Loading...
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