Office Of Management And Budget Director Ann Visalli At The CLNCC Set For 7PM May 15th In New Castle

CIVIC LEAGUE FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY 

Chuck Mulholland, President

Guest Speaker: Ms. Ann Visalli Director of the Office of Management and Budget Tuesday May 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM Location: Del Tech Innovation & Technology Center 97 Parkway Circle New Castle, DE 19720 Map

The Civic League also hosted our Secretary of Education, Lillian Lowery, in March:

~*~

NCC Civic Association Seminar Set For 7PM Monday May 7th In New Castle

From the NCC.DE web site ~

Seminar Announcement: Strengthening Your Civic Association

Monday, May 7, 2012  7:00pm
Gilliam Building Multi-Purpose Room
77 Read’s Way, New Castle Corporate Commons

 

A forum to help Civic Associations manage community activities.

 

An important aspect of this forum will be the ability of civic association leaders to communicate with one another, as well as with representatives of various agencies who can lend assistance. Along with presentations, a Q&A session will facilitate this dialog.

 

Guest speakers include Linda Stump on DELDOT Snow Removal Reimbursement, NCCPD Sr. Corporal Amy Kevis on Community Policing, along with representatives from New Castle County Code Enforcement and Parks departments.

Civic association leaders are encouraged to register to attend this informative, free 90-minute session.

 

Contact Norm Spector at 395-5618 to learn more and to sign up.

County-Wide Candidates Forum 7PM Tonight For Registered DEMs And The CLNCC Hosts Finance Secretary Tom Cook 7PM Tuesday In Bear

Two meetings to catch this week ~

The 12th Democratic RD Committee Meeting, Monday, April 16th, 7:00 pm - New Castle County Democratic Candidates will be addressing the group at Marbrook Elementary School, 2101 Centerville Road, Wilmington, DE - this is open to all registered DEMs. I have confirmation that we can expect to see Bill Dunn and Bill Shahan, candidates for NCC Council President and NCC Executive respectively.

And at 7PM Tuesday the 17th, Delaware Finance Secretary Tom Cook will make a presentation at the Civic League for New Castle County monthly meeting at the Delaware State Police Troop 2, 100 LaGrange Ave., Bear, in the Paris Community Room.

Chuck Mulholland, President, Civic League for New Castle County has some questions for the Secretary~
Regarding the above meeting and the matter of the bonded debt level for the State of Delaware, we are seeking the following information:
#1. Given a current (2012) amount of $1.7B compared to the 2002 amount of $709.9 M, can you outline the average $100M yearly increase over each of the past (10) years and provide the highest (5) different items( ie. specific capital projects) of increased expense each year during that time period?
#2. Is a yearly cost per resident available for that time period?
#3. Is a yearly amount of debt service payments available for that time period? What is the percentage amount necessary from yearly expenditures authorized by the General Assembly?
#4. What are the current projection(s) going forward, both for bonded debt amounts and debt service payments?
#5. Do the $1.7 B and $709.9M amounts, with all intervening amounts, include or exclude bond amounts for road construction and/or DelDOT project(s) ?
#6. Has the Department made any calculation(s) regarding the event of increased interest rates? If so, what are the plans going forward?
#7. Are all bond amounts for capital projects? If not, what is the amount outstanding as "General Obligation Bonds" and can you provide an overview of amounts and increases for this category over the same time frame?
#8. Can you provide an overview of income streams for the State and how these source(s) may have changed over the last (10) years?

Education Secretary Lowery Will Speak At The CLNNC Monthly Meeting 7PM March 20th In Bear

On Tuesday, March 20, 2012, the Civic League for New Castle County will host a presentation by Dr. Lillian Lowery, Delaware Secretary of Education.

This will be our regular monthly meeting, starting at 7:00PM, Paris Community Room, Delaware State Police, Troop 2, 100 LaGrange Ave., Bear.

The public is encouraged to attend.

- prepared by Chuck Mulholland President, Civic League for New Castle County

Coming CLNCC monthly meeting speakers:

Finance Secretary Tom Cook is set for April - 4/17/12 , 7 PM at Troop 2

Office of Managment and Budget Director, Ann Visalli, is set for May - 5/15/12, 7 PM , Del Tech Innovation and Technology Center, 97 Parkway Circle, New Castle ( near Hare's Corner, ie traveling south on 13, turn right on Frenchtown Rd, 97 Parkway is in the new complex behind the magistrate court, on the left )

~*~

Here is a video clip of DelDOT Secretary Bhatt Speaking at Civic League For New Castle County Meeting Feb. 20th , 2012

DelDOT Secretary And Red Clay School District Are The Featured Speakers At CLNCC's February Meeting, 6:45PM Monday Night In Bear

On Monday, Ferbruary 20, 2012, the Civic League for New Castle County will host Delaware Transportation Secretary Shailen Bhatt for a presentation on his plans for DelDOT moving forward. After Friday's front page News Journal report, this should be a rather informative event. Secretary Bhatt will speak from 7-8 PM.

Thereafter we will hear a presentation from the Red Clay School District committee on their referendum plans in the near future. [Also See: Rick Jensen Interviews Red Clay Officials On Referendum ].

This meeting will start at 6:45 PM, in the Paris Community Room, Delaware State Police Troop 2, 100 LaGrange Ave, Bear.

Finding DelDOT's missing pieces - (Sunday Op-Ed) What is it that we don't know about the Delaware Department of Transportation?

DelDOT records prompt inquiry - Forensics team will audit deals, ethics in push for reforms - Transportation Secretary Shailen Bhatt did not rule out the possibility of criminal misconduct.

The investigation was triggered by a series of Freedom of Information Act requests filed by The News Journal in recent months involving agency land deals and the involvement of political figures in certain highway projects that affect commercial interests. DelDOT officials were unable to document specifics of some land deals, Bhatt said. Records that would show what happened to payments to the agency for taxpayer-funded services and highway entrances also were missing, he said.

...Answers to the recent FOIA requests, Bhatt said, were complicated by DelDOT's paper-intensive and fragmented record-keeping system, and in some cases be inexplicably missing or never-recorded land agreements and roadway plans. As internal inquiries widened and top managers urged disclosure of problems, he said, employees came forward with other concerns, including some involving missing documents and checks from developers.

"The staff has come forward and talked about old checks that were not cashed, and have made assertions that checks may have disappeared," Bhatt said. "Whether that was because they were supposed to have been shredded or because a developer has moved on, it's hard for me to know." DelDOT has since ordered staffers to record and deposit all checks received by the agency within 24 hours of receipt.
In addition, the department plans to:

» Gather, secure and strictly control access to agency files and documents.» Retain outside engineers and planning consultants to examine key files for omissions or shortcomings.

» Work with Kent County to re-record complete site plans spanning a seven-year period after 2003, when the county stopped automatically documenting plans that left original property boundaries intact.

» Acquire a modern document recording and management system, an investment that could approach $1 million.

...The site plan problem was confined to Kent County, Bhatt said, but potentially left DelDOT unable to easily document agreements with developers involving such matters as land acquisition or land donation deals with developers, land easements and provisions for walkways and building line restrictions to protect driver views at intersections.

Check the CLNCC web site for more details.

What You Won't Hear About New Castle County From The County Executive!

True picture of New Castle County? This is not what you will hear from Paul Clark
Middletown Transcript —
New Castle County union leaders at the Civic League for New Castle County:
The union presidents shared their concerns...such as being short staffed in areas where more manpower is needed.
- "We're short staffed," Dan Tharby, president of Local 349- skilled trades ...
- Joe Lavelle, a retired county police officer who represents the police officers through FOP Lodge 5, said that he feels a sense of frustration when dealing with the county. A county police officer's starting salary is lower than that of a University of Delaware officer's, he said. The force is also 22 officers short.
- There also aren't enough paramedics in the field, said Local 3911 President Kenneth Dunn who represents the paramedics. There are about 100 personnel total, with only about 85 on the streets
- there was a five-percent raise for all appointed county positions last year and that county council has never amended the executive's budget when put before them.

See More: Residents express concerns and raise complaints at Civic League panel www.middletowntranscript.com

Janet Kilpatrick Responds To Request To Deny Stoltz's Lifting Of The Deed Restrictions For 20 Montachanin

Please click here to read about what you can do to help Save Our County fight the lifting of deed restrictions on the Stoltz parcel, 20 Montchanin Road, at the gateway to the Brandywine Valley.

According to the agenda posted for the January 24 NCC Council meeting, the vote on this Resolution --R12-015-- is to be withdrawn. A possible date for the vote will be February 14th but that is yet to be determined.

http://www2.nccde.org/council/Documents/MeetingAgendaDocuments/Council%20Agenda%201-24-12.pdf

I received the following information yesterday from Janet Kilpatrick in response to an email asking NCC Council: "Please don't lift the deed restrictions that protect the Brandywine Valley at 20 Montchanin" -

I do not know how I am going to vote on this, but thank you for your
comments. There are both protections and detriments to the proposal.

Below is information that I have so far on the requested change to this
property. This research is based on verifying statements made in emails
that I have received as well as the general research that is required for each vote.

EXISTING RESTRICTION:

1. The existing restrictions allow for a 1.7 acre footprint of building. 2 stories or 40' tall not counting the basement, but the basement is counted as total gross floor space so it can be made into offices, restaurants, or any other commercial or office use allowed under the code for this zoning category. The existing agreement says an office building and accessory uses so anything allowed in this zoning category can be placed within the building.

2. The site as built now is 138,000 sf on a 1.4 ac footprint (it is not at buildout - so without any change someone can build out the remaining .3 ac. which comes to about a 12,000 sf footprint, but as they can use 3 floors (basement, 1st and 2nd) that translates into 36,000 gross floor space more.

3. As it is now, that expansion can be on any side of the building, and this is where I
understand that the Breck's Lane people have concerns. Because of the topography of the site, if the building is builtout on their side , it will be higher than the rest of the building as the measurement goes from the existing ground to the top of the building, not from the lower ground level at the other side of the building. This could give them a towering effect next to their neighborhood.

4. If this were ever rezoned the original deed restrictions automatically are lifted. Existing restrictions take into account the possibility of rezoning.

5. There are no setbacks from propety lines.

NEW PROPOSED RESTRICTIONS

1. Would allow for 1.79 ac footprint - that> is 9/100th of an acre more than allowed in the (same> as in the existing restrictions).

2. Would allow for a separate 1 story building limited to 6000 sf>> and 25' high plus mechanicals. The square footage remains the same, it just allows for a split of buildings.

3. Calls for a 90' setback from property lines which ultimately does not allow buildout on the Breck's Lane side of the existing building. The newly proposed setback line is parallel to Breck's Lane.

4. It preserves the existing entrance and doesn't allow for other entrances.

5. It would only ever allow a rezoning on the 2 ac parcel that has the 1 story building, not allowing the whole site to be rezoned as the exsiting restrictions do. (this protetcs from combining w/the adjacent property to form one 30 ac site for development.

6. It limits use of what can be put on the site, since it is not just limited to office (accessory use per the existing agreement).

The public will have the opportunity to speak at the Tuesday Council
meeting. I encourage all those who have concerns to attend. Janet
Kilpatrick, New Castle County Council Member, 3rd District

Note - the vote is now tabled until February

________________________________________
From: Nancy Willing [http://us.mc1138.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nancyvwilling@yahoo.com]Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 10:10 AMTo: Kovach, Thomas; Reda, Joseph; Weiner, Robert; Kilpatrick, Janet; Hollins, Penrose; Diller, Elisa; Powers, Jr., William; Smiley, George; Cartier, John; Sheldon, Timothy; Street, Jea; Tackett, David; Bell, James
Subject: Please don't lift the deed restrictions that protect the Brandywine Valley at 20 Montchanin

CLNCC Discussion With New Castle County Union Presidents Set For 7PM Tuesday In Bear

On Tuesday, January 17, 2012, the Civic League for New Castle County will host a panel discussion with various union presidents with New Castle County government at their monthly meeting.

AGENDA
Discussion with New Castle County Union Presidents
With some regularity, the Civic League has discussions about County government operations and subsequent costs, and inevitably, taxes. The leadership and elected officials of the County come and talk from time to time, but we have never gotten input from the rank and file employee groups that represent where the rubber hits the road.

Accepting this invitation are:
Kenneth Dunn, AFSCME Local 3911, Paramedics;
Joseph Lavelle, FOP Lodge 5, Police;
Marc Klinefelter, AFSCME Local 1607, salaried positions
Frank Gentry, Local 2270 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Dan Tharby, AFSCME Local 459 - skilled trades

This segment will begin at 7 PM and will include their comments on staffing and funding issues in New Castle County government, from their prospective.

The meeting will be held in the Paris Community Room, Delaware State Police Troop 2, 100 LaGrange Avenue in Bear.

Prepared by Chuck Mulholland
President, Civic League for New Castle County
378-4216

~
DelDOT Secretary Bhatt is the scheduled CLNCC speaker in February - he will attend our meeting at Troop 2 from 7-8:00 PM on Monday, February 20th.
Check the CLNCC web site for more details.

2012 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Comment Period Extended To 4PM February 2nd

News Journal reports ~ NCCo growth plan review extended - Land-use map complaints lead to longer public comment

New Castle County Planning Board has extended by 30 days the time for the public comment on the proposed 2012 update of the county’s Comprehensive Plan. The new deadline is 4 p.m. Feb. 2.A copy of the plan is on the county’s website at www.nccde.org. Follow the link under the “NCC Spotlight” area of the home page. For detailed maps down to the parcel level, click on “Draft Documents” and follow the directions to view map layers through the GIS mapping system.All county libraries also have a copy available. Comments on the plan should be sent to compplan12@nccde.org or to NCC Department of Land Use, Attn.: D.J. Guthrie Carter, 87 Reads Way, New Castle, DE 19720.

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.