UTILITY COMMITTEE

The Utility Committee Meeting was held on December 13, 2004, at 5:30 p.m. with Chairman Carey presiding. Members present were Mr. Ruane, Mr. Sadusky, Mr. Cregar, and Mr. Snaman. Members of Council present were Mr. Slavin, Mr. Ritter, Mr. Hogan (arrived at 5:55 p.m.), Mr. Salters (arrived at 6:12 p.m.), and Council President Williams. Mayor Speed was also present.

AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS

Mr. Ruane moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried.

Proposed Ordinance Amendments - Street Widths

Noting that City Council has granted numerous requests for street width waivers, during the committee meeting of April 28, 2003, members suggested that the Director of Planning and Inspections, Mr. James Galvin, prepare amendments to the street width requirements. As a result, Fire Chief Bashista relayed concerns with reducing street widths and, during the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee Meeting of June 2, 2004, he presented a PowerPoint Presentation which visually depicted his safety issues and concerns with emergency response on narrow width roadways. It was suggested that the Chief Bashista and Mr. Galvin work together on developing an agreeable ordinance amendment.

Mr. Galvin submitted an ordinance that would amend Appendix A - Land Subdivision Regulations, Article VI - Subdivision-General Requirements and Design Standards, Section A-Streets, Subsection 13. The current 38-foot wide standard allows for parking on both sides of a street and two travel lanes of approximately 24 feet. The minimum of 24 feet of clear area has been required for the fire department’s ladder truck from Station 2 to access all properties. The alternatives requested by the development community are smaller street widths that do not allow parking on both sides or, in some cases, any on-street parking. Mr. Galvin explained that the text amendment will reconcile the frequent waivers for street widths for most subdivision applications that the Planning Commission, Utility Committee, and City Council have been considering, particularly in 2003 and 2004, and at the same time, accommodate the current fire fighting and other emergency apparatus. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the ordinance amendment.

Mr. Ritter reminded members that, during previous discussions, it was suggested that the turning radii be increased at the intersections of developments to accommodate fire apparatus and questioned if it would be appropriate to include such language in the proposed amendment. Responding, Mr. Galvin suggested that this issue could be addressed during the Planning Staff review of the pre-application plans.

Concurring with Mr. Ritter, Mayor Speed suggested that the committee provide conditional approval of the proposed ordinance amendment for staff to provide additional language to address intersections and curved roadways.

Mr. DePrima suggested that there be included an incentive for alleyways. It was his opinion that there is a significant difference and improvement in terms of accessibility that an alley brings to a development that adding additional parking does not, such as emergency access, utility access, police patrol, sanitation collection, etc. He also noted that there are some minor corrections necessary, such as changing the word “minor streets” to “local streets”, and that there should be reference to streets for commercial properties.

Mr. Ruane moved to recommend amending the proposed ordinance to change the word “minor” to “local”, seconded by Mr. Snaman and unanimously carried.

Mr. Ruane moved to recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission, as amended. The motion maker withdrew due to the lack of a second.

Mr. Galvin suggested that members forward the proposed ordinance to Council for adoption, contingent upon the inclusion of the radii, as mentioned, as well as an incentive for alleys.

Responding, Mr. Carey suggested that the revisions be reviewed by the Utility Committee during their meeting of January 10, 2005 and be forwarded to Council later that evening for a First Reading. The City Clerk, Mrs. Green, advised members that since the proposed ordinance would amend the Land Subdivision Regulations, a public hearing would be required; therefore, Council would also be setting a public hearing for January 24, 2005. In order to meet a 15 day advertisement requirement, Mrs. Green stated that the ad could be placed the week prior to official action by Council setting the public hearing.

Mr. Ruane moved to defer action with the understanding that the revised ordinance will be provided to members at their next meeting for review in sufficient form after having been reviewed by all appropriate parties so that a final recommendation can be formulated and forwarded to Council later that evening. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sadusky and unanimously carried.

Report by City Manager - Public Hearing on Draft Summary Report for Statewide Mandatory Recycling Program

Members were provided a draft Memorandum of Agreement Report Summary on the Statewide Mandatory Curbside Recycling Program, dated November 2004. The Report Summary was prepared by the Delaware Recycling Public Advisory Council (RPAC), Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC), and Delaware Solid Waste Authority (DSWA). Mr. DePrima, City Manager, advised members that he attended a public information session entitled “Bringing Curbside Recycling to Delaware” on November 4, 2004, and that during the public comment section, he indicated that he would be submitting written comments. He provided a brief review of the proposal and reviewed the comments and questions he developed after consulting with the City’s Public Works Director, who manages the City’s Sanitation Division.

Mr. DePrima explained that the report summarizes the recommendations of the RPAC, DNREC, and DSWA. To his knowledge, the plan is for the final findings, recommendations, and draft legislation to be presented to the Governor and the General Assembly for their consideration in January 2005.

Mr. Ruane noted that the Report Summary references transfer stations and that, during the most recent review of the contract with the DSWA, he recalls there being a promise that Kent County would have a transfer station and questioned its status. Responding, Mr. DePrima stated that the DSWA has delayed any discussion of transfer stations until after the election. There was a site selected; however, it was too close to an Airpark and they have since begun investigating alternative sites. There has been no further information in this regard. A revised contract with the DSWA will be forthcoming. Mr. DePrima assured members that staff will look into the matter and report back.

It was Mr. Ruane’s opinion that there is additional information regarding transfer stations in terms of cost savings, convenience, etc.

Mr. Ruane moved to recommend that when the City Manager and Public Works Director present the contract for renewal with the Delaware Solid Waste Authority, that they address the issue of the advantages and disadvantages and potential for including that in the negotiations. The motion failed due to the lack of a second.

Responding to Mr. Carey, Mr. DePrima stated that staff could provide the information requested by Mr. Ruane; however, he reminded members that much of it is a function of a general analysis, such as a savings per mile of the costs to travel to Sandtown versus the costs to travel to a transfer station, as well as time and wear and tear on equipment. Mr. Carey explained that the purpose of this report was to bring forward preliminary information regarding the Statewide Mandatory Recycling Program.

In response to Mr. Ritter, Mr. DePrima stated that the penalties for not participating in the recycling program are not well defined in the Report Summary. Although the plan provides for funds to be set aside for enforcement, there are no details in this regard. Many communities institute very mild enforcement for recycling.

Information - Use of Alternative Fuels for City Vehicles

With the advancement of alternative fuels for vehicles, such as bio-diesel and ethanol, Mr. Carey suggested that staff conduct further research to determine if the City should consider the use of alternative fuels for City vehicles.

Mr. DePrima advised members that under State contract, flexible fuel vehicles can be purchased that provide for the use of an alternative fuel at no additional cost. He felt that the City could take advantage of this opportunity and, should the fuel become available, the City would have that option if flexible fuel vehicles were acquired.

Mr. Carey moved to recommend authorizing staff to research the use of alternative fuels for City vehicles for a report back to the committee within six (6) months of their findings and recommendations. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cregar and unanimously carried.

Mr. Ruane moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Snaman and unanimously carried.

Meeting Adjourned at 6:32 P.M.

                                                                                    Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                    Carleton E. Carey, Sr.

                                                                                    Chairman

CEC/jg

S:ClerksOfficeAgendas&MinutesCommittee-Minutes200412-13-2004-Utility.wpd