New Castle County Residents File Suit To Overturn Rezoning Of Barley Mill Plaza

The “Save Our County” news release on their Delaware Chancery Court - Barley Mill Plaza Lawsuit: We are asking the Court to overturn this rezoning and send it back to Council for an informed debate and vote. This would provide the opportunity for a full and frank discussion of the true traffic impact on our community and whether this proposal would need to be downsized. The timing and scope of needed road improvements, and who pays for these upgrades, would also be identified -- all based on thorough, in depth traffic analysis. Council would then be in a position to make an informed decision as to whether this rezoning should occur at all or on what terms.

~~~~~~~~~
New Castle County Residents File Suit To Overturn Rezoning of Barley Mill Plaza

Wilmington, Delaware-- The civic association “Save Our County” and four individual plaintiffs filed suit in the Delaware Court of Chancery seeking to overturn New Castle County Council’s approval of Commercial Regional rezoning at Barley Mill Plaza. Among other things, the suit contends that the County should not have granted the zoning change from Office Regional requested by the Stoltz real estate organization ("Stoltz") without following the mandate of Delaware law to first consider existing and projected traffic impact.

On October 25, the County Council approved, by a bare 7-6 majority, developer Stoltz’s proposal calling for a more intensive, commercial use at the site it purchased from DuPont in 2007. The Council’s decision capped several years of local and regional opposition to various plans for the site by Stoltz, which represented the owners and wealthy investors in the parcels.

Stoltz proposes to build a large regional mall with high traffic pad sites along Route 141 at the site. The suit alleges that Commercial Regional zoning, the most intensive commercial zoning status available and intended to attract retail activity from throughout the region, was inappropriately granted to a site primarily surrounded by residential and low impact use uses, and where significant traffic congestion and other problems already exist. Plaintiffs claim that state law required Council to consider effects of existing traffic, projected traffic growth in the area, and projected traffic generated by the proposed Barley Mill development as a regional shopping area. Neither the Council nor the County Department of Land Use, which recommended approval of Stolz’s proposal, had done so.

David Culver, general manager of the Land Use Department and who reports directly to County Executive Paul Clark, is also named as a defendant in the case, as well as New Castle County, the Department of Land Use, County Council, and Barley Mill LLC, applicant for the rezoning and property owner of record. The individual plaintiffs of record are local residents whose homes are located at various points near the Barley Mill Plaza site.

Attorney Joseph Kelly, a leading member of “Save Our County,” said, “Residents throughout New Castle County are quite frankly shocked that aproject of this magnitude and precedence was approved without regard to expert traffic data, despite clear state law requirements. The lawsuit seeks simply to ensure that our decision makers follow the law and review all relevant and appropriate data in order to make informed decisions on behalf of county residents. I am convinced that once a full traffic analysis is presented, it will show that this project or any alternative project must be significantly downsized or scrapped altogether.”

Plaintiff Thomas S. Neuberger, an individual plaintiff in this case, stated, “It was irrational and arbitrary to rezone property bigger than 5 football fields, found along two major highways and in our home neighborhoods, without first requiring a completed traffic study, as state law requires. But instead the County narrowly gave in to the big bucks pressure and threats of the Stoltz machine which never saw a quiet residential neighborhood it did not want to destroy. Fortunately, the Delaware courts will not be bullied or outsmarted by Stoltz, as were the politicians. The other plaintiffs and I will never give up and will fight Stoltz to the end on this new battlefield where the law and not politics will decide this David and Goliath battle.

Mail contributions toward this legal action to: Save Our County, PO Box 4164, Wilmington, DE 19807-0164. soc@hushmail.com - The future of our County is in our hands.

And here's more from (News Journal) Adam Taylor today ~ Group files suit seeking to overturn Barley Mill development vote
...County Attorney Gregg Wilson said Tuesday he hadn’t seen the suit, so it was difficult for him to comment in detail. But Wilson said the intersection has been sufficiently studied by DelDOT for years. In addition to the county government, the suit names County Council, the county Land Use Department, Land Use Department General Manager David Culver and Barley Mill LLC, the owner and developer of the site, as defendants. The suit identifies Keith Stoltz of Stoltz Real Estate Partners as member of Barley Mill LLC.

.... The suit also alleges other “procedural irregularities,” such as adding on 10 deed restrictions late in the process that the suit says “turned the tide” of the Oct. 25 council vote. The legal action is also critical of the Land Use Department’s recommendation that council approve the rezoning. The suit claims that the report, and by extension the council’s vote, could have been influenced by the fact that Pam Scott, County Executive Paul Clark’s wife, was Stoltz’s attorney for three years, until March. Scott resigned from the Saul Ewing firm after the county Ethics Commission said either Scott or Clark would have to step down from their positions to prevent a conflict of interest on Clark’s part. Because Scott was Stoltz’s attorney for so long, the suit claims that the “orientation and mindset” of the Land Use Department officials who authored the report was skewed because of Scott’s former role as Stoltz’s attorney. “The departmental review should be conducted and then reported with total impartiality,” the suit says.

Delaware Land Use And The Law - A Never-Ending Saga?

(News Journal - Delaware Voice) Vic Singer writes ~ County violating own law by approving Barley Mills rezoning (with Del Code and County Code section references)

Perhaps FIASCO is too strong a term for the Barley Mill Plaza rezoning. Maybe
not. Judge for yourselves.

New Castle County Council's rezoning of 36.8 acres of the 92.1 acre Barley MillPlaza parcel from Office Regional to Commercial Regional violates portions of the Unified Development Code and State law. Council accepted the Land Use Department's favorable recommendation, not the Planning Board's unfavorable one. All Delaware public officeholders are by oath bound to uphold the law. Therefore they must read and understand it. Ignorance doesn't excuse malfeasance. They needn't be attorneys; the words were given force by lay legislators.

The UDC constrains land use intensifications initiated after its effective date(12/31/1997) according to the capacity of infrastructure already in place,under construction, or under contract for construction. For land uses thatbecame nonconforming when the UDC became law, a "Nonconforming Situations"Article allows lawful continuation of prior lawful uses without full compliance with the UDC's adequate infrastructure provisions. But redevelopment with a use (zoning) change thereafter had to comply fully with the UDC use provisions (ref: Section 40.08.110).

That was in the UDC at its beginning, and hasn't been amended. Years later, however, Council added subsections (Subsections 40.08.130.B.6.a thru h) establishing for "all major redevelopment plans . . and any plan that is also requesting a rezoning" (Section 40.08.130.B.6.d) that "a traffic impact study (TIS) shall only be required if requested by DelDOT" (Section 40.08.130.B.6.e.7). The first section of the "Transportation Impact" Article of the UDC (Division 40.11.000) states: "No major land development or any rezoning shall be permitted if the proposed development exceeds the level of service set forth in this Article unless the traffic mitigation or the waiver provisions of this Article can be satisfied."The Article requires that "the transportation capacity for a proposed development shall be based upon the available capacity as determined by a traffic impact study" (Section 40.11.110).

No redevelopment exemption is among waiver provisions (Section 40.11.121), but staging to coincide with transportation system improvements and developer contributions to improvement costs are addressed. Our nation is ruled by law, starting with the Constitutions of the US and each State. Each State makes rules governing its Counties and Municipalities. New Castle County Council and the
Land Use Department occasionally forget to comply with State law. Delaware State law demands that when a new County Ordinance repeals or amends prior County law, the new Ordinance must set out in full both the prior language and the new language(Ref. 9 Del. C. 1152).

The recently added UDC subsection clearly authorizes redevelopment with a usechange, which had been forbidden earlier. At the very least, the phrase "except as provided elsewhere in this Chapter" should have been - - but wasn't - - added to the UDC's "Nonconforming Situations" and "Transportation Impact" Articles. Violation of this procedural requirement alone is sufficient to void the UDC change enabling a rezoning without a TIS.

A deeper issue also applies. State law designates that among the purposes of the County's zoning regulations is promoting the safety and convenience of the state's inhabitants by limiting congestion in the streets and roads (Ref. 9 Del. C. 2603(a)). It prohibits any zoning change that doesn't follow an agreement between the County and DelDOT ensuring that while the rezoning is being sought, traffic analyses must be performed that "consider the effects of existing traffic, projected traffic growth in areas surrounding a proposed zoning reclassification and the projected traffic generated by the proposed site development for which the zoning reclassification is sought" (ref. 9 Del. C. 2662).

That State law provision requires the County and DelDOT to share responsibility for congestion on the transportation system. HOW to share - - rather than WHETHER to share - - is left to the County andDelDOT to work out. The County cannot discharge its SHARING responsibility by legislating that it won't think about congestion while giving redevelopment rezonings a free pass. Even if the State's procedural requirements for changing the UDC had been followed to the letter, the recently added UDC changes are voided by their substance.

Plus, (News Journal) Harry Themal writes ~ New Castle County residents must scrutinize county's development plans

News Journal once again demonstrated the real and possible friction between state government and the counties.A story detailed how the State Supreme Court is trying to decide whether SussexCounty or the state Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Controlcan fix the width of buffers along the inland waterways ['Zoning' at issue in court hearing].

In an op-ed column, Victor Singer, former chairman of the New Castle County Planning Board, said the county violated its own Unified Development Code in approving the massive rezoning of DuPont's former Barley Mill Plaza -- in part because it did not get a new appraisal from the state on the transportation effect.

Readers of this column might be aware of my strong feelings that Delaware has too many layers of bureaucracy, and that, as small as our state is, we may notneed the three county governments. But I know that nothing will ever change that constitutional order, which makes it even more important that residents of the counties pay close attention to what's happening on that level. Perhaps nothing is more important to our way of life than the provisions of the New Castle County Development Plan.

....If you are an involved New Castle County resident, you will go to a county library to see all the details and accompanying maps or see them by logging on to nccde.org. Then you may want to attend the first public hearing Jan. 3 at 7 p.m. in the county's Gilliam Building, at 77 Reads Way in New Castle Corporate Commons.

With Charlie's comment and letter from Saturday: I usually agree with Harry Themal, but he is a defeatist on the belief a Constitutional change could not occur on land use. Moreover, the Coastal Zone Act did not require a Constitutional change. Correct me if I am wrong. The only impediment to County change is ourselves----resistence to such needed change must be coming from the quarters that have been accepting Federal and State money for local/parochial desires for over a half a Century---with change, the County direct avenue to such funds could then be denied -
Many parties involved in land use battle

In regards to the recent article "Fight for control of land use heads to Supreme Court," the issue before the court is major. Clearly, the state, having earlier delegated such land use control to the individual counties and incorporated jurisdictions, must now reassert its prerogative, whether through judicial mandate or new legislative change. For Sussex County, land owners, including the chicken/dairy/crop farmer, could earlier rule the day, in being a prime economic generator -- whether or no, the seasonal, vacationing resident might bellyache about nearby stench or reported pollution to recreational waters. Meanwhile, those latter visiting dissidents were, in turn, churning up the bay with their "stink pots" and ignored theirsewer overflow during storms. "The overpopulated geese were the problem." Few were thinking of the fishing economy.

Despite earlier court decisions upholding local, political subjective decisions in land use, the Coastal Zone Act has interceded within its boundaries, such law a basis for counterargument. Beyond the immediate issue, what entity pays for this residential growth and the requisite roads, schools, etc.? Not the county government. It is time to stop this land use dalliance and place such direction strongly to a professional, nonpartisan group, one well-grounded in econometrics -- purpose being long-term [planning], the environment and a prerequisite, viable economy. Let's hope DNREC has their facts straight to every detail. We're now beyond just tree-hugging.
Charles M. Weymouth, Wilmington

Regarding DRBC regulations for hydraulic fracturing in the Delaware River Valley

Here's the CLNCC Resolution adopted on Tuesday night:

N.C.C. Civic League Resolution # 11-11-02
Adopted - November 15, 2011
Regarding the proposed Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) regulations for hydraulic fracturing in the Delaware River Valley

WHEREAS, the Delaware River Basin Commission's proposed fracking regulations utilized by oil and gas industries are unacceptable because of the absence of sufficient controls over the chemistry of liquid and gaseous injectants and because of the absence of appropriate controls to prevent the escape of natural gas into the water table

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CIVIC LEAGUE FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY stands in opposition to the proposed Delaware River Basin Commission's authorization of hydraulic fracturing in the Delaware River Valley until appropriate regulations and oversight are required and guarantees are established to protect the water quality of the basin from unforeseen contamination by the industry.

Chuck Mulholland, President
Civic League for New Castle County

NCC Homeowner Association Help Line And Web Site Launched!

Newark Post reports -

New Castle County launches call center, website for homeowner associations
http://www.newarkpostonline.com/articles/2011/11/09/news/doc4ebab56b60d19773621101.txtNew Castle County Executive Paul Clark announced the launch of a new centralized communications resource for the more than 800 maintenance corporations and civic associations in the county.
The county’s Homeowner Association Help Line – 395-5601 – will give directors of these homeowner groups easy access to answers on everything from storm water management to annual dues to grass-cutting schedules for parks. The goal, Clark said, is to help homeowner associations address questions and concerns quickly and efficiently.

“My experience working with maintenance associations and civic groups has made it clear that they need a way to get easily accessible information,” Clark said. “We want to help people navigate through the system and get them answers as quickly as we can. It’s all about providing exemplary customer service and helping to build community.”

The county has set up a Homeowner Association Help Line website, www.nccde.org/hahl, as an additional resource for those with questions about homeowner associations. And starting in January the county will hold quarterly information sessions on topics important to homeowner associations. The first session will introduce the initiative and will include representatives from all county departments. “These countywide community outreach meetings will be valuable forums for questions and answers related to homeowner associations,” Clark said. “It’s important for residents to have this kind of direct contact with their county government.” The call center is designated to serve the needs of homeowner associations directors; the county’s general customer-service line – 395-5555 – remains the number residents should call with questions or concerns about code violations or general county government services. The call center will be staffed from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday. Since the center will use existing county staff, startup costs will be minimal and will come from the existing budget. All calls to the 395-5601 help line will be entered into a database to provide information for county administrators and County Council on the types of calls received, where they came from and how and when they were resolved. The help line’s staff will use the call logs to develop a list of common questions and answers.

“We presented this program to County Council this week and look forward to collaborating with council members to enhance service to the homeowner associations in their districts,” Clark said. Maintenance corporations are legal bodies mandated in some communities to govern issues such as maintaining open space, managing storm water and removing snow. Membership in a maintenance corporation is made part of the deed when a house is purchased, and residents are billed a mandatory annual assessment. Civic associations are voluntary groups of dues-paying residents who sponsor community events and advocate on issues that affect their communities. Some communities are represented by both maintenance corporations and civic associations.

Public Workshop On Traffic Impact Studies And Traffic Operational Analyses Set For 6PM Wednesday In Wilmington

Public Workshop on Traffic Impact Studies and Traffic Operational Analyses

For your information: DelDOT to Hold Public Workshop on Traffic Impact Study Regulations - Public Input Sought on Proposed Regulations
Dover - The Delaware Department of Transportation will be holding a public workshop, facilitated by the University of Delaware’s Institute for Public Administration (IPA), to solicit community input on changes to its regulations regarding Traffic Impact Studies and Traffic Operational Analyses.
The workshop will be held on Wednesday, September 14, 2011 from 6-8 p.m. in the Carvel State Office Building Auditorium (Mezzanine Level) in Wilmington, Delaware. A previous workshop was held on August 1, 2011 at the DelDOT Administration Building in Dover, Delaware.

DelDOT has proposed revision to standards and regulations regarding requirements for the conduct of Traffic Operational Analysis and Traffic Impact Studies prior to agency decisions on proposed land use questions. These proposed changes to the regulations revise and update the Standards and Regulations for Subdivision Streets and State Highway Access, enacted in March 2008 and revised in February 2010.
These regulations define the requirements which apply to:
· New subdivisions and land development
· Rezoning· Changed or expanded subdivisions and land development
· Any new access on to a State-maintained road
· Modifications to an existing access· Assessment of the impacts of traffic
· Off-site improvements
The intent of the workshop is to inform the public about the changes and to solicit input prior to finalizing the regulations. The workshop will consist of a presentation on the regulatory changes and a question and answer session with a panel of DelDOT staff. Interested citizens are encouraged to contribute written questions in advance of the meeting by sending them via email to Brett Taylor at Dotpr@state.de.us Audience members may provide written questions at the time of the meeting to be asked during the panel discussion. The number of questions addressed will be subject to the time available at the meeting.
Copies of the proposed Regulations are available at http://regulations.delaware.gov/register/june2011/proposed/14%20DE%20Reg%201323%2006-01-11.htm#P8_224. You may also review the Regulations on www.deldot.gov <http://www.deldot.gov/>. The Department will take comments on the Regulations through September 30, 2011. The public may submit their comments to Ted Bishop, Assistant Director of Planning, via email (Theodore.bishop@state.de.us) or in writing at Division of Planning, DelDOT, P.O. Box 778, Dover, DE 19903.

Read Bob Weiner's Questions for DelDOT HERE: New Castle County Councilman Bob Weiner's Questions For The DelDOT Panel On Wednesday Night
and the 2010 letter from members of the Delaware Bar to Jack Markell HERE: DelDOT's Rights, Powers And Responsibilities Are Not Limited By NCC's Redevelopment Ordinance

Also Read Middletown Corridor Coalition - No One Can Justify The Costs of Bonds For The Construction Of US 301

Click onto the link:
Middletown Corridor Coalition Chair, Andye Daley, Writes: US 301 And DelDOT's FUNNY MONEY - From the inbox ~ No One Can Justify The Costs of Bonds For The Construction Of US 301

The US 301 Public Workshop Set For 3PM - Stoltz At Planning Board At 7PM - All On Sept. 6th!

Upcoming Project Workshop Rt 301 Workshop The US 301 Public Workshop has been rescheduled for Tuesday, September 6 between 3:00pm and 8:00pm. The location remains the Middletown Fire Hall at 27 W. Green Street. There will be a PowerPoint presentation at 3:15, to be repeated at 4:15, 5:15, 6:15 and 7:15pm. Please let your friends, neighbors and anyone else who may have an interest in the US 301 project know of this rescheduled date.

This a a project that the Civic League has opposed due to the misguided alignment that appears to be designed to promote sprawling new development, such as the Bayberry North and South Developments, rather than interstate transportation.

Of even more critical concern is the highly questionable need and deeply concerning debt financing for this road. The project does not appear to have any potential to be self sustaining due to inadequate traffic volumes and limited toll revenues.

Anyone in NCC should be concerned with this project and its questionable funding scheme. The initial phase was funded with GARVEE Bonds, which are a sort of a federally authorized Ponzi scheme where States borrow large sums of money, but must repay it using federal funds "expected "to be received in the future. There is no guarantee that the federal funds will be available. (But perhaps congress may consider cuts to things like social security, medicare, or education to fund GARVEE debts!!!). At present, the risk to Delaware tax payers of having to pay these debts is pretty high due to the imminent risks of federal budget cuts, an expected delay in extending the gasoline tax, and a likely stalemate over a new transportation bill in the U.S. Congress.

If federal funds are not sufficient, the State taxpayers will have to pay the bill directly. Even if federal funds are available, the GARVEE commitment will severely limit options for future road projects that may actually be much higher priorities throughout NCC than the Proposed Rt. 301.

Thursday, we learned that the US 301 project did not get the targeted federal aide. Someone at the federal level appears to have done their homework and concluded that this project is not sustainable due to low traffic demand. They realize that the traffic volume will not produce enough toll revenue to pay the debt service in the bonds proposed for financing its construction. It is unsustainable unless the Delaware tax payers decide to heavily subsidize this sprawl promoting effort. There is a pretty good overview of the problem by Jeff Montgomery of the News Journal in today's paper. You can read it at: http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20110903/NEWS02/109030324/US-301-project-loses-out-aid?odyssey=tabtopnewstextHome
Please come out to ask questions, learn what is happening, and let your views be known on this massive project. After all, no matter what, you will be paying for it.

A few potential questions to consider:

• If we must subsidize this small area with hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue, should we be building this highway, or considering other alternatives such as improved bus service or train service to get local traffic off 301?


• Do you have other pressing transportation issues that should be made a higher priority in NCC?


• Do we want to continue to claim we support Smart Growth in the New Castle County Development Plan, and then build sprawling communities dependent on interstate highways in areas with no employment base such as SNCC?


• Is this project really needed, or just a misguided effort by self serving politicians to try to create some unsustainable jobs in the short term that will make employment conditions even worse in the future due to the long term debt incurred with no clear revenue stream to pay it back?


• Do you think it is fine to subsidize this road, and want to support it?

Please come out to ask questions, learn what is happening, and let your views be known on this massive project. After all, no matter what, you will be paying for it.

I recognize that this meeting conflicts with another critical project meeting with serious transportation implications when NCC Planning Board will review the Stoltz plan (at 7PM in New Castle at 77 Reads Way). http://www2.nccde.org/landuse/PlanningBoard/PublicHearingAgenda/Default.aspx?MeetingDate=2011-09-06T04:00:00Z

For those that can make it down to Middletown, you may be able to attend early and then still get up for the 7 PM Stoltz meeting. If not, you can at least comment on the DelDOT webpage. Thank you for your consideration of this critical public issue and hope you will let Del DOT know your thoughts and views on this project.

Dave Carter

Dear Paul Clark: Give Developers A Pass On Paying Fair Share Of Road Improvements ONLY When They Are Not Needed

Bob Weiner's letter to the editor on how he and Paul Clark differ on Redevelopment.

Changes To The NCC Redevelopment Ordinance And Acierno's Rezoning For Box Stores Near Newark Are Up For Discussion At 7PM In New Castle

Been so much happening and no time to post lately!! A lot has happened for the better for New Castle County residents as a result of actions taken in Dover at the State level this year - more on that another day. As for today - don't miss the Planning Board hearing tonight at 7PM at the Gilliam Building in New Castle.

See for details:

Changes To The NCC Redevelopment Ordinance And Acierno's Rezoning For Box Stores Near Newark Are Up For Discussion At 7PM In New Castle

Stoltz Rezoning Is On The Agenda - Come Out For Tuesday Night's Planning Board Meeting - Set For 7PM IN New Castle

This is an important meeting for all of NCC as to whether the traffic on our roads and bridges will be unbearably clogged or will the redevelopment planned around Greenville be offset by traffic mitigation paid for by state tax payers?

Or will the public demand that developer Keith Stoltz must pay for the improvements if he wants his properties rezoned and redeveloped.

Click here for my post on the Barley Mill project and the News Journal's story
http://delawareway.blogspot.com/2011/06/barley-mill-project-doesnt-depict-class.html

Please Make Some Calls To The Transportation/Land Use and Infrastructure Committee In Support Of The 'Traffic" Bill That DelDOT Wants To Kill!

PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD about the AGENDA for this Delaware State House committee hearing tomorrow and get people to make calls today - tonight, if possible, and attend the meeting on Wednesday. Call the committee members and Speaker Gilligan! The word is out that DelDOT doean't like this bill and that Deputy Attorney General Fritz Schrank-their lawyer, will be there to discount this bill.
WHAT: House Committee: Transportation/Land Use and Infrastructure WHO: Dems - William Carson, Jr. Chair Gerald Brady Vice Chair Edward S. Osienski Earl Jaques, Jr.; GOP - Gregory Lavelle Ruth Briggs King
WHERE: House Majority Hearing Room at 1PM
AGENDA
House Bill # 102
Primary Sponsor: Hudson Additional Sponsor(s): Sen. Blevins - CoSponsors: Reps. Outten, Ramone, Brady, Carson, Keeley, Mitchell
AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 17 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO REGULATION OF TRAFFIC.
SYNOPSIS This bill requires the Department of Transportation to require certain studies, nalyses, and publications for certain development or redevelopment.

HS 1 for HB 101
Sponsor: Hudson Additional Sponsor(s): Sens. Blevins - CoSponsors: Reps. Ramone, Brady, Carson, Keeley, Mitchell; Sen. Ennis
AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 17 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO AGREEMENTS THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MAKES WITH LOCAL JURISDICTIONS FOR TRAFFIC STUDIES RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT.
Synopsis: Memorandums of Understanding (MOAs) exist between the Department of Transportation and local governments to guide their interaction on land use development.This bill requires the Department of Transportation and local jurisdictions to rework their MOUs which may be in conflict with the authority of the Department of Transportation as set forth in this Bill. It requires the Department to put a greater emphasis on safety factors. It allows the Department to use its discretion to broaden, if necessary, any traffic study that will be required in conjunction with an application. This should help diminish future road congestion throughout the State. The bill also requires the Department to analyze the future costs to the State of construction and maintenance in conjunction with the project for which the application is submitted. It provides additional specific data that the local jurisdiction should consider in making its decision. Subsection (c) also mandatesthat traffic studies will not be based on traffic counts obtained on days or in periods when schools are not in session except on roads that haveincreased traffic due to weekend and vacation trips. Subsection (b) requires a TIS for all new development and redevelopment that will increase the traffic load. If the Department believes a full TOA is needed, it shall be treated with the same effect as the TIS. Subsection (d) requires a study of a signalized intersection in each direction from a proposed project for which the traffic needs to be studied. Subsection (e) mandates a TOA for project that will mean 50,000 square feet of additional gross floor area, or a 10% increase in traffic at the nearest large intersection not at the project entrance. Subsection (f) requires a report on bridges that may be impacted by a site development or rezoning. Subsection (g) requires DelDOT to coordinate with local jurisdictions to insure the developer meets its agreedto terms recorded on the Record Plan. Subsection (h) makes clear that the Department of Transportation has the final authority over the roads and highways of this State. The public safety must be paramount, and federal law must be considered in the air quality standards that can cut off federal funds if exceeded. Backed up traffic is the single greatest contributor to bad air quality.

New Castle County Council Begins Redistricing

Delaforum: NCC Council Redistricting Maps Due By July 26th
[Click above for graph and Jim Park's story]

"The two largest County Council districts stand to lose fairly large chunks of turf when the 13-member legislative body is reapportioned this summer. They will be divided among the other 10 districts. The Council president is chosen at-large."

Dist. - Council member - Commission member
At Large: Thomas Kovach - David Tise
1. Joseph Reda - Kenneth Woods
2. Robert Weiner - Thomas Schrandt
3. Janet Kilpatrick - Joseph Amon
4. Penrose Hollins - Theodore Blunt
5. Lisa Diller - Michael Gritz
6. William Powers - Robert Workman
7. George Smiley - James Holladay
8. John Cartier - Terrance Wright
9. Timothy Sheldon - Stuart Swinger
10. Jea Street - Cynthia Turner
11. David Tackett - Jennifer Thompson
12. Bill Bell - Mark North

More from the article:
Southernmost districts, which together cover all the area south of U.S. Route 40, added a total of 13,718 residents since Council was expanded from seven to 13 members and the former Council districts were cut in half in 2003.

As a result, the sixth district deviates by +50.5% from the average population and the 12th district by +24.6%. State law permits up to a 15% deviation, plus or minus, but the state General Assembly is limiting itself to a 5% variance and it's believed county government is inclined to follow suit. If so, Council members would each represent between 42,630 and 47,116 residents

....At its first meeting, on May 16, the commission elected Ted Blunt, former president of Wilmington City Council, to be its chairman. He is the only commissioner with prior experience at redistricting.

Brookland Terrace Civic Club Park CleanUp & Egg Hunt Tomorrow

ParkCleanUp & Egg Hunt Tomorrow

B.T.C.C. Annual Park CleanUp
April 30th 9AM

Trash Bags & some pick up sticks will be provided.

Bring GlovesWe will gather 9 AM at the baseball field.

For more info contact Dave 633-0828 orChuck 999-7733

brooklandterrace@gmail.com
------------
Easter Egg Hunt
April 30th 1:30 PM Woodland Run Park

BTCC ParkCleanUp - 9AM April 30th
B.T.C.C. 2011 Dates Meetings are 7PM Marbrook Elementary School
2101 Centerville Road
Easter Egg Hunt 1:30PM April 30th
ParkCleanUp - 9AM April 30th

Meeting - Monday May 2nd 2011 -Incorporation Day Event July 30th

Meeting - Monday September 12th 2011

Meeting - Monday November 7th 2011

Brookland Terrace Civic Club

Incorporated 1940
405 Hillside Ave
Wilmington Delaware 19805
United States of America
brooklandterrace@gmail.com
http://brooklandterracecivicclub.blogspot.com
http://deantigraffitibrigades.blogspot.com

President - Charles C. Stirk Jr - 302.463.2239 ccstirkjr@gmail.com

Vice President - Phil Weir - 302.357.6802 philweirjr@gmail.com

Secretary - btccsecretary@gmail.com - Treasurer Joyce Grymes

Urgent - Save Our County - Stoltz Proposal Meeting At 6:30PM April 13th At The Tatnall School

SAVE OUR COUNTY COMMUNITY MEETING ON TRAFFIC ISSUES WITH BARLEY MILL PLAZA PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT APRIL 13, 2011 - 6:30 PM TATNALL SCHOOL – Lower School (Located in the original house at the West entrance to the school) Come hear the issues we all face with the CRG/STOLTZ compromise plan for Barley Mill Plaza. "Stoltz's proposal--which links four developments in a single package that requests an approval 'of the whole' -- is an unacceptable tactic. Each of the four development proposals--Greenville Center, 3704 Kennett Pike, Montchanin Corporate Center, and Barley Mill Plaza--should, and will be, treated as separate applications. There will also be presentations from representatives of WILMAPCO, and Civic organizations (GHADA & Civic League). DelDot and NC County Land Use have also been invited. Please distribute this notice to your neighbors and all of your friends in New Castle County. This will impact the county with traffic congestion spreading throughout the entire region.

Ask Your Senate And House Members To Resolve To Mandate An Open, Public Redistricting Process To Shape Senate And House Districts

If you read Chad Livengood's article this morning [Redistricting to shift political power ] and thought that the redrawing of legislative districts should be a process open to public view, you weren't alone. Be an empowered citizen and ask your state officials to take the lead on an open and transparent redistricting!

Mandate An Open, Public Redistricting Process To Shape Senate And House Districts - As noted in a January DelCOG-CLNCC press release:
Equal population is required in legislative districts by the U.S. Constitution. Equal elections are also required by the Delaware Constitution. "When such fundamental fairness is the goal of a legislative act, it is important that the citizens feel included." said Frank Sims of the Civic League. "This promotes greater participation in democracy and less alienation in society in general".

[A]s population centers have shifted to the South, many northern voters will be really distressed if they find two members who are very popular winding up in the same district. Being able to participate in the process will give them confidence that it was done fairly.....Districts have to be balanced also by race, political party and ethnicity as much as possible.

This presents a real challenge for the Democratic Party the first time they have controlled the entire process to do it openly.....but it will benefit them to show the public they are committed to good government. Fortunately, the New Castle County Council tried it last time and found no problems in doing so.

Tell your representation that you want to be included. Ask if they will resolve to support an open, public redistricting process!

Click here to find your Legislator (must be registered to vote)

COMPLETE LISTING OF DELAWARE ELECTED OFFICIALS.

The Redistricting Working Group of The Civic League for New Castle County and DelCOG Draft Resolutions for the House and for the Senate:
A RESOLUTION TO MANDATE AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT REDISTRICTING PROCESS WITH PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.

WHEREAS, the citizens of Delaware are entitled to comment on the redrawing of Legislative district lines as the process unfolds; and

WHEREAS, the migration of more people to the south compared to older residential patterns in this State will require the shifting of more than a few Census Tracts from within their current Representative and Senatorial districts lines to others; and

WHEREAS, not only Legislators, but their constituents, also have strong feelings about the geographic cohesiveness and the partisan balance of districts; and

WHEREAS, citizens should be able to recommend Redistricting Plans for the House and Senate they feel will represent the public interest;

NOW, THEREFORE: BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE/HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THAT the 2010 Redistricting process for the Delaware SENATE/House of Representatives shall be open and transparent;

THAT all drawing of lines or grouping of Census Tracts to produce new Representative Districts shall take place in a public forum with the public being notified no less than 8 days in advance;

THAT Census data for Delaware and the computer program used by the General Assembly shall be available for a reasonable fee to any member of the public who wishes to purchase a copy from the Legislative Council;

THAT opportunities shall be provided for proponents of plans to present them in public to the House and/or the committees or persons charged with the task of Redistricting the House; and

THAT the final plan or plans to be voted on by the House shall be a product of this public process.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Legislators believe the public can fairly weigh all information that should go into considering how Census Tracts should be grouped and while they may be likely to favor people from their area, they will also be motivated to preserve fundamental fairness for all future candidates.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the objective of redistricting, as established by the United States and Delaware Constitutions, is to make elections equal, and this shall be the goal that drives the process--numerical equality in persons represented per district, along with equality of opportunity for anyone to be elected in districts balanced by party, race and ethnicity.

NEW CASTLE COUNTY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MEETING

  The New Castle County Council Executive Committee meeting scheduled for this Tuesday, February 22, 2011 has several several critical issues on it that impact all county residents.   These issue address the underhanded action by Council to sneak the controversial removal of the dead restrictions for the Governor's Square project without public discussion or input, an effort to improve transparency by web streaming of public meetings, and a resolution urging council to follow the spirit of their own rules.  

 

     The specific agenda items include: 

    Agenda Item 4.  The deed restriction was underhandedly removed as part of the consent calendar without even naming the project.    If you are not familiar with this issue, please check the News Journal Article Links at:

Only the Public was hurt by Councils Hidden Vote (Click Here)

Councilman Smiley Deceived his Colleagues and Constituents (Click Here)

     Agenda Item 5.  There is an effort to start exploration of Internet streaming of council meeting, providing access to the public to keep track of what they are doing.  This would help us ensure accountability, which is currently lacking.

     Agenda Item 6.  There is an resolution urging council to follow the rules and not sneak things through with listing the name such as was done for Governors Square.

      All three of these items are good government actions, but they will likely be opposed by many on council. 

      If we want to help urge and ethical, honest, and accountable County Government, we need to show support to  those council members courageous enough to push for these improvements.

      IF AT ALL POSSIBLE, PLEASE ATTEND THIS MEETING, SPEAK OUT IN SUPPORT OF THIS ACTIONS, AND SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR ETHICAL BEHAVIOR AND GOOD GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES BY NEW CASTLE COUNTY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

      A detailed agenda can be found at the link below: 
   

NEW CASTLE COUNTY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MEETING

Councilman Smiley deceived his colleagues, constituents

The editorial below appeared in the News Journal on February 16,2011.   Great read and a call to action for all civic minded people in New Castle County, Delaware.


 _______________________________________________________________________________________

A consent calendar means an agreement exists among the members that no one will put anything on it that needs debate. The purpose of it is to relieve a busy council from the necessity of reading everything.

Our council serves part time. By putting a resolution on it that did need debate, Councilman George Smiley deceived his colleagues and hundreds of his constituents for the benefit of a developer.

If Smiley was acting in his role as a committee chairman, he was ethically obligated to see that legislation assigned to his committee was handled properly. He has been dishonorable and he should be censured for his conduct.
But the council does not have to live with this mistake. Unlawfully enacted legislation does not become law.
The vote on lifting a deed restriction is a discretionary vote; therefore, it must be preceded by a fact-finding hearing. First error.

The citizens are entitled to testify regarding the lifting of a deed restriction to which they are essentially a party. It was a violation of their due process rights not to allow that, hence the resolution is unconstitutional. Second error.

Resolutions govern only the internal matters of a legislative body. State law specifically requires that anything done by County Council that has the force and effect of law must be done by ordinance. Third error.

Enough of the council did not cast a knowing vote – instead one based on fraud – therefore the vote was not legitimate. Fourth error.

The resolution is void ab initio. The council president can declare it that and require the sponsor to have it redrafted as an ordinance and reintroduced.

This is a test. Do we have a government of laws or not?

Christine Whitehead, Mill Creek

New Castle County Government FOIA And Ethics Are Topics For Tomorrow's DECOG Meeting In Wilmington

Delaware Coalition for Open Government (DelCOG)Board of Directors meeting
February 14, 2011 - 12:00 p.m.Woodlawn Library, Wilmington
Agenda
12:00 - 12:05 I. Welcome - John Flaherty
12:05 - 12:10 2) Approval of Meeting Minutes of December 6, 2010
12:10 - 12:15 3) Treasurer’s Report - Bill Pearson
12:15 - 12:20 4) By-Law Review and Disposition of Absent Board members
12:20 - 12:45 5) New Delaware state web site highlights social media - Bill Pearson
12: 45 - 12:50 6) New Castle County FOIA Issues - Coralie Pryde
12:50 - 12:55 7) New Castle County Ethics Issues - Chris Whitehead
12:55 - 1:00 8) Open Court Testimony - Bonnie Corwin
1:00 - 1:05 9) Highmark/Blue Cross Blue Shield proposed affiliation
1:05 - 1:10 10) Public testimony

Plus, Vic Singer is on the agenda for the NCC Council's Land Use Committee meeting on Tuesday at 3PM to discuss FOIA as well. This meeting is on the 8th floor conference room in the City/County Building at 800 French Street in Wilmington.

Comp Plan Update Tonight And A Message From Vic Singer: "Planning board stands by oversight power"

(cross posted at DE Way - New Castle County In The News)
There's a Comp Plan Update meeting tonight at 6:30 at the Gilliam Building in the New Castle complex. The general public might take an interest. Paul Clark thinks that those who show up to meetings don't represent the public. I know that civic leaders, conservation and environmental leaders are participating in these planning activities along with the usual suspects (found on Clark's infamous memo [Paul Clark is dumb, not unethical?] with the Saul Ewing confidentiality tag). Meanwhile, those of us attending the process are still waiting for access to a report on the current Comprehensive Plan (2007).
(WNJ Delaware Voice) Vic Singer, president of the New Castle County Planning Commission writes ~ Planning board stands by oversight power
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UNEXPURGATED TEXT OF OP ED ESSAY:
State and County law give the New Castle County Planning Board a large role in New Castle County's 2012 Comprehensive Plan Update (CPU) now ongoing. As PB Chairman, I must assure intense examination of facts and laws relevant to this and other assigned responsibilities, to prevent arbitrary or capricious decisions. At our 12/21 Meeting, I requested a summary of the Land Use Department (LUD) staff views on which features of the 2007 CPU need fixing, and which are fine as is.

The County's request for proposals (RFP) for Professional Planning Services for the 2012 CPU announces that "The County is currently in the process of reviewing and planning for the 2012 update. The review of accomplishments of the goals set forth in the 2007 update and an evaluation of recent economic trends are being analyzed." Further, the RFP defines as the first deliverable Consultant work product, an "Analysis of Current plan and data" due 9/1/2010 after two months of work. I requested a copy of that also.

We didn't get the LUD's staff work product, clearly public property. Nor did we get the Consultant's work product, which according to the RFP needn't be disclosed until the end of the consulting contract. Nor were we advised how to find them. Instead, the LUD General Manager (GM) said that nothing is in writing. Reacting, I called a 1/4/2010 Special Meeting (following our Public Hearing) where the LUD GM stonewalled again. Since the State's Quality of Life Act of 1988 requires an ANNUAL report presenting "an assessment and evaluation of the success or failure of the comprehensive plan or element or portion thereof," I demanded copies of the most recent version.

Incidentally, the Quality of Life Act defines "Local Planning Agency" as "the agency designated to prepare the comprehensive plan required by this subchapter," and requires County Council to "designate and by ordinance establish a 'local planning agency.' " Further, it assigns to the local planning agency "the GENERAL responsibility for the conduct of the comprehensive planning program." County Council's response: direction in the UDC requiring the Planning Board "to prepare or cause to be prepared the Comprehensive Development Plan, or any element or portion thereof" and requiring the LUD to "assist the Planning Board in its current and long range comprehensive planning responsibilities."

Instead of releasing documents that are public property, the LUD argued with the incidental issue. It interpreted other parts of State law as contradictions and thus invalidations of Council's authority to designate the local planning agency, and declared that "The contract was secured by the Department on behalf of the Department and is solely responsible for overseeing the contract and its provisions."

Clearly, the LUD GM regards the LUD as the "Local Planning Agency" for the CPU, and the Planning Board's role as subordinate. It's a nice theory but it's not what was given the force of law by the General Assembly and County Council. Contradictions among the relevant provisions of Delaware law can be found when they are isolated rather than considered cumulatively. The Delaware Supreme Court addressed precisely that issue in a 1984 case, declaring that:

"The golden rule of statutory interpretation . . . is that unreasonableness of the result
produced by one among alternative possible interpretations of a statute is reason for
rejecting that interpretation in favor of another which produces a reasonable result."

Cumulatively, the relevant provisions clearly express the General Assembly's intent for the bulk of the work of preparing and updating the Comprehensive Plan to be performed by the Land Use Department and for a separate entity to have GENERAL oversight responsibility. That shows insight into human nature. Working on complicated matters, we're often so close to the trees that we don't see the forest. The General Assembly sought to avoid that by assigning oversight responsibility to folks far away enough to see forest and trees together.

In summary, the LUD GM is concealing public information not exempted from public disclosure by Delaware's Freedom of Information Act. Concealing it from the public prompts suspicions of undetectable schemes too nefarious for sniff testing. The LUD GM is under notice that the in-house review must be exposed. Yet he stonewalls. A formal FOIA demand is now timely.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TEXT OF BOTH Feb 2, 2011 FOIA REQUESTS:
FIRST FOIA REQUEST: By this Information Request, I ask for an opportunity during usual business hours to examine in the Land Use Department facilities the following documents:
<> The review and evaluation described in the two sentences in the indented quotation below,which appear in two places: !) The General Information section in the 4/13/2010 solicitation for proposals for "PROFESSIONAL PLANNING SERVICES BID #10PP-012"; and 2):NC County's contract with JMT, the CPU Consultant engaged pursuant to BID #10PP-012, in the first two sentences of Section I.A.1.of Exhibit "A" therein.

"The County is currently in the process of reviewing and planning for the
2012 update. The review of accomplishments of the goals set forth in the
2007 update and an evaluation of recent economic trends are being analyzed."

<> The ANNUAL REPORT for the years 2008, 2009, and 2010 required by 9 Del. C 2658(c) and (d) of the Quality of Life Act of 1988 to be submitted to the Governor's Advisory Council on Planning Coordination, which "shall present an assessment and evaluation of the success or failure of the comprehensive plan or element or portion thereof . . .".

SECOND INFORMATION REQUEST:
By this Information Request, I ask for an opportunity during usual business hours to examine in the Land Use Department facilities the CPU Consultant's response to the DELIVERABLES SECTION of the 4/13/2010 solicitation for proposals for "PROFESSIONAL PLANNING SERVICES BID #10PP-012" which cites as the first "deliverable" the Consultant's "ANALYSIS OF CURRENT PLAN AND DATA" covering the period between 7/1/2010 and 9/1/2010.
That response is further described in the resulting contract, with Johnston, Mirmiran & Thompson, JMT, dated 6/30/2010, wherein Section 1 binds JMT to perform all services necessary and appropriate to complete the tasks defined and set out in JMT's 6/17/2010 proposal responding to the #10PP-012 solicitation and incorporates the proposal into the contract as Exhibit A. Within Exhibit A, Section I.A.1 repeats the following two key "Project Background" sentences from the County's solicitation, therein termed "Background," with an added third sentence, the underlined portion of which describes what I seek to examine:
"The County is currently in the process of reviewing and planning for the 2012 update. The review of accomplishments of the goals set forth in the 2007 update and an evaluation of recent economic trends are being analyzed. JMT's Comprehensive Plan Team will conduct a review of the current plan, analyze data, conduct public workshops and other means to actively engage input on (sic) from the community on various elements of the Plan, assist in drafting Plan goals, and objectives and draft the 2012 Plan. . ."
At this point, the requests are from me as an individual rather than me as Planning Board Chairman, for several obvious reasons.

Reminder: 2012 Comprehensive Plan Update Meeting Tonight In New Castle

Read more about the saga of the missing 2007 Comp Plan report:
NCC Comp Plan: A Blueprint For Legislation Relating To Zoning, Community Design And Redevelopment

John Flaherty Sends Along Good News From The State House - Unanimous Passage Of The FOIA Bill!

BENNETT FOIA BILL UNANIMOUSLY PASSES HOUSE
HB 5 sets deadline for governments to respond to requests
DOVER – Legislation setting a deadline for government entities and other public bodies to respond to a Freedom of Information request unanimously passed the House Tuesday.
Under House Bill 5, sponsored by Rep. E. Bradford “Brad” Bennett, any FOIA request for a public record must be granted within 15 business days from the receipt of the request. However, the public entity can extend that deadline if the request is for “voluminous records, requires legal advice” or if the record is in storage. In those situations, the agency or entity must inform the person making the request within 15 business days of the need for additional time.
Currently, state law does not include any time limit for public bodies to respond to or fulfill FOIA requests.
“A request can sit for months without a response,” said Rep. Bennett, D-Dover South. “Public information should be readily accessible to any citizen, and any person who makes a FOIA request for public records deserves a prompt response. This bill further improves the FOIA legislation passed last session. It makes us a more transparent and open state. By adding these provisions, we will go from being one of the least transparent states to one of the more transparent.”
HB 5 is similar to legislation that passed the House last session, with a couple small changes. Rep. Bennett said he extended the deadline – it was 10 business days in the previous measure – after hearing some concerns raised last session.

Milltown-Limestone Civic Alliance And Civic League For NCC Both Meet This Week

The MLCA monthly meeting is THIS Thursday, January 20th at the Mill Creek Fire Hall, starting at 7pm. Civic Leaders in organizations between Wilmington and Newark are always welcome.
MLCA TOPICS include:
- Council President Election (Tom Kovach will be invited)
- Missing annual land use comprehensive plan reports (Ref: State Law 9 Del. C. 2658(c) and (d)
‏- Proposed changes to Redevelopment Ordinance
- Update on Development projects at Limestone/Milltown Rds, Little Falls Village and Barley Mill Plaza
- Rejection of proposed change to Little Falls entrance by DelDOT
- No update on DNREC HSCA Plan for Little Falls area development
- Newark Area Hospice's changes to their Development Plan
- DelDOT stance on road improvements regarding Greenville Overlook I (original Hercules effort)
- Feedback from this month’s Civic League for New Castle County (CLNCC) on Jan 18th. Read the Newsletter at http://www.civicleagueforncc.org/.

You are also encouraged to attend monthly meetings of the Civic League for New Castle County Next Meeting: January 18th at 7 PM, Delaware State Police Troop 2 Building, 100 La Grange Ave, Newark, DE.
Agenda: Legislative Proposals.
Get info and directions at http://www.civicleagueforncc.org/

Bill Franey, President, Milltown-Limestone Civic Alliance (MLCA)

Planning Ahead For NCC Comprehensive Plan Update Meeting # 1 - Land Use

[Cross-posted - Is NCC Going Into 2012 Planning Without Any Discussion Of Whether, Or How Successfully, The Goals And Objectives Of The 2007 Planning Update Were Met? ]

Jan. 26th 2011 (6:30PM at 77 Reads Way) - NCC Comprehensive Plan Update Meeting ~ Public Meeting #1 Land Use Agenda pdf

1). Welcome / Introductions
2). Overview of the Comprehensive Planning process: Register Email/Twitter and Process Flow Diagram
3). Update on accomplishments from 2007 Comprehensive Plan (the following list of 2007 accomplishments was taken from the Kick-Off Meeting Summary pdf ~)

• Accessory Dwelling Unit code amendment.
• Drafting of the Water Management Code.
• Implementation of the two-step development process.
• Cooperating with DelDOT - prioritizing of transportation projects.
• Affordable Housing code amendment.
• Improved Village/Hamlet provisions.
• Updates to the Building and Property Maintenance Codes.
• SNCC Master Plan process, ongoing.
• MOU for preservation of Red Clay Scenic Byway.

4). Discussion on Land Use: This meeting: Where we've been and where we are. Jan 26 2011 Vision for the future: Review and Refinement of Vision Statement, Goals and Objectives and Vision Mapping activity

5). Facilitated Activities /Public Participation Round 1
- Mapping Activity: Community Assets
- Mapping Activity: Issues and Concerns
6). Facilitated Activities /Public Participation Round 2
- Mapping Activity: Issues and Concerns
- Mapping Activity: Community Assets
7). Visual Preference Survey
8). Closing / Next Step
9). Reminder: Comment Cards and Email Registration

Plus the Summary Kick-Off Meeting pdf - activity outcomes

A. Identification of Community Issues and Concerns:

Population Density
Unincorporated land
Space for new high-paying jobs
Parks near future development areas
Development/Redevelopment regulations
Transportation standards
Attract young people/recent graduates
Preserve agriculture and open space
Mixed use walkable communities
New housing only where infrastructure exists
Avoid "fad" planning
Community interconnectivity
Community character
Promote redevelopment

B. Assess/Prioritize Delaware Community Design Core Values:

1). Land features before land design
2). Land design before yield
3). Cluster before sprawl
4). Scale before statement
5). Pedestrian before vehicle
6). Context before application
7). Sensibility before fad
8). Neighborhood before individual ownership
9). Community inclusion before site exclusion
10). Community character before ordinance
11). Land planning and architectural design before engineering

C. Reactions to 2007 Comprehensive Plan Vision Statements:

List of vision statements is too lengthy
Eliminate redundancy in vision
Add remediation of brownfields as a priority
Is development pattern economically viable?
How much development is too much?
Vision statements are too vague
Need to plan for future population and employment
Should articulate where we want the community to go
Infrastructure vs development
Need for multi-modal mobility for seniors
Consistent "Community character"
Consistency from Land Use Dept.
Need consistent County codes
Desire for form-based codes
We should care how the County looks
Communicate with the cities

According To The Cape Gazette, So Far, CLNCC Working Group Gets Some Press, Some Supporters But No Sponsors For Their Redistricting Bill

Updated Feb. 2011: Good to report that there is currently a lineup of support and interested sponsors of this bill. Stay tuned!
~~~~~
(Cape Gazette) Kara Nuzback reports ~ Activist calls for transparency in redistricting - Senate leader expects change to come slowly

[Frank] Sims said legislators on both sides of the aisle have already pledged support for the resolution, including Rep. Earl Jaques, D-Glasgow, Rep. Deborah Hudson, R-Fairthorne, Sen. Bethany Hall-Long, D-Glasgow and Sen. Gary Simpson, R-Milford, but no one has volunteered to sponsor it. “We’ve got to open the process, or for the next 10 years, people will not be represented,” said Sims, who serves on the civic league’s board of directors.

“People are nervous about this kind of change,” said Senate Majority Leader Patricia Blevins, D-Elsmere. Blevins said in the past two legislative sessions, she has attempted to introduce a bill to establish an independent redistricting commission. The bill was never put on the agenda.“The districts are intended to be for the benefit of the voters, not for the benefit of people in office,” Blevins said. She said it is important future redistricting take place more openly than in the past. Blevins said she knows there will not be time to pass the bill, fund and establish a commission before redistricting this year, but she wants the law on the books for the 2020 census.“It’s a change you don’t shove down people’s throats,” Blevins said.

...Sims said he is concerned Democrats will use redistricting to secure their incumbency by redrawing electoral lines in their favor, a process known as gerrymandering. “It makes our votes null and void,” Sims said. The former chairman of Delaware’s Independent Party filed a lawsuit against the Legislature in Superior Court in 2002, when the General Assembly failed to redraw district lines. Ultimately, electoral lines had to be redrawn, but Sims said, it was done behind closed doors.“Most people don’t have any idea this is going on,” Sims said. “The people need to be involved.”Sims’ resolution emphasizes an open and transparent process for redistricting involving public participation.

See: DE Way ~ Sims Finds Sponsorless Support For 146th General Assembly Redistricting Bill for more from the CLNCC working group and the draft of the bill.

Why Is The County Refusing To Share A REPORT CARD On 2007 Comprehensive Plan Failures And Success?

Update: This meeting has been cancelled due to snow. The next meeting is Jan. 26th.

This is a reminder that the next meeting on the New Castle County Comprehensive Development Plan Update will be:

Wednesday, January 12th - "Land Use"

6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.

New Castle County Government Center - Gillian Building

77 Reads Way, New Castle, DE 19720

The topic is "Land Use", with no detailed description ... or any itemized agenda posted to the website, providing no opportunity for engaged citizens to prepare meaningful information and make positive contributions to the planning efforts. We cannot comment if this is by omission, or deliberate.

To better understand what is to be included in the Comprehensive Plan, please see pages 1 and pages 7-10 of the 9 Del. Code, Chapter 14, Subpart II – The Quality of Life Act.

County refusing to share a REPORT CARD on 2007 Comprehensive Plan Failures and Success

Of critical importance is that neither New Castle County Government nor their consultants (JMT) appear to have developed nor provided the required report on the implementation failures (such as completely ignoring the promised developing a Transfer of Development rights program for balance "smart growth") or success, actual or perceived. This report is required by State Law – Please see details below!

We have a legal right to see a REPORT CARD on the 2007 NCC Comprehensive Plan Failures and Success. THIS REPORT IS REQUIRED BY LAW.

Statutory provisions of the Quality of Life Act of 1988 (9 Del. C. 2658 - Evaluation and appraisal of comprehensive plan - (c) and (d)), are that "(c) . . . The local planning agency shall prepare a report on the comprehensive plan, which shall be sent to the Governor's Advisory Council on Planning Coordination each year after adoption of the comprehensive plan. . ." and "(d) The report shall present an assessment and evaluation of the success or failure of the comprehensive plan or element or portion thereof . . ."

At a special business meeting of the New Castle County Planning Board ... on Monday, January 4, 2011, this legal requirement was specifically raised. The Planning Board requested that the New Castle County Department of Land Use submit their information and report on the "evaluation of the success or failure of the comprehensive plan or elements thereof..."

Dave Culver, the Manager of NCC Department of Landuse claimed that no report existed, and that he would seek a legal determination of whether one was required!!! Please click on the link above to 9 Del. Code, Chapter 14, Subpart II – The Quality of Life Act. The law is clear, despite the argument by Dave Culver that it may not apply to the New Castle County Government. They are mandated to produce an assessment report.

NCC Citizens Deserve Better

Please attend the January 12th meeting, so that you and other members of the public can insist on a detailed assessment and evaluation of the success or failure of elements of the 2007 comp plan. Citizens need to insist that our county government follow the laws of our State.

With this mandated assessment report in hand, we would be able to make informed decision about the NCC Comprehensive Plan that guide us to identify and keep what is good, tweak those things than need improvement, and develop new approaches to those things that we still desire that have failed.

Sincerely, Chuck Mulholland, President

Bill Dunn, Vice President

Dave Carter, Vice President

Civic League for New Castle County

NCC Special Election Debate - Tues. Jan 11, 2011 @ 6 PM Hockessin Memorial Hall

With the Special Election fast approaching for NCC Council President on Jan 13th, there have been no opportunities to get the two major party nominees to face one another in a public forum.

Today, we received confirmation that both Tim Sheldon (D) and Tom Kovach (R) will attend the special election forum co-sponsored by the Greater Hockessin Area Development Assoc. (GHADA) and the Civic League for New Castle County (CLNCC) in conjunction with the Community News.

The forum will take place:

Tuesday evening, January 11th,

Form 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM

The Hockessin Fire Company's Memorial Hall

Lancaster Pike (Rte 40) in downtown Hockessin.

Please get the word out to as many people as you can, as this is the ONLY public, live debate that will occur before the election. There will be a interview of both candidates by the Community News this week which will be published in this week's edition of the Community News. There will also be some talk radio coverage, but nothing where both candidates will appear together in front of a "live" audience.

Adam Taylor, reporter for the News Journal, is planning to attend the debate and should be able to get a story in the News Journal before election day.

Mark Blake
GHADA, President & Land Use Chairman
Greater Hockessin Area Development Association
email: markwblake@aol.com