Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout1981_03_11 38 MINUTo. OF REGULAR MEETING OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL, MARCH 11 , 1981. regular meeting of the Leesburg Town Council was held on March 11 , 1981 at 7 : 30 p.m. in the Council Chambers , 10 west Loudo • Street, Leesburg, Virginia. The meeting was called to order ky the Mayor, with the invocation given by Mr. Tolbert and followed with the Salute to the Flag led by Mrs. Hill. Pres- ent w=re : Mayor Kenneth B. Rollins, Councilmembers Charles A. Bos, 'tanley D. Herrell, Jr. , G. Dewey Hill, Jr. , Marylou Hill, John . Tolbert, Jr. and Howard -M. Willis, Jr. ; also Town Manager John iccolls, Assistant Manager Jeffrey H. Minor and Town Attor- ney Gorge M. Martin. • r. Bos made two corrections on Page 11 of the Minutes of the Janua ' y 28 , 1981 meeting - both to refer to the $204 , 000 perform- ance . ond for Section 1, Phase I , of Carrvale Subdivision. he minutes of the regular meeting of February 11, 1981 were appro ed as written. PUBLI' HEARING ON REZONING APPLICATION ZM-30 - WILLIAM J. CHEWNING. he public hearing was opened by Mayor Rollins, who asked that the C erk read the Notice and that Mrs. Hill give the Planning Com- missi• n ' s recommendation. The Planning Commission recommended that this ezoning be denied on the basis that it would pose a problem for tie surrounding residential area. PROPONENTS : Ir. William J. Chewning, an overseas radio news editor, foreign corre .pondent and publisher, as well as the owner of the property at 15 ) South King Street which is the subject of the rezoning request, said e is desirous of moving his operation from his Waterford resi- dence to larger quarters. The property at 150 South King Street would provi•;e such an office. He, therefore, made application to rezone this Property from R-2 to B-2 and appeared before the Planning Com- mission on December 18 , 1980 , at which meeting an investigative com- mitte - was appointed. That committee reported to the Commission on February 5 that it felt such rezoning would pose a problem for the surro nding residential area. The Code of Virginia states that re- zonines are granted when they will improve the welfare in general as fa as the town is concerned. The committee did not feel he had demon.trated that the general public welfare would be upgraded - it reconended that the Planning Commission turn down this application, whic was done. He was attracted to this property because of its prox ' ity to Virginia Village Shopping Center and even in 1967 could envi- ' on that it had definite business potential, especially if the Cart tract across the street was developed as a business property. This is now the new Safeway Store. His intentions have always been to koep the property well maintained and keep quality tenants in _ - the ouse. During the first five years, he had an out-of-pocket loss of $2 , 600 in improvements. The next four years showed a slight net •ain of $1, 245 . In June of 1975, the Highway Department ac- quir:d title to 5/100ths of an acre, which was most of his front yard During the next year he could see that the character of the area was changing and knew it would be harder to rent the property. Sout King Street was widened to four lanes, with two lanes taking the ront of his property. Safeway opened in 1979 and in 1980 a seri: s of ten traffic lights was erected just south of his house. In 1' 78 his long-time tenants were transferred to the west coast. The ext tenants did not honor the commitments made to him and he was orced to ask them to leave. He again spent a good deal of moneto put it back on the rental market, but still experienced prob ems in renting the house for any length of time. The property is n . longer a desirable rental property. He asked that Council cons der the real improvement in the general public welfare, not only for the local area, but also for the town as a whole. He has o plans to sell the property, but does plan to improve it if t is application is approved. He would modify the existing stru ture so that it would continue to blend into the neighborhood - a professional planner would be engaged to do this work. Parking wou . be limited to the rear of the building - probably no more tha four to six cars at any one time. Mr. Ours, Trustee of the Virginia Village complex, has indicated that he would discuss ing .-ss and egress from the rear of this property at any time. MINUT:S OF MARCH 11, 1981 MEETING . 39 The H ' ghway Department has advised that there is no .reason to worry about the existing entrance - modifications to the King Street cor- ridor were done in such a manner as to maintain the highest stand- ards . f safety. This property is bounded on the east by a service parki g lot; on the south by a Shell gas station; an R-4 zone to the n. rtheast of the property; a busy public laundromat to the east southeast of the house and a very active Safeway supermarket to the south est across King Street. There is a Drug Fair to the south oppos to the Shell station just north of the Phillips 66 station. He di. not consider such a rezoning as setting a precedent for the resid: ntial area, but rather squaring off the boundaries of the ' Virgi is Village complex, thus completing the original boundaries of the old Caviness farm. Such rezoning will not have as much effeci on the immediate area as the recent rezoning of the Carter tract (now the Safeway store) . He asked Council not :to allow this situa ion to constitute a "taking" - it would be a disservice to the c.•mmunity in that his property would certainly suffer, as would the adjoining residential area. Rezoning would allow him to improve his p operty which, in turn, would add to the general public welfare of the entire local area. r. Bos said Mr. Chewning has said he has no intention of sell- ing t e property - he felt a lot of the questions concerning B-2 zonin; are based on the fact that, once it is zoned B-2 , it would open : t up for other uses. Mr. Chewning said he has no plans, but he wo ld be willing to state that he will not sell it if Council would grant the rezoning. Mr. Hill asked if there is any other zon- ing at would permit him to do what he wants? Mr. Chewning said Mr. •rhes indicated that there was a possibility he could devote 25 p.' cent of it to an office if he were residing on the property. The •Ely way he could envision this would be allowing one of his daug ers to reside there in the future and allowing them 25 per- cent •f the operation. He has checked with his immediate surround- ing -ighbors and none of them are in opposition - the opposition is f .•m those neighbors who are here tonight. II OPPO ENTS : Mr. C. A. English Cole, representing the Georgetown citizens, said there are 31 homes from Hirst ' s on the north to the Safeway store on the south. The present zoning has been in effect since Mr. curs bought the Caviness tract and the Master Plan was adopted in 1' 74 . He said that Mr. Webb stated, at the Planning Commission' s meet ng on January 8 , that he had confirmed the fact that, if the appl cation was approved, the owners of the next three houses would request commercial zoning (Campbell , Grehan and Walker) . So they are :ot just concerned with the applicant ' s request - it would conc -rn three more properties and would be the "domino" series. Comm -rcial zoning never contracts - it always expands. Of those 31 o ners, 15 are new and young - they have all immediately up- graded their homes. They are all good citizens and perform their civi duties and responsibilities - they don' t want this. It is not p to the town nor the people in Georgetown to "bail out" what has •roven to be a mistaken business decision. The rezoning of two or three other adjoining properties would further decrease the pro• -rty values in the neighborhood. He asked Council to reject this application and keep the Master Plan inviolate. They feel it necessary to defend and maintain the credibility of the tow , which is the Master Plan. Mr. Bos asked how many neighbors he ' defending and how they feel about this matter? Mr. Cole said I/ rou.I ly 26 and they are all opposed to this rezoning . Mr. Vernon Davis, a resident of 112 S. King Street, said Mr. Che ning mentioned, during one of the meetings of the Planning Com- mis- ion, that there was a request for an additional month to study the issues involved. One of the committee members was asked for spe. ific reasons for not reaching a decision. Three reasons were lis ' ed: (1) The rezoning was not within the Comprehensive Plan; (2) they were concerned about adjacent properties, which they had con irmed would also request commercial rezoning; and (3) the strong pub is opposition to the rezoning. In Mr. Davis ' opinion, these are three perfectly valid reasons for turning down this application. He 'aped Council would help maintain the atmosphere that is presently in his community by defeating this application for rezoning. 40 MINUT S OF MARCH 11, 1981 MEETING. rs. John William Clemens , who lives next door to Mr. Cole, said -he is sorry for Mr. Chewning, but these people who have boug homes on South King Street have spent a great deal of money on t -ir homes in making them a lovely place to live. She did not want ' o see South King Street become commercial - if it starts comi s down the block, it will be completely different and there will of be these nice two blocks of residential homes. Perhaps Mr. t ewning can put his daughter in that house and do his busi- ness . rom there. r. Greg Wedemeyer of 119 S. King Street said the applicant aske• Council to change the zoning for the betterment of the Town of L=esburg. He feels there is enough vacant space in the town alre-dy zoned commercial that he doesn ' t have to have this one zones to accommodate his business . ayor Rollins declared this public hearing adjourned and re- ferred this matter to the Finance and Administration Committee for cons [deration and report back in order that Council might act on Marc 25th. MANA' ER' S REPORT: Mr. Niccolls reported: (1) A written Activity Report has been distributed this evening, as w: 11 as a Schedule of Cash Investments dated March 1 and a Capi- tal •rojects Report. There is also a brief report indicating that Mr. Martin and Mr. Devine have reached an agreement on a permanent inju 'ction resolving litigation regarding the trash business of Arth 'r Phillips at his home at 217 S. Wirt Street. The terms of the •roposed Decree are also attached. It appears a fair and rea- sona .le settlement has been achieved. (2) Mr. Shope and he will be meeting tomorrow with representa- tive - of VDH&T traffic engineering division to discuss a proposed plan prepared at our request for traffic improvements on that por- tion of Market Street between the East Loudoun Street intersection and atoctin Circle. He requested this study be done to determine wha minimal pavement adjustments and traffic painting could be und' taken in this section to improve traffic flow and increase sae: y through the area. These recommendations will be sent to the rublic Works Committee for review and action. ( 3) Applications are being accepted for the position of secre- tar to the Town Manager . (4) We expect to hear by Friday on what we hope will be ap- pro al on the Town' s application for a Community Development grant fro HUD for the S. Harrison Street project. (5) The cable stringing crew is in town starting that work. (6) There is a copy of an audit report from HUD on the 1979 co unity development project indicating the town has complied sat sfactorily. (7) You will receive word from the Planning Commission that the have approved the so-called commission permit for 20 South Wir Street. (8) The work going on in the Street Department is early spring preparatory work,: as well as miscellaneous projects. (9) Randy Shoemaker asked for help from the Northern Virginia Co unity College for a training course for treatment plant operators wh' h they designed and are offering. He is to be commended for as-isting other jurisdictions in getting training, as well as our ow people. (10) There are no well problems. (11) Council also has a Request for Proposal and Application foi Management Agreement for the Airport. We have been talking MINUTE . OF MARCH 11, 1981 MEETING. • 4i 1 about his as part of the resolution of the bankruptcy issue. The Truste- in Bankruptcy holds title, so to speak, to the lease and that 1-ase will be put up for public auction on April 14th. Inten- tionally in advance of this, the town will be receiving proposals from a number of people for the Management Agreement side. The object is to secure acceptable financial proposals for the Manage- ment • !reement and then we will identify to the Bankruptcy Court a num•-r. of these proponents who are acceptable to the town. Then these •eople will be bidding on the lease itself . The object of the b. •ding will be to secure the highest price for the estate of the b-i krupt corporation. II ( 2) We have received notice of a public hearing from the Di- visio of Legislative Services for Friday, March 13 at the George Mason niversity at 9 : 30 a.m. This hearing will be conducted on redis .ricting of the House. COUNCILMEMBER INQUIRIES AND COMMENTS : r. Bos attended a meeting last week with the Assistant County Admin strator, who had the Preservation Society of Loudoun County come n the evening to give a status report on the jail properties. CD There has been a lot of concern by the citizenry about the four Cr house. on Edwards Ferry Road next to the jail. The purpose of the meeti' g was to hear a status report on these properties. The County CX has h red a consultant, who had four or five different types of Q changes to the property which would accommodate the jail expansion. Sever.. l included remodeling and others included demolishing these house . . That report should be in in another month or so. Ir. Bos said there was a big session on the Leesburg Area Man- ageme t Plan last night - it was environmentalist night. r. Bos also took note of the advertisement in the County paper with egard to the Town tag sale - he thought it was a good ad. He II also alked with Mr. Brannon and some of the advertising people with egard to his request concerning public hearing notices. They will •e back in touch with him. 1r. Bos noticed that the archeologists are back digging at Potte. ' s Field. Ar. Hill asked if the cable TV people will run into a problem tryi • to locate the dish in the County - will this set it back 60 to 9 days in getting it to the residents? Mr. Niccolls did not know I•ut they are working hard to prevent that. They will change the • rn-on plan - they will turn on the whole system simultane- ousl - he did not think completion will be pushed back. Mr. Hill said it will take 60 to 90 days in order to get this rezoning - they should have done this in the winter when they were not doing anyt ing else. Mrs. Hill asked if the town is doing anything about the excess litt: r in the Virginia Village area? Mr. Niccolls said every year at tris time we work with the Keep Loudoun Beautiful group in their sprig clean-up. They have been waiting for this effort to begin. He w. s aware of the fact that it is a mess and something must be done There are several options open to us , including contact with the individual business owners. He will contact the owner of tie shopping center about the careless practices that exist. Mr. 'Tillis said a lot of this trash comes from the Drug Fair - the ind sweeps through there and papers blow down the street befo e they open. Mr. Tolbert said the Kiwanis Club is taking this as a project and will take care of this. Mr. Tolbert said he needs some more gravel up and down the Seco d Street shoulder . 42 MINUT S OF MARCH 11, 1981 MEETING. MAYOR' S REPORT: ayor Rollins said we have been engaged in expansion of the Sewag- Treatment Plant for some time now. There are three phases : (1) Ti have a Facilities Plan which designates the area that will be se ved by the Leesburg Plant, along with the recommended type of tr-atment and several other things; (2) the design of that fa- cilit, ; and (3) the construction of the facility. The first phase (the acility Plan) has been completed and approved at the State level - this should be forthcoming very shortly. We are now in the s-cond phase. Leesburg is on the first, second,:athirth or four year priority list of the State Water Control Board for 75 p- cent funding. The question coming before this body is who is ging to perform the engineering services for the design and cons auction. He understood Mr. Niccolls discussed this at_the . Util ' y and Public Works Committee meeting along the lines of re- guessing certain engineering firms to submit qualifications for thei ability to perform this work. From that list, they are to Bele• two or three more firms to submit proposals to do the ac- tual •esign and construction phases of the project. He feels this is no the proper time to change engineers on this project. In disc ssing this with the members of the committee -and Mr:. _Niccolls, and ; om his own involvement over a period of years, they have per- form-d very satisfactory work for the town and are continuing to do v_ry satisfactory work on the Water Treatment Plant. It was thei . continuing work that brought to the Town ' s attention some of t e improper and imperfect work being performed there and he comm.nds them for this good inspection. It seems to him that the expa sion of the Sewage Treatment Plant is really all one project. He c.uld see no justification in not awarding Phaseb-2_:and 3 of this work to the engineers who have been working on it for some numb:r of years . He feels very strongly about this and asked Mr. Hill to take this to the Public Works Committee and to report back a re-olution concerning the engineering award for Phases 2 and 3 of t is work. Mr. Hill said he would like to take Mr. Niccolls off of the "hot seat" - he takes full responsibility for not giving clear di- rect on as to how they should proceed. This was discussed in Com- mitt: e and he took exception in that when a firm has been given the . uty of starting a project of this nature, the same firm should follrw it through. With no direction, Mr. Niccolls acted as he shou d have. The process of selecting a firm is right - however, he h. d the following solution: In the very beginning of a project such as this, they should go through this selection process and invi e eight to ten people to give their critique on the work; then narriaw it down to three or less; then the committee, with the ad- vice of the staff, would bring it back to the Council to select a fi m. If the firm decided on has demonstrated that it is not doin ; the_ job or fulfilling their contract, then they can get rid of t em. At that point, they would be required to furnish us with the ;ata accrued during that period of time and which we have paid for. We would then pass this information on to a new a firm. He was of sure whether we could get a commitment for all three phases, whic would more or less put everybody in a competitive situation, but e could ask for it. We are talking about a lot of money (this coul• be several hundred thousand dollars) . He feels the firm that star ed with it is on top of it and has a lot more knowledge than bri eing in another firm. Mr. Niccolls has advised that this first phas- is more or less an "environmental impact stage" and anyone cou . pick it up from here. Mr. Hill felt, though, that they must hay:- had a plan for the design in order to come up with this. He sug• -sted that, in the future, as a matter of policy when we have a p .ject going out, we advise the bidders this will be for all pha--s of the project unless they demonstrate otherwise. He felt May.' Rollins ' comments are in order and they will certainly take thi- up at the committee meeting. He, as Chairman, did not ask the co 'ittee to give the manager any guidelines and he would have done exa.tly as he did. Mr. Bos said Mr. Niccolls suggested that an al- ter ative would be to pre-select ten firms and then break it down to three. They considered this the thing to be done. He thought, by mplication, Mr. Niccolls was directed to go ahead with that. MINUTE' OF MARCH 11 , 1981 MEETING . A9 Mr. Hi 1 did not feel that, when they are in the middle of a contract, they s', ould do this - they should bring it back to council . Mayor Rollin. felt this engineering firm had already exposed itself to some e tent - they had already applied for the grant years ago and 1 it has been up-dated each year. In that Phase II grant, this firm has sa d what their engineering fees will be. Granted they are high - purposesly so - he felt there is a formula that in-house peo- ple us: , but when it is put out on competitive bidding or proposals they w 11 certainly use that as a yardstick to go by. It would be i unfair to tell them we don ' t want them to finish this job, unless we are dissatisfied with them. He felt they have done a good job on the Water Plant, as well as the Sewer Plant, and asked that the commit ee present a resolution to award the second and third phases now. ir. Herrell asked if he said the prices were too high? Mayor Rollin explained that they have to put in all of their costs for grant ; urposes - it is generally recognized that these costs would be higher than ordinarily. 81-29 RESOLUTION - ENDORSING A ONE-OPERATOR SIDE LOADER REFUSE COLLECTION SYSTEM AND DIRECTING THE MANAGER TO SOLICIT BIDS FOR EQUIPMENT. N O. motion of Mr. Herrell, seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the follow- 0 ing re olution was proposed: W;iEREAS, inflation, energy costs and rising federal and county taxes make it imperative for Leesburg to maintain Q t. xes, licenses and fees at minimum levels; and . Q W:;EREAS, one viable alternative to resource limitations is t ie implementation of cost saving measures to reduce over- a 1 government expenditures; and W :EREAS, the annual cost of solid waste collection in Lees- b :rg has risen from $60, 271 in July, 1976 to $140 , 914 in January, 1981, a 134% increase; and ' W :EREAS, federal studies conducted by the Environmental P otection Agency and recent experience of both private h aulers and municipal operators alike demonstrate the econo- m c benefits of one-operator side loader collection ve- h cies; and W :EREAS, an efficiently administered municipal system - has f nancial advantages over a private contractor in terms of 1 lower interest rates for debt service, accessibility to collection routes, elimination of profit margin, and ex- e ption from payment of excise taxes, fuel taxes and s .ecial licenses; and W 'EREAS, it is firmy projected the Town of Leesburg can save up to '$50 , 000 in total refuse collection and disposal e penses in the first year and over $370, 000 in the next five years with the implementation of a side loader col- 1 -ction system: T EREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, V; rginia, as follows : 1 S CTION I. This Council endorses the concept of a town II o•erated side loader refuse system as a means to signifi- cantly reduce the cost of garbage and refuse collection • its citizens. S CTION II . The manager is authorized and directed to se- re written quotations for the purchase of two new side •ader refuse trucks and one used side loader refuse truck : om acceptable suppliers. Mrs. ill asked for an estimate of the number of localities that colle• garbage themselves? Mr. Minor said in Virginia, because they .i. e already in unions, substantially more than half. A lot of th: cities and towns the size of Leesburg do. In Northern Vir- ginia, Herndon, Vienna, Falls Church, Arlington County and Fair- 4 MINUTE . OF MARCH 11, 1981 MEETING. Y fax County - they are heading in the direction that we propose Leesbu g start. Arlington has secured four of these side loader vehicl -s and they propose adding more and more. They had a three- man sy .tem, using standard rear loaders - they had work agreements with t eir quasi-organized labor force. They dropped from three to two operators. The Director of Sanitation Services today told Jeff t at they are moving toward a one-man collection shortly. Portsmouth has four of these vehicles. There is a variety of system. - some are using the old three-man system, but almost all of the are heading toward a one-man system - this has to happen becaus- of labor costs . Mr. Minor said Chesapeake has eight of these n-wly designed units. ith regard to contracting in general, Mr. Niccolls said the Manag- of MICA did the initial study. He was very skeptical that the s dy would ever be able to logically and accurately conclude that - would be able to operate such a system at significant savings. He fe we had a good contractor who was giving us fairly competitive price-. When we looked around at what private haulers are charging per c -tomer in the County, our charges are much less. It is fairly obvio - we have a lot of townhouses, a dense housing mix where you pick I. a lot of stops, whereas in the County the stops are scattered. When nes contracting a service of this sort make sense for a com- munit ? Generally, we like to see private enterprise performing these rind of activities, but there are some things that are appro- priate . One of the criteria would be when do you contract for service? When the service is not .required on an ongoing basis - for examp e, design services on the Sewage Treatment Plant. If it is an oncoing operation, such as maintenance operations of our Sewage Treat 'ent Plant, it is most efficient and we get better service by havino our own employees. You also contract when a service you wish to perform is not a normal municipal function - like cable television - it is so unique and unusual that it was dismissed. Refuse collection is certainly not unusual - municipalities all over the country do it. Anoth: r question was "Can a contractor, because of his vast size, provi. e the service cheaper?" That would be another good reason to contr. ct for service. Here we are talking about a very small opera- tion it would not' make any difference if we had BPI - there is no ec. nomy of scale in this type of operation. For those reasons, and l. oking very carefully at these numbers we have been studying, he feels there is a savings there - we can provide economy of oper- ation better service, greater reliability and we can coordinate this activ ty with other town services such as brush collection, leaf loadi 'g and Christmas tree removal . Yes, there are potentional problems with labor, and he feels we can handle complaints better. He ha . become convinced, as the report indicates, that this is somet ing that is appropriate. r. Herrell commended Mr. Niccolls and Mr. Minor for following up on the recommendation from MICA - if we can save this kind of money this is what the citizens want to see from the Town' s staff and t e Council . He was skeptical at first but he is in favor of it - :ny time you can save $50 , 000 a year you have to go with it. Mrs. ill was concerned that we might end up increasing the adminis- trate e staff . Mr. Herrell felt we would be ahead even if they save only -20, 000 or $30, 000 . Mr. Niccolls said they will be proposing in t - Budget the creation of a new department - it will be water and -wage treatment - this will be done because of the opening of the -w Water Treatment Plant. The responsibilities are of a tech- nic- nature that Randy understands - he has worked up the staffing and •i•erations plan for this . In effect, Mr. Chaves ' level of re- spon- ' bility will be somewhat reduced by the movement of the water supp i operations over to Randy' s responsibility. There is no rea- son .• add administrative personnel to supervise the refuse collec- tion service - David is already here and he supervises the picking up of brush, leaves, heavy appliances and junk of all types. He is conf ' dent that this can be done with his supervision. He does not thin this will be a problem. Mr. Herrell did not think the tax- paye . s can complain about an increase in staff in the town. Mr. Hill concurred with what has been said - he could not see the easibility of this project in the beginning. He thinks Grayson 45 MINUTEZ OF MARCH 11 , 1981 MEETING. : has done a tremendous job and he should be commended. He could remember advertising the trash contract every two years - they took tie lowest bid one year from a firm in Winchester. That firm was nothing but problems and they had to call the bond. He hated :o take this away from free enterprise - however, he has been swayed in another direction. Hopefully, they can dump this at the County landfill at no cost, even though there may be some problems with that. Some of our tax dollars will go to help with the laidfill . We will not have to be bidding it every year or two. In fact, Grayson has. asked, if we go with him, that we go for a five-y ?ar period - he will have to make a large investment over that p _riod of time. We do have good substantial employees in the town - they take a tremendous pride in whatever they are do- ing. 'le can do the job and he felt we can ' t dismiss the savings involy?.d. Mr. Willis felt that, if we can save this kind of money, it is worth Looking into. We should get the bids and then see the final figures. He did have some questions but hoped they could be re- solved at the next committee meeting. Mr . Bos said the test studies were done on relatively light days - he asked how this would :ompare to heavy days, etc? Mr. Niccolls felt the first test tzat was done in the rain was representative of the worst conditions you could face. He finished in 7; hours on a Tuesday. There will be additional pick-ups for grass clippings, etc. in the summer months. They will not run us over hour-wise on a 40-hour week. They might have to work overtime on Mondays and Tuesdays, but than they possibly could go home early the end of the week. There is no way for us to sample the summer work at this time. Along Edwards Ferry Road, for example, the volume does go up dur- ing the summer months - however, the townhouses do not go up or down. There is more brush collection, but it would be centered in this refuse collection by a two-man team on Wednesdays after the commercial stops. David is now devoting time from his other activities for brush collection - this costs about $10 , 000 a year. We can ' t really answer this with hard numbers. Mr. Bos asked if the dumpster service provided by Grayson will be discontinued? Mr. Niccolls said we provide curbside refuse collection - we do not provide container service. That would remain the commercial venture - BFI , Grayson and others could come in here and offer this commercial service - this takes specialty trucks. If customers would bag treir garbage, anybody' s collection would be simple, but cats and dcgs do get into the bags . Mayor Rollins understood that, if this resolution is adopted. the next step would be an appropria- tion for the equipment. Mr. Niccolls said this is correct - after the bids come in. Mrs. Hill asked if we are endorsing the concept, do we not have to pass another resolution to collect the garbage? Mr. Niccolls said there will be a number of resolutions that will be necessary. Mr. Minor said the next step would be to authorize purchase of the equipment because of a time deadline. Mayor Rol- lins Eaid Mr. Willis has raised a procedural question - if Council adopt: this resolution, it still does not mean the Town is going into the field of garbage collection. It merely authorizes the receiving of bids or prices relative to the equipment. Is this the Council ' s understanding? Mr. Bos felt that Council is endors- ing the concept - they would be saying essentially that they ap- prove this system and the Manager would go ahead with soliciting bids, etc . There was some controversy concerning the meaning of the word "concept" as it pertains to this matter. Mayor Rollins felt .his is endorsing the concept, contingent upon the appropria- tion of funds to buy the equipment. A roll call vote on the reso- lution was 6 to 1 : Aye: Councilmembers Bos , Herrell , D. Hill , M. Hill , Tolbert and Willis . Nay: Mayor Rollins . M :. Hill left the meeting at this time. 81-30 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR FLOW ANALYSIS AND REHABILITATION OF SANITARY SEWERS AND MAKING AN APPROPRIATION. OZ motion of Mr. Willis, seconded by Mrs. Hill , the following resolution was proposed : 46 MINUT' S OF MARCH 11 , 1981 MEETING. W :EREAS, Penetryn Systems, Inc. , performed satisfactorily i 1979-80 on a contract for sanitary sewer rehabilitation; a d W EREAS, it is necessary that the town expedite reduction o infiltration/inflow into the town ' s sanitary sewer system. T EREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg i Virginia as follows : S CTION I . The manager is authorized and directed to enter i to a time and materials contract with Penetryn Systems, I c. of Knoxville, Tennessee, for flow analysis and rehabili- :tion of sanitary sewers in Leesburg in accordance with netryn ' s proposal dated December 22 , 1980, at a cost not .. exceed $33 , 000 . CTION II . An appropriation is made from the Utility Fund .. Account No. 20600 . 806B, Rehabilitation; construction, in .: e amount of $33, 000 for the fiscal year ending June 30 , 1981. Mr. :os explained that this was discussed in committee - this is a seco d batch of problem areas that were identified. Mayor Rollins aske. what section this is? Mr. Niccolls could not say definitely - the 'own is divided into some 26 mini-systems - we did five or six last year and this is an additional effort. One of them is the inte ,ceptor sewer from the old sewage treatment plant to the new one it was identified as one of the sewers that contributes the most by way of I/I. It will require physical inspection from in- side out. Mr. Willis said these are the people who worked on it last year and they are familiar with it. Mr. Niccolls said they will start work as soon as the ground water tables are high enough. Mayo Rollins asked if we have noticed any improvement after their work on the first section? Mr. Niccolls said it is "anecdotal noti• ing" - sewage treatment plant flows in 1980 were remarkably lowe than in 1979 by some 40 percent. We don ' t attribute all of this to the I/I work, but certainly part of it was . Our estimate was hat we gained 100 , 000 gallons per day in sewage treatment ca- paci y as a result of the work done last year. Because of weather inco sistencies, it is difficult to make accurate estimates. The prob em areas have been identified but we did not, by way of re- view ng the efficiency of the work done last year, re-do the flow anal sis in those segments that were repaired. It would be ap- prop iate to do that, but it would be rather expensive. The reso- luti.n was unanimously adopted: y e: Councilmembers Bos , Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis and Mayor Rollins. ay: None. 81- I - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH VEPCO FOR INSTALLATION OF ELECTRICAL SER- VICE TO THE POTOMAC RIVER WATER TREATMENT PLANT. On motion of Mr. Herrell , seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the follow- ing resolution was proposed: RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: The Mayor is authorized to execute an agreement with VEPCO which provides a 15-foot wide easement for installation of electrical service to the Potomac River Water Treatment Plant. Mayr Rollins thought there was enough room to put these easements. Mr. Niccolls said they will not put additional facilities in ease- me s. There is a clearance requirement from high voltage lines. Th. resolution was unanimously adopted: Aye: Councilmembers Bos , Herrell, M. Hill , Tolbert, Willis and Mayor Rollins . Nay: None. MINUTES OF MARCH 11 , 1981 MEETING. 47 81-32 - RESOLUTION - MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1981 . Cn motion of Mrs. Hill , seconded by Mr. Herrell, the following resolution was proposed: RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows : An appropriation is made from the General Fund to Account 1`o. 3010 . 251 for legal services related to the Potter ' s Field lawsuit in the amount of $12 , 500 . 00 for the fiscal .ear ending June 30, 1981 . Mrs. I-ill said this figure is one the committee has reached after a year Cf negotiation. Mr. Herrell said this comes from the Finance Committee, not the lawyers. The resolution was unanimously adopted: 7,ye : Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis and Mayor Rollins. Pay: None. N 81-33 - RESOLUTION - PARTIAL RELEASE OF A PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR C) BROWN' S MEADOW SUBDIVISION. 7 On motion of Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Tolbert, there being Q no ob: ection to consideration tonight, the following resolution was Q proposed: WHEREAS, Brownell Incorporated, developers of Brown' s Meadow Subdivision, have requested partial release of the $167 , 960. 00 performance guarantee for public improvements for that subdi- vision; and WHEREAS, a "set aside" agreement in the amount of $167 , 960. 00 had been approved to guarantee the installation of those pub- .ic improvements; and i II WHEREAS , $57 , 239. 10 worth of public improvements have been :ompleted in accordance with town standards; and WHEREAS, Brownell Incorporated understands that this partial release is not an indication that the public facilities are accepted for maintenance, and that they are solely responsible Eor the condition of those improvements until such time as :hey are accepted. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Jirginia as follows : The performance guarantee in the form of a "set aside" agree- ment in the amount of $167 , 960 . 00 is reduced to $110, 720. 90 . Mayor Rollins asked if there is a new concept about the storm water to the west being held in a pond? Mr. Niccolls said this is a tem- porary erosion and siltation control pond - it will not be a part of the final project. It is designed to trap storm water to allow settling of the solids and then the more or less clear water will go or down - it is intended to protect people downstream from sil- tation that might occur while the grading is being done. When the final project is done, there is also a storm retention system that will call for an earthen low area in an easement to the rear of two of tl-e lots. During certain storm drainage conditions during heavy stores, there will be 18 inches to two feet of water come up and then slowly go down in that pond. It will be a dry area during nor- mal conditions . It would fill within probably 15 minutes of the end cf the storm. It continues on down the channel it followed be- fore. The purpose of this system is to restrict the downstream flow: of water to a quantity no greater than what existed before this development occurred. Quantities will last longer, but it will not exceed the previous velocities and quantities. There will be a grass lined channel and there will be covenants written n MINUTES OF MARCH 11, 1981 MEETING. Y into the deeds of those lots letting the property owners or pros- pective buyers know of the existence of this and preventing the constru :tion of a garage or planting of trees or shrubbery in this area. This is a relatively new system in this area but there is a great dal of experience with it in Fairfax County. Mr. Bos said the Couity is considering this. Mr. Bos said Mr. Hill asked him to speac for him - he is still very much concerned about houses being sold before public improvements are completed. He would like an amendment to this resolution to the effect that no public dwell- ings be sold until all public improvements have been completed and accepted by the town. He so moved. Mr. Herrell seconded this amend- ment. the Chair ruled this out of order to this resolution - this would have to be a separate resolution applying to all subdivisions. It is npt germane to this resolution. The resolution was unanimously adopted: Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell , M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis and Mayor Rollins. Nay: None. Mayor Imllins asked Mr. Bos to take up in Public Works Committee the matter just discussed above. 81-34 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING NOTICE OF PUBLICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING ON APPLICATION #ZM -31 BY JOHN STOWERS . Or motion of Mrs . Hill, seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the following resolution 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 ZD -31 by John A. Stowers to have rezoned from R-2 to B-1 a tract of land containing 0 . 45 acres of land located on the west side of North Harrison Street shall be published in the Loudoun Times-Mirror on March 19, 1981 and March 26, 181 for Public Hearing on April 8 , 1981 at 7 : 30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 10 West Loudoun Street, Leesburg, Vir- g: nia. Awe: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis and Mayor Rollins. Nay: None. 81-35 - RESOLUTION - ENDORSING KEEP LOUDOUN BEAUTIFUL' S ANNUAL SPRING CLEAN-UP. On motion of Mr. Tolbert, seconded by Mr. Bos, the following resolution was proposed : WIEREAS, Keep Loudoun Beautiful ' s annual spring clean-up wLll be held April 3 through April 20, 1981 ; and W-IEREAS, past efforts by many individuals, organizations, etc . have contributed to the success of Keep Loudoun Beauti- fal ' s project within the Town of Leesburg; T.:IEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg iz Virginia as follows : SFCTION I . The Town Council endorses Keep Loudoun Beautiful ' s Spring clean-up from April 3 to April 20 , 1981. 'CTION II . The Town Council urges its citizens, businesses, c-rganizations, clubs and governmental groups to join in this Froject by cleaning up their own premises and placing discarded items at the curb for regular trash pick-up during this par- ticular time. Mrs. Fill asked what happens to this after it is passed? Mr. Tolbert said it will be used in their publicity campaign. The resolution was unanimously adopted: •MINUTE OF MARCH 11 , 1981 MEETING. 49 A - : Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis and Mayor Rollins . N.1 : None. 0 motion of Mr. Tolbert, seconded by Mr. Herrell , the meeting was un-1imously adjourned at 9 : 30 p.m. Mayor I I/ nor Clerk .f t%' Council CDN Nt 7 a a