Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout1978_04_12 56 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON WATER AND SEWER RATES, LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL, APRIL 12, 1978. • A regular meeting of the Leesburg Town Council was held in the Council Chambers, 10 West Loudoun Street, Leesburg, Virginia, on April 12, 1978. The meeting was called to order by the Mayor at 7.:40 P.M. , with the invocation :being offered by Mr. Herrell, and followed with the Salute to the Flag._ Present were: Mayor Mary Anne Newman, Councilmembers Glen P. Cole, Stanley D. Merrell, -.Jr. , James A. Rock, C. Terry Titus and John W. Tolbert, Jr. ; also Town Manager John Niccolls , Assistant to the Manager Jeffrey H. Minor, Director of Engineering Andrew G. Shope and Town Attorney George M. Martin. Absent from the meeting was Councilmember Charles E. Bange. The minutes of the regular meeting of March 22, 1978 were approve as written. • Public Hearing on Proposed Water and Sewer Rates. A public hearing on proposed water and sewer rates' was held, ' with the Clerk reading the Notice of public hearing." • Mr. Charles Bos of 55 N. King Street said there is no question that the rate increase is necessary due to changing costs in the last ten years. People should get used to the idea of increasing costs - whether it be new wells or going to the Potomac for water, it will be more expensive. He felt that perhaps computer billing might be a way to remind people that they must still conserve water; also, to determine how many people in a family, etc.' He also suggested that the Town might print some signs' to •bedisplayed in the kitchen or bathroom of homes to encourage the conservation of water. People are using more water now because there is no constant pressure to conserve. He was in favor of an excess use charge for those families using in excess of a normal amount. Mayor Newman said it is possible to program a message on the computer bills. Mr. Bos suggested that such a message might spell out the cost per day, 'as is done on elec- tric bills. • Mr. C. A. En lish Cole asked why there is no reason given for the rate increase. yor ewman said there are a number of improvements that have to be made or are being made to both the water and sewer systems : (1 ) Standby generators must be installed at the wells (this has been mandated by the State Health Department) ; (2) A gravity separator was installed at the Myers Well to eliminate sand in the water; (3) we are in the process of installing six new water mains in the system that will help alleviate low pressure problems ; (4) the Hospital standtank needs to be painted and repaired. You are talking about roughly half a million dollars on those items alone. Also, there is constant maintenanceand repair work; hardly a day goes by without a water main break somewhere. Sewer lines need TV inspection to detect leaks and infiltration. She pointed out that there has not been a rate increase in ten years'. _'Mr. Cole felt that these items should be covered by the rates because this is a con- tinuing thing. Mr. Cole asked what the flat rates of $1. 50• and $6.08 are for. Mayor Newman said the $1. 50 is actual cost for billing per water user; the $6.08 is intended to be used for system improvements. Mr. Cole felt that this is a tax increase, rather than a utility in- crease - it puts a much greater burden on the poor man with a large family than if you raise taxes• in the first place. He noted, after looking at the budgets for the last two years , that roughly one- quarter million dollars. has been "siphoned off" and used for various things. in the General Fund. It would seem that, if you can take this half million dollars out of the utility. fund in two years (and this is. about the _amount of revenue this rate increase would generate) , it looks like a tax increase without it being so. Therefore, the people outside of town would be paying taxes to the Town, in effect, ' ' and he didn' t think they would take very kindly to this. He was not sure that the Code of Virginia permits transferring and intermingling of funds to spend for everything. The purpose of availability fees was to assess the man just moving here for using a system that already existed. At the same time, he is also going to be paying on the debt service for the rest of his life, so he is almost paying twice. Mr. Cole suggested that this be simplified by charging everything in one rate, so that the user knows what he is actually paying. . He asked how much+revenue this tax increase will generate in the utility system. • t" a �1 MINUTES OF APRIL 12, 1978 MEETING.,. Mayor Newman said the Town is not trying to make money on this. If we don' t have a rate increase, we will have a $200, 000 deficit by the end of the fiscal year. Mr. Cole asked if this would be true in spite of the fact that $280, 000 has .been taken out in each of the last two years. Mr,. Niccolls explained that, if you take the ad- ministrative overhead of the Town, including the cost for insurance, pensions, social security, the Town Office, his and other- salaries, along with the cost of the Finance Department itself, and estimate the percentage of the various departments ' budgets, it is appropri- ate for the utility charges to pay for these costs. It is not sur- prising that a quarter of a million dollars or more, which is paid out of the General Fund, should come out of the Utility Fund. If you closed out the Finance Department and the other departments in- volved in this process, the Utility Fund would have to go out and buy these services somewhere else. Therefore, the function and pur- pose of this transfer is to reflect accurately on the books what it truly costs to operate the utility system independent of .any other subsidy. Mr. Cole asked what the Airport Fund does for the Utility Fund. Mr. Niccolls said there is absolutely no transfer out of this. There was a loan of $70, 000 out of the Airport Fund, but that Fund paid back to the Utility Fund $5, 950 in interest. Mr. Cole felt these figures are a little inflated and he found it hard to believe that the General Fund performs $250, 000 worth of duties for the Util- u ity Fund. He hoped Council would simplify the rate for the benefit of the users. Mr. Niccolls said a copy of the 'rate study is avail- -V able for his study. Mr. Bos asked if Mr. Niccolls had a comparison of water and sewer costs in adjoining jurisdictions. Mr. Niccolls said he did not. Mayor Newman declared the public hearing closed at 8 : 05 P.M. 78-0-8 - Ordinance - Amending Chapter 16 of the Town Code. On motion of Mr. Cole, seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the following ordinance was proposed: BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows: SECTION I. Article II, Chapter 16 of the Town Code shall be amended to read as follows : ARTICLE II PROJECTIONS OVER STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAY Sec. 16-27. Permit required; compliance with Article. Except as otherwise provided, it shall be unlawful for any person to erect or maintain any street graphics, awning, canopy, balcony or any object projecting over any public right-of-way of the Town, until and unless a permit therefor shall have first been obtained from the-town manager; and then only under the terms and conditions as set forth in this Article. - A permit shall not be required for the following graphics or actions, provided such graphics shall be sub- ject to all other provisions of this Article. a. Repainting of graphics without changing wording, composition or colors ; b. Relocation of graphics as required by the Town; c. All exempt graphics. Sec. ' 16-28. Permit applications and plans. A projection permit may be obtained upon application and payment of the required fee to • the town manager on forms prescribed by him. Applications shall include plans of the proposed projection with its size, shape, height, location, letter style, lighting, color, construction and MINUTES OF APRIL 12, 1978 MEETING. _ materials and specifications detailed thereon. If the pro- posed projection is to be located within a historic conser- vation district, a certificate of appropriateness shall be issued by the Board of Architectural Review prior to the issuance of a permit by the town manager. Sec. 16-29. Permit Fees. The fees for permits under this Article, to be col- lected by ,the town manager before the issuance of a per- mit for any new projection over any public right-of-way, are as follows : Buildings or parts thereof $25. 00 Graphics 15. 00 Sec. 16-30. Liability for Damage. The provisions of this Article shall not be construed to relieve or to limit in any way the responsibility or liability of any person who owns or erects any projecting object for personal injury or property damage caused by the projecting object; nor shall the provisions of this Article be construed to impose upon the town, its officers and its employees any responsiblity of liability, by reason of the approval of any projecting object under the provi- sions of this Article. Sec. 16-31 . Abandoned Street Graphics. Any person who owns a graphic shall remove the legend from it within 30 days after the activity it advertises is no longer conducted and remove the graphic within six months after the activity it advertises is no longer conducted. Sec. 16-32. Unlawful Projections. Except as provided herein, any projecting object pre- viously or hereafter erected or maintained in violation of this Article shall be removed by the owner within ten days after receipt of written notification from the. town manager. If the owner fails to remove the object within the time specified, the town manager shall have the object removed and the owner shall pay the town for expenses incurred. Sec. 16-33. Exemptions. (a) Graphics of a public non-commercial, nature, in- cluding safety signs, danger signs, and trespas- sing signs , signs • indicating scenic or historical points of interest, and any other official sign provided it is erected by a public officer in the performance of a public duty are exempt from this Article. (b) Wall display cases, awnings, canopies, balconies, marquees and buildings or parts of buildings exist- ing at the time of enactment of this Article are exempt from provisions of this Article except Sec. 16-34 below. (c) Graphics existing at the time of enactment of this Article are exempt from permit fee requirements, Sec. 16-32 and Sec. 16-35, provided: (1) The requirements of Sec. 16-28 are met. (2)• The graphic shall have been in place for at least 25 years. (3) The graphic shall be designated a classic by the Board of Architectural Review and shall have unusual style, aesthetic qualities., or other distinctive characteristics rendering it unique among graphics. 59 MINUTES OF APRIL 12, 1978 MEETING. Sec. 16-34. 'Maintenance Requirements. All projections together with all their supports, braces, hooks, guys and anchors shall be of substantial and sturdy construction, shall be kept in. good repair, and shall be painted or cleaned as often as necessary to maintain cleap, neat, safe and orderly appearance. Sec. 16-35. Street Graphics Prohibitons and General Requirements. No street graphic shall be constructed, reconstructed, erected, relocated or maintained which: (a) Prevents free ingress or egress from any door, window or fire escape; (b) Covers or intrudes upon any architectural features of a building such as windows, columns , moldings or any major decoration; - (c) Obstructs free and clear vision or distracts the attention of the driver of any vehicle by reason of its position, shape, color, reflection or il- lumination; ur (d) Bears or contains statements, words or pictures of an obscene, indecent or immoral character, which will offend public morals or decency; ^z' (e) Advertises or publicizes an activity, business, product or service not conducted on the premises adjacent to the public right-of-way upon which such graphics are maintained; (f) Is in any way animated, emits smoke, visible vapors, particles, sound or odor; (g) Is portable or fixed on a movable stand, (h) Is located on a utility pole, tree or rock; (i) Is not hung from brackets, not attached flat against the building or not painted upon the surface of an existing building; (j ) Projects, in whole or in part, from the right- of-way line over a right-of-way more than three and one-half feet, except seasonal decorations, existing awnings, canopies and marquees; (k) Is a time-temperature device or a reader board; (1) Is illuminated with any color light other than white light and which source of light is visible from a pedestrian level ; (m) Is internally illuminated; Sec. 16-36. Permitted Projections. Subject to the provisions of this Article, the following projections and street graphics are permitted to be placed over street rights-of-way. (a) Architectural features of buildings such as cornices, eaves and bay windows ; (b) Window plant boxes and mail boxes; (c) Wall graphics ; (d) Projecting graphics; (e) Temporary window graphics; (f) Seasonal decorations. Sec. 16-37. Specific Requirements for permitted projections. Permitted projections and street graphics may be placed over street rights-of-way only in the followingmanner: 6Q MINUTES OF APRIL 12, 1978 MEETING. (a) Architectural features , including gutters and downspouts, window plant boxes and mail boxes may project not' more than 12 inches. (b) The combined area and number .of wall graphics and projecting graphics shall not exceed the limits per building as specified by any other ordinance of the town; (c) Wall graphics for any activity conducted on the premises may be displayed by attachment flat to the wall ; (d) One graphic per street entrance into a building may announce activities conducted on the premises, may project not'more than three and one-half feet, shall have a minimum clearance of nine feet above the- sidewalk, shall not exceed 10 square feet in area and shall project perpendicularly from the building wall, provided the total area of all pro- jecting graphics shall not exceed in area 10 square feet plus one square foot• for each four lineal feet of building frontage. - (e) Projecting graphics shall be located no higher than the sill of a second floor window or 14 feet above the sidewalk, whichever is less, except however, if the Board of Architectural Review deems a projecting graphic appropriate in a higher or lower location, the town manager may permit such exception; (f) Temporary window graphics' for all activities shall occupy not more than 25 percent of the area of the window in which such graphics are displayed and shall not remain in place for more than eight weeks. (g) Seasonal decorations shall be permitted for display purposes by a civic organization or governmental agency with no fee charged provided a play for the location of such decorations is submitted to the town manager at least two weeks prior to the date that the decorations are proposed to be placed. Such plan shall show that Sec. 16-35 of this Arti- cle will be complied with. Sec. 16-38. Definitions. For the purpose of this Article, certain terms and words are defined as follows : Animated Graphics : (a) Movement of a sign body or any segment thereof such as rotating, revolving, moving up or down or any other type of action involving a change of. position of a sign body or segment thereof, whether caused by mechanical illusion or other means ; (b) Lighted sign on an intermittent or flashing circuit or the movement of any light used in connection with any sign such as blinking,' traveling, flaring or changing degree of intensity. Eaves : The projecting overhang at the lower edge of a roof. Front or Frontage: Surfaces of any building or facility that present themselves to a public right-of-way giv- ing immediate access to the premises. Graphics : Any device used for visual communication, includ- ing signs. Indirect Lighting: The use of fluorescent, and other vapor light, or incadescent lighting set apart from but di- rected towards the surface of the street graphic. 61)• MINUTES OF APRIL 12, 1978 MEETING. Interior Lighting: The use of fluorescent, and other vapor light, or incandescent lighting to illuminate a street graphic from behind the lettering or from inside the graphic structure. Marquees, Canopies, Awnings: Various forms of permanent temporary, or portable roof-like coverings for en- trances and windows. Projecting Graphic: A graphic attached to a building or other structure and extending from the building wall or structure. Reader Board: A graphic with movable characters for a temporary message. Sign: Any device employing letters,-" words, symbols , etc. used or intended to attract the attention of the pub- lic from streets, sidewalks or other outside public areas. (See street graphics. ) Street Graphic: Evey sign, bulletin board, ground sign, wall and roof sign, reader board, window sign, il- luminated sign, projecting sign, official sign, in- cl'uding any letter, word, number, logo, symbol , or y combination thereof; model, mural, decoration, ban- ner, flag, pennant, clock, thermometer, insignia, light or combination of lights, used or placed as an announcement or declaration to identify, adver- tise or promote the interest of any person, place, product, or corporation from outside the structure, including interior window signs on which it is placed. Wall Graphic: A sign attached to, -painted on, or erected against a all or flat Vertical surface of a structure • with the exposed face of the sign on a plane parallel to the face of said vertical surface. Window Graphics : - All signs .attached _toror applied directly onto the internal or external surface, orset back less than one foot from the interior surface, of any window in view of the general public from outside the structure. _ - SECTION II, This ordinance shall be 'effective May 1 , 1978. Mr. Rock asked if the Highway Department has reviewed this.- Mr. Niccolls said they have - they said it would not apply to the By-Pass. Gene- rally, their remarks were uncritical . Mr. Titus felt tha private sector should. not use the public right-of-way to sell, display or advertise their wares.. The downtown -section has been uncluttered with signs overhanging the sidewalks. .and public rights-of-way and he felt this should. continue - most businesses have found it un- necessary to advertise in this way and have used flush signs. There are a few old signs thatproject, but they have. become a part of the town and should' probably stay. He was opposed to the ordinance be- cause he did not feel it can be demonstrated that it will be of any economic advantage to. use the public streets for personal benefit. The ordinance was adopted by a roll call vote of 4 to 2 : Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Herrell , Tolbert and Mayor Newman. Nay: Councilmembers Rock and Titus. 78-0-9 - Ordinance - Amending the Zoning Map according to Application #ZM-19 Sy Tunis H. Campbell and Doris W. Campbell. On motion of Mr. Herrell., _ seconded by Mr.. Tolbert, the following ordinance was proposed: . • WHEREAS , the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, at a meeting held on January 11 , 1978, referred rezoning applica- tion numbered ZM-19 by Tunis H. Campbell and Doris W. Campbell to the Leesburg' Planning Commission for the purpose- of. holding a public hearing on the application and making a recommendation, as provided by Chapter 11 , Article 8, Section 15. 1-493 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and 6 2 MINUTES OF APRIL 12, 1978 MEETING. WHEREAS, the Leesburg Planning Commission, after due public notice, held a public hearing on February 2, 1978, having heard all persons desiring to speak on the rezoning applica- tion; and WHEREAS , the Leesburg Planning Commission, at a regular meet- ing held on February 2, 1978, recommended to Council that the ' proposed rezoning be approved; and • WHEREAS, the Council for the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, after due public notice, held a public hearing on April 5, 1978, and- heard all persons desiring to be heard on the rezoning applica- tion; BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows : • SECTION I. The Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended by revising the Zoning Map according to application number ZM-19 by Tunis H. Campbell and Doris W. Campbell to change from R-2 to B-2 a parcel of land containing 7 , 205 square feet, located on the east side of South Wirt Street (its use discon- tinued) and bounded by the properties of Francis H. Jackson and Mary I. Jackson on the north, Mary F. Coleman and Sallie J. Jones on the east, Tunis H. Campbell and Doris W. Campbell on the south and South Wirt Street (its use discontinued) on the west. SECTION II. This ordinance shall be in effect from and after its passage. Mr. Herrell felt that this is spot zoning - to rezohg/FVUES1ar prop- erty next door to a commercial property would soon lead to an entirely commercial zoning. He felt there should be residential areas and com- mercial areas - if an area is to be rezoned commercial, then it should be done all at once, not a piece or two of property at a time. The ordinance was adopted by a roll call vote .of 4 for, 1 against and 1 abstention: Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Rock, Tolbert and Mayor Newman. Nay: Councilmember Herrell. Abstention: Councilmember Titus . Proposed ordinance amending the Zoning Map according to Application ZM-20 by William S. Savopoulos and Charlotte D. Savopoulos. • • On motion of Mr. Tolbert, seconded by Mr. Cole, the following ordinance was proposed: • WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, at a meeting held on January 11, 1978, referred rezoning appli- cation numbered ZM-20 by William S. Savopoulos and Charlotte D. Savopoulos to the Leesburg Planning Commission for the purpose of holding a public hearing on the application and making a recommendation, as provided by Chapter 11 , Article 8, Section 15. 1-493 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the Leesburg Planning Commission, after due public notice, held a public hearing on February 2, 1978, having heard all persons desiring to speak on the rezoning appli- cation; and WHEREAS, the Leesburg Planning Commission, at a regular meet- ing held on February 2, 1978, recommended to Council that the proposed rezoning be approved; and WHEREAS, the Council for the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, after due public notice, held a public hearing on April 5, 1978, and heard all persons desiring to be heard on the rezoning applica- tion; BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows : 6 3- MINUTES OF APRIL 12, 1978 MEETING. SECTION I. The Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended by revising the Zoning Map according to application number ZM-20 by William S. Savopoulos and Charlotte D. Savopoulos to change from R-2 to B-2 a parcel of land containing 12, 465 square feet, located on the south side of East Loudoun Street and bounded by East Loudoun Street on the north, the property of Cloverdale Corporation on the •east, East Royal Street on the south and the property of Lois W. Francis on the west. SECTION II. This ordinance shall be in effect from and after its passage. • Mr. Herrell was against, this ordinance for the same reasons as for the previous ordinance. Mr. Rock said he was opposed to this par- ticular ordinance also for the same reasons aired by Mr. Herrell. The ordinance was assumed adopted by a roll call vote of 3 to 2, with one abstention: Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Tolbert and Mayor Newman.' Nay: Councilmefnbers Herrell and Rock. Abstention: Councilmember Tiles. (See Minutes of special meeting of April 19 and special meeting of May 3 for further disposition of the above ordinance) . Tr 78-57 - Resolution - Amending Resolution 78-16 to change the offer for the diZerega Well •option. - r^. On motion of Mr. Herrell , seconded by Mr. Cole, the following resolution was proposed and adopted by a vote of 5 to 1 : RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows : • The amount of the purchase option for •the diZerega tract in Resolution No. 78-16, adopted January 25, 1978, is hereby changed from $30, 000 to $45, 000. Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Herrell , Titus, Tolbert. and Mayor Newman. Nay: Councilmember Rock. 78-58 - Resolution - Authorizin• a contract with Perry Engineering for West arket Street sewer extension. On motion of Mr. Rock, seconded- by Mr. Herrell, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted: RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows : SECTION I. The Town Manager is authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Perry Engineering Company, Inc. , for installation of sanitary sewer to service 120, 124 and 130 West Market Street in an amount of $18, 780. 00 plus $3, 000.00 for additional work as required as outlined in their proposal dated April 3, 1978. SECTION II. An appropriation is hereby made for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1978, of $21 , 780•. 00 to Account No. 10300. 821. Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Herrell, Rock, Titus, Tolbert and Mayor Newman. Nay: None. 78-59 - Resolution - Authorizing an• advertisement for bids for the collection of- garbage and refuse within the town of Leesburg. • On motion of Mr. Herrell , seconded by Mr. Rock, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted: . 1-s- 64 MINUTES OF APRIL 12, 1978 MEETING. RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows : - - - • SECTION I. The Public Notice, Contract, General .Specifica- tions, Instructions to Bidders and Proposal form for the collection of garbage and refuse within the town, as sub- mitted with a memorandum to the •Mayor and Council dated• . March 31 , 1978, are hereby approved. SECTION II. The Manager is authorized and directed to pub- lish the Invitation to Bidders in the April 20 issue of the Loudoun Times-Mirror. Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Herrell , Rock, Titus, Tolbert and . Mayor Newman. Nay: • None. 78-60 - Resolution - Authorizing the purchase of public official liability •insurance from Unimark-McDonald, Inc. On motion of Mr. Rock, seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the following resolution was proposed: RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows : SECTION I. . The quotation submitted by Unimark-McDonald, Inc. of Dallas, Texas, dated December 28, 1977, is accepted and the manager is authorized and directed to execute all forms necessary for the purchase of public official liability in- surance at an annual premium of $2, 550. SECTION II. An appropriation of $2, 550 is made to Account No. 4100-222 - Liability Insurance, for the fiscal year end- ing June 30, 1978. • Mr. Herrell felt that the Town and Town Attorney are capable. of tak- ing care of any problems such as this - thpr li§ajp need to throw this money away. The resolution was adopted by a/vo e of 4 to 2: Aye: Councilmembers Rock, Titus, Tolbert and Mayor Newman. Nay: Councilmembers Cole and Herrell . 78-61 - Resolution -. Authorizing- agreement with Loudoun County School Board or computerized utility billing services. On motion of Mr. Rock, seconded by Mr. Herrell , the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted: RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows: . The Town Manager is authorized to enter into , an agreement with the Loudoun County School Board for computerized utility billing services, in accordance with proposal dated February 27 , 1978 from Eugene D. Troxell , . Director of Computer Services. Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Herrell, Rock, Titus, Tolbert and Mayor Newman. Nay: None. 78-62 - Resolution - Authorizing notice of publication of Public Hear- ing on Application Number ZM-21 by Robert W. Ahrens , Trustee. . On motion of Mr. Rocky seconded by. Mr. Cole, the following reso- lution was proposed and unanimously adopted: RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows : A Notice of Public Hearing to consider Application Number ZM-21 by Robert W. Ahrens, Trustee, to have rezoned from MINUTES OF APRIL 12, 1978 MEETING. R-2 to B-1 a tract of land containing 20,997 square feet located on the south side of East Cornwall Street shall be published in the Loudoun Times-Mirror on' April 20, 1978 and April 27 , 1978 for Public Hearing on May 10, 1978 at 7 : 30 P.M. in the Council Chambers , 10 West Loudoun Street, Lees- burg, Virginia. Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Herrell , Rock, Titus, Tolbert and Mayor Newman. Nay: None. 78-63 - Resolution - AcceptingDeed of Easement from Roy Stowers, et als fr waterworks improvements. On motion of Mr. Cole, seconded by Mr. Herrell , the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted: - RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows : The Deed of Easement made the 24th day of March, 1978, by and between Roy and Lillian Stowers and Henry Stowers and the Town of Leesburg, for the construction, reconstruction, maintenance, replacement or repair, use and inspection of tit water main or mains, including necessary appurtenances, over, across, through and under the land of the Grantors, and for a "temporary construction easement",.- . p ycontiguous to the permanent easement during the original installation of water main for any and all purposes related thereto, which shall become null and void once construction is completed, is hereby accepted and the Mayor is hereby authorized to acknowledge the same on behalf of the Town. Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Herrell, Rock, Titus, Tolbert and Mayor Newman. Nay: None. 78-64 —Resolution - Making appointments to the Board of Grievance Commissioners. On motion of Mr. Herrell , seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted: RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, -Virginia,. as follows : In accordance with Section 12.1-55 of the Personnel ' Manual for •the Town of Leesburg, the following persons are appointed for one-year terms to the BoardofGrievance Commissioners: Non-Supervisory Employee Members Mary Mack Janet Humphrey Shirley Haines Nelson Downs - - - Catherine Mabe John Wells Supervisory Employee Members • Hazel Church Reginald Evans Randolph Shoemaker • Citizen Members Wayne Reynolds - Roland Flint Walter Murray Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Herrell , Rock, Titus, Tolbert and Mayor Newman. Nay: None. 66 MINUTES OF APRIL 12, 1978 MEETING. Mr. Niccolls called attention to a supplement distributed tonight concerning the 1978-79 Budget. This can be discussed at the Budget workshop. Also, there is a small packet of materials relating .to the status of the water supply. Proposed resolutions are included to release car washing and swimming pool filling restrictions and to advise the State Health Department that the Town will begin issuing new connection permits for use after October 1 . In the meantime, the current excess use rates will apply until the .new proposed rates are adopted. These recommendations are made because the Town' s regular and emergency water supplies are sufficient to provide at least 140 .percent of average. daily demand and to create a surplus condition. The owners of Consolidated Dairy Farms have signed the well drilling option agreement. Sydnor says they will begin the re-drilling of the Phillips-Nickels Well the beginning of May. There is good news concerning the bacteriological samples from the Royal Street well , so it is appropriate to start planning fluoridation of this facility. There are proposals in the budget for upgrading the area. The Public Works Department has been asked to make some recommenda- tions as to how we should replace the existing street sweeper - it is to the point now where it does not do the right kind of job and its maintenance and down time are excessive. A demonstration of a rather large and expensive machine was had today and it is expected to have a demonstration of a smaller one soon. This is a major purchase, but the public seems to want clean streets. Mayor Newman suggested that the restaurants be advised that they can start serving drinking water again. Mr. Niccolls said this can be done. He did feel that, even if restrictions are lifted on the use of water, we should stress that careful use of water should be made even though we can meet the peak demand at this time. • Mayor Newman also said that Budget workshop sessions will begin next Monday night at 7 : 30 P.M. in the Town Office. She asked Mr. Niccolls to see if the County Planning Commission might be able to meet on one of these Monday nights to discuss the County Resource Management Plan(this was their request) and to ask the Town' s Plan- ning Commission members tobe present. Mr. Titus asked the status of the site plan for Safeway Stores. Mr. Shope advised that it has received preliminary' and final approval and permits were issued last Friday. Mr. Titus asked where they are getting their water. Mr. Niccolls said they have requested a transfer of their water system at the present location to the new store. They will abandon use of that connection until such time as water permits are allowed. They have a 30-year lease on the building and it will be unoccupied until such time as water is available. Mr. Rock said he was "shocked" to learn of Mr. McEwan' s resigna- tion and asked why he is leaving. Mr. Niccolls said he was also shocked, he did not know Mr. McEwan' s immediate future plans. 78-65 - Resolution - Authorizing contracts- for construction and in- spection of cathodic protection and painting. On motion of Mr. Herrell , seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the following resolution was proposed: RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, as follows : SECTION I. The Town Manager is authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Sarakinis Construction Company of Arlington, Virginia, in an amount not to exceed $60, 000 for cathodic protection of water storage tanks in Leesburg and painting and rehabilitation of the hospital standpipe as out- lined in their bid proposal received April 3, 1978. SECTION II. The Town Manager is authorized and directed to enter into an inspection contract with KTA-Tator Associates MINUTES OF APRIL 12;'" 1978 MEETING. 6 7' of Coraopolis, Pennsylvania, fore inspection of the painting of the hospital standpipe as . outlined in their proposal dated March 28, 1978, in an amount not to exceed $4, 000. SECTION III, An appropriation is hereby made to acdount number 50000. 805, Waterworks Improvements in the amount of $60, 000 and account number 50000. 803 Waterworks Improvements- Engineering in the amount of $4, 000. Mr. Niccolls said the contractor can move in promptly - this is de- sirable so that the painting might be done before hot weather and also it gives all summer in case they run into any unantidipated problems. The contractor has been fully checked out and did work under Mr. Minor' s .supervision• in the State of Maryland. Mr. Rock commented that this is a low bid. The resolution was, unanimously adopted: Aye: Councilmembers Cole, Herrell, Rock, Titus, Tolbert and Mayor Newman. - Nay: None. 4 e Mr. Rock objected to consideration of the resolutions concerning water use restrictions and new connections at this time. They are, therefore, referred to workshop. if On motion of Mr. Rock, seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the meeting was adjourned at 8 : 35 P.M. - - Mayor AO C er of t - Counci