a westerly direction along said property line to the point of intersection of said property line and the land of Conrail Railroad, then proceeding in a northerly direction along the easterly right-of-way line of Conrail Railroad in a northerly direction to the point of intersection of the right-of-way of Conrail Railroad and the northerly property line of lands now or late of Souther States Cooperative, Inc., then proceeding in an easterly direction a distance of 52.76 feet +/- to the northeasterly corner of the lands now or late of Southern States Cooperative, Inc. then, proceeding in a southerly direction along the easterly property lien of lands now or late of Southern States Cooperative, Inc. to the point of intersection of said property and the centerline of Cecil Street, then proceeding in an easterly direction along the centerline of Cecil Street to the point of beginning, being the point of intersection of the centerline of Cecil and North State Street.
ARTICLE III: ELIGIBILITY
Section 1. Issuance of a city building permit for an eligible project must be obtained during the eligibility period.
Section 2. In order to be eligible for development incentives, the owner of an eligible project must agree to contribute ten percent (10%) of the total value of the incentives received to the Downtown Dover Development Corporation for reinvestment in Downtown Dover.
Section 3. An otherwise eligible project shall be ineligible for development incentives if:
(a)An application for a building permit for the project was filed prior to the effective date of this ordinance, or
(b) Construction or renovation commenced prior to the effective date of this ordinance.
ARTICLE IV: DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES
Section 1. Building permit fees shall not exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000-00) for eligible projects.
Section 2. Eligible projects which maximize land use (e.g., multi-story mixed use residential, commercial and office combination) will qualify for impact fee waiver.
Section 3. Eligible projects shall receive property tax waivers for a period not to exceed ten (10) years so that improvements to the properties made in accordance with the intent of this ordinance will not be taxed for a period of time not to exceed ten (10) years from the date of the making of the improvements. The said ten-year period will commence with the date of issuance of a building permit.
ARTICLE V: ADMINISTRATION
The City Manager and his staff shall develop the administrative procedures necessary to implement this ordinance. The City Manager and his staff shall promulgate reasonable standards to be used in determining whether an eligible project shall receive development incentives and, if so, which incentives shall be granted. Administrative staff shall review applications for development incentives and grant incentives to eligible projects. Applicants shall be notified of the action taken,on their applications by mail.
ARTICLE VI: APPEALS
Applicants denied development incentives shall have the right to appeal the decision to the City Council within thirty (30) days from the date of mailing of the formal notification. Such appeal shall be in writing, signed by the owner of the property in question, and filed with the City Clerk.
ARTICLE VII: SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE
Section 1. Should any section or provision of this ordinance be declared to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the parts so declared to be unconstitutional or invalid.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective as of January 1, 1991.
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
(Mr. Worley pointed out that some minor revisions have been made to the development incentives ordinance since its first reading.)
SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT
The Safety Advisory Committee met on November 13, 1990 with Chairman Hall presiding.
Two Hour Parking - Gooden Street - Dr. Taylor
The committee considered a letter from Dr. Taylor in reference to the recently enacted two hour parking limitation in the vicinity of his office on Gooden Street. Dr. Taylor explained that there are times that patients are required to be in a medical office for periods longer than two hours and requested relief from the restriction.
Staff recommended that action not be taken at this time, feeling that Phase I of the program was intended as a test phase to allow an opportunity for the program to be enacted and for citizen complaints or concerns to be realized. Information derived from Phase I of the program would be utilized to make corrections or revisions to Phase I prior to implementation of Phase II. Staff recommended they be permitted to assess the impact of the phase-in prior to further action.
Although the effects of the parking ordinance are being reviewed by staff, Mr. Hall requested that specific effort be given to resolving the problem on Gooden Street since a letter was received. He suggested that staff present a recommendation during the December committee meeting.
The committee recommended that action be deferred to allow staff to further review the impact of the ordinance.
Two Hour Parking - Kings Highway - George Farschman
Mr. George E. Farschman, 139 Kings Highway #1, submitted a letter objecting to the sequence of areas specified to receive residential parking permits as indicated in Phase I of the residential parking ordinance. It was his feeling that the Kings Highway area should have been considered in Phase I for residential parking permits. Mr. Farschman requested that Council recognize the error and identify Kings Highway as an area for residential parking permits.
Chief Hutchison noted that Kings Highway has been selected to receive residential parking permits under Phase II of the parking ordinance. Prior to initiating Phase II, he again relayed the importance of evaluating Phase I.
The committee recommended that Mr. Farschman's concerns be taken under advisement and that action be deferred for staff’s report in the December committee meeting.
Mr. VanSant reminded members of Council that residents of Kings Highway have been requesting relief from the two hour parking restriction for several years and urged them to take action on this matter as soon as possible.
Noise Ordinance - “Boom Boxes” and Car Stereos
Upon receipt of several complaints concerning excessive noise created by “boom boxes” and car stereos, Council President Christiansen and Mr. VanSant requested that the noise ordinance be enforced or re-vamped to solve these disturbances.
Chief Hutchison advised members that citizens can prosecute offenders in accordance with the current noise ordinance. He explained that if a citizen becomes a victim of excessive noise, they would be required to sign a warrant against the offender; once the person responsible for the violation is identified, they could be prosecuted.
The committee recommended that staff contact other communities to determine what steps have been taken for similar disturbances, for a report during the December committee meeting.
Mr. Hall moved for acceptance of the Safety Advisory Committee report, seconded by Mr. Lynn and unanimously carried.
UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT
The Utility Committee met on November 13, 1990 with Chairman VanSant presiding.
Noting that the committee took no action on certain items, Mr. VanSant moved that items #5D - “Stormwater Runoff - Stoney Creek” and #5I - “Energy Conservation Update” be approved under a consent agenda format, seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried.
Annexation Request - Fox Hall Drive - Dr. Zurkow
The committee considered a request for annexation from Dr. Robert Zurkow for his property located on Fox Hall Drive. According to a survey conducted in 1988, a majority of those residents on Fox Hall Drive were opposed to annexation. Having concern with the up-front costs of providing utilities to this area if all properties are not annexed, staff was directed to re-survey those that were interested in annexation in 1988 and develop the necessary groups of referendums that would annex as many properties in the area as possible.
Staff provided members with a map depicting the results of the poll, noting that according to the survey, a referendum for the entire area would fail. The estimated cost to extend water to the entire area is $61,000; the estimated cost to extend sewer is $84,000, for a total cost of $145,000. If the entire south side and the one property at the end on the north side of Fox Hall Drive were annexed, the total cost to extend services would still be $145,000. The cost to extend services to serve the Zurkow's property and the other two properties located between the Zurkow's property and Kenton Road, would total approximately $93,000.
Feeling that it would be too costly to extend water and sewer lines to serve Dr. Zurkow's property and the other two properties, staff recommended that an annexation referendum be held for the south side of Fox Hall Drive and property #6 on the north side.
Several residents of Fox Hall Drive were present during the meeting relaying their opposition to annexation. They also were concerned with the ability to pay the assessment charges and to regain those costs in terms of property value.
Some members of the committee voiced concern with the approximate cost of $145,000 to extend water and sewer in this area. Since several properties would not be annexed nor assessed the front-foot charge, the City would be responsible for the charges and for paying the interest until such time that all properties are annexed.
Based upon the strong opposition from a majority of the property owners and the costs involved in utility extensions, the committee recommended denial of the annexation request.
Mr. Vansant moved to approve the committee's recommendation for denial of the annexation request, seconded by Mr. Lynn and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Placement of Underground Stormwater Piping - Barrister Place
During their September committee meeting, members considered a letter from Mr. Robert Tudor concerning a drainage problem at 447 Barrister Place, owned by Mr. and Mrs. Soja. The problem involves the northern four properties, located on the east side of Barrister Place (443, 443, 447 and 449). The City does not usually get involved in problems between property owners and private property; however, as a result of a law suit between the property owners, the Courts instructed the City to assist in correcting the problem. The committee deferred action to allow staff to meet with the property owners for a solution.
Mr. Tudor felt that the only acceptable alternative would be to place underground pipe across all of the properties and maintain the existing elevations. Although this would alleviate the problem, due to the grading of the driveways, it would require a grate across each of the driveways. It has been estimated that this project would cost $8,300, which would be the responsibility of the property owners. Staff also considered restoring the original design by removing the blockages to drainage, at a minimal cost.
Staff recommended the installation of underground pipe with the cost to be assessed to the property owners.
A member of the Utility Committee expressed concern with the City being authorized to restore the drainage without obtaining an easement from the property owners.
The committee recommended that the matter be referred to the City Solicitor to determine if the City has a legal obligation and, if not, no action shall be taken on this matter.
Mr. VanSant moved for approval of the committee's recommendation, seconded by Mr. Salters.
Mr. Daisey voiced his objections to the motion, stating that this has been an ongoing problem for several years and the Courts have ruled that the City should assist the property owners in resolving the matter. Mr. Daisey stated that the City could end up spending more in legal fees to research the problem than it would cost to correct it.
Mr. VanSant reminded Council that staff's recommendation to install underground pipe, assessing property owners for the cost of $8,300, was rejected by the involved property owners.
On a call for the question on the motion by Mr. VanSant, the motion was approved with Mr. Daisey voting no.
Water Conservation Performance Standards
During their meeting in May, Mr. Stewart Lovell, from the Water Supply Branch of DNREC, presented members with information on a pilot project utilizing ultra-low consumption flush toilets. He presented a Resolution, adopted by the Delaware River Basin Commission, which provides for water conservation performance standards for plumbing fixtures and fittings for all new construction effective January 1, 1991. Mr. Lovell also presented members with a draft ordinance developed by the Delaware River Basin Commission for municipalities to utilize in implementing the Resolution.
The committee referred the proposed Resolution and Ordinance to Staff for refinement to be brought back before the committee for their review and recommendation to Council.
Staff submitted a draft resolution and draft ordinance which would amend Chapter 5 Buildings and Building Regulations; Article V., Plumbing Code of the City of Drover code of Ordinances by adding a new Section 5-77 entitled “Water Conservation Performance Standards”.
If Council chooses to adopt the ordinance, Mr. Cregar requested that adequate time be allowed for preparation of the regulations for those that would be affected such as plumbing contractors and plumbing fixture distributors.
The committee recommended approval of the Water Conservation Performance Standards in accordance with the draft resolution and ordinance, to be effective July 1, 1991, subject to modifications and compliance with the statewide plumbing, code.
Mr. VanSant noted that the draft ordinance will be brought to Council on December 10, 1990 for the second and final reading prior to adoption.
Mr. VanSant moved for approval of the following resolution, seconded by Mr. Weyandt and unanimously carried:
WHEREAS, water is a natural resource that should not be taken for granted; and
WHEREAS, water is essential for the preservation of all life and for future development; and
WHEREAS, the quality and quantity of our water resources is an absolute necessity if we are to maintain a healthy environment for ourselves and generations to come; and
WHEREAS, all individuals, organizations, and businesses throughout the City of Dover should commit to protecting our water supplies and developing conservation plans so that water will be readily available and usable in the future.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET:
1. That the Mayor and Council do hereby declare that all citizens of the City take time to reflect not only on the importance of water as a natural resource but on conservation measures designed to protect this natural element;
2. That the Mayor and Council have determined that in order to conserve and protect the water supplies used in the City of Dover for the greatest public benefit, it is prudent to reduce the demand for water in the manner set forth in the attached Ordinance; and
3. Such Ordinance will amend the Plumbing Code of the City of Dover to require stricter water conservation performance standards for plumbing fixtures installed in new construction and in connection with the remodeling of existing structures; and
4. The purpose of this Ordinance is to insure continued availability of water to residents and businesses in the City of Dover.
ADOPTED: November 26, 1990
Acceptance of Streets and Utilities - Mallard Pond
The developer of Mallard Pond has requested that the streets and utilities of Mallard Pond be accepted for maintenance and ownership. Staff inspected the improvements and provided the developer with a list of repairs to be made to meet City standards. During their October meeting, the committee tabled action since the required repairs were not completed.
Staff advised members that the repairs have been completed with the exception of one portion of sidewalk and some street lights. A 150% completion guaranty has been submitted for the sidewalk. As-built drawings, a one-year maintenance agreement and bond, and a release from liabilities form have been submitted.
The committee recommended acceptance of the dedication of Mallard Pond, with the following provisions: 1) that the repairs required by staff are completed prior to Council action on November 26, 1990; and 2) that the 150% completion guaranty submitted for the sidewalk is completed prior to the expiration of the letter of credit.
Mr. VanSant reported that staff has informed him that the required repairs have not been made. He, therefore, moved to table action on the acceptance of the streets and utilities in Mallard Pond until the repairs are completed and reported to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lynn and unanimously carried.
Acceptance of Streets and Utilities - Fox Meadows
The developers of Fox Meadows have requested that the streets and utilities of Fox Meadows be accepted for maintenance and ownership by the City. After construction was completed, staff inspected the improvements and provided the developer with a list of repairs to be made to meet City standards. Those repairs have been completed. As-built drawings have been submitted and a oneyear maintenance agreement and bond, and a release of liabilities form have been submitted.
The committee recommended that the dedication of Fox Meadows be accepted.
Mr. VanSant moved for acceptance of streets and utilities in Fox Meadows, seconded by Mr. Levitt and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Sidewalk Assessment
As directed by Council, staff conducted an inspection of the area designated for the 1990 sidewalk replacement program and the sidewalk was replaced where necessary. The final cost for sidewalk replacement is $64,778-47. The portion of that cost to be recovered through special assessment is $58,756.34.
The committee recommended adoption of an ordinance to approve the 1990 Sidewalk Assessment.
Referring to Mr. Weyandt's concern with incomplete work in the areas that were designated in previous year's programs, Mr. VanSant relayed that staff will monitor the repairs and a completion date will be required.
Mr. VanSant moved for approval of the 1990 Sidewalk Assessment, noting that the ordinance has gone through the first reading process and will be considered for adoption during the Council Meeting of December 10, 1990. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salters and unanimously carried.
Bid - Warehouse Substation - Voltage Regulators
The planning/design of the replacement and upgrading of the Warehouse Substation requires larger capacity voltage regulators to replace the existing ones. The low bid was received from Comsip, Inc. in the amount of $43,296. The committee recommended that a purchase order be issued to Comsip, Inc. for the amount of $43,296.
Mr. VanSant moved for approval of the committee's recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lynn and carried by a unanimous roll call vote.
Bid - Warehouse Substation - Structural Steel and Associated Electrical Components
The planning/design of the replacement and upgrading of the Warehouse Substation requires a steel structure to replace the existing wood pole structure. The new steel structure will be erected in an area beside the existing structure in order to maintain service to Playtex during substation construction. Work on this phase of the project is scheduled to begin in December 1990. All design and specifications for this portion of the project were prepared by City staff.
The low bid was received from M.D. Henry Co. , Inc. in the amount of $33, 704. The committee recommended that a purchase order be issued to M.D. Henry Co. , Inc. for the amount of $33,704.
Mr. VanSant moved for approval of the committee's recommendation, seconded by Mr. Lynn and carried by a unanimous roll cal vote.
Future Electric Power Supply Requirements
Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC) conducted a power supply workshop for City Council to discuss future power supply issues for the City of Dover. Council was reminded that the 1989 Long-Range Resource Planning Study prepared by Resource Management, International, Inc. (RMI), projected that the City would need another source of electric power by the 1996-98 time frame. In order to meet this deadline, SWEC stressed that the City must begin planning now because of the development time required for the creation of a suitable power source.
SWEC recommended that, as a first step toward a power source, a power option study should be performed including an analysis of demand-side techniques; however, SWEC agreed that it would be prudent to update the RMI study to reaffirm the 1996-98 projection. The RMI study recommended that the City should update its load forecast annually and reevaluate the power supply plan at a minimum 0f every two years. It was staff’s feeling that several circumstances have changed which justifies updating the RMI study.
Staff recommended approval of a three-step plan, as follows:
1. Update the RMI Study immediately.
2. Following the update, perform the recommended power options analysis, including demand-side options.
3. Select a given option and begin development of the selected option.
Staff also recommended that an organization and staffing analysis be performed of the Electric Department. This would insure that the department is property positioned in terms of staffing and organizational structure for the changes and demands that will be made on the department in the 1990's.
The committee recommended that Council endorse the three-step plan and authorize staff to prepare proposals for updating the RMI study and performing an organization and staffing analysis.
Mr. VanSant moved for approval of the committee's recommendation, seconded by Mr. Lynn.
Responding to questions of Mr. Weyandt, Mr. Worley stated that the RMI portion of the study will be to update load forecast. The second part of the plan would include analysis of options to meet the demand needs. The possibility of other organizations enjoining the City in a venture will be considered in the second part of the plan.
Mr. Worley explained that this ac