Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout1990_09_26MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 26, 1990 A regular meeting of the Leesburg Town Council was held in the School Board meeting room, 102 North Street~ N.W., Leesburg, Virginia on September 26, 1990, at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Vice-Miyor James E. Clem, with the invocation given by Councilmember Kimball and the Salute to the Flag led by Councilmember Christine Forester. Present were: Vice-Mayor James E. Clem, Councilmembers Georgia W. Bange, Christine M. Forester, Donald A. Kimball, Claxton E. Lovin and William F. Webb. Mayor Sevila will be arriving late. Also present were: Acting Town Manager, Director of Finance Paul E. York, Director of Planning, Zoning and Development Katherine Imhoff, Director of Parks and Recreation Gary Huff, Chief of Plan Review Paul Gauthier, Planners Peter Stephenson and Sally Vecchio and Town Attorney George Martin. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Kimball, the regular meeting minutes of July 11, 1990 and July 25, 1990, were approved as amended by Mrs. Forester, and the special meeting minutes of September 5, 1990, are approved. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb Nay: None Absent: Mayor Sevila PETITIONERS Mr. Clem presented Certificates of Appreciation to Mr. Nelson Downs and Ms. Edna Signor. Mr. Chip Groff, general manager of the Loudoun Times-Mirror and a resident of the Town of Leesburg since 1976, addressed the Council. He referred to his letter addressed to the Mayor and Council and wished to stress a couple of points covered in the letter. They are: public access, proof of publication, guaranteed readership, timeliness, circulation accountability, cost versus value and longevity. These issues are reasons for the Council to not be party to any kind of legislation that would allow legal advertising in non-seconded class publications. Second class publications referred to are under very strict guidelines. He wished to also apologize to Council, staff and to the citizens with regard to the mistake that the Loudoun Times-Mirror made by taking a public notice and not having it in a timely fashion in the paper. It was part of a cancellation notice for that same hearing which the new publication date was actually printed on the cancellation notice and was misfiled. The Virginia Press Association (VPA) which represents both paid and free newspapers in Virginia is vigorously opposed and has testified today in front of the subcommittee of the Courts of Justice in Richmond against this particular vote. Mr. Randy Beaman, general manager of Leesburg Today, addressed the Council who was also in Richmond today and testified before the Senate Subcommittee in the Courts of Justice. The VPA does represent both paid and free circulation newspapers. The subcommittee informally stated that time has come to change. We are asking the Town of Leesburg to send a letter stating that they would like to have the option to choose which newspaper to use. PUBLIC HEARINGS: b. Rezoning Application #ZM-101 by Donald K. Allman Ms. Sally Vecchio, addressed the Council presenting a staff report. She explained that the applicant has requested to rezone 8.05 acres of land located on South King Street encompassing, in ps .% the historic Greenway Farms area and a small portion of land directly north from a R.-1 Resi~;ent al District to a B-1 Downtown Mixed-use Zoning District with proffers. The proposed ~ ev ~1o~ mE st includes a total of 60,000 square feet as follows: 15,000 square feet of corr, mercial retail us ~.s, ~ i4,0 l0 square foot hotel/inn, 30,000 square feet of new commercial developme~,t. Tl~ere i~ ~ ls a si~ .ac 'e library site that continues to be included in the proffers as part of the original application. This application was initiated in 1988, and conditionally approved by the Planning Commission in April 1988. Two Council public hearings were held; June 1988 and March 1989. Prior to Council action it was deferred. The application was brought back to Council in February 1990 and was reduced from its original 79,000 square feet to 59,000 square feet. Currently the Land Use Policy Map recommends that this be low/medium density residential. The applicant is requesting a mid-point access on this site in order to provide a more convenient entry onto the site. The applicant has proffered monies related to transportation improvements. They have agreed to provide the cost of constructing one travel lane on Route 15, which would be approximately $150,000.00. They have also agreed to contribute 25% of the traffic signal at the north Greenway entrance. Also a general transportation contribution of $39,000.00. This brings their total proffer contributions to $220,800.00 for this site. Staff could endorse the mid-point access if the applicant would show a right-in, right-out road design on the concept plan and assuring that access to the site from either Meade Boulevard or Greenway Drive is also constructed prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit. This would insure left-turn movements in and out of this site. An important issue is the regional library site that is still showing up on the proffers. This was one of the most important features of the rezoning application when it was originally proposed in 1988. At that time the town needed a library site and the Allman family was generously offering that six acre site. Now Loudoun County is committed to the development of the library adjacent to Ida Lee Park. The applicant may want to consider contributing this site for some type of public use. We have suggested the possibility oi~a public facilities site because the public facilities site in Greenway has been basically lost to the regional detention pond. Greenway Farm is designated as a historic resource in Leesburg. The applicant has agreed to put this in the H-1 overlay district once the rezoning is approved. Staff recommends the entire site be included in the H-1 which would give the BAR the flexibility of reviewing the entire site in the context of historic preservation and appropriate development with historic preservation. The applicant has proffered $.15 per square foot for building area for fire and rescue. Staff is recommending $.30 per square foot since this area was never anticipated to be a commercial site, rather a residential site. Mr. Clem asked, referencing the public facilities site, if the town has something in mind appropriate for that six acres. Ms. Vecchio said that staff has not come up with anything specific. This evaluation of the library site proffer has been fairly recent at staff level. Mr. Marc Weiss, representing the applicant~ addressed the Council. The project is really about historic preservation. It is an opportunity to preserve one of the historic properties designated in the Town Plan. The restoration will occur entirely in the hands of the private sector and needs to have some uses that will make it economically feasible. In general, we think that the project does conform with the Town Plan. We agree with staff's analysis of what the proffer contributions are. We will be willing to discuss with staff the public facilities site and what they might have in mind. The site now, is currently zoned for church use. We feel that a church site is an equally good use for the property and would contribute to the character of the area. Mrs. Forester said she would like to discuss further, the architectural town house style and landscaping at committee level, since they are not included in the current proffers. Mr. Weiss agreed. The public hearing was closed. Vice-Mayor Clem said the Council will receive public comment in writing for a period of ten days. On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Lovin, this matter was referred to the Planning and Zoning Committee of October 3, 1990, for further consideration. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb Nay: None Absent: Mayor Sevila a. Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan - Proposed fire substation Ms. Katherine Imhoff, addressed the Council presenting a staff report. She explained that this is a Town Plan amendment regarding the fire station location proposed in a portion of the ten-acre public facilities site in Exeter. In 1987 the Town Council approved the preliminary development plan and proffer amendment for Exeter. Proffer number three indicated that there was ten-acres set aside for the Town of Leesburg that could be used for a number of uses not limited to a public safety facility, a library, museum and parks and recreation facilities. In December 1988 the Council began to consider a proposal to co-locate a fire sub-station on the proposed senior little league field. In a memo dated February 2, 1990 it was suggested that a public hearing be held in order to allow citizens to comment on the fire station site at Exeter. On February 13, 1990 the Council did initiate an amendment to the Town Plan. In this case it is Community Facilities Map 4. A public hearing was set by the Planning Commission for April 5. As we began to see that there were some problems associated with the Exeter site we began to explore, with the fire company, other potential sites. The Edwards Landing site was discussed. If the Council did choose to accept the Edwards Landing site, a Town Plan amendment public heariv.~ would have to be held. The Planning Commission further considered the Exeter site in April and May and recommended denial of the Town Plan amendment. On June 8, 1990, the Town Council authorized a public hearing and a date was set for August 8, which was subsequently cancelled in order to allow more time for additional information to be gathered. Ms. Imhoff said the scheduling for tonight's public hearing was inaccurately advertised by the Loudoun Times-Mirror. A certain amount of days is required between advertisements and that requirement was not met. A resolution is included in the agenda, tonight~ that establishes an October 24, 1990 public hearing date for this item in order to meet state requirements for notification. Mr. J.B. Anderson, a resident of 308 Valley View Avenue, S.W., Leesburg representing the Leesburg Volunteer Fire Company, addressed the Council. He has been a member of the fire company 0 Minutes of September 26, 1990 for twenty years. Currently holds the rank of Captain and is assisting Mr. Dave Hunt as the public information officer. He has been an officer with the fire company for fourteen years, three years as the chief. Mr. Anderson addressed the issues concerning the public hearing. A copy of his prepared statement is attached to and made a part of the minutes. Chief Jim Caiser, from the Sterling Volunteer Fire Department, addressed the Council. He has been a member of the Lou~loun County Volunteer Fire and Rescue Systems since 1970. He is presently serving as Chief of the Sterling Park Volunteer Fire Department. The Sterling fire company is presently the busiest fire company in Loudoun County. The average number of calls for the last several years has steadily increased in excess of 1,000 calls per year. The number of calls received effecting the issue of safety of school children average about one call per week. Main access routes, for calls for Sterling fire station 11 in Sterling Park, go by the Sully Elementary School which has in excess of 500 students half of which are walkers. Another route, Sterling Boulevard using Holly Avenue, goes by the Sterling Middle School which has in excess of 800 students half of which are walkers. The line of children walking to this school looks like a division of military on review and to date, no child has been injured by any fire apparatus. The children are in far more danger by the average driver on Sterling Boulevard or Holly Avenue then they are from the fire apparatus. All volunteer fire company fire fighters, as well as the Leesburg fire company, take a defensive drivers training course. We make every effort, when going to any calls, to watch for children. We also receive help from the school crossing guards. We talk with the crossing guards to let them know how we operate and how to react to certain intersections. We never blow through an intersection. Our people are trained to stop and look before proceeding especially on red lights. They are trained to look while backing up and to also look on both sides. Station 18, in the Sugarland Community, drives by the Sugarland Elementary School which has in excess of 405 students of which approximately 100 students walk by the fire station each day. When you come out of the Sugarland fire station doors and make an immediate left onto the main drag there is no room to see - they have yet to have an accident. Rolling Ridge Elementary is another school by which the Sterling Fire Department drives by. Having a fire station with EMS training personnel or a fire station that houses rescue equipment has proven beneficial in the past for serious calls involving children with heart conditions, asthma, emphysema, etc. Response time, for instance, to the Sully Elementary School is only several minutes at a maximum. He is a little mythed at the school board. They have always taken the attitude that does not indicate that they are worried about the safety of children. If they were worried about the safety of the children there would be sprinkler systems in the schools and the schools would have a public fire education and safety program, which at this time many schools do not participate in. The school board seems to have taken a stand that this is a safety issue. There is no safety issue here. The only safety issue is that the school board does not support the fire services in providing educational programs that teach children about fire safety and first aid. Mrs. Forester asked Chief Calser, between the fire station in Sterling and Sully Elementary School, if there was any parking on the street on Holly Avenue or any houses that face Holly Avenue with driveways. Chief Caiser answered yes. When you come out of the fire house and take a right on Commerce Street which is about 25 feet to the intersection of Holly Avenue. At Sully Elementary there is parking and housing that face Circle Drive just before you get to the main intersection. Also, a lot of parents drop their children off during the day and there is always a lot of traffic coming by Sully Elementary including general traffic - people going to work. Between the hours of 7:00 a.m., and 9:00 a.m., Circle Drive probably gets in excess of 1000 vehicles. As far as Sterling Boulevard and Holly Avenue, sometimes if it were not for the school crossing guards we would have a hard time getting out. We also have back up units from Fairfax County and Dulles which come on multiple unit calls - house fires, commercial, etc. These units also come by Sully Elementary and the middle school. To date there have been no problems. Mrs. Forester asked about Frederick Drive that is in fror. t cf t~e Roi in~ R dge Scaool. Chief Caiser said that East Frederick - is only used when we go to the si oppir, g n all.,, o ~ ~outa 7 b.;t~ cea Route 228 and Sterling Boulevard. That is cur main access ':orte drring Iae da~. 'ligh~ t ours. it is basically a very good short cut and saves us from going into a ins0o~ in'~er~ec~on - Route ~ and taking a chance on a side collision of vehicles that refuse to stop. We go by there probably once or twice a year during the school hours when children are walking. It is more than that for a 24-hour period because it is a rosier travel route for us especially for auto accidents at the mall or on Route 7. It is a judgement call on the driver and the officer as to whether they want to go onto Route 7 or stay on Frederick. To date there have been no problems. There is no guarantee that nothing will ever happen. As long as the people are trained and the SOP's are followed all we can do is hope that the best will occur and so far there is no reported incident in Loudoun County of fire apparatus being involved either with a child or school bus. Mrs. Forester asked what kind of on-street parking and houses back up to Frederick Drive. Chief Caiser said there are town house developments and housing developments and does not believe that the driveways of the housing development open onto Frederick Drive. The driveways on the town house development do have some openings onto Frederick Drive. 206 Minutes of September 26, 1990 Mr. Webb, being familiar with that area, noted that the new "Wood Stone" development would add about 600 to 700 town house units adjacent to the school. This will also increase the calls. Mr. Rick Huxta, an engineer representing the fire company, addressed the Council. Mr. Huxta's firm was retained to conduct a fire station site evaluation. He explained that one of the issues addressed was the operations and safety concern. We wanted to make sure, depending upon the decision for this site, that there would not be any site conditions that would prohibit the development of this site in the Exeter i~rea. Therefore, our firm did a wetlands investigation on that site. The conclusion was that there are no wetlands to be concerned about that would prohibit the development or limit the development in certain areas. We also looked at the scales and geological information. There will be a need for some geotechnical work to determine the correct foundation site. Other information looked at was the future growth in the area. Most of the people in the community are aware that Exeter will expand in the near future. Right now portions of Battlefield Parkway are being constructed between the bypass and the business route of Route 15. Plaza Street is also being expanded. When that development occurs the neighborhood as it proceeds today as a nice, low volume neighborhood with minimum traffic will see a significant change in the traffic patterns and traffic volumes on Plaza Street. Ideally Plaza Street was determined that it should be a corridor connecting Battlefield Parkway through to Market Street and that will occur sooner or later. Traffic that is anticipated by the substation will be minimal. Parking at the fire company - generally the average number of response volunteers, on a typical weekend, may be twenty. Since this is a substation it will primarily be operational during the evening, weekends and will take some calls during the day. Also because it is a substation, with a lesser number of apparatus, its response volunteers will be less then twenty - maybe in the neighborhood of ten to fifteen. Therefore, the traffic generated by the substation will be very insignificant. Also, the substation will not have a social hall for social events as in the case of the Loudoun Street station. It will strictly be a substation primarily used for rescue and fire response. Training will also be focused at the Loudoun Street station. In conclusion, looking at the traffic, site conditions and the overall risk considerations, are basically such that the proposed station will operate significantly less traffic then a standard fire station because of the general size and number of response volunteers. The construction of Battlefield Parkway and Plaza Street will have a significant impact .on the future traffic within the area. The substation site is free of wetlands. The proximity to Battlefield Parkway will provide additional access to Route 15 should there be an incident on Edwards Ferry Road or any other intersection - the fire company would not be locked in. Site distance along Plaza Street and the intersection is more than sufficient for clear visibility. There is more than sufficient room to maneuver a response vehicle and the volunteers coming to the site. The concern for pedestrian safety is acknowledged. Everyone has to be concerned with that. The proposed substation site in the Exeter area should be viewed as an improvement to the community. It is very common in general planning concepts to have recreation facilities and fire stations in a common area. It is advantageous when the children are playing ball if someone gets injured they have someplace to go. Mrs. Forester asked what the projected peak hour traffic will be after Plaza Street and Battlefield Parkway are connected. Mr. Huxta said there were several reports done by three other consultants from 1985 to 1989 for the Edwards Landing site. Those reports had no traffic information for Plaza Street. They were primarily concerned with Route 15 Bypass and Edwards Ferry Road. Mrs. Forester asked Mr. Huxta, if he does not know what the projection of the peak hour traffic will be, then how did he come to his conclusion that by adding 20 more vehicles would not have an adverse impact. Mr. Huxta said other then those 20 vehicles, arriving within a 5 to 15 minute interval, there is very little activity going on at this site. With conclusion of the Exeter development, in excess of 950 residential units, that in itself will probably generate close to 10,000 vehicle trips per day. Normally the peak hour numbers might be any where from 10% to 15%, therefore, out of 9,000 vehicles there could be 900 vehicles or as low as 500. Mrs. Forester asked, without the distribution figures of vehicles between Plaza Street and Battlefield Parkway, how can a determination be made of the impact of twenty or more volunteer vehicles approaching that same place within five min~tes. Mr Huxta explained that the twenty vehicles was based upon the Loudoun Street station operati m. If there were ten to twelve vehicles - even if they arrived in two minutes they would gener~ lly be stagge;'~e(' fi'~e to ten seconds apart. Mrs. Forester said she was not addressing the iWer,, ec~ion - s ~e is ~ddres~in.; impact on Plaza Street and the school. What if that were to occur o.t t ~e sa~..le ~ '.mt ~ th ~ ~ ~ool~ ,u: es were arriving or leaving and the parents were picking up their chilSren i. t the rain Wi:hc~t projections she is having a hard time understanding. Mr. Huxt, i zl~ r. ed th~s~ tea c: twenty ~ehicles to what would happen if there were several hundred vehicles coming down Plaza Street, during the peak hour, because of the future development. Mrs. Forester guessed the answer to her question was that there are no projections for peak hour traffic flow on Plaza Street when it is connected - it is just Mr. Huxta's feeling, for the fact, that it is going to be impacted. Mrs. Forester noted that some research was done on traffic around fire stations and driver training. She asked for the basis of that research. Mr. Huxta answered - in conversation with Dale McGuire which was supported by some of the other chiefs that he talked to about Standard Operating Procedures. Mr. J. B. Anderson said documentation regarding the training of the fire fighters and driving facilities, as well, both in the statewide defensive driving courses and in-station programs. We are mandated by the state to keep those records. Minutes of September 26, 1990 In summary, Mr. Anderson referenced and read an excerpt from the Draft Loudoun County Choices and Changes General Plan: Fire and Rescue Services: (1) (2) Fire and Rescue facilities will be combined with other public facilities such as recreation, schools and offices wherever feasible. New fire and rescue facilities should directly access arterial or collector roads, between residential neighborhoods or adjacent to town centers and located to provide the safest routes and shortest response time to the m~jority of properties in the service area. (3) The Department of Fire and Rescue Services and Fire-Rescue Commission will determine the need for new facilities in designated Urban Growth Areas and will identify suitable sites based on General Plan land use and growth policies. He attended, along with other members of the fire company, a five hour meeting with residents of Carrvale. There were a number of question and answer sessions with Council persons. We have had meetings at the station and elementary school which were well attended by the citizens. We established good relations. He is certain they will be good neighbors regardless of the outcome. Mr. Lovin said during Mr. Anderson's slide presentation, Mr. Anderson referenced the ISO rating of the Town of Leesburg as being a Class 5 which is the highest class of any town in Loudoun County. The rating that the ISO does for a town takes a number of years - the town's original rating was done in 1980 and has gone down in the process. He also said Mr. Anderson talked about 1991 as a need to identify a substation in the northeast quadrant of Leesburg with an operational date of 1995. Mr. Lovin asked - if a site is not identified by 1991 does that put the Class 5 rating in jeopardy. Mr. Anderson said it was possible. In 1980 the town went from an 8 to a 6 to a 5 based on construction. The reason it was called for in 1978 was the four-phase plan to implement the additional water tower on Edwards Ferry Road as well as the looping of the system on the Bypass. The identification for a site was determined by the Fire and Rescue Commission based on the growth factors, etc. They identify Leesburg as having a station site selected and fully operational by 1995 with the site ready for construction and building by 1991. There is a possibility that we could loose the Class 5 rating based on the change in the annexation area of the town as well as the impact of time and travel distances for apparatus. Mr. Lovin asked if the substation is designed to have sleeping accommodations. Mr. Anderson said that is correct. Also, there was some concern whether there would be a house siren to alert the volunteers. There are no plans for one at this time, however, in discussion with the residents many of them said they would rather have one to know when there was a fire call coming. Mrs. Forester questioned whether or not a town would request an ISO evaluation when they felt that their ISO rating would be lower because of something that they have done to facilitate it. Mr. Anderson said usually when there is a msjor impact such as the water system, distribution system, additional stations, etc. Mrs. Forester asked how and who makes the determination. Mr. Anderson said the Fire Protection System as a whole. We draw information from all the reports, demographics, determine the fire management areas. These are the areas that because of certain changes may or may not have fire hydrants, high risk hazards, response times for apparatus which is a msjor impact. Our response time from the southwest quadrant to the northeast quadrant is exceptional. Also previous fire encounters, target hazards themselves, such as schools, nursing homes, bulk storage, shopping centers and water flow needs in areas. Once these areas are determined, all the factors are put together then we decide whether or not we have suppression capability. The entire group, which includes the fire company, the town, town Planning Commission, utility companies, police departments, rescue squads, is consulted as far as coming up with needs. We draw statistical data to determine where our fire calls are occurring. We do not put a lot of weight on the time factors. Fires do not pick a time of day nor does it pick a person it is going to kill, nor does it pick a building that it is going to burn. There are increased times becaYse of seasonal factors or because of road conditions, etc. Mrs. Forester asked if there were national guidelines that are applied when an area is rated. Is there a point system - i.e., if you have 10 [ )in' s [,ou arE' ~ cccptable, if you have 20 points you are an unprotected risk, if you have 3(' p,,in:~ y )u trE an unde,~i~, bb risk. Mr. Anderson said it comes from the National Fire Academy Sy ~te ~ ~hi :h '.s L s :ho~~, th~ ,'. ('~.ea's with community fire risk analysis, challenges and solutions. It id mt~fies h ~w to esta}.li: h ~ ire management system and a community fire risk analys,s. This is .vt. ~r; a lot of ;he & ~a com ~'s fr~m. ~ here ace national data standards that identify response times on the average nation wide. Keeping in mind that the largest msjority of the country is a volunteer system. The career status is about 400,000 persons and over 2 million volunteers. Therefore, the statistical data is independent of their areas, some of them rural, some urban, suburb those factors all fit in and we utilize that data as well. Mrs. Forester asked if there is a proposed cost for the fire station if the land is donated. Mr. Anderson said an estimated cost between $1 and $2 million based on the type of structure. A msjor factor will be the length of time before we are allowed construction. The longer we wait the costs escalate. Mrs. Forester asked what kind of current funding the fire company has for this project. Mr. Anderson said some funds have been obtained. Mr. McGuire through his efforts, proffers and working with the contractors has done a tremendous benefit to this community. He has managed to acquire a ladder truck which will be mandated by ISO. He has monies coming for a pumper as well as money coming in from the residential and commercial developments. Those monies will be put into a fund for the construction of the building. Mr. McGuire said $385,000.00 separate from the equipment. Mrs. Forester asked if Minutes of September 26, 1990 this was from proffers that are being received from current construction, rezonings, special exceptions, etc., Mr. McGuire answered yes and also from bingos, raffles, community events. Mrs. Forester noted that the fire company's 1989 budget was $300,000.00 and asked if that was from raffles, fund raisers, etc. Mr. McGuire answered yes. Mrs. Forester asked if the County's Draft General Plan had been to public hearing at any level. Mr. Anderson said that it is a draft document that was reviewed and assimilated by all the people involved. It is not an officially adopted document. Mr. Carl Johnson, a resident of 109 Plaza Street. addressed the Council representing himself and speaking against the ~roposed fire station site. On the Town Council is one of the most civic minded residents that I know and admire. He listens to everyone and has a record of voting the wishes of the citizens. Mr. Clem and I agree on 90 percent or more of the issues but not this one. The only political sign ever allowed in my front yard was his and if elections were being held tomorrow that sign would be welcome. I personally will keep seeking a fully acceptable site. The need is surely there. However, I feel that it does not have to happen immediately. Let us explore some of the thoughts that I have heard or read about concerning this site. Many firemen live in Carrvale, therefore, if a station is built at this site the response time will be shorter. This is not really an argument. You cannot build a facility, for the future, based on a current residency of firemen. By the time ground is broken that residency may no longer exist. Neither should you build a fire station in a large residential area next to an elementary school. This is not a rural site. This is not Lucketts nor is it like some other station built in commercial areas near residential areas. There is a big difference. Another quote I read. Why are these citizens squawking now. This site was on a plan ten years ago. Ten years ago Carrvale was just being built. Exeter had not been started. The elementary school was not finished. I was living in a Jerry Smith built house on Plaza Street and the water moratorium had just been resolved. Leesburg has grown greatly over the past ten years. Ten years ago no one could possibly anticipate our current traffic and speeding problems on Plaza Street. Moreover a few years ago Exeter residents and potential residents were assured that this designated public service site would not be used for a fire station. This assurance may not be in writing, however, officials assured citizens that no proffer changes were needed and many people purchased homes in Exeter based on assurances. Now lets look at a few firemen's statements. During a recent house burning in Carrvale we the residents of Carrvale were taunted by firemen saying - you still don't want a fire station in this neighborhood where it belongs? Well now maybe you will want a fire station in this neighborhood. These were unnecessary and uncalled for statements on a bad day for everyone. Two weeks ago I heard fire officials say when Plaza Street is built out to Battlefield Parkway there will be so much traffic on Plaza Street that a few fire engines won't add that much. My question is why add any? About noise and disruptions - I heard the following the same night. The concord goes over and creates more noise, shakes windows, etc., a little more noise won't matter. I seldom hear the Concord but I do hear every siren and every fire truck. Besides the Concord does not produce the same kind of noise nor does it cause the same psychological unrest for children as a fire truck does leaving the station. Mr. Johnson read the following article from a local paper: "Members of the fire company reject the claims that a fire station will endanger children and disrupt school activities. They claim that opposition to a station is merely part of the not my backyard syndrome and are planning to conduct a survey of the neighborhoods involved to find out whether opposition is widespread or is merely the product of a few loudmouth critics as one company member said". Lets investigate who these few loudmouth critics are. First there are the 200 petitioners who signed a petition against this site. Every person or speaker here tonight who is in opposition to this proposed location and I guess the seven members of the Planning Commission who after an in depth study unanimously recommended against this site. Their concern was mainly with the safety and psychological health of our children. I employ you no: tc reverse the Planning Commission's decision. Mr. John Yarburough, a resident of 802 Rust Drive, addressed the Council. I have been associated with six meetings in about six months. I remain somewhat distressed over the fact that the meetings are being held at all. It continues to distress me t~. at town staff still does not recognize that this issue was dealt with some three and a half years a~,o an,] is a matter of record. It is in the description of the current comprehensive plan f,~r Ex, ter '?he ew~ni,ag that it was brought up Mr. Minor seemed also to be somewhat surprired th ~t ~hi., is,~ ae ha~l b~en d ~.al' with. It is often pointed to as item 3 and the reference made is its ~ ~'en.~rg m ~n tip tl pot o' Il.nd given to the Town of Leesburg. I happen to be associated w/;h ti~. effort t hat to ~k p:ac .~ f~u:inj that ueriod of time that involved four members of th~ homeowners a~soc~at, on of Exeter, n,embers of the staff and members of the Pulte organization represented by Dewberry and Davis. We were in the process of resolving a plan that had been found unacceptable and improved a few years before. Item 5 in the document that is a matter of record states. This ares, in question right now, indicated available for the building of a fire house is designated as two ball fields. We were told that because of the peculiarity of the zoning definitions that we could not be exclusive and could not restrict the particular definition of that plot. However, we were assured by town staff that by adding item 5 we would restrict, satisfactorily and sufficiently, the use of that parcel of land to what was intended and agreed upon some three years ago. I find it hard to believe that Mr. Minor was not aware of these restrictions. It was his staff that recommended them to the fire department that this land would be available. I find it hard to believe that with both sides, the fire department and the citizens, being faced-off one against the other by ambiguous statements by town management that we have arrived at this position. Many of us have taken sides, drawn lines and said there are people here that are no good, that are lying. We are fighting one against the other and we have no trust. As a result I hold Mr. Minor and staff responsible 0 Z Minutes of September 26, 1990 for it. There is not one person among us that does not agree that we need and want a fire house in the northeast sector. I take offense at the statement that says put it any where but my backyard. Take a bad idea, white wash it with as many coats as you want and it remains a bad idea. This is a bad idea for all of the many reasons that you've heard and will hear. I don't imagine that anyone will come up with anything particularly new or enlightened on this topic that has not been discussed and heard in front of the Planning Commission and Council. There is nothing that would produce anything better than a similar mentality that would agree to putting a tot lot in the median strip of Route 7. Putting a fire house in this location is an invitation to many problems. It is unfortunate that this meeting is being held at ail. I recommend that this not be modified to accept the fire house and I recommend that this be made a number one priority, that the Mayor and Council direct town management to provide the location for this fire house within the next six months to a year. Make it a time frame that the town manager will be able to respond to and if his performance is no better in the next year then it was in the past five years then we obviously have the wrong man sitting in that position and we need to do something about that. Mayor Sevila addressed Mr. Yarburough stating that it was not fair to pick on one person. This item is on the agenda tonight not because of Mr. Minor but because this Council adopted a resolution when we were approached for the use of that site by the fire department for the location of their substation. By vote of this Council, directed staff to refer to Planning Commission for public hearing. We considered two approaches. One was the Commission Permit, the other was the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Both require a special exception. It is not fair to put all the heat on Mr. Minor. It is easy to because he is not hear to respond. We take the blame not for making any decision but for giving ourselves the opportunity to hear from you. That is why we are here. We put in motion this process so we would hear from the public on this issue. No decisions have been reached. This is a Council initiated issue. Mr. Lovin asked, in fairness to both parties, for the public not to applaud. Mrs. Forester said that Mr. Yarburough, in his presentation, was addressing something that the citizens have heard over and over again in the last several weeks and that is that Mr. Minor promised this site to the fire company five years ago. I have not talked to Mr. Minor about it but in all the records that we have in front of us and all the discussions since I have been on this Council, Mr. Minor has always told this Council that it would have to go through a Town Plan amendment with whatever process the Council chose. Without having Mr. Minor here to answer the charge that he promised the site, we have to go on the level that based upon what we have in front of us that may not have occurred - the citizens and the fire company should know that. There is a lot of misinformation out there. I don't believe that anyone can promise anyone anything when that is not part of the process. Mayor Sevila acknowledged that this is an emotional issue - we cannot make emotional decisions. There are no good or bad guys in this room. We have a lot of citizens that raised there hand in opposition. The volunteers are here only trying to find a place to provide a service to our community as volunteers for which none of them are paid. What we have is all good guys. People looking out for their community. We need to hear the issues so we can study them and make an enlightened and correct decision that represents everybody. Mr. Clem said that he believes that we are all here tonight to try and come to some good resolution of this problem to benefit the fire company and to benefit the citizens in the northeast quadrant of Leesburg. I join Mrs. Forester in saying that there are many avenues that we could have used in looking at a fire site and we all endorsed, fully, the public hearing process so that everyone would have an opportunity to speak. Mr. Martin Lovett, a resident of 801 Rust Drive, addressed the Council. The concern I have is the 25 MPH school zone and 15 MPH during school hours. The areas that the fire department represented in their surveys are in the areas of between 35 MPH and 55 MPH speed limits with the schools two blocks away. These fire stations are in commercial or retail areas not residential areas. Another concent a.'e prof~els 3 and 5 which some people worked very hard on. I bought my house 3 and a hs f y ;a~ ~ ago. I ,:id a lot of research because the area was set up with an elementary school tt at rn.,, ch 'ldx ~n co~'.ld ~ o '~. B ~se ball fields on one side, soccer fields, a park on the other side with ~ ~ry ftc ~dp air. ~u d :. w( ~ pos d, te~nis :ourts and a community pool. You expect to take those aw~y ~n ! p,~t in ~ fir~, s atio~, - yc~ mod ~ th~nk hard about that. There is another proffer that states tha, t~e ba_'ric~d a~ t~,e nort.~ ~,n,~ of I laza Street could not be removed until after 95 percent of Section 1 was completed. The time frame that the fire department is asking for I don't think will be completed in that amount of time because of the downgrade in economics and the housing industry is not moving as fast. Mr. Lovett asked Mr. Clem if he was still the president of the volunteer fire department. Mr. Clem answered yes. Mr. Lovett asked Mr. Clem, since he is still in that position, does he feel he can vote with the ability as being a main body of the volunteer fire department. Mayor Sevila told Mr. Martin that this was the public's opportunity to present thel~ position. We do not want it to break down into discussions back and forth with Councilmembers or even a debate of issues. You are raising an issue of whether or not there is a conflict of interest and we can go through the appropriate avenues or channels to determine that. Mrs. Vicki Smith, a resident of the Carrvale Subdivision, addressed the Council trying to send 240 Minutes of September 26, 1990 her reasoning behind why a fire house should not be built in a family oriented subdivision and next to walk-to elementary school. My biggest and foremost concern is for the safety of our children. Our schoolhouse is approximately 400 students most of whom walk to and from school each day. We have 250 children who walk on Plaza Street alone. With the connection of Battlefield Parkway to Plaza Street the children from Fieldstone Apartments, who are currently bused, will be walking. That count is approximately 50 students. When the other housing developments are completed behind Leesburg Elementary those children will also be walking to school. We have major traffic backup at least three times each day except for weekends for the most part which will ultimately force the volunteers to find alternate routes through the subdivision. To keep within the 25 MPH speed limit it seems to me to be an impossibility. Even when school is not in session, we have school activities, ban games, scout meetings and even on Sunday our schoolhouse is a church group. So as you can see there are so few times when our school area is without congestion. I had the chance to meet with Mr. Clem and Mr. Anderson for that five hour meeting to understand why they wanted this Exeter site. That evening I learned a lot about what it takes to be a volunteer fireman and I know I could not be one. I understand what ISO's are now and we know we are a number 5 which is excellent. We have approximately 28 volunteers near the Exeter site. A good enough reason to build here? I should hope not. I really do understand their problems and I have been actively looking for other possible solutions. We do need another substation in the northeast quadrant of town but not in Exeter. ff the Town Council knew about the fire company's problem why were so many millions of dollars donated to Ida Lee Park and what are our priorities. It seems to me that no one would have minded if a few hundred thousand dollars would have been put aside for our fire company. As you all know the Planning Commission voted unanimously against this site. The school board has written to each of you with their concerns and tonight you will be hearing from the citizens. I am submitting approximately 250 petitions against the Exeter site but not against helping the fire department find a better location. I would think that having heard from so many professionals, the citizen input and knowing that we all want to work together as a community to help our fire company that this hopefully would make the decision a little easier. In conclusion I would like to quote a statement from the Loudoun Times- Mirror dated June 27, 1990. "One thing we definitely need he said is to listen to the concerns of the citizens". I am asking you to do that this evening. Mr. Doug Smith, a resident in the Carrvale Subdivision, addressed the Council addressing the information that was given to the citizens at two public meetings of the Leesburg Volunteer Fire Company. This information compares the Exeter site to other schools in Loudoun County that have fire houses within two blocks or within visual site of the school. I was amazed to find that these fire stations were located in commercial areas on or very near major roads and not quite as many children walking to them as the list states. When I went to Sugarland Run to locate Fire Company 18, I did find it two blocks from the school but with only 392 children walking not the stated 1,000. I also found the station located next to a four lane divided highway - the school had two walk under tunnels. There is also a path behind the school that handle more children walking. These children, I assume, would have to cross the four lane highway to go to school. I went to Sterling Park to locate Fire Company 11 and Rescue 15 that join the same building. This station is located in a commercial area with a divided service road in front of the station with Sterling Boulevard about a haft a block away. The elementary school was about two long blocks away and have 400 children that walk not 1,000. Aldie, along Route 50, connects to small shops and has 63 children which are all bused to the elementary school. Lovettsville Fire and Rescue is far enough away from the elementary school on an open highway - I could not even see why it was listed. There are 310 children who attend this school and all but 4 are bused. Purcellville fire company which is located closer to a commercial area then to the high school cannot be compared, because we are talking high school students not elementary students. There are 895 students that attend Loudoun Vaney High School, only 7 students walk. The Lucketts fire station was the closest station to an elementary school with 115 students an of which are bused even the children that live across the street in the trailer park. I also went to Round Hill, Middleburg and Upperville to see where these stations are located and found them on major roads within commercial areas. In conclusion, comparing these facts to the Exeter site is totally unacceptable. The citizens of Leesburg and town officials must look together to find a suitable site which is not located in a residential area but iD a more c,,mmercial area that the fire company can work with and we the citizens can live with. Ms. Linda Ne]so D a r, sid ~,n~ of 304 I or' as~ury Court, addressed the Council representing a group of citizens ~ h( li ,e )ut id¢ tl e Carr tale/~x ~,te: area but who share equal concerns that the Exeter site is not an approprfi te loc ~tion f, r .~ fire station. I have two children ages 5 and 7 who attend Leesburg gl ;~ mt~-y Si UeJl. The cl ildreu on Lounsba,3' Court, North Street and Woodberry Street are within walking distance of the school but they are currently being bused due to the pending construction of 102 duplexes being built at the extension of North Street through to Plaza Street. This development is called Exeter Hills Section 5. Once North Street is completed to Plaza Street an of the children in our area plus the children in the additional duplexes will be walking to and from school. When Plaza Street is completed to Battlefield Parkway an the children in Fieldstone Apartments plus the children in the additional new construction will also be walking dally to and from school past the proposed fire station. Despite the excellent driving record of the fire department it is inevitable that by placing a fire station among hundreds of walking school children that you will multiply the risk of a tragedy happening. It only takes one split second. I speak from personal experience. One month ago today on August 26, my five-year old son was struck by a vehicle as it was slowly backing out of a parking lot. Although his legs were run over by one wheel he has made a miraculous recovery. However, an stories don't have a happy ending. In August 1985, the month my son was born, my cousin's five-year old son was killed instantly by a large commercial vehicle. The emotional trauma, 0 Z Minutes of September 26, 1990 the family and the driver of the vehicle, will continue with them the rest of their lives. I share these very personal experiences to impress upon you how important it is to use wisdom, and foresight in locating our next fire station. We all agree that a fire station is needed in the northeast quadrant of Leesburg. But lets not add fuel to the fire by placing it in a densely populated, residential area next to a school with hundreds of walking students. As elected officials you have a responsibility to the citizens of this community who put you in office. I urge you to listen carefully to what we are saying and to vote against the Exeter site in favor of a more appropriate location that can then serve our fire department and the community. Ms. Jean B. Johnson, a resident of 109 Plaza Street, addressed the Council. I am here to speak on behalf of the northeast children who make the twice daily walk on busy Plaza Street to and from the Leesburg Elementary School. I am not a teacher or a retired teacher but I have had a very long association of working with children. Children are effected more by siren then any other noise. You cannot keep their attention when a siren of any kind is in their hearing range. As for air conditioned schools and not hearing the noise of sirens I ask you do you hear sirens in your closed up air conditioned house. Of course you do. There are enough disruptive influences in a students school day without this additional one. That is why field trips to the fire station are so very important. As it helps to allay some of those fears but it certainly does not eliminate them. These children who have no voice in this matter are a vital part of our Leesburg community and need to be considered as you make your decision. We all agree that we need a fire station in the northeast quadrant. Lets try to find an appropriate space at any cost away from the school. Mr. David Gouldfeldt~ a resident of 102 Appletree Drive, addressed the Council. I have three children, a seven-year old and two three-year olds. My son is not allowed to ride his bike on Plaza Street but he does ride on Appletree. There is a danger to my children by having this fire station. My understanding is that the fire station will be built before Battlefield Parkway. The fire trucks will be coming down Plaza Street and will be turning down Edwards Ferry where my house is. ! think that having a fire station next to a school is asking for a tragedy. It only takes one time. I am very glad that there has not been a previous accident in Loudoun County with a fire truck and a child. I do not want to add one more risk factor. At the Planning Commission we had a police officer who has taken these exact same driving courses that the firemen take and he said that even after taking this training he would not feel comfortable driving next to a school every time there is a call. The officer sees this as a risk. We need a fire station but there are better sites. A number of the officials that I voted for, in the last election, ran on the platform of protecting established neighborhoods, Carrvale is an established neighborhood. I hope that the votes that I cast will pay off by protecting my neighborhood and children. Mr. Brian Balthrop, a resident of 822 Cattail Lane, addressed the Council. Like Mr. Yarburough I have been involved in this issue since its beginning as we know it back to the golf course days. I am somewhat distressed, in that, it is an issue that should have been resolved some time ago. Mr. Peter Whitmore, the Principal of the Leesburg Elementary School, addressed the Council. Presently we have about 200 children walking to and from the school. That is the smallest number that we have had in ten years. In the future, there will probably be about 400 to 500 children walking. Currently, children walking to and from school can only use Plaza Street. On a daily basis we also have 19 buses. We have a large number of special education programs housed at Leesburg Elementary. Children coming from all over Loudoun County. This year we have nine children in the morning kindergarten class that get off the bus along Plaza Street. Principals come and go, families come and go, Leesburg Elementary will remain for a long time. One of the responsibilities that I have, in addition to educating the children at Leesburg Elementary, is insuring the safety of those students to and from school. I would like to say that once the children leave the building it is no longer my responsibility. I cannot say that. My responsibility does not end until the children are home. We depend upon a number of crossing guards, 5th Graders who act as patrol, a volunteer teacher and myself. The spontaneity of a five-year old, a six-year old, a seven-year old, the unpredictability of that child is something that I cannot measure. With regard to noise distractions, I could bring 40 staff members who would be glad to share that with you. We have worked with the fire company for a long time and I continue to want to work with the fire company - that is not the issue. I am greatly co.~cerned e,bout the safety of the boys and girls in my care. ~{s R~becca White, a resident of 214 Plaza Street, addressed the Council. I have attended a lot of ~ he ~ ee~n~ and talked with a lot of people and have come to the conclusion that this does not m~k~ ..ny s~nse. It does not make sense to build an emergency station next to an elementary school where th ~y have ~ go through an established residential neighborhood. It does not make sense when comparing them with the other schools. I used to live across from the Sterling school. They are not t~lking about the same thing. They are talking next door. They are talking on the street where the students have to walk. There are no other options for the fire engines or for the students. Also it is not necessarily the fire engines it is the volunteers. Why would volunteers want to go through an area that becomes terribly congested twice a day, with people going slowly, children in crosswalks, then the fact that they have to stop for the school buses. This is a catch 22 situation. If my house were on fire I would not want the volunteers responding at 15 MPH. If my daughter is at a crosswalk - they must. The only thing that makes sense is to find a site more appropriate. Ms. Elizabeth Steele, a resident of 404 Appletree Drive, addressed the Council. It is very important that we acknowledge that the fire department and the volunteers in the fire department are very special people. If they weren't they would not be doing this job. It is a very dangerous job and I thank each and every one of them for giving that. I have two children that go to Leesburg 2q,2. Minutes of September 26, 1990 Elementary. I do not want them at a crosswalk when volunteers are driving to the fire station. The level of risk is unacceptable. I live next to the house that burned this summer. When the fire started to wear down, and the firemen were in the house handing out furniture that could be saved, my husband went over to help. At that time a volunteer fireman left the scene in his personal car at a high rate of speed, he pulled into my driveway and came within six inches of hitting four children. He did not notice us, backed out and went on his way. This is a human being. Human beings when responding to a situation like this get an adrenalin surge. To go from Edwards Ferry Road to the blockade on Plaza Street ~ I timed this at midnight when there were no other cars - it takes one minute and 32 seconds at ~.5 MPH. If somebody is in a hurry to respond to a fire alarm, I don't see how with all this adrenalin pumping through their veins, can keep their foot off the accelerator. It is very hard not going 25 MPH. If I was trying very hard to respond to something that might be a life or death situation I don't think I could do it. It would be nice if we could all work together and find someplace to put this fire station. Ms. Sharon Dix, a resident of 912 Redbud Lane, addressed the Council. I also live across from the house that burned this summer. It was quite a tragedy. I do support the fire department. The response time seemed very long for them to get across town, so I do believe we need a firehouse on this side of town. I do not feel that it should be right next to the elementary school. Ms. Bobbie Meyer, a resident of 207 Plaza Street, addressed the Council. I have two children, four-years old and six-years old and they move very quickly. I applaud the fire company. I know you work hard. I am proud of you. I love what I've heard but there is a better place. We live, sleep and play on Plaza Street. My children cross the street to play with the neighbors. Mr. John Tello, a resident of 918 Marshall Drive, addressed the Council. I would like to boil this very emotional issue down to its root. I feel that this is really about public safety. On the one hand we have our fire experts who none of us can contest, who know their business and we respect, arguing that the public safety will be enhanced by placing this fire station in Exeter. On the other hand you have some people arguing that the public safety will be in perils by placing the fire station in Exeter. This is what the whole thing is about. Your final analysis and decision is going to have to be is if this new threat to the public safety which will be introduced by building a firehouse in Exeter is that threat justified by any benefit to the citizens in terms of fire safety. It really comes down to a safety issue. It is clear to me that building a firehouse in a residential, school, recreational area does introduce a new safety threat in the area. I am not qualified to comment on how much the public safety could be enhanced but it does seem that other public safety type issues are threatened. Leesburg is a growing town, surely we will have other, less threatening sites available in the future. I caution us about rushing into this. Traditionally law enforcement people and fire fighters work/stick together. I grew up around public safety people so it is very difficult for me personally to have to side against the fire company in an issue but morally I have to do it. I am drawing on my law enforcement experience and to do so I have to give the usual disclaimer that I am not representing any agency, I am only representing myself, as a person, as a citizen. I probably have as much experience and as much training with defensive, safety driving as anybody could possibly get. Maybe I don't have as much as some of the fire fighters - I don't know. I have extensive training in high speed driving, felony pursuit driving, counter terrorism driving, skid-pan training, obstacle courses and finally I've driven with a gas mask. So I do know first hand, from my own experience and from the people I train. The law enforcement side of public safety and the fire side of public safety are separate and distinct, however, the feeling that one experiences with a blue or red light flashing, is very similar. There are some common things that happen to us, no matter how many years we have been in it, or whether we are a rookie. One of them is dry mouth, one is tunnel vision. You can train and train but you'll still get it. You have to fight and try to defeat it. I don't know how much training the fire fighters go through but if it is a once a year, perfunctory type thing - that is not enough. Even if its movthly, it wil) not seriously impact on some of these things - the feelings that you get. Based on all that, the effect (,f the driver himself, there is a potential for disaster because of our own emotions and feelings. When we add speed as additional factors we can run into other problems. The fire fighters have noted that there will be an increase in traffic on Plaza Street. Common sense tells me with that increased traffic we are increasing the target population, moving vehicles. As opposed to most of the people here ton.~ght I am ~.ot quite as concerned, although there is a very real concern, about the pedestrian traffic. The veb. ide O~ c intrv& ces another threat which is still a threat to the pedestrian. It is almost a chain ~. pe re~ ction. F~r instance, on the issue of speed at 20 MPH on dry pavement, a passenger v, ,hi.:le ak ~s ::5 ~'eet to si ~p~ when the pavement is wet it becomes 75 feet, if snow 105 feet, ice 160 f~ et. T: .e l t.S D .~poz ~me~ t (f Transportation did a study and found that the siren was not necessarily a rel~ab, e i-~di 2tot o t. af ic conditions. They found that a vehicle going 50 MPH, at best, it gave a pc,~c a ,~ x ,ec ,nds at d .vo,st caoe 2 seconds. Both my daughters were school crossing guards on Plaza Street - they could not handle it. The responsibility was too great. Many police departments, today, are telling their departments that they cannot pursue a high speed pursuit within the city bounds. There are certain rules when that engagement has to be broken. To put a fire house in this area when we have the opportunity to not do it just flies right in the face of all the conventional wisdom that I can see on the law enforcement side. I agree that we need a fire house. Of all the arguments that I've heard, the most compelling one was the financial one that the land was proffered and it would be considerably cheaper. There are things more precious then money on this earth that are worth saving. You have a difficult decision to make. I urge you to consider it carefully. It is a decision you have to live with for a long time. Ms. Cheryl Kull, a resident of 211 Plaza Street, addressed the Council. This afternoon about 5:30 p.m., I witness a child almost get hit on Plaza Street. Understandably the children were playing in the street where they don't belong but it does happen. That was a scary feeling. I see the cars 2"/3 Minutes of September 26, 1990 speeding up and down plaza Street and I yell at them all day long. When you put the risk of having volunteers ride up and down our street - they are going to go faster then 25 MPH. I go faster then 25 MPH leaving my house at 6:00 a.m. and I know how easy it is. What does the fire department propose that Mr. Whitmore do to protect the students going in every direction. Mr. Whitmore does go up and down Plaza Street to insure the safety of my children. Mr. Richard Forbes, a resident of Wildman Street, addressed the Council. People are talking about a more appropriate site and then they just let it drop at that point. Who decides where a more appropriate site could be. ~[f you pick a commercial site - commercial sites are already designed to be fire resistent, sprinkler systems, steel construction, concrete construction. Wooden houses will go up in flames quickly. People talk about putting a fire house where the firemen are. I think it makes sense because response time seems to be very important. When your house is on fire there is a concern for - is a child going to get hit or is a child going to burn badly in a fire. People should take that into account. I am for the Exeter site. Mrs. Forester asked Mr. Forbes if he is aware of the proposal on a current plan for a fire station in his neighborhood? Mr. Forbes answered yes. A letter received from Mrs. Cheryl L. Balthrop of 822 Cattail Lane is attached and made a part of the minutes. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Sevila said the Council will receive public comment in writing for a period of ten days. On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Mrs. Forester, this matter was referred to the Planning and Zoning Committee meeting of October 3, 1990. Mayor Sevila wished to commend everyone who spoke tonight. You are all a credit to the community and to the town. This is the way the process is supposed to work. We cannot make good decisions if we do not have good input and we have received some real good comments tonight. Nay: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila None COUNCILMEMBER'S COMMENTS Mr. Webb reported that he attended the Cable Commission meeting where quite a delegation of citizens from the Woodlea Manor Subdivision attended. They have been trying to get tv service and were promised this service in June, July, August and now it is scheduled for October 10. They gave numerous reasons for the delay. A lot of the delay was based on the power company and telephone company not giving the cable service space on the poles. Mr. Webb made a few telephone calls this week and with the help of the phone company and power company we were able to get the problem resolved. Linda McBride, the local manager for the cable company, said that Woodlea Manor will have service by October 10, 1990. Mr. Webb is concerned with why it has taken five months. Fort Beauregard is still another situation. The report that the cable company gave at the Cable Commission meeting was that they were having problems with NOVEC who owns that particular set of poles. Mr. William Fiske, with NOVEC, investigated this situation, made the corrections on the cable company's application and sent it back to the cable company. If the cable company will now make the necessary financial arrangements, hopefully within the next 30 days, Beanregard will also have service. Mr. Webb received two different telephone calls, this evening, from citizens who received their cable company' bills and in the bill they were notified that the cost of the basic service will be going up $2.00 per month beginning November 1. Mr. Webb asked that the Assistant Town Manager check into this. Mr. Webb believes that the rate can be increased only once every 12 months. If the rate increases from $19.95 to $21.95 that is a 10% increase in the basic rate, is 10% allowed? When was the last time they had an increase? Mr. Lovin wished to compliment town staff, in particular, those individuals instrumental in the VML awards. He wished to thank Mr. Minor on his new news letter for town employees. It will be a productive means of communication for all of town staff. He attended the September 19th Leesburg Renaissance meeting. The meeting was very interesting. They are trying to get organized. Mr. Clem reported on the Leesburg Renaissance meeting held at the Sovran Bank in Leesburg. There were 110 applications received for the director's position. We have narrowed it down to six. He attended the EAC meeting where a lot of good ideas are being thought of. Mr. Kimball had no comments. Mrs. Forester also found the new employee newsletter to be very informative and entertaining. Mrs. Bange said that she is very pleased with the Parks and Recreation Commission. Mr. Huff came back from the state meeting with two awards. Minutes of September 26, 1990 MANAGER'S REPORT Mr. York reported that the Council did receive a written copy of the Activity Report. Director of Parks and Recreation Mr. Huff, today, returned from the Virginia Parks and Recreation Society Conference held in Richmond where Leesburg was awarded two awards by the honorable group for the Leesburg At Leisure Brochure. This award won the best promotional award for localities with a population of less than 50,000. The second award was for the Gifts Catalogue. Mayor Sevila told Mr. Huff that he has received numerous compliments regarding the recreation center, the way it is being run and the programs being offered. It is quite an amenity. LEGISLATION On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Kimball, the following ordinances and resolutions were proposed as consent items and unanimously adopted. 90-0-26 - ORDINANCE - APPROVING THE REZONING APPLICATION AND AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP FOR #ZM-116 STRATFORD IN LEESBURG BY EVERGREEN MILLS INVESTMENTS WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg received a complete rezoning application and fees from Hazel & Thomas on behalf of Evergreen Mills Investments on January 10, 1990; and WHEREAS, rezoning application #ZM-116 was received and referred to the Planning Commission on January 23, 1990; and WHEREAS, this application is for approval of rezoning plan modifications and proffer amendments to approved Ordinance No. 88-0-20 adopted June 22, 1988; which amended the Town Plan, the Leesburg Zoning Map and approved a rezoning concept plan and rezoning plan, for Planned Employment Center (PEC) and Planned Residential Community (PRC) zoning as proffered for #ZM- 95 Stratford in Leesburg; and WHEREAS, the rezoning plan modifications and proffer amendments were sought to accommodate the proposed County of Loudoun government complex and an expanded Leesburg Airport clear zone due to the proposed runway instrument landing system; and WHEREAS, a joint Planning Commission/Town Council public hearing was held on February 13, 1990 to consider the initially proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, an additional joint public hearing was held on April 24, 1990 to consider an alternative master plan as part of the proposed rezoning plan modifications and proffer amendments; and WHEREAS, a third joint hearing was held on June 13, 1990 to consider a new, redesigned plan, dated May 29, 1990, as revised; and WHEREAS, on July 26, 1990 the Planning Commission recommended to Town Council the approval of rezoning application #ZM-116 for proffer amendments, as well as rezoning plan modifications dated May 29, 1990 as revised, with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors suspended negotiations regarding the proposed government center on August 7, 1990; and WHEREAS, the applicant made additional revisions to the rezoning plans and proffers to address the conditions made by the Planning Commission and concerns expressed by the Town Council; and WHEREAS, final rezoning plan modifications are dated September 18, 1990 and are referenced as Plan A, and final proffer amendments are dated September 19, 1990; and WttERF,~, the proposed rezoning plan modifications and proffer amendments are consistent with Town Plan goals and policies and are compatible with surrounding zoning and development; and WHE~, this rezoning request is in the interest of public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Rezoning application #ZM-116 Stratford in Leesburg by Evergreen Mills Investments is hereby approved and the Leesburg Zoning District Map is hereby amended to adjust the zoning district boundaries for the Planned Residential Community (PRC) and Planned Employment Center (PEC) zoning districts as proffered, for the 447.95 acres identified as Loudoun County Tax Map 48, Parcels 66, 66A and 73, subject to the following voluntary conditions proffered in writing by the property owner on September 19, 1990, in accordance with the provisions of Section 15.1-491(a) of the 295 0 Z Minutes of September 26, 1990 1950 Code of Virginia as amended: Development of the Property shall be in substantial conformity with Plan A which shall control the density, use, general layout, and general configuration of the Property, with reasonable allowances to be made for engineering and design alteration to meet town zoning, subdivision and land development regulations. The applicant or its successors- in-interest shall, however, have the right to transfer any multi-family or single-family attached units shown on Plan A into single-family detached units so long as the maximum ~number of residential units shown on Plan A is not exceeded. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, proffers that the amount of commercial development in the PRC district mixed-use center of the Property shall be broken down approximately as follows: A. Retail Uses - 250,000 gross square feet. B. Office Uses - 100,000 gross square feet. In addition, residential units may be relocated, within the PRC district, from the Residential Areas and placed in the above ground floors in the mixed-use center. Retail uses may be located on the first floor of office structures. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, proffers that the amount of commercial development in the PEC district of the Property shall be broken down approximately as follows: C. Hotel, Office, and/or, Hospital/Health Care Uses - 1,271,950 gross square feet. Secondary Uses - of the 1,271,950 gross square feet referenced in (C) above, a maximum of 190,793 gross square feet may be allocated to "secondary uses" as permitted in the PEC district under Section 6A-17(3) and outlined as follows: 1. Business service and supply establishments 2. Restaurants 3. Personal service establishments 4. Repair service establishments 5. Pharmacies 6. Health dubs and spas 7. Convenience retail stores 8. Drive-through banks The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, will construct the internal "On Site" public streets designated on Plan A in accordance with town and VDOT standards. Dedication of fee simple title to these public street fights-of-way to the town will be accomplished upon the recordation of the plat of subdivision of the various sections of the Property and construction of the streets will be completed in accordance with the provisions of the contract with the town, designated PC2, and bonding requirements. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, will provide a title insurance policy, if requested by the town, insuring the town that title to these public street rights-of-way is free and dear of any liens, defects, restrictions or easements with the exception that such dedication shall reserve unto grantor, and its successors-in-interest, any needed utility and/or drainage easements approved by the town to accommodate the Ap )lic development and the fee simple title is vested in the To, tn or th: d,.te th.~ pl~t is recorded. Construction of these internal public streets si ali occur in pt ~s~s a~ the project develops. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, agrees to contribute up to the aggregate sum of ONE MILLION THREE HUNDRED TWENTY-NINE THOUSAND DO~ ($1,329,000.00) (based on a projection of 1,329 residential units), under the terms and conditions stated hereinafter, as its pro-re, ta share toward the construction of off-site transportation improvements supporting residential uses on the Property. Subject to the limitations set forth in paragraph 5 below, this donation shall be in the form of nonrefundable cash contributions or bonded commitments, which shall be paid into an account established by the Town (referred to hereinafter as the "Offsite Roadway Improvement Fund") for the purpose of financing construction of such transportation improvements. The Applicant. or its successors-in-interest, shall make such payments to the Town immediately prior to issuance of each zoning permit in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) for every residential zoning permit issued up to and until the aforementioned $1,329,000.00 aggregate sum is reached. Minutes of September 26, 1990 The Applicant. or its successors-in-interest" agrees to contribute up to the aggregate sum of TWO MILLION ONE HUNDRED EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY FIVE AND 30/100 DOLLARS ($2,108,535.30) (based on a projection of 1,621,950 gross square feet of commercial and appropriate office uses), under the terms and conditions stated hereinafter, as its pro-rata share toward the construction of off- site transportation improvements supporting commercial and appropriate office uses on the Property. Subject to the limitations set forth in paragraph 5 below, this donation shall be ih the form of nonrefundable cash contributions or bonded commitments, which shall be paid into the "Off-site Roadway Improvement Fund." The Applicant. or its successors-in-interest, shall make such payments to the Town immediately prior to issuance of each zoning permit in the amount of One Dollar and Thirty Cents ($1.30) per gross square foot of commercial and private office development for the individual buildings actually constructed on the Property. Notwithstanding the above, no payments under this paragraph shall be required for any buildings to be devoted to uses such as non-profit or HOA-owned recreational buildings, non-profit day care facilities, religious buildings, fire and rescue facilities, a library, post office, non-profit health care, or any form or kind of governmental service facility including the County Government Center. In the event the Applicant, or its successors-in-interest" either constructs or causes to construct such road improvements to roads identified elsewhere in these proffers as "off- site roadways," then to the extent of the cost of such improvements or monies so provided, there shall be given a direct dollar for dollar credit against contributions made to the "Offsite Roadway Improvement Fund" required pursuant to Paragraphs (3) and (4) above. The costs of "offsite roadway" improvements shall include but not be limited to: all engineering, surveying, bonding, permit fees, construction costs and utility relocation. In the event that the amount of monies paid into the "Offsite Roadway Improvement Fund" by the Applicant" or its successors-in-interest, are insufficient to cover the costs of the "offsite roadway" improvements constructed or caused to be constructed by the applicant" or its successors-in-interest" then the Applicant shall initially pay said costs with the understanding that future contributions into the "Offsite Roadway Improvement Fund" required under paragraphs (3) and (4) above will be waived until the costs born by the Applicant" or its successors-in-interest" for such "offsite roadway" improvements are recovered. In the event the Applicant or its successors-in-interest makes the contributions required under paragraphs (3) and (4) by bonded commitments and then constructs "offsite roadway" improvements itself, the aforesaid bonded commitments shall be released or not renewed as appropriate so long as the monies secured by the bonded commitments are expended toward "offsite roadway" improvements as defined in these proffers. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest" will submit actual invoices of money expended for construction of "offsite roadways" to the Town Land Development Official for review and approval. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest" proffers to construct or cause to be constructed the following roadway improvements in accordance with Town of Leesburg and VDOT standards and pursuant to the Project Phasing Plan of Plan A: The westerly half-section of a four-lane divided roadway on Sycolin Road (Route 643), possessing approximately 35 feet in width and 1500 feet in length, from the southern boundary line of the Property to existing proposed Battlefield Parkway (realigned Route 654) with necessary acceleration, deceleration and turn lanes. This improvement shall be considered to be a "off-site roadway" improvement. A four-lane undivided roadway on Sycolin Road (Route 643), possessing approximately 52 feet in width and 3100 feet in length, form existing proposed Battlefield Parkway (realigned Route 654) to the Route 643/Route 15 Bypass intersection with necessary acceleration, deceleration and turn lanes and including the possible demolition of the existing Route 643. All of these improvements shall be considered as "off-site roadway" improvements. Additionally, the Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, shall dedicate free and clear of all liens rights-of-way to VDOT for the planned future flyover of Sycolin Road (Route 643) over the Route 15 Bypass consisting of approximately 100 feet of right- of-way from the centerline of Sycolin Road extending for a distance of approximately 400 feet from the centerline of the Route 15 Bypass into the Property. This dedication will not occur until the Dulles Toll Road Extension and its above-grade interchange with Battlefield Parkway (realigned Route 654) has been constructed and is in operation and when requested by VDOT. Interim improvements at the Route 643/Route 15 Bypass intersection which shall include a left turn lane from northbound Route 643 to westbound Route 0 Z Minutes of September 26, 1990 15 Bypass and extension of the existing left turn lane and/or an additional left turn lane from westbound Route 15 Bypass to southbound Route 643, exclusive of bridge improvements. Such improvements shall be considered to be "off-site roadway" improvements. D. Traffic signalization contributions as identified below: 1. Route 15 and Evergreen Mills Road 5% 2. Evergreen Mills Road and West Site Access 1 100% 3. Battlefield Parkway and Evergreen Mills Road 24% 4. Battlefield Parkway and Stratford Center Parkway 100% 5. Battlefield Parkway and East Site Access 1 100% 6. Battlefield Parkway and Sycolin Road 40% 7. Long Lane and Stratford Center Parkway 15% 8. Long Lane and Sycolin Road 20% 9. Sycolin Road and East Site Access 2 33% 10. Sycolin Road and Stratford Center Parkway 100% Contributions for traffic signalization devices listed as 2, 9, and 10, above, shall be paid by the Applicant with the express understanding that the Applicant shall be reimbursed by other landowners using the three referenced traffic signalization devices in accordance with those landowners' respective pro-rata percentage of assigned use as determined by the Town at time of development of those landowners' parcels. The pro-rata reimbursement shall be based on traffic use projections at the respective intersections identified above and shall be inflated by the Consumer Price Index from the date of installation. The intent of this proffer is to provide a mechanism whereby the cost of the signal in its ultimate use will be proportionally borne by the users according to their actual use. To the extent that a participant is to be reimbursed for a previous expenditure then reimbursement will occur on a proportional use basis plus interest. Should warrants not be deemed by VDOT and/or the Town to exist mandating the installation of said signalization immediately prior to site plan approval for the last phase of the Stratford development, then the Applicant. or its successors-in-interest. shall post, if requested by the Town, a cash escrow representing its proportional shale cost with the Town prior to such site plan approval. These traffic signals shall be considered to be "off-site roadway" improvements. The Applicant. or its successors-in-interest, shall dedicate free and clear of any liens a 120-foot typical right-of-way section for proposed Battlefield Parkway (realigned Route 654), as shown in Plan A, and a 70-foot typical right-of-way section for Stratford Center Parkway, as shown in Plan A. The deed of conveyance shall contain provisions reserving in the grantor and its successors-in-interest, rights for utility and/or drainage easements to accommodate the Applicant's proposed development. These dedications shall take place pursuant to the Project Phasing Plan of Plan A. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, shall construct proposed Battlefield Parkway (realigned RcutE 654) '-s a four-lane divided typical road section, possessing approxi~ lat ,ly 2500 f.~e~ ir leng*~, with the necessary acceleration, deceleration, turn la ~e.~, an t s'~n ~lizatio ~ in .cc ,rSsnce with the Town of Leesburg and VDOT standards tt to' ~gh th~ P 'oF .~rty Ti ~: err aining two lanes of the ultimate six-lane divided road section Ilar ne I for t~ ~tCet ela Parkway (realigned Route 654) shall be constructed by otLeL. ]?1.~ ..pplica.,t" o~ its saccessors-in-interes% shall construct Stratford Center Parkway as a four-lane undivided typical road section, possessing approximately 600 feet in length, from proposed Battlefield Parkway as a four-lane undivided typical road section, possessing approximately 600 feet in length, from proposed Battlefield Parkway (realigned Route 654) to Long Lane (Route 654). The construction of Battlefield Parkway (realigned Route 654) and Stratford Center Parkway between proposed Battlefield Parkway (realigned Route 654) and Long Lane (Route 654) will occur as indicated on the Project Phasing Plan of Plan A. These roadway improvements shall be considered to be "offsite roadway" improvements. Any traffic signal warranted at the intersection(s) of Stratford Center Parkway or other internal roads with Battlefield Parkway (realigned Route 654) shall not be considered "off-site roadway" improvements. Additionally, construction of Stratford Center Parkway between proposed Battlefield Parkway (realigned Route 654) and Sycolin Road Minutes of September 26, 1990 (Route 643) shall not be considered an "off-site roadway" improvement. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, shall provide three recreational facilities as shown on Plan A and shall construct at least two of these three recreational facilities, with at least one such facility located east of the Dulles Toll Road extended, in accordance with the following construction schedule: Ao Recreational Facility West of Dulles Toll Road Extended - Begin construction prior to issuance of the residential occupancy permit representing a thirty percent (30%) completion of the residential area west of the aforesaid Toll Road and complete construction prior to issuance of the residential occupancy permit representing a fifty percent (50%) completion of the residential area west of the aforesaid Toll Road or within eight (8) months after commencement of construction, whichever event occurs first. Recreational Facility East of Dulles Toll Road Extended - Begin construction prior to issuance of the residential occupancy permit representing a thirty percent (30%) completion of the residential area east of the aforesaid Toll Road and complete construction prior to issuance of the residential occupancy permit representing a fifty percent (50%) completion of residential area east of the aforesaid Toll Road or within eight (8) months after commencement of construction, whichever event occurs first. Co Multi-Family Recreational Facility - The Third recreational facility is to be constructed in conjunction with the multi-family residential units and will be completed prior to the issuance of the 1000th residential occupancy permit or within eight (8) months after commencement of construction, whichever event occurs first. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, shall provide roadway improvements in phased increments in accordance with the Project Phasing Plan of Plan A. This Project Phasing Plan represents the schedule for roadway improvement construction and is not a proffered mandatory sequencing of residential or office/commercial development. The Project Phasing Plan provides that the road improvements identified for the individual Sections (A-L) will be implemented when the respective section(s) is (are) developed. More specifically, the Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, may commence and/or complete construction of any section independent of any other section provided that the appropriate roadway improvements for the section or sections under construction are implemented in accordance with the Project Phasing Plan. 10. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, agrees that prior to obtaining each zoning permit for individual residential units actually constructed on the Property, Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, will pay the Town the total sum of FIFTY DOLLARS ($50.00) per residential unit constructed on the Property as a nonrefundable cash donation for the benefit of fire and rescue facilities providing service to the Property, which monies will be provided by the Town to fund fire and rescue services. Further, Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, agrees that prior to obtaining each zoning permit for individual commercial and office buildings actually constructed on the Property, Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, will pay the Town the sum of EIGHT CENTS ($0.08) per gross square foot of commercial and office development construction on the Prope~qzy as a nonrefundable cash donation for the benefit of fire and rescue facilities providing service to the Property, which monies will be provided by the Town to fund fire and rescue services. Notwithstanding the above, no payments under this paragraph shall be required for any buildings to be devoted to uses such as non-profit or HOA-owned recreational buildings, non-profit day care facilities, religious buildings, fire and rescue .facilities, a library, post office, non-profit health care, or governmental service facility, es in, luding fie County Government Center. 11. r ?h~ ,~ ppi ca~ t, )r 'ts., uc ze so s-i a-interest, agrees that prior to the issuance of each .or tn/ p rn, i.t fo~ i.n ~ivid ,al r~side.utial units constructed on the Property, the Applicant: or its succes .o~ s-i ~-i'ttcrest, will make a nonrefundable cash donation to the "ov, n :n th~ ; mount o~ ~WO HUN-DKED FIFTY DOLLARS ($250.00) for each residential unit actually constructed on the Property. These payments shall be placed by the Town in a fund for the improvements of the Ida Lee Community Park. 12. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, agrees that it will convey free and clear of all liens, fee simple area of land composed of approximately two and one-half (2 1/2) acres in the approximate location shown on Plan A as "Fire and/or Rescue Station Site," to the Town for a future fire and /or rescue facility at a time to be determined by the Town. Donation of this site to the Town shall occur upon request of the Town following approval of the record plat for the 2.5 acre parcel and the record plat for the Battlefield Parkway (realigned Route 654). The deed of conveyance shall contain provisions reserving in the grantor and its successors rights for utility and/or drainage easements to accommodate the Applicant's proposed development. Any structures constructed on the Fire and/or Rescue Station site shall be of comparable architectural Minutes of September 26, 1990 style and materials with the overall Stratford development. 13. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interes~ agrees that it will convey, free and clear of all liens, in fee simple to the Town a parcel of land composed of approximately 62 acres located and fronting on the west side of Route 621 which is known as the "Orchard Tract". The Applicant. or its successors-in-interest, will convey the Orchard Tract to the Town within four (4) years of the date of this rezoning approval. The Orchard Tract is not currently served by public sewer and water. In the event that the Loudoun Cbunty School Board acquires the title to the Orchard Tract for the purposes of a school site, and if by the time construction of a school has been commenced there is neither public sewer nor public water available to the Orchard Tract. then the Applicant. or its successors-in-interest, agrees to (1) extend public water and sewer lines to the nearest boundary of the Orchard Tract; or (2) provide monies necessary to accomplish such extension of sewer and water service to the nearest boundary of the Orchard Tract. providing that there is a pro-rata reimbursement agreement in place which will provide for monetary reimbursements to the Applicant. or its successors-in- interest, from private developments benefiting from said extension. This pro-rata reimbursement will be based on linear front footage for sewer and on projected daily gallon usage for water. 14. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, agrees that it will dedicate, fee simple, free and clear of ail liens, to the party approved by VI)OT and the Town to construct the Dulles Toll Road Extension or other alternative regional roadway approved by the Town, the land areas designated on Plan A for the probable extension of the Dulles Toll Road (Route 267), upon request of the Town. Such dedication shall reserve unto grantor, and its successors-in-interest, any needed utility and/or drainage easements or necessary rights-of-way approved by the Town to accommodate the Applicant's proposed development. The Applicant will work cooperatively with the Toll Road Corporation of Virginia and assesses its best efforts to identify and implement the most effective alignment and most workable interchange design to maximize access to the Dulles Toll Road Extension at this location. The dedication and cooperative effort envisioned by this paragraph does not carry with it any obligation whatsoever on the part of the Applicant. or its successors-in-interest, to engineer or construct any improvements or bridge related to such roadway. 15. The Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, shall restrict the use of approximately 54.1 acres designated as "clear zone" in Plan A to ensure that no development occurs within this area with exception of roads, parking lots, sidewalks, and related landscaping as shown on Plan A and such other uses as may be permitted consistent with the FAA regulations and the Town Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant. or its successors-in- interest, shall retain the right to maintain this area, if desired at any point in time. Furthermore, the Applicant. or its successors-in-interest, commits to work with the Town and the Federal Aviation Administration during the development of site plans for the Property to further define any additional restrictions, including possible relocation and/or consolidation of structures necessitated by the future adoption of an Instrument Landing System (ILS) for the Leesburg Airport, providing that the definition and imposition of these additional restrictions or the adoption of the ILS does not in any manner reduce the maximum allowed square footage for non-residential development or the maximum allowed number of residential units expressed in Plan A and in these proffers. 16. Architectural elevations for any use for which there are no typical architectural elevations shown on Sheet 8 of 9 of Plan A shall be approved by the Land Development Official in conjunction with zoning permit issuance. It is understood that the Land Development Official shall make a determination within (30) calendar days after the date of filing of any said architectural elevations. 17. All single family detached dwellings which have a chimney shall have an exterior masonry chimney. A minimum of thirty percent (30%) of the townhomes will have brick facades. The facades of the multi-family buildings and a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the single family detached units will include brick. 18. ]~he applicant, or its successors-in-interes% will convey free and clear of all liens, fee simple area of a maximum of 0.5 acres generally located along the west side of Route 643 approximately 300 feet north of its intersection with Stratford Center Parkway for a water booster station. The architectural style will be compatible with proffered elevations for the Stratford development. No metal buildings or roofs shall be constructed on the site. 19. The Applicant. or its successors-in-interest, shall disclose in writing to all prospective home buyers at time of execution of sales contracts the noise exposure forecasts (as contained in the most currently approved Town ordinances or documents as of the date the rezoning is approved by the Town Council) for the Leesburg Municipal Airport so as to allow such prospective home buyers to make informed decisions regarding possible present and future noise exposure from the Leesburg Municipal Airport. Minutes of September 26, 1990 20. The Applicant shall design and construct the stormwater management facility located west of the Dulles Toll Road Extension and identified as "Stormwater Management" Pond on Sheet 4 of 9 of Plan A as a regional stormwater management facility to hold stormwater flows originating off-site providing that there is a pro-rata reimbursement agreement in place which will provide for monetary reimbursements to the Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, from private developers desiring to utilize the "Stormwater Management" Pond for the management of stormwater flows originating off-site. The pro-rata reimbursement will be based on the cost of projected total storage requiremerlts as inflated by the Consumer Price Index from the date of installation of the pond. The intent of this proffer is to provide a mechanism whereby the cost of the stormwater management pond in its ultimate use will be proportionally borne by the users according to their actual use. To the extent that a participant is to be reimbursed for a previous expenditure the reimbursement will occur on a proportional use basis plus interest. 21. It is understood that there presently exists sewer trunk and water lines and associated easements running through the Property which are inconsistent and conflictory with the layout of land uses illustrated in Plan A. Should the Applicant, or its successors- in-interest, be required to relocate any such lines or have vacated any such associated easements to achieve the layout of land uses illustrated in Plan A, then the Applicant, or its successors-in-interest, shall be relieved of obligations to make contributions to Town "sewer and water extension prorata reimbursement funds" on a dollar-for-dollar basis for all monies required to be expended in the aforesaid line relocation and/or associated easement vacation efforts. SECTION II. In accordance with Sections 6A-16(3) and 6A-17(4) of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance, special use permits are hereby granted for a child care facility, hospital and/or health care facilities, a maximum of seven free standing uses in the PRC mixed used center which may include two drive-in bank facilities, two automobile service stations, and two fee-standing drive-in fast food restaurants as outlined in Section I above. SECTION III. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage. 90-242 - RESOLUTION - ADOPTING A REVISED MASTER PLAN FOR IDA LEE PARK WHEREAS, the Ida Lee Park Master Plan was adopted by Town Council on June 8, 1988; and WHEREAS, the firm of Resource Planners, Inc., was hired in February 1990 to revise the Master Plan, design, engineer and provide specifications and construction documents for development of Phase II; and WHEREAS, the revised Master Plan reflects improvements to Ida Lee Park by redesigning the recreation field areas and relocating the basketball, volleyball and tennis courts; and WHEREAS, the revised Master Plan incorporates the joint parking lot to be constructed with the development of the new library; and WHEREAS, the revised Master Plan has been favorably reviewed by youth soccer, football and baseball organizations; and WHEREAS, the revised Master Plan has been endorsed by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission; and WHEREAS, the revised plan has been referred to Town Council by the Council's Administration and Public Works Committee: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: 'the Ida Lee Park revised Master Plan prepared by Resource Planners, Inc., dated June 15, 1970 is ~e:'eb,~ approved. "/Ir Ydmb~l said that he continues to support Ida Lee Park as being a premier facility within Nc ~era Vir~,inia a,~d perhaps in all the state. Mr. Huff and town staff did a tremendous job. It is encouraging to see a revised Master Plan - it certainly denotes progress in what we are doing. 90-243 - RESOLUTION - CLARIFYING THE RECREATIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FOX CHASE DEVELOPMENT, AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF A FUTURE OUTDOOR BASKETB.aLI. COURT DONATION, AND MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR CARRVALE PARK WHEREAS, the Leesburg Town Council approved special exception #87-1 on May 13, 1987, which authorized construction of 246 multi-family condominium units in the B-2 zoning district on 12.35 acres of land at the northern end of Heritage. Way; and WHEREAS, the special exception plan attached to Council Resolution No. 87-92 which approved the special exception, illustrates a multi-purpose court in the northwest segment of the property; and Minutes of September 26, 1990 WHEREAS, Mr. Donald N. Rose, through Leo Construction Company, offered to donate construction of a basketball court on the town's currently unimproved public park within the Carrvaie Subdivision adjacent to the Fox Chase development; and WHEREAS, Pulte Home offered to construct bridge access to the park and pay the Town of Leesburg's General Fund $10,068.50 in lieu of constructing the court as shown on the special exception plan; and WHEREAS, the l~eesburg Parks and Recreation Department conducted a survey of the residents who would reside near the proposed public basketball court to determine the degree of citizen support or opposition to the proposal; and WHEREAS, while a m~jority of residents surveyed favored the facility, a sufficient number strongly objected; and WHEREAS, Ida Lee Park represents an acceptable alternative location for the development of an outdoor basketball court in conjunction with the implementation of the town's Phase II Master Plan; and WHEREAS, Leo Construction Company is willing to provide this facility at Ida Lee Park at a later date at no cost to the town; and WHEREAS, Pulte Homes remains willing to pay to the Town of Leesburg the sum of $10,068.50 in lieu of constructing the multi-purpose court as shown on the special exception plan: WHEREAS, the Administration and Public Works Committee recommended a msjor portion of these funds be used for landscaping and development of picnic areas at the Carrvale public park to include pedestrian bridge access: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Leo Construction Company's gracious offer to donate a full-sized basketball court at Ida Lee Park at a future date is hereby accepted. SECTION II. Pulte Home Corporation's offer of $10,068.50 as a cash contribution to the town's General Fund in lieu of construction of a multi-purpose court is hereby accepted. The requirement for construction of the pedestrian bridge structure to provide access to the northeast segment of the property remains a condition of the plan and Pulte Homes is encouraged to develop the property as a passive recreational area. A portion of the Pulte contribution shall be used to landscape the Carrvale Public Park, create a public picnic area and pedestrian bridge access between Carrvale Park and Marshall Drive. SECTION III. An appropriation in the amount of $8,000.00 is authorized for the General Fund to Account No. 200.7101.700.090, Carrvale Park. 90-244 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING A NOTICE OF A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF LEESBURG WHEREAS, the Leesburg Town Council held a public hearing on September 26, 1990, on a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the Town of Leesburg to locate a fire substation on the 10-acre public facilities site in the Exeter Planned Development; and WHEREAS, the technical advertising requirements of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, were not met due to an error by the Loudoun Times-Mirror; and WHEREAS, a second public hearing is required. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia, as follows: A Notice of Public Hearing to consider an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan ~m tl.e Town of Leesburg to locate a fire substation on the 10-acre public facilities site in the F. xcte- l larued Development. adjacent to the proposed senior little league field, shall be pu0lished in tae LJudou~ Times-Mirror on October 3, 1990, and October 10, 1990, for public hearing on Wednesday, October 24, 1990, at 7:30 p.m., in the Loudoun County School Board Annex located at 102 North Street. N.W., Leesburg, Virginia, 22075. 90-245 - RESOLUTION - RECEIVING AND REFERRING REZONING APPLICATION #ZM-124 BROWNELL, INC. TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR PUBLIC HEARING UNDER CHAPTER 11, TITLE 15.1 OF THE 1950 CODE OF VIRGINIA, AS AMENDED RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: Rezoning application #ZM-124 by Brownell, Inc. to rezone approximately 14 acres located north and east of the intersection of Wildman Street and Cranbrook Lane from the R-4, Residential to the R-6, Residential zoning district to allow the resubdivision of lots in Section 2-5 of the Paxton Subdivision for duplex units is hereby received and referred to the Planning Commission for public hearing and recommendation under Chapter 11, Title 15.1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. Minutes of September 26, 1990 90-246 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASING THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE AND APPROVING A MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN FOXRIDGE SECTION 4 WHEREAS, Pulte Home Corporation, the developer of Foxridge Section 4, has completed the public improvements in accordance with approved plans and town standards and these have been inspected and approved. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. The irrevocable letter of credit from Sovran Bank, N.A. in the amount of $572,680.00 is released and a new surety in a form approved by the town attorney for a maintenance guarantee in the amount of $28,634.00 is approved, and shall be in effect for a period of one year from this date. SECTION II. This release is contingent upon delivery of a properly executed instrument conveying unto the town all such improvements and easements free of any liens or charges. 90-247 - RESOLUTION - ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF LAND FOR MAINTENANCE OF A SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO THE ST. JAMES EPISCOPAL CHURCH WHEREAS, the St. James Episcopal Church approached the Town of Leesburg last year concerning its interest in dedicating to the town 1827 square feet adjacent to Wirt Street, which represents the existing slate sidewalk along Wirt Street, N.W.; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate for sidewalks adjacent to public streets, used by pedestrians, be under public ownership and maintained by the town; and WHEREAS, this sidewalk represents one of the last slate sidewalks within the Town of Leesburg and is located within one of the most architecturally and historically significant portions of Leesburg's Old and Historic Districts; and WHEREAS, the public interest is served by ensuring that the slate sidewalk, which significantly contributes to the history and character of this neighborhood be preserved; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to obtain Loudoun County Circuit Court approval of said land dedication from the St. James Episcopal Church: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. The mayor is authorized to acknowledge the town's acceptance of a Deed of Dedication as shown on a plat prepared by Ken W. Erickson, Inc., dated May 18, 1990, containing approximately 1,827 feet, in a form approved by the town attorney. The town attorney is hereby authorized to prepare the necessary documents and to petition the Circuit Court for approval of said Deed of Dedication, on behalf of the St. James Episcopal Church. The clerk shall attest to the mayor's signature. SECTION II. The manager shall schedule initial maintenance work on the slate sidewalk to remove all trip hazards and shall propose in the FY 92-97 Capital Improvements Program later restoration of this sidewalk. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None Mr. Stephenson, presented a brief staff summary on the following ordinances. Mrs. Forester said that she will be voting against item 10 (b) because when she voted for it at the Planning Commission she inferred something from the proffers that were written in the agreement that was really not there. She does not have a problem with the special exception going from commercial to residential. On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following ordinance was proposed and adopted. 90-0-27 - ORDINANCE - APPROVING THE REZONING APPLICATION #ZM-122 LEESBURG GATEWAY BY SYCOLIN PARTNERSHIP AND AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP WHEREAS, on June 27, 1990 the Town Council received and referred to the Planning Commission an application for rezoning proffer amendments to allow multi-family development by special exception in the B-2 zoning district on the remaining acreage of the Gateway Subdivision located south of Gateway Drive; and WHEREAS, the incorporated proffers amend the previously approved proffers associated with adopted rezoning application #ZM-28; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 26, 1990 to consider the 303 0 Z Minutes of September 26, 1990 proposed proffer amendments; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended conditional approval of this application on July 26, 1990 following the public hearing, and WHEREAS, the Town Council held a public hearing on September 12, 1990 to consider this application; and WHEREAS, this ~rezoning proffer amendment request to allow additional multi-family development by special exception is consistent and compatible with adjacent land use and zoning;, and WHEREAS, this rezoning request is in the interest of public necessity, convenience and general welfare: THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Rezoning application #ZM-122 Leesburg Gateway by Sycolin Partnership is hereby approved and the Leesburg Zoning District Map is amended to adopt amended proffers for the balance of Leesburg Gateway Subdivision located south of Gateway Drive, comprised of 19.3 acres, and further described as Tax Map 48S, Parcels 6B, 7, 8, 9B, and 9C, subject to the following conditions proffered in writing by the property owner on September 19, 1990, in accordance with the provisions of Section 15.1-49(a) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended: The B-2 zoned property comprised of approximately 19.3 acres will be in general conformance with the Concept Plan developed by Dewberry and Davis, P.C., dated June 7, 1990, as revised July 23, 1990. A maximum of 268 dwelling units will be developed on the property. Environmental controls, such as a pro-rata maintenance share of the stormwater management pond will be established. To the extent practical, site grading will minimize the differential topography between these units and proposed units on the adjacent parcels. In addition to the buffering and landscaping required by Ordinance, a 6-foot high wood-on-wood fence will be constructed by the property owner or successors in interest between the two Multi-Family Condo apartment projects and adjacent properties on both the east and west sides at time of 50% occupancy. The typical architectural exterior elevations of the residential units submitted with this application shall be equal to the residential character established by such developments as "Brookmeade" for the 156 Garden Style units. Exterior materials of construction for the 156 Garden Style units will be a mixture of siding on the rear and architectural brick on the front and side elevations. Brick fronts and sides shall apply to the "Garden Style" units only and shall not be applicable to units designed as "Townhouse Style". At the filing of the development site plans, exterior elevations shall separately be filed and reviewed by the Land Development Official within three (3) working days. The standard of review shall be the previously submitted elevations which are filed with this revised proffer, Exhibits A & B, which shall equal or exceed the other developments set as standards in the above paragraph (2). A Homeowner's Association, with appropriate covenants, will be established with participation by each residential unit; said association is to assume financial, legal and insurance responsibility for common areas which shall include recreational, landscaping, parking, fencing and other physical improvements that will not be dedicate6 te the Town of Leesburg. In addition, the Homeowner's Association shall be responsible for the maintenance of all exteriors of the buildings as well as the interior common areas. The Am, ociation's charter and accompanying documents shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Attorney before recordation. The builder, prior to the issuance of zoning permits for each new dwellitg unit on the property, shall make a non-refundable cash contribution to the Towr of L(esburg, c,f One Hundred and no/100 Dollars ($100.00) per dwelling unit for th~. fire am r.~scue ~n[ Four Hundred and no/100 ($400.00) per dwelling unit for pre-pa~d crt di~s o t nen be:~hips at Id t Lee Park for each dwelling unit constructed on the properB. In ret trn f( c Ite ;,ce I m .~ contributions, the first occupants of said units shall receiv ) efi ~e, pr~p~ d f~n ily n .e: ~b ~r~hiv' to Ida Lee Park, for one year. SECTION II. The proposed multi-family development shall be in general conformance with the separately approved special exception application #SE-90-04 and the concept plan prepared by Dewberry and Davis dated June 7, 1990 as revised July 23, 1990. Final plat and construction drawings are subject to the terms and conditions of the applicable subdivision and zoning ordinance as well as town engineering and construction standards. Also, rezoning concept plan approved does not express or imply any waiver or modification of the requirements set forth. Housing density may be decreased below the maximum approved if necessary to provide in general locations indicated, all public facilities and proffered items to the appropriate town standards. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila. Nay: Councilmember Forester On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following ordinance was proposed and unanimously adopted. Minutes of September 26, 1990 90-0-28 - ORDINANCE - APPROVING SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION #SE-90-04 LEESBURG GATEWAY BY SYCOLIN PARTNERSHIP WHEREAS, special exception application #SE-90-04 Leesburg Gateway by Sycolin Partnership to allow for multi-family residential development on the balance of Gateway Subdivision, zoned B-2, located south of Gateway Drive was received on June 14, 1990; and WHEREAS, the applicant requests a maximum of 268 dwelling units with an overall density of 13.9 dwelling units per acre in conformance with a submitted concept plan dated June 7, 1990 as revised July 23, 1990 prepared by Dewberry and Davis; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a separate rezoning application, #ZM-122, for proffer amendments to allow for approval of this special exception application; and WHEREAS, on July 26, 1990 the Planning Commission recommended conditional approval of this application to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Town Council held a public hearing to consider this application on September 12, 1990; and WHEREAS, multi-family residential development is preferred over many other B-2 commercial zoning district uses available for the balance of Leesburg Gateway subdivision; and WHEREAS, the proposed multi-family residential development is compatible with adjacent land use and zoning, and meets the review criteria set forth in Sections 11A-5 and 11A-7(3) of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance: THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: Special Exception application #SE-90-04 Leesburg Gateway by Sycolin Partnership is hereby approved to allow for a maximum of 268 multi-family residential dwelling units with an overall density of 13.9 dwelling units per acre on the balance of the Leesburg Gateway subdivision comprised of 19.3 acres and located south of Gateway Drive and further identified as Tax Map 48S, Parcels 6B, 7, 8, 9B, and 9C. Development of the multi-family residential uses shall be in conformance with the following.' Amended proffers adopted as part of approved rezoning application #ZM-122 Leesburg Gateway by Sycolin Partnership; and Concept plan submitted with this application, prepared by Dewberry and Davis, dated June 7, 1990 as revised July 23, 1990; and 3 Review criteria statement submitted with this application, dated June 11, 1990 and Sections 11A-5 and 11A-7(3) of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance; and All applicable terms and conditions of the Leesburg Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances as well as town engineering and construction standards. Nay: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila. None Item 10 (c) Mr. Webb does not believe that Westgreen and 106 Morven Park Road should be incorporated together. He can support one but not the other. Mrs. Bange thought that the Council was going to stop and look at the overall town map and talk about this further before anything else was added. She does not feel comfortable enough or fully ir formed enough to vote on this. 3.~r. Lovin, represents the Council on the BAR and said that this legislation has been with the B,~J~ for mo~,ths. It has been the subject of two public hearings. Both pieces of property were put in there because they were requested by two entities to become into the historic district. They were both brought in at the same time. He welcomed any councilmember to come to the BAR meetings. This is a situation that is more geographic in nature than historic. It closes the gap between the H-1 District and the H-2 overlay which we are trying to protect. There is no reason the send this back to the BAR that no one comes to. Mayor Sevila, referring to the last committee meeting, thought that it would be appropriate for the Council to perhaps reevaluate or study the entire overlay district. Staff pointed out that such a study had been done and that this incremental addition to the district is being made pursuant to that study and consideration by Council. We have done the surveys, analyzed the maps and received feedback from the citizens. This is the last step in the procedure that has been going on for months and months. Mr. Kimball questioned the last "WHEREAS" in the Ordinance referring to . . . in the best interest and public necessity;... Is this in the best interest of the Town? 305 Minutes of September 26, 1990 0 Ms. Bange questioned - how much is the general population of Leesburg aware of this and how much have they been informed. Mr. Lovin doesn't know that he would put up to a vote of the citizens of Leesburg whether or not his property was going to be put into a historic district - if he favored it and his neighbors favored it. His opinion should be what is measured not someone who lives on the other side of town. Ms. Bange said wd were talking about what is good for the whole of Leesburg. Mayor Sevila would prefer that the Council go back to committee and take the material that has been furnished seriously. Lets talk about if from a standpoint of what i£ actually accomplishes so that the Council can answer the questions of the citizens. We have done a good job with advertised public hearings at the Planning Commission and Council. On motion of Ms. Bange, seconded by Mr. Clem, Item 10 (c) is referred back to the Planning and Zoning Committee of October 3, 1990, for further discussion and consideration. Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila. Kimball On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following ordinance was proposed and unanimously adopted. 90-0-29 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING SECTION 10-171 OF THE TOWN CODE TO PROVIDE THREE HOURS OF FREE PARKING AT THE LIBERTY STREET LOT METERED Z SPACES WHEREAS, downtown merchants have requested that the town offer free parking for customers and clients at the Liberty Street lot to further stimulate economic activity downtown during construction of the municipal parking facility; and WHEREAS, the lot is under utilized with the exception of 11 spaces immediately south of Royal Street at the Royal/Liberty Street intersection; and WHEREAS, three hours is sufficient to offer customers the opportunity to shop and dine in downtown Leesburg, as well as ensure necessary parking turnover; and WHEREAS, all day parking will continue to require the $20.00 town permit; and THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Section 10-171 of the Town Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 10-171. Establishment of meter zones and parking time limits therein. Parking meter zones with the following time limits for lawful parking are established as follows: (1) West side of King Street, between Loudoun Street and North Street, for two-hour parking at any one time except for that area designated at the northwest corner of King Street and Market Street as a no parking here to corner zone. (2) East side of King Street, between Virginia Power right-of-way and 180 feet south of Royal Street, for two-hour parking at any one time. (3) (4) South side of King Street, and 120 feet west of Liberty Street for two-hour parking at any one time, with the following exceptions: the time limit for lawful parking shall be 15 minutes at any one time in front of the po~ office on 1VTarket Street and the time limit for lawful parking shall be three hours at any one time at three spaces immediately west of Wirt Street, five spaces bef~veen Liber~ Street ~n~ the entrance of the Presbyterian Church parking lot arid ~wo s~ac~ i~ f~on~ of ~ae ~me~tr~ Municipal parking area between Wirt S~re~t, Kir~g Street. L~udo'~n Sgre~t~:nd Market Street, for three-hour parking, four 15-mmv;re ~o~n office ~risitor apaces an~ 25 ten- hour meter spaces. (5) East side of Church Street, between Edwards Ferry Road and Cornwall Street, for two- hour parking at any one time, except spaces reserved for official cars of the state and town police and the county sheriff's department. (6) North side of Loudoun Street, between Wirt Street and Church Street, for two-hour parking at any one time. (7) Municipal parking area know as Vinegar Hill Parking Lot between Loudoun Street and South Harrison Street, for four-hour parking at any one time. (8) Municipal parking area known as South Harrison Street Parking Lot between South Street and South Harrison Street, for four-hour parking at any one time. 3O6 Minutes of September 26, 1990 (9) East and west side of South Harrison Street, between Loudoun Street and 160 feet north of Depot Court, for two-hour parking at any one time except as hereafter provided. (10) One space east side of South Harrison Street at southern-most point of parking bay in front of 202 Harrison Street, S.E. for up to ten-hour paid parking. (11) South side .of Loudoun Street, between East Market Street and 160 feet east of South Harrison Street, for three-hour parking at any one time. (12) Municipal parking area on the south end of Liberty Street, with the exception of the southernmost 53 metered spaces which will be bagged and offered for 3 hours of free parking and fcr *~v...~ ..w. ~ ....... ~--.---~,~"" ~F-t spaces designated for permit-only parking. (13) West side of Wirt Street between Loudoun and Royal Street for three hour parking at any one time. SECTION II. All prior ordinances and resolutions in conflict herewith are repealed. Mr. Kimball thought it was proper to relieve, during the next three months, all parking fees. Not just three hours of free parking. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 90-248 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING PERMIT PARKING FOR THE VINEGAR HILL AND SOUTH STREET PARKING LOTS WHEREAS, permit parking is currently available at the town's Liberty Street lot for all day parking; and WHEREAS, the Vinegar Hill and South Street lots are presently underutilized; and WHEREAS, office and retail employees at Market Station have requested permits for all day parking at Vinegar Hill and South Street parking lots; and WHEREAS, the lots could be more efficiently utilized by the issuance of ten parking permits for each lot; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 90-181 established $20.00 as the monthly fee for permit spaces at the Liberty Street lot. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: The town manager is authorized to issue twenty parking permits for monthly parking at the Vinegar Hill and South Street lots at a fee of $20.00 for each monthly parking permit effective October 1, 1990. Mr. Kimball again recommended relieving all parking fees for the next three months until the holiday season is over. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Webb, t?e f)llcwing resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 90-249 - RESOLUTION - REQUESTING THE :9~ l 1 IR~I~ IA 3t NtqBA', AS ;E'.~(LLY TO CONSIDER LEGISLATION TO PERMIT NOI~:-PklD C RCU] .ATP )]'l~ E N~PAPEP~S TO BID ON PUBLIC NOTICE ADVERT1SL$C WHEREAS, Section 8.0-324 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, provides that newspapers must have a second-class mailing permit to qualify for public notice and legal advertising, and WHEREAS, this law restricts the Town of Leesburg to placing its public notice advertising in the Loudoun Times-Mirror or The Washington Post; and WHEREAS, the Senate Courts of Justice Committee has created a subcommittee to study the requirements for publication of public notices; and WHEREA~q, the subcommittee will hold a public hearing on the issue on September 26, and will keep the record open for comments; and WHEREAS, Leesburg Today has requested the Council support the concept of allowing non- paid circulation newspapers to compete for public notice advertising, and (D Z Minutes of September 26, 1990 and WHEREAS, the Coalition of Loudoun Towns has endorsed a bidding process for public notices; WHEREAS, competition for public notice advertising should lead to reduced costs and better service: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by th~ Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia, as follows: This Council hereby requests the 1991 General Assembly to consider legislation that would permit newspapers with a bulk-rate mailing permit to compete for public notice and legal advertising. Mr. Randy Beaman, representing Leesburg Today, addressed the Council with regard to this matter. Mr. Chip Groff, representing the Loudoun Times-Mirror, addressed the Council with regard to this matter. Mayor Scylla said that the town's concern and interest is that public notices get out to the broadest number of readers in the community. He does not see any harm done and perhaps there is a potential benefit of having this done competitively. Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila None On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 90-250 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING TOWN ASSISTANCE TO THE LOUDOUN COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION FOR ITS LEESBURG PROGRAM TO COORDINATE TRANSPORTATION FOR THE DISABLED, ELDERLY AND DISADVANTAGED WHEREAS, the Loudoun County Transportation Association is a non-profit organization dedicated to coordinate transportation in Loudoun County to benefit the disabled, elderly and disadvantaged; and WHEREAS, a Leesburg transportation program to service the disabled, elderly and disadvantaged has been proposed; and WHEREAS, this program will address a long-standing need in the Town of Leesbur~, and WHEREAS, this Council wishes to assist the Loudoun County Transportation Association with their Leesburg program: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: The manager is authorized and directed to ensure that the vehicle servicing the Loudoun County Transportation Association's Leesburg "shuttle bus" service for the disabled, elderly and disadvantaged is provided fuel, oil and general maintenance at the town's Public Works facility and maintenance garage and other assistance at no cost as contained in a letter to Mr. David M. Daugherty, Jr., dated August 15, 1990. This assistance is made available for a one-year period from the date of activation and the manager and the Loudoun County Transportation Association shall provide quarterly reports on the town's cost to assist with this program as well as general ridership information. Mr. Kimball said that this is a good example of a partnership in servicing the elderly people. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None ~_ E~ 7 ~USINESS Ms. Imhoff addressed the Council with regard to the County's Draft General Plan. It would b~ app,oprlate for the town to make a presentation and take a position with respect to some of the provisions in this draft plan. Ms. Imhoff will make the presentation to the County on behalf of the town. The Mayor asked that the Council review the draft plan and give any comments or concerns to Ms. Imhoff before the presentation. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mrs. Forester made the following motion: Pursuant to Section 2.1-344 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, I move that the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg go into Executive Session. The authority for this Executive Session is found in Section 2.1-344(1), of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. The purpose for this Executive Session is to discuss an evaluation process for the Town Manager. Minutes of September 26, 1990 The motion was seconded by Mr. Lovin. Mr. Clem made a motion to amend the original motion to also include personnel issues. Mr. Clem's motion was seconded by Mr. Webb. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Kimball, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: Councilmembers Forester, Lovin Mrs. Forester made a motion to withdraw her motion. Mr. Lovin did not object to Mrs. Forester's withdrawal. Mr. Clem made the following motion: Pursuant to Section 2.1-344 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, I move that the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg go into Executive Session. The authority for this Executive Session is found in Section 2.1-344(1), of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. The purpose for this Executive Session is to discuss an evaluation process for the Town Manager and personnel issues. The motion was seconded by Mr. Webb. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Kimball, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: Councilmembers Forester, Lovin Mrs. Forester made the following motion: I move that the Executive Session be adjourned, that the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg reconvene its public meeting and that the minutes of the public meeting reflect that no formal action was taken in the Executive Session. The motion was seconded by Ms. Bange. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Ms. Bange, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 90-251 - RESOLUTION - CERTIFYING EXECUTIVE SESSION OF SEPTEMBER 26, 1990 WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg has this day convened in Executive Session in accordance with an affirmative recorded vote of the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg does hereby certify that to the best of each member's knowledge, 1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Freedom of Information Act were discussed in the Executive Session to which this certification applies; and 2) only such public business matters as were identified in the Motion by which the said Executive Session was convened were heard, discussed or considered by the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg. Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Ms. Bange, the meeting was adjourned. Councilmembers Bange, Ct. em, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila None Robe.~ E. Sevila, Mayor Town of Leesburg Barbara Markland, Deputy Town Clerk