HomeMy Public PortalAbout1981_10_14 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL, OCTOBER 14 , 1981 .
204
A regular meeting of the Leesburg Town Council was held in the
Council Chambers, 10 West Loudoun Street, Leesburg, Virginia on Oc-
tober 14 , 1981 at 7 : 30 p.m. The meeting was called to order by the
Mayor Pro-Tem in the absence of the Mayor, with the invocation by
Mr. Tolbert, and followed with the Salute to the Flag led by Mr.
Herrell . Present were : Mayor Pro-Tem G. Dewey Hill, Jr. , Council-
members Charles A. Bos, Stanley D. Herrell, Jr. , Marylou Hill, John
W. Tolbert, Jr. and Howard M. Willis, Jr. ; also Town Manager John
Niccolls and Town Attorney George M. Martin. Absent from the meeting
was Mayor Kenneth B. Rollins.
The minutes of the regular meeting of August 26, 1981 and the
regular meeting of September 9 , were approved as written.
PETITIONERS :
Mr. James Griffith, Manager of the local C & P Telephone Company,
presented to Council a copy of the painting of the British surrender
at Yorktown. The bicentennial of this event will be celebrated on
October 19 in Yorktown. The Telephone Company chose this. painting
for the cover of its directories for this year and feels Leesburg
should have a copy of it since it is a historic town and was in
existence during the Revolutionary War. Mayor Pro-Tem Hill thanked
Mr. Griffith and the Telephone Company on behalf of the town.
Mr. Peter Dunning, a resident of Bluemont and very active in the
Bluemont Concert Series, was introduced by Mr. Bos, who distributed
copies of a newsletter concerning the Bluemont Series. Mr. Dunning
explained that they are a private non-profit corporation in the
State of Virginia with a non-taxable status, and work actively with
schools, hospitals, senior citizens and any community organizations,
sharing basically the performers they work with for a variety of
programs. They are seeking expansion, principally because they
can ' t pay the bills and the fees ,charged by the performers from the
Bluemont hall. Leesburg would be a fine setting for some sort of
cultural activity and the summer series of concerts would be a good
way to begin. By sponsoring such events, Council would be making
an investment in the future of the community. They focus on the
kind of activities that families can enjoy and would be high caliber
performances. Mr . Tolbert asked if there were members of their or-
ganization at the Trade Fair? Mr. Dunning said one group was a band
that originated in Bluemont - the other was an Irish band - they
were either hired or people in the community who wanted to partici-
pate. He said they started on a small scale and growth has been
pretty steady - Their newsletters are sent at no charge and they
now have around 3, 000 people who want to receive it. Mrs. Hill
asked where such concerts might be held in Leesburg? Mr. Bos said
Herndon does theirs on the town square. He felt it could be done
on the courthouse lawn, with the cooperation of the County and the
judges. Of course, you have to be concerned about weather and traf-
fic . In Herndon, it is underwritten by the town and the concerts
are free. This year they have had commercial sponsors that have
paid for a good part of the budget - this is the key issue. If
Council is interested in pursuing this type of thing, it will take
some money. You would soon run the gamut of talent if you have only
local performers. If you want high quality entertainment, it takes
money - the legislative body could underwrite it or. you could get
some commercial involvement with businesses or a combination of the
two. Perhaps there is some State money available under the arts
program. He suggested that Mr. Dunning sit in on the next committee
meeting and give some suggestions as to what it would cost. It
also takes a group of people to organize and run it and do it prop-
erly. Mr. Dunning said, if Council decides to pursue this, finances
could be set at a small first step. Other organizations could be
involved and, if you start soon enough, there are some public monies
available and there are State and local challenge grants from the
Virginia Commission on Arts. Mr. Hill said this Council held a work-
shop about a year ago trying to set goals for the Town, and this is
one of the things that really came out of their discussion - to cre-
ate some kind of cultural environment for this, area. This would fit
right in with our goal and he would like to see this done. He asked
that Mr. Bos and Mr. Niccolls pursue this.
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
205
Mr. Steve Colvin, a resident of Harrison Street in the Carr-
vale Subdivision, said this would be a real asset to the Town. How-
ever, he is appearing on behalf of the residents of -Harrison Street
to re-petition Council concerning the renaming of Harrison Street
to Marshall Drive. Mrs. Hill said she has talked with Mr . Dube
about this and he says there will be no problem. Mayor Pro-Tem
Hill referred this to the Utility and Public Works Committee.
Mrs. Mary Dierman, President of the Board of the Loudoun Mu-
seum, said the Town contracted with Orkin Company to look at the
Log Cabin, the Museum and the Odd Fellows Hall. The Odd Fellows
Hall has termites and the existing Museum structure has post beetles.
The Museum, in accordance with the lease with the Town, will take
care of treating the post beetles in that portion of the Museum.
The termites in the Odd Fellows Hall was a pre-existing condition
when that lease was signed - they would like Council to consider
working this out with the Museum. The damage is quite extensive
and would cost $917 . 00 for treatment and follow-up. The cost of
treating the post beetles in the Museum building will be $566 . 00 .
The Museum has been very active in the past few months raising
funds, looking for new members and doing nice things that will
r benefit the Town. It seems that the termite condition, which is
usually a condition of sale, was not taken care of at that time.
CD They ask Council to give them a hand with this situation. They
NT have some long-term goals and the amount of $917 . 00 would be a
set-back to them. The town is interested in preservation and this
Q is the town ' s building. They can ' t put artifacts in a building like
this - it is not a condition that they can just let go. There is
Q some responsibility between the Museum and the Council . Mrs. Hill
did not feel that the Museum should bear the entire cost - this was
a pre-existing condition. Mr. Herrell agreed, but he thought ter-
mite inspection was discussed at the time they were talking about
the lease to the Museum. Mr . Niccolls said it should have been
done and he will take the responsibility to see that something is
done. Damage is already extensive - for example, there is a big
hole where one window sill was and extensive damage to the front
door and surrounding wall . Orkin gives a 37-year guarantee, but
this requires a yearly check-up. Mr. Niccolls said the appraisal
did not go into this type of thing - he didn ' t think it would have
unless the structural damage was evident at the time of appraisal .
Mr. Niccolls reminded Council that this building was bought at the
low appraisal . Mr. Niccolls said there is an item on the Agenda
for tonight on the log cabin. Mr. Hill felt we should have a
proposal for both the new building and for the log cabin as a unit.
Mr. Niccolls felt that, if we are going to do this, we will get a
price and act on it - we ' ll get the best service for the best price.
It is in the budget.
PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS RE CLUSTER
DEVELOPMENTS .
The notice of public hearing was read by the Clerk. There
being no-one to speak on this proposed amendment, Mayor Pro-Tem
Hill declared the hearing closed.
Mayor Pro-Tem Hill asked if there is any objection to acting
on these proposed amendments tonight? Mr. Herrell objected, he
felt it should go back to committee. This matter was referred to
Finance and Administration Committee .
MANAGER' S REPORT:
Mr. Niccolls called attention to the written Activity Report.
COUNCILMEMBER INQUIRIES AND COMMENTS :
Mr . Bos commended the staff on the nice painting job on
light posts, traffic lights, etc . - this dressed up the town.
Mrs. Hill noted there was nothing in the Activity Report con-
cerning action by the Board of Architectural Review. Mr. Niccolls
said they haven' t had a meeting.
206 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
Mrs . Hill also reminded that the Planning Commission will be
holding a public hearing tomorrow night on the update of the Com-
prehensive Plan.
Mrs. Hill said Edwards Ferry Mews came back to the Planning
Commission at its last meeting. This proposed development was turned
down by the Commission because it did not meet the final plat ap-
proval . The builder has proposed an easement across his lot front-
ing on Edwards Ferry Road, so this provides the 10-foot requirement:
The Commission will have a public hearing tomorrow night, but there
is nothing else on the agenda. If he is submitting his final plat,
it will not be until the next meeting.
Mrs . Hill reported that Mr. Phillips appeared before the Plan-
ning Commission and proffered as B-1 a small section of land next
to the town houses. Several citizens had objected to the possi-
bility of a bowling alley or gas station. He said he has no in-
tentions of putting anything like that on this property - he ex-
pects to put in multi-family or townhouse type units, so he would
consider an R-4 proffer for that area. The Commission felt if he
wants to do this, he can present it to the governing body.
Mr. Herrell asked what will happen to the traffic signals at
Plaza Street since the Highway Department has put off the Route 7
east improvements? Mr. Niccolls said they have already agreed to
do this - they will start work on this in about two weeks. They
will install the left turn advanced signals and the traffic de-
tectors in the pavement. This intersection will be further im-
proved with this. •
Mr. Hill said Mr. Lawrence Reed, a resident of Madison Court,
has requested. a "No Parking to Corner" sign on Monroe Street beside
Jean Chamblin ' s house - this to improve site distance coming out of
Madison Court. Mr. Chamblin has no objections - he parks on Madi-
son Court.
81-0-25 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING THE LEESBURG ZONING ORDINANCE CON-
CERNING "R" DISTRICTS .
On motion of Mr. Willis, seconded by Mrs . Hill, the following
ordinance was proposed and unanimously adopted after several minor
corrections which are incorporated herein:
WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning
practice require amendment of the regulations contained in the Leesburg Zoning
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, draft zoning amendments dated Nay 16, 1980 were initiated by this
Council and transmitted to the Planning Commission for public hearing and recom-
mendations required by Section 15. 1-431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended;
and
WHEREAS, the Leesburg Planning Commission, after advertising and conducting
a public hearing on June 17, 1980, as required by Section 15. 1-431 of the Code
transmitted to this Council certain amendments of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance
pertaining to residential district rules, and associated technical amendments,
with recommendation for approval; and
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING. 207
WHEREAS, a public hearing was advertised and held by this Council-as re-
quired by Section 15. 1-431 of the Code on September 23, 1981, at which time in-
terested persons appeared and presented their views on the proposed ordinance
amendments:
THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as
follows:
iSECTION I. Section 1-1 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is amended to read
1 as follows:
1-1 DISTRICTS ,
For the purpose of this Ordinance the Town of Leesburg is hereby divided
into the following districts :
N "R-1" Residential District (single family)
0 "R-2" Residential District (general residential)
cr. "R-3" Residential District (town house)
7 "R-4" Residential District (multi-family)
a "R-5" Residential District (mobile homes)
Q "MC" Medical-Hospital Center District
"B-1" Community Business District
"B-2" General Business District
"M-1" Industrial District
"F-1" Flood Zone District
The term "R" Districts, as used herein means the "R-1" "R-2", "R-3"
"R-4" and "R-5" Districts; "B" Districts means the "B-1" and "B-2"
111 Districts.
SECTION II. Article 3 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is amended to read
as follows:
ARTICLE 3. R-1 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS
3-1 PERMITTED USES
The following are permitted uses in the R-1 Residential District:
(a) Single-family dwelling, detached.
(b) Two-family dwelling, provided an existing structure is converted
without modification of exterior features.
•• (c) Park.
(d) School board office buildings on school board owned property.
(e) Public library; public museum.
(f) Gardening and general farming, but not including commercial chicken
farms or fur farms, provided that any building or feed lot where live-
stock are kept shall not be less than 200 feet from all adjacent lots
in any residential zoning district.
3-2 CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES
The following are conditionally permitted uses in the R-1 Residential District:
(a) Public and private school.
r
(b) Country club; golf course.
•
208 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
(c) Public utility substation or transmission facility.
(d) Church.
(e) Cemetery.
(f) Public recreation facility.
(g) Family care home.
3-3 AREA, SIZE, HEIGHT AND YARD REQUIREMENTS
In the R-1 Residential District :
(a) Zoning lots shall be at least 10,000 square feet in land area.
(b) Zoning lots shall be at least 75 feet wide.
(c) No dwelling shall exceed 30 feet in height, no other structure shall
exceed 50 feet in height.
(d) Front yards shall be at least 20 feet deep.
(e) Side yards shall be at least 10 feet wide.
(f) Rear yards shall be at least 20 feet deep.
SECTION III. A new Article is added to the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance to read
as follows:
ARTICLE 3-A.R-2 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS
3A-1 Permitted uses.
The following are permitted uses in the R-2 Residential District:
(a) Single-family dwelling, detached.
(b) Two-family dwelling (i. e. duplex)
(c) Park.
(d) School board office building on school board owned property.
(e) Public library; public museum.
(f) Gardening and general farming, but not including commercial chicken
farms or fur farms, provided that any building or feed lot where live-
stock are kept shall not be less than 200 feet from all adjacent lots
in any residential zoning district.
3A-2 Conditionally permitted uses.
The following are conditionally permitted uses in the R-2 Residential Dis-
trict:
(a) Public and private school.
(b) Public recreation facility.
(c) Country club; golf course.
(d) Public utility substation or transmission facility.
(e) Church.
(f) Cemetery.
(g) Boarding or rooming house.
(h) Family care home.
(i) Group home.
(j) Clubs, lodges and recreational buildings.
": •• '.Ti
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
209
3A-3 Area, size, height and yard requirements.
In the R-2 Residential District:
(a) Zoning lots shall be at least 8,000 square feet in land area for de-
tached dwellings and 10,000 square feet in land area for each two-
family attached dwelling.
(b) Zoning lots shall be at least 75 feet wide.
(c) No dwelling shall exceed 30 feet in height; no other structure shall
exceed 50 feet in height.
(d) Front yards shall be at least 20 feet deep except front yards for
residential lots in the H-1 Historic District may be reduced to the
front yard depth of an adjoining lot with an existing residence.
(e) Side yards shall be at least 10 feet wide.
(f) Rear yards shall be at least 20 feet deep.
O SECTION IV: Articles 4, .4-A and 4-B of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance are amended
7 to read as follows:
a ARTICLE 4. R-3 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Q 4-1 PERMITTED USES
The following are permitted uses in the R-3 Residential District:
(a) Single-family dwelling, detached.
(b) Single-family dwelling, attached (i. e. town house) .
(c) Two-family dwelling (i. e. duplex) .
(d) Park.
(e) School board office building on school board owned property.
(f) Public library; public museum.
(g) Gardening and general farming, but not including commercial chicken
farms or fur farms, provided that any building or feed lot where live-
stock are kept shall not be less than 200 feet from all adjacent lots
in any residential zoning district.
4-2 CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES
The following are conditionally permitted uses in the R-3 Residential District :
(a) Public and private school.
(b) Public recreation facility.
(c) Country club; golf course.
(d) Public utility substation or transmission facility.
(e) Church.
(f) Cemetery.
(g) Government office building.
(h)' Tourist home.
(i) Family care and group homes.
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
210
4-3 AREA, SIZE, HEIGHT AND YARD REQUIREMENTS
In the R-3 Residential District:
(a) Zoning lots shall be at least 8,000 square feet in land area for detached
single-family_ dwellings, 10,000 square feet in land area for each two-
family attached dwelling and 2,000 square feet in land area for attached
single-family dwellings.
(b) Zonings lots shall be at least 75 feet wide for detached single-family
dwellings and 20 feet wide for attached single-family dwellings.
(c) No dwelling shall exceed 30 feet in height; no structure shall exceed 50
feet in height.
(d) Front yards shall be at least 20 feet deep. Required front yards for
attached dwellings shall not be used for parking or driveways.
(e) Side yards shall be at least 10 feet wide except that side yards are
not required between attached single-family dwellings.
(f) Rear yards shall be at least 30 feet deep.
(g) No structure shall contain more than eight attached dwellings and no
more than two adjoining dwellings shall have the same front yard depth
and such depths shall vary not less than one foot from the adjoining
pair of dwellings.
(h) Attached single-family dwellings shall not be constructed to a greater
density than eight dwelling units to the gross acre.
ARTICLE 4-A. R-4 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS
4A-1 Permitted uses.
The following are permitted uses in the R-4 Residential District:
(a) Single-family dwelling, attached (i. e. town house) and detached.
(b) Multi-family dwelling.
(c) Park.
(d) School board office on school board owned property.
(e) Public library, public museum.
(f) Gardening and general farming, but not including commercial chicken
farms or fur farms, provided that any building or feed lot where live-
stock are kept shall not be less than 200 feet from all adjacent lots
in any residential zoning district.
(g) Two-family dwelling (i. e. duplex) .
4A-2 Conditionally permitted uses.
The following are conditionally permitted uses in the R-4 Residential
District:
(a) Private and public school.
(b) Public recreation facility.
(c) Public utility substation or transmission facility.
(d) Church and cemetery.
(e) Government office building.
41:;:.f'
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING. 1
(f) Parking garage.
(g) Rooming house, boarding house and tourist home.
(h) Business or professional office.
(i) Family care and group homes.
(j) Club, lodge and recreational building.
4A-3 Area, size, height and yard requirements .
In the R-4 Residential District :
(a) Zoning lots shall be at least 8,000 square feet in land area for de-
tached single-family dwellingsand2,000 square feet in land area for
attached single-family dwellings. Zoning lots shall be at least
10,000 square feet in land area for two-family and multi-family
dwellings. The total number of multi-family dwellings on a zoning lot
shall not exceed the density limits set out below??fe number of bed-
rooms per dwelling shown:
0 Maximum Number of
D
Bedrooms per welling_ Dwellings per Acre
One (or efficiency) 30
Q Two 22
Three 17
Four or more 15
(b) Zoning lots shall be at least 75 feet wide for detached single-family,
two-family and multi-family dwellings and 20 feet wide for attached
single-family dwellings.
(c) No single- or two-family dwelling shall exceed 30 feet in height. No
other structure shall exceed 50 feet in height.
(d) Front yards shall be at least 20 feet deep for single-family dwellings.
Required front yards for attached dwellings shall not be used for off-
street parking or driveways.
(e) Side yards shall be at least 10 feet wide for detached single-family
and two-family dwellings and 15 feet for each main structure for attached
single- and multi-family dwellings. Side yards are not required between
attached single-family dwellings.
(f) Rear yards shall be at least 30 feet deep for attached single-family
dwellings and 20 feet deep for all other structures.
sin°77,, -fell
(g) No structure shall contain more than eight attac ed/dwe Ings and no
more than two adjoining dwellings shall have the same eront yard
depth and such depths shall vary not less than one foot from the ad-
joining pair of dwellings. No zoning lot used for multi-family buildings
shall be coveredmorethan 20 percent by buildings.
(h) Attached single-family dwellings shall not be constructed to a greater
density than eight dwelling units to the gross acre.
ARTICLE 4-B. R-5 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS
4B-1 Permitted uses.
The following are permitted uses in the R-5 Residential District:
(a) Mobile home parks in accordance with requirements of this Article.
(b) Park.
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1981 MEETING.
212
4B-2 Conditionally permitted uses.
The following are conditionally permitted uses in the R-5 Residential Dis-
trict:
(a) Public and private school.
(b) Public and private recreation facility.
(c) Public utility substation or transmission facility.
(d) Church; cemetery.
(e) Government office building.-
(f) Convenience retail establishment.
4B-3 Area, size, height and yard requirements.
In the R-5 Residential District.
(a) Zoning lots shall be at least seven acres in land area.
(b) Zoning lots shall be at least 200 feet wide.
(c) No dwelling shall exceed 15 feet in height; no other structure shall
exceed 50 feet in height.
(d) Front yards shall be at least 40 feet deep.
(e) Side yards shall be at least 25 feet wide.
(f) Rear yards shall be at least 25 feet deep.
4B-4 General requirements for mobile home parks and mobile homes.
(a) Mobile home parks which meet the requirements of this Division are
permitted in the R-5 district.
(b) No mobile home shall be used as a dwelling or occupied except within
a mobile home park.
(c) No mobile home of less than 500 square feet of habitable ground floor
area shall be used as a dwelling or occupied.
(d) No mobile home shall be used as a dwelling or occupied unless it is
securely affixed to the ground.
(e) No mobile home shall be used as a dwelling or occupied unless it
complies with the Mobile Home ManufacturerkAssociation Mobile Home
Standards for Plumbing, Heating and Electrical Systems.
(f) No mobile home shall be used as a dwelling or occupied unless it
complies with requirements of the Virginia Industrialized Building
Unit and Mobile Home Safety Regulations adopted May 18, 1971 by
the State Corporation Commission.
(g) Each mobile home shall be parked on and supported by a concrete
stand designed to carry the load placed thereon. Skirts shall be
provided to screen the space between the mobile home and its con-
crete stand.
(h) No mobile home park shall be occupied until at least one-third of
the proposed mobile home sites are completed and ready for occupancy,
including streets, walks and recreation areas.
4B-5 Zoning plan requirements.
In addition to other requirements of this Article, the zoning plan sub-
mitted by an applicant for a zoning permit for a mobile home park shall submit
the following:
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
213
I (a) The size, location and number of mobile home sites proposed within the
park.
(b) The location and area of streets, walks and recreational areas pro-
posed within the park.
43-6 Design requirements for mobile home parks.
Mobile home parks shall meet the following requirements.
(a) Mobile home parks shall be placed on zoning lots of at least seven acres.
(b) Mobile home parks shall not contain more than seven mobile homes per
acre.
(c) Each mobile home site shall be at least 3,500 square feet in land area
for mobile homes up to 15 feet wide and 4,500 square feet in land area
for mobile homes 15 feet or more wide.
(d) Each mobile home site shall be at least 35 feet wide for mobile homes
up to 15 feet wide and 45 feet wide for mobile homes 15 feet or more
wide.
0
• d- (e) No mobile home shall be placed less than 16 feet from any other mobile
home or any buildings except permitted accessory buildings on the same
Q mobile home site.
a (f) No mobile home or its accessory buildings shall, cover more than 50
percent of the mobile home site on which it is placed.
(g) All mobile home sites shall abut interior streets within the mobile
home park.
(h) Each mobile home park shall have at least two driveway connections,
II
at least 100 feet apart, onto public streets. All streets within
mobile home parks shall be at least 24 feet wide and shall be paved
for their full width to the specification for dustless surface
herein.
(i) Within the boundary of each mobile home site there shall be two paved
parking spaces at least three feet from the mobile home.
(j) Each mobile home site within mobile home parks shall be provided
public water supply and sewer systems. Each mobile home site shall
be within 400 feet of a fire hydrant connected to the public water
system.
(k) Each mobile home park shall include a management and maintenance
building of at least 1,000 square feet floor area.
(l) Each mobile home park shall include a safe recreation area or areas
conveniently located within the park of an area equal to at least
eight percent of the area of the park or one acre, whichever is
greater.
SECTION V: Sections 5-1-1 and 5-4-1 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance are
amended to read as follows:
5-1-1 All "R-1" and "R-2" Residential District permitted uses.
5-4-1 "R-1" and "R-2" Residential District accessory uses.
Section VI. Sections 8-1 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is amended to read as
follows:
8-1 TABLE OF REQUIREMENTS. The following requirements shall be observed unless
others are specified elsewhere in this ordinance.
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
214
8-1-1 In the MC Medical-Hospital District:
(a) Zoning lots shall be at least 10,000 square feet in land area for
residences.
(b) Zoning lots shall be at least 75 feet wide for residences.
(c) No building shall exceed two and one-half stories or 30 feet in height.
(d) Front yards shall be at least 40 feet deep.
(e) Side yards shall be at least 15 feet wide.
(f) Rear yards shall be at least 25 feet deep.
(g) Structures shall cover no more than one-half a zoning lot and no
zoning lot shall be covered more than 80 percent by impervious
features.
8-1-2 In the B-1 Business District :
(a) Zoning lots shall be at least 8,000 square feet in land area for de-
tached dwellings and 10,000 square feet in land area for each two-
family dwelling. Zoning lots for multi-family dwellings shall be at
least 10,000 square feet in land area. The total number of multi-
family dwelliq¢ on a zoning lot shall not exceed the density limits
• set out below7tfie number of bedrooms per dwelling shown:
Maximum Number of
Bedrooms per Dwelling Dwellings per Acre
One (or efficiency) 30
Two 22
Three 17
Four or more 15
(b) Zoning lots shall be at least 60 feet wide for residences.
(c) No building shall exceed three stories or 40 feet in height.
(d) Front yards shall be at least one foot deep except in the same block
front with an "R" district in which case front yards shall be at least
equal to an average of existing front yards.
(e) Side yards shall be at least 10 feet wide for residences. (See also
Sec. 8-2-8. )
(f) Rear yards shall be at least 20 feet deep for residences and 15 feet
for all buildings on lots abutting an "P." district. no zoning lot
shall be covered 7aore-than 20'percert by rulti-family buildings.
3-1-3 In the B-2 Business District:
(a) Zoning lots shall be at least 8 ,000 square feet in land area for de-
tached dwellings and 10,000 square feet in land area for each two-
family attached dwelling. Zoning lots for multi-family dwellings
shall be at least 10,000 square feet in land area. The total number
of multi-family dwel ings on a zoning lot shall not exceed the density
limits set out below ?ie number of bedrooms per dwelling shown:
Maximum Number of
Bedrooms per Dwelling Dwellings per Acre
One (or efficiency) 30
Two 22
Three 17
Four 15
.icxr.}
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
215
(b) Zoning lots shall beat least 60 feet wide for residences. "
(c) No building shall exceed three stories or 40 feet in height.
(d) Front yards shall be at least one foot deep except in the same block
front with an "R" district in which case front yards shall be at
least equal to an average of existing front yards.
(e) Side yards shall be at least 10 feet wide for residences. (See also
Sec. 8-2-8.)
(f) Rear yards shall be at least 20 feet deep for residences and 15 feet
for all buildings on lots abutting an "R" district . No zoning lot
used for multi-family buildings shall be covered more than 20 per-
cent by multi-family buildings.
8-1-4 In the M-1 Industrial District :
(a) No building shall exceed three stories or 40 feet in height.
(b) Front yards shall be at least 25 feet deep.
(c) Each side yard shall be at least equal to the height of the highest
O building on the lot.
(d) Rear yards shall be at least 15 feet for all buildings on lots abutting
an "R" district.
Q
Q SECTION VII. Section 8-2-10 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is amended to read
as follows:
8-2-10 Accessory Buildings and Uses.
Accessory buildings and uses customarily incidental to a permitted principal or
conditional use on the same lot therewith and public utility facilities are permitted
' in all zoning districts subject to the following:
(a) Accessory buildings shall be at least three feet from the lot lines of
adjoining lots in any "R" District, and at least six feet from any alley
or from any other building on the same lot. On a corner lot, any acces-
sory buildings in the rear yard shall be as far from the side street as
required for the principal ,building itself.
(b) Customary incidental home occupations shall be in compliance with the
following requirements:
(1) No person other than members of the family_occupying such dwelling
shall be employed in connection with the home occupation.
(2) No alteration of the principal or any accessory building shall be
made which changes the residential character thereof.
(3) No home occupation shall occupy more than 25 percent of any one
floor in the dwelling unit in which it is located.
(4) No mechanical or electrical equipment may be used except such type
as is customary for purely domestic or hobby purposes.
(5) No home occupation shall be operated in such a manner as to cause
offensive noise, vibration, smoke or other particulate matter,
odorous matter, heat , humidity, glare, electronic interference or
otherwise constitute a nuisance or safety hazard to the occupants
of nearby properties.
(6) No wholesale jobbing or retail business shall be permitted unless it
is conducted entirely by mail and/or telephone and does not in-
volve the receipt, sale, shipment delivery or storage of merchan-
t dise on or from the premises, provided, however, that articles
produced by the members of the family residing on the premises may
be sold on the premises.
2i f) MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING. --
1 (7) No outdoor storage shall be permitted.
(8) No sign shall be displayed.
(9) The area of any outdoor offstreet parking shall not exceed 1000
square feet.
(10) Vehicles over 7,800 pounds gross weight shall not be parked or
stored on the premises for more than two consecutive hours.
(11) Home occupations shall be interpreted to include, but are not limited
to the following: dressmaking, beauty shop, office or studio of
an artist, musician, physician, dentist, lawyer, architect, engineer
or real estate agent .
(c) Signs as specified in Article 8-A.
SECTION VISI. Section 8-2-11-7_of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is repealed.
SECTION IX. Article 9 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is amended by adding
thereto Sections 9- 6, 9-7, 9-8, 9-9 and 9G10to read as follows:
9- 6 APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USES; GENERAL; FEE -
(a) Conditionally permitted uses listed in Article 3, 3-A, 4, 4-A and
4-B inclusive are permitted within zoning district only upon applica-
-. tion for and-approval ofra Conditional Uge Permit by the Zoning Ad-
ministrator after approval by -the Commission^in accordance with the
provisions of this Article.
(b) Application for a Conditional Use Permit shall be made to the Zoning
Administrator, on forms prescribed by him at least 21 days prior to
the Commission meeting at which first consideration is desired and
shall be accompanied by a zoning plan necessary to demonstrate that
the conditions for approval set out in this Article shall be fulfilled.
The application fee for a conditional use permit shall be $25.00 and
shall be paid prior to acceptance of the application by the Administrator.
(c) The Zoning Administrator shall transmit completed applications to the
Commission with a report setting out the Administrator's findings as
to whether or not the conditions for approval have been met by the
application.
(d) An existing use conditionally permitted in an "R" zoning district by this
Ordinance shall be considered a conforming use in that district.
(e) A new use for which a Conditional Use Permit is required in an "R" zoning
district and which complies with this Ordinance shall be considered
a permitted use in that district.
9- 7 CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES AND SPECIFIC CONDITIONS APPLICABLE
The numbers and letters below under the column headed "Specific Conditions
for Approval" for each conditionally permitted use refer to the enumeration
of specific conditions applicable to each such use set out in 9-8.
Conditionally Specific Conditions
Permitted Uses for Approval
Boarding and rooming house,
tourist home (f) (1) .
Cemetery (a) (1) , (g) (2) , (e) .
Church (a) (2) , (b) (1) , (d) , (e) , (f)
(1) , (g) (2) .
Convenience retail establishments (a) (1) , (f) (1) , (e) , (g) (2) .
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING. +
21-7
Country club, golf course (a) (4) , (b) (4) , (d) , (e) , (f)
(1) , (g) (2) .
Family care home, group home (a) (3) , (b) (1) , (c) (1) , (f) (1) ,
(g) (1) .
Government office/building (f) (1) , (e) .
Legal office, business or pro-
fessional office (a) (4) , (b) (4) , (e) , (f) (2) ,
(g) (1) •
Parking lot, structure (d) , (e) .
Private and public recreation
facilities (a) (4) , (b)(5) , (f) (2) , (d) , (e) , (g) (2)
Private club, fraternal lodge (b) (5) , (f) (1 ) , (g) (2) , (e) ,
Public utilities substation or
transmission facility (a) (2) , (b) (2) , (e) , (f) (2) ,
(g) (1) .
0
Schools, public and private (a) (4) , (b) (3) , (d) , (e) , (f) (2) .
(g) (2) .
Q 9-8 SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
The following specific requirements shall apply to conditionally permitted
uses as enumerated in Section 9- 7:
(a) Minimum lot area.
(1) 5,000 square feet.
(2) 10,000 square feet.
(3) One-half acre.
' (4) One acre.
(b) Minimum yards, in feet.
Front Side (each) Rear
(1) 50 20 20
(2) 50 40 40
(3) 75 40 40
(4) 100
0
(5) 25 25 5 255
District regulations apply if no limit is shown.
(c) Minimum floor area of principal building(s) .
(1) 3,000 square feet.
(2) 40 square feet per student.
(d) Adjoining and connecting streets must be adequate for traffic generated
by the use.
(e) Plan of outdoor lighting required.
(f) Minimum distance of off-street parking and loading facilities from ad-
joining lot with residential use.
(1) 25 feet.
(2) 50 feet.
(g) Maximum number of driveway connections, provided that a pair of
separate connections for ingress only and egress only shall be counted
as a single connection.
(1) One.
(2) Two.
• 979 GENERAL CONDITIONS
The following general requirements shall apply to conditionally permitted
uses:
218 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING. "" '
(a) The proposed use is to be located in a district wherein such use is per-
mitted and the general requirements for the district are met.
(b) The specific conditions for approval set out in Sections 9-7 and 9-8
are to be met.
(c) All other requirements of this Ordinance including additional
requirements for certain uses following in this Article are to be
met by the proposed use.
(d) The Commission has determined that the proposed use is generally
consistent with provisions of the comprehensive plan and not de-
trimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort or general wel-
fare of persons or property in the town.
(e) The proposed use is to meet such additional reasonable conditions
and requirements with respect to location, design, siting, maintenance
and operation which are imposed by the Commission for protection of
nearby properties and the public.
9-10 FAMILY CARE HOMES AND GROUP HOMES
A Family Care Home and/or a Group Home is conditionally permitted as a
special exception by the Board of Zoning Appeals in R-1 and R-2 Zoning
Districts. The following requirements for family care and group homes are in
addition to others in this ordinance:
(a) A family care or group home shall not maintain lower than the minimum
building, fire, health and safety standards set by state and local laws
and regulations applicable to such a home.
(b) A family care or group home shall not be permitted to be constructed
or operated until the agency, organization, or institution supervising
such a home satisfies the Board that the home and its operation comply
or will, within a reasonable time, comply with all licensing require-
ments of the appropriate state agency.
(c) In order to prevent the creation of a de facto social service district
and to avoid impacting either a residential block or neighborhood, the
Board shall exercise care in considering a request to establish a
family block face beyond 30 persons, or beyond approximately three per-
cent of the total number of persons, according to the most recent cen-
sus figures, living within one-half mile of the applicant home. These
provisions are intended to assure that family care and group homes do
not exceed the limited capacity of a neighborhood's existing social
structure to accommodate them. These provisions are also intended to
avoid an over-concentration of family care and group homes which may
inadvertently recreate an institutional setting, and thus impede suc-
cessful functioning of such homes. No more than three family care or
group homes shall be permitted on the same block face.
(d) The minimum lot area for a family care or group home shall be 20,000
square feet.
(e) Each family care or group home shall have a minimum front yard of fifty
feet; minimum side yards of twenty feet each and a minimum rear yard of
twenty feet.
(f) The minimum floor area of each principal building containing a family
care or group home shall be 3,000 square feet.
(g) Each family care or group home shall have off-street parking and load-
ing facilities located at least 25 feet from any adjoining lot.
SECTION X. Section 15-1-23 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is repealed.
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
-- - 219 _
SECTION XI. Sections 15-1-24 and 15-1-25 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance are
amended to read as follows:
15-1-24 DWELLING, Single-Family Attached (i. e. townhouse) means a dwelling
having a party wall in common with an adjoining dwelling, each dwell-
ing to be on a separate zoning lot.
15-1-25 DWELLING, Two-Family (i. e. duplex) means a dwelling designed for or
used by two families living independent of one another located on a
single zoning lot whether vertically or horizontally.
SECTION XII. Three new sections are added to the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance to
read as follows:
15-1-48. 1 MOBILE HOME means a single-family dwelling designed for transportation,
after fabrication, on streets and highways on its own wheels arriving
at the site where it is to be occupied as a dwelling complete and ready
for occupancy except for minor and incidental unpacking and assembly
operation, location on permanent foundations, connection to utilities
and the like.
r-
Q 15-1-59. 1 PUBLIC UTILITY FACILITIES means the poles, wires, transformers, lights,
mains, drains, sewers, pipes, conduits, cables, fire alarm and police
call boxes, traffic signals, hydrants, valves and similar facilities of
Q local distribution and local conveyance systems for gas, telephone,
telegraph, traffic, tele-communications, cable television, police and
Q fire alarm, electricity, water and sewer systems, excluding public utility
substations or transmission facilities.
15-1-59.2 PUBLIC UTILITY SUBSTATIONS OR TRANSMISSION FACILITIES means the exchanges,
substations, pumping stations, valve or pressure control stations, trans-
mission poles, towers and wires and similar facilities of non-local dis-
tribution or non-local conveyance facilities for gas, telephone, tele-
graph, tele-communications, cable television, electric, water, and sewer
systems.
SECTION XIII. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage.
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis
and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill.
Nay: None.
81-0-26 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING LEESBURG PERSONNEL MANUAL REGARDING A
WRITTEN SAFETY PROGRAM.
On motion of Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Bos, the following ordi-
nance was proposed :
WHEREAS , Leesburg ' s participation in the Virginia Municipal
League insurance pool requires the town adopt a written safety
program; and
WHEREAS, a written safety program is in the best interests of
the town ' s employees and the general public :
THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in
Virginia as follows :
SECTION I. Chapter 12 . 1 of the Town Code is amended by adding
a new article to be known as Article 20 to read as follows:
Article 20
SAFETY PROGRAM
Sec. 12 . 1-52 . 1. Intent and Application
(a) It is the policy of the town that every employee is
entitled to work under the safest possible conditions repre-
senting all occupations. To this end every reasonable effort
220
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
will be made to provide and maintain a safe and healthy work-
place, safe equipment, proper materials and to establish and
insist upon safe methods and practices at all times . Accidents
which injure people, damage machinery or equipment and destroy
materials or property cause needless suffering, inconvenience
and expense. The safety rules and regulations developed here-
in are for the protection of town employees.
(b) The manager shall have prepared for dissemination to
all current and future employees a safety manual which shall
include all of the requirements, regulations and other infor-
mation contained in this article, as well as additional mater-
ial to be developed by the town manager to instruct employees
on the value of a safe workplace. The safety manual shall be
in easily understandable language and shall include a listing
of typical unsafe acts, typical unsafe conditions, and other
material deemed appropriate by the manager .
(c) The provisions of this article apply to all officers
and employees of the town.
Sec. 12 . 1-52 . 2 . Safety Rules for Supervisors and Employees
(a) Supervisors. Employees look upon Supervisors to
provide guidance and leadership in the provision and mainte-
nance of a safe working environment. Supervisors in all de-
partments and divisions of the town shall :
(1) Assume responsibility for the safety of em-
ployees within their department, division or crew.
(2) Constantly train and retrain all employees
(both new and veteran ones) .
( 3) Create safety awareness and encourage a safety
attitude by instruction and by example.
(4) Insure the necessary safety equipment or de-
vices are available and properly used on each job. Un-
derstand the intended purpose of protective equipment
and explain the need for the equipment to applicable
employees.
(5) Take necessary corrective action whenever unsafe
conditions or procedures are observed.
(6) Make sure that all accidents are reported prompt-
ly, regardless of the extent of damage or injury.
(7) Follow the accident reporting requirements found
in this article and take corrective action to assure simi-
lar type accidents are not repeated.
(8) Maintain an on-going frequent safety inspection
program within assigned work areas to monitor housekeep-
ing or unsafe working conditions and promote safe work
habits.
(b) Employees . All employees have a responsibility to
themselves and to fellow workers to follow and maintain safe
working practices. Each employee shall :
(1) Follow all safety instructions of the Super-
visor.
(2) Correct unsafe conditions or report them to
the Supervisor.
(3) Keep all work areas clean.
(4) Use only the proper tools or equipment for each
job and use them safely.
(5) Operate only equipment that you are authorized
and qualified to use.
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING .
221
(6) Report all accidents to the Supervisor re-
gardless of the severity.
(7) If injured, even slightly, get prompt first
aid or medical care. Properly wear the personal pro-
tective equipment required by the job. Maintain the
equipment and report any defects so that replacements
can be provided.
(8) Avoid unworkmanlike "horseplay" or fighting
which detract attention from the job.
(9) Obey all safety rules and practices estab-
lished in this article and those found in the town
safety manual.
Sec. 12 . 1 . 52 . 3 . Accident Investigation and Reporting
(a) Every on-the-job accident which results in per-
sonal injury (no matter how slight) or damage to property
shall be reported to the Department of Finance on forms
provided for that purpose. The town manager shall receive
photostatic copies of these reports as soon as possible.
C) (b) The manager may require a second report when the
nature of the accident is deemed of a serious nature or
where a thorough investigation could develop changes re-
CI quired to prevent future similar accidents. Forms for
Q this purpose will be prepared by the Personnel Director
and contained in the safety manual referred to in this
article.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its
passage.
Mr. Hill thought we had a safety program of sorts - he had seen some
posters . Mr. Niccolls said we have not had a policy direction from
the Council . Our new insurance arrangement with the Virginia Munici-
pal League workers ' compensation insurance pool calls for us to
have a written safety policy adopted by the governing body in order
to officially set out the obligations of the staff . Mr. Hill thought
this is a wonderful thing, but what happens when someone violates the
rules? Mr. Niccolls said the current Personnel Manual deals with
violation of job requirements and allows disciplinary action for
anything from an oral reprimand up to dismissal for violation of
known policies. We have, over the years, set out certain require-
ments for safety. In fact, employees are directed not to work in
unsafe conditions or with unsafe tools or without the proper safety
equipment and that wilful violation of those rules can result in
disciplinary action. We haven ' t fired anyone but he has made it
very clear that any employee who suffers an eye injury for lack
of wearing the appropriate safety gear will be suspended for three
days. We were having too many instances of eye injury, so he made
it very clear that the next one would be penalized. We don ' t nor-
mally stipulate specific penalties for specific violations, but
there are almost always extenuating circumstances. We haven' t •
lost any more time as a result of eye injuries. Mr . Hill wondered
if someone was dismissed under this ordinance, would they have a
strong case for grievance? There are some very specific responsi-
bilities which we have never written down before, except in a few
cases. Over the years, the employees have been told formally and
informally about precautions, but they will be advised of this.
He, personally, has stopped employees regarding not having on safety
equipment. The ordinance was unanimously adopted:
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis
and Mayor Pro-Tem Hill .
Nay: None.
81-133 - RESOLUTION - INITIATING AMENDMENTS OF THE LEESBURG ZONING
ORDINANCE.
On motion of Mr. Herrell, seconded by Mr . Tolbert, the following
resolution was proposed:
2 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
22
WHEREAS, Section 11-8-4 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance
allows conditional rezonings in line with Section 15. 1-491. 1
et seq. of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and it is
appropriate to take into consideration Planning Commission
recommendations on proffers made for conditional zonings;' and
WHEREAS, Section 11-5 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance pro-
vides that no amendment of the zoning map shall be approved
for a change in zoning classification different from the one
applied for and contained in the public notice of hearing but
Section 15 . 1-493 of the State Code provides that the Council
may make appropriate changes in proposed amendments; and
WHEREAS, the Management Improvement Corporation of America
recommended changes of fees charged for zoning permits, var-
iances, special exceptions and appeals :
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg
in Virginia as follows :
SECTION I . Amendments of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance are
initiated to revise Section 11-8-4 and repeal Section 11-5
as follows :
11-8-4 . Those proffer provisions provided for in Sec-
tion 15 . 1-491. 1 through Section 15 . 1-491 . 6 of the 1950 Code
of Virginia, as amended, are incorporated as part of this
zoning ordinance• as if set out fully herein. Proposed prof-
fers shall be presented to the Council and Planning Commis-
sion at any time prior to the Planning Commission ' s recom-
mendation on the proposed map amendment to the Council.
11-5. PUBLIC HEARING BY COUNCIL, ACTION:
SECTION II . Amendments of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance
are initiated to revise Sections 8-A-1-12 , 9-3 , 10-3-1,
10-3-2 and 11-2 to read as follows :
8-A-1-12 . Permits, fees for permits. Except as pro-
vided herein, no person shall erect, install, use, alter,
relocate, replace or reconstruct any sign regulated by this
Article without first applying to the Zoning Administrator
for a sign permit; applying for and receiving a Historic Dis-
trict Zoning Permit, if applicable; paying the fee provided
herein to the Town and being issued an approved sign permit.
For signs of six or less square feet of sign area, the
fee for a sign permit shall be $10 . 00.
For signs of more than six square feet of sign area, the
fee shall be $20 . 00 .
For identification signs of less than ten square feet
and for all temporary and political signs, there shall be
no fee.
For repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure
or the changing of advertising copy or message thereon, un-
less a structural change is made, there shall be no permit
or fee required.
9-3 . FEES
Fees and charges to be paid to the town for application
for zoning permits shall be as follows :
9-3-1 . For single- and multiple-family dwellings to be
newly erected, altered, reconstructed, enlarged or relocated,
the fee for filing the application for a zoning permit shall
be $15. 00 per dwelling unit.
9-3-2 . For newly erected, altered, reconstructed, en-
larged or relocated nonresidential uses, the fee for filing
the application for a zoning permit shall be $40. 00.
•
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981. MEETING .
223
9-3-3 . For newly erected, altered, reconstructed,
enlarged or relocated accessory buildings, the fee for
filing the application for a zoning permit shall be $5. 00 .
10-3-1 . An application to the Board for a variance,
special exception, or interpretation of the Zoning District
Map, or any other case in which the Board has original juris-
diction under the provisions of this Ordinance may be made
by any property owner, tenant, governmental officer, depart-
ment, board or bureau. Such application shall be filed in
triplicate with the Zoning Administrator, who shall transmit
a copy thereof, together with all the plans, specifications
and other papers pertaining to the application, to the Chair-
man of the Board. Each such application shall be accompanied
by a filing fee of fifty dollars ($50. 00) to defray the cost
of processing said application, which amount shall be paid
to the Town Treasurer .
10-3-2 . An appeal to the Board may be taken by any per-
son aggrieved, or any officer, department, board or bureau of
the Town of Leesburg affected by any decision of the Zoning
Administrator relative to the administration of this Ordinance.
Such appeal shall be taken within thirty (30) days from the
0 date of the decision complained of , by filing with the Zoning
Ct Administrator and with the Board a notice of appeal stating
-J the grounds thereof. A notice of appeal in triplicate shall
be accompanied by a filing fee of thirty dollars ($30 . 00) to
Q defray the cost of processing said appeal , which amount shall
Q be paid to the Auditor-Treasurer. The Zoning Administrator
shall forthwith transmit to the Board all papers constituting
the record upon which the action appealed from was taken.
11-2 . INITIATION OF AMENDMENTS : Amendments of the Zoning
Ordinance shall be initiated only in the following manner:
(a) Amendments to the text of the Ordinance and/or
changes in the zoning boundaries or classification
of properties shown on the Zoning Map may be initi-
ated by the Council or the Planning Commission in
accordance with the provisions of Sec. 15 . 1-493 ,
Code of Virginia, as amended.
(b) Amendments to the zoning boundaries or classification
of property shown on the Zoning Map may be initiated
by property owners of the land proposed to be rezoned,
by the filing with the Council of a Zoning Map amend-
ment petition addressed to the Council , which petition
shall be on a standard form approved by the Planning
Commission and provided by the Zoning Administrator,
and accompanied by a fee of one hundred fifty dollars
($150 . 00) , and all other material and data required
in said form.
SECTION III . The Planning Commission shall conduct a public
hearing on these proposed amendments and shall make a report
to this Council as provided by law.
Mrs. Hill said this merely refers it to the Planning Commission - not
acting on it. Mr. Niccolls further explained that these are amend-
ments that have been floating around the Finance Committee concerning
procedures for proffers. Mr. Hill asked if this will allow down-
grading of zoning? Mr. Niccolls said all of the present Section
11-5 is being repealed - they found the whole section can be elimi-
nated. This will make it less complicated. Mr. Hill asked if this
would help the Phillips case? Mrs. Hill replied "Yes. " Mr. Bos
was concerned with Sec. 10-3-2 - if the appeal is deemed proper,
is it good policy to charge these people or, if the Board ruled
in favor of the appeal, should this money be refunded? Mr. Hill
asked Mrs. Hill to look into this. The resolution was unanimously
adopted:
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis
and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill.
Nay: None.
224 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
81-134 - RESOLUTION - ALTERING PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE AND PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR PART OF PARCEL
M, SECTION I , VIRGINIA VILLAGE.
On motion of Mr. Willis, seconded by Mr. Herrell, the following
resolution was proposed:
WHEREAS, the development plan for part of Parcel M, Section
1, Virginia Village called for improvements to Tuscarora
Creek to maintain or reduce flood levels; and
WHEREAS, an easement was required and secured by condemna-
tion from the Virginia Knolls Community Association; and
WHEREAS, Council Resolution #79-95 approved a performance
guarantee for installation of public improvements in the
amount of $127 , 072 in the form of a first deed of trust
on Part of Parcel M, Section 1, Virginia Village; and
WHEREAS , the Town Council extended the time for installa-
tion of public improvements for the development plan on
May 27 , 1981 in Resolution #81-63 and at that time stipu-
lated that the channel improvements be completed prior to
October 1 , 1981; and
WHEREAS, objections were raised by nearby property owners
when channel improvements began on August 12 , 1981 and in-
cluded removal of trees in the project area; and
WHEREAS, the developer has offered to deposit $21, 000 with
the town, as estimated remaining cost of the channel improve-
ment work in lieu of requiring the developer to perform the
channel work as part of their required public improvements;
and
WHEREAS, study of the impact on the proposed improvements to
Tuscarora Creek and alternatives for work to accomplish the
flood level reduction and/or maintenance are appropriate:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg
in Virginia as follows :
SECTION I . The offer of Virginia Village Associates to de-
posit $21, 000 with the town as outlined in the letter dated
September 18 , 1981 from Victor G. Trapasso, Managing Partner,
Virginia Village Associates, is accepted with the condition
that if the deposit is not used for channel improvements or
related expenses within a period of ten years from receipt,
the deposit shall be returned to Virginia Village Associates
without interest.
SECTION II . The requirement for the developer of part of
Parcel M, Section 1, Virginia Village to construct channel
improvements to Tuscarora Creek is hereby released.
SECTION III . The manager shall secure engineering consultant
services to review the existing plan for channel improvements
and, if appropriate, design alternatives at a cost not to ex-
ceed $5 , 000 . Funds for this review and design will be pro-
vided by the escrow account established by Virginia Village
Associates.
SECTION IV. An appropriation is made from the General Fund
to Account No. 3401 . 300 in the amount of $5, 000 for the fis-
cal year ending June 30 , 1982 .
SECTION V. The performance guarantee for installation of pub-
lic improvements approved by Council Resolution No. 79-95 on
June 27 , 1979 in the amount of $127 , 072 is reduced to $106 , 072 .
SECTION VI . Town Attorney George Martin, Trustee, shall upon
request by Virginia Village Associates, reduce the first deed
of trust on Part of Parcel M, Section 1, Virginia Village to
$106 , 072 .
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING. 225 C
SECTION VII . This resolution shall be in effect upon re-
ceipt of $21, 000 from Virginia Village Associates .
Mr . Herrell felt this should be passed. The committee met with
the contractor and citizens from Brandon - they made the people
in Brandon aware that there will probably be more flooding down
there until this project is done. Some of them would like to
have this work done, but without widening the channel and without
destroying any more trees . It will cost the town another $5, 000
for another study. We should let the developer out of his contract-
there is nothing more he can do - he is stuck with a bond that he
is paying for. Mr. Bos agreed and Mr. Hill said this is the con-
sensus of the Public Works Committee as well. He asked how the
people out there feel? Mr. Niccolls said they want flood protec-
tion and they want the aesthetics of the stream pretty much the same.
It may be possible to design some modified stream improvements that
wouldn ' t be as deep and as wide as the other. $5, 000 would be kind
of the worst case. The new computer runs should cost less than
$1, 500 or so to do the new calculations to see where we stand today -
and what minimal improvements could develop. If something less,
we could then get bids. We are talking about grading and we will
have to submit some drawings to the Corps and the State before we
can do the work. Mr. Hill asked if we didn ' t transmit some funds
CD to the Association for an easement or something? Mr. Niccolls said
Cr the transaction went from the developer, in effect through us, to
the Association and funds were paid. Those funds were to be used
Q for re-landscaping. The people we were dealing with then knew that
Q the stream was going to be changed. Mr. Hill said we shouldn ' t put
it off any longer than we have to - it will cost more. Mr. Niccolls
agreed with this - the soonest we could do something would be next
summer. Mr. Herrell said these people might feel differently if
their basements are flooded. Mr. Niccolls said this is a risk, but
even if we build the stream to a 25-year storm, lots of things could
change that. Theoretically, a 10-minute storm, an 8-year storm or
a one-year storm could do as much flooding as a 25-year storm - it
would be very difficult to prove a number of things . Mr. Herrell
asked if the town would get the permit from the Corps? Mr. Nic-
colls said it wouldn ' t make any difference as to the time required,
but the question has never come up. Mr . Herrell felt the town should
get the permit and then, if they want to do anything, let them sue us .
rather than the contractor . The resolution was unanimously adopted:
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis
. and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill.
Nay: None.
81-135 - RESOLUTION - RECEIVING AND REFERRING THE APPLICATION OF
JOHN A. WALLACE, JR. , TRUSTEE, FOR REVISION
OF ZONING DISTRICT MAP TO THE PLANNING COM-
MISSION FOR PUBLIC HEARING UNDER CHAPTER 11,
TITLE 15 . 1 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA, AS AMENDED.
On motion of Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Bos, the following reso-
lution was proposed:
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia,
as follows :
The application of John A. Wallace, Jr. , Trustee, for re-
vision of the zoning district map, assigned No. ZM-36 , is
received and referred to the Planning Commission for public
hearing and recommendation under Chapter 11 , Title 15 . 1 of
the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended.
Mrs. Hill explained that this is the back end of the Francis prop-
erty on Loudoun Street - the front end was rezoned several years
ago from M-1 to B-2 . The resolution was unanimously adopted:
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis
and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill.
Nay: None.
22G MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
On motion of Mrs. Hill , seconded by Mr. Bos, Council voted
unanimously to go into executive session to discuss legal matters :
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Herrell , M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis
and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill .
Nay: None.
It is noted here that Mayor Rollins joined the meeting during
the executive session, however, Mr. Hill presided during the re-
mainder of this meeting.
On motion duly made and seconded, Council resumed session at
9 : 20 P.M. :
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis,
Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill and Mayor Rollins.
Nay: None.
81-136 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING AN APPRAISAL AND OFFER TO ALFRED AND
MILDRED GARDINER FOR AN EASEMENT FOR CONSTRUC-
TION OF CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS, DECLARING A PUBLIC
NECESSITY AND AUTHORIZING CONDEMNATION PRO-
CEEDINGS .
On motion of Mr. Herrell , seconded by Mr . Tolbert, the follow-
ing resolution was proposed :
•
WHEREAS, SRL Properties, Inc . , was granted a rezoning from
F-1 to M-1 of 89, 576 square feet of land located on the
north side of Catoctin Circle and bounded by Joffe Prop-
erties on the north, other lands of SRL Properties, Inc.
on the east, Catoctin Circle on the south and Harrison
Street extended on the west in accordance with a plat pre-
pared by Bengtson, DeBell, Elkin & Titus dated July 31, 1979 •
and now a part of Section 2 of Catoctin Circle Industrial
Park; and '
WHEREAS, proffered conditions of the rezoning included in-
stallation of an additional drainage pipe under Catoctin
Circle at its intersection with Town Branch and construction
of an earth berm on the east side of the creek to increase
the capacity for drainage on Town Branch; and
WHEREAS, this drainage pipe installation requires a storm
drainage easement of approximately 650 square feet on the
property of Alfred and Mildred Gardiner, as shown on the
plat prepared by Bengtson, DeBell , Elkin & Titus, Inc . ,
dated April 3, 1981; and
WHEREAS, a public necessity exists for the acquisition of
the storm sewer easement because installation will elimi-
nate flooding of Catoctin Circle and resulting road damage
and allow continuation of normal and emergency vehicular
traffic during 100 year and less floods; and
WHEREAS, SRL Properties, Inc . , owner of Section 2 of Ca-
toctin Circle Industrial Subdivision has agreed to pay all
costs related to the securing of the required drainage ease-
ment from Alfred and Mildred Gardiner and to post a $5, 000
cash bond with the town to guarantee payment of such costs :
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg
in Virginia as follows :
SECTION I . The manager shall secure an appraisal of the re-
quired easement as shown on the plat prepared by Bengtson,
DeBell, Elkin & Titus, Inc . and determine the fair market
value of the easement based upon the appraisal .
SECTION II . The manager shall offer to purchase said ease-
ment from Alfred and Mildred Gardiner as described on the
plat on the condition the title to the lands affected is free
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
227
and clear of all defects, liens or conditions which could
inhibit the use of the area for the purposes intended; the
easement will be conveyed according to the plat and descrip-
tion prepared by Bengtson, DeBell , Elkin & Titus, Inc . by
good and proper deed with the usual warranties of title.
SECTION III . In the event the offer is not accepted in writ-
ing within 30 days from receipt, an essential public neces-
sity exists for acquisition of the easement by condemnation
and right of early entry on behalf of the town.
SECTION IV. The appointment of special counsel is authorized
at the expense of SRL Properties, Inc . , to carry out Sections
II and III of this resolution.
SECTION V. SRL Properties, Inc. shall be charged for all ex-
penses relative to the condemnation action authorized herein
including any award for the value of the easement and damage
to the residual .
Mr. Bos requested that representatives from SRL Properties describe
the processes they have been through to try to obtain the easement
h and what stumbling blocks they have run into. Mr. Ottinger, attor-
Q ney for SRL Properties, asked Mr. Bowers of Bengtson, DeBell, Elkin
CT and Titus to relate to Council from an engineering standpoint the
fact situation there. Mr. Bowers exhibited a plat of Gardiner ' s
Q property prepared by DeLashmutt Associates (Bill Chamberlin) . The
final plat showed the proposed fourth pipe under Catoctin Circle
Q within the town' s existing easement on Town Branch. They approached
Mr. Gardiner through Mr. Gore for an easement of 650 square feet.
It forms a triangle, it is 20 feet wide on Catoctin Circle and
tapers to 0 . 65 feet down the creek. They were asking for permission
to do some necessary grading - sloping of the existing ground in
order to properly install the fourth pipe and .not to create any
sharp drop-off. Mr. Gore ' s initial response was fine, providing
they would build a piece of sidewalk between his entrance and the
culvert pipe - then, when his site plan is approved, he would move
to agree with this easement. DeLashmutt ' s plan shows this sidewalk
to be done at SRL' s cost. The Planning Commission ' s and Council ' s
approval of the bond would not allow any development until construc-
tion of the culvert pipe was substantially completed. When they
thought they were in position to secure the easement, they started
site plans on the two lots, only to have them tabled by the town as
well. Since then, contact with Mr . Gardiner or Mr. Gore has diminished
and they have come back saying SRL has eliminated spaces on their prop-
erty - this is not true. They have said that, instead of a sidewalk
(which would be $300 to $400), they would prefer to see a retaining
wall (around $25, 000) . Such a wall would follow the existing ease-
ment line. The plan shows a building in front of this, as well as
a parking lot.
Mr. Ottinger explained that Mr. Gore and a partner are the con-
tract purchasers of this property from Mr. and Mrs. Gardiner. The
Gardiners would give us an easement, but not unless their contract
purchaser agrees. The four-lot subdivision was approved in late
May or June, contingent on getting this easement, among other off-
site easements they have gotten with no problems at all . He and
Mr. Bowers ' firm were dispatched to Mr. Gore to negotiate this and,
ultimately, Mr . Gore said he would not mind the slope easement but
SRL would have to build the sidewalk. He then said that, when they
got their site plan for the office building approved, they would
release the easement. He prepared a contract to take care of the
sidewalk, etc. and to indemnify them in case of damage, etc. Ap-
proximately two months went by and he understood the site plan was
approved, so he called Mr. Gore, but he seemed to know nothing about
it. He called to get a letter from the town concerning this and
did get a letter from the Zoning Administrator stating that it had
been approved. He took the letter to Mr. Gore in full anticipation
of picking up the easement, but he then said he was going to lose
six parking spaces - if the retaining wall is built he could have
these spaces, but it would cost from $15, 000 to X5, 000 : Six parking
spaces are certainly not worth that kind of money, so it is not
economically feasible to do this. They are in a bind and can ' t
move unless they get a release.
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
228
Mayor Rollins asked if the site plan has been approved for
what they intend to do in front of the skating rink? Mrs. Hill
said the Planning Commission has given preliminary approval. Mr.
Niccolls could not recall a bond on this to be approved by the
Council . Mayor Rollins felt we should not be concerned about
what Mr. Gardiner and Mr. Gore want - let the water go on over
there without an easement - then he can come back to Council for
some relief. We can either hold up his development or make him
put up the money to give the easement - put the burden on him.
If he says anything, we can refuse to approve the bond. Mr.
Bowers asked if this wouldn ' t be trespassing? Mayor Rollins said
this is the town ' s problem and he is willing to take that risk.
He did not feel this would be trespassing. Mr. Ottinger said they
did go back to Mr. Gore to see what they could do, but they could
not go along with the retaining wall . Mayor Rollins again said let
the water go over there since he is not cooperating. Mr. Herrell
could not agree with this - there would be many places in town with
this same kind of problem. Mr. Ottinger said this would not be done
only for Ross Lipscomb - the purpose is to benefit the people in
Leesburg - it is a public need. Mr. Niccolls said Mayor Rollins has
raised the possibility of not attempting to secure the easement, but
there may be some engineering and construction implications to that
approach that Council might want to see from Mr. Bowers ' point of
view. Mr. Bowers drew a diagram of what would be done, but said
this would not be good engineering practice. Mayor Rollins insisted
that they could just put the pipe under the road the way they intended
to do in the beginning - they would have to come back with some legal
action. Mr. Herrell asked if Mr. Gardiner has been made aware of
this alternative? Mr. Niccolls did not agree that this is a viable
solution - an aggressive property owner could sue us for a reverse
condemnation action. There followed further extensive discussion con-
cerning this matter, with Mr. Bowers agreeing that there would be only
minimal damage if they go ahead without the easement. Mayor Pro-Tem
Hill felt this is in the interest of being "good neighbors" . If the
developer is willing to do this, it can ' t be all wrong. He didn ' t
feel it would be "going overboard. " Mr. Herrell thought we should
hear Mr. Gore ' s side of the story before we condemn. Mr. Ottinger
said this was not brought out at the committee meeting - they would
have been pleased to do that. Mayor Rollins asked if there would
be anything to prohibit them from putting it under Catoctin Circle
And stopping it on the town ' s right-of-way if this resolution is de-
feated? Mr. Hill suggested that they could come back with a plat
and we could rescind our previous resolution and approve that plat
as going across the road. Mr . Niccolls said the requirement to put
the pipe in is in the Zoning Ordinance, but the technical details
are not. We are talking about an engineering requirement imposed
by our engineer that an easement be secured where water will be dis-
charged. If the resolution is defeated, could we have a resolution
telling our engineer to approve the installation as described by
Mayor Rollins? He will then amend the site plan, approve it and
he can do it. Mr. Willis called for the question and the resolution
was defeated by a roll call vote of 4 to 3 :
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, M. Hill and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill .
Nay: Councilmembers Herrell , Tolbert, Willis and Mayor
Rollins.
On motion of Mayor Rollins, seconded by Mr . Willis, the follow-
ing resolution was proposed :
RESOLVED by the Council- of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia
as follows :
The Town Manager is instructed and directed to approve the
engineering plans to see to it that the proper facilities
on Catoctin Circle Industrial Park, Section 2 , are installed
to the southern boundary line of Catoctin Circle.
Mayor Rollins said the intent of this resolution is that it is done
properly, adequately and to the proper capacity. Mr. Herrell inter-
preted this to mean that, in cases where the parties cannot agree,
we will not require anything more than what can be done on-site.
Mayor Rollins said we are not passing that hurdle - we are making
Mr. Lipscomb put in the proper facilities to the end of his prop-
erty. Mr. Herrell felt this is a good policy - if we want work
done on another ' s property, then the town should do that. Mayor
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
Rollins said this means that Mr. Gore will have to prove some dam229
ages and, if he comes in for development of his land, he will have
to take care of that water. The burden would be on him. Mr. Bos
felt this is a worse precedent than condemning land. Mr. Willis
said this is within the town ' s easement now. Mayor Rollins said
he makes this motion with the understanding that the damage could
be so little on his property. Discussion continued with reference
to how this affects our current standard requirements and policies.
Mr. Niccolls referred to the case where condemnation was filed for
an easement on Town Branch and, although this case was settled on
the Court House steps, an Order was entered by the Judge agreeing
to the settlement. This case was Town of Leesburg v. Virginia Knolls.
This is the same type of case. Mr. Willis asked if it would be pos-
sible to put this pipe on the opposite side of these three existing
ones? Mr. Bowers said this is just as bad a problem - there is no
room in the existing easement. Mr. Ottinger said the owner has
offered to sell them the lot for $50, 000 , and the property would
probably appraise for only $5, 000, so they are blocked in. The
resolution was defeated by a roll call vote of 5 to 2 :
Aye: Councilmember M. Hill and Mayor Rollins.
Nay: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, Tolbert, Willis and Mayor
Pro-Tem D. Hill.
0 Mr. Herrell felt Council should establish under what circumstances
the town should condemn property, particularly if they have not even
7 talked to the parties involved. Mr. Niccolls said the original reso-
Q lution on this matter set out steps to follow before condemnation.
Q On motion of Mr. Willis, seconded by Mr. Herrell, Council voted
unanimously to reconsider the original resolution:
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis,
Mayor Rollins and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill .
Nay: None.
' On motion of Mr. Willis, seconded by Mr. Bos, Council voted
unanimously to propose the original resolution concerning this matter :
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis,
Mayor Rollins and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill .
Nay: None.
On motion of Mr . Herrell , seconded by Mr. Bos, and after some
further discussion, Council voted 4 to 3 to delete Sections III and
V and to delete at the end of Section IV the words "and III of this
resolution. " :
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill and Tolbert.
Nay: Councilmember Willis , Mayor Rollins and Mayor Pro-Tem
D. Hill.
The resolution, as amended, was adopted by a roll call vote of
6 to 1 and reads as follows :
WHEREAS, SRL Properties, Inc . was granted a rezoning from
F-1 to M-1 of 89 , 576 square feet of land located on the
north side of Catoctin Circle and bounded by Joffe Prop-
erties on the north, other lands of SRL Properties, Inc.
on the east, Catoctin Circle on the south and Harrison
Street extended on the west in accordance with a plat pre-
pared by Bengtson, DeBell , Elkin & Titus dated July 31, 1979
and now a part of Section 2 of Catoctin Circle Industrial
Park; and
WHEREAS, proffered conditions of the rezoning included in-
stallation of an additional drainage pipe under Catoctin
Circle at its intersection with Town Branch and construction
of an earth berm on the east side of the creek to increase
the capacity for drainage on Town Branch; and
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
• 230
WHEREAS, this drainage pipe installation requires a storm
drainage easement of approximately 650 square feet on the
property of Alfred and Mildred Gardiner, as shown on the
plat prepared by Bengtson, DeBell , Elkin & Titus, Inc . ,
dated April 3 , 1981; and
WHEREAS, a public necessity exists for the acquisition of
the storm sewer easement because installation will eliminate
flooding of Catoctin Circle and resulting road damage and al-
low continuation of normal and emergency vehicular traffic
during 100 year and less floods; and
WHEREAS, SRL Properties, Inc . , owner of Section 2 of Catoctin
Circle Industrial Subdivision, has agreed to pay all costs re-
lated to the securing of the required drainage easement from
Alfred and Mildred Gardiner and to post a $5, 000 cash bond
with the town to guarantee payment of such costs :
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in
Virginia as follows :
SECTION I . The manager shall secure an appraisal of the re-
quired easement as shown on the plat prepared by Bengtson,
DeBell, Elkin & Titus. , Inc. and determine the fair market
value of the easement based upon the appraisal .
SECTION II . The manager shall offer to purchase said easement
from Alfred and Mildred Gardiner as described on the plat on
the condition the title to the lands affected is free and
clear of all defects, liens or conditions which could inhibit
the use of the area for the purposes intended; the easement
will be conveyed according to the plat and description pre-
pared by Bengtson, DeBell, Elkin & Titus, Inc. by good and
proper deed with the usual warranties of title.
SECTION III . The appointment of special counsel is author-
ized at the expense of SRL Properties, Inc . to carry out
Section II .
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell , M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis .
and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill.
Nay : Mayor Rollins.
81-137 - RESOLUTION - APPROVING WATER EXTENSION FOR THE MARION DUPONT
SCOTT EQUINE MEDICAL CENTER.
On motion of Mrs. Hill , seconded by Mr . Bos , the following reso-
lution was proposed and unanimously adopted :
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia,
as follows :
The extension of municipal water works for the Marion DuPont
Equine Medical Center on Old Waterford Road adjacent to Morven
Park is approved.
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell , M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis,
Mayor Rollins and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill .
Nay: None.
81-138 - RESOLUTION - RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 80-121 AND AUTHOR-
IZING REFUND OF A CASH PERFORMANCE BOND FOR
LOTS 8 & 9 , PARKER SUBDIVISION.
On motion of Mr. Willis, seconded by Mr. Bos, the following
resolution was proposed:
WHEREAS, the developer of Lots 8 and 9 , Parker Subdivision on
South Street in Leesburg has postponed development in that lo-
cation until some future date; and
WHEREAS, a written request has been received for refund of
the cash escrow in the amount of $5, 723 which was provided
to the town for a guarantee of installation of public im-
provements; and
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
231
WHEREAS, on November 26 , 1980 in Resolution No. 80-121 the
Council authorized an agreement and approved a cash per-
formance bond for the installation of public improvements
for Parker Subdivision, Lots 8 and 9 ;
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg
in Virginia as follows :
SECTION I . Resolution No. 80-121 is hereby rescinded.
SECTION II . The town manager is authorized and directed
to refund the cash escrow in the amount of $5, 723 plus ac-
crued interest to the developer .
Mr. Hill said he will have to come back in with the whole package
in order to develop these lots . Mr. Willis understood they have
been sold. The resolution was unanimously adopted:
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis,
Mayor Rollins and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill .
Nay: None.
81-139 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF VALVE INSERTING
Q EQUIPMENT FOR THE UTILITY LINES DIVISION.
There being no objection to considering tonight, on motion
Q of Mrs. Hill , seconded by Mr. Willis, the following new business
item was proposed:
Q
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia
as follows :
SECTION I. The manager is authorized and directed to pur-
chase valve inserting equipment for insertions of 4" , 6"
and 8" valves from Water Works Supply-Valley, Inc. of Salem,
Virginia at a cost not to exceed $15, 946 . 00 .
SECTION II . An appropriation is made from the Utility Fund
to Account No. 5100 . 711, Equipment, in the amount of $15, 946 . 00
for the fiscal year ending June 30 , 1982 .
Mr. Willis asked if this is the tool that allows us to insert a
valve without cutting off the water? Mr. Niccolls said Mr . Chaves
gave a description of the equipment and why it is necessary to ac-
quire it. We could hire this work done, but the cost is substan-
tially higher than buying our own equipment and using our own forces.
In the future, there will be less and less need for this, but it
will pay for itself in the meantime. We will be able to rent it
out to contractors for a fee and loan it to other governments when
they need it. There are about 15 to 20 other locations where they
will need it - in fact, they are still identifying them. He explained
just how this equipment can be used to repair valves on long water
lines without interrupting service to the customers. Mr. Hill said
we have the basic part of this equipment where we can put on a
standard tap - he feels this is a very valuable piece of equipment.
The resolution was unanimously adopted:
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis,
Mayor Rollins and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill .
Nay: None.
81-140 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO ADAP AIRPORT
PROJECT #5-51-0027-02 .
On motion of Mr. Willis, seconded by Mr. Herrell, the follow-
ing resolution was proposed:
WHEREAS, the Federal Aviation Administration has agreed to
increase the federal share of Leesburg ' s 1979 Airport Im-
provement Project from $170 , 344 to $184 , 706 . 40;
232 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg
in Virginia as follows :
The manager is authorized and directed to execute, on behalf
of the town, Amendment No. 1 to the Grant Agreement for Proj-
ect #5-51-0027-02 which authorized the increase in federal
funding for the 1979 Airport Project from $170, 344 to
$184 , 706 . 40 effective September 29 , 1981 .
Mr. Niccolls said the date is correct - the grant agreement increase
was offered to the Town by FAA ' prior to the close of the fiscal
year ending September 30, .so we are basically trading a situation
where they made an offer to us that has to be executed with the date
of September 29 - they are backdating the check in order to pick up
$14 , 000 . The resolution was unanimously adopted :
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis,
Mayor Rollins and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill.
Nay: None.
81-141 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING NOTICE OF PUBLICATION OF PUBLIC
HEARING ON APPLICATION #ZM-35 BY S . D. , JR.
AND BETTY H. PHILLIPS .
On motion of Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Bos , the following reso-
lution was proposed:
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia
as follows :
A Notice of Public Hearing to consider Application Number
ZM-35 by S. D. , Jr. and Betty H. Phillips to have rezoned
from R-1 to B-2 approximately 13, 872 square feet of land
located on the west side of Valley View Avenue shall be
published in the Loudoun-Times Mirror on October 29, 1981
and November 5, 1981 for public hearing on November 11,
1981 at 7 : 30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 10 West Loudoun '
Street, Leesburg, Virginia `
Mr. Bos asked Mrs. Hill if it is expected that Mr. Phillips will
come back with a different proffer? Mrs . Hill said he may come back
with this one or he may change it to an R-4 . There was confusion as
to what the proffer should be - we couldn 't rewrite his proffer.
This lot is surrounded by B-2 . He originally asked for the entire
lot to be B-2 . Citizens from the town houses objected to some of
the B-2 uses next to them. He said he had a contract on it and the
prospective buyer would not put anything but mult-family houses on
it. The citizens agreed to this and he came in and proffered the
B-1 in that small section abutting the town houses. This could
have included bowling alleys, etc . He then said he would be will-
ing to proffer R-4 , but he had already submitted his proffer to B-1.
The resolution was unanimously adopted:
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis,
Mayor Rollins and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill.
Nay : None.
81-142 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30 , 1982 .
On motion of Mrs. Hill , seconded by Mr. Willis, 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 No.
4301 . 300, Contractual Services, in the amount of $1, 000 for
the fiscal year ending June 30 , 1982 .
It was explained that this is for the post beetles in the log cabin.
On motion of Mr. Herrell, seconded by Mr. Tolbert, it was proposed
and unanimously adopted to change the amount to $2 , 000 .
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14 , 1981 MEETING. 233
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Herrell , M. Hill , Tolbert, Willis
Mayor Rollins and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill .
Nay : None.
The resolution, as amended, was unanimously adopted and reads as
follows :
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Vrginia
as follows :
An appropriation is made from the General Fund to Account
No. 4301. 300, Contractual Services, in the amount of $2 , 000
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1982 .
Aye : Councilmembers Bos , Herrell , M. Hill, Tolbert, Willis,
Mayor Rollins and Mayor Pro-Tem D. Hill .
Nay: None.
Mayor Pro-Tem Hill recognized two guests in the audience. Mr.
Paul Cook introduced himself and Miss Amy Gates - they are members
of the firm of Gates and Associates, which firm provides consulting
services. They are interested in seeing what the issues and prob-
lems are. Their offices are located in Fairfax City.
Mr. Herrell felt Council should look into the Town' s policies
concerning off-site improvements and determine how they should pro-
ceed in cases like they had tonight - the SRL Properties-Gardiner
matter. He believed the town should be involved when no agreement
can be reached between the parties involved and when the town is
requesting the improvements to be made. Mrs. Hill felt the reso-
lution adopted tonight establishes that. Mayor Rollins said we
have the same type of situation with regard to a sewer line east
of Leesburg, where owners may want to develop to the north of
Route 7 to get to the sewer plant and the owners of Leegate won ' t
let them through there - are we going to sit idly by or are we
going to assist the developer to get to the sewer line? He per-
sonally feels the town has an interest in providing utility services
to those people. Mr. Niccolls said, in the case of electric power,
no one property owner can stop it - VEPCO would use its power of
eminent domain to run the power to it - this is done routinely.
Mr. Herrell thought the town should be very cautious in condemning
property and should decide whether negotiations are breaking down
rather than having one of the property owners come in for help.
On motion of Mr. Willis, seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the meeting
was adjourned at 11 : 00 P .M.
1_,CA2111
Mayor P
it f i IL
Clerk of-the Council