HomeMy Public PortalAbout1982_04_28 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL AND PUBLIC
354 HEARING ON ZM-39 (DeHART) , APRIL 28 , 1982 .
A regular meeting of the Leesburg Town Council was held in the
Council Chambers, 10 West Loudoun Street, Leesburg, Virginia on
April 28 , 1982 at 7 : 30 p.m. The meeting was called to order by the
Mayor, who led the Salute to the Flag, and followed with the invo-
cation by Mr. Tolbert. Present were: Mayor G. Dewey Hill, Jr. ,
Councilmembers Charles A. Bos , Glen P . Cole, Stanley D. Herrell , Jr. ,
Marylou Hill, John W. Tolbert, Jr. , and Howard M. Willis, Jr. ; also
Town Manager John Niccolls , Assistant to the Manager for Community
Development Marc Weiss, Director of Finance Donald O. Taylor and
Town Attorney George M. Martin.
The minutes of the regular meeting of March 24 were corrected
by Mr. Bos as follows : Page 1 , last line - should read "intense" :
Page 2 - his comments re meeting with Water Control Board, next to
• last line - should read " gave a rather negative impact on the
Board, "as opposed to Mr. Hill ' s presentation " The minutes
were then approved as corrected.
PUBLIC HEARING ON ZM-39 - RANDALL W. and DELORES Y . DeHART:
The Public Notice of Hearing was read by the Clerk. Mayor Hill
declared the hearing opened and asked those speaking to try to keep •
their comments as brief as possible in order that everyone might be .
heard.
PROPONENTS :
Mr. E. William Chapman, attorney representing the applicants,
owners of the subject property on Memorial Drive, tendered the
Affidavit required by the Zoning ordinance concerning the posting
of the property for this hearing. He also asked that certain docu-
ments to be discussed be made part of the record of the hearing -
the current Comprehensive Plan; the KDA proposal; resume of Mr.
Wagner; certain photographs of similar projects ; the traffic im-
pact analysis of SG Associates; Mr. Spielberg ' s resume; petitions
of 26 doctors who have indicated endorsement of this project; pe-
titions
of approximately 80 other citizens or property owners en-
dorsing the project; the South Harrison Street Redevelopment Plan;
two separate tentative site plans of a condo to be referred to.
This parcel of land has been before the Council previously,
however , he felt there are some distinguishing factors concerning
the use to which his client intends to put the property as well as
his desires. Mr . and Mrs . DeHart are not contract purchasers of
the property, but currently own it. It is zoned R-2 and, under
existing regulations , somewhere between 23 and 28 residential units
of the duplex or clustered duplex type can be put upon the property.
They originally filed an application seeking B-1 zoning and, after
the hearing by the Planning Commission and a staff report by Mr .
Forbes stating that the proposed rezoning did not conform to the
adopted plan, they withdrew without prejudice. Mr. Forbes ' report
also said that, if the owner proffers to the Council that the land
will be used only for those uses permitted in the MC District, then
the proposed rezoning would comply - this is what they. are here for.
No staff report has been prepared in response to their subsequent
application , so he assumes the position of the staff remains basi-
cally the same. So they are now in compliance with the 1974 plan,
which specifically designates this particular parcel for an. exten-
sion of the hospital-type uses . There is no doubt about the avail-
ability of services in Leesburg for a project of the type they are
talking about, as well as the needs to which the property could be
currently put under the R-2 category. There will be much criti-
cism tonight - many objections that they are intruding upon a
neighborhood that is residential in character. North of this
property is the hospital ; immediately west is the Wynkopp Nursing
Home; immediately east and adjacent to their property is the Ordi-
nary, which is currently not in use; south across Market Street
within half a block there are churches ; on the north side of Mar-
ket within half a block is a library - none of these are residential
type uses. The argument that they are intruding upon a residential
neighborhood really needs to be analyzed and thought about by the
Council tonight as they hear objections - is this a valid argument?
14
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
355
They propose office condominiums for medical related uses. He
exhibited the tentative site plan prepared by Beery, Rio and As-
sociates, pointing out existing buildings . This is the general
format of the site plan they are talking about utilizing for the
property assuming it is rezoned. The fundamental question Council
will have to hear, address and ultimately decide is what is an ap-
propriate use for this parcel of ground? Is it appropriate to keep
it as is (R-2) and have 24 to 28 duplexes (every unit must have a
driveway cut) or is it a more appropriate use to rezone it into an
MC category? There would be no question of control over the de-
velopment process through the town ' s `ordinances. This is not only
an appropriate use (MC) but the best use for the Town. He urged
Council to vote in favor of this rezoning. He asked for time to
rebut at the close of the hearing.
Mr . F. P. Spielberg of SG Associates gave an in depth traffic
impact analysis for the , -proposed- medical office development on
the subject land. In conclusion, the traffic flow along Memorial
Drive, Market and Cornwall Streets will not be significantly af-
fected by the proposed office complex. The intersections at Mar-
ket Street and Memorial Drive and at Memorial Drive and Cornwall
Street will continue to operate at Level-of-Service A (the highest
level of service that can be achieved) . Proposed parking satis-
CD fies the requirements of the zoning code and also complies with
uct independent estimates of required parking for medical office build-
ings.
Q Mr. Whitney Wagner of Beery, Rio & Associates , architects, said
Q they have done about 1 , 000 , 000 plus square feet of this transitional
type residential town house offices all up and down the eastern sea-
board. They have done 20 to 21 projects and have four or five under-
way at the present time. He distributed small photos of the pro-
posed project to the audience, stating that Council has already re-
ceived a larger version. They have made a great deal of effort to
make them look residential in appearance - they have interspersed
one and two-story buildings - they have used pitched roofs - they
' have used a lot of colonial detailing - they have, in general , tried
to make them look residential in scale and in feeling, even more so
residential than a town house. Usually this type of use goes into
a transitional category. In 10 or 12 of the projects they have been
involved with rezoning . The density in this type zone is usually
way down and they usually have green space or landscaped areas in
about 30 percent of the site as opposed to the 10 to 15 percent
usually seen in commercial areas. There is an excess of parking -
better than one per 200 square feet. They can compare this to
Colonial Square - it is a similar type project. This project is
less dense, there is more parking and more landscaping and the fa-
cade is reduced. They have tried to keep the parking away from the
residential lots and have provided a very thick landscape screen.
On the two sites combined, there would be 22 units - 11 single and
11 two-story.
Mr. Randy DeHart, co-owner of the property in question, said his
research and efforts to acquire this property began in 1978 . In the
four years hence, he has familiarized himself thoroughly with the
history of the property - it has been zoned R-2 since the 1950 ' s,
when the town was in the earliest stages of its zoning efforts.
This zoning classification has held fast during the continuous ex-
pansion of the hospital - it is contiguous to the right-of-way for
Memorial Drive, which has become the primary access to the hospital.
I/ In June of 1974 the Town ' s most recent Comprehensive Plan was adopted.
This document calls for this property to be used for semi-public use -
and it includes the MC designation they are requesting. It was this
information, coupled with a significant amount of market research,
that they used in determining the purchase of this property in 1980.
Tonight is the climax of an effort of almost four years and he is
more convinced that the subject property is improperly zoned for
today ' s Leesburg. He has been told his application will be judged
on three criteria : (1) whether or not they are in compliance with
the Comprehensive Plan, (2) the proposed rezoning ' s effect on the
community and (3) whether or not there is a need for the proposed
facilities. With regard to (1) , he did not feel there is any
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
356
disagreement over the fact that they are in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan - Mr. Forbes has continually ruled that the MC
classification does fall under the semi-public use category set
forth in the present plan. Kamstra, Dickerson and Associates recom-
mends development for medium to low density office commercial for
these two tracts of land. KDA also recommends that medical and
health facilities be maintained and expanded in this area as the
need arises . No-one questions the credentials of the KDA firm,
therefore, Criteria No. 1 is a cut and dried issue. As to Cri-
teria No. 2 - the effect of the rezoning on the community - there
is no such thing as a "no effect" project - whatever is done will
have some effect, whether it be positive or negative. This proj-
ect will have more positive and less negative effects than any du-
plex property would have. This project has been discussed with
the Hospital authorities and they have not taken- a position rela-
tive to this project. Their letter states their concerns, which
are also the developer ' s concerns, and will be whether the property
is developed commercially or residentially. In their discussion
with the Fire Marshal , he has indicated that it will be the re-
sponsibility of his office to see that the project meets all fire
and emergency access requirements and that all structures meet Fire
Code regulations. There will be no further statement from his of-
fice with regard to this project. Mr. Wagner has expounded on how
well this type of project serves as .a transition between a resi-
dential and commercial or professional area.. Council has seen their
preliminary development plan, heard about the floor area ratio, the
probable traffic flow, the parking requirements, which are now some
300 percent of what was required at the Jackson Building and at Co-
lonial Square. The town ' s ordinances dictate these parking require-
ments. Mr . Shope and his staff will thoroughly scrutinize their site
development plans and this will significantly affect any traffic
flow. All off-site development will be bonded according to ordi-
nance requirements. The Board of Architectural Review must approve
the design prior to issuance of any permits. In each of these areas,
the town remains in absolute control. He asked Council to envision
24 to 28 duplexes along Memorial Drive, each with two off-street park-
ing spaces , 48 trash cans, one garbage truck along the emergency
access to the hospital , kids, bicycles , residents possibly backing
onto Memorial Drive. He called attention to a petition signed by
some 80 residents and/or property owners in Leesburg who feel that
open or developed land is no longer the choice - they feel that
medical facilities would be the best use of the property - this
would benefit the town as a whole, both economically and aestheti-
cally. Among these names are ex-councilmembers, Cornwall Street
residents , business and professional people who represent Lees-
burg ' s tax base; also, people who removed their names from a pe-
tition earlier submitted to the Planning Commission as being op-
posed to the project. He asked that Council note their conspicu-
ous absence on any list the opposition might present. These peo-
ple canvassed the Colonial Square,Sn& found that this type of proj-
ect does make a good neighbor. If a "no effect" policy becomes a-
requirement of a developer, the economic development posture of the
town will be in jeopardy. In the fall of 1980 , the Council adopted
"economic development" as its No. 1 goal .
As to Criteria No. 3 , although they question the legality of this
requirement, he will show there is a need for this type of facility
and that the need is present now. The Hospital officials have said
that for some time they have had provisions for similar type facili-
ties in their long-range plan, the feeling being that in order to
have good physicians, you must have good office facilities . In
the binder presented by their attorney, there is a petition of
medical practitioners. This reads the same as the previous one,
with the addition of one sentence - "As qualified occupants with-
in an MC zone, we feel that there is a definite need for this type
of facility and would consider the purchase of one or more units
for our own use. " They approached 28 doctors and got 27 signatures .
There are some 60 local professionals that qualify for use of such
facilities . His problem was that he did not have these units readily
available for sale. The Town Council adopted, on April 14 , 1982 ,
the South Harrison Street Community Development Project Comprehen-
sive and Redevelopment and Revitalization Plan. Under "Economic
Analysis of the Project Area" this report says that discussion with
officials of the Loudoun Memorial Hospital indicates a need for medi-
cal offices for the hospital physicians. Parcels available for
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING. 9
development within the South Harrison Street Project area 3 57
are not suitable for this type of use. The Hospital , the doctors,
the consultants and he all feel there is a need for this project
and nowthe Council also feels there is a need for it. Where in
this town can that need be more aptly satisfied than on both sides
of Memorial Drive? As to the economic impact - they are proposing
some 21 medical condo units, with a total of 38 , 233 square feet
and with a total fair market value of $3 . 8 million dollars; as op-
posed to 21 potential residential duplex units, at a fair market
value of $1 . 44 million dollars. Look at the difference in annual
revenue to the town and the difference in cost of services to a
professional facility vs. a residential facility.
He referred to Mr. Griffith' s report to the Planning Commission,
wherein he said that "contingent residential zoning is the safer
course for the town to pursue at this time" Safer? Might it not
be safer if the town withdrew its annexation efforts? Or if it
had not built the new water treatment plant? Or the brick side-
walks? Or drop the plans for expansion of the sewage treatment
plant? Is a safe course what we are seeking? He applauds all
those acts and sees them as being progressive, far-sighted and
in the best interest of the town and its citizens. Mr . Griffith
said 'There does not appear to be a pressing public need for addi-
O tional MC-zoned land at this time . " He also says "Rezoning to MC
is contrary to good zoning practice, which seeks to separate widely
differing uses such as residential and offices. " Is it not good
7 planning and zoning procedure to draft and adopt a Master Plan and
Q then stick by it? The town has employed a number of professionals
a with a variety of backgrounds and expertise and it seems that all
recommendations on Memorial Drive and medical office facilities
have been consistent. He challenged Council to sort the facts
from the emotion it will hear tonight - cast your vote for the
project that will be good for the town and the surrounding com-
munity, whether that community understands this tonight or whether
it takes them some time to thank Council for its foresight.
Dr . Riley Boone, a surgeon who has been practicing in Lees-
burg for the past 11 years and who has been Chief of Staff at
Loudoun Hospital for the last two years, said he knows the physi-
cians and their needs . He is in his third office now and even
it is not totally satisfactory. He and other physicians and
surgeons would appreciate a place that would be close to the hos-
pital , as well as convenient for patients. The long-range plans
for the hospital include a good medical facility close by so
it can attract good physicians .
Mr . David Dodds, a resident of the historic district for the
past 13 years, said the issue is whether the town will continue
to hold on to that innate quality which makes it a good place to
live, with people living in the downtown area, or will Leesburg
become just another town where houses are no longer homes, but
have been converted to offices? Each week the Times-Mirror ad-
vertises homes in the downtown area for "commercial potential"
or "commercial prime investment property. " He believes the major
reason for this is the lack of office space or suitable land on
which to build in the downtown area. If the town is to attract
business and industry, it needs a thriving, lively downtown and
quality health care. The second item is at issue here tonight.
Leesburg is the focus of the health care community of Loudoun
County and, as such, plays an important role in how we are viewed
I/ - as a place for business and industry to locate. If the health
care community is allowed to grow and thus serve the needs of
Leesburg and Loudoun County, we would be evaluated as a good place
to live and Leesburg will continue to prosper. He believed MC..zoning
in the subject area would benefit Leesburg - it would provide
needed space for the health care community, increase the tax base and
protect our old historic homes from developmental. pressures. The
second issue does affect the first - health care supports a thriving
downtown Leesburg. If our historic homes are pressured into con-
version for professional offices , who will there be to populate
the neighborhood? Tourists and commuters. He and his wife sup-
port this rezoning.
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
358
Mr. Terry Titus, resident, taxpayer and freeholder in Leesburg,
said he partially owns a similar unit in Colonial Square and he did
not feel that Colonial Square is a burden on the neighborhood. As
a resident of Leesburg and Loudoun County, it is time that people
speak up at public hearings to endorse economically viable projects,
yet they are potentially unpopular. For too long, he and others have
sat by and watched the vocal opposition vote projects down. It is
time to speak out for some managed growth, especially those as po-
tentially tax positive as this one appears . Mr. DeHart plans to
build this project - he has done several other projects in town,
all of which are attractive, an asset to the community and which
show his track record. He urged Council to consider this project
for its economic viability and as an expansion of the tax base.
The Council represents the entire community of this town and not
just a small group of citizens that live in a particular area.
OPPONENTS :
Col . Michael C. Grenata • rejected some of the statements made
by the supporters of this project. The Comprehensive Plan provides
for MC zoning - the zoning in the Comprehensive Plan is merely a
guide - it is not a mandate. Council should consider all the state-
ments made tonight. The statement was made that there are many
buildings in the vicinity of this tract, such as the hospital,
the library and others - they were all there before the town adopted
a zoning ordinance and have no bearing on this particular subject.
The traffic engineer pointed out that much of the traffic would
come down Market Street and very little down West Cornwall - Market
Street is a very busy street, particularly during rush hours, so
people leaving the project will look for the street with less traf-
fic - this would be West Cornwall. The traffic plans do not in-
clude the additional traffic expected when the hospital addition
is built - they plan to add two more stories to the present building.
This will certainly increase traffic . It was said that the area is
improperly zoned R-2 - he suggested that it should be R-1 . There
are only five houses in northwest Leesburg that are not single-family
homes. There is only one new duplex - the rest became two-family ,
homes because the owners set up an apartment within their homes.
He suggested that the petition presented be examined very carefully
to see whether or not some of these people are new residents who
are not familiar with what the town and the county are trying to
preserve - the best in historical qualities. Newcomers always
want to do what they did in the place from which they came.
This area is a part of the Old and Historic District and the
rezoning of this 3-acre tract would be spot zoning. This would
be a massive intrusion which would erode and eventually destroy
the adjacent residential area. The proposed MC zoning is a varia-
tion of the B-1 commercial zoning and could consist of commercial
buildings, parking lots and a high level of traffic - this type of
zoning would spread in all directions . People would move out and
their homes would be used for commercial, the green lawns would be-
come parking lots as in the business district. The result would
be that the historic area would be ruined. The KDA representative
based his recommendation on questionable facts which make that
recommendation invalid. He said the magnitude of existing and
foreseeable traffic makes this property unfavorable for residential
development - the volume of traffic now is extremely light - it is
the proposed rezoning that would increase the traffic to a high
level intolerable to the area. The KDA representative also said
the value of the land would indicate that high density housing or
MC construction would be needed for financial feasibility - this
is an improper consideration in determining suitable zoning. A
local realtor believes it could be developed as R-2 residential at
a reasonable profit. KDA further recommended that the extension of
commercial on South King Street beyond the former location of Hirst
Lumber Company be not made as it would deteriorate the established
residential area and cause traffic congestion and other conflicts.
However, he had no hesitation in eroding the historic area in north-
west Leesburg. These same facts were presented to Council when the
KDA representative was present - he heard these objections and he
did not challenge them. The Town Plan shows there is a surplus
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
of land zoned commercial - this could be used for MC construction 59
if needed. The Plan states that the historic area should be pre-
served and intends just that. The town has a commitment to these
people in a residential area as a fit place to live and raise their
families . The historic residential district is a valuable tourist
attraction - tourism in Loudoun County in 1980 generated $22 , 556 , 000,
provided employment for 612 persons who earned $4 , 703, 000 and pro-
duced $248 , 000 in sales taxes for Loudoun. The number of tourists
in 1981 was 23, 452 , an increase of 38 percent over the 1980 count.
This is an impressive number and is expected to increase in the fu-
ture. KDA says there is an urgent need for parks in Leesburg and
has urged the Council to address this problem. Colonel Grenata
said the best use for this 3-acre tract would be to use it as a
passive park. He suggested that each member of the Council walk
through this area and get the feel of it and learn to love it as
those who live there do. The Planning Commission has rejected
KDA' s recommendation in the Town Plan to rezone the 3 acres B-1
Commercial for institutional use related to the hospital and recom-
mended that the R-2 Residential zoning be retained and has denied
the applicant ' s request for MC zoning . It is requested that the
council do likewise.
N Mr. Mike Blair of 81 West Market Street and who works for a
O developer in Fairfax County that every year develops the equiva-
lent residential capacity of the entire Town of Leesburg, had the
following comments : (1) Traffic - Using Mr. Spielberg ' s traffic
7 plan and his count of approximately 156 trips per hour for 10 hours,
Q Mr. Blair said this would make 1560 trips per day - this is a lot
a of trips . The last VDH&T traffic count on West Market Street was
in 1979, with an average of 5960 - they are looking for approximately
a 26 percent increase on Market Street alone. There would be about
144 trips per day if this is developed as multiple family housing
versus 1560 - this is almost 13 times the traffic coming out of that
street. (2) Need - Mr. Blair felt the commercial interests have
done well in Leesburg. This morning he rode around Leesburg and
found 38 commercial properties in Leesburg that have For Rent or
For Sale signs on them - this is a lot of open empty space. There
are three units for sale in the Colonial Square project and there
are 10 new units at Route 15 and the By-Pass. He could count only
50 doctors and dentists in town and a good part of these are in
owned facilities . There are a few practitioners that have multiple
doctors in the practice - they would probably come into this project.
Out of the 26 or 27 doctors signing the petition, you might?Ib that
would sign on the dotted line . This is, therefore, a long-range
project. He concluded that there is no need for this project.
There are a number of other permitted uses in that zone. Once it
is zoned MC, what they get and what they hear and see are not neces-
sarily the same. As economic conditions change, we could end up
with a nursing home or a boarding house in an MC zone. He doesn' t
want that.
Why are we putting in the proposed Master Plan into the record?
He spoke in front of this council on the amendment to it - he believes
this wording was changed. Mrs. Hill said the Planning Commission
did change it, but this council has not taken any action on the
Plan. Mr. Blair said the architect gave them something over one
parking space per 175 feet. Mr. Wagner said the plan is for one
per 200 square feet. Mr. Blair said they are limited to at least
20 percent for green space. He is still convinced that they are
trying to put commercial use in a residential area. It is resi-
I/ dential. This is a clear case of commercial zoning creep - it
will continue with its inherent domino effect, just as it went
up East Loudoun Street. If this goes through, his house will be
commercial in five years and he will not be there any longer.
•
Mr. Fred Flemming, an owner of property on Cornwall Street,
asked if the Planning Commission members are appointed by the
Council? Yes, they are. He, therefore, felt it would be in the
best interest that the Council endorse the recommendation made
by the Planning Commission - to deny the rezoning in this appli-
cation. He also read a letter by Mr. and Mrs. McDonald of 106
West Market Street - they are totally opposed to this rezoning
and to any other "spot zoning" in the lovely historic district.
3 CO MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
U Mrs. Patricia Devine, who lives next door to the subject prop-
erty, resubmitted for the record her calculations estimating traffic
flow and parking volume which would derive from business or medical
use of the subject tract of land. She used the Institute of Trans-
portation Engineers Informational Report for 1976 , as did Mr. Spiel-
berg, to estimate traffic flow, etc . She, as well as Mr. Blair,
gets 15. 2 times as much traffic for MC use as for residential use.
Mr. Wagner, as well as Mr. DeHart, commented on the transition of a
residential to a commercial neighborhood. - this is accurate - this
is what we are talking about. There is very little residential
neighborhood left near the downtown area and in the historic dis-
trict - this is the basic question - do you want this total and fi-
nal gradual but complete transition to occur as it surely will if
this zoning change is made? The current Town Plan in effect does
still have that land zoned R-2 , so there is no planning conflict.
The need for this rezoning was discussed only from the viewpoint of
the doctors . There are other needs as well - the patient or the
boarding house occupants or whoever: lives there - anyone using those
offices will be driving. Few patients drive straight from the doc-
tor ' s office to the hospital , so the need is purely for the owner-
occupants, the doctors, but they are only a very small segment.
The hospital, the Planning Commission and the people living in the
neighborhood are all against this rezoning - there is already a
lot of property zoned for doctors ' offices. This will have a bad
effect on the community. They are not talking about aesthetics -
they are talking about land use. Yes, there are a lot of offices
that are better looking than some houses, but we have no control
over which goes in - this is not the point. She would rather live
next door to children, dogs and garbage cans than to offices. Of-
fices also have garbage cans - they also have delivery trucks, noisy
air conditioning units and they leave lights on all night long. If
you prefer to live in an office area, then do so - people don ' t choose
a residential area unless they want to live next door to people.
She hoped Council will keep this land residential .
Mr. Fred Williams, a resident of West Cornwall Street, said he
has spoken to Council before about the effect of such rezoning on
the children. He takes issue with Mr. Chapman ' s statement that
this is not a residential area. He counted over 25 children in
this area. He has to park on the street and there is only room
enough for one car to get by - there is sidewalk on only one side
of the street. If traffic is increased to the extent indicated
tonight, we place the lives of these children in jeopardy. This
is a fact. As to the need for medical offices, his father is a
doctor in Williamsburg and, after having his office next door to
the community hospital for many years, he has just moved three or
four miles away and he didn ' t lose his patients. Such offices are
just as effective in other areas of town.
Mrs. Joan Williams, a resident of West Market Street and who has
been in Leesburg for 45 years, said her husband built a small house
on a derelict miniature golf course on the edge of a rural slum on
Market Street. Since then, the few hovels that were there have
either been pulled down or redone, and that end of Market Street is
now the nicest residential area of Leesburg. There are old and new
and big and small houses and there is both black and white owner-
ship. Most of the houses are lived in by their owners and all are
very well cared for . She did not fear this bit of spot zoning, but
feels that Mr. and Mrs. Peale would not have built their lovely
home in this area had they felt the Council would let them down.
This is only a start - the whole town would be let down. She and
Winslow own about an acre abutting Memorial Drive - their houses
take only about a third of it and the rest is their yard. They
would certainly not apply to have this piece zoned commercial .
She hoped Council will not let this be the beginning of the end of
the historic area of Leesburg.
Mrs. Helen Williams said her thoughts are the same as Mrs . Joan
Williams. If Council allows this and does not support the historic
district, it will be the beginning of the end. As commercial, one
will follow another. This is "the tip of the iceberg. "
Mr. Stephen Price, who lives at the corner of Cornwall and Lib-
erty Streets, said the real question is whether or not the hospital
or an established residential area is going to determine the character
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
361
of this vacant land. He comes down on the side of the established
residential neighborhood for several reasons : (1) it is fair to
the existing residents, who have invested money, time and energy
into making their homes into pleasant, attractive and comfortable
homes in which to live; (2) if this area is converted into office
space, there will be pressure to rezone surrounding areas for simi-
lar office-commercial type space. It is important to the town, in
a commercial sense, to have a viable residential area near downtown.
Many of his family and neighbors patronize the businesses along King,
Market and Loudoun Streets. Should this area be developed into of-
fice space, the effect on the merchants will not be favorable - it
I/ will see the decline of downtown Leesburg. It is important to main-
tain this residential area in fairness to the residents and to the
downtown merchants. He has heard no convincing testimony or opinion
offered that these medical offices need to be on this particular tract
of land. Once the town finishes its annexation proceedings, there
will be a lot of land for medical offices. It probably would be
convenient for the doctors to have their offices this close to the
hospital, but this must be weighed against the needs and interests
of everyone else in the community. Concerning Colonial Square, which
is a very attractive addition to the Edwards Ferry Road area,
there is inadequate parking and cars are parked all along Edwards
Ferry Road. Colonial Square vindicates the citizens of Leesburg who
O have been here and have been urging a domino theory on Council. All
you have to do is look at the church and the parsonage that sits di-
_) rectly behind Colonial Square - they are now office space. You can
probably expect each and every lot on that block gradually becoming
Q commercial . If this vacant tract is rezoned to office development,
Q it will have the effect of having the rest of the neighborhood going
the same way. Someone else said tonight that if this area is con-
structed for medical offices, it will have the effect of relieving
pressure on the owners of the old homes to convert their homes into
office space. He doesn' t see such a demand - that could take place
only if this body rezones such areas to commercial . He urged Coun-
cil to preserve this area for continued residential use so the peo-
ple in the neighborhood can continue to live in this quiet, peace-
ful atmosphere and raise their families.
Judge Carleton Penn, who owns a home about 200 yards from the
subject property, was concerned as to what this "spot zoning" would
do to the whole town. If Council grants this rezoning, the door
will be opened and whoever is similarly situated in other residen-
tial areas of town will face the same economic detriment that the
people in this area will face. The diagram of the traffic flow
makes Cornwall look almost as wide as Memorial Drive, but this is
not so. The hard surface west of this project is 18 ' 2" wide with
no parking on it and at a point east of the project it is 21 ' 8" .
He suggested that the expert opinions from out of town belie the
fact that people will go either east or west on Cornwall Street
to get to the main street - none of these exits are good places
to turn into traffic . There is no parking on Memorial Drive and a
lot of these people would park on the residential streets, just as
they do in Winchester, where some residents put garbage cans, planks,
etc . in spaces in front of their homes so they will have a place to
park when they return from taking children to school or from the
grocery store. This has caused a problem in Winchester that re-
sulted in litigation. If this zoning is approved, there will be
other applications for rezoning in adjoining areas . This is a
spot zoning. Council should look to see what uses are permitted in
an MC zone - he didn ' t think councilmembers would want some of them
next to their homes. If this is a proffer situation, after Mr.
DeHart sells all of these units, someone else couldcome along and
want to do something different and the town would have to bear the
expense of any litigation to enforce the conditions of a proffered
zone. This is something that should not be done. He found out this
afternoon that hospitals are permitted in an R-2 zone, or it can grow
this way. He asked that Council represent the people of this town
and those who voted for them - not someone from outside who wants
to make a buck at the expense of those in town.
Miss Nancy Bradfield, of East Cornwall Street, said they have
old houses too, one built in the 1700 ' s and several in the 1800 ' s.
If we let spot zoning in the one end of the street, theirs will
have to go too.
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
362
Mr. Donald W. Devine, who lives just east of the property, said
Mr. DeHart leans heavily on KDA' s recommendation that this area be-
come an MC category. The only reasons he can see for justification of
this in the report are that traffic is incompatible with the residen-
tial use and that it is not financially feasible to develop this prop-
erty as a residential use. The figures of Mr. DeHart ' s expert show
that traffic will increase in that area as a result of MC zoning,
therefore, the first basis of KDA' s recommendation fallsby the way-
side. Anyone knowing property values in that area knows that it can
be profitably developed as a residential area. . If you accept the con-
cept of zoning, you accept the idea that zoning is based on separat-
ing one use from another for the mutual benefit of both. You must
draw a line somewhere, so there must be a commercial zone somewhere
in the town that comes right up to a residential zone, but there is
usually an extent of each zone. The architect called his condo a
"transitional type" and said he tried to make it look residential.
He could not understand why he is putting a commercial use into a
residential zone and trying to fool everybody by making it look like
a residence, particularly on this property. He could understand it
if it were on the edge of a residential zone and they wanted to tran-
sition into a commercial zone, but not here. They are actually creat-
ing in the midst of a residential zone a small packet of commercial .
There is no transition - it is surrounded by residential . If this
were done, then others would come in and ask for rezoning - eventually
it would meet the commercial area. The only way to prevent this is
not to rezone the first tract as such. The house he lives in was
140 years old when he bought it and he has lived there for 25 years.
Council owes it to these people to leave it as it is - this is the
only way to preserve the old and historic area. He wished Mr . DeHart
luck in developing this property - he feels he can develop it and make
some money. He bought the land as R-2 and so did those who bought
homes in the area - let it stay that way. He and his neighbors have
no complaint about the hospital - it is a public institution which
we must have - if they want to expand it or put a parking lot beside
him, he will not complain about it .as long as it is owned by the hos-
pital. He asked Council to follow the Planning Commission ' s recom-
mendation and deny this application.
Mr. Thomas Monahan said he has a personal interest in this be-
cause he goes out that road in the evenings and comes back and he
really doesn ' t want to see something go in there that will increase
the traffic 10 to 15 times what it is now, particularly at rush hour.
This , however, is a small matter in terms of the total zoning. Dr.
Boone said he has been a practicing surgeon for 11 years and is in
his third office and looking for a fourth. All the doctors in Win-
chester seem to look for office space too until they form a clinic
and buy sufficient land on the edge of town so that five to ten of
them can practice together. The area west of Route 50 across from
James Wood High School is occupied by no less than five separate
multiple doctor clinics - the attraction being that they can practice
together, support each other and don 't find this inconvenient to the
hospital . All the growth in Winchester in the last 10 years in terms-
of doctors ' offices has occurred away from the hggktal . There is
one major building within a block of the hospital was purchased for
doctors ' offices but has not been utilized. If Mr. DeHart puts in
20 to 25 units on that limited size property, it will end up being
used for ancillary uses permitted under Article 4C of the Town' s
Zoning Ordinance unless he has made a proffer.
Mr. Monahan said that Article 11-1 of the Town' s Zoning Ordinance
provides that rezoning should be accomplished "whenever the public
necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice re-
quires . "
This is not a matter of public necessity - certainly there
is not only this tract available for MC. On the basis of the Win-
chester experience, doctors will look for larger tracts where they
can put clinics. etc . It is said that this is convenient to the hos-
pital - you have heard the Williamsburg and Winchester experiences -
there is no special public convenience. It can be as much served in
other aspects by the clinic-type offices elsewhere and letting doctors
work in groups there as it is to have the serious patient at the hos-
pital. The general welfare is not served by this - it would not sup-
port the destruction of this residential and historic district. As for
being good zoning practice - it does not qualify - it is not good zoning
practice to alter for an unnecessary reason an existing stable resi-
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
dential neighborhood. None of those purposes can be equated to 363
economic advantage to the developer - that ' s not the purpose of
good zoning. The Lerner case put this thought to rest two years
ago when that zoning was denied, although it amounted to a loss of
about $4 , 000 , 000 in difference in value. You would have here a
"spreading cancer" or a "dangerous precedent. " This is quoted from
a case of Town Council versus Jackson in the Supreme Court in 1980.
In this instance, the rezoning application was denied even though
the request was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Supreme
Court did not find that controlling - a Comprehensive Plan is a long-
range possible plan and is reviewed on a periodic basis - changes
may occur . The only promise made to a citizen when he buys land is
this is what your land is zoned now. - there is no promise for anything
else in the future. The Supreme Court so held in that particular case
where it was attempted to change residential to commercial use. The
Court stated "The question is not merely whether the refusal to re-
zone is unreasonable, rather the more precise inquiry is whether. the
landowner or the legislative body has the right to select the zoning
category when the underlying zoning and the proposed zoning are both
reasonably applicable to the subject property. " It is the Council ' s
job to make the decision. On this basis, if you make such a change
you will not be able to stop with this piece of property. Mr. Mona-
han quoted from other cases - from Board of Supervisors of Fairfax
O County v. Allman-"A discriminatory action is an arbitrary and ca-
pricious action and bears no reasonable or substantial relation to
the public health, safety, morals or general welfare. The reasonable-
-) ness of the Board ' s action is not fairly debatable and it will not be
Q sustained. " From the Jackson case - "stand for the proposition at a
a minimum that the proper scope of the zoning power is a purpose to pre-
serve relatively stable areas of homogeneous use from incompatible
changes. " This is what you are being asked to do by the opponents -
There are residential homes of magnificent beauty in that area, a
residential area that is part of the historic district - to make this
change would be the opening wedge for the "spreading cancer" which
would destroy that homogeneous use. In Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County v. International Funeral Services, Inc . , the Court
stated "It is not enough that the suggested change might have been
more appropriate or even the most appropriate use for the Board.
The burden is on the one seeking change to prove both the unreason-
ableness of the current zoning classification and the reasonableness
of the proposed use. " Council has not heard one word about meeting
the necessary requirement to prove the unreasonableness of the cur-
rent zoning classification. He asked that Council overrule this.
He submitted a list of some 32 households that have asked him to
speak for them. There followed discussion between Mr. Herrell and
Mr . Monahan concerning theEuture possibility of a property owner on
the north side of Cornwall Street (namely, Mr. Hetzel) requesting
rezoning to MC because he abuts an MC zone. Council could turn this
down. Mr. Monahan said one of the major distinctions with respect
to attempting to draw zoning lines is whether they use the same
roads - this is a criteria. The distinction is that the MC prop-
erties behind the north side of Cornwall Street use a different
traffic network. The Jackson case talks about "time period" as
well as geographical location.
REBUTTAL:
Mr. Chapman wished to address "the dagger" theory voiced by Mr.
Price. His (Mr. Chapman"s) office is located in Colonial Square -
they almost reach the easternmost block of Cornwall Street and this
did not lead to the wholesale rezoning of that area. With regard to
the next block u on Cornwall Street, the County used the old Regis-
trar ' s building, nhe office of the County Attorney for a short time,
Mr. Stilson Hall ' s building was rezoned for office, King and Corn-
wall is on the opposite corner - all of that activity did not lead
to a wholesale rezoning of that block of Cornwall Street. Across
the street on both corners are offices and those did not lead to
this wholesale rezoning of the next two blocks either, so the
"dagger" theory does not hold a lot of merit in terms of what has
in fact happened in the Town of Leesburg. Mr. Price complained
about parking at Colonial Square - there are a lot of people em-
ployed elsewhere that park in their lot all day and nobody wants
to go around to the back section of this lot. He has never been
• MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
364
unable to find a parking space. As to the need, Mr . DeHart is a
reasonable and prudent business man - he won' t build it if there
is no need for it. They feel there is a real need - all the evi-
dence in this case demonstrates that. With the exception of Mr.
and Mrs. Devine, he did not hear any of the opponents address the
issue of multiple residential housing on that particular parcel.
Everyone spoke that they were opposed to the commercial or proposed
MC-type development of the property. The issue they are trying to
draw is "to keep it open space" and that ' s not going to happen in
this case. Colonel Grenata urged the Council to scrutinize their
petitions to be sure they aren ' t a lot of newcomers and people who
have no interest in what has happened and will happen in the future
in Leesburg. Mr. Chapman encouraged Council to take a look at some
of the 80 signatures of property owners and residents of the town -
he named some of these people who are concerned and who contribute
and have endorsed this project. Arlyn Black ' s name is on their pe-
tition - he is not a resident and does not own property in Leesburg,
but he so enthusiastically supports this project that he accidentally
signed the petition.
A letter from Mrs. Teckla Cox was read into the record, this
letter calling this "inappropriate planning" . The area, with the
exception of the hospital, which has been in its present location
for many decades, is a residential area. The introduction of office
uses is an inappropriate intrusion in an area which has been steadily
maintained in its present land use for the entire historic life of
the town. She hoped the Town Council will deny this application.
Mr. Bos asked if Mr. DeHart or any of his associates has any
traffic figures for Colonial Square? Mr . Chapman said they do not
have, but they will make them available.
Mrs. Hill asked how many units there are in Colonial Square?
Mr. Nalls said there are 22 .
Colonel Grenata suggested that Council scrutinize the petition
very carefully, particularly for ' newcomers and for people belonging
to the building and development industry to see whether there is a
conflict of interest.
Mayor Hill asked Mr. Devine if, under `its present R-2 zoning,
he could live and be satisfied with this property being developed to
its fullest extent under R-2? Mr. Devine said he could, but he
couldn ' t speak for his neighbors. Mayor Hill then asked those in
attendance who are opposed to this rezoning if they could live with
this area being fully developed as R-2? There were not too many to
agree to this. Colonel Grenata said it is the least of two evils.
Mayor Hill declared the public hearing closed.
Mayor Hill declared a 10-minute recess, after which Council re-
convened to hear reports and consider the agenda items.
MANAGER' S REPORT:
Mr. Niccolls referred to the written Activity Report.
COUNCILMEMBER INQUIRIES AND COMMENTS :
Mr. Bos said he has heard a lot of talk about speeding traffic
through the intersection of North Wirt and West North Streets. He
asked that this be passed on to the Police Department.
Mr. Bos also asked about progress on the Potomac Water Plant?
Mr. Niccolls passed around some progress photographs and reported
they expect to have treated water flowing from the plant on June 15.
The plant won ''t be completed 100 percent until probably October.
As to the lawsuit, there will be a report in about two weeks - it
may be appropriate to have Mr. Ney talk to us then.
Mr. Willis noted that the parking lot changes have been accom-
plished. When will the Wirt Street parking changes be made? Mr.
Niccolls said this will be done in a week or so. Mr . Willis asked
that Chief Kidwell be informed of what will be done in this location.
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
365
MAYOR' S REPORT:
Mayor Hill said that Rezoning Application No. ZM-39 by Mr.
and Mrs. DeHart will. be referred to the Finance and Administra-
tion Committee.
The Virginia Municipal League has extended the time to fill
committees for another week (June 14) . Anyone willing to serve on
any of these committees please let the Clerk know.
82-0-14 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING THE LEESBURG ZONING MAP .
On motion of Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Bos, the following
ordinance was proposed :
WHEREAS, rezoning application #ZM-38 by Waterford Investments
was referred to the Planning Commission on January 13, 1982 ,
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on February 4 , 1982 held a
public hearing on the application for rezoning, and
WHEREAS, on March 4 , 1982 the Commission recommended to the
O Council denial of the rezoning request, and
WHEREAS, the applicant ' s written proffer was presented to
Q the Council prior to a public hearing held by the Council
on April 14 , 1982 , and
Q
WHEREAS, it is determined that the public necessity, con-
venience, general welfare or good zoning practice require
this amendment,
NOW, THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Lees-
burg in Virginia as follows :
' SECTION I . The Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is amended to re-
vise the Zoning District Map to change from R-2 to B-1 , ap-
proximately 10, 000 square feet of land located on the west
side of Old Waterford Road, bounded by the property of Wil-
liam and Robin L. Amos on the north, Old Waterford Road on
the east, the property of John Berry, Trustee for Community
Cemetery on the south and the property of Esta Jackson on
the west in accordance with the following proffer:
"Pursuant to Section 15. 1-491 of the Code of Virginia,
as amended, and Section 11-8-4 of the Zoning Ordinance of
the Town of Leesburg, the Applicant, in Zoning Amendment
Petition #38 concerning property referred to as Tax Map
48-A, Parcel 6-13, does hereby proffer the following con-
ditions contingent upon rezoning of the property to the
B-1 zoning category under the applicable Town Zoning Ordi-
nance.
"The Applicant does hereby covenant and agree that if
the rezoning of the property is granted to the B-1 category,
that notwithstanding such rezoning, the uses to which the
property may be put subsequent to the rezoning, shall in-
clude only the uses permitted under the Town of Leesburg
Zoning category MC, plus the use of professional offices
as defined under the B-1 zone.
"The above proffer conditions are the only ones of-
fered on this Rezoning application, and any prior proffers
are hereby declared void and of no force and effect. Fur-
ther, in the event the property is not rezoned to the B-1
category, these proffers shall be of no binding effect upon
the Applicant in any subsequent proceedings . "
SECTION II. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its pas-
sage.
36 r MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
U U Mrs. Hill said the Planning Commission recommended denial of
this application because the developer failed to show a need and
the rezoning is not in accordance with the adopted Comprehensive
Plan for the town. Under the new ordinance, the proffer would
have to go back to the Planning Commission. This was submitted
the same night, so it will not have to go back. Mr . Bos said
this is a difficult vote for him because he essentially favors
the rezoning - it is right around the corner from him. He has
talked with neighbors on North Street and Liberty Street and has
for a long time viewed the two houses there as part of the hospi-
tal complex - they are surrounded by B-1 or MC zoning and are well
buffered or isolated from the area. This is totally different
from the hearing we have just held in terms of the type of zoning,
its location and how it might be used. The house has been an eye-
sore and it is unlikely that anyone will buy it and restore it as
a residence. He felt the applicant will rehabilitate the property
and put it to a reasonable use - it won ' t harm the neighborhood -
in fact, it will help it. He hoped people will not confuse this
with the Memorial Drive property - this is an entirely different
zoning and is not a spot zoning. There is a huge area right next
to it that is zoned the same way and the applicant has proffered
out any objectionable uses . Mrs . Hill said the Planning Commission
used the rationale that it would be the first property to be re-
zoned on Old Waterford Road - there had been several other appli-
cations for rezoning on this road that had been denied. Mr. Bos
said there are two houses in question and they are so well isolated
that he couldn ' t see that this would create a problem on Liberty
Street or on Old Waterford Road. Mr. Herrell felt Council would not
have a leg to stand on if it denied this. Mr. Bos felt this is not
an intrusion into a residential area - the Memorial Drive is such
an intrusion.
Mayor Hill asked if the property owner adjacent to this tract
has any objection to it? Mrs. Hill said Mr. Amos spoke for it - he
would like to have his property rezoned if this is accomplished.
Mr. Bos said he doesn ' t object because he could make more money out
of it if it is rezoned - the house is in relatively poor condition.
This is an isolated area that is part of the hospital complex and
several neighbors on North and Liberty Streets agree. Mayor Hill
said that if the affected people in the area completely object to
rezoning, then he has a sympathetic ear. There are eight acres be-
hind his home now that are zoned R-1 and he would hate to see that
rezoned to anything other than what it is now. This is difficult
when you have to look at the overall picture to decide what is best
for the town. If there is substantial objection by the people liv-
ing in the area, then he has to respect it.
A roll call vote was 4 to 3, thus adopting the proposed ordi-
nance:
Aye : Councilmembers Bos , Cole, Herrell and Willis.
Nay: Councilmembers Hill , Tolbert and Mayor Hill.
82-0-15 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING SECTIONS 12 . 1-32 , 12 . 1-33 and 12 . 1-34
OF THE TOWN CODE REGARDING LEAVE POLICIES FOR
PART-TIME EMPLOYEES .
On motion of Mr. Tolbert, seconded by Mr . Herrell, the follow-
ing ordinance was proposed and unanimously adopted :
ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg in Vir-
ginia as follows :
SECTION I . Section 12 . 1-32 of the Town Code is amended to
read as follows :
Sec . 12 . 1-32 . Application.
The terms of the Article shall not apply to the following
positions and categories of positions :
(a) Full-time seasonal employees .
•
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
367
SECTION II . Section 12 . 1-33 of the Town Code is amended
to read as follows :
Sec. 12 . 1-33. Vacation Leave.
(a) Each employee in the service of the Town shall be
credited with vacation leave after it is earned at the follow-
ing rates :
Regular hours worked Length Amount accrued
per 2-week payroll of per 2-week payroll
Period Service period
80 5 years or 3 . 70
less
80 5 to 15 years 5. 54
80 More than 15 7 . 39
years
70 5 years or 3 . 23
less
CD 70 5 to 15 years 4 . 85
NT
70 More than 15 6 . 46
years
Q 40 5 years or 1 . 85
less
40 5 to 15 years 2 . 77
40 More than 15 3. 69
years
Employees working a regular 40-hour week (80-hour payroll
period) shall use leave based on an 8-hour day. Employees
working a 35-hour week (70-hour payroll period) shall use
leave based on a 7-hour day. Employees working a 20-hour week
(40-hour payroll period) shall use leave based on a 4-hour day.
(b) New employees shall begin accruing sick and vacation
leave during their first full two-week payroll period worked.
(c) All requests for vacation leave shall be submitted
to the applicable Department Head in advance for approval.
In approving vacation leave, department directors shall in-
sure that during the period of approved leave, the employee
is not scheduled to report for court appearances or will be
required to report to work because of staff shortages, major
scheduled projects, projected adverse weather conditions or
other reasons. The Town Manager shall approve the scheduling
of all vacation leave requests .
(d) The Town Manager shall require that all employees use
a minimum of five days of vacation leave of the total accrued
during each year plus all of the vacation leave carry-over
from the previous calendar year to effectively maximize the
period of rest and recuperation provided through time off from
work. Additional days accrued during the year which are not
used may be carried over into the next calendar year only.
Vacation leave required to be used under these rules which
lapses unused into the next calendar year unless time for use
is extended by the Manager for a maximum of 30 days at which
time the employee shall present an approved schedule to use
the excess days during the extended period.
SECTION III . Section 12 . 1-34 of the Town Code is amended to
read as follows :
3c MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
U 8
Sec . 12 . 1-34 . Sick Leave
(a) Each employee in the service of the Town shall be
credited with sick leave after it is earned at the following
rates :
Regular hours worked per Amount accrued per
2-week payroll period 2-week payroll period
80 3. 70
70 3. 23
40 1. 85
Sick leave is earned regardless of the years of service.
Employees working a regular 40-hour week (80-hour payroll
period) shall use sick leave based on an 8-hour day. Employ-
ees working a 35-hour week (70-hour payroll period) shall use
sick leave based on a 7-hour day. Employees working a 20-hour
week (40-hour payroll period) shall use sick leave based on a
4-hour day.
(b) Employee use of sick leave shall be limited to the
following circumstances :
(1) Personal illness or injury.
(2) Visits to physicians, dentists, optometrists -
and other approved medical professionals for
personal health care.
( 3) Quarantine.
(c) To receive paid sick leave an employee must notify
the applicable Department Head within four hours of his start-
ing time unless some other arrangement has been approved by
the Department Head. A physician ' s statement or examination
by a physician designated by the Town may be required.
(d) At the close of each calendar year all unused sick
leave in excess of 21 days shall be converted to extended sick
leave credits. These credits shall accumulate annually and are
used by an employee who has received the limit of his disability
income coverage due to catastrophic illness or other eligible
long term incapacitating circumstance.
(e) Employees who retire from the Town service shall be
paid for 25 percent of their unused extended sick leave credits
accrued during town employment.
(f) Employees who have lost time because of illness or in-
jury and have exhausted sick leave credits may have such time
deducted from vacation leave.
SECTION IV. Section 12 . 1-44 of the Town Code is amended to read
as follows :
Sec. 12 . 1-44 . Application.
The terms of this Article shall apply to part-time as well
as full-time positions . Part time officers and employees shall
receive a paid holiday for the four hours of their normal work
schedule.
SECTION V. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage.
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Cole, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Hill .
Nay: None.
82-0-16 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING SECTION 12 . 1-53 AND SECTION 1271-54
OF THE TOWN CODE REGARDING THE GRIEVANCE PRO-
CEDURE.
On motion of Mr. Herrell, seconded by Mrs. Hill, the following
ordinance was propcsed and unanimously adopted :
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
369
ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg in
Virginia as follows :
SECTION I . Section 12 . 1-53 of the Town Code is amended to
read as follows :
Section 12 . 1-53 . Intent and Application
(a) For the purposes of this grievance procedure a
grievance shall be construed as a complaint or dispute by
an employee relating to his or her employment, including,
but not necessarily limited to: (1) disciplinary actions
involving dismissals, demotions and suspensions; (2) con-
cerns regarding the application, meaning or interpretation
of these rules; (3) acts or reprisal as the result of utili-
zation of the grievance procedure; (4) complaints of dis-
crimination on the basis of race, color, creed or sex; and
(5) reprisal on the part of the town as a result of an em-
ployee ' s participation in the grievance of another employee.
(b) Complaints are not grievable where they involve :
(1) establishment and revision of wages or salaries, position
N classifications or general benefits; (2) work activity ac-
CD cepted by the employee as a condition of employment or work
activity which may be reasonably expected to be a part of the
job content; (3) the contents of ordinances, these rules, or
other established procedures and regulations; (4) failure to
Q promote except where the employee can show established promo-
Q tional policies or procedures were not followed or applied
fairly; (5) the methods, means and personnel by which such
work activities are to be carried on; or (6) discharge, lay-
off or suspension from duties because of lack of work, reduc-
tion in work force or job abolition.
(c) Questions of grievability shall be resolved by the
Town Manager. The grievant may appeal the decision of griev-
ability made by the Town Manager to the Circuit Court for Loud-
oun County, which decision shall be final .
(d) This grievance procedure shall apply only to the fol-
lowing positions and categories of positions :
(1) Career service employees with the exception of
the Clerk of Council.
(2) Uniformed police officers except those who e-
lect to resolve grievances in accordance with
Section 12 . 1-56 : 1 et seq. of this article.
SECTION II . Section 12 . 1-54 of the Town Code is amended to
read as follows :
Sec . 12 . 1-54 . Procedure
(a) Step 1 . The grievant shall verbally present the
facts surrounding the grievance to his immediate supervisor
within 10 days of the date the grievance or dispute occurred.
The supervisor shall render his decision to the grievant with-
in 4 working days from the day the grievance was presented.
(b) Step 2 . If the grievance is not resolved in Step 1,
the employee shall reduce the grievance to writing within five
days and present it to the appropriate department head. It
shall include a statement of the grievance and the facts in-
volved, alleged violation of these rules, the initial deci-
sion of the immediate supervisor and the remedy requested by
the grievant. The Department Head shall arrange a meeting
with the grievant and his immediate supervisor where appli-
cable to review the facts and shall notify the grievant of
his decision in writing within three working days of such
meeting. Step 2 and Step 3 shall be waived if the Town Mana-
ger serves as the grievant ' s immediate supervisor.
g MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
J�0 (c) Step 3. If the grievance is not resolved -in Step
2 , the grievant may ask the Town Manager for a meeting to
discuss the grievance further. Such request must be made
within five working days following receipt of the Depart-
ment Head ' s reply. Such meeting shall be held within two
working days of the date of the request and shall be at-
tended by the grievant, such representatives as he may se-
lect, the Department Head and the immediate supervisor.
The Town Manager shall provide a written decision to the
grievant with a copy to all other attendees , within three
working days of the date of the meeting. This section
shall not be construed as limiting the Town Manager ' s au-
thority to require additional meetings with only the griev-
ant present to discuss matters pertaining to the grievance.
(d) If the Town Manager ' s decision does not resolve the
grievance, the grievant may proceed by requesting a panel hear-
ing with the Board of Grievance Commissioners. Such a request
must be received by the Board within seven working days of the
grievant ' s receipt of the Town Manager ' s decision.
(e) The grievant ' s failure to follow this process or
generate the proper correspondence within the time limits es-
tablished herein shall be construed as a termination of the
grievance.
(f) The respondent ' s failure to comply with all substan-
tial requirements of this article without just cause will, at
the option of the grievant, advance the grievance to the next
step in the grievance process . Failure of the respondent, with-
out just cause, to comply with all substantial procedural re-
quirements of Step 3 of the grievance process shall result in
a decision in favor of the grievant. A grievant may petition
the Circuit Court to order the implementation of any decision
of the grievance panel .
SECTION III . This ordinance shall be in effect upon its pas-
sage.
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Cole, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Hill .
Nay: None.
82-0-17 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING SECTION 12 . 1-49 . 2 OF THE TOWN CODE.
On motion of Mrs. Hill , seconded by Mr. Willis, the following
ordinance was proposed:
ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia
as follows :
SECTION I . Section 12 . 1-49 . 2 of the Town Code is amended to
read as follows :
Sec . 12 . 1-49 . 2 . Employee option benefits program.
The town council may from time to time make appropriations
for an employee option benefits program under which a specified
amount of money is provided annually for each full time employee
for benefits selected by the employee from the following list
of benefits. The employee option benefits program shall be
administered by the manager under the following general poli-
cies :
(1) Employees shall elect from among the optional bene-
fits shown below on an annual basis . New employees
are eligible for optional benefits after .six months
service.
(2) Benefits and payments shall be prorated on a monthly
service basis. Not more than twenty-five percent of
the annual allotment earned may be carried over to
the ensuing fiscal year.
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
371
(3) The health, athletic condition and physical fit-
ness of town employees is of interest and benefit
to the town as employer. Therefore, the manager
is authorized to enter into group or master agree-
ments with providers of health, athletic and physi-
cal fitness services to employees electing such ser-
vices . The agreements may provide for payments by
the town to the providers for health, athletic and
physical fitness services rendered employees.
(4) Each employee may elect to receive any number of
the optional benefits available. The aggregate ex-
penditure by the town per employee shall not exceed
the amount of money specified by the council. Em-
ployees may purchase with their own funds additional
optional benefits above the amount provided by the
town.
(5) Optional employee benefits are approved as follows
at rates and terms to be approved by the town mana-
ger :
N (a) Term life insurance up to $40, 000 per employee
C) in increments of $10, 000.
Cr
(b) Medical (including mental health) , dental and
optical (including eye glasses and corrective
Q lenses) expense reimbursements made semi-annu-
ally to the employee or dependent provided,
however, no payments shall be made which dupli-
cate benefits provided under the town ' s group
health insurance plan.
(c) Employees may elect as an optional benefit to
have the town pay for spouse, family or other
dependent coverages up to the amount authorized
by the council for optional benefits.
SECTION III . This ordinance shall be in effect for claims made
after December 31, 1981 .
Mr. Bos asked Mr . Niccolls to describe briefly what this is. Mr.
Niccolls said the original program put a limitation on medical ex-
pense reimbursement for anyone other than those covered on our in-
surance plan. The thought was that, for audit purposes, we would
know there were no duplicate payments being made. However, there
are so many employees whose spouses are covered elsewhere, but they
perhaps do not have as good insurance or don ' t cover optical or
dental or some other care, so there were employees who were limited
in their employee options . They can now sign a statement to the ef-
fect that these expenses are not covered elsewhere, .submit the bills
and it is their problem if they receive duplicate payments - such
payments would become taxable income. The ordinance was unanimously
adopted :
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Cole, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Hill .
Nay: None.
On motion of Mr . Herrell , seconded by Mrs. Hill , Council voted
unanimously to table a proposed ordinance concerning special speed
limits on certain streets :
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Cole, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Hill.
Nay: None.
82-48 - RESOLUTION - APPOINTING THE PLAZA STREET PARK CITIZENS COM-
MITTEE.
On motion of Mr. Tolbert, seconded by Mr. Herrell, the follow-
ing resolution was proposed:
372 MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
WHEREAS, the Plaza Street Park is an important community
facility; and
WHEREAS, prospective users and beneficiaries of this public
facility should have a formal means to monitor its opera-
tions :
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg
in Virginia as follows :
SECTION I . The Plaza Street Park Citizens Committee is hereby
established for the following purposes :
1. To maintain oversight and review of the operations and use
of Plaza Street Park.
2 . To serve as a liaison between park users and the Town of
Leesburg.
3 . To promote responsible use of the park and to disseminate
information about rules and regulations for its use.
4 . To promote the active participation of parents and community
volunteers in the supervision of the park.
SECTION II . The following members are appointed to the Plaza
Street Park Citizens Committee for a term ending June 30, 1986 :
1. Frances Scott 5. William Owens
2 . Terri Turner 6 . Sandi Kitts
3. Jean Corbin 7 . Keith J. Smith
4 . Betty D'bannion
Mayor Hill said this is his idea and he talked to practically all of
them the day of the dedication. They thought it was a good idea to
continue this committee. The resolution was unanimously adopted:
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Cole, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Hill .
Nay: None.
82-49 - RESOLUTION - ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS , RELEASING A PER-
FORMANCE BOND AND APPROVING A MAINTENANCE BOND
FOR LOT #4 , PARKER SUBDIVISION ON SOUTH STREET.
On motion of Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Herrell , the following
resolution was proposed:
WHEREAS , the developer of Dick ' s Muffler Shop at 181 E. South
Street, Lot 4 , Parker Subdivision, has completed public im-
provements in accordance with the town standards and specifi-
cations and these have been inspected and approved; and the
as-built drawings have been submitted and approved.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg
in Virginia as follows :
SECTION I . The public improvements for Lot #4 , Parker Subdi-
vision are accepted for public use by the town; and
SECTION II . The cash performance bond in the amount of
$3 , 701 . 50 is released and a cash maintenance bond in the
amount of $200 . 00 is approved.
Mr . Herrell asked if anything has been done about water running
down the ditch line and onto the funeral home - there is no curb
there. Mr . Niccolls was not aware of this. Mrs . Hilt understood
he is putting a ground cover on this. The resolution was unanimously
adopted:
Aye : Councilmembers Bos , Cole, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert
Willis and Mayor Hill.
Nay: None.
MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING. 373
82-50 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING DISPOSAL OF THE TOWN ' S WAYNE
MODEL 973 , THREE WHEEL STREET SWEEPER.
On motion of Mr. Willis, seconded by Mr. Herrell, the following
resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted :
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia
as follows :
The manager is authorized and directed to dispose of the sur-
plus Wayne Model 973 , three wheel street sweeper through the
solicitation of sealed bids to be opened on May 21, 1982 .
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Cole, Herrell , M. Hill, Tolbert
Willis and Mayor Hill.
Nay: None .
82-51 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT WITH HORNER, BARKSDALE
& CO. AND MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1982 .
r- On motion of Mr . Herrell , seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the following
O resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted:
T RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia
7 as follows :
QSECTION I . The manager shall execute on behalf of the Town a
contract with Horner, Barksdale & Co. , of Lynchburg, Virginia,
for underwriting and financial consulting services as described
in the April 19 , 1982 proposal of Horner, Barksdale & Co.
SECTION II . An appropriation of $6 , 800 is made from the Gene-
ral Fund to Account No. 1214 . 300, Contractual Services, for
fiscal year 1982 .
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Cole, Herrell, M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Hill .
Nay: None.
82-52 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING NOTICE OF PUBLICATION OF PUBLIC HEAR-
ING- ON APPLICATION #ZM-40 BY RICHARD O. GORE.
On motion of Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Herrell , the following
resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted:
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia
as follows :
A Notice of Public Hearing to consider Application Number
ZM-40 by Richard O. Gore to have rezoned from R-1 to B-2 ,
14 , 685 square feet located on the south side of Davis Avenue
shall be published in the Loudoun Times-Mirror on May 6 , 1982
and May 13, 1982 for public hearing on May 26 , 1982 at 7 : 30
p.m. in the Council Chambers, 10 West Loudoun Street, Lees-
burg, Virginia.
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Cole, Herrell , M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Hill .
Nay: None.
82-53 - RESOLUTION - MAKING APPROPRIATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING
JUNE 30, 1982 .
On 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 :
SECTION I . An appropriation of $300:00 is made from the Gene-
ral Fund to Account #1101 . 300, Contractual Services, for fiscal
year ending June 30 , 1982 .
74 MINUTES OF APRIL 28 , 1982 MEETING.
Mr. Niccolls explained that this is an assessment made by the
Virginia Municipal League to pay expenses for negotiating an elec-
tric contract with VEPCO. All the municipalities join together
and retain special counsel, who is responsible for negotiating the
unified State-wide contract for street lighting, electric power for
pumping and other miscellaneous uses. The State Corporation Com-
mission does not have authority over the municipal use of electric
power, so we have to negotiate directly. This combined negotiation
gives us a stronger hand. The assessment is based on the killowatt
hours used by the respective municipalities. The resolution was
unanimously adopted :
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Cole, Herrell, M. Hill , Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Hill .
Nay: None.
82-54 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING LAND ACQUISITION FOR THE SOUTH
HARRISON STREET REDEVELOPMENT AND REVITALIZA-
TION PROJECT.
There being no objection to consideration, on motion of Mr.
Herrell, seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the following resolution was pro-
posed:
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia
as follows :
SECTION I . The manager shall purchase on behalf of the town
the building at 39 South Harrison Street owned by Herbert
Bryaht Associates and shown on a plat prepared by Bengtson,
DeBell , Elkin and Titus dated August 24 , 1981 at a price of
$3930 . 00
SECTION II . An appropriation is made to account 9150. 725
Land and Building Acquisition, Community Development Program,
in the amount of $4000 . 00 for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1982 .
Mr. Weiss said this is the building on the corner of South and Har-
rison Street. It is in the Old and Historic District, but all the
buildings in there have been reviewed by Mr . Edwards of the Virginia
Historic Landmarks Commission. The only one of any value is the -. •
freight depot. The resolution was unanimously adopted:
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Cole , Herrell , M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Hill .
Nay : None.
Mr. Herrell complimented Mr. Bos for his vote tonight on the
Waterford Investments matter . This is the kind of Council we need.
On motion of Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Herrell , Council voted
unanimously to go into executive session, pursuant to Section 2 . 1-344
of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended (a) , Exemption (6) for dis-
cussion of a legal matter pertaining to annexation :
Aye: Councilmembers Bos, Cole, Herrell , M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Hill .
Nay : None.
On motion of Mr. Tolbert, seconded by Mr. Cole, Council re-
convened. There was no action taken.
On motion of Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the meeting
was adjourned.
I
/ a' ov
Clerk of e Council