HomeMy Public PortalAbout2020_tcmin0114COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, 7:00 p.m. Mayor Burk presiding.
Council Members Present: Ron Campbell, Thomas Dunn (arrived at 8:17 p.m.),
Suzanne Fox (arrived at 7:19 p.m.), Vice Mayor Marty Martinez, Neil Steinberg, Joshua
Thiel, and Mayor Kelly Burk.
Council Members Absent: None.
Staff Present: Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Town Attorney Barbara Notar, Deputy
Town Manager Keith Markel, Director of Planning and Zoning Susan Berry Hill,
Director of Plan Review Bill Adman, Director of Utilities Amy Wyks, Economic
Development Director Russell Seymour, Deputy Director Parks and Recreation Kate
Trask, Zoning Administrator Mike Watkins, Traffic Engineer Calvin Grow and Clerk of
Council Eileen Boeing.
AGENDA ITEMS
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION was given by Apostle Shawn Stephens with Ignite Church
International.
3. SALUTE TO THE FLAG was led by Boy Scout John Matthew, Purcellville Boy
Scout Troop 39.
4. ROLL CALL Council Member Fox arrived at 7:19 p.m. and Council Member
Dunn arrived at 8:17 p.m.
5. MINUTES
a. Work Session Minutes of December 9, 2019
MOTION 2020-001
On a motion by Council Member Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Campbell, the
minutes of the Work Session of December 9, 2019, were approved by a vote 5-0-2 (Dunn & Fox
absent).
b. Regular Session Minutes of December 10, 2019
MOTION2020-002
On a motion by Vice Mayor Martinez, seconded by Council Member Thiel, the minutes of
the Regular Session of December 10, 2019, were approved by a vote 5-0-2 (Dunn & Fox absent).
c. Special Meeting Minutes of December 23, 2019
MOTION 2020-003
On a motion by Council Member Thiel, seconded by Vice Mayor Martinez, the minutes of
the Special Meeting on December 23, 2019, were approved by a vote 5-0-2 (Dunn & Fox absent).
1 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
6. ADOPTING THE MEETING AGENDA (AMENDMENTS AND
DELETIONS)
On a motion by Vice Mayor Martinez, seconded by Council Member Steinberg, the
meeting agenda was moved for approval.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 5-0-2 (Dunn & Fox absent)
7. CERTIFICATES OF RECOGNITION
a. Certificates of Recognition: None.
8. PROCLAMATIONS
a. Proclamation: Recognizing Inova Loudoun Nursing and Rehabilitation
Center.
Ms. Stacey Metcalfe, Ms. Pam Janney and another Inova representative
accepted the proclamation and made a few remarks.
b. Proclamation: Ignite Church International Celebrating 16 Years of Service
to the Community
Bishop Shawn Stephens accepted the proclamation and made a few
remarks.
c. Proclamation: Tom Marshall.
Mr. Marshall accepted the proclamation and made a few remarks.
9. PRESENTATIONS
a. Presentation: Annual Christmas and Holiday Parade "Holiday in Lights
Winner" (Boy Scout Troop 39, Purcellville, VA).
Purcellville Boy Scout Troop 39 accepted the proclamation. Boy Scout
John Matthews and the Troop's Scoutmaster made a few remarks.
b. Presentation: County Designation of JLMA as a Revitalization Area
(Assistant Loudoun County Administrator Valmarie Turner).
Loudoun County Assistant Administrator Valmarie Turner and members
of the Loudoun County staff presented Council with an overview of the County's
plan to designate the entire Joint Land Management Area (JLMA) as a
Revitalization Area. Ms. Turner and the Loudoun County staff members
explained that this does not affect the zoning of the JLMA nor is it a land use or
comp plan approach or policy. They stated it is really to enable someone to get
financing. Council Member Thiel, Council Member Campbell, Vice Mayor
Martinez and Mayor Burk asked questions. Ms. Turner, along with Loudoun
staff members Ms. Sarah Coyle Etro and Ms. Rebecca King answered Council's
questions. At the end of the presentation, Ms. Turner noted that she would be
happy to take back any comments or concerns to the Board on behalf of Council.
2IPage
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
10. REGIONAL COMMISSION REPORTS
Mayor Burk reported on the recent Coalition of Loudoun Towns (COLT)
meeting. She said they discussed data centers and the inclination that they are wanting
to head westward. Mayor Burk noted that they also discussed the upcoming census and
need for workers. She added that she also attended the Loudoun County Economic
Development Board meeting and reported on their activities.
11. PETITIONERS
The Petitioners section was opened at 7:37 p.m.
Will Murphy. Spoke to Council regarding a Youth Summit that he and other
students were organizing for May 31, from 2-5 p.m. at Ida Lee Park.
Danielle Marks. Spoke to Council regarding a Youth Summit that she and other
students were organizing for May 31, from 2-5 p.m. at Ida Lee Park.
Luke Hubbard. Spoke to Council regarding a Youth Summit that she and other
students were organizing for May 31, from 2-5 p.m. at Ida Lee Park. Mr. Hubbard
petitioned Council to waive the $880 fee for use of the Ida Lee Park Banquet facility.
Cody Francis. Spoke to Council regarding the sewer service to his property at
Graydon Manor and the Town's sewer capacity. Mr. Francis petitioned the Council to
go back and follow the policy or what was presented to Council by the Town's own
Utilities department.
Dave Culbert, 40834 Graydon Manor Lane. Spoke to Council regarding the
sewer service to the Graydon Manor property and the Town's sewer capacity. Mr.
Culbert asked Council to direct staff to do the job that they're supposed to do, which is to
analyze the sewer capacity and respond honestly and candidly that the Town has
capacity and can serve Graydon Manor.
Theresa Bishop, 104 Cornwall Street NE. Spoke to Council regarding the
Courthouse Expansion project and her concerns and impact about closing Church Street
for an extended period of time. Ms. Bishop added that if the County is going to impact
the residents of Leesburg to this extent that they at least underground the utilities in this
area.
John Burnham, 114 Slack Lane NE. Spoke to Council regarding the Courthouse
Expansion project and his concerns about closing Church Street for an extended period
of time. Mr. Burnham asked Council to ask the County to honor their commitment to
the project and not have Church Street closed for as long as they are stating. He would
also like improved communication from the County to the Council and the residents.
Mr. Burnham requested they underground the utilities in this area.
The Petitioners section was closed at 8:01 p.m.
3 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
Council Member Thiel requested a Suspension of the Rules to have Council
consider deferring the fee for the student's use of the Ida Lee Park Banquet Hall for their
Youth Summit on May 31, 2020.
MOTION 2020-004
On a motion by Council Member Thiel, seconded by Vice Mayor Martinez, the following
was proposed:
To Suspend the Rules to allow Council to vote on approving deferring the fees for the Youth
Summit to be held on May 31, 2020, at Ida Lee Park.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 6-0-1 (Dunn absent)
MOTION 2020-005
On a motion by Council Member Thiel, seconded by Vice Mayor Martinez, the following
was proposed:
To defer the fees for the Youth Summit on May 31, 2020, from 2-5 p.m. at the Ida Lee
Park Banquet facilities not to exceed $1,000.
Council Member Campbell, Council Member Fox, Council Member Thiel,
Council Member Steinberg, Vice Mayor Martinez and Mayor Burk all remarked how
impressed they were with each of the student's presentations and that they were happy
to support their event. The motion was modified to include an amount not to exceed
$1,000.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor Burk
Nay.• None
Vote: 6-0-1 (Dunn absent)
12. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION 2020-006
On a motion by Vice Mayor Martinez, seconded by Council Member Steinberg, the
following consent agenda was proposed:
a. Public Art Exhibit by Ligia Inra
RESOLUTION 2020-001
Approval of a Public Art Exhibit at the Leesburg Town Exhibit Hall by
Ligia Inra
4 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
b. Public Art Exhibit by Antonia Plazibat
RESOLUTION 2020-002
Approval of a Public Art Exhibit at the Leesburg Town Exhibit Hall by
Antonia Plazibat
c. Public Art Exhibit by Larry Roeder
RESOLUTION 2020-003
Approval of a Public Art Exhibit at the Leesburg Town Exhibit Hall by
Larry Roeder
d. Requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to Accept Certain Streets
RESOLUTION 2020-004
Requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to Accept Certain
Streets
e. License Agreement between the Town of Leesburg and SummitlG
RESOLUTION 2020-005
Authorizing the Town Manager to Execute a License Agreement between
the Town of Leesburg and SummitlG for Telecommunications Facilities in
the Town's Right of Way
f Water Pollution Control Facility Replacement of Solids Handling Polymer Blend
Units
RESOLUTION 2020-006
Approving a Task Order for Replacement of Solids Handling Polymer
Blend Units at the Water Pollution Control Facility to FJlndustrial in the
Amount of $100,751
Replacement of a Programmable Logic Controller and Remote Terminal Unit at
the Old Waterford Knolls Wastewater Pump Station
RESOLUTION 2020-007
Approving a Task Order for Replacement and Installation of a
Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) and Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)
at Old Waterford Knolls Wastewater Pump Station to M.C. Dean in the
Amount of $109,882
5 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
h. Water Pollution Control Facility — Upgrade of the Unity Control Expert
Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC)
RESOLUTION 2020-008
Approving a Task Order for Unity Control Expert Programmable Logic
Controllers (PLC) Upgrade at the Water Pollution Control Facility to
M.C. Dean in the Amount of $159,537
The Consent Agenda was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 6-0-1 (Dunn absent)
13. RESOLUTIONS /ORDINANCES / MOTIONS
a. West Market Street Sidewalk Design Change Order No. 3
MOTION 2020-007
On a motion by Council Member Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Thiel,
the following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2020-009
Approve and Authorize the Town Manager to Execute Design Change
Order No. 3 in the Amount of $49,475 for the West Market Street
Sidewalk Improvement Project from Ayr Street to Morven Park Road
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor Burk
Nay: Fox
Vote: 5-1-1 (Dunn absent)
b. Recognition of The More Than Peach Project Proclamation
MOTION 2020-008
On a motion by Mayor Burk, seconded by Council Member Steinberg, the
following was proposed:
I move to approve The More Than Peach Project Proclamation to be presented at
the January 28, 2020, Town Council Meeting.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 5-0-2 (Dunn & Vice Mayor Martinez absent)
6 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
c. Supporting Leesburg's Jewish Community
MOTION 2020-009
On a motion by Mayor Burk, seconded by Council Member Steinberg, the
following was proposed:
I move to approve the Supporting Leesburg's Jewish Community at the January
28, 2020, Town Council Meeting.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 5-0-2 (Dunn & Vice Mayor Martinez absent)
14. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. Rezoning Application TLZM-2019-0003, Shops at Compass Creek, and
four (4) Special Exception Applications, including: TLSE-2019-0005,
TLSE-2019-0006, TLSE2019-0007, and TLSE-2019-0008, Shops at
Compass Creek
The public hearing was opened at 8:11 p.m.
Zoning Administrator Mike Watkins gave a brief presentation on the
proposed rezoning application and four Special Exception applications for the
Shops at Compass Creek. Mr. Watkins advised Council that the applicant is
Leesburg Commercial LC and that the purpose of the applications is to rezone
4.6 acres from Il to B3 and to approve four special exception applications that
are eating establishments with driving facility.
Council Member Dunn, Council Member Campbell, Council Member
Fox, and Council Member Thiel asked Mr. Watkins clarifying questions.
Ms. Colleen Gillis with Cooley LLC, representing the applicant, The
Peterson Companies, made a presentation regarding their proposed project. She
shared the overall master plan and a 3D perspective of the project. Ms. Gillis
noted the benefits of the Special Exception applications by adding drive thru
capabilities to these establishments. She also shared a rendering of each
building's architectural design and an overview of the surrounding areas.
Council Member Dunn, Council Member Campbell, Council Member
Fox, Council Member Thiel, Council Member Steinberg, Vice Mayor Martinez
and Mayor Burk asked Ms. Gillis clarifying questions. Council generally did not
like the design of buildings H & J. Ms. Gillis offered to add a voluntary
condition to have the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) review the
architecture of these two buildings and provide referral comments to the Land
7 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
Development Official (LDO) in lieu of the conceptual building elevations dated
November 15, 2019.
Public Speakers:
Taylor Chess, The Peterson Companies. Spoke to Council regarding the
mischaracterization of the events that occurred. He noted that they were not
trying to do a bait and switch. He reviewed the sequence of events with Council
to clarify the situation. He also commented that he also did not like the look of
Building J.
The public hearing was closed at 9:28 p.m.
MOTION 2020-010
On a motion by Vice Mayor Martinez, seconded by Council Member Steinberg, the
following was proposed:
ORDINANCE 2020-0-001
Approving TLZM2019-0003, Shops at Compass Creek, to Rezone 4.67Acres from
I1, Industrial/Research Park District to B-3, Community Retail/Commercial
District subject to the concept of development plan dated December 20th, 2019 and
the proffer is dated December 20th, 2019 based on the findings for approval
contained in the January 14th, 2020 Town Council Staff report.
Council Member Dunn and Council Member Fox asked clarifying
questions.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Dunn, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor
Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
MOTION 2020-011
On a motion by Vice Mayor Martinez, seconded by Council Member Campbell, the
following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2020-010
Approving Special Exception TLSE-2019-0005, Compass Creek — Restaurant with
Drive -In Facility — Building F to allow an eating establishment with drive-in
facilities subject to the rezoning concept plan and special exception dated December
20th, 2019 and conditions for approval contained in a draft resolution dated
January 14`", 2020.
Council Member Dunn clarified with Ms. Gillis the approving body for
the designs of the buildings in this area.
8 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor Burk
Nay: Dunn
Vote: 6-1
MOTION2020-012
On a motion by Vice Mayor Martinez, seconded by Council Member Fox, the
following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2020-011
Approving Special Exception TLSE-2019-0006, Compass Creek — Restaurant with
Drive -In Facility — Building G to allow an eating establishment with drive-in
facility subject to rezoning concept plan and special exceptions dated December
20th, 2019 and conditions for approval contained in the draft resolution dated
January 14, 2020.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor Burk
Nay: Dunn
Vote: 6-1
MOTION 2020-013
On a motion by Vice Mayor Martinez, seconded by Council Member Steinberg, the
following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2020-012
Approving Special Exception TLSE-2019-0007, Compass Creek — Restaurant with
Drive-in Facility — Building H to allow eating establishment with driving facility
subject to rezoning concept plan and special exceptions dated December 20th, 2019
and conditions for approval contained in a draft resolution dated January 14, 2020.
Notwithstanding the elevations for building H included in the design guidelines
attached as exhibit B to the proffers. The applicant shall submit new building
elevations for building H that shall be reviewed by the Board of Architectural
Review which shall make its referral recommendations or to the LDO which may
be accepted in lieu of the elevations for building H included in the design guidelines.
Council Member Fox noted a correction to the motion which was
accepted by Vice Mayor Martinez. Council Member Dunn made comments to
the Applicant regarding the design standards.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Dunn, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor
Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
9 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
MOTION 2020-014
On a motion by Vice Mayor Martinez, seconded by Council Member Fox, the
following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2020-013
Approving Special Exception TLSE-2019-0008, Compass Creek — Restaurant with
Drive-in Facility — Building J to allow an eating establishment with drive-in
facility subject to the rezoning concept plan and special exception dated December
20th, 2019, and conditions for approval contained in a draft resolution dated
January 14, 2020, notwithstanding the elevation for building J included in the
design guidelines attached as exhibit B to the proffers. The applicant shall submit
new building elevations for building J that shall be reviewed by the Board of
Architectural Review which shall make its referral recommendations or to the LDO
which may be accepted in lieu of the elevations for building J included in design
guidelines.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Dunn Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor
Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
b. TLOA-2017-0006, Zoning Ordinance Batch Amendments
The public hearing was opened at 9:41p.m.
Zoning Administrator Mike Watkins gave a brief presentation on the
proposed Zoning Ordinance "Batch" amendments. Mr. Watkins noted that these
are changes that started in 2017. He noted the four principal reasons for the
changes: changes in the State Code, use and interpretation changes by the Zoning
Administrator, correcting errors that may have occurred, and then responding to
business and/or citizen requests. Mr. Watkins added that with the 2017 "Batch"
amendments, there's 31 recommended changes to the Zoning Ordinance.
Council Member Fox, Council Member Campbell, Council Member
Dunn and Council Member Steinberg asked Mr. Watkins clarifying questions
regarding the proposed amendments.
It was the consensus of Council to remove the following items from the
"Batch" amendments and defer them to the February 24 Council Work Session
for further discussion: the wording on membership requirements for the Board of
Architectural Review; the inclusion of homestay; and, section 9.4.9 regarding the
vending kiosk. Option three for the Doggie Daycare commercial will be included
in the Zoning Ordinance to present the use by Special Exception.
There were no citizens wishing to address this public hearing.
10 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
The public hearing was closed at 10:12 p.m.
MOTION2020-015
On a motion by Mayor Burk, seconded by Council Member Dunn, the following
was proposed:
ORDINANCE 2020-0-002
Amending the Town of Leesburg Zoning Ordinance Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11,
15, and 18 as part of the 2017 Annual "Batch" Amendments and deferring the
items removed to the February 24, 2020, Work Session for further discussion.
Council Member Dunn asked clarifying questions.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Campbell, Dunn, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg, Thiel and Mayor
Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. None.
16. NEW BUSINESS
a. None.
17. COUNCIL DISCLOSURES AND COMMENTS / ADDITIONS TO
FUTURE MEETINGS
Council Member Dunn disclosed he responded to an email from Ms.
Molly Novotny regarding Compass Creek.
Mr. Dunn requested a letter to be drafted to be sent to the Loudoun
County Board of Supervisors regarding the concerns about the Courthouse
project as well as requesting that they underground the utilities in this area.
It was the consensus of Council to prepare a letter on this topic (All).
Mr. Dunn requested a Work Session discussion to address Town
Council's concerns regarding the County Board of Supervisors' intent to make
potential changes to the JLMA to designate it as a Revitalization Area.
It was the consensus of Council to discuss this at a future Work Session (All).
Mr. Dunn requested a Work Session to have a discussion on expediting
the design standards that have been proposed to be done by the end of the year
and expediting them to July 30.
11 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
It was the consensus of Council to discuss this at a future Work Session (Dunn,
Fox, Thiel and Vice Mayor Martinez).
Mr. Dunn requested a discussion by February 29 to pursue annexation for
any properties not incorporated into the Town by Boundary Line Adjustment.
Mr. Dentler said that staff could discuss this with Council at the January 27
meeting; however, staff's recommendation is to do so in Closed Session. Mr.
Dunn said that point could be debated at that time but he would like to see as
much as possible discussed in Open Session.
It was the consensus of Council to discuss this at the January 27, 2020, Work
Session (Dunn, Fox, Thiel and Steinberg).
Mr. Dunn shared that his son received a nomination from
Congresswoman Wexton to attend West Point.
Council Member Campbell disclosed that he met with Mr. Peter Kalaris
concerning Meadowbrook Farms and had email correspondence with Ms. Molly
Novotny regarding Compass Creek. Mr. Campbell commented that Council
needs to establish a relationship with the County where Council has regular
communications about important issues and not just staff to staff conversations,
but elected officials to elected officials.
Council Member Fox disclosed that she had a text conversation with Ms.
Molly Novotny regarding Compass Creek, a meeting with Mr. Cody Francis and
Mr. David Gregory regarding Graydon Manor, an email exchange with Cody
Francis regarding Graydon Manor and a phone conversation with Mr. Peter
Kalaris on Meadowbrook Commercial.
Ms. Fox requested a discussion at a Work Session on term limits at the
January 27 Work Session.
It was the consensus of Council to add this item to the January 27, 2020, Work
Session (Campbell, Dunn, Fox and Thiel).
Council Member Steinberg disclosed that he had a phone conversation
with Mr. Peter Kalaris regarding Meadowbrook Commercial. Mr. Steinberg
added that he disagreed with Mr. Francis and Mr. Culbert's assessment of a by -
right use at Graydon Manor. Mr. Steinberg also commended the young students
who spoke to Council at the meeting.
Council Member Thiel disclosed that he met with Mr. Cody Francis and
Mr. Dave Gregory regarding Graydon Manor. Mr. Thiel requested prayers be
sent to 20-year Town Staff Member Mr. O.J. Jackson who suffered a health issue.
12 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 14, 2020
Vice Mayor Martinez disclosed that he spoke with Mr. Peter Kalaris about
Meadowbrook and that he spoke to Ms. Molly Novotny regarding Compass
Creek. Mr. Martinez shared with Council that there was a recent AARP article
titled Facing Dementia: You Need a Friend naming the Town of Leesburg as a
dementia -friendly Town and noted the requirements for receiving the
designation.
18. MAYOR DISCLOSURES AND COMMENTS / ADDITIONS TO FUTURE
MEETINGS
Mayor Burk reminded Council about their time limits for Council
Comments and adding future items. Mayor Burk disclosed that she had an email
exchange with Ms. Molly Novotny. Mayor Burk congratulated the Fire
Department on the election of their four new officers. Mayor Burk noted that she
met with Ms. Sharon Virts, Ms. Sally Travis and Mr. Joe Rizzo regarding the
Loudoun Museum. She encouraged them to contact each Council Member
regarding their plans. Mayor Burk noted that the ice sculptures will be back in
Virginia Village on January 18. She commended the young students who spoke
at the meeting.
19. TOWN MANAGER COMMENTS
None.
20. CLOSED SESSION
None.
21. Adjournment
On a motion by Council Member Dunn, seconded by Vice Mayor Martinez, the meeting
was adjourned at 10:37p.m.
Town of Leesburg
ATTEST:
Clerk of Council
2020 tcmin0114
13 I Page
January 14, 2020 — Leesburg Town Council Meeting
(Note: This is a transcript prepared by a Town contractor based on the video of the meeting. It
may not be entirely accurate. For greater accuracy, we encourage you to review the video of the
meeting that is on the Town's Web site — www.Ieesburgva.gov or refer to the approved Council
meeting minutes. Council meeting videos are retained for three calendar years after a meeting
per Library of Virginia Records Retention guidelines.)
Mayor Burk: I would like to call to order the Town Council meeting of January 14th, 2020. If anyone in
the room needs hearing assistance please see the Clerk. Council Member Campbell is going to have
Apostle Stephens do the invocation and that will be followed by John Matthews who will be doing a
salute to the flag. Apostle Stephens, welcome.
Apostle Stephens: Thank you. Good evening. Let us pray. Father, tonight, we thank you for this
opportunity to gather together in this chamber to further advance the agenda of the residents of the
Town of Leesburg. We pray tonight Father that you would give us wisdom to have the conversations
necessary for unity. We pray for peace tonight. We pray for oneness of heart and a wonderful spirit.
Father, we pray tonight that anything that would be divisive, that will cause a strife tonight would be
removed in the name of Jesus. We thank you tonight for a night of love, unity, and peace. In Jesus'
name, amen.
Members: Amen.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. John Matthews.
John Matthews: If you have a hat on please put it down. If you're a scout, scout sign, please. I pledge
allegiance to the flag to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands
one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
John Matthews: Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you, John. Let the record reflect that all members are here with the exception of
Council Member Dunn who might be coming later and Council Member Fox who is late. She should be
here around 7:30. We have two sets of minutes; a working session minutes from December 9, 2019.
Do I have a motion?
Council Member Steinberg: I move.
Mayor Burk: Been moved by Council Member Steinberg. Second?
Council Member Campbell: I second.
Mayor Burk: Council Member-- I'm sorry. Council Member Campbell. All in favor?
Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Oppose? That passes. 5-0-2. Regular session minutes of December 10th, 2019.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I move.
Mayor Burk: Moved by Mr. Martinez. Seconded? Seconded by Council Member Thiel. All in favor?
Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? That's 5-0-2. Special meeting minutes of December 23rd, 2019. Do I have a
motion?
Council Member Thiel: I move.
1
Mayor Burk: Moved by Mr. Thiel. Seconded by Vice Mayor Martinez. All in favor?
Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? That's 5-0-2. Do I have a motion to adopt the meeting and agenda?
Vice Mayor Martinez: I move.
Mayor Burk: Moved by Mr. Martinez. Seconded by Mr. Steinberg. All in favor?
Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? That's 5-0-2. Presentation of the proclamations. We were going to recognize
the Loudoun County High School girls' volleyball team, but they asked us to move it to the next meeting
where they can all come. The second recognition for tonight is !nova Loudoun Nursing and
Rehabilitation Center. Let me read that one. Okay, this is the recognition of lnova Loudoun Nursing and
Rehabilitation Center. Whereas (nova Loudoun Nursing and Rehabilitation Center is among the 19%
United States skilled nursing facilities that have been recognized as the best nursing home for 2019/20
by the US News and World Report.
Wow. Whereas the home earned best nursing home status by achieving a rating of high performance,
performing at the highest possible rating for short term rehabilitation. Whereas the US News gives the
designation of best nursing home only to those homes that satisfy the US News assessment of
appropriate use of key services and consistent performance and quality measures. Whereas (nova
Loudoun Nursing and Rehabilitation Center proudly serves our community and is committed to
providing comprehensive and compassionate care to their parents and families.
Whereas we welcome Stacey Metcalfe with lnova Loudoun Nursing and Rehabilitation Center to receive
the proclamation and therefore, the Mayor and the Town Council of Leesburg, Virginia do hereby
congratulate (nova Loudoun Nursing and Rehabilitation Center for all of your hard work, dedication,
service, and commitment to our community proclaimed this 14th day of January 2020.
That will be followed by the recognition for Ignite Church International celebration. This is celebrating
16 years of service to the community, whereas the Leesburg Town Council recognizes Bishop Shawn
L. Stephens and Overseer Yolanda M. Stephens for celebrating 16 years of pastoring and 32 years of
ministerial service. Whereas Bishop Stephens and Overseer Stephens founded the Ignite Church
International in December 2003 to be an entity that not only provides a non -denominational house of
worship, but also a community service springboard to add value to the greater Loudoun County area.
Whereas the Ignite International has blossomed into the trusted friend of the region through its outreach
program to the homeless and displaced citizens of the community, as well as its mentorship and
counseling programs that are designed to restore and rebuild individuals, and whereas the Stephens'
have continuously given themselves as exemplary citizens of Leesburg, Loudoun County and the
Commonwealth of Virginia. Whereas they have founded and supported many Leesburg community
service initiatives to serve their town and whereas they each have unselfishly given their time and
abilities and expertise to help other new faith -based nonprofits to plan and organize for their own future
success.
Whereas we welcome Bishop Shawn L. Stephens and Overseer Yolanda M. Stephens here this
evening for accepting a proclamation for their continued years of service. Therefore, the Mayor of the
Town Council of Virginia hereby recognize and honor the accomplishments of Bishop Shawn Stephens
and Overseer Yolanda Stephens for their leadership in our community and congratulate the Ignite
Church International on their 16 years of service in Leesburg and greater Loudoun County area
proclaimed the 14th day of January 2020.
Then we have a proclamation of recognition for Tom Marshall. Whereas Tom Marshall has served two
terms as the Leesburg District Member of Leesburg, the Loudoun County Public School Board, and
whereas Mr. Marshall's term of office expired on December 31st, 2019, and whereas he started with
dedication commitment on various committees, including the Discipline Students Committee, the
2
Support Service Committee and was Chairman of the Human Resources and Talent Development
Committee.
Whereas having been a teacher himself, Mr. Marshall has always been a strong supporter and an
advocate for teachers as the Committee Chairman and as a voting member of the Loudoun County
School Board. Whereas Mr. Marshall is an active supporter of the diversity existing within the Town of
Leesburg and has fought to preserve the demographic balance in schools. Whereas during his two
terms, he strived to provide differential staffing and additional resources for those Leesburg schools
that need greater services.
Therefore, the Mayor and the Council of the Town of Leesburg Virginia, hereby congratulate Tom
Marshall on his service as the Leesburg District Member of the Loudoun County School Board. We
thank him for his enthusiastic devotion to the teachers and the students of the Loudoun County School
System, proclaimed the 14th day of January 2020. If you all would like to come down and join me, we
will present these to the various people. Up and everything, wow, that's good. [laughs] We're going to
move over here. Stacey, please come join me. Ladies, come join me. We have Pam. Nice to see you
and --
Stacey Metcalfe: [inaudible 00:10:25].
Mayor Burk: Great, wonderful. Well, thank you for being here.
Stacey Metcalfe: These two are the ones that make LNRC run.
Mayor Burk: Aha, wow, that's great. Let me tell you, I'm sure all of us have been at the hospital at one
point or another and without a doubt, all of us know deep in our hearts that it's really the nurses that
make the experience what it is and we really appreciate all the work that all of the nurses do here at the
(nova Hospital and the Rehabilitation Center. To receive such a prestigious award is just remarkable. I
hope you all are very proud and that you know how much we are very proud of what you've been able
to accomplish. It's just really wonderful. Would you like to say a few words?
Pam Janney: I'm Pam Janney. I'm the administrator of (nova Loudoun Nursing and Rehab, and I'm
very proud of my center. We have a hundred beds, and we do get high performing for skilled rehab
patients. I'm very proud of my staff. Thank you very much for the honor.
Mayor Burk: Stacey, I know you want to say something.
Stacy Metcalfe: No, I just want to say that I am so proud of what we do at LNRC and, again, I know it's
been serving this community for over 100 years, and LNRC has been part of that equation. We always
like to say that we are neighbors taking care of neighbors. Thank you, everybody, for inviting us here
and we really appreciate you acknowledging the great work that's being done over there.
Mayor Burk: Sure, thank you and would you like to say a few words?
(nova Representative: Just on behalf of (nova leadership, I just want to thank you, Pam for your
amazing leadership because without you, none of this would happen. You're leading the teams that
help take care of patients each and every day. Thank you for all that you do.
Pam Janney: Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you all very much.
[applause]
Mayor Burk: All right. The next one is Ignite Church. Bishop Shawn Stephens and Overseer Yolanda
Stephens. I know you're here. There you are. Yolanda, are you going to come up and join us?
Bishop Shawn Stephens: No, she's actually home sick.
3
Mayor Burk: I'm so sorry.
Bishop Shawn Stephens: My daughter's with me and my grandson.
Mayor Burk: Your daughter and grandson are welcome to come join you up here if you would like.
[chuckling]
[applause]
Mayor Burk: Would you like to say a few words? No.
[laughter]
[crosstalk]
Mayor Burk: Well, we want to thank you very much for all the service that you provide the people in
our Town and people in the region. It most certainly is very important and very significant. Thank you
very much for all that you do and the fact that you care about all of our residents. That's significant and
we really appreciate it. Would you like to say a few words?
Bishop Shawn Stephens: Sure. Preachers are never shy of a mic, right? Just let me, first of all, thank
Mayor Burk and of course, Councilman Campbell and all of you that have seen it and being that
noteworthy to honor us tonight. There's a few of us here tonight from Ignite Church. We are honored to
have served this great town and this County for 16 years. We look forward to serving as long as the
Lord would allow. Thanks again for honoring us, to all of you. We don't take your kindness for granted.
Brother Ron, thank you so much. To this great town, we're honored to be here. We don't take for granted
that God has entrusted us with the assignment of serving this community. Thanks again.
Mayor Burk: Thank you very much.
[applause]
Mayor Burk: Would you like to say words about your grandfather?
Bishop Stephens' Grandson: No.
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: Well, I tried. All right. Tom Marshall. Well, Mr. Marshall, it's been a long time. [chuckles]
Tom and I have known each other for many, many years. I was a teacher for 34 years in the school
system. I always knew that we had a school board member that was on our side. That was really
important to us. If there was any issues or any concerns that we had, we always knew that we could go
to Tom. Tom would listen to us and try to help us with our situation. We are sad that you are leaving but
very happy for you, for your new chapter [chuckles] and what you're going to do.
Tom Marshall: It's going to be a short [inaudible 00:15:00].
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: I know that you would have a few words you'd like to say.
Tom Marshall: No. First of all, thank you very much. What's your name? Mayor Burk. I wanted to say
to everybody that I've never been proclama-tized or whatever it is when we get a proclamation. I've had
a few restraining orders against me -
[laughter]
Tom Marshall: -but I've never been proclama-tized and I really appreciate it. I would like everybody to
know that I really felt such a love for the Town of Leesburg. I can't tell you how much I feel like I have
4
to protect them when I'm with the School Board because there are a lot of people out there from different
areas that don't realize they need to serve our town. I always want to keep that diversity that we have.
I always want to keep the fact that we are our town and we're not just a group of neighborhoods or
HOAs. That makes me feel great that I can represent you for the eight years I did. I'd like to brag this
fact. I've never missed one single scheduled School Board meeting in eight years.
[applause]
Mayor Burk: I guess we should give you a certificate for attendance too. Gosh.
[laughter]
Tom Marshall: I got that already.
Mayor Burk: Okay. Well, thank you.
Tom Marshall: Thank you so much.
Mayor Burk: Thank you.
[applause]
Mayor Burk: We're going to have presentations. I'm sorry. Don't go away.
Kate Trask: Madam Mayor, Council, I'd like to introduce a special group that's here tonight. They are
the winners of the 2019 Holiday in Lights Contest. They had the best lit float in the Town's Christmas
and holiday parade this year.
Mayor Burk: I saw it and it is.
Kate Trask: Yes, they did. At this time, Boy Scout Troop 39 from Purcellville, Virginia, come on up.
[applause]
Mayor Burk: All right, gentlemen, whose idea was the float? I think it was yours.
John Matthews: Yes, the float's idea was the troops and my family, the Matthews group. We built it in
their shop. I'd personally like to thank you, the Town of Leesburg, for supporting us through the float
and just giving us that award is-- We really appreciate you guys. I appreciate it so much. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Absolutely.
John Matthews: On another note, I'd like to thank my troop. You all did such a great job. We loved. It
was a great turnout, absolutely. I had a lot of fun.
Mayor Burk: Tell them what your float was.
John Matthews: Yes, so our float was a-- It was like a jazz Santa kind of style. Our Santa is here. It
was Alex Richard, my man right here. He was a Santa as a jazz guy. He had a hat on, cool glasses.
Like not Santa, but like a jazz Santa. We had two trees in the back and it was all for Lego, which is
going to be the next thing. It is going to be Scouting for Bricks. What were the dates again?
Scoutmaster: April 25 and 26.
John Matthews: Yes. If you could come out and support us guys that'll be great and we'd appreciate
it.
Mayor Burk: I'm sure you'd like to thank your scoutmaster.
5
John Matthews: Of course, yes, scoutmaster. We got to thank him. He's appreciated. Do you want to
say a few words?
Scoutmaster: I just really appreciate the Town and it was a great honor to participate in the float. It
was a lot of fun to watch the boys work together and they had the great vision for the float and they
brought it all together and it was great. It was good. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: I'm sure they learned a lot.
Scoutmaster: Yes.
Mayor Burk: This is the trophy. You don't get to keep it. Sorry boys.
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: It does have your name, your pack name on it.
[background conversation]
Mayor Burk: All right.
Scoutmaster: Thank you.
Mayor Burk: I know this hurts but you have to give it back.
[applause]
Mayor Burk: Guys, I have something for you before you actually sit down. [chuckles] Here's a patch.
Each of you get a Leesburg patch. Even though you're Purcellville, you get a Leesburg patch.
Mayor Burk: Do you need any more? Are there any kids that aren't here that you would--?
Scoutmaster: [inaudible 00:20:05].
Mayor Burk: Sure. [laughs] Excuse me, Martin. All right. We have a presentation from the County on
the County designation of the JLMA as a revitalization area.
Valmarie Turner: Good evening, Mayor Burk, and the entire Town Council, thank you so much for
having me. My name is Valmarie Turner. I serve as one of the Assistant County Administrators.
Specifically, I oversee the Human Services Department which includes the Office of Housing. Here
today, I have with me Sarah Coyle Etro as well as Rebecca King and Brenda Morton, and Steve Harris.
We have a brief presentation. I'm going to give some overview, and they will be happy to answer any
questions that you have.
We're here today specifically, of course, to talk about the Leesburg Joint Land Management Area. In
2017, the Board of Supervisors designated the suburban policy area, which is the eastern half of the
County for this specific revitalization area designation, which identifies an area where the product sector
is unlikely to build housing, particularly affordable workforce housing.
At that time, the County did not move forward with the Leesburg JLMA because coordination had not
occurred with the Town, which is one of the reasons why I'm here today and also had the opportunity
to meet with Town staff. This designation simply gives an apartment developer an advantage when
applying to use tax credits to help finance his apartment building. It is not a designation stating that the
County has to term that this area is designated for affordable housing.
This designation provides a financing opportunity for a rental housing developer. Apartments will be
built where allowed by plan policy and appropriate zoning. This designation does not influence or affect
land use, or zoning. The project that we're talking about in particular is Tuscarora Crossing and it is
building overall for mixed -income, both rental and homeownership. The apartments are only one part
6
of a larger development and right now I'd like to turn it over to Rebecca King to give you a little more
insight on the entire project.
Rebecca King: Good evening, as Ms. Turner said, I'm Rebecca King. I'm with the Office of Housing. I
run our multifamily loan program. I appreciate the opportunity to come before you tonight, so thank you.
I love it when technology works. All right. This is the map of the area we're talking about, the Leesburg
JLMA, that we are proposing as a revitalization area per the Virginia Housing Development Authority or
VHDA per their definition in the State Code.
The reason we are requesting this designation is to help developers applying for competitive tax credits
through VHDA to create workforce housing. Again, it does not circumvent land use policy or existing
zoning. The definition of a revitalization area is as VHDA has defined it, which is an area that lacks
workforce housing that's affordable and where the private sector will not create it without assistance.
The reason we're bringing this forward is because we want to do more to support our workforce and to
meet their housing affordability needs. We want to add to our toolbox so that we can serve families
earning up to 60% of Area Median Income. That is for one person $51,000. For a family of four, that's
almost $73,000. That's a firefighter. That's a daycare teacher or an administrator to single working mom.
This is where we need to create more workforce housing and this would help us do that.
Being in this revitalization area would provide a development applying for competitive tax credits with
15 additional points. Applications at VHDA are incredibly competitive. They win or fail on one point so
this designation is incredibly helpful. It really matters for those applications. The County is considering
an application that would benefit from this designation. In summary, it's to help developers applying to
VHDA for financing. It only applies to VHDA financing. It gives us another tool to support the
development of workforce housing. Thank you and we'll take any questions.
Mayor Burk: All right. Are you ready for questions at this point then? Mr. Steinberg? No questions? Mr.
Thiel?
Council Member Thiel: Just one quick question. If you head back to the map slide, is this for all of the
JLMA or just portions of the JLMA?
Rebecca King: The entire JLMA.
Council Member Thiel: Entire JLMA? Okay, thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Campbell?
Council Member Campbell: Yes, thank you for being here tonight, appreciate it. Seems like you're
always here talking about affordable dwelling and housing to some extent. Just a couple of probably
technical questions. If this area is designated as revitalization area, is that a permanent designation? Is
that the expectation of the government and once we designate this area, that kind of title conveys with
the land?
Rebecca King: There's no expiration date on the designation but again, it's for developments applying
for tax credits for VHDA. It doesn't exist outside of a VHDA financing program. I don't know if there's
any--
Valmarie Turner: That's what I wanted to stress. Sir, can you hear me? That's what I wanted to stress
that it is specifically and for the sole purpose of obtaining financing from the Virginia Department of
Housing Authority.
Council Member Campbell: Right, but with the government expect that once that loan is given under
that designation that that designation stays as long as that loan's in place.
Valmarie Turner: I'm sorry, can you repeat your question? I'm sorry.
7
Council Member Campbell: Once the government or once a loan is obtained under that designation,
it would be the expectation, I would think, that that designation would stay as long as that loan is in
effect.
Valmarie Turner: I would think so as well.
Council Member Campbell: Okay. Then at least to my final question, since this whole policy area
currently is under the County, and I say policy with JMLA, but at the same time, the ADU program is
under the County and the particular program that you're running with housing now, that this area then
would be best administered by the County because of this new designation? Since the Town doesn't
have a program, does it matter who controls this territory?
Sarah Coyle Etro: I would say Councilman Campbell that it really would have no impact. This is not
part of a County program. It's not part of a County ordinance. The affordable dwelling unit ordinance,
ADUs, are required by the Zoning Ordinance. That is not what this is. This would really be a private -
sector apartment builder building an apartment building and they're getting financing through the
Virginia Housing Development Authority, that simple.
Council Member Campbell: Okay, so there's no ADU designation for this particular program?
Sarah Coyle Etro: No, sir. They would be meeting the terms of the tax credit. They would be offering
the low market rents and, I don't know Rebecca if you want to add anything to it, but the low market
rents and the idea would be housing for the workforce.
Council Member Campbell: Okay, but it is the County that does approve these land development
applications?
Sarah Coyle Etro: That's correct.
Council Member Campbell: I'm just trying to figure what the role of the County is because if that role
transfers to the Town, I want to make sure that we understand what's being transferred, but if it's not
being transferred as a process to the Town then--
Valmarie Turner: That is correct.
Council Member Campbell: I'm sorry, go ahead.
Valmarie Turner: I'm sorry. I said you are correct that it is not a County program in terms of what our
role is. We have an application from a developer that is seeking County funds to assist or to provide
some gap financing.
Council Member Campbell: Right. Okay, at this point, there is no role for the Town to really play. Your
presentation is simply advising us of what's happening.
Valmarie Turner: Well, it's more of a partnership. My purpose for being here is to actually hear from
the entire Council. If you do have concerns, I'll take those concerns back to the Board of Supervisors.
It's not that we're just here just to advise you as much as we want to hear from you and I will take any
concerns that you have back to our Board of Supervisors.
Council Member Campbell: Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Ms. Fox?
Council Member Fox: No.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Martinez? I do. I have a couple of questions. Why are you designating the entire area
when parts of it have already been developed?
8
Valmarie Turner: Right and that's the same thing as the suburban policy area. Our goal was to be
consistent. In 2017, we did designate the suburban policy area which is almost the Eastern half of the
County as a revitalization area. It's for consistency and to ensure that we're not arbitrary and we're
simply just looking at one project at a time.
Mayor Burk: Well, those areas are already developed though. There are not going to be-- There are
single-family homes or duplexes and businesses. I'm concerned that you're going to end up getting -
that we're going to get feedback from the people that live in those areas saying, "Wait, what are you
doing? This is what we are right now. This is where we're going to stay. Why are you designating us a
revitalization area when we're not going? We're staying where we are as we are." There's limited
opportunity for any revitalization in those areas. They're all pretty new to begin with.
Valmarie Turner: Mayor Burk, you're correct. When we looked at the designation, again, we did not
want to look just for one project at a time, we're looking for areas that we can designate as revitalization
area. With this suburban policy area, there are areas that are already developed that would not fit into
this guideline but it's within the entire area. It helps in terms of the developers because we know that
we have a need for workforce housing. This is just a tool that is being used.
Mayor Burk: I understand that. I'm not making myself clear enough. These areas are developed
already. You're designating them as revitalization areas. What impact does that have on those areas?
Some of them are shopping centers, some of them are housing, what impact does it have to those
people to their properties?
Valmarie Turner: It will not change zoning or any effective plan policy.
Mayor Burk: Now they've been designated as a rezoning, a revitalization area.
Valmarie Turner: For the sole purpose for a developer to obtain funding. It does not impact zoning, it
does not impact any type of plan policy. It is only if it meets the guidelines to get financing. If a developer
cannot develop in an area because it's already developed then that --
Mayor Burk: Then why designate it?
Valmarie Turner: Because it is one area that we have looked at from a standpoint of JLMA area as
what the suburban policy area, to be consistent.
Mayor Burk: We have an airport in there also. We, as a Town, have worked diligently to keep housing
from the airport. We haven't always been successful but we have tried very hard. On this side of it, there
is no housing because we don't want to have housing next to an airport. Now, you're designating the
airport as a revitalization area and the areas around it.
Valmarie Turner: If staff or the Town Council has a different proposal, I'll be more than happy to take
that back to the Board of Supervisors which is why we're here today.
Mayor Burk: We're most certainly not ready tonight to give you any proposal or whatever. We
appreciate you giving us the information on this, but this is going to be-- Especially the airport issue,
that's very important to us. The closer you get houses to an airport, the sooner the airport ends up
getting closed and we want to make sure that that doesn't happen.
Sarah Coyle Etro: If I could just clarify one thing. I understand what you're saying about the blanket
designation. There are many steps you have to go through before an area can even produce the
housing. You'd have to go through a rezoning, your plan or the County's plan would have to support the
rezoning. All those steps still have to be taken. This is not a land -use designation at all.
This is simply a way and it's in the State Code in the section that governs the Virginia Housing
Development Authority that says a locality can designate identifying an area where there are jobs but
there's not the likelihood that the private sector would build a workforce housing to support those jobs.
It's that simple. That's what the code is saying. Again, it's to get financing. It is not a land use designation
or a zoning designation. It cannot change the land use at the airport.
9
Mayor Burk: You're actually doing this for one developer that has a project.
Sarah Coyle Etro: One reason we're identifying the entire JLMA is so that there's opportunity
throughout the JLMA. We don't know what's going to happen in five years or in the future.
Mayor Burk: Then that goes to my concern. You don't know what's going to happen in the JLMA and
we're trying to protect the airport and you're designating it as an area to develop.
Sarah Coyle Etro: I understand what you're saying Mayor Burk, but we can't change the zoning without
it going through a zoning process. This is not a land use or comp plan approach or policy. This is really
to enable someone to get financing. It's that simple. You may have a shopping center in the future
where you want it to become a mixed -use center, and you have a developer who wants to build housing
within that shopping center somewhere in the JLMA. This could provide them a tool to get financing for
their residential part. We just don't know where that might be in the future. The idea is not to be arbitrary
or piecemeal in the designation.
Mayor Burk: All right, I think I have some issues with it still. [chuckles]
Sarah Coyle Etro: Understood.
Mayor Burk: Although I understand what you're saying.
Sarah Coyle Etro: Thank you.
Valmarie Turner: We certainly understand that.
Mayor Burk: Thank you very much. We appreciate you-
Valmarie Turner: Thank you so much.
Mayor Burk: -bringing the information to us. That's great to be able to share that information. I
appreciate it. All right. Regional Commission reports. Does anybody have any reports? I know Council
Member Fox you're being reappointed to the-- What's the title of it? The transportation one. It begins
with a P, I know.
Council Member Fox: No, [inaudible 00:37:09].
Mayor Burk: Have you had your meetings yet?
Council Member Fox: No.
Mayor Burk: Okay, is there anyone else at this point that has a comment on any regional? I do. I
attended the COLT meeting which is the meeting among the Mayors and we had a very lively discussion
on data centers. Data centers are looking to move out West and what was the reaction and that sort of
thing. We talked extensively about the census. The census is coming to the United States. We're going
to be starting in the next few weeks.
There is a shortage of census workers, so if you know anybody that doesn't have a job, that would like
to earn some money, they are looking for census staff. It is very important that we get as much
information as we can from as many people as we can because so much of different funding sources,
we get are from the census. When we get that information, I hope that everybody in Leesburg will fill it
out and send it back in and talk to the census workers if they come to knock on your door.
I also attended Loudoun County's economic advisory board. This was their first meeting and so they
elected new officers and they did a report on FOIA. The one statistic that really struck me was Mr. Rizer
who's the head of the economic development department said when he came in 2009, the ratio of
commercial to residential was 19 to 81 and now, as of this present day, it's 34% commercial. That's a
huge growth and it's an even out that all of us, all the counties try to seek. They have been very
10
successful with it but I did note that they also have 21 employees in their department so maybe that
helps a little bit with everybody working on the same goal.
That's all I have, and now it takes us to our petitioners. Our first petitioner is Christopher Rohland, and
he will be followed by Will Murphy. Is Mr. Rowland here? I guess not, okay. Will Murphy will be followed
by Daniella Marks, who will be followed by Luke Hubbard.
Will Murphy: Good evening, Mayor Burk, Vice Mayor Martinez, and the rest of the Council. I'm Will
Murphy, along with me are Daniella Marks, Teryn Gasby, and Luke Hubbard. We are members of a
group of students seeking to better the Town through increasing the knowledge of our young citizens
on their civil rights and duties. Public policy has routinely fallen into the back burner of our education
system. We are using our own time and liberty because we see public policy as a necessity to nurture
young citizens.
Many of our age do not understand the power that they wield at the tip of their tongue and stroke of
their pen. In a world where activism is needed more than ever, we seek to educate on how to effectively
use these tools given through the expulsion of tyranny and the promotion of democracy. Following me
will be Daniella Marks on the explanation.
Danielle Marks: My name is Daniella Marks. I'm a senior at Tuscarora High School and I'm also an
organizer for this event. To achieve our goal of facilitating understanding and participation in local
government, our summit will feature free workshops spearheaded by experts within their respective
fields, followed by student discussions. We will utilize the topic of environmental stewardship within the
Town of Leesburg to generate ideas that will later be converted into suggested policies for the Town
Council and community leaders.
Our scheduled date is May 31 st from 2:00 to 5:00 PM. Our intent for this summit is to be able to return
to the Council with suggestions and recommendations for policy changes. We believe that the input of
today's youth on these issues will allow us to become effective leaders in our community in the future.
I'll be followed by my peer, Luke Hubbard who has a request for the Council.
Luke Hubbard: Hello, I am Luke Hubbard and a senior at Tuscarora High School and a life-long
resident of Leesburg. Since this is the first of hopefully many government -oriented summits in Leesburg,
we've yet to establish where the summit will be held. As a collective, we have decided- we have
determined that Ida Lee Recreational Center basement is the ideal location for our event due to its
spacious open floor plan and its placement in the heart of our community.
We are asking that the Town Council waive the $880 fee for the usage of the Ida Lee Recreational
Center basement for May 31 st from 2:00 to 5:00 PM. We would be overjoyed to have our request
fulfilled as this is critical to the success of our event. Thank you, Mayor Burk, Vice Mayor Martinez and
members of the Town Council for your consideration. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Very good. Luke is followed by Cody Francis who is followed by Dave Culbert.
Cody Francis: Good evening, Mayor Burk and Council Members. My name is Cody Francis. I'm a
resident of Loudoun County and I'm here as one of your customers representing Graydon Manor. I want
to talk a little bit about sewer tonight and put some things out on the record. I think you had a
presentation last night about our sewer service. Couple of things I felt I needed to clarify.
One is that there is no capacity issue with sewer that is affecting whether or not additional development
can occur at Graydon Manor. I think if you look at your own documents, they don't support that. I'm
going to read and share with you a few numbers that are pertinent that I obtained from your own
information. Your current sewage plant capacity is seven and a half million gallons a day. You're
currently using as of a few months ago 4.6 million gallons per day, which is about 60% of that at full
build which means you've looked at every property in the Town limits or wherever you think that you're
serving and have said that that 6.8 million gallons per day.
There's about 2.9 million gallons per day today of unused capacity. There is about 0.66 unused capacity
of everything was built out that has been imagined or planned for by Town staff. Further, when the
11
current treatment plant was developed or designed, it was designed to accommodate 10 million gallons
a day, which it's more than double what you're using today.
Just for comparison purposes you recently approved in the JLMA area, of course, that the County has
said they have rights to serve. You've approved the use of a sewer by Microsoft and by comparison
purposes, that's about 0.14 million gallons per day. That's a small percentage. What's proposed at
Graydon is less than that. I think you got the numbers last night from your Director of Utilities at about
0.1 million gallons per day is the anticipated use of Graydon and what's has been proposed and
presented to the staff.
With that comes, it's not a free thing that Graydon Manor would be getting. You'd be also receiving
about $1.9 million in availability fees. It may not sound as exciting as a data center. What's troubling is
that our perception is that you are trying to use a sewer to control uses. You are our utility provider. You
are not our local government. You're a utility provider and the Town of Leesburg agreed to serve this
property over 50 years ago. Our expectation is that you do the right thing and serve the property as we
have the rights to be served.
I think when I went back and looked at-- If you go back and look around correspondence on the topic,
Town staff came to you two years ago or a year half ago in May and they explained correctly to you
that the standard for serving Graydon Manor is that if we subdivide or if we extend the sewer to an
adjacent property, then a Town Council approval of an extension is required. If we don't do that which
we're not planning to do that, it's an administrative approval and staff should just be processing our
applications, which they have refused to do today. They've conjured up some reasons that they think
sounds good but that's just an obstructionist tactic. It doesn't feel very friendly.
You may think that we're overthinking that, but when I read the correspondence between Mayor Burk,
yourself, and others on this topic, it averts efforts to use sewer to block the development of Graydon
Manor. I don't how else to interpret your communications. I don't know whether communications had
been had between other Council Members and staff or constituents, but it's hard to see anything besides
obstructionist efforts by Town staff and certainly at least the Mayor.
What am I asking to do? What's the petition? The petition is go back and follow the policy or what was
presented to you by your own utilities department to begin with, which was correct. Their first look at it
was correct. It wasn't haphazard. It wasn't by accident. It wasn't ill -thought out. It was very carefully
studied. They presented the right thing and you don't need Town Council approval for another
extension.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mr. Francis, your time is up. Next one is Dave Culbert, followed by Theresa
Bishop.
Dave Culbert: Thank you. Good evening and Happy New Year. For the record, my name is Dave
Culbert. That's spelled D-A-V-E C-U-L-B-E-R-T. Now one of the New Year's resolutions I have this
particular new year is to be more candid, to be more plain-spoken as I think sometimes, I'm too subtle
and my message is not received. Let me start this year with trying to be a little bit more candid.
With respect to last night's presentation, I think Cody addressed that in some part, but Ms. Wyks
indicated I believe you go to Council Member Fox or to Council Member Campbell at some point in time
that staff was not in a position to make a recommendation. That's my recollection from the meeting, but
I note that slide seven of the staff's PowerPoint last night had a staff recommendation that Council will
not authorize the extension.
At one point in time, staff is up here telling you, "Gee, we don't have the information in front of us. Of
course, we got it and sent it back and chose not to look at it," but we believe they, in fact, did look at it.
Then having looked at it said, "Hey, without having analyzed it, we can't make a recommendation but
without having analyzed it, we recommend that you don't extend."
Now one of the reasons they recommended you don't extend utilities, as they describe it, extend, is that
there's County policy that says you don't go out there. Well, County policy doesn't even control County
actions. It's policy. If this Town wants to recognize and acknowledge the County policy controls what
12
this Town does, that is perhaps your decision and certainly, I recognize that the County has adopted a
policy for the JLMA that this Town is not the primary provider of utilities in the JLMA.
It didn't stop you earlier in the year or past year but apparently, it does now. Again, as Cody indicated,
two years ago, provision of sewer to Graydon Manor was an administrative matter, apparently,
according to staff. Today, not so much. Under the Loudoun County Zoning Ordinance, so here's
something that, again, may have been missed in prior presentations. We are seeking a by -right use.
Now there may be some confusion about that but if we were seeking a rezoning, if we were seeking a
special exception, there would be a legislative process that we would have to go through. I'm not sure
why you would be worried about continuing to provide utilities which is a proprietary act if there is some
legislative action in front of us but what we want is a by -right use. It's administrative, it's ministerial, so
too when we come before this board through the County as a referral that should also be an
administrative response to an administrative application.
Now, so really the only real issue and I would say there are two and there's not a question. There's no
only real question, but it's a real issue is does the Town have capacity? The quick answer is, of course,
it does. Let me be more candid. Of course, it does. It absolutely has capacity. We know that, staff knows
that, and we believe you know that. Then, what is being asked of the Town? What is being asked of the
Town by the County in this instance? Please confirm that the Town has capacity. Please confirm that
for an existing user you have capacity.
As Cody pointed out, it is not the function of a utility provider to cut off utilities for the purpose of
regulating land use. Now, we can give you citations on that, but I would like to think that's self-evident.
Again, this is a theme that I addressed earlier at one of my other meetings. Just as a County is not the
boss of the Town of Leesburg, so too Town staff is not the boss of this Council.
At some point in time, we do hope that this Council and I think we saw some of that last night and we
appreciate that, that this Council will actually direct staff to do the job that they're supposed to do, which
is to analyze the sewer capacity and respond honestly and candidly that you have capacity and then
can serve. Thank you very much.
Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Culbert. Miss Bishop is followed by John Burnham.
Theresa Bishop: Thank you. Theresa Bishop, 104 Cornwall Street. I like that. Nobody's the boss to
you. [chuckles] I like that. Madam Mayor, Town Council, thank you for the opportunity to speak and to
voice my concerns and suggestions. The Town and the Town Council have a responsibility to protect
the Town and its residents. Up to this point in this process, it seems that the Town has just approved
whatever the County proposes and has not really stood up for its citizens.
The Town residents in the neighborhood where this massive development, the courthouse expansion
is occurring, are having to accept more and more inconveniences, loss of street parking, increased
traffic and disruption to our community. I implore the Town Council to stand up for us against the
developers' constant changes and demands. We need sensible access to the new Pennington Lot and
we need reasonable mitigation of the disruptions caused by the County's proposals.
The first thing is the tunnel. I don't even recall why the courthouse needs this tunnel. I do recall that its
for staff use, its not for the public. It's for the employees or some use of the County, not for the residents
or for the normal general public. Why can't they consider a bridge or even better, use the sidewalk like
the public and everybody else is going to have to do.
I suggest that they scrap the tunnel and if it comes up to where it's a prisoner thing, I think that the new
courthouse in the proposal that I've seen, they have parking inside underneath in the courthouse, so
it's not a safety prisoner concern. To eliminate the need to close Church Street for three years, they
could just stop with the tunnel idea. That's one of my thoughts.
The impact to the Town and the residents for this is the sole purpose of the court, not for the Town and
not for the residents. The closure of Church Street for an extended period of time will cause major traffic
and safety issues. Fire trucks go down there daily, that's a major route. How will the construction trucks
come if Church Street is closed? That's the main route for the construction vehicles that's been
13
proposed all along is Church Street. Where will they go if it's closed? How will they receive the transport
vans?
The judges come in, I think I know that one. They'll go one way, the wrong way up Church Street
because they're the County, right? Just trying to make a point that all of this is about the County and
the courthouse and their demands. I just want to reiterate this, it's the Town Council and the Town's
responsibility to protect us, the residence, not the courthouse, not the County.
Secondly, there needs to be an alternate entrance and exit to the Pennington Lot. Those talks about a
temporary entrance in through from the Harrison Street -North street intersection. I think that that's wise
there needs to be an alternate entrance besides Church Street. It's the Town's responsibility to require
the County to provide an alternate and regress. It should be permanent, but at minimum that should be
in place during the Church Street closure. Church Street, North Street intersection is a poorly conceived
intersection. It's not designed to handle this volume of traffic. There's no planned improvements to
handle the increase of traffic. It'll be unsafe. It's a very dangerous traffic pattern in place.
Then to send a detour down Market, King to North, what are they thinking? How do they expect the
width of that road to handle the shuttle bus, vehicle traffic, the school buses, the bus stops? It's ludicrous
to think that that's going to work. I urge the Council to please use some common sense and seriously
consider an adequate entrance, and exit of this Church Street closure takes place. The Harrison
intersection is the logical and obvious choice and the Town should require this.
Lastly, if Church Street's going to be closed for this length of time, the County could consider continuing
the underground utilities down Church Street, and maybe do something positive for the Town and its
residents. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you Miss Bishop. John Burnham.
John Burnham: Thank you Mayor, Town Council. I appreciate it. I've also come to talk about the
closure of Church Street. It seems like as my understanding that we were supposed to get advance
notice with major changes in this project. They mailed out a letter on January 6th, I got it on Friday. I'm
sure many of my neighbors never even received the letter before it would respond before Council.
They're trying to sneak this in.
Just to provide a little background about this. This whole project has been a series of misdirections by
the County, first they tried to, when we realized that the garage needed to be four levels, they came up
with some fictitious studies that had contradictory assumptions, mathematical errors. It was pointed out
to them, they refuse to correct it. Even then their numbers didn't show it needed a fourth level, but they
went ahead and built it anyways.
There have been major delays, major cost overruns on the part of the County for this. It took twice as
long to build the garage it was supposed to. When they were proposing to build the new courthouse, or
the extension of the courthouse, they were asked why they couldn't underground the utilities on Church
Street, and they quoted some ridiculous prices that nobody really believed. I did a little bit of work on
this. I looked around and what's in the public domain, and it looks like they misplaced a decimal.
They were saying it was about $700,000 to over a million dollar to do it. According to what I've been
able to find it's about $70,000, and that's not high -density urban area. That's the high end of what I've
been able to find would say that it costs. Again, misdirection.
Now they're trying to take away spaces on Cornwall, and the reason they don't want to have, they may
have to take away space on Cornwall is because they don't want the traffic to have to go through
Semones. The reason they don't want the traffic to go to Semones, is just now they want to make it a
secured lot part of it, which means need fencing, barbwire who knows what to secure that, which is
ridiculous.
They're already going to have twice as much secure parking as they have now without that.
Then the County used eminent domain to seize property from local land owners. Now that's usually
only used when old landowners for being in transient. They were not being in transient. Some of the
14
landowners donated their land for the sidewalks, any improvements that needed to be done. The reason
they did that was because they didn't want to wake us up a month for the banks to approve it. Now here
we are, six months later, they hadn't even begun building it. It's ridiculous.
Now they are seeking to change what they propose to do, when they got approval for this project. They
were asked multiple times by the Planning Commission, and by the Town Council, how long this Church
Street going to be closed for this tunnel? They were told six to eight weeks.
Now they're saying three months and then by the way another three years. Because we know it's going
to take longer than what they're saying because of what's happened with the garage and everything
else they've done. I don't understand why they couldn't have anticipated this. They were asked multiple
times and they gave multiple reassurances to the Town, and to its residents that this would not be
closed more than about two months. Now they're changing this. They don't give us notice when they're
going to change it like they're supposed to.
This is just going to wreck traffic in downtown Leesburg. If you're going to either go up to King Street,
which is already congested. The main entrance for the only parking for the courthouse is Church Street
and they're closing it up from the main artery that comes into town, from the East which is where most
people in Loudoun live.
What are they going to do? They're going back, they're going to take North Street, they're going to take
Harrison, they're going to go to already congested King Street and it's just going to create a mess and
danger for kids. Because I know that there are seven kids under the age of 10 on those two blocks of
Harrison right there that they're going to be cutting through.
My reaction to this request is, no, you said that wouldn't happen honor your commitment, do what you
said you're going to do. Make it work, figure out a way to do it. If for some bizarre reason they can't
make this work without a hazard to public safety don't make it just a blanket statement. Make them
come to you and say, "Hey, we need it for this amount of time, for this reason, because of public safety
issues."
Also, get them to underground those utilities, we've got poles leaning on that street and $70,000, not
$700,000 that number is fictitious, it's ridiculous, they misplaced a decimal. If in the end, you have to do
it, at least get them to do that. Thank you for your time, and I applaud your service. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mr. Burnham was the last person that signed up. Is there anybody else that
would like to speak that didn't have a chance to sign up? All right, then I will close the petitioner section
at this point.
Council Member Thiel: Madam Mayor, I would like to ask for a suspension on the rules.
Mayor Burk: Okay, suspension of the rules was by Mr. Thiel, seconded by Vice Mayor Martinez. What
did you want to suspend the rules for?
Council Member Thiel: I would like to waive the Ida Lee fee for the policy event that the students have
come to speak for us and inform us on.
Mayor Burk: All right, before we can do that, we do have to suspend the rules. Is there anybody that
has any objections to suspending the rules? All right all in favor?
All Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed. That's 6-0-1 did you have another motion?
Vice Mayor Martinez: The motion would be to defer the cost.
Council Member Thiel: The second is to defer the cost of $885 or to be determined?
15
Kaj Dentler: They've stated a number of $800. I don't have an exact price. In my understanding the
staff does not have all the details so I think it's an approximate amount at this point. If you wanted to
use $850 as a number, that's acceptable.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Could we make that not to exceed a thousand? Would that be appropriate not
to exceed a thousand?
Kaj Dentler: Sure.
Council Member Thiel: We're in.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Thiel has made a motion to defer the cost for the students to have their youth summit
in May. Mr. Martinez, did you second that?
Vice Mayor Martinez: Yes, I did.
Mayor Burk: Any discussion on this? Mr. Campbell?
Council Member Campbell: Yes, I'd like to congratulate the students. Your civic responsibility today
is your seat up here tomorrow. If we can encourage others to come along, understand what the issues
are, use their voices as well as someday their votes, I'm all for it. Thank you very much for bringing this
to our attention, to our Town, and to our community. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: All right, Mr. Martinez did you want to say anything?
Vice Mayor Martinez: I want to make sure that in the motion that we have not to exceed a thousand
dollars.
Mayor Burk: That's correct, not to exceed $1,000.
Vice Mayor Martinez: The only comment is, whenever I talk to boy scouts and other things, it's amazing
what you can do when you come up and you talk to us and you put out a concern or an issue, we do
listen and we do take to heart what you're doing. I'm personally really proud of you guys. I think it's
phenomenal that you came to us and asked for this, which is why we're all ready and willing to help you
out.
Hopefully, as Congressman Campbell said, sorry, I didn't mean to give you a promotion. [laughs] As
Council Member Campbell said, I'm looking forward to seeing you guys getting more involved in the
community and maybe campaigning for you, for a seat up here.
Mayor Burk: Anybody else at this point.
Council Member Thiel: I just want to implore you guys for standing up and taking the initiative. It's
nice to see youth that has come before us asking for policy changes about the Town they live in and
take the initiative. You have some great policy people up here, so we expect invitations. I know the
Mayor will most likely be there because she's at every event especially if it has to do with policy. Keep
up the great work and we look forward to seeing what you guys have for us in the future.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg.
Council Member Steinberg: Short and brief, I would say, I am impressed and I'm more than happy to
support the motion.
Mayor Burk: Ms. Fox?
Council Member Fox: I want to echo that I'm impressed but I am also encouraged. I've seen a lot of
voter apathy. I've seen a lot of apathy in the political field. I'm very encouraged by this, so thank you for
coming forward and I will be happy to support it as well.
16
Mayor Burk: I will just conclude by saying, I'm very proud of you guys for coming forward to doing this.
Not only have they come forward, but they are planning it all themselves. This is their project. They're
working on it. They're doing it, so it's truly student led, so nice job. I'm looking forward to May 30th or
31 st, whichever day it is. We have a motion all in favor?
All members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? That passes. There you go. That's 5-0-1.
Vice Mayor Martinez: [inaudible 01:07:58] really civic [inaudible 01:08:00].
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: Six, you're right. I'm sorry. It's six. It's 6-0-1. I forgot, I counted wrong.
Council Member Thiel: Congrats guys
Mayor Burk: Approval of the consent agenda is next. You can leave if you want.
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: The Council will now consider the approval of the consent agenda. I will read each item
for the agenda and then I will ask if anybody wants anything removed. 12A, is Public Art Exhibit by Ligia
Inra approval of a public arts exhibit at the Town Hall. B, is approval of a public arts exhibit in the Town
Hall by Antonio Plazibat and I hope I didn't miss that one up. C, is approval of a public art exhibit at the
Town Hall by Larry Roeder. D, is requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to accept certain
streets. E, is authorizing the Town Manager to execute a license agreement between the Town of
Leesburg and summit IG for telecommunications facilities and the Towns right of way. F, is approving
the Task Order for replacement of Solids Handling Polymer Blend Units at the Water Pollution Control
Facility to FJ Industrial for the amount of $100,751. G, approving the Task Order for replacement and
installation of a Programmable Logic Controller and Remote Terminal Unit at the Old Waterford Knoll's
wastewater pump station to MC Dean, in the amount of $109,882. H, is approving the Task Order for
the Unity Control Expert for Programmable Logic Controllers, the PLC upgrade at the Water Pollution
Control Facility to MC Dean in the amount of $159,537. [crosstalk]
Vice Mayor Martinez: So moved.
Mayor Burk: Thank you for catching that. So moved by Mr. Martinez, second?
Council Member Steinberg: Second.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Council Member Thiel. Is there any anything anybody wants removed? Mr.
Steinberg, okay thank you. Everybody is okay? All in favor?
All Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? That's 6-0-1. We are now to resolutions. The first resolution that we're going
to deal with tonight is the approval and authorized the Town Manager to execute a design change order
number three in the amount of $47,475 for the West Market Street Sidewalk Improvement Project from
Ayr Street to Morven Park Road. Do I have a motion for that one?
Council Member Steinberg: So moved.
Mayor Burk: So moved by Council Member Steinberg. Second, Council Member Thiel. Any discussion
on this? All in favor?
Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed?
17
Council Member Fox: Nay.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Martinez you voted, right?
Vice Mayor Martinez: I did.
Mayor Burk: That is 5-1-1. The next resolution is the recognition of the More than Peach Project
proclamation. I move to approve the More than Peach Project proclamation to be presented at the
January 28th Town Council Meeting. I moved that, so is there a second?
Council Member Steinberg: Second.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Council Member Steinberg. Any discussion on this? All in favor?
All Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? This is another student -initiated project. We've got some active students in our
community. C, is supporting Leesburg Jewish Community, I move to approve the supporting Leesburg
Jewish Community proclamation to be presented at the January 28th, 2020 Town Council meeting.
Council Member Steinberg: So moved.
Mayor Burk: I moved it seconded by a Council Member Steinberg. All in favor?
All Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? All right, that passes, 5-0-2. Public hearing, let me get to the public hearing
wording. I have to read all multiple ones of these? There's only two.
I call to order this January 14th, 2020 public hearing of Leesburg Town Council. Unless there is an
objection, I will dispose with the reading of the advertisement. If you wish to speak, we ask that you
sign up on the sheet in the hallway. If you did not get a chance to sign up, we will give you the opportunity
to speak. Also, please identify yourself and give your address for the tape to record.
In the interest of fairness, we also ask that you observed the five-minute time limit. The green light in
front of you will turn yellow at the end of four minutes indicating that you have one -minute remaining.
At that time, we would appreciate you summing up and you'll be in the floor when the bell indicates your
time has expired.
Under the rules of orders adopted by this Council, the five-minute timer will apply to all citizens.
However, rather than have numerous citizens present remarks on behalf of the group, the Council will
allow a spokesperson for the group a few extra minutes. In that instance, we would ask speakers when
they sign up to indicate their status as spokesperson, the group they represent and their request for
additional time.
Our procedure for the public hearing is as follows. First, there is a brief presentation by staff. Second,
there will a brief presentation by applicants. Then third, the members of the public that has signed up
to speak will be called and given a five -minutes to make their comments.
The rezoning application for tonight is TLCM 2019-003 shops at Compass Creek. Is that correct? Is it
2019? Okay, 2019 Shops at Compass Creek and four special exception applications including TLSE
2019-005, TLSE 2019-006, TLSE 2019-007 and TLSE 2019-008 Shops at Compass Creek. All right,
staff, hello.
Mike Watkins: Madam Kelly, members of Council, good evening, Mike Watkins presenting these
applications to you this evening. I wanted to start off with an apology at the dais, you've got the copy of
the presentation, but there were some housekeeping errors that I made in the resolutions and the
ordinance. Those hard copies are to be provided there to you, they primarily included incorrect
18
references to the building numbers and the reference for the date of the concept plan. Again my
apologies.
Continuing on, again, you have several applications before you this evening, a rezoning and four special
exception applications. The applicant this evening is Leesburg Commercial LC. The purpose of the
applications is to rezone 4.6 acres from 11 to B3. It's also to approve four special exception applications,
they are eating establishments with driving facility.
As you can recall this application is accompanying the cross Compass Creek boundary line adjustment
application. Again, with this application to rezone pieces of property with the property owners needed
to provide consent, but a condition of the applicants consent was this rezoning application and the
special exception approvals. The subject property is located on this graphic, its 4.67 acres. It's currently
vacant, unimproved and it's currently zoned 11.
The plain land use for the property is regional office. Just a few notes about the plain land use, there's
an acknowledgement that the market for corporate office parks has changed. The impact of the County
rezoning applications ZMAP-12-021 allowed predominately retail uses adjacent to the property. Staff
also knows that the proposed restaurant use supports regional national sporting venues such as the
Ion Training Center, Bolen Park and the Evergreen Sports Complex. It's the opinion of staff that the
proposed land use is compatible with the executive airport.
Regarding the proposed development and the layout that's depicted on this slide, it depicts four eating
establishments with driving facilities. The applicant includes a small plaza area that's not required and
there are several modifications, including the buffer yard planting materials, and shared parking
agreement, and a reduction of the side yard setbacks for each pad site.
In this particular instance, there are no specific use standards for eating establishments with drive-
thrus. However, there are two development standards that must be provided which with each pad site.
That is 10 park, stacking spaces for the drive -up window and a bypass lane. With all applications that
come before you staff looked at site design. In this instance, we're looking for compatibility with adjacent
property. We look at the building orientation, the building heights, pedestrian circulation, parking and
loading, landscape and buffer yards and amenity features. In this instance, we don't see any conflicts
in any of those themes.
To give you some context of what development may occur outside the corporate limits. To the left of
the dash line is the Town corporate boundary, inside, to the right of the shaded area is the area within
Loudoun County. The applicant anticipates developing a property with inside the shaded area with a
hotel, multi -tenant retail spaces, and possibly a sit down eating establishment.
Regarding traffic analysis Compass Creek is fully constructed. There is a proposal to provide the full
signalized movement for the intersection providing access to this property. In addition, there is a second
right in access provided as well. Conceptual building elevation is required rezoning applications. These
four slides show you representative architecture for each pad site. This application does include a
proffer statement.
Briefly, the applicant is proffering the concept plan will be in substantial conformance with the concept
plan. It limits development to 10,500 square feet of building. The applicants provided some design
guidelines. The properties address pedestrian connections between each pad site, there is a
requirement to provide shared parking. The applicant will install the perimeter buffer yards with initial
development of the property. The applicant will be providing a bus shelter, again a traffic signal and
include a monetary contribution for fire and rescue.
As I stated earlier, there are three modification requests, they primarily involved the shared parking
agreement to provide adequate parking on site for all of uses. A change in the buffer yard planting
material, this is primarily due to the FAA restrictions with height and again, Council recently adopted
the ordinance modification to allow reduction in the side yard setbacks, so that's included in this
application as well.
Like recent applications that have come that have come before Council, staff is recommending at least
four special exception conditions against substantial conformance with the special exception plat, no
19
requests to modify or implied waivers or modifications. Special exceptions are limited to only those
locations shown on the plat in the height limitation of the many board signs.
The Planning Commission has made a recommendation of approval by a vote, 7-0, there were no public
speakers and again, their public hearing was conducted on December 19th. Staffs recommendation is
for approval, two primary reasons, the rezoning approval criteria has been met and the special
exception approval criteria has been met. Staff has provided suggested findings and this evening
because there are several applications, you'll need to do separate motions for each application, so one
for the rezoning and then one each for each special exception.
Then regarding the special exceptions themselves if there are any additional conditions that you wanted
to place on them that would need to be contained in the motion for this evening. I've provided two slides
for suggested motions, one for the rezoning application, and the other for the special exception
applications. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mr. Campbell, Mr. Dunn is here now.
Council Member Campbell: Thank you, sir. As usual, I appreciate the presentation. A couple of
statements and maybe questions you can answer. One, I think it's important to note that we hear, and
the issue of public transparency is important. I want to make sure that we treating this application
irregardless of the agreement for boundary line adjustment, just like we would any other application in
terms of a review in the concerns and considerations notwithstanding the Planning Commission
support.
Let me say, I'm not anti this development, but in terms of how we look at the Town plan and being in
compliance, and I know this is a different area that's not in the Town control currently but does it meet
the public good. When I see those things missing I have to ask those questions so I think that's the right
that we have to protect our citizens and our land use and to absorb this into the Town.
I think we have to be consistent how we treat this area irregardless of the process for the BLA and how
we would treat any other land development application. These are the reasons why I ask these
particular types of questions. I know for the economic development and the financial piece we look at
this as being in the public good. We've had many conversations about the economic value.
I don't know where that particular piece is, but again approving the special exceptions, approving these
applications I guess that's what's missing for me right now. Where are these pieces so we can look at
the entire application and its completeness and then say, "Yes, this is a good thing."
Mike Watkins: I thought I heard maybe two questions in there. The first being plain land use and that's
why I went to the slide. Obviously, staff can give you its opinion. Council has its own opinion as well.
The slide highlights a few aspects of why we came to the conclusion that it's in compliance with the
Town plan goals and policies.
As you well know we're going through the process of updating our Town plan with this application and
several others that have the regional office designation. The manner in which that designation was
applied is dated. Do I have the right answers as to what they should be today? No. Are we going through
the process of discovering what they should be? I anticipate that process will come to Council here
shortly.
In terms of the rigor that this application was reviewed, it received the same treatment. Was it an
expedited review? Yes. Given the context of the boundary line adjustment. The staff met with the
applicant not on 45-day intervals but on an as -needed basis to go through each and every single one
of the criteria that's in the ordinance. The application received the same vigor that we applied to all
plans that are reviewed by staff.
Council Member Campbell: Thank you. I think that's important to note. The other question I have is
about lighting in terms of proximity to the airport. Was that addressed? I'm sure it was. Can you please
state it for the record that that was addressed?
20
Mike Watkins: Yes. In terms of lighting, the Town does not have an intensity factor on the site itself.
We look at the perimeter of the property and then the fixture itself. All lighting fixtures within the Town
have to be a full -cut-off fixture. Meaning that the light is dispersed down and not vertically up. In that
regard, it met both criteria and that the perimeter of the property and the cut-off light fixture as well.
Council Member Campbell: That would satisfy the FAA?
Mike Watkins: In terms that FAA, there's no special lighting requirements, again with the full cut-off.
It's not creating the glare that can be perceived as a taxi or runway light. Then in terms of any height
projections, there are height certifications that the applicant must receive from the FAA. Both of those
aspects will be addressed or have been addressed I should say.
Council Member Campbell: They have been addressed?
Mike Watkins: Yes, sir.
Council Member Campbell: I think that about covers it again. I do understand why we've gone through
this process? Why it was expedited? What we're looking for is a Town? What the applicant is looking in
exchange for the consent agreement? I just wanted to be assured that our process was, how we would
treat any other applicants irregardless of the special conditions. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Dunn.
Council Member Dunn: Thank you. Could you go back I think one more map, maybe another one or
maybe it's forward? It's hard to know. It's the part that shows, yes, right there. The land that J through
F are on is already in the Town?
Mike Watkins: Correct.
Council Member Dunn: They're subject to Town guidelines?
Mike Watkins: Yes, sir.
Council Member Dunn: The land that is grayed out is not in the Town its in the County and its
proposed to bring into the Town through a BLA, correct?
Mike Watkins: Yes.
Council Member Dunn: The applicant said, "If you want us to sign the bill A you approve this
application." Those part of the terms.
Mike Watkins: It was part of the consent agreement, yes.
Council Member Dunn: It is definitely tied to the BLA, the applicant has made that clear to us. Did the
applicate bring that condition to us? Or do we make out a condition of them?
Mike Watkins: It was them to us.
Council Member Dunn: It is 100% tied to the BLA at the applicant's request? Correct.
Mike Watkins: We were going to have the BLA signed off by the applicant one other time when we
approve something for the applicant, I think over the project near Lowe's. Isn't that correct? We made
some zoning adjustments that they requested and that they had said that they would sign the BLA upon
giving them that request.
Barbara Notar: That was one of their conditions, correct. Sorry, I didn't hear you the first time. Correct.
Mike Watkins: They obviously didn't sign it because it's still BLA it's not the Town. Still in the County
they didn't go through a BLA at that point?
21
Barbara Notar: The BLA has not occurred. No, not yet.
Mike Watkins: When is the BLA going to be signed upon approval of this?
Barbara Notar: The BLA is in process. This Council has approved the BLA, the County's meeting to
approve the BLA they're waiting for the action here. I think it's either February 2nd or February 4th.
Council Member Dunn: Excuse me, that was the County?
Barbara Notar: The County. The board of supervisors will approve the BLA hopefully either February
2nd or February 4th. They are waiting on this action. Then once that occurs we have to petition the
circuit court to approve the BLA and that's the process.
Council Member Dunn: Where is the applicant's signature or agreement to the BLA in that process
before it goes to the County I assume?
Barbara Notar: The applicant has given the Town written consent which was also sent to the County
with certain conditions and this is the last condition. Actually, there's one last condition they have to
send a letter. The applicant has to send a letter, a final consent letter to the County so that the Board
of Supervisors is assured that full consent has been given.
That has to go and actually this week, so the written letter of consent, the final consent by the Peterson's
companies must be sent to the Board of Supervisors this week in order for the agenda item to be ready
for the Board of Supervisors in the beginning of February. The agenda item meeting approval of the
boundary line adjustment by the County.
Council Member Dunn: When do you see the court signing off on the BLA?
Barbara Notar: We don't know exactly.
Council Member Dunn: What's your estimate?
Barbara Notar: A week, two weeks at the most hoping.
Council Member Dunn: Really?
Barbara Notar: Yes, it will happen.
Council Member Dunn: This should happen before the end of February?
Barbara Notar: Yes.
Council Member Dunn: Middle of February?
Barbara Notar: Hopefully, yes. Yes, February we are hoping.
Council Member Dunn: It is a leap year, it might, who knows strange things that happen. Yes, this
application obviously directly tied to the BLA. If we should not vote for this rezoning my understanding
is the applicant will just seek the rezoning from the County. They can't because this is in Town.
[crosstalk]
Barbara Notar: No, this property is the Town.
Council Member Dunn: They would seek, I guess rezoning and the other. Can they still get access to
their-- The ingress and egress will change at one location unless they get a rezoning from the County,
should it, the BLA not happen? Or is this the one that's in the middle just a right in no out?
22
Mike Watkins: In terms of a designed to access to the property regardless of the zoning action that
may or may not happen this evening, the property could develop under a by -right scenario. In addition,
the area in the County could be connected to the Town via an inner parcel access a private agreement.
Council Member Dunn: Between the applicant and the County or the applicant and the Town and the
County?
Mike Watkins: Let's see. In terms of the legal right to do it, it would just be a plain approval through
Loudoun County and our Department of Plan Review.
Council Member Dunn: They would still be able to get access to the property even though part of that
access is in the County?
Mike Watkins: Correct.
Council Member Dunn: The estimate according to the packet the estimated total revenue to the Town
is $373,000?
Mike Watkins: I run a different fiscal impact to you. The question was the fiscal revenue?
Barbara Notar: $261,000, the Town Manager is telling me. I don't have it handy.
Council Member Dunn: I saw $370K something in there somewhere. The point I'm asking is, do you
know the breakdown of that? Is that meals tax? Is it improved property? You'll get your chance. You're
going to be coming up in a minute. Is that meal tax improve property? Is that the total?
Mike Watkins: Yes.
Council Member Dunn: [laughs] It's all of the above. The total of improved property and meals tax
would be the-- Is it the $373 then? If that's what they saw, that's what it is.
Kaj Dentler: The report I'm reading says $261K.
Council Member Dunn: Okay.
Kaj Dentler: Mr. Seymour, if you have different information, please identify it.
Council Member Dunn: $354? Okay. Suzanne just said it's in there, Peterson said it was $354. The
Town is saying it's $270 something, two whatever. Okay, I think that's all the question I have for now.
Thank you.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Council Member Fox?
Council Member Fox: I have a few questions. As I was reading the staff report, you were talking about
the 11 there was no proffers with 11 development. That's been the case for any 11 development, correct?
Mike Watkins: For by -right zoned 11, correct.
Council Member Fox: I'm trying to get to their proper statement. I know it's on page 14, but I keep-- I
am not scrolling fast enough, oh, my heavens. There's something wrong with my computer. The proffer
statement that I was just looking at or the proffer said, they are proffer, it says they've submitted a proffer
statement in their own design standards. Do we require any design standards in that area?
Mike Watkins: No, ma'am.
Council Member Fox: We do not require?
Mike Watkins: It's outside of any architectural overlay, so for instance, it's not in the H2 and it's definitely
not in our H1.
23
Council Member Fox: All right. Also, in that same statement, they said they're going to put a light at
Compass Creek. Isn't there a light at Campus Creek?
Mike Watkins: At the intersection of Battlefield and Compass Creek but not at the site entrance.
Council Member Fox: Okay, it's at the site entrance. I read that wrong. I'm sorry, I don't have it in front
of me. There's something wrong with my computer. [crosstalk]
Mike Watkins: I'm glad to answer, my pleasure.
Council Member Fox: [laughs] Let's see. The other thing I have a concern with is the shared parking
agreement. They're meeting their parking requirements through shared parking obviously.
Mike Watkins: In closer examination each of the-- on this graphic, you can see the dash lines that
represent future parcel lines. The plan has not been final engineered yet. The shared parking agreement
would be and the instance, for instance the site requires 30 parking spaces, and there is a site design
change and they were only able to provide 28 spaces.
The whole site is going to be able to provide if the required parking, it just may not be on that individual
parcel. As presented, each pad site does provide its requisite parking, 30 required, 30 provided. The
shared parking agreements there just for the one off that there's a change in the site plan that there
aren't able to provide all the parking on that parcel.
Council Member Fox: I just have a few comments I suppose. To me, it doesn't fit there at this point
anyway, with Walmart, Home Goods, Ion. To me, it doesn't fit. This fits a bit better, in my opinion.
However, I think those buildings are ugly. I just wanted to put that out there on the record. I'm not quite
sure why. I guess we don't have any design standards where we can control that whatsoever, correct?
Okay. Thanks.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Theil.
Council Member Thiel: Yes. Just two quick questions. Thanks for the presentation, Mike. What else
is being proposed along with this site plan? You mentioned a hotel in the Loudoun County in the JLMA
portion.
Mike Watkins: This is multi -tenant retail and office. This is multi -tenant retail and office. This is the sit
down eating establishment and then this is the hotel.
Council Member Thiel: Okay, perfect. Then the small parcel across the street, what is that being-- Is
that --
Mike Watkins: Over here is Ion and then there's a portion of the property that's not in the Town. Then
you've got Walmart over here.
Council Member Thiel: Is there any proposal across the street?
Mike Watkins: Staff is not aware of anything.
Council Member Thiel: Okay, thanks. Appreciate it.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg.
Council Member Steinberg: No questions.
Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor?
Vice Mayor Martinez: No questions.
Mayor Burk: Okay, and I would like to hold my questions until after the presentation from the applicant.
24
Colleen Gillis: Hello, good evening Madam Mayor, members of the Town Council. My name is Colleen
Gillis. I'm an attorney with Cooley and we have been really pleased to work with your staff over the last
couple of months on this project and the overall effort to revision this corner of the world. Right now,
some of it's in the County and we're hoping that in short order it's going to be part of the Town.
Mayor Burk: As do we.
[laughter]
Colleen Gillis: Geographically, you all are very familiar with where this property is located but I thought
it was really important for us to know all of the confluence of rows that are here. I know that tonight's
application has to deal with drive through uses, drive through restaurants and these uses want to be
here in this part of Loudoun County in the Town.
I think it's important to know why this is such an excellent location for these uses. As a mom, as a busy
mom with two active teenage daughters, it's sometimes very difficult for me to figure out how I'm going
to feed them at the end of the day or after I've taken him to this sporting activity or that.
One of the nice things about the location of these four uses here for just average moms and dads in
and around Leesburg and in this portion of Loudoun County is that its easy to get to and we don't have
to drive through the already crowded portions of Town, say up the bypass onto downtown Leesburg.
It's really ideally located off of the Greenway, Compass Creek Parkway, Battlefield Parkway and
obviously soon to be connected with Crosstrail.
Additionally, this is such an exciting part of Town in the County with all of the sports tourism
opportunities, be it the DC United training facility, Evergreen Sportsplex just down Evergreen Mills
Road. Ion literally right across the street and we've seen what a huge smashing success that's been.
Then Freedom Park not too far from here, giving folks the opportunity to get these types of uses, these
types of food needs serviced in a quick opportunity. They can get in, they can get out, they can get back
to their kid's sporting activities. They can bring the food with them and make it within the schedule of
the day. It's one of the reasons why we think that this is so important in this location and why it can be
distinguished from other drive through restaurants elsewhere.
This is an overall master plan. I think it's really important to look at how these uses layout from a 3D
perspective. This is looking from, if you will aerial, over the portion of the property that is currently within
the County but we'll hopefully be within the Town very shortly.
Mike already identified, you can see in the top right corner that 116 room hotel. There's also a gas
station convenience store in the foreground. If you will bottom right, you've got those multitenant
commercial buildings, a high -end, what we hope to be as the high -end restaurant in the top center of
this.
Then looking from the other direction, what you see in the foreground of this picture are those drive
through uses. I hear you, Council Member Fox about your perspective on how these look, when you
see it in an overall view here, I think you get the sense for how well it all synergistically works together.
How it does make sense with the airport in the background? You've got Ion in the foreground. You've
got obviously a huge box used with Walmart here.
It all starts to make sense when you start to look at it in the totality of all the uses. This is the concept
development plan as Mike pointed out earlier.
One of the things that I think is important to know, we've got a question from Madam Mayor about the
landscaping and the open space. There is no requirement for a minimum amount of open space within
the B3 district. Nevertheless, this plan provides for 35% open space and 28% landscaped area.
Even dealing with this piece of property, we've done everything that we can. We've added trees and
shrubs, et cetera. Every place that we possibly can, you'll see it more in the images coming forward
and we've put trees throughout this plan wherever we could.
25
This is building F, this is an anticipated coffee shop. I will leave it to the Town Council to determine
which coffee shop this could be, but it would be a coffee shop with a drive through one that I know for
me personally, I'd be very excited to have. These are the elevations for that building. One thing to note,
I'll go back to this one thing to note is we are providing more than the required amount of parking on
each and every one of these parcels, so it's important to note that.
Building G, another fast casual restaurant with outdoor seating, these are committed to elevations. We
will require our tenants to commit to these elevations as opposed to asking for the permission to be
more flexible and identify the tenant and then hopefully have to conform to their architecture. Building
H, another anticipated fast casual restaurant, nearly 3,000 square feet these are the elevations.
Again, if you think about these elevations and the architectural rendering some of these elevations, it
does make sense in the corner of the world in which we're in building J is another anticipated fast casual
restaurant. This one is anticipated to be two stories. This is an example of what we're looking to do in
this location.
Council Member Dunn, I was waving my hand only because I had this breakdown and I knew I was
going to show it to you in a couple of minutes. Other than just being friendly waving to you and saying,
"Hey, how are you doing?" This is from our fiscal impact report. What you'll see is in the top, if you will
box above the second black line, you got the total revenues of $354,000.
There's a difference between what the staff presented in their staff report to what we are presenting
here. Because the staff analysis doesn't take into consideration the sales tax because it's not directly
paid to the Town. Our analysis did because ultimately it does get paid over to the Town. What you see
is the total revenue number of $354,000 on an annual basis. When we take into consideration the
operating expenditures for these uses, it takes about $12,000 of Town budgetary money for a net fiscal
impact on an annual basis of $342,000 in this location.
One of the things that's really important to note here and this also goes to the point Council Member
Dunn, you were asking about access. What you can see here are all the different points of access in
and around this property and the ways to get in and out of come in and off of Campus Creek Parkway.
One of the important things to know about this property and one of the questions that was raised was
the proximity to the airport. We have looked at how tall we could have our buildings adjacent to the
airport. Roughly, the third of the property that is closest to the airport cannot be built with any significant
height, which is why you see as you look at this illustrative, why you see in this portion of the project,
so many of our buildings being pulled up on to you Compass Creek Parkway with the parking behind it.
It's one of the reasons why we think it's absolutely ideal for these types of uses. You can pull the
buildings away from the airport, you put the parking in the back. Again, just to underscore one more
time, we've got more than enough parking. The required number of parking spaces for this project is
115 parking spaces, and the overall plan utilizing much of that open space or that space adjacent to the
airport property, we're providing 201 parking spaces, nearly 40% more parking than would be required.
Any of those other times you've been to fast food complexes and you can't quite get a parking space,
this is providing more than enough parking and we think it's exactly the right space to do it. Additionally,
one other thing before I hop off of this slide, we know we're asking for a rezoning from 11 to B3.
I would point you back to the actions of the earlier BLA. We are taking a portion of property on the Ion
side of Campus Creek Parkway and putting it into the 11 district. It's not a whole sale loss of 11 property.
You have already approved the reintroduction of 11 into this complex, presuming the BLA is ultimately
approved.
Finally, I will end with the questions that were asked about the consent letter and Miss Notar pointed
out that there's one more condition and that is the consent letter to be delivered to the County. We had
it signed just this evening by Taylor Chess. Obviously, assuming that this gets approved this evening.
We are in a position to deliver this forthwith to Miss Notar and to the County. I'm back and happy to
answer any questions.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mr. Steinberg, we'll start with you.
26
Council Member Steinberg: Can we just go over again, the discrepancy between your estimation of
the revenues versus staff's?
Colleen Gillis: The part that we saw of that number was in the staff report. When you read that portion
of the staff report, what it says is that there's a discrepancy because the Town's fiscal analysis doesn't
take full credit for the sales tax because it's passed over I believe.
Maybe I should defer to the Manager, Mr. Dentler, but I understand that it gets paid over to the state,
which then is distributed to the County and then the Town gets a portion of it back. That's why it wasn't
given full credit. We've done the analysis to determine that that's how much sales and meals taxes
would be.
Council Member Steinberg: Some eighty thousand dollars?
Colleen Gillis: Yes.
Council Member Steinberg: Okay, and the staff concurs? That's okay. Would you do me a favor and
put the slide for building J back up, please?
Colleen Gillis: Elevation?
Council Member Steinberg: One of the elevation, exactly.
Colleen Gillis: Sure.
Council Member Steinberg: This is mostly commentary at this point. I think overall, this whole area,
Campus Creek is going to be an extraordinary benefit to the Town. I haven't always agreed in my short
time on a Council with Peterson and some of their proposals. I believe the Campus Creek area is going
to be quite a revenue generator for the Town and I commend staff's efforts and everybody else's efforts
in bringing this to fruition. I will state now I will wholeheartedly support this proposal.
I think one of the things that will make this is the look of the area starting with the Ion building, it's sort
of this industrial, it's not exactly brutalist, but it's in that realm, but that building in the context of the rest
of your development, I have to agree with Council Member Fox, that's one of the least attractive
buildings I think I've ever seen anywhere. What is that supposed to become? What is that?
Colleen Gillis: It's a fast-food restaurant, it's actually a photo of a user in Frederick, Maryland.
Council Member Steinberg: That may be but that building has no appeal whatsoever. If I were looking
at a fast-food restaurant just on the basis of how the building looks, that would fall way off any of my
choices. Just you might want to take that into consideration.
Colleen Gillis: Thank you.
Council Member Steinberg: Here we are and I'm sure this is going to pass this evening. I'm just going
to echo one thing that Council Member Dunn brought up earlier. We were involved in an agreement
with Peterson, some time ago, and personally sitting here, I would have been happy to support this on
that agreement. I have to tell the applicant this is a great proposal, but I am unhappy that I feel we had
a deal, so to speak and all of a sudden, we were set. Yes, we have a deal but this.
I would have much preferred as a member of the Council, sitting before you all and members of the
public, if we had gotten here on the basis of the agreement we had come to previously, without them
being suddenly said, "Well, yes." Now we want this in the hardball negotiation notwithstanding I have
to tell you, I resented it and I'll give the staff credit. They talked me down that's fine. I'm happy to be
here now.
Again, as I said, I believe this will be a benefit to the Town, but I just felt I needed to express that to you
for future negotiations with your company and the Town. Thank you.
27
Colleen Gillis: Understood, I appreciate it and so you know, we received similar feedback as your staff
was talking you down from a ledge, they also did a good job of carrying the water the perspectives of
this Council back to us.
Council Member Steinberg: They did?
Colleen Gillis: Yes. I feel like they deserve some praise for letting us know the situation and we
appreciate your support.
Council Member Steinberg: They absolutely do. Okay, thank you.
Colleen Gillis: Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Thiel.
Council Member Thiel: It sounds like we're all stroking Town staffs egos. Just kidding, you guys are
doing a great job. I would also like to reiterate what Council Member Steinberg said. I don't need to say
it all again but that aside, I do think that the location of the proposed amendments are very beneficial
to the Town. I do think this will be a very good success considering the location. It's right off the toll road
or the Greenway. It's right next to a high school.
There's no other real areas of fast food or hotels in the area, not in the plans or in the near future. I do
think this will be a success and I will be supporting it tonight. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Dunn.
Council Member Dunn: Thank you, the -
Mayor Burk: Can I interrupt you, Mr. Dunn? I walked out at some point, have you already spoken on
this?
Council Member Dunn: Yes.
Mayor Burk: Okay, so all right. Thank you. I'm sorry to interrupt you. [crosstalk] I know. I'm a little
worried over here.
[laughter]
Council Member Dunn: You can talk to me another second for the way like that. Thank you. Can you
bring up-- that's fine. I have a question with this slide. Your fiscal estimate is based on that or just the
drive -through fast food? What is your estimate on that?
Colleen Gillis: I'll show you this from the slide.
Council Member Dunn: I get this one. That's fine. What is your estimate on the previous?
Colleen Gillis: On the entirety of it?
Council Member Dunn: Yes.
Colleen Gillis: I don't know what it is off the top of my head. I know that there were some fiscal impact
analyses that were done by Town staff six months ago, give or take.
Council Member Dunn: Does anyone in the staff know that estimate?
Colleen Gillis: I don't know what they are off the top of my head, I apologize.
Council Member Dunn: We have no clue what the benefit to the Town is fiscally of bringing this
property into the Town. Nobody knows.
28
Colleen Gillis: No, with all due respect, we do know. Just tonight we were prepared to just talk about
the portion that's being rezoned tonight and the four fast-food restaurants, the portion that would be
BLA'd into the Town, those numbers we had back of our hands six months ago. I just don't know where
they are right now, but I know that we had them.
Council Member Dunn: Does anyone on the staff have an idea?
Barbara Notar: I'm going to look for it, Mr. Dunn
Council Member Dunn: Thank you. I think it's important because as the applicant has required this to
be part of the BLA, I don't know what the numbers are for the benefit to the Town. Then I'd like to find
out from staff what they plan on doing with those funds because we represent the citizens of Leesburg.
We don't represent you. We don't represent staffs interests. We represent the citizens. If there's not a
direct benefit to the citizens by your fiscal impact to bringing it in, the question is to be asked, why are
we doing this? Why are we going through all this? Can you bring up your buildings again, the elevations?
You can start at the beginning. The pictures-- You don't have any photographs, this is just the
illustratives?
Colleen Gillis: Right.
Council Member Dunn: I don't agree with you at all that this is great for that area and it just fits what
already is not the greatest looking things in that area. To say that we want to have our businesses look
like hangers at the airport is not why I have-- I don't send people to the airport and say "If you want to
see some architecture, I got some stuff to show you." Your last picture I agree with Neil. [chuckles] It
was coming, that if you can fast forward to the ugly one.
Colleen Gillis: Can I just call it the one for building J? [laughs]
Council Member Dunn: You can call it whatever you like.
[laughter]
Council Member Dunn: I'm calling it the ugly one. If this isn't a-- this literally looks like, without the
bricks, the top or the second level of our airport terminal, only the airport terminal is looking much better.
What I'd like to know tonight is if you are, in consideration of this application, willing to consider better
design standards for this area because frankly, from what you've shown me, I would rather have a
guessing game with the new applicants coming in who are going to fill that space. I don't want them to
build in this. That is not what I want my Town to look like, even if it is near the airport and even if Ion
looks the way it does.
It's a skating rink but that doesn't mean I have to have a whole street of warehouse -looking restaurants.
Tin can looking restaurants. Sorry, you don't agree, but I don't think this is what I want to see in my
Town. Since this is still in the Town and I do have a little bit of a say of what's going on in the Town, I
don't feel that this design, and if you could back up a house or a building, there you go. I'm not seeing
it. Now, I'm guessing that that is Burger King because that's what it looks like to me and I wasn't thrilled
with Burger King came up with their design, which we currently have in Town.
We had no choice over that, but here we do have a choice of approving this application with better
design standards. I'd like to know if you would rather come back with something better or if you're just
willing to go ahead and go with what you have.
Colleen Gillis: I will have to consult with my client about that because obviously, for us to come back,
it would mean a material alteration to the schedule in terms of getting with the County and being on the
County's agenda. I know that they're anticipating, as Ms. Notar said, anticipating us being on their
agenda the first meeting in February.
Council Member Dunn: Is it something that you're willing to make as a-- getting our approval that there
are-- it's approved with conditional design standards being brought back forward to Council?
29
Colleen Gillis: I didn't realize Ms. Notar [unintelligible 01:56:47] the best. I think we would have to
give some thought to how our process would work if this is not to be approved because obviously, I
think coming back with conditional design standards I'm unclear as to how this gets approved this
evening and then there's design standards separately. I apologize. I don't know that we've had a
conversation to figure out how that would work and how that would work in the context of action tonight.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. Why are you adding-- If you could go to your overhead showing the
parking for the whole site?
Colleen Gillis: Yes.
Council Member Dunn: Right there. I guess you're saying the over parking is all the stuff that's towards
the top left. Is that the over?
Colleen Gillis: Let me see if this is going to work.
Council Member Dunn: What is the excess part? You said there was 150 excess?
Colleen Gillis: 115 is the number of required parking spaces and 201 parking spaces are what is
required.
Council Member Dunn: About 85 extra?
Colleen Gillis: Yes.
Council Member Dunn: Where is that? Where is that excess parking?
Colleen Gillis: Well, they're throughout the site. We did not go, "Okay, this is what we need," and then
say, "Well, let's just put a bunch of other parking here." Roughly, from a height perspective-- I'll look at
my engineer as he looks at the line that I just drew, that's roughly the line beyond which you can't get
any meaningful height, it will be surface. Everything to this side of the property more or less is surface
at best. The usable portion of the property is everything south of that line. I shouldn't say south because
that's not really directionally what it, but below that line on this exhibit. To your question about where is
the excess parking, a lot of it is up in this location but it's made by the constraints of the site, meaning
you have to put your buildings closer to Compass Creek Parkway because the height limitation to
protect the airport.
Council Member Dunn: That's fine. Why are you being so generous in giving all this excess parking?
Which most people will generally not want impervious surfaces. Why are we getting this?
Colleen Gillis: You're getting it to create a better experience for the user. The people who go over, and
let's say that there's a tournament at Evergreen Sportsplex, and there's also a skating competition at
Ion, and people want to be here. We want to make sure that we're not creating a nightmare for the users
here. We know that the standards are 115, that's what the ordinance would require and --
Council Member Dunn: Is there not enough parking at Ion? Is that why it's being created?
Colleen Gillis: No. No, no, no. No.
Council Member Dunn: Because I'm concerned about parking there and events across the four -lane,
five -lane road.
Colleen Gillis: This is not parking for Ion. This is absolutely not parking for Ion.
Council Member Dunn: Okay.
Colleen Gillis: There's plenty of property on the other side from a parking perspective.
Council Member Dunn: Plenty of parking?
30
Colleen Gillis: Yes. Yes.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. I would prefer not having the excess parking because I think that it is
going to fall to either by demand or convenience, basically a kiss and ride lot or a rideshare lot. If it's
not already designated for use, then it'll be found out for use. Frankly, I don't know why we would be
considering any additional impervious surfaces than we already need unless its definitely needed by
the restaurants, but you're saying it's not.
Colleen Gillis: Well, what I'm saying is that the ordinance doesn't require that number of parking
spaces, more than 115. We're providing more than enough parking for the ordinance. Nevertheless,
one of the things that we want to ensure is that every person who goes to any one of these uses has a
place to park, there's not competition for spaces. "I wanted to get to my Chick-fil-A," or whatever, the
use sense of being there, and they're battling it out to get to a space. We thought we were using this
property efficiently and providing an experience for the future users that was beneficial. It may not ever-
- We for sure do not want commuter parkers, people who are parking here and then hopping in a car
with their friend and driving to DC. That will not be permitted. We will absolutely not allow that to happen.
Council Member Dunn: You're not using it for the property next door?
Colleen Gillis: No. No.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. Right. Thank you.
Colleen Gillis: Yes.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Campbell?
Council Member Campbell: Thank you, Ms. Gillis. For the record, I want to say that if there was a
perception that the applicant came and asked for additional conditions, I for one was not upset. if I were
the applicant and the Town was asking the applicant for what it was asking for, I would have asked for
more, but it's too late for that now because that's just how it's played. That's just the nature of the beast.
Getting into these situations, there are going to be changes or additional requests. Our job is to make
sure we vet the request, not necessarily be upset that somebody might have asked because we were
also asking for something in return.
What I'm asking for is a project timeline. Because money is nothing until its earned. The expectation
that somehow there's going to be money here, is it two years from now, is it three years from now?
We've also seen developments that haven't been built that have been approved. The expectation is not
that this is not going to be built, but when and when then we can expect any measure of revenue.
Because like our residential projects, they don't get 100% occupancy in the first year. I don't know if this
is built in phases, this is coming all at once, or the buildings will be leased or sold, however you intend
to distribute the ownership. Then, at some point, the Town makes money. Well, first of all, do we have
a commitment to build?
Colleen Gillis: Yes.
Council Member Campbell: I thought we would.
Colleen Gillis: I'm going back to this exhibit because I might ask for a bird to come and speak in my
ear here, but if you see the C-store and gas pumps that are right here, that is currently approved, the
C-store. It's in for approval right now.
Unidentified Speaker: Right now?
Colleen Gillis: Yes.
Steve Green: It opened last spring 21.
Colleen Gillis: Open spring 21. The hotel, which you can see behind there is--
31
Steve Green: We deliver their pad in May.
Colleen Gillis: We deliver their pad in May of 2020.
Steve Green: They build it themselves.
Colleen Gillis: They built it themselves, but obviously once they're delivering the pad, they're on the
hook and there's no sense in them sitting on it. With regard to the two commercial buildings.
Steve Green: 100% leased
Colleen Gillis: 100% leased.
Steve Green: Opening of C-store.
Colleen Gillis: Opening at the same time as the C-store opens.
Council Member Campbell: Spring of 21.
Steve Green: 50% leased.
Colleen Gillis: That one's 50% leased.
Steve Green: Opening at the same time as the others.
Colleen Gillis: Opening in the same time as the others.
Mayor Burk: It looks like you're a puppet.
Colleen Gillis: This is totally like this is it. His hand moving like this behind me. Here's the coffee shop.
Steve Green: Delivering [inaudible 02:04:11].
Colleen Gillis: Delivering with the rest of the buildings that I just identified.
Steve Green: [Unintelligible 02:04:15], probably about two months behind.
Colleen Gillis: Two months behind that one.
Participant 1: The next two are lagging behind.
Colleen Gillis: Those two are lagging behind, but you can see the motion, the movement, the
progression of the development starting the portion closest to the Walmart and moving up Compass
Creek Parkway. Every single aspect of this, these are not dreams. These are not, "Well, let's get them
approved and then we'll take it to market." In December of last year, the Peterson team was up at ICSC,
the International Council of Shopping Centers convention up in New York and they were talking about
this project and there is a good bit of interest.
Council Member Campbell: Is it fair to estimate that from start with the hotel pad and this May, for
the next couple of years, there's got to be the build -out? Given what may happen in a timeline,
everything's not coming in the spring of 21 but it's coming.
Colleen Gillis: Yes. It's not all coming in the spring of 21, but obviously, from a mobilization perspective,
it makes as much sense as any for us to get out there and to get things vertical as simultaneously as
possible.
Council Member Campbell: Again, I only raised the point, one, for just hearing the timeline and two,
as people look at numbers and expectations about revenue, that's not a year one proposition.
32
Colleen Gillis: No.
Council Member Campbell: It could be still a couple years out before any fulfillment of whatever
number is realized.
Colleen Gillis: It's not a 20-year proposition either.
Council Member Campbell: Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Ms. Fox.
Council Member Fox: A couple of questions. Thank you. Could you go show me on this slide exactly
where that traffic signal will be? Okay. It's back at the last building and closer to the Walmart, correct?
No.
Colleen Gillis: No.
Council Member Fox: The hotel?
Colleen Gillis: You can see where the Walmart is here. Then you can see the four pad sites all the
way in the top left. The traffic signal is here.
Council Member Fox: For staff, is that ample linear footage away from the Battlefield Compass Creek-
- What would the stacking be like especially when it starts getting busy there?
Mike Watkins: The applicant did conduct intense analysis and the appropriate stalking queue lengths
have been provided in that analysis. In terms of being able to get a permitted fully -signalized intersection
there, we believe it will meet all the VDOT standards.
Council Member Fox: That's what 1 was wanting to know about that. My next question I suppose would
be about the-- you said the progression, to me, the-- this is a little gateway into this Compass Creek
area. I understand you're trying to make it look industrial. One of the biggest things that I like about
these uses is not an 1-1 use because an 1-1 use right there at that corner would have been an eyesore
in my opinion. I have to mirror-- 1 feel like if you're going to progress from where that traffic light is on
up you've got some time to take a look at that last building and possibly change those things.
It's just a suggestion. I have had a little bit of heartache over-- I see pedestrian. One more thing, will
that Tight have a pedestrian crosswalk from Ion over to-- I'm sorry, I don't have my proffers in front of
me it just won't [crosstalk]
Colleen Gillis: That's okay. That's okay. You're saying across Compass Creek Parkway. I'm almost
positive we have a plan.
Council Member Fox: It is?
Colleen Gillis: Pedestrian activated [crosstalk]. Yes.
Council Member Fox: I can see that being busy when there is an event at Ion. I just want to make sure
that safety feature was in place. I guess my last comment is, I've had a lot of heartache ever since 1
saw that we have one ingress to Campus Creek here and the Town has been taking-- We have to take
care of that. Everything else was County. I've had a lot of heartache over that and not getting anything
back from that. I'm happier that we have some of that revenue coming now toward the Town, although
1 get the distinction between and you guys went high, we went lower. I'm sure it's somewhere in
between.
For that reason I feel at least we have some sort of benefit, but I do want to reiterate what Council
Member Steinberg and Council Member Dunn said, Council Member Thiel. I agree. Moving the
goalposts sometimes is a little irritating. I just want to put that on record. Thanks.
33
Colleen Gillis: Yes, understood.
Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor.
Vice Mayor Martinez: [inaudible 02:09:15]
Mayor Burk: Put your mike on.
Colleen Gillis: It's intimate. [laughs]
Mayor Burk: We got you though.
Vice Mayor Martinez: What is-- She didn't wave. What is the required parking for that whole area?
Colleen Gillis: For the number of required parking spaces is 115 parking spaces.
Vice Mayor Martinez: You're putting how many?
Colleen Gillis: 201.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I still because I can envision a Saturday and Sunday with Simpson Middle School
having all their soccer and other events going on. Freedom Park having their softball tournaments and
baseball tournaments at the same time. Heritage High School having their thing. My biggest concern is
not enough during those kind of events, but not only that, you're going to probably find some of the
older kids wanting to walk. My concern is that I would love to see wider sidewalks or potential-- Now, I
know this is what I would like to have seen on the plan was wider sidewalks and maybe a bike lane to
allow those users to be able to access it because that can really --
You're also talking about Ion and other people using that same area. On weekends, I don't know if 200
will be enough. I have no heartburn with you putting out more parking spaces.
Colleen Gillis: I was just asking Ms. Novotny to check. It's a 10-foot wide, multi -use trail along Campus
Creek Parkway.
Vice Mayor Martinez: There is a wrap around the back end. It could be a full lap and people can use
that as a --
Colleen Gillis: I don't think we did. We did not do full lap.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Because if I go to one of those fast-food, I want to walk off.
Colleen Gillis: You got to walk off the fries. To walk off fries. I get it. I'm with you.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Those are things that I was hoping to see and more understanding that you have
a lot of youth and young kids, drivers from the high school. I didn't even include Evergreen Mill because
they do a lot of youth sports back there. Evergreen ---
Colleen Gillis: Evergreen Sportsplex.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Not just the Sportsplex but I'm talking about the elementary school. You've got
the elementary school. You've got Simpson Middle School. You've got Freedom Park. You got Heritage
High School. They're all having things-- I've been there on a Saturday and Sunday with kids, impossible
to get out of.
Colleen Gillis: For whatever it's worth. I do think because we continue to talk about this physical impact
analysis, it's really important to note that those took into consideration an average restaurant like that.
They're not taking into consideration that sort of a usage on Saturdays and Sundays. That you've got
the tournament that starts at 9:00 AM, and people are rolling in to get their breakfast and then go to the
tournament. Then there's the mid-- we've all had kids in sports. We know. We were kids in sports, it's
34
the constant hunger, the constant need to get food. I would hope, I can't promise it, but I would hope
that this fiscal analysis turns out to be even more to the good.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I do have to have my opinion on building J. It looks like somebody built the
building then added on top, and then added in the back. Whatever you do, if there's something
cosmetically you can do to make it more-- get rid of that. I don't know. For me right now, that looks --
Colleen Gillis: If I may, I am for sure not the person to redesign a building on the spot, ever. I'm
probably not even the person to make a decision on my comfort or color on the spot. I have a proposed
new condition that could alleviate and assuage some of these concerns. I'll read it, hopefully, I'm okay.
Notwithstanding the elevation-- I'm going to read it just for one building but because we've got separate
conditions of approval for each of the buildings. We're going to say H, but it's also going to be applied
to building J. Those are the two buildings that y'all had a heartburn over.
Notwithstanding the elevation for building H or as the case may be, building J, included in the design
guidelines attached as exhibit B to the proffers. The applicant shall submit new building elevations for
building H or building J as it would be, that shall be reviewed by the BAR, which shall make its referral
recommendation to staff. Then staff shall have the option of accepting the BAR's recommendation.
Council Member Fox: With that the BAR [inaudible 02:13:57]?
Colleen Gillis: It's not in the BAR, but we will be asking for their input for the-- They will be a referral in
this case. This is not in an area --
Council Member Fox: So, this is voluntary.
Colleen Gillis: This is voluntary. What we're saying is, let the BAR put their design hat on with regard
to those two buildings. We'll work with the BAR. The BAR will make a recommendation to staff, and
then staff can make a decision as to the LDO.
Molly Novotny: LDO.
Colleen Gillis: Sorry, LDO. I'm getting the feedback now of the land development officer for the County
and then they can either choose to use these elevations, which I doubt they'll do, or use the BAR
recommended elevations in lieu of the ones that you're seeing this evening. It gives us a path forward,
while simultaneously keeping us on a path for moving forward with the BLA tonight.
Vice Mayor Martinez: You should have an earplug so that all these people can talk into a mic and just
give you all this information.
Colleen Gillis: I know. My next job is going to be like a sports reporter where people talk into my
earpiece.
Vice Mayor Martinez: My last comment is, you use casual restaurant several times. I would like to
have a definition of what a casual restaurant is.
Colleen Gillis: I would define it as a restaurant that does not have metal silverware, maybe.
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: I think that's a guarantee. [laughs]
Colleen Gillis: Obviously, we're getting at this notion that it's obviously not a white tablecloth restaurant
but it's not a restaurant that's solely drive -through, that you just drive through and you can go and you
can sit there.
Vice Mayor Martinez: It's a typical drive -through restaurants, where you go in and you can get burgers
inside or burgers on the drive -through kind of thing.
35
Colleen Gillis: Yes.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Okay. Because when you say casual restaurant, it could be a restaurant that
you go in and sit down and eat, and where you can wear shorts and a T-shirt.
Colleen Gillis: You can wear whatever you'd like because you're getting out and walking after.
[laughter]
Vice Mayor Martinez: I appreciate you coming forward and talking with us. Thank you.
Colleen Gillis: Thank you for your consideration.
Mayor Burk: Well, it's my turn. Let me reiterate. Building J is really ugly.
[laughter]
Colleen Gillis: I've heard.
Mayor Burk: You might not have picked that up. That's really ugly.
Vice Mayor Martinez: The others could use some [unintelligible 02:16:31].
Mayor Burk: Well, I'm not a fast-food person particularly, and so I'm not excited particularly about this
project. I don't have any issues with the other designs, the fast-food restaurants. They're kind of modern
and different. I do think it goes along with Ion and how it looks and that sort of thing. I was going to ask
about the bike lane. Now, the multi -path is on the one side it's not on both sides.
Colleen Gillis: It's a 10-foot wide, multi -purpose trail on the Ion side. It's hard to see. I don't know if you
guys have a better view of this.
Mayor Burk: Well, the front page shows it.
Colleen Gillis: Yes. You can see, if you're looking at your print out, you should be able to see that on
the-- it's not really the south but we'll call it the south for this purpose, on the south side. On the portion
of the property adjacent to Ion, you can see that meandering path that runs down along Ion. On the
other side, on the restaurant side, there is a six -foot -wide sidewalk. There is some path on both sides
that you can use to bike or to walk or to --
Mayor Burk: Can you show how far the multi -modal path goes?
Colleen Gillis: I know it's shown all the way down but it goes all the way down to the Microsoft campus.
You can see it on here. If you look at that slide in your packet, you can see that it goes all the way down.
Mayor Burk: Okay. You've made a change and you really want to the BAR to weigh in on this. Wow.
Okay.
Colleen Gillis: I want a solution tonight. I think that we have also, for the duration of this process, heard
about your concerns and considerations about how this process has unfolded and I think in an effort of
good faith we're coming up with a solution that hopefully leaves you with a better taste in your mouth
this evening if we agree to go to the BAR and review the architecture.
Mayor Burk: Well, while others are concerned about the buildings and all of that, I'm more concerned
about the trees, and the bushes, and the landscaping and what it looks like, and that is going to be very
important to me as to what's the green aspect to it. I'm not sure what you're agreeing to.
Colleen Gillis: With regard to that, we are --
[laughter]
36
That's okay. That's okay. I said earlier everywhere we could plant additional green we did. Just to give
you a sense for the numbers, I want to ensure that I say them correctly. On this 4.6 acre parcel, we
have 262 trees and we have fully 263 shrubs for a total of 525 plants. Over this 4.6 acre parcel, 525
plants roughly split between trees and shrubs. It's not all low stuff, it's not all the easy stuff. It's not all
trees and you don't get any of that low level blocking stuff that really gives you that totality of experience.
525 plants. My apologies as we walked through each of these site plan elevations, for example, building
J or building H, or building G, or building F, and these illustratives you get a sense for how much tree
planting and shrub planting there is throughout this project.
Mayor Burk: All right. Is there anyone else have anything else at this point? Mr. Thiel.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Madam Mayor.
Council Member Fox: I had a question.
Mayor Burk: Excuse me, I asked Mr. Thiel and then Ms. Fox.
Council Member Thiel: Just one quick question. The parcel that is across the street that is still zoned
I is that planned to have any construction at the same time or moving forward, what will be the plan for
that?
Colleen Gillis: The portion that would take into the Town as part-- that currently has no construction
on it but it would be adjacent to the Ion parcel.
Council Member Thiel: Okay.
Mayor Burk: Ms. Fox.
Council Member Fox: Just one more comment or question/comment. With the four buildings leading
up to what's in the County right now and obviously you are going to the counties for some plan approvals
at this point and they're approving them. I took a look at your concept plan there, they have full control
over what is going on as far as architecture right now. We don't have any say in that. It's just all County,
correct?
Colleen Gillis: Right.
Council Member Fox: Right. That's my question. Thanks.
Mayor Burk: I do want to say one thing myself was, while I say I am not a fast-food enthusiast, I didn't
take my personal opinion into this, I am going to support these.
[laughter]
Mr. Martinez.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Yes, Madam Mayor. I'd like to make a motion for approval.
Kaj Dentler: Madam Mayor, folks, citizens --
Mayor Burk: Wait a minute. Wait. Not yet. I can't do that because I have to --
Vice Mayor Martinez: Okay. You got to close the [crosstalk]
Mayor Burk: Yes. I didn't realize that too. l'm sorry.
Council Member Dunn: Mayor, I did have a question for the staff.
Mayor Burk: Okay.
37
Council Member Dunn: They're going to look up something for me. I wonder if you had that answer
for me.
Mayor Burk: Do you have any answers?
Council Member Dunn: I think it was the estimated revenue from the whole master plan.
Colleen Gillis: I'm sorry.
Russell Chambers: What we did was we looked at some original estimates that were done by our
finance staff going back a couple months speaking with the group today, you've got two parcels of land.
The parcel that was in Town, we talked about there's a difference between 261 and I think 354, were
the numbers of that. When you look at the parcel that is the BLA section, which is the one with a hotel,
the four restaurants, the gas station, roughly you're looking at about another $608,000 that would come
into the Town from that parcel being BLA'd into the Town. That got the number right around --
Depending on which numbers you use for the both pieces, anywhere between 869 and 962. These are
probably fairly conservative numbers based on some averages that finance staff looked at based on
similar types of uses around the County.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. Then a quick question for staff on the architectural, the BAR. Right now
the BAR doesn't have architectural design standards to go by. They just have materials standards to
go by. Under what basis do you anticipate them evaluating architectural design versus material?
Mike Watkins: I think when we were doing our powwow where we're trying to find an independent
perspective. It's not just staff offering up their opinion. There's a sounding board. I would suggest that
we might include a recommendation for them to use. Obviously, we're outside the H2 guideline. You're
right, the basis upon which they're going to make their recommendation, it was strictly an independent
party.
Council Member Dunn: They could come back with ugly is the new orange. That's the new thing. I'm
concerned that we're sending it to the BAR with really no standards to go by and what's going to be the
end result? I don't have any assurance that is going to be any different than what we already have.
Mike Watkins: If you're comfortable just letting staff work with the applicant, we're willing to do that as
well.
Council Member Dunn: Well, no. Not there either.
Susan Berry Hill: The reason we suggested the BAR, Mr. Dunn is because that is the body that has
the most design experience in the Town. Some communities have design boards or community design
boards. We do not. So, it's de facto the BAR.
Council Member Dunn: Your powwow was just for building J or was it going to be for that whole --
Colleen Gillis: J and H
Council Member Dunn: J and H.
Colleen Gillis: Yes.
Council Member Dunn: Which one was H? Just trying to get clarifications.
Colleen Gillis: It's okay. That's totally fine. This is J. l'm going to skip over it, it's upsetting to people,
and this is H.
Council Member Dunn: Okay, why not the others?
38
Colleen Gillis: Well, because they are moving forward more quickly and to work with, from a design
perspective, it's going to-- has the potential to slow us up [crosstalk].
Council Member Dunn: We're going to be getting corporate architecture.
Colleen Gillis: No, you're going to get this architecture. You're going to get this architecture. We have
signed tenants.
Council Member Dunn: Okay, and they're bringing forward some of their design desires. That's what
1 mean by corporate architecture. Okay, thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Martinez. You're not making a motion.
Vice Mayor Martinez: !want to make a-- Go ahead.
Mayor Burk: Okay. 1 just want to ask if there's anybody in the audience, nobody has signed up to
speak, is there anybody in the audience that didn't sign up that would like to at this point? Yes, sir.
Taylor Chess: 1 heard a lot of concern tonight that we were baiting and switching. That we were
changing the game on the request for rezoning. That is not the case. When the Town came to us and
asked us to participate in the BLA, would we do the BLA? We said, "Yes, we will with conditions." One
of the conditions was to have this site plan in that configuration that we could build exactly what's up
there, approved as a part of the BLA. That and the change of the B1 that incorporated into Russell
Branch. That was the request. During the process of figuring out how to do this, it was brought to our
attention we can't just bring it in like it is.
We actually have to rezone this little piece that we still own, which is 1-1. So, it wasn't a bait and switch.
It was the plan the whole time was with the BLA, we'll do the BLA if we can build that on the site. We
didn't take into account, some of it was on the Town land, some of it was on the County land. We knew
it would all be Town land at the end of the day because we were doing the BLA and that was the plan
we wanted. I just wanted to make that clear because it's not our intent to change the deal. It's not our
intent to post -negotiate even though you gave us the right to do it, 1 appreciate that. That's not our deal,
and Neil, that's not what we do.
This was the plan from the very beginning. If you were not told that, that was the plan from the very
beginning. That and I think there was a question about is there going to be any construction on the
additional 1-1 property? All of Ion is 1-1, and previously, the original plan, the parking for Ion was going
to be on the 1-1 property across the street when it was expanded. That is the way it was approved. By
doing this plan, we made it safer by pulling the parking back onto the same side of the street as Ion
expanding their ability to build their parking around their site when they do the expansion of the building.
What you see up there is Ion plus a, how big is the expansion? 68,000 square foot expansion to that
building. The parking out there today is adequate for the building today but with the expansion, it's going
to need more parking. The expansion was always planned, that parking was going to go on the 1-1
ground in the Town on the other side of the street. 1 think that this really solved a lot of issues by making
the Ion site safer, by being able to put some development on the 1-1 ground in the Town, as well as
incorporating what was already approved in the County in one place and it makes it a good design. I
can't tell you how much 'agree with you on building J.
Mayor Burk: [laughs] All right. Thank you.
Taylor Chess: That was real easy, yes, we'll do it. We do need to make plans for that. Thank you. That
is all I want to say.
Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Chess. Everyone's had their turn. Mr. Martinez, did you have --
Vice Mayor Martinez: Don't you have to close the hearing?
Mayor Burk: I've got to close the hearing. That's right. Sorry. I close the hearing. Now, do you have a
motion.
39
Vice Mayor Martinez: Yes. I'd like to move to approve rezoning application TLZM-2019-0003 subject
to the concept of development plan dated December 20th, 2019 and the proffers dated December 20th,
2019 based on the findings for approval contained in the January 14th, 2020 Town Council Staff report.
Mayor Burk: Is there a second?
Council Member Steinberg: I second.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Council Member-- I'm trying to find my place. I'm sorry. Council Member
Steinberg. Everybody is forgetting your name tonight.
Council Member Steinberg: Really?
Mayor Burk: Yes. Vice Mayor Martinez and Council Member Steinberg. Any additional questions at
this point or comments?
Council Member Fox: A quick question. The applicant has clearly stated that they would work on
buildings J and H, right?
Mayor Burk: Yes.
Council Member Fox: Does that need to be part of this motion?
Barbara Notar: Yes.
Mike Watkins: Not with the rezoning. It will need to be --
Barbara Notar: There's a special exception, we're just doing the rezoning. I'm sorry. People are asking
me questions. Okay. All right.
Council Member Fox: Thanks.
Mayor Burk: Yes, thank you. All right, Mr. Dunn.
Barbara Notar: I'm sorry. I don't believe-- Could we reread that motion, please? I think there were
some words-- that's what we were talking about. He went so fast. We think you missed some important
words.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I missed nothing, but I will read it again. I move to approve rezoning applications,
TLZM-2019-0003 subject to the concept of development plan dated December 20th, 2019, and the
proffer is dated December 20th, 2019 based on the findings, correction, on the findings for approval
contained in the January 14, 2020, Town Council Staff report.
Mayor Burk: All right. Mr. Dunn.
Council Member Dunn: Does this include the verbiage that you made for design? Is that in this one?
Colleen Gillis: That's not the rezoning, it's for conditions [crosstalk].
Mayor Burk: It's the next one.
Colleen Gillis: I'll give that to you when it's time to vote.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. All right. Thank you.
Colleen Gillis: This is the rezoning.
Council Member Dunn: This is for just approving the usage. Correct.
40
Mayor Burk: For rezoning.
Barbara Notar: This is the rezoning. Did Mr. Steinberg second the second motion?
Mayor Burk: Yes. Sorry. All right. All in favor?
Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? That passes seven -zero.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I have a question for the Town attorney. We have four special exceptions. Can
we group them into one motion or do I have to do each one individually? Four?
Barbara Notar: Four, please.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Okay. Then I'd like to move to approve special exception, TLSE-2019-005 to
allow an eating establishment with drive-in facilities subject to the rezoning concept plan and special
exception dated December 20th, 2019 and conditions for approval contained in a draft resolution dated
January 14th which also includes the consideration of design for --
Mayor Burk: No. No. No.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Does it go on this one?
Mayor Burk: No. This one and this one it doesn't.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Last two.
Colleen Gillis: The last two.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Okay. Got it. Okay.
Mayor Burk: January 14, 2020.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Right.
Mayor Burk: All right. Second?
Vice Mayor Martinez: I tried to sneak that in.
Mayor Burk: Council Member Campbell. Any discussion, Mr. Dunn?
Council Member Dunn: Another quick question. I hate to delay for this but there was something that
was brought up about the design standards. I think somebody asked a question about what's going to
be the design terms for, I'll call it the master plan, the other half of this. It's in the County currently.
What's going on with the designs there? I thought I heard you say something where it's going by County
design or has that been determined yet?
Colleen Gillis: Yes. That's being brought in without design commitments.
Council Member Dunn: Say again.
Colleen Gillis: That's being brought into the Town without design commitments.
Council Member Dunn: Are there going to be commitments?
Colleen Gillis: No. Those buildings are all designed and under, if you will, review right now. That's what
was shown-- The designs are as this.
41
Council Member Dunn: They're under review by staff at this point?
Colleen Gillis: Have they been submitted yet? No. We're designing them right now, and they will be
submitted. That's what those buildings will look like.
Council Member Dunn: That's what's going to be under review by the Town not the County?
Colleen Gillis: The C store and the gas station is under review by the County right now because the
property is currently in the County.
Council Member Dunn: Right. We won't have any say over it once it comes under Town?
Colleen Gillis: Right. Right.
Council Member Dunn: Those are the only two?
Colleen Gillis: Those are the only two what? I'm sorry.
Council Member Dunn: That we have any input on the design?
Colleen Gillis: Where design comes in is with this application right now in the Town. Everything with
regard to the County we provided it for context but that's already been moved, and if you will,
anticipatorily rezoned to be included into the Town. What comes forward with those is substantially what
was already approved in the County.
Council Member Dunn: Even if it's not approved in the County by the time the BLA is approved?
Colleen Gillis: You've already taken action and I'll defer to Ms. Notar on this but the Town Council's
already taken action on the portion of the property in the County with regard to rezoning. The last step
in that process is the BLA action that will be approved by the court.
Council Member Dunn: Just real quick. We don't have any say on the design of those areas around
the circles and those things next to the circles in our circle. We have no say?
Colleen Gillis: Right.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Martinez.
Vice Mayor Martinez: No comments.
Mayor Burk: No comments. Anyone else have comments at this point? Okay. We have a motion made
by Mr. Martinez, seconded by Council Member Campbell. All in favor?
Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed.
Council Member Dunn: Nay.
Mayor Burk: That is six -one. All right.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I would like to move to approved special exception TLSE-2019-0006 to allow an
eating establishment with drive-in facility subject to rezoning concept plan and special exceptions dated
December 20th, 2019 and conditions for approval contained in the draft resolution dated January 14,
2020.
Mayor Burk: All right. Is there a second?
42
Council Member Fox: Second.
Mayor Burk: Council Member Fox. Any discussion on this one? All in favor.
Members: Aye.
Council Member Dunn: Nay.
Mayor Burk: Opposed. That is six -one. All right, now we are at D with building H.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Yes, I'd like to move to approve special exception, TLSE-2019-0007 to allow
eating establishment with driving facility subject to rezoning concept plan and special exceptions dated
December 20th, 2019 and conditions for approval contained in a draft resolution dated January 14,
2010. Notwithstanding the elevations for building H, building J included in the design guidelines
attached as exhibit B to the proffers. The applicant shall submit new building elevations for building H,
J that shall be reviewed by the board of architectural review which shall make its referral
recommendations or to the, LDO?
Colleen Gillis: Yes.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Which may be accepted in lieu of the elevations for building H, J included in the
design guidelines.
Mayor Burk: Is there a second?
Council Member Steinberg: Second.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Council Member Steinberg
Council Member Fox: Madam Mayor, I don't know if this is just a technical thing, but it was referred to
as 2010 instead of 2020 is that an issue, when he was reading?
Mayor Burk: [crosstalk] you correct that? Because it only needs to be 2020.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Date January 14, 2020.
Barbara Notar: This last sentence should only be according-- I thought it was building H and J.
Colleen Gillis: Because [crosstalk]
Vice Mayor Martinez: Okay, this is for H, not J?
Barbara Notar: Yes.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Okay. Got it.
Barbara Notar: Thank you.
Council Member Dunn: Madam Mayor?
Mayor Burk: Yes.
Council Member Dunn: A quick comment. I'll go ahead and vote for this because I appreciate your
efforts in at least considering in some part, our desire for better design features. I was very reluctant at
approving the whole thing because I'm very concerned about the design features and how it looks for
the Town. I don't think, for me, anyway, I wasn't trying to apply any type of bait and switch regarding
this. My comments regarding that we were under the impression the BLA was going to be signed when
we approved your rezoning on your property over by Lowe's. That was what my understanding was. It
43
had nothing to do with this, did I think that you were trying to pull one out from under us, but if you do, I
know where you live.
[laughter]
Actually, I don't. I am going to go ahead and approve this. I do appreciate your --
Mayor Burk: I have a motion from Mr. Martinez.
Council Member Dunn: Excuse me, Madam Mayor. I still have the floor. I do appreciate your efforts
in changing the design standards on these two properties. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Martinez made the motion, seconded by Council Member Steinberg. All in favor.
Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? That passes seven -zero.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Mayor, I move to approve special exception TLSE-2019-0008 to allow an eating
establishment with drive-in facility subject to the rezoning concept plan and special exception dated
December 20th, 2019, and conditions for approval contained in a draft resolution dated January 14,
2020, notwithstanding the elevation for building J included in the design guidelines attached as exhibit
B to the proffers, the applicant shall submit new building elevations for building J that shall be reviewed
by the board of architectural review which shall make its referral recommendations or to the LDO which
may be accepted in lieu of the elevations for building J included in the design guidelines.
Mayor Burk: There was a motion by Mr. Martinez, seconded by Council Member Fox, any additional
discussion? All in favor?
Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? That passes seven -zero. Okay.
Colleen Gillis: Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Mayor Burk: Thank you.
Colleen Gillis: Thank you members of Town Council. Thank you for your work tonight, but I really-- I
would be remiss if I didn't one more time, thank your staff. Your staff has gone above and beyond and
they have been a true delight to work with. Thank you. Thank you to you all.
Mayor Burk: Thank you very much. All right. Our last item is the Zoning Ordinance Batch Amendments.
Who is doing that one?
Mike Watkins: Madam Mayor, members of Council, Good evening. Again, this is part of what we had
hoped to be a regular annual update. Yes, TLOA-2017 are amendments that we started in 2017. One
housekeeping note, I have a slide that addresses it. Just give me a few minutes, but there's some
language that was not in the original ordinance that you have at the dais, but again, in review, the
batched amendment is a process for the regular review and amendment of the Zoning Ordinance for
the purpose of keeping the ordinance current, relevant, and comprehensive for our users. There's four
principal reasons why we do these batch amendments.
It's not everything, but the four principal reasons are changes in the State Code, use and interpretation
changes by the Zoning Administrator, correcting errors that may have occurred, and then responding
to business and/or citizen requests. In the 2017 batch, there's 31 recommended changes to the Zoning
Ordinance. The minor correction that I needed to make, and you have it at the dais here, is at the
Planning Commission, I made reference to language proposed by the BAR. In the ordinance that you'll
approve, it includes the exact language that was suggested by the BAR. The Planning Commission has
seen this.
44
It's not an issue of whether or not the language was not heard or discussed by the Planning
Commission. I just made the omission in the ordinance that's before you. Speaking of the Planning
Commission, the Planning Commission held public hearings on September 5th.
Mayor Burk: I didn't open the public hearing. I'm sorry.
Council Member Steinberg: We blame you.
Mayor Burk: No, don't. Stop it there. No.
Council Member Dunn: Hold off.
Mayor Burk: Okay, I call to order January 14th public hearing of the Leesburg Town Council. Unless
there's an objection, I will dispense with the reading of the advertisement. If you wish to speak, we ask
that you sign up on the sheet in the hallway. If you did not get a chance to sign up, we will give you the
opportunity to speak. Also, please identify yourself and give your address for the taped record. In the
interest of fairness, we ask that you observed the five-minute timeline. Green light in front of you will
turn yellow at the end of four minutes indicating you have one minute remaining. At that time, we would
appreciate your summing up and yielding the floor when the bell indicates your time has expired.
Under the rules of order adopted by this Council, the five-minute time limit applies to all. However, rather
than have numerous citizens, although, I don't see any, present make remarks on behalf of the groups,
the Council will allow a spokesperson for the group a few extra minutes. In that instance, we would ask
the speaker to sign up to indicate their status as spokesperson and the group they represent and
request additional time. Our procedure will be, there will be a brief presentation by staff, second,
members of the public who have signed up to speak will be called and given five minutes. The public
hearing item on the agenda for tonight is TLOA-2017-006 Zoning Ordinance Batch Amendments. Okay.
Mike Watkins: Continuing. Sorry, ma'am. The Planning Commission held their public hearings on
December 5th and 19th. They also held two work sessions on October 3rd and November 7th. There
were no public speakers through the process. The Planning Commission made its recommendation
with a seven -zero vote, with two substantive recommendations. One regarding the homestay use, that's
the VRBO, Airbnb short term lodging, and then deletion of the doggy daycare use, both on a commercial
setting and at-home or in -home setting. In the staff report or memo that I gave you, there's a brief outline
of all the changes to the ordinance, but I did include two discussion points.
The first, in regard to the Planning Commission's recommendation for the commercial settings, I don't
think that they understood the true nature of the difference in the commercial setting versus the at-home
setting. This request did come at the behest of a business owner. The request is to add this as a
personal service, in a retail setting this-- common to see it. In this regard, there will be no overnight
boarding. That's akin to a kennel and we have a separate definition for that. You have options this
evening regarding this. Option one is you don't amend the ordinance. The businesses that do have
lawfully permitted uses would just become non -conforming.
No direct impact to them if there were a change or if they left their place of business, that use would
just go away. That's one option. Option two would be to update the use table to acknowledge the use
for those existing businesses. In the use table, we would add an E for existing. Couldn't ask for it new,
it'd just be recognition of that existing use where it is today, or three would be to amend the Zoning
Ordinance to permit the use by special exception. Again, just to reiterate real briefly, number one, if you
don't elect to do anything, there's no direct impact to that business owner. It just becomes what we refer
to as a legally non -conforming use.
Two would be to acknowledge the use by adding an E to the table, and three would be to make it a use
by special exception. Conversely, there was a request by a resident to permit this as a home occupation
in their home. This would be added as a home occupation. I included draft performance standards in
the staff memo. Again, the same thing with a commercial setting. There'll be no overnight boarding;
that's a kennel. In the Planning Commission's discussion of this, they felt that this just introduces more
possible negative impacts on neighbor's nuisance in that setting.
45
They generally had concerns with the performance standards. We did not go through each of the
performance standards, because again, they're feeling that this would introduce the nuisance use. The
conversation stopped there. This language is not in the ordinance before you this evening. This was
just to give you a heads up that, yes, we did go through the effort of addressing the residence request.
We staff -drafted performance measures, but based on the Planning Commission's recommendation,
we did not put this in the ordinance.
If you felt like you wanted to put this in the ordinance, again, you would make a motion to adopt the
performance standards that are in the memo. With that said, again, I've briefly summarized the nature
of the changes in the staff memo. I provided you two suggested motions. One is to adopt the ordinance
as drafted, and then the other is to help you with potentially exploiting some sections, but advancing
those cleanup things that aren't confrontational so we can clean up the Zoning Ordinance.
With that said, that's the end of my presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions.
Mayor Burk: All right. Ms. Fox?
Council Member Fox: I have got a few questions, one concerning the Doggie Daycare. Maybe I want
to opine on that. I just got a complaint just this evening from a resident who says a dog walker everyday
walks past their property, dog deposits right on the property and they keep going. I can see that as a
concern in a residential area, especially with a lot of dogs. I for one would probably not want to go there
with this. That's my opinion.
The other issue I have, the section 2.3 Board of Architectural Review; our current code, it looks like,
under 2.3.4 required qualifications, it says here that all persons appointed to the Board of Architectural
Review. Is that the current and what you gave us, is that the addition? The addition here says, "With
the following exceptions."
Mike Watkins: Yes, ma'am.
Council Member Fox: Okay. We have had folks who have served on the BAR before not being able
to really serve on the BAR per our code right now. Am I correct about that?
Mike Watkins: We're trying to correct that issue with qualified persons that own property within the
Town, but may not necessarily be a resident.
Council Member Fox: If we're going to talk about the VRBO and things like that later, say we go ahead
and say, "VRBO is going to be a business in the Town. You're going to go ahead and sublet your house
or whatever you're going to do." Somebody who moves from their home here and maybe resides in
Fairfax, and they say they're a business owner here because their home is here and everything, would
they be allowed to come to Fairfax and sit on the BAR?
I see this snowballing into people who don't really have a vested interest in being here, which is why
we have this in our code in the first place, be one of the seven folks up here making decisions about
architectural standards right here in the H1 and the H2. I have a real issue with that because we didn't
adhere to this before and I don't understand why we didn't. I would not support the extra wording
because I can see it spiraling out of control, actually.
Mike Watkins: Yes, ma'am. I don't know if it's going to help or hinder your decision -making process,
but the word 'may' was enclosed. You have the discretion to look at the totality of the qualifications of
the candidate, what their background is, where they live, where their business is, and you can elect to
appoint them to the board. It's not a -
Mayor Burk: Guarantee.
Mike Watkins: Yes, ma'am. Yes, thank you.
Council Member Fox: I know, and I hear you. Out of respect for our colleagues and our colleague's
choices. We usually say, "Okay, if that's what you want, that's great. We'll all accept it." I don't see that
as a necessarily good thing. We might not speak up because we don't want to say, "Your choice is
46
bad." I don't see this and I understand the word 'may', but I really don't think that it's what's best for the
time. I feel like if you live here, great, you have some say in the architecture, but that's just my two
cents. Then also the wording on the VRBO, I think there are some issues with that that haven't been
discussed yet. Correct?
Mike Watkins: I had a feeling this was going to be discussed. Let me put it this way. The research that
staff did for the temporary short-term rentals, I personally went and looked at a variety of different
ordinances. This was addressed by the General Assembly in regards to an addition to the State Code
that says, "localities can require a registration process". That was the first hurdle to overcome.
In terms of the proposed ordinance, I modeled it after primarily Charlottesville. The distinguishing
features of our ordinance versus most of the other ones is I did not put a qualification on the unit type.
There are two primary things that the Planning Commission raised objections to, still pushed it forward
for your consideration, but there were two primary issues that they had. One was parking and the other
was silent on the unit type.
Council Member Fox: What about garbage, things like that?
Mike Watkins: That's addressed with the Town code. All of our residential dwellings are required to
maintain their solid waste. There's nothing unique about introducing this use to a single-family
residence. The same requirements would apply and, in fact, the ordinance was written such that nothing
can be done to the structure to make it appear or operate any differently than what it was intended for
and that's a family residence.
Council Member Fox: Is it your opinion that this needs a little bit more work?
Mike Watkins: I don't. From my perspective, I have equal number of folks that have done the proper
thing and called our department and said, "I would like to get a permit for this use." I've got an equal
number of folks who are saying, "I think this person's operating an Airbnb or a short term rental, what
can you do to help me?" I don't have any regulations in the ordinance today. It's not a perfect ordinance.
Are the things that can be changed? Absolutely, but as far as the characteristics of our ordinance versus
others, the primary, not deficiency but difference in ours is I did not include a restriction on the unit type.
Council Member Fox: My gut feeling tells me we should work on this and some sort of work session
at some point.
Mike Watkins: Sure.
Council Member Fox: If it's Council's will, could we take it out and work on work sessions?
Mike Watkins: Absolutely. That's one of the reasons why I included that alternate motion there for you,
is that for those items that you're not ready to move on tonight, let's go to work session and you can get
it corrected.
Council Member Fox: Okay. Thanks.
Mayor Burk: Just so I understand, Council Member Fox, you want to remove the home occupation at
Home Doggie Daycare and the inclusion of homestay use short term logic?
Council Member Fox: Yes and then work on [inaudible 02:55:06]
Mayor Burk: Okay. Anyone else have a comment? Mr. Steinberg?
Council Member Steinberg: Question, first on the Airbnb. Were we to pass something this evening,
and somebody then registers under whatever we pass, how would they be affected if we then come
back and revise it and replace what we approved this evening with something else?
Mike Watkins: The way the ordinance is written is the permit is good for a year. Anything that would
be potentially adopted this evening AND somebody were to come and receive an approved home
47
occupation permit for the homestay, it would be good for a year. Then if the Council were to amend that
ordinance, they will be subject to that amendment after that year expiration.
Council Member Steinberg: Okay. At worst, we'd be living with something for a year as we work on it,
but we would have something in place is your point?
Mike Watkins: Yes, sir.
Council Member Steinberg: Okay. This would be, I presume, in many respects, primarily complaint -
driven in terms of enforcement? Somebody says, "They're operating a..."
Mike Watkins: The ordinance includes the requirement for an inspection. Staff would confirm that
they're operating under the permit as approved and then, yes, sir, it would be complaint -driven.
Council Member Steinberg: Okay, fine. I'm willing to agree with the majority of the Council depending
on what that maybe, but I also might offer that if we get something in place at least and then as we work
through this if we come up with something better, then so be it.
Now, regarding the BAR and, I confess, I'm the guilty party here, but when I appointed and had my
current BAR member approved, I did it with a lot of research. It was my understanding that because he
was a licensed architect and had business within the Town, he was okay and the Council approved. My
thought was, as opposed to the language I see here, that the BAR member must be-- This is what I
envisioned, that the BAR member must be a resident or a licensed architect whose primary place of
business is within the incorporated limits of the Town of Leesburg and who holds a current business
license from the Town.
That's what I had in mind. Meaning they would have a direct interest in their business within the Town
of Leesburg, and as a result, also the interests of the Town of Leesburg at heart. Sometimes business
owners have more interests than property owners. That's the idea I had in mind. If we want to consider
not approving anything this evening going to a work session and working on this, I think that's fine.
My experience is that finding qualified members for the BAR, talented members for the BAR, it's one of
the most difficult commissions that we have to fill. To eliminate certain talents, especially architects
many of whom don't live within the Town but have lots of experience here falls short of making the BAR
as qualified and efficient a group as it could be. Thanks.
Mayor Burk: Anyone else? Mr. Campbell?
Council Member Campbell: I appreciate the work, and obviously, it's hard to just make all the
comments in five minutes that need to be made on a number of issues. I'm curious as to why we went
so deep into vending machines, particularly with a requirement that you can't have one unless there's
a 100,000 square feet of non-residential space. I'm wondering --
Mike Watkins: It was an enforcement issue at the Outlet Mall. There aren't any regulations out there.
Again, they're entities out there that are operating without the proper permit, so this would be a
mechanism to bring them into compliance.
Council Member Campbell: I'm also looking at office space. If I'm on a 50,000 square -foot building, I
can't have a kiosk for my employees?
Mike Watkins: The playing the darts trying to hit the bull's eye was to find where they're most common.
We don't really have them in our office parks. That was the --
Council Member Campbell: Gas stations sometimes have outdoor vending machines?
Mike Watkins: A vending kiosk is different than a vending machine. The vending machine is defined
differently. The vending kiosk is what you see out the Outlet Mall.
48
Council Member Campbell: To me, that's not a vending kiosk. I also think we need definitions. That's
a distinction, a pop-up stand, as you will, to sell goods is different than an automated machine. I think
we just need to work on our definitions a little bit as we look at that. I was just curious, again, about the
background. What are we really trying to regulate, versus vending machines? If this is not intended to
regulate vending machines, I think we need to at least clarify the difference.
Then I have the same issue with the homestay. I'd like a little bit more time to really talk about that
because, again, there is a difference between a person renting a home and the definition of a short
term and maybe how the industry defines a short-term rental versus a short-term stay. Again, just trying
to avoid confusion as we look at the job of the Zoning Administrators not being more burdensome than
it needs to be, but also being clear with our community as to what it is we're really trying to regulate and
talk about.
Again, I don't know the effectiveness of how we want to apply the regulations until we get some more
clarity because what we don't want to do is create this onerous situation. If we're really only talking
about the Outlet Mall, then we can do something specifically as a piece to only talk about the Outlet
Mall. If it's bigger than that, then I'd like to hear how big it is and where we're talking about because we
look at new land applications and developments and we heard some tonight, what's to the stop the
inclusion of looking at open space and someone deciding that pop-up merchandise, I'll call them stands,
is really nothing other than regulation. As you're suggesting, we need something to regulate. It has
become a nuisance in the Outlet Mall?
Mike Watkins: The backstory there is that anytime we look at commercial uses, there's square footage
associated with it. The Outlet Mall has a restriction on its overall building square footage. Instead of
requiring or asking them to come back and amend that, we wanted to include something in the
ordinance that allows accessory uses. The vending kiosk, there's a description for it. I don't know if this
helps, but the vending kiosk is an enclosed accessory retail structure subordinate to the other principal
uses.
Council Member Campbell: That's what I thought of a vending machine because it could be described.
Again, I don't want to necessarily get into it, but in terms of the uses of the property owner in Outlet Mall
is a little different than a property owner of Village of Leesburg. They control that space and who leases
those kiosks. They're actually leased by and through the retail owner of the property. Now we're
interjecting another step.
Mike Watkins: I think what we're doing is we're trying to protect the business owners' interest and the
things that do occur there and create the provision for them to have something that's not overly
regulated but gives them the permission to do what they're doing. That's what this ordinance does.
Council Member Campbell: They have permission anyway. It's private property, isn't it, the Outlet
Mall?
Mike Watkins: It's still subject to our zoning regulations of which there's a restriction on the types of
uses and square-footages that they can do.
Council Member Campbell: Is the same true in the Village of Leesburg?
Mike Watkins: The Village of Leesburg has a concept plan and proffers as well that restricts the certain
types of uses and square-footages, yes, sir.
Council Member Campbell: That would restrict vending kiosks?
Mike Watkins: In this circumstance, the ordinance would not restrict it. It gives them permission to do
that. We're inserting the ability for them to come and request, "Mr. Zoning Administrator, here's my
permit. Can this be approved?" It's an opportunity.
Council Member Campbell: I hear you. It's just a time to consider what it is that we're doing and to
talk it through and have a better understanding. I'm not opposing it. I'm just trying to understand -
Mike Watkins: I love the conversation.
49
Council Member Campbell: -the practical application because, as you well know, sometimes there's
appeals.
Mike Watkins: Yes, sir.
Council Member Campbell: Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Dunn?
Council Member Dunn: Thank you, yes. To continue on that, I have a similar question to Mr.
Campbell's. My question was about the same thing. Are we talking primarily about trying to regulate the
Outlet Mall? If that's the case, it seems like we could go about it a little more streamlined and basically
say, "Kiosks are allowed under the terms and conditions as established by the property owner." Then
if you want to set that property owner at a certain square -footage, then go ahead and do that.
For example, a 20,000 square -foot property owner, we don't want 15 kiosks on 20,000 square -feet and
other businesses. If you have the Outlet Mall, I tend to want to defer to the Outlet Mall being able to
manage what's best for their customers instead of us as the government wanting to step in and say,
"No, we know better how to manage your situation." That's how I see it.
Mike Watkins: I absolutely agree with the comments that the two Council Members are making,
yourself and Mr. Campbell. I'm not looking to create regulation where it's not needed. In this particular
instance, though, there are different circumstances. We've got by right development, we've got a
development that occurs under a proffered rezoning. In the Outlet Mall's instance and the example for
the Village of Leesburg, there are very specific uses and square footages that are assigned to those,
that the property owner volunteered into. It wasn't the Town of Leesburg Zoning Administrator saying
that you can't do this, they volunteered the restriction.
This ordinance acknowledges the fact that we've got unique things happening and provides an
opportunity for those to occur under limited regulation. It works around the property owner, I hate to say
work around, but it affords an opportunity for unique uses that occur if we modernize the ordinance
such that they don't have to go through legislative action to get the uses that are occurring on the
property. It's done administratively. That's what this tries to accomplish.
Council Member Dunn: I would like to try and see if there's a way we can even cut out the
administrative apart and just say that, for example, if-- I don't know what the square footages of these
properties are. Let's just use 100,000 square feet because that's what's referenced here. Properties
over 100,000 square feet are allowed kiosks on their property. That's as simple an ordinance as I can
imagine.
To read all that, it's onerous in my view, as to set down that then within their property we're going to
dictate whether they're going to be, how many feet they have to be, how far the walkway is, whether
they're going to have hooked up to electricity or water, I think is what you had. It just seems like there's
a lot more things that we're stepping into in giving them the authority to do what they're already doing.
Mike Watkins: Not getting in the nuances of each of the performance standards, but I understand. In
a work session you want to simplify the ordinance? Let's talk about it.
Council Member Dunn: I would suggest that.
Mayor Burk: Excuse me, which ordinance?
Council Member Dunn: This is the kiosks. I'm not sure of the number. Do you have a number on that?
Mike Watkins: 9-4-9.
Mayor Burk: Okay. Thank you.
50
Council Member Dunn: As far as the Architectural Review Board, are we required by the state to have
an architect on the Architectural Review Board?
Mike Watkins: This language came to us maintaining the requirements of the CLG language. That's
where the genesis for this change came is that we wanted to make sure that our regulations are
consistent with other requirements of us. Is an architect required? I don't want to tell you an answer
that's incorrect. I'd have to go back and look, off the top of my head, I can't pull the answer. I don't know -
Barbara Notar: The State Code it's not, you just have to have a board. You don't have to have an
architect on the board.
Mike Watkins: There's other regulations that I don't have in front of me that may require this.
Council Member Dunn: Right. If you're going to a historic district you have to have a board to evaluate
that. It doesn't necessarily have to be an Architectural Review Board. It could actually be a Planning
Commission committee or the Council that does it. You have to have a board designated to do the
review. Therefore, that's why I questioned, are we really required to have an architect because,
personally, and I don't know if it's going to what you were getting at, Neil, was, I'd rather see somebody
more and ultimately interested in the way the Town looks, than what their architectural opinions are and
what they think is like the last applicant, what looks good and what doesn't.
It's tough to find an architect to sit on the board and I would rather have somebody who is more
interested in our community than holding a position out for somebody who meets a standard that we're
setting for ourselves and is not required by the state. The other one, I would agree homestay needs to
see the Tight of a work session.
Two quick questions on numbers, under family day homes, I thought this was already in our terminology
or how we're determining daycare centers, which I assume that's what you're talking about. Why are
we adding that line and it's highlighted about the numbers of children because I thought we were already
to that standard?
Mike Watkins: There was a change in the State Code definition for Family Day home and the number,
so we're reflecting that in our ordinance.
Council Member Dunn: These weren't in there before?
Mike Watkins: No, sir.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. Last question was under alternate residential development options, rear
garage setback. Why are you laughing? Why did we change that from five to four or vice versa?
Whatever it is. Yes, we're changing it from four to five.
Mike Watkins: Correct. In this instance, the TDL ordinance, traditional design ordinance was put
together without the benefit of coordinating it with the Design & Construction Standards Manual, the
DCSM. This is regarding a detached garage or a garage in the rear of the property. There's a clearance
requirement so that you can maneuver the vehicle into the garage and still stay on your property. That
requirement is five feet. This is a cleanup correction to memorialize the fact that five -feet is required.
Council Member Dunn: You said something was different than what I understood here. I envisioned
the rear of my garage was absolutely my family room so it wouldn't count but you said a detached
garage.
Mike Watkins: It can be attached or detached as a garage in the rear, think of it that way.
Council Member Dunn: All right. I don't know if it's required or Council wants to consider the changing
of the requirement for an architect on the board of architectural review. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Everyone has had a chance to speak on this. My understanding is that we are pulling
inclusion of homestay use short term lodging. We are adding personal services Doggie Daycare. We
are not taking home occupancy at Home Doggie Daycare. We're not doing that one. We're pulling that
51
off altogether and we are pulling the kiosk one for further discussion. Do the majority of people want to
pull the recommended language for the planning, the one member of the board? How do people feel
about that? To talk about it at a work session?
Unidentified Council Member: [inaudible 03:13:02]
Mayor Burk: Now I'm asking about the one member of the board. Do we want to discuss that at a work
session?
Council Member Fox: [inaudible 03:13:13]
Mayor Burk: We're pulling that one for a work session. We're doing the homestay for a work session.
We're doing a kiosk for a work session. We are adding the personal service Doggie Daycare as it's
stated here and we are not including home occupancy at Home Doggie Daycare at all. Right?
Council Member Steinberg: Can I get a point of clarification for the Doggie Daycare? We're adding
that for commercial--?
Mike Watkins: Personal service.
Mayor Burk: The commercial one not the at-home one. I'm just trying to get organized here. Thank
you. I know I've been missing them, it's just so we understand that. Let me close the public hearing at
this point. Are there any speakers? No speakers. Is there anybody that would like to speak? I will close
the public hearing.
We need a motion to, I'll move it, that we are going to accept the Batch Zoning Ordinance amendment
changes with the exception of the language about the BAR endorsement by the Planning Commission
or the one member of the board may be at the discretion of Town Council be appointed as a non
resident. We're going to talk about that one. We're going to talk about inclusion of homestay. We are
going to add the personal service Doggie Daycare, the commercial aspect of it. We are not going to talk
about the home occupancy at all. We're not going do anything with that. We are going to talk about the
kiosk one.
Mike Watkins: One clarification. I need you to pick one of the options for the personal service. With the
personal service Doggie Daycare, if you include an amendment, are we including the-- this is in the
staff memo. It's on page five of the staff report. The first option is to do nothing. The second option is to
add to the existing use table. Then the third option is to add it as a special exception.
Mayor Burk: I believe we were doing option two. We were updating the use table to acknowledge the
use of existing businesses. Am I wrong? Is that where people were--?
Council Member Fox: If it's existing businesses [inaudible 03:15:37] all new business. All new
business wouldn't be subject to that table. If anybody came in and applied, is that what you're talking
about?
Mike Watkins: It only recognizes those existing businesses that have permits. You would not be able
to ask for a new Doggie Daycare. If you wanted to ask for a new Doggie Daycare, the staffs
recommendation was to include it as a special exception use.
Council Member Fox: I would support that.
Mayor Burk: I think that's what the majority would.
Council Member Dunn: I thought we were talking about taking that to a work session too. Has the
Planning Commission reviewed that? Is that required?
Mike Watkins: The Planning Commission's recommendation to the Council was to not adopt either /
or - the at home or the commercial setting. Again, I'm bringing it to your attention because it was an
52
existing business that's out there that wanted to protect their rights, enhance the options for you to
consider.
Council Member Dunn: Okay.
Mayor Burk: All right. The motion that I will make and see how it goes is, again, the wording on the
architect that we are approving all of the batch Zoning Ordinance amendments with the exception of
the one member of the board may be out of Town, that the inclusion of homestay will go to a work
session also, that the Doggie Daycare commercial will be option three, the Zoning Ordinance to present
the use by special exception, and that the 9-4-9, the vending kiosk, we'll talk about at a work session.
Do I have a second?
Council Member Dunn: Yes.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Mr. Dunn. Any additional discussion at this point?
Council Member Dunn: Just a point of clarification because I don't want staff to go down the wrong
path on this. You said on the architect, rather than it being not an architect, but somebody not from out
of Town. You understand it to be the other way though. Right? In Town [crosstalk]
Mayor Burk: We're going to discuss it.
Council Member Dunn: Not having it be an architect?
Mayor Burk: Yes.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. Are we taking these items that we took off to a work session?
Mayor Burk: Yes.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. Thank you.
Barbara Notar: Was that a motion?
Mayor Burk: Yes.
Barbara Notar: Okay, because I think you need to state the work session. I just told the Town Manager
of what the date is so that there doesn't have to be readvertised. You're deferring action to a certain
date.
Mayor Burk: In my motion, adding to my motion, I am deferring to what date? Do I have to have a
specific date?
Barbara Notar: He is going to give it to you.
Kaj Dentler: Your work sessions coming up are February 10th, February 24th and then you're into
March. I'm not sure when you're ready to discuss that.
Mayor Burk: Why don't we take it in the middle? Not the 10th. What's the next one?
Kaj Dentler: 24th?
Mayor Burk: 24th.
Kaj Dentler: Does that work for you? February 24th?
Mayor Burk: All right. Is that okay with you Mr. Dunn? All right. I have a motion by me, seconded by
Mr. Dunn, all in favor?
53
All: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? It passes.
Mike Watkins: Thank you very much.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. All right. Now I got to find my agenda in all these papers. We have Council
disclosures. Mr. Dunn?
Council Member Dunn: Actually, I need to write the form out. I believe I responded to an email from
Molly Novotny about Compass Creek. A couple things that I would like to have under consideration for
a future meeting is a letter to the Board of Supervisors with our concerns about the courthouse and
Church Street being designed and the period that it's being blocked off, and ask that the Board of
Supervisors consider any suggestions that the Council might have in helping to mitigate the conditions
thereof the citizens in the area.
Mayor Burk: Are you asking for a letter that we will--?
Council Member Dunn: Expressing our concerns and asking that the Board of Supervisors considers
suggestions that we may bring forward that could help mitigate the stress on the local citizens.
Mayor Burk: What do you mean by may bring forward because if we're going to put this letter together
it will go out--?
Council Member Dunn: If we feel that there are, I don't want to limit it to just suggestions that we may
have now, we may have some today, but there may be some that come up as a result of the
development and the build -out that we make. That they're open to at least hearing our suggestions. As
we said yesterday, do we have much say? No, but I think that our citizens deserve to have us express
their concerns to the Board of Supervisors for them.
Mayor Burk: Do you include undergrounding the utilities as requested by the residents tonight?
Council Member Dunn: Sure. I would say any suggestions that we can put forward to them. I don't
know the need of a work session unless staff feels that they need to have us work on that.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Does it need four head nods?
Mayor Burk: It does.
Council Member Dunn: We could just say it in our suggestions to you, maybe?
Mayor Burk: Yes, that would be okay.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. That's fine. I don't have to have a work session on it as long as you can
get the letter going.
Mayor Burk: Do we have four people that are interested in that letter? Okay. Mr. Steinberg, Mr. Thiel?
Vice Mayor Martinez: Everybody.
Mayor Burk: Everybody. Okay.
Council Member Dunn: I'd also like to have a work session to address the Council's concerns about
the potential changes to the JLMA that were brought forth in the presentation tonight by County staff.
Mayor Burk: Okay. Anybody? I need four people. It looks like everybody on that one too.
Council Member Dunn: This next one is, I'd like to see if we can get four votes from Council at least
to ask staff to expedite the design standards that they are saying are going to take to the end of the
54
year to get done. If focusing just on the design standards and working on the regulations afterwards
can get design standards out by July 30th, I would really like to see those design standards move
forward prior to the end of the year.
Mayor Burk: Do you have four people that are interested in--? I'm afraid that doesn't have four--
Kaj Dentler: Madam Mayor, just on that point. I think if you're going to make that decision, you should
do that with Ms. Berry Hill. Council has given direction and that's what staff is following. I think you
should hear what that direction has been and what our ability to get that done before you just somewhat
make this decision on the split-second tonight without remembering what the direction has been. That's
all.
Council Member Dunn: If we need to discuss it more, I'm willing to do that, which I think it could
deserve. At the last presentation, she even offered that if Council desires us to work on the design
standards first, we can do that. She did say that it's still going to require the regulatory process. I still
think that tonight was a perfect example of how without any design standards to point to, we can't even
tell applicants of even suggestions on what we might have that they can use. I see a benefit of getting
design standards done sooner than waiting till the end of the year.
I would just like to see if there is four members of Council. If we want to have a discussion with it, fine.
I fully agree but last time it was brought up, we didn't get the chance to really vote that in.
Mayor Burk: Alright. How about if we do it that we bring Ms. Berry Hill back and have the discussion
to see what the impact will be at that point?
Council Member Dunn: On doing it faster?
Mayor Burk: Yes. Are there four people that are interested in doing that? Mr. Thiel, Mr. Dunn, Ms. Fox.
That's it.
Kaj Dentler: We'll have a work session, no?
Mayor Burk: It didn't pass.
Council Member Steinberg: It did.
Council Member Dunn: I thought Marty had his hand up.
Council Member Steinberg: It did, yes. One, two, three, four.
Mayor Burk: Did you have your hand up? Okay, yes. You'll have to have a work session on it.
Kaj Dentler: Work session to discuss trying to accelerate it.
Council Member Dunn: My last thing is that ask staff to-- if by February 29th or March 1st, whatever,
if after that date the staff has to pursue annexation of the JLMA by those properties who have not signed
on to our BLA. That may require a meeting to discuss that. That's the hopeful end result, to start putting
a little more of a push on this effort. That's the request. Let's see what happens Kaj.
Kaj Dentler: Staff is prepared to have conversations with Council so you can make decisions on what
you want to do. I do agree that you need to make those decisions. I would recommend that we have
that conversation and then you give us the direction you wish to go which may be exactly what you
asked. It may not be. I think you need to be updated on the latest and then make an informed decision
on which way you want to go. We can do that on, we would recommend a closed session for sure, but
we can do that on the 27th. The Town attorney is not here on the 28th, we could target that for the 27th
if you're agreeable to that.
Council Member Dunn: I would love to see how much we can discuss in an open section dealing with
the process of annexation because I think the public needs to hear that there is an active plan that we
55
are considering. That can be debated at that time I guess, but if you're saying that you would agree that
that does need to be discussed, that's what I'm looking for. We need to move forward on annexation.
Kaj Dentler: I believe that we are ready to have that conversation. We would definitely recommend that
it'd be in a closed session on the 27th. You do have a reception -
Council Member Dunn: This month?
Kaj Dentler: I believe we can be ready. We'll target that and if we're not, we'll go into February. I think
that we have a chance to be ready on the 27th. You have a reception coming up on 30th. We're hoping
to have some information ready. There are a few things that have to occur, but that's been our target
all along. That'd be my advice.
Mayor Burk: Are there four-
Kaj Dentler: We'll target that date.
Mayor Burk: -votes or indications of people that would be interested in having a discussion on
annexation?
Council Member Dunn: Yes.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Dunn, Mr. Campbell, Ms. Fox, Mr. Steinberg, and Mr. Thiel. Okay.
Council Member Dunn: I'm out of time. I think I was going to bring up something about Graydon, but
I'll let Suzanne do that. I'm done. Thank you. I did want one shout out, if I may. I don't blow my own
horn much, but I'll do it for my son. He did get the nomination from Congressman Wexton for West
Point. He still has to qualify. He did do a ROTC scholarship for four years so that was very good to see
that.
Mayor Burk: Congratulations. Mr. Campbell, do you have anything you want to add?
Council Member Campbell: Two disclosures. One on December 19th with Peter Kalaris concerning
Meadowbrook Farms. The others are email correspondence with Molly Novotny today, the 14th about
Compass Creek. Certainly, just for comments, I appreciate the fact that we're being extremely thoughtful
about extremely serious issues. I would agree on our relationship with the County and I'll go back and
repeat what I repeated a couple of years ago. We need to establish a relationship where we have
regular communications about important issues and not just staff to staff conversations, but elected
officials to elected officials.
I think our posture needs to be less adversarial and more collaborative. I went back and I read
components of the Town Comprehensive Plan and we need to treat it like it does exist because it does
exist until we change it and vote differently. There's talk about the JLMA area as a cooperative
agreement and relationship with land development between the Town and the County. If that's true, we
need to make it true because we see a lot of things happening.
At a future point, I would like to look at strategies and agenda items that we can bring forward mutually
between the Town and the County that is a mutual benefit to our residents that values-- we talk about
this every year during the budget time. We're either not getting what our County share is or we think we
need more or we think we want this supported, that supported and we come away disappointed year
after year. Well, those are relationships and opportunities that have to be worked on. They just can't be
talked about or hope for. Some things can't be negotiated through a letter. There has to be a face-to-
face conversation.
Hope that as we continue to move down this road, and we look at this relationship which is an important
one for us, that we'd be willing to talk about it and then strategy hopefully will follow. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Ms. Fox?
56
Council Member Fox: Just a few disclosures. I had a text communication with Molly Novotny about
Compass Creek. I had a meeting with Cody Francis and David Gregory about Graydon and also an
extra email from Cody Francis. I had a meeting with Peter Kalaris concerning Meadowbrook, this past
week. I wanted to bring forward the possibility-- the other night, I mentioned something about term limits.
I think I'll save that. Never mind. Thanks.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg?
Council Member Steinberg: Thank you. Disclosure, I had a brief phone conversation with Peter Kalaris
regarding his new proposal at the Meadowbrook Commercial. That's all for that. Regarding Graydon
Manor, I continued to disagree with Mr. Cody, that's his first or last name, and Mr. Culbert in their
assessment that what they're doing is by right. I think we do have an established plan as it refers to that
area. I will continue to maintain that the Town is well within its rights to follow the course of action that
I believe is proper regarding providing them with the service that they request.
I'd like to commend the young people that were here this evening and their presentation to us. It's
refreshing to see that level of involvement in our process. If we have more youth and citizens who
involve themselves throughout the period, I think our job to be a whole lot easier. Thanks.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Thiel?
Council Member Thiel: Yes, I had a meeting with David Gregory and Cody Francis as well, on Graydon
Manor. No real comments other than, please, pray for OJ Jackson in public works. He suffered a heart
attack the other day and he has been at the Town 20 plus years and needs prayers. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: And he's home. Mr. Martinez?
Council Member Martinez: I also spoke with Peter Kalaris on Meadowbrook on the 9th about the
Meadowbrook. I talked to Molly Novotny on Compass Creek yesterday via phone. Also, even though
this AARP bulletin, yes, I'm old enough to get that, they have a special report on marijuana and your
health, but that is not what I'm talking about. They had an article in here that talks about Facing
Dementia: You Need a Friend.
I'm not going to read the whole article, but I'm going to read a paragraph. "At least four other Virginia
localities have become dementia friendly, Alexandria, Arlington, Leesburg, and Lexington. To receive
the designation, a group draws a plan and make its locality supportive of people with dementia and their
caregivers, volunteers trying to be dementia friend champions, holding informational sessions for
businesses and other communities. A lot of it is just respect, just slowing down and listening."
AARP recognized Leesburg as being friendly to those people and I just wanted to bring that to your
attention. Did you want the article?
Council Member Fox: Madam Mayor. I just wanted to see if I can bring something up. I feel like I need
to because there's a timing issue. I was wondering if I can go ahead and bring it up?
Mayor Burk: You've already spoken.
Council Member Fox: Yes.
Mayor Burk: Can't it wait till the next meeting?
Council Member Fox: I'm not sure. I'm trying to figure out in my head, but it has to do with the term
limits that I suggested. The only reason I'm bringing it up is because if we discuss anything at all, we
have to have some sort of input or designation from the state and they don't meet for very long. I feel
like time is of the essence.
Mayor Burk: Well, it would be too late this year to put it into the state, if-
57
Council Member Fox: I disagree with that, but I would still like to have the conversation as soon as
possible.
Mayor Burk: What are you asking?
Council Member Fox: I'm just asking if we can put it on the next work session. I understand we're
having some sort of Planning Commission/Council Work Session and we don't have anything else for
that night. Is that on purpose?
Council Member Dunn: Or is that at the Regular meeting?
Council Member Fox: No, I think it's work session. Is it a work session meeting?
Kaj Dentler: Your next work session is January 27.
Council Member Fox: Yes.
Kaj Dentler: Your previous direction is to have a joint planning session with the Planning Commission
on the Town plan and that was your only item. That's your decision to add an additional item on top of
that. Based on last night, I did add the term limits conversation to February 10, but if that is not what
you're looking for, then you have to have the conversation on the 27th.
Council Member Fox: I feel like earlier we have it the better just because --
Mayor Burk: Lets see if-- I'm sorry.
Council Member Fox: That's okay. I would request the Council to consider that.
Mayor Burk: Are there four votes that want to talk about term limits on January 27?
Kaj Dentler: If you wish to do that it's --
Council Member Fox: I think that would be added to the Town Plan discussion.
Kaj Dentler: Yes, ma'am. On the 27th, you would have two items, the joint planning
Planning Commission and then a discussion on term limits.
Mayor Burk: We had we had originally decided we were going to not put anything
except the Planning Commission, so we're changing.
meeting with the
on that meeting
Kaj Dentler: That's correct. Well, that's your prerogative. I would suggest if you're going to do that, then
we'll go ahead and give an update on the legislative agenda as well because if there is any other
amendments time is completely of the essence. Its your decision.
Mayor Burk: Are there four votes? No, if we had to be a work session I'd have to talk about it.
Council Member Dunn: Yes. Well, we have stuff go to regular meetings too.
Kaj Dentler: You can do that. It's your prerogative.
Mayor Burk: Without talking about it?
Council Member Dunn: Well, we can talk about it that night. Just a suggestion because I know we had
already set that night for some planning event. Anyway, just a suggestion.
Mayor Burk: Are there four votes that want to talk term limits on the 27th?
Council Member Fox: At the work session.
58
Mayor Burk: Are there four votes? Mr. Thiel, Mr. Dunn, Mr. Campbell, and Ms. Fox.
Kaj Dentler: 27th.
Mayor Burk: All right. I think we have to be careful. We did set up these time limits so let's try to respect
them in the future if we can. I need to identify the disclosure that I did also have a discussion with Molly
Novotny. Well, it was email back and forth. I want to congratulate the fire company for their new officers.
They had a luau the other day and sent off some of their retired officers and commanders but they also
selected their new leadership.
I met with Sharon Virts, Sally Travis, and Joe Rizzo in regard to the Loudoun Museum. I asked that
group to get in touch with each of you to talk about the Loudoun Museum and the plans that they have
for it. If anybody is not doing anything on the 18th, the ice sculptures we'll be back at Virginia Village. I
want to commend the young people that came in, their enthusiasm for this youth summit that they're
putting together and the recommendations that will come out of it could be very useful to us.
Do I have a motion to adjourn? No. Did you want to say anything Mr. Dentler?
Kaj Dentler: No comments.
Mayor Burk: No comments. All in favor?
Members: Aye.
The meeting adjourned at 10:37 p.m.
59