HomeMy Public PortalAbout1990_12_12MINUTES OF THE REG~ MEETING OF THE LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL
DECEMBER 12, 1990
A regular meeting of the Leesburg Town Council was held in the Loudoun County School
Board Meeting Room, 102 North Street, N.W., Leesburg, Virginia on December 12, 1990 at 7:30 p.m.
The meeting was called to order by the Mayor, with the invocation given by Councilman Kimball and
the Salute to the Flag led by Councilman Lovin. Present were: Mayor Robert E. Sevila,
Councllmembers James E. Clem, Christine M. Forester, Donald A. Kimball, Claxton E. Lovin and
William F. Webb. Absent was Councilmember Georgia W. Bange. Also present were: Acting Town
Manager Steven C. Brown, Director of Finance Paul E. York, Director of Planning, Zoning and
Development Katherine Imhoff, Director of Utilities Randolph W. Shoemaker, Director of Parks and
Recreation Gary Huff, Director of Engineering and Public Works Thomas A. Mason, Zoning
Administrator Scott Johnson, Public Information Officer Susan Farmer, Planners Sally Vecchio and
Peter Stephenson, Town Attorney George Martin and Clerk of Council Dorothy B. Rosen. Planning
Commission members present included: Chairman Mervin Jackson, Robert Altland, Councilmanic
representative Christine M. Forester, Carl Johnson and Clifton Vaughan.
PETITIONERS
Mrs. Pat McMahon, a resident of 1308 Campbell Court, addressed the Council, thanking them
for their understanding with regard to some issues brought before them concerning Potomac Crossing.
She referred to the proffer system as it relates to Potomac Crossing and the swimming pool.
She referenced a proposal presented by the manager of the development which proposes that the
homeowners association of Potomac Crossing take out a loan of $250,000.00 to purchase the pool that
has been promised and proffered by the developer. The proffer system is a legal contract with the
town. The development received increased density based on part of this proffer package. The
homeowners have been requested by the consultant of the development to provide this amenity
themselves. We have watched one amenity go by the waste-side when an all-purpose court was
eliminated from the plan because it was too close to some homes. We are concerned with this and
request the Council's help.
Another issue is the fire house. I live in the northeast quadrant and response time is quite long
to get from the fire house to the northeast quadrant. We need a fire station other then the one in
town.
Mrs. Heidi Malacarne, a resident of 919 Chancellor Street, addressed the Council with regard
to when a program for curbside pickup of recyclables would take place and is there a place where we
can drop off plastic recyclables in our area? Mr. Brown stated that there is an item on the agenda
tonight that addresses the town's obligation to prepare a resource management plan and also to
implement Phase II of the town's recycling program. Phase II should begin in mid January and will
consist of an experimental curbside pickup in the Country Club neighborhood.
Ms. Alicia Wilson, a resident of 709 Duff Road, addressed the Council regarding Potomac
Crossing, supporting Mrs. McMahon. She read a letter addressed to the homeowners from Mr.
Clemente.
"We have accomplished many positive things since taking control of Potomac Crossing. We have
completed all public improvements that were undergone. We have completed the approval process for
the pool and bathhouse facility and all mechanic leans released from the project and generally cleaned
up the construction debris and made substantial strides towards completing homes so that future
sections of lots will become a reality.
Nevertheless, the collapse of the United Savings Bank and the uncertainty of future funding
puts Potomac Crossing in a position that makes it impossible for me to achieve my personal goals.
Accordingly, I regret to inform you that I have resigned as President of Potomac Crossing Corporation.
The other members of my organization have resigned as Potomac Crossing officers as well. To ensure
continuity and to do everything we can to keep the project moving forward Carolyn Olshaker and I will
serve as consultants to Potomac Crossing Corporation and will continue at the request of the managing
agent of United Federal Savings to serve as directors and officers to Potomac Crossing Homeowners
Association. In that role we will continue to be responsive to the homeowners of Potomac Crossing."
Ms. Wilson stated that when Mr. Clemente came on board the homeowners were very excited
because he asked us as homeowners what is it that we want. What will make us happy here. The
consensus was a pool. Little did we know that the economy was going to be like this and obviously
from Mr. Clemente's letter he did not know either. However, now there is another division within the
homeowners at Potomac Crossing. We were asked to take out a quarter million dollar loan to build
a pool in our development and in our eyesight this is not fair. The way the economy is right now, we
will be looking at our taxes going up, people are losing their jobs, it is a transit area and is a pool
really going to help our investment and sell our property. I am here tonight to ask for Council's
suppo~ According to the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Potomac Crossing
Minutes of December 12, 1990
Homeowners Association Article 2 Property Rights Section 2.01(h), this will have to come before the
Town Council to vote on any monies due to be borrowed for improvements and construction in common
areas, etc. I ask that you look at this very carefully and support the people of Potomac Crossing and
not have us go into debt.
Mayor Sevila asked Ms. Imhoff to prepare an analysis of what has happened with respect to the
recreational amenities so that we can see what the situation is with respect to these kinds of promises
that get broken.
Mr. Hubbard Turner, a resident of 1107 Bradfield Drive, addressed the Council. He stated that
he had his car repaired at the Plaza Street Texaco and remembered about one year ago when Mr.
Collins, owner of the Texaco station, came before the Council requesting relief for his signage. Council
should take another look this may be the time to do something with special exceptions. Mr. Collins
is a very helpful individual. I was once in business and I know what it is like to not have a sign.
Mayor Sevila stated that Council did discuss Mr. Collins' situation in great depth at the last
committee meeting and is looking into ways to help solve Mr. Collins' problem by maybe creating a
special category for filling stations in our sign ordinance.
Mr. Alton Echols noted a couple of instances where land is zoned B-2 - we are proposing to
build a multi-fsmily use on it and have encountered provisions in the zoning ordinance that are difficult
if not impossible to have smaller scale multi-family projects. He requested that Council refer two
specific problems to the Planning and Zoning Committee for discussion.
The first concerns the development of 20 or more units shall include 250 square feet of active
recreational space. This is difficult in lower units. Units between 20 feet and 100 feet particularly
those that are too small to have a pool. What type of recreational activity does one have? You end
up with a tot lot and no one wants to live in a townhouse near a tot lot. In view of our new town
recreational facilities - 250 square feet may be eliminated.
The second concern is the height limitation of 35 feet. If you do three-story garage style
townhouses it takes 10 feet per level which only leaves you with five feet for the roof. You cannot do
a colonial room with five feet. We should raise this back to 40 feet. Another problem is the rear yard
setback - right now it is 30 feet.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Planning Commission Chairman Mervin Jackson stated that Planning Commission members
present included: Councilmanic representative Mrs. Christine Forester, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Vaughan and
Mr. Alt]and.
a_. Joint Public Hearing - #ZM-109 Edwards Landing
Mr. Brown stated that the boundary line adjustment has been entered in the Circuit Court
which has paved the way for the Council and Planning Commission to now vote on this rezoning
application. Mayor Sevila stated that he is in receipt of copies of the final order and signed proffers
dated today.
Ms. Imhoff stated that this was the second joint public hearing and the reason for a second
hearing was because of a written request by the court to make sure that there had been due notice.
Mr. Randy Minchew, representing the applicant~ addressed the Council stating that the
advertising and public notice requirements have been complied with.
Mr. Minchew stated, with regard to plastics recycling, that there was a group in downtown
Washington known as the Council for Solid Waste Solution. They are an association formed by some
of the larger manufacturers of plastic in the United States. Their mission is to assist local governments
in finding ways to recycle plastic.
Another issue brought up by a petitioner is recreational amenities. I am a strong believer in
the proffer system and am somewhat appalled when I hear stories about proffered amenities not being
completed. In assuring that this does not happen, I offer a few thoughts. First~ the town can place
in the proffers, required timing mechanisms for the provision of recreational amenities. Additionally,
the town does have bonding power - even non-public amenities should be bonded.
With regard to the public hearing presentation. At approximately 9:30 this morning a Final
Order was officially entered by Judge Home bringing into the town the 32 acre parcel known as the
Carr tract. For the first time in a long and distinguished history of the town, the town now has a
window on the Potomac River. This parcel win be maintained in accordance with the AADP
recommendations as a park with only 40 units and the other side of the tract will be maintained as a
park facility.
This case has been around for about 4 years and the subject of numerous public hearings. One
of the commitments and statements of intent is that the applicant will dedicate a fire station site if
certain events come to bear and if requested. As a way of clarification of the proffers - should the fire
company decide they do not want the site then the applicant would want to contribute a monetary sum
Minutes of December 12, 1990
of $100.00 per unit payable to the Leesburg Fire and Rescue Company at the time of issuance of a
zoning permit.
In summary, this is a sound application and is supported by good, solid proffers. This
application will benefit the town and the citizens.
The fire company can make the decision to obtain the Loudoun County Commission Permit to
construct the fire station on this site provided this is done within two years after rezoning approval.
The reason for the two year date after rezoning approval is because the site on which the fire station
is located is C-1 commercial currently slated for development as a shopping facility. At some time the
market will be ready for that site to develop in conformance with the existing zoning and at that time
we would like to know "yes or no" whether the fire station will be located there. We feel that two years
is long enough for the fire company and town to decide
Mayor Sevila stated that the proposed dedication of the 1.5 acre site is an accompanying
statement of intent, not a proffer. He raised concern with this not being within the proffers themselves.
Would such a statement of intent be binding on the developer or any successors? Mr. Minchew stated
that it was the applicant's intent to make this fully binding and would be glad to put this in the form
of a binding contract.
Ms. Imhoff stated that the Planning Commission has requested that this application come before
them again. They were not copied on this ordinance and would like to have a chance to look at it.
This will be placed on their December 20 agenda so they can reexamine it. They will be rescinding
a previous denial, since they did previously deny this application because of unresolved land use issues.
Mrs. Pat McMahon, a resident of 1308 Campbell Cour~ addressed the Council asking if the
Council put a calendar time limit on proffers as opposed to a construction time limit. Other concerns
are whether the proffer package includes in depth architectural guidelines, environmental concerns and
were the proper permits obtained from the various organizations.
Mrs. Heidi Malacarne, a resident of 919 Chancellor Street, addressed the Council requesting that
the applicant calculate the total number of acreage for wetlands, soil limitations, existing vegetation,
steep slopes, stormwater control, wildlife habitat, parkland development in consistencies with the plan
itself. The neighboring agricultural land all seem to have a conflict that I brought up on October 26,
1989. I still do not feel comfortable with this plan and have not seen anything that shows quality
improvement with regard to concerns about the agricultural land surrounding this site.
With regard to wetlands, according to the National Wetlands Inventory (NWl), there are two
areas designated by the Department of Interior on the NWI Map, therefore, a permit must be obtained
if the applicant is planing to develop in an area where there is over one acre of wetlands.
Mrs. Malacarne read from the Town Plan "In order to seek harmony with the town's natural
features, future growth must protect areas sensitive in environmental characteristics. Which include
steep slopes, problem soils, flood plains, etc..." I believe that in this rezoning all of the above elements
pertain. Also from the Town Plan - "Steep slopes designated in the Town Plan as slopes of 15 percent
or greater are considered sensitive. Preservation of slopes between 15 and 25 percent should be
encouraged". Why are there houses being allowed on areas of 15 to 25 percent slopes?
Mrs. Malacarne referred to a map depicting areas of problem soils and proposed building.
According to the planning ~ff and most developers - they will tell you that you can work around
problem soils. That is not true - you don't work around problem soils. This is one of the greatest
conflicts in this plan - the applicant has not worked around the environmental features and in this case
the environmental features are so sensitive, such as floodplains, steep slopes, heavily wooded, poor soils,
wetlands. All of these things are not conducive for development. This area is heavily vegetated. With
regard to endangered species. Of the 14 endangered species as designated by the Chesapeake
Watershed, at least three of these endangered species have been sighted in this area. With regard to
the parkland - it is not an area where a novice hiker should go - it is very dangerous. This would be
a concern for liability for the town. If the town does use this for parkland, how will it be accessible
if used for hiking. Bonus density of 87 units for the open space - the applicant is going to give the
town 32 acres of useless land and in turn get 87 units. In the area where there are 400 units proposed
there is a definite need for an active, open area where children can play. If the 32 acres of unaccessible
land is going to be left as it is, will the town accept liability, and will the town maintain this area?
Why are we granting 87 units of bonus density? There is also a 5 percent increase in bonus density
for preserving slopes greater than 25 percent. I am hard pressed in finding any developer that will
develop on slopes greater than 25 percent. So why are we granting bonus densities? All of the
ferfi_'lizer and pesticides used on these yards are going to run off inW the Cattail Branch. There are
several active farmers that use the Cattail Branch water supply for their livestock. This could be
hazardous to the livestock.
One final question, if there is going to be a homeowners association for this planned residential
neighborhood, after all the concerns of the Potomac Crossing residents, I wonder at this point did the
Town Council take it upon themselves to start reviewing the covenants and bi-laws, maybe establishing
some bonding procedures for these recreational facilities. Are the stormwater detention ponds going
to be built prior to construction and will the ponds be constructed with each phase? Will the developer
ensure stabilization of soil during construction? Will there be fencing around the detention pond and
will the fence be screened? There are tot lots proposed next to the detention pond. The swimming
Minutes of December 12, 1990
pool is proposed by Battlefield Parkway and a tot lot is proposed in a parking lot. These little
idiosyncracies that conflict in the plan itself prove to me that this plan is not the kind of development
that we need in an area that is extremely environmentally sensitive. The balance between urb_~ni~-ation
and environmental aspects has been tipped especially by the granting of bonus densities where areas
should be left undisturbed. There are many conflicts with the Town Plan itself.
Mr. Alfred Dennis, an adjoining landowner, addressed the Council stating that he is already
experiencing some of the things that the previous speaker eluded to. This project will cause a lot of
problems and will cost the taxpayers of Leesburg quite a lot of money. I don't know what advantage
you are getting out of this. I know we are getting a lot of disadvantage. For instance, Cattail Run,
there is a continuing flow of trash from Potomac Crossing. We are very concerned about our animals
who depend on this water supply. What quality of water are we going to have when pesticides are
being used. Another large problem is that a tremendous amount of silt is coming down the stream
already and will get far worse when these steep slopes are attacked. A lot of care must be taken about
how these slopes are attacked and how they are protected during the construction stage and the finished
stage. This is going to be a major problem for those of us downstream as well as the people who will
be living there. Traffic is also a concern.
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. Lovin, seconded by Mrs. Forester, this matter is
referred to the Planning and Zoning Committee meeting of January 2, 1991.
Aye: Councilmembers Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
Joint public hearing - #ZM-127 Leesbur~ Gateway Lot 1
Ms. Imhoff stated that this is a request for a proffer amendment to a residential development
on Lot 1 of the Gateway Subdivision by special exception. It consists of 3.55 acres of land and is a
similar request, covering the same set of proffers as approved by Council on September 26, 1990, for
approximately 19 acres and 268 multi-family dwelling units.. This is a request for 24 townhouse style
condominium units with one car garages - density of 6.8 dwelling units per acre. This property is
zoned B-2 with proffers. Lot 1 does back up to the Silver Oaks development. The Town Plan
recommends this property for high density residential development with a density range of 6 to 10
dwelling units per acre. This project will also help meet/enhance the Town Plan goal of increasing
townhouse development town wide. The applicant has raised a question with regard to what setbacks
apply. If this is classified as townhouse then the front setback is 20 feet~ the sides are 10 feet and the
rear setback is 30'. If this project is classified as multi-fAmily then the setbacks would be 30'-30'-30'.
Staff will be working with the applicant to discuss setbacks. The proffers submitted are being "fine
tuned". The architectural elevations have been submitted and show a townhouse style similar to Kings
Chase. The applicant has requested that the architectural elevations be reviewed within a three day
work period. Staff believes that architecturals should be tied in with whatever development plans are
approved for the property. If this project is defined as townhouses there is no active recreation is
shown on this property. If this project is defined as multi-family there is a requirement for 250 square
feet of active recreational space for each unit. Townhouses do not have this requirement. The
applicant has noted that 30 percent of the site is openspace and is proposing, in lieu of onsite
recreation, a proffer contribution of family memberships to Ida Lee Park. StAff would like to look more
closely at the Ida Lee contribution. This worked well for the 19 acres but I do not think that it will
work as well for this project and I don't think that it is a requirement for this rezoning. In terms of
land use, I feel that this is a more compatible land use with Silver Oaks and provides a good transition
between Silver Oaks which is single-family cluster and across the street which is multi-family.
The Planning Commission raised a question with regard to the fence located along the Silver
Oaks property line. Ms. Imhoff stated that the homeowners of Silver Oaks are very interested in the
fence being maintained. The Planning Commission has asked that point be clarified as part of either
the applicant's proffers or any conditions of approval with the special exception.
Mr. Alton Echols, the applicant~ addressed the Council stating that substantial changes have
been made with regard to transportation and further described the history of this property. He raised
concerns regarding active recreation and building height for this site.
Mayor Sevila stated that it may be helpful to Council, Planning Commission, staff and the
public if proffer statements identify the particular property - perhaps by incorporating tax map
references or metes and bounds surveys.
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 Mr. Webb, this matter was
referred to the Planning and Zoning Committee of January 2, 1991.
Aye: Councilmembers Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent~ Bange
c_. Public hearing - Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance re~arding Condominium Regulations
Minutes of December 12, 1990
Ms. Imhoff stated that this was initiated by the Town Council. A condominium is a form of
ownership not a building type. The Zoning Ordinance dearly defines single-family, attached, detached,
multi-family and townhouse but does not define a dwelling type that is called a condominium unit.
Currently the Wwn does not review condominium documents nor does the Zoning Ordinance include
condominium form of ownership. In June, legislation was promulgated to cover three objectives. The
first, to follow through with what the Code of Virginia allows the town to look at. Second, there is
concern there is a condominium conversion, what happens to some of the residents, and finally, how
to address lot size, yard area, and density requirements.
Staff did receive a lot of input from the development community and this did receive a favorable
recommendation from the Planning Commission.
Mr. Tim Hyland, from William, Feldman and Pittlemen representing First Aid Holdings the
consultant to Prosperity Woods Apartments which is in some stage of a conversion, addressed the
Council. We would like to know if the adoption of this ordinance will result in a review of the condo
plats and plans. Ms. Imhoff stated that condominium plats and plans are reviewed by the state and
the town does not duplicate the same review of state documents. Mayor Sevila stated that this only
results in a requirement that those same documents be submitted to the town. Mr. Hyland requested
the Council to insert language into the resolution memorializing this.
Mr. Beckham Dickerson, addressed the Council expressing concern that the new ordinance
would make it difficult to do anything innovative within the town. Before we rush off to legislate an
area that would add more control, we should understand exactly the equal that we are preventing by
doing that.
Mayor Sevila, stated that Mr. Dickerson's points are well made, particularly with respect to the
Chesterfield development and the townhouse/condo development along the bike trail. I asked this sort
of quest/on last week - what sorts of development in town would this have prevented had these
regulations been in place. I have to agree with Mr. Dickerson that those developments given certain
physical constraints of the sites on which they are located are happy alternatives to some of the things
that perhaps could have been done under other parts of our zoning or subdivision regulations. That
is the kind of alternative for development that we don't want to discourage through the adoption of
these regalafions.
Ms. Imhoff stated that there was no urgency to adopt this legislation and that staff would be
glad to answer any questions and concerns raised by Mr. Dickerson this evening.
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 Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Clem, this matter was
referred to the Planning and Zoning Committee of January 15, 1991.
Aye: Councilmembers Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
d_. Public hearing - Rezoning Application #ZM-117 Linden Hill
Ms. Imhoff stated that this is a request for a proffer amendment which affects phase H of the
Linden Hill development which is a planned residential neighborhood. This request would eliminate
the previously approved recreational amenities and would significantly reduce the overall density of the
project. The Planning Commission did forward a favorable recommendation. Given the improvements
to the property, staff feels that the applicant satisfies the planned residential neighborhood requirements
for recreation.
Ms. Julia Cannon, representing the applicant, addressed the Council presenting some additional
background history of the application.
Ms. Janet Frey, a resident of 1110 Rollins Place, addressed the Council stating that we have
come a long way with this project. The Planning Commission, staff and the Council have all worked
with the residents long and hard. "We take our hats off to the Council."
Mr. Hubbard Turner, addressed the Council concurring with Ms. Frey's comments. He noted
a book called Tree Maintenance, stating that construction traffic and trees are incompatible. It is very
expensive to save trees and the only way to do it is mark the trees that you want to save and put a
fence along the rip line to not allow any traffic or back/ill over the roots, otherwise the trees will go
into a slow decline and eventually die.
The public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Mr. Lovin, this matter
was referred to the legislation portion of the Council agenda.
Aye: Councilmembers Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
Mayor's Report
Minutes of December 12, 1990
Mayor Sevila read the following proclamation and presented it to Officer VanGilder.
PROCLAMATION
SAFETY AWARE~ MONTH
WHEREAS, the Loudoun County Transportation Safety Commission has designated December
10, 1990 through January 2, 1991 to be Loudoun Safety Awareness Month; and
WHERF. J~, drunk driving causes more violent deaths and injuries than any other crime; and
WHE~, from 1982 through 1989, approximately 189,000 people in the United States died
in alcohol-related crashes. That is an average of one alcohol-related fatality every 22 minutes; and
WHEREAS, such enormous and tragic waste of life can be decreased each year by greater
public attention to automobile and highway safety measures; including proper use of seat belts,
avoidance of dangerous alcohol and drugs and careful attention to driving by all on the road; and
WHEREAS, it is eminently fitting that all in Leesburg be warned about the deadliness of
driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia, I Robert E.
Sevila, Mayor, do hereby proclaim the dates of December 10, 1990 through January 2, 1991 to be
Safety Awareness Month and urge all in our town to observe this time in a manner appropriate to
its importance to the safety and health of our citizens.
Mayor Sevila presented a Certificate of Appreciation to Office Andrew Orr who committed acts
of bravery and heroism above and beyond the call of duty, in our town.
Councilmember's Comments
Mr. Webb stated that the cable company now has 4330 subscribers and has provided service
to 70 percent of the residents in Loudoun House. Cable is being installed in Beauregard Estates and
should be completed by January 15. Linden Hill should have service by the end of this month. The
cable company anticipates having about 14 hours on the local origination channel by the end of
January.
Mr. Lovin complimented Clerk of Council Dorothy Rosen on becoming a Certified Municipal
Clerk.
The BAR has added a new member, Mrs. Teckla Cox. Congratulations and welcome.
I would like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Mr. Clem reported on the EAC meeting, in which Phase II of the town's recycling program was
discussed.
On December 17, the EAC members will be observing homes in Leesburg displaying Christmas
decorations. One or two homes will be selected and will receive an award.
I would also like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Mr. Kimball wished everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Mrs. Forester also congratulated Ms. Rosen on becoming a Certified Municipal Clerk.
I would like to invite everyone to join in the celebration of First Night Leesburg and the joint
celebration of the 110th birthday of George C. Marshall.
I would also like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
As a member of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MAI)D), I would like to give each of my
fellow councilmembers a red ribbon to tie on your vehicles which indicate that you have also joined
MADD. I also hope everyone has a safe and sober holiday season.
Mayor Sevila reported on the celebration and parade that took place this past Saturday on the
courthouse lawn in connection with the observance of the 10th anniversary of the George C. Marshall
statue. Ceremonies were held at Dodona Manor and was attended by Britain's Ambassador to the
United States, followed by a speech from Graham Ashworth, a professor from the United Kingdom.
Mayor Sevila tb~nl~ed members of Council who were able to be present for this ceremony.
I also attended the dedication of formerly 6-8 Loudoun SWeet now called the Tolbert Building
located on South Church Street near Market Station. Mr. Peter Burnett, the successful bidder on the
proje~ decided that it would be appropriate to dedicate the building to a prominent town citizen and
selected Mr. Tolbert. I would like to thank Mr. Burnett on behalf of the town for doing an excellent
job of preserving an old building that had been listed as an architectural asset in our community.
Minutes of December 12, 1990
Manager's Report
Mr. Brown reported that members of Council did receive a copy of the written Activity Report.
He wished to recognize and congratulate town employees involved in the relocation of our offices to the
new building. They did an outstanding job.
He reported that an award had been won by Gary Huff, Director of Parks and Recreation, from
the Department of Conservation and Recreation for the outst-nding effort on behalf of public lands
natural and cultural resources for the Greenway and Trails effort underway.
The town has once again become a beneficiary from our long term benefactor Mr. Rust who
has contributed an additional $50,000.00 for specific outdoor facilities at Ida Lee Park.
Mayor Sevila invited everyone to join him in applauding Mr. Rust's generosity. On behalf of
the Council I would like to thank Mr. Rust again for his unprecedented generosity in promoting
recreation passive and active in our community.
Mr. Lovin asked Mr. Brown to inform he and the council of any proposed hearings of the
County on the retention of the county government in Leesburg.
On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Mrs. Forester, the following ordinances and resolutions
were proposed as consent items and unanimously adopted.
90-0-39 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF LEESBURG, VIRGINIA, AS
AMENDED, BY THE ADDITION OF SECTION 17-6.1 TO IMPOSE A
"COLLECTION FEE" ON DELINQUENT TAXES
WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg under Section 58.1-3958 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as
amended, is authorized to impose a fee on delinquent taxpayers to cover the administrative costs
associated with the collection of delinquent taxes; and
WHEREAS, such fee shall be in addition to all other penalties and interest that may be due
on the delinquent taxes; and
WHEREAS, such fee shall not exceed ten dollars ($10.00) for taxes collected subsequent to the
filing of a warrant or some other appropriate legal document but prior to judgment and fifteen dollars
($15.00) for taxes collected subsequent to judgment:
THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The Town Code is hereby amended by adding Section 17-6.1 to Chapter 17, Article
II to read as follows:
Section 17-6.1 Collection Fee.
Where any taxes on real estate or any other taxes imposed by this chapter or any other
provisions of this Code are not paid by the date on which such taxes are due and
payable, there is hereby imposed a fee, as set forth below, in addition to all penalties
and interest otherwise levied for failure to pay taxes on time, to cover administrative
costs associated with the collection of such delinquent taxes. If such taxes are paid or
collected subsequent to the filing of a warrant or the appropriate legal document by the
town, but prior to judgment, the fee shall be ten dollars ($10.00). If such taxes are paid
or collected subsequent to the time a judgment is obtained, the fee shall be fifteen
dollars ($15.00).
SECTION II. The provisions of this section are hereby declared to be severable. If any clause,
sentence, section or part of this ordinance shall for any reason be adjudged to be invalid, such invalidity
shall not affect the parts which are not adjudged to be invalid.
SECTION III. All prior ordinances and resolutions in conflict herewith are repealed.
SECTION IV. This ordinance shall become effective upon its passage.
90-0-40 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING SECTION 10-171 OF THE TOWN CODE TO PROVIDE FOR
POLICE VEHICLE PARKING ON W1RT STREET
WHEREAS, the town police department occupied the third floor of the municipal government
center effective November 21, 1990; and
WHEREAS, police officers require space to park their vehicles temporarily and a loading zone
is required for the Methodist Church day care; and
WHE~, staff recommends that the loading zone on the west side of Wirt Street (adjacent
to the Methodist Church) be moved to the south side of Market Street just west of Wirt Street to
accommodate temporary police vehicle parking at the new municipal government center.
Minutes of December 12, 1990
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:
Section 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 fight-of-way and 180 feet south
of Royal Street, for two-hour parking at any one time.
(3)
South side of Market 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 post office on
Market Street and the time limit for lawful parking shall be three hours at any
one time at five spaces between Liberty Street and the entrance of the
Presbyterian Church parking lot.
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.
North side of Loudoun Street, between Wirt Street and Church Street, for two
hour parking at any one time.
Municipal parking area known as Vinegar Hill parking lot between Loudoun
Street and South Harrison Street, for four-hour parking at any one time.
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.
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.
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.
10.
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.
11.
Municipal parking area on the south end of Liberty Street, with the exception
of the southern-most 53 spaces which will be offered for three hours of free
parking and spaces designated for permit-only parking.
12.
West side of Wirt Street between Loudoun and Royal Street for three-hour
parking at any one time.
90-0-41 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING SECTION 2-24 OF THE TOWN CODE REGARDING THE
DAY OF STANDING COMMITTEE MEETINGS
WHEREAS, this Council desires to change the day for the Planning and Zoning Committee
meeting and the Administration and Public Works Committee meeting:.
THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. Section 2-24 of the Town Code, Standing Committees, is amended to read as
follows:
Section 2-24. Standing Committees.
The planning and zoning committee and the administration and public works committee are
hereby established as standing committees of the council:
(1) The planning and zoning committee shall have jurisdiction over land use
proposals for rezonings, special exceptions and planned developments.
(2) The administration and public works committee shall have jurisdiction over all other
remaining items requiring council action.
Each committee shall consist of two members and a chairman. Members of each committee
Minutes of December 12, 1990
shall be appointed by the council biennially. Each committee shall select its own chairman.
The planning and zoning committee shall meet at 4:30 p.m., on the Wc~"_c=~ay Tuesday of the
week preceding each regular council meeting in the council chambers or other place as agreed. The
administration and public works committee shall meet at 7:30 p.m., on the V!c~_r. ccS=y Tuesday of the
week preceding each regular council meeting in the council chambers or other place as agreed. At
committee meetings, the members shall review upcoming meeting agenda items, hear st_off reports and
take other nonlegislative action as it deems appropriate.
SECTION II. All prior ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed.
SECTION III. This ordinance shall become effective on January 15, 1991.
90-303 - RESOLUTION INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LEESBURG ZONING
ORDINANCE SECTION 10A-14 (5) REGARDING SIGNS FOR GASOLINE STATIONS
AND SETTING A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
WHEI~_~, the Planning and Zoning Committee on December 5, 1990 directed staff to propose
an amendment to the sign regulations specifically for gasoline stations; and
and
WHE~, the proposed revisions are narrow in scope and applicable to only gasoline stations;
WHEREAS, these amendments will promote greater visibility for gasoline stations without an
appreciable impact on the existing sign regulations:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. An amendment to Section 10A-14(5) of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is hereby
initiated to delete the current text in its entirety and replace as shown below:
n
10A-14(5)
Signs for Gasoline Stations. Automobile gasoline stations may erect signs as
follows:
a_. Maximum Number of Signs. Three.
.Types of Signs Permitted. Wall, ground mounted (Monument
StYle). awning, canopy or marquee.
c_. Maximum Size of Signs:
Wall and Marquee. Same as individual businesses
(Section 10A-14(2).
Ground mounted (Monument Style). Same as for
individual businesses (Section 10A-14(2), but may
include within the allowable square footage a provision
for changeable fuel price sign. The location of the
ground mounted (Monument Style) sign must be
demonstrated as not interfering with entrance sight
distances.
Canopy or Awning. One square foot per linear foot of
the canopy or awning, up to a maximum fifty square
foot Der sign.
Gas Pump Signs. Each zas DumD shall be permitted a
total of two square foot of sign area to identify the
product dispensed.
SECTION II. A joint public hearing with the Planning Commission and the Town Council
shall be held on January 22, 1991 regarding the proposed zoning ordinance amendment pursuant to
Minutes of December 12, 1990
Title 15.1-431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. The public hearing shall begin at 7:30 p.m.
or as soon thereafter as the matter may be reached, and shall be held in the Lower Level, Council
Committee Meeting Room, 25 West Market Street, Leesburg, Virginia. The clerk shall publish notice
of this hearing in the Loudoun Times-Mirror on January 9, 1991 and January 16, 1991 and shall
advise the Planning Commission of the purpose, time, and date of the hearing.
SECTION III. The Planning Commission shall consider this proposed amendment and report
its recommendation to the Town Council on or before the Joint Public Hearing date of January 22,
1991.
90-304 - RESOLUTION - INITIATING AND REFER2JNG TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE 10 OF THE LEESBURG ZONING ORDINANCE
REGARDING SIGN REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Committee on December 5, 1990 directed staff to prepare
legislation to initiate proposed amendments to Article 10 (Sign Regulations) of the Leesburg Zoning
Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the proposed revisions represent a clarification of the existing sign ordinance and
create new categories of signs; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Committee desires the proposed revisions to be evaluated
by the Planning Commission and obtain comments from the Board of Architectural Review; and
WHEREAS, the proposed revisions are intended to promote the public health, safety and
welfare, and will facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. An amendment to Article 10 (Sign Regulations) of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance
to modify the existing text as shown below, is hereby received and referred to the Planning Commission
for a public hearing and recommendation under Chapter 11, Title 15.1-431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia,
as amended, and referred to the Board of Architectural Review to evaluate and comment on the
proposed revisions.
Section 10A-1. PURPOSE AND INTENT
The purpose of this Article is to regulate the size, location, height and construction of
all signs placed for public observance; to protect the public health, safety, convenience
and general welfare; to facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious
community; to protect property values; and to further the urban design and economic
development objectives of the Town Plan. To these ends, these regulations are intended
to promote signs that are:
(1) Compatible with the landscape/streetscape and architecture of
surrounding buildings, including historic sites and structures;
(2) Legible and appropriate to the activity to which they pertain;
(3) Not distracting to motorists; and
(4)
Constructed and maintained in a structurally sound and attractive
condition.
Section 10A-2. APPLICABILITY
These sign regulations shall apply to all signs erected within the Town of Leesburg
following the effective date of this Ordinance.
Section 10A-3. SIGN PERMIT REQUIRED
Except as provided herein, no sign shall be erected, installed, used, altered, relocated,
replaced or reconstructed until a Sign Permit has been issued and approved by the
Board of Architectural Review if within an applicable overlay district.
D;.~ Zoning Pcr_~A*, ff a;~?.~b!c. For the purpose of this Ordinance, all signs are
considered accessory uses and, unless specifically qualified, shall be located on the same
lot with the principal use to which they pertain.
Section 10A-4. SPECIAL DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of these sign regulations, unless the context otherwise requires, the
following terms shall have the meanings established below:
Animated Sign. Signs which involve the use of motion, rotation, or the appearance of
Minutes of December 12, 1990
motion.
Awning/Canoov Sian. A sign placed directly on or attached to the surface of an awning
or ~RnOD¥.
Banner. A ~: .... ~:~ +~ Cloth, paper~ balloons or f~b--.'c material of any kind
intended to attract attention.
Billboard Sign. See "Off-premises sign."
Changeable CoDy Si~n. A sign or part of a sign that is designed so that characters,
letters or illustrations can be changed or rearranged without altering the face or surface
of the sign.
Change of Use. Any use which substantially differs from the previous use of a building
or land.
Construction Sign. A temporary sign identifying those c~g~_gcn_ ~.n involved with the
construction or financing of any building site.
Directional Sign. An on-premises sign designed to guide vehicular and/or pedestrian
traffic by using such words as "Entrance", "Exit", "Parking", "One Way" or similar
directional instruction, but not including any advertising message.
Director~ Sign. A sign on which the names and locations of occupants or the use of
a building or group of buildings is given.
Flashing Sign. A sign used for identification, direction, advertising or promotion that
includes lights which flash, blink, or turn on and off intermittently.
Identification Sign. A sign which displays only the address and n~me or crest~ insignia
or trademark, occupation or profession of an occupant or the name of any building on
the premises.
Illuminated Sign. A sign illuminated in any manner by an artificial light source,
whether internally or externally lit.
Institutional Bulletin Board Sign. A sign containing a surface upon which is displayed
the name of a religious institution, school, library, community center or similar
institutional or community service use, and the announcement of its services or
activities.
Marquee. A permanent structure projecting beyond a building wall at an entrance to
a building or extending along and projecting beyond the building's wall and generally
designed and constructed to provide protection against the weather.
Marquee Sign. A sign attached to and made a part of a marquee or any other similar
projection from a building.
Monument Sign. A-&g~ffi~4~Lte A structure built on-grade in which the sign and the
structure are an integral part of one another;, not a pole sign.
Off-premises Sign. A sign which directs attention to a business, commodity, service or
establishment conducted, sold or offered at a location other than the premises on which
the sign is erected.
Pole Sign. A sign 'that is mounted on one or more freestanding poles or similar
supports.
Projecting Sign. Any sign, other than a wall, awning or marquee sign, which is affixed
to a building and is supported only by the wall on which it is mounted.
Roof Sign. A sign erected or constructed, in whole or in part, upon or above the
highest point of a building with a fiat roof, or the lowest portion of a roof for any
building with a pitched roof.
Sign. Any ~-c~cc cm~!c~".'ng letters, words, symbols, artistic display, etc., used or
intended to attract the attention of the public from the streets, sidewalks, or other
Minutes of December 12, 1990
outside public right-of-way. For the purposes of this Article, the term "sign" shall
include all structural members.
Sign Area. See Section 10A-8.
Tempora .fy Sign. A sign or advertising display designed or intended to be displayed for
a specified period of time, as provided in Section 10A-6 and 10A-7.
Wall Sign. A sign attached to a wall, or painted on or against a fiat vertical surface of
a structure, which displays only one advertising surface.
Window Sign. Any sign used or intended to attract attention, visible through exterior
windows. This excludes merchandise displayed in windows for sale.
Section 10A-5. PROHIBITED SIGNS
The following signs are expressly prohibited unless specifically stated otherwise.
(1)
Off-premises Signs, Including Billboards except as provided in Section
10A-7.
Portable Signs. Any sign not permanently affixed to a building.
structure or the ground. This catego~ includes, but is not limited to1
A-frame signs, signs attached to or placed on vehicles not used for the
daily conduct of the business, banners, balloons, and similar devices used
to attract attention. This catego .ry of signs will not apply to authorized
tempora .fy signs listed in Section 10A-7.
(3)
Changeable Cony Signs excluding approved institutional bulletin boards,
theater signs and fuel price signs as permitted by this Ordinance.
(4)
Simulated Traffic Signs or any sign which may be confused with or
obstruct the view of any authorized traffic sign or signal.
Animated Signs. Signs which involve or simulate motion or rotation,
including but not limited to pennants, propellers, disks, streamers and
flags. This prohibition shall not apply to the hands of a dock, a
weathervane, or flags meeting the requirements of Section 10A-6(4).
(6) Flashing Signs except for time and temperature signs.
(7)
Glaring Signs or signs with light sources of such brightness as to
constitute a hazard or nuisance as determined by the Zoning
Administrator.
(8)
Strings of Lights outlining property lines, sales areas, or any portion of
a structure, unless part of an approved sign or sign-structure. This
prohibition shall not apply to seasonal decorations.
(9) Roof Signs.
(10) Signs Affixed to a Tree other natural vegetation or rocks.
(11)
Signs that Obstruct the visibility at intersections or block any window,
door, fire escape, stairway, or any opening intended for light, air or
access to any building.
(12)
Signs Erected in or Over a Public Right-of-Way or on public land except
as permitted in Section 16-27 of the Town Code.
(13) Home Occupation Sign.
(14) Neon Signs.
Minutes of December 12, 1990
Section 10A-6. EXEMPT SIGNS
Sign permits shall not be required for the following signs; however, all other applicable
regulations of this Ordinance shall apply:
(1)
Address or Identification Signs. Signs indicating the address and/or
names of occupants of premises, and services provided such as credit
cards accepted and hours of operation but not exceeding two square feet
in area.
(2)
Changing the Message Content of an approved directory, institutional
bulletin board or theater marquee sign.
(3)
Commemorative Plaques and historical markers erected by a recognized
historical agency or governmental body.
(4)
Flags, Emblems and Insignia of any governmental agency or religious,
charitable, public or non-profit orgo_ni~.ation; provided, however, that no
single flag shall exceed fifty square feet in area and no individual
building_._~._~--' .... _v.__~"~ l^+.v, shall display more than three ._._~ flags _or
exceed 100 square feet in area. T.f +~C *~*"-A =rc~" cf =ut" fi~ c:cccd~
(5) Handicapped Parking Space Sign.
(6)
Directional Signs not exceeding one 1..~5 square foot in area or located
closer than five feet to any lot line. Directional signs may be internally
lit or inuminated by white light only.
(7)
Security and Warning Signs. Signs posted on private property warning
the public against trespassing, or similar messages, provided that any
such sign does not exceed 1.5 square feet in area.
(8)
Private Drive Signs. One per drive entrance, not exceeding two square
feet in area, with the message content limited to the words "Private
Drive" and the address of any residences utilizing the private roadway.
(9) Public Signs including traffic, utility and other regulatory signs.
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
Seasonal or Temporary Displays of patriotic, religious or civic character
on private property, not advertising a product or service, not displayed
for a period to exceed 30 days.
Signs Not Visible Beyond the Boundaries of the lot or parcel upon which
they are located, or from any public right-of-way.
Temporary Political Camvaian Sizns on Private Property not to exceed
^~.~,_~_. nine square feet in area and six feet in height. Such signs shall
not be erected more than 45 days prior to the election and shall be
removed within five days after the election. If, after reasonable notice,
such signs are not removed, the town may remove them and the
candidate, organization or person who caused the sign to be erected may
be charged for the removal.
Temporary. Private Yard Sale Signs not exceeding three in number per
yard sale and not placed in a public right-of-way. All such signs are to
be removed within 24 hours of the end of the sale.
Temporary Real Estate Signs located on the premises, not exceeding four
square feet in area or six feet in height for single-family residential uses
'~;'~'~'~'~_.._, or c!ght nine square feet in area for other uses ......
No real estate sign shall exceed a height of six feet. One real estate sign
shall be permitted per property, except for corner lots, which may have
two such signs. Temporary real estate signs shall be removed within
seven days of the settlement or lease of the property.
Temporary Window Signs covering no more than 25 percent of the
window area and not displayed above the first floor, e-~ ~ ~-"
Vehicle Safety Inspection Siaus not exceeding ten square feet in area.
Such signs may be either a wall sign or attached to an existing
authorized ground mounted sign structure (one per business) not to
Minutes of December 12, 1990
exceed the height of the ground mounted sign.
(17)
Government Signs which are approved by the Town Council or installed
for the public benefit by the Town of Leesburm
(18) Town sponsored special event signs.
Section 10A-7. SIGNS REQUIRING TEMPORARY SIGN PERMIT
The following signs shall require the issuance of a Temporary Sign Permit by the
Zoning Administrator prior to their erection. The permit shall cite the length of time
any such sign may be displayed. If after the expiration of the Temporary Sign Permit,
such signs are not removed, the town may remove them and charge the cost of removal
to the enterprise or proprietor responsible.
Special Event Sign. The sign will be attached to an existing principal
structure or sign, and not exceed 20 square feet in area or six feet in
height. Display of the sign is limited to 14 continuous days, twice a
year. The sign shall be removed within five days following the end of
the event.
(2)
Temporary and Seasonal Produce Stand Signs. The total area of all
such signs shall not exceed 20 square feet, nor shall any sign exceed six
feet in height.
Construction Signs installed at the time of zoning permit issuance not
to exceed one per street frontage, limited to a maximum six foot height
and 20 square foot area. Such signs shall be removed within five days
of the issuance of temporary, or permanent certificate of occupancy.
Temporary Business Identification. A wall mounted temporary sign not
to exceed 20 square feet to identify a new business for a period of not
more than two months prior to approval of permanent signage.
Temporary Real Estate Sign (Leasing/Sale Information). Leasing/Sale
information can be displayed for all uses other than single-family
residential developments. One sign is permitted for each street frontage
which is limited to 20 square feet in area~ or six (6) feet in height. The
sign may be displayed for a six (6) month time period. Another
temporary sign permit may be granted at the end of the six (6) month
period, which is not subject to extension.
(46)
Temporary Residential Subdivision and Model Home Identification Signs.
One sign may be erected for not more than two years at each principal
entrance to the development. Such signs shall not exceed c;.ght six feet
in height or $6 20 square feet in area. Individual model homes may
maintain a sign not exceeding six square feet in area. In -"-d~;-~cn, ono
(~_7)
Temporary. Signs Announcing a Civic Philanthropic, Educational or
Religious Event. Such signs shall not exceed ~6 20 square feet in area
or six feet in height. The location of the sign shall be determined by
the Zoning Administrator.____e"~u :~.::,..:~ _~-" _~.-^+ ~__ _.____--~+~ The sign will
not be displayed more than 14 days prior to the event and zh-~! will
be removed within five days after the event.
Section 10A-8. GENERAL SIGN STANDARDS
(1)
Determination of Si~n Height. The height of a sign shall be measured
from the average elevation cf +_."c ~_~cct +~ -:/h'.'ch thc :;.g= i: c~cn+~~_
of the edge of pavement at the points most nearly ac~{acent to the subject
parcel corners.
Minutes of December 12, 1990
(2)
Number of Sign Faces. No sign shall have more than thr4~ two sign
faces.
Determination of Monument Sign Area. The surface area of the
structure determines the total square footage of the monument sign.
This calculation will exclude the first eighteen (18") inches of the base,
provided it does not include any sign copy. In addition, a planter
structure which does not exceed one foot (12") in height or include sign
copy will also be excluded from the area calculation.
Determination of Sign Area. This is a measure of the surface area
which encompasses any regular geometric figure (square, circle,
rectangle, triangle, etc.) enclosing all parts of the sign face.
(~)
Area of Signs With Two cr .¥.c~ Sign Faces. The area of a sign with
two cr mcrc sign faces shall be computed according to the followin~
ao
Sign faces separated by an interior angle of 45 degrees or
greater, both sign faces shall be included;
Sign faces separated by an interior angle of less than 45 degrees,
one sign face shall be included, provided, however, the area of
the largest sign face shall be used when two faces are unequal
in area.
Section 10A-9. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR PERMITTED SIGN TYPES
All new signs and all existing signs which are replaced, reconstructed, extended or
changed structurally shall comply with the following development standards:
(1) ~'-'--"-~ .~cuntc~_ Monument Sign - Development Standards
Road Frontage Requirements. C~,-_.~ =c11-~ Monument signs
shall be permitted only on :c~:g lots with 100 feet or more of
road frontage.
Minimum Separation Distance. No gr-cun~- mc'-'n+~~- monument
sign shall be permitted to be erected within 199 50 feet of an
existingo- ..... v_.._~ mcun~d monument sign.
c_. Maximum Height. Ten (10) feet.
(2)
Maximum Size. One square foot per five linear feet of lot
frontage on which the sign is to be located, up to a maximum
size of 45 square .feet.
Proiectin~ Sign - Development Standards
a. Frontage Requirements. Eighteen feet of gr. cund !c-:c! frontage.
b. Angle of Prqiection. Ninety degrees.
Limit on Projection. Three and one-half feet (3'6").
Pro. iection Over Right-of-Way. Permit required as provided in
Section 16-27 of the Town Code.
Minimum Clearance. F.;.:c f~t Seven and one-half feet (7'6").
Maximum Height. Fourteen feet ~c~ or the bottom cf t~c sill
Minutes of December 12, 1990
of any second story window, cr *~^ ] ..... ~ ~c:.~t ~ thc ~
whichever is lowest.
Maximum Size. One square foot per linear foot of building
frontage on which the sign is to be attached, up to twelve square
feet.
(3) Wall Sign - Development Standards
Placement, Generally. No wall sign shall cover, cross or
otherwise hide columns, belt courses or other decorative
architectural features of the building, including balconies.
Maximum Height of Wall Signs. Twenty-five feet, or the height
of the bottom ef *~c sill of any second story window, cr thc
1,,,~ -~, ^~ .~ .... ~ whichever is lowest.
c. Limit on Projection. Twelve (12) inches.
do
Window Signs. Window signs (exempt and permanent) will not
exceed 25 percent of the window area or 25 square feet,
whichever is less.
Maximum Size. One square foot per linear foot of building
frontage on which the sign or signs are to be attached, up to a
maximum of 100 square feet.
Building Identification Wall Sign. For those uses which the
Board of Architectural Review (BAR) have approved a Building
Identification Wall Sign, the size is limited to 1 square foot per
linear foot of building frontage, up to a maximum of 100 square
feet.
(4) Awning, Canopy and Marquee Signs - Development Standards
Location. Parallel to the face and not projecting above or below
the face of the awning, canopy or marquee.
Maximum Height. 14 feet or the bottom sill of any second story
window, whichever is lowest.
Limit on Projection. To within one foot of the vertical placement
of curbs, but shall in no way interfere or obstruct either
pedestrian or vehicular traffic. Any sign which projects over the
public right-of-way shall comply with Section 16-27 of the Town
Code.
Maximum Size. One square foot per linear foot of the awning~
canopy, or marquee up to a maximum 100 square feet.
Section 10A-10. CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE STANDARDS
(1)
Building Code Compliance. All signs shall be constructed in compliance
with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code.
(2)
Condition of Signs. All signs and components shall be maintained in
good repair and in a safe, clean and attractive condition.
(3)
Repair or Removal of Nuisance Signs. Any sign which is declared to
be an immediate or imminent hazard to life or property may be caused
to be immediately removed or repaired. All costs associated with the
removal or repair shall be charged to the owner of the premises.
(4)
Removal of Obsolete Signs. Any sign which is obsolete because of
discontinuance of the advertised activity, or any other reason which
would cause the sign to be obsolete shah be removed within 30 days.
(5)
Removal of nlegal Signs. The Zoning Administrator may order the
removal of any illegal sign at the expense of the property owner. An
illegal sign is any sign erected without a permit as required by Section
Minutes of December 12, 1990
10A-18 of this Article or does not comply with any provision of this
Article. (#5 was formerly located at 10A-22)
Section 10A-11. NONCONFORMING SIGNS
(1)
Nonconforming Signs, Generally. Any sign which was lawfully in
existence at the time of the effective date of this Ordinance which does
not conform to the provisions herein, and any sign which is accessory
to a nonconforming use, shall be deemed a nonconforming sign and
may remain. The sign copy only may be changed to accommodate
similar businesses, except as qualified in subsection (2), herein. No
nonconforming sign shall be enlarged, extended or structurally
reconstructed.
(2)
Removal of Nonconforming Signs. Nonconforming signs may remain,
provided they are kept in good repair, except for the followin~
Damage or Destruction of Nonconforming Signs. A
nonconforming sign which is destroyed or damaged to the extent
exceeding 50 percent of its appraised value shall not be altered,
replaced or reinstalled unless it is in conformance with these sign
regulations. If the damage or destruction is 50 percent or less
of the appraised value, the sign may be restored within two
years of the destruction, but shall not be enlarged in any matter.
Damage or Destruction of Use. A nonconforming sign shall be
removed if the structure or use to which it is accessory is
destroyed or demolished to the extent exceeding 50 percent of
the principal structure's appraised value.
Change of Use. Whenever a change of use occurs upon a
lot which contains a nonconforming sign, such sign shall not be
permitted without being modified in such a manner as to be in
full comphance with these sign regulations.
Scion !9A 12. PEP~.~TTED SIGNS, ~_~xT~v ..... -------Ar r v
Section 10A-~12. RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; PERMITTED SIGNS
(1) General Regulations
Minimum Setback. Five feet from all public rights-of-way unless
further restricted by provisions of this Article.
nlumination of Signs in Residential Districts. The following
signs may be illuminated by white light only: institutional
bulletin boards and residential development identification signs.
(2) Signs for Permitted Principal Uses
Single-Family and Two-Family Dwellings. None except for those
signs exempt from permit requirements and temporary signs
authorized in Section 10A-6 and 10A-7, respectively.
Residential Developments. Permanent subdivision or
development identification signs indicating only the name and/or
address of the premises. The identification sign shall be ~r-cun~-
mcun+~~- "--~-d designed as monument signs with the maximum
sign area ~h~11 bC dC+~,~r--,.~-~-C~ as follows:
Developments of 20 Units or Less. One ~
monument sign, not to exceed si~ 10 square feet in area
or cig?. six feet in height.
Developments of 21 Units or More. One ~
monument sign at each msjor entrance, not to exceed
~6 20 square feet in area or cig?. six feet in height. A__~n
alternative to construction of a monument sign is
providing an architectural entrance feature on both sides
of the main entrances not to exceed six feet in height
with up to ten square feet of sign area for each feature.
c. General Farming Activities. Two ground-mounted farm signs
Minutes of December 12, 1990
per property up to eight feet in height, with a combined area
not to exceed 12 square feet.
(3) Signs for Accessory Uses
Accesso .ry Management or Rental Offices. One wall or projecting
sign up to four square feet in area.
Other Accesso .ry Uses. One wall or projecting sign up to four
square feet in area.
(4) Signs for Special Exception Uses
Institutional Bulletin Boards. One ground-mounted or wall sign
per use, not to exceed 16 square feet in area and, if a ground-
mounted sign, six feet in height.
Other Special Exception Uses. One sign of any type identifying
only the name and/or address of the premises, not to exceed 16
square feet in area and, if a ground-mounted sign, six feet in
height.
Section 10A-14. BUSINESS AND EMPLOYMENT ZONING DISTRICTS; PERMITTED
SIGNS
(1)
(2)
Signs in Business and Employment Districts; General Regnlations
Development and Construction Standards. All signs requiting
a permit shall comply with the requirements of Sections 10A-
9 and 10A-10.
Ground-mounted Signs; Monument Sign Requirement. All
ground mounted signs erected within business and employment
districts shall be constructed as monument signs, as defined in
Section 10A-4.
Signs Facing Residential Areas. Any sign erected within 100 feet
of either an existing residential use or a residential zoning
district shall be non-illuminated and limited to 16 square feet
in area.
Minimum Setback of Ground Mounted Signs. Ten feet from any
public right-of-way, service drive or entrance.
Signs for Individual Businesses cn "_ S~ng!c-v.....~7~;-- ~.~ ~* A single
business located on one :v_;.n~- g lot may erect signs as follows:
ao
Maximum Number of Signs Per Business. Two; however, ~e
~;-~ ]~* a business shall not be permitted to have both a
..... n ..... *^n monument sign and a projecting sign.
Types of Signs Permitted. Wall, ~cund mcun~d (monument
sty4~ monument, projecting, awning, canopy or marquee.
c. Maximum Size of Signs.
Wall or Marquee Sign. One square foot per linear foot
of building frontage on which the sign or signs are to
be attached,, up to a maximum aggregate of 100 square
feet.
P_ ..... ,4 ..... +^,4 /~l' ....... * q~'~']^: Monument Sign.
One square foot per five linear feet of lot frontage on
which the sign is to be located, up to a maximum size
of 44) 45 square feet and a maximum height of ~::ck:c
ten feet.
Awning or Canoov Sign. One square foot per linear foot
of the awning or canopy, up to t~m one-hundred square
feet.
Prqjecting Sign. One square foot per linear foot of
building frontage on which the sign is to be attached,
up to twelve square feet.
(3) Signs for Multiple Businesses cn -"- S~-n~!c Zcn:'ng Lot. Multiple
Minutes of December 12, 1990
businesses located on a single =c~r.g lot may erect signs as follows:
ao
Maximum Number of Signs Per Zc~ng Lot. No ~_-^ '-~ lot shall
be permitted to have erected both a projecting sign and a
g~m~L~ma~4 monument sign.
Maximum Number of Signs Per Business. Two plus a directory
sign.
.Types of Signs Permitted. Wall, ~--eun~ mc'-'"~m~- (menumc=t
_~y!c) monument, projecting, awning, canopy or marquee.
Maximum Size of Signs. Same as for individual businesses
(Section 10A-14(2)).
Directory Sign. One wall mounted sign per building placed near
the principal entrance, up to 15 square feet in area with a
maximum height of eight feet. Identification of a business on
the directory sign will not be included with the number of signs
permitted in (b) above. ~-~ ^;"~* ~^~* ~" ~* A ..... n
Wall Signs. One per establishment having an individual outside
entrance; harmonious with other wall signs as to color and
lettering. The size shall be limited to one square foot per linear
foot of building frontage for the establishment, up to a maximum
of 100 square feet.
Building Identification Wall Sign. The BAR may approve an
alternative building identification wall sign when the location and
proposed building name will better relate to the overall design
and architectural quality of the building. The maximum size of
the sign may be 100 square feet (one square foot for each linear
foot of building frontage), and is permitted in lieu of individual
wall signs.
(4)
Signs for Commercial, Office and Industrial Centers. Commercial, office
or industrial centers or parks at least two acres in size and including
five or more establishments planned as an integrated development shall
be authorized to erect signs based on the following.
ao
Signs for Individual Establishments Within Center. Same as for
individual or multiple businesses, as appropriate (Section 10A-
14 (1) and (2) respectively); provided, hc~.vc¥cr, no
mc'_'ntc~_ monument signs shall be permitted for individual
businesses located ':~+_~Jncr on the same .... -^-;.n~ lot ;;~-th _in a
shopping center. One ..... n ..... *~n
~,,a~;~,____._o -------~-~-;~"~^~' monument sign may be erected for each
detached principal building within an office or industrial center.
~ ..... ~_~-~^-~.. thereof. No such sign shall exceed 20 square
feet in area or eight feet in height.
bo
Shopping Center Identification Sign. One ..... ~ ..... *~'~
[,~..-----.-....+ ..~.~,~*+"']'J~ monument sign with ~ area of one square
f~t per five ~n~ f~t of lot ~on~e on which the si~ is to
be ere~d, up ~ a m~mum of ~ 4~ square feet and a
m~mum height of ~ 1~ feet Only ~e name and address of
~e cen~r and up ~ V::c thee n~es of e~bUshmen~ lc~tcd
~crc~n sh~ be displayed. Shopoing centem exceeding 150~000
square feet may ere~ a monument si~ of up ~ 60 square feet
(one square f~t per five ~n~r feet of lot ~on~ge), and ~elve
feet in height. The monument ~ may include the name of
the shopping ~n~r ~ up ~ four ~nant names.
Office or Industrial Signs. One ..... ~ ..... *~ -~-*^-
~.~_cn~ifi~-__~_'gn ~!~'_ monument sign at each major entrance of an
office or industrial center identifying the name of the center only.
No such sign shall exceed 40 4_~5 square feet in area or ~ 10 feet
in height.
(5)
Minutes of December 12, 1990
Signs for Gasoline Stations. Automobile gasoline stations may erect
signs as follows:
a_. Maximum Number of Signs. Three,
.Types of Signs Permitted. TN'~T, ground mounted (Monument Style),
awning, canopy or marquee.
c_. Maximum Size of Signs:
Wail and Marquee. Same as individuai businesses (Section 10A-
14(2).
Ground mounted (Monument Style). Same as for individual
businesses (Section 10A-14(2), but may include within the
ailowable square footage a provision for changeable fuel price
sign. The location of the ground mounted (Monument Style)
sign must be demonstrated as not interfering with entrance
sight distances.
Canopy or Awning. One square foot per linear foot of the
canopy or awning, up to a maximum fifty square foot per sign.
Gas Pump Signs. Each gas pump shail be permitted a total of
two square foot of sign area to identify the product dispensed.
(6)
Signs for Theaters. Theaters are authorized to erect one of the
permitted wall or marquee signs with a changeable copy board displaying
the name(s) and time(s) of the current motion picture or theatrical
production.
(7)
Signs for Other Uses Within Business and Employment Districts. In
cases where nc:'thcr the regulations within ~.~_'cn 19A !3 er Section
10A-14 =p~Afi~"_~!"y do not address a sign for a permissible use within
a business or employment district, the Zoning Administrator shall make
a written interpretation of the Ordinance, which shail be kept on file
and used as a guide for future determinations.
Section 10A-15. SIGNS IN FLOODPLAIN DISTRICTS
(1)
Board of Zoning Appeais Authorization Required. Signs may be erected
within a Floodplain District only after approval by the Board of Zoning
Appeals, and the issuance of a sign permit by the Zoning Administrator.
(2)
Criteria for Signs in the F-1 District. In addition to all applicable
criteria established within these sign regulations, any sign which is
proposed to be erected within the F-1 District shall satisfy ail applicable
standards established in Article 5C of this Ordinance.
(3)
AreaI Height and Location of Signs. The Board of Zoning Appeais is
authorized to require morJification of the area, height~ or location of a
sign upon a determination that such change is necessary to promote the
purpose and intent of the Floodplain District Regulations.
Section 10A-16. SIGNS IN THE OLD AND HISTORIC DISTRICT
(1)
Historic District Zoning Permit Required. Signs within the'H-1 Historic
District require the approvai of an Historic District Zoning Permit by
the Board of Architectural Review and the issuance of a sign permit by
the Zoning Administrator.
(2)
Memm~t Sign Modifications P~q"Arcmcnt .~5=;' ~c W~'.'cd . The
Board of Architectural Review may authorize an aiternative signage plan
Minutes of December 12, 1990
that does not strictly adhere to the height and location criteria within
the H-1 District if it is determined that the design is more consistent
with the architectural character of the building to which it relates and
other surrounding properties. In no case, however, may a sign exceed
the area limitations which otherwise apply. ~.
(3)
Additional Review Criteria. Any sign erected within the H-1 District
shall also satisfy all applicable criteria established in Article 5A.
(4)
Area~ Height and Location of Signs. The height and location standards
for the underlying zoning district shall be applicable to signs erected
within the H-1 District; however, the maximum sign area per use shall
not exceed 40 50 square feet for wall,canopy and marquee signs, 14 20
square feet for ground-mounted signs, and 14 12 square feet for
projecting signs.
Section 10A-17. SIGNS IN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS
(1)
Signs, Generally. Applicants submitting a petition for a planned development
district (PRN, PRe or PEC) shall submit the proposed maximum size, height
and number of signs, including proposed limitations and requirements on all
private signs, as required by Section 10A-9 of this Article.
(2)
Optional Comprehensive Signage Plan. In order to allow greater design
flexibility, planned development applications may include a
comprehensive signage plan indicating the types, general location, size,
height and design of proposed signs. Such a comprehensive signage plan
shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission and approved by the
Town Council as part of the final development plan procedures.
Section 10A-18. SIGN PERMIT PROCEDURES
(1)
Applicability. A Sign Permit shall be required for all signs erected after
the effective date of this Article, except for those signs which are
specifically excluded from the Sign Permit requirements as provided in
Section 10A-6.
(2)
Filing of Application; Fees. Applications for Sign Permits shall be filed
on a form provided by the Zoning Administrator, shall contain
information required herein, and shall be accompanied by a fee of $25.00
for signs less than six square feet. $35.00 for signs more than six square
feet and $35.00 for a temporary sign permit of any size.
(3)
Information Required. All applications for Sign Permits shall contain,
or have attached thereto, the following information in either written or
graphic form:
Name, address and telephone number of the sign erector
and the sign owner.
Position of the sign in relation to adjacent lot lines, buildings,
sidewalks, streets and intersections.
Type of sign and general description of structural design and
construction materials to be used.
d. Purpose of the proposed sign.
Drawings of the proposed sign which shall contain specifications
indicating the height, perimeter and area dimensions, means of
support, method of illumination, colors, and any other significant
aspect of the proposed sign.
f.
Any other information requested by the Zoning Administrator
in order to carry out the purpose and intent of these regulations.
(4)
Recording of Sign Permit. The Zoning Administrator shall maintain a
record of all Sign Permits issued. All Sign Permits shall be numbered
in the order of their issuance.
Minutes of December 12, 1990
(5)
Inspections. A final inspection shall be completed after installation of
approved signs. Any discrepancies between the approved sign and the
sign as constructed shall be identified and may result in the halt of
construction or sign removal, if so ordered by the Zoning Administrator.
(6)
Revocations. The Zoning Administrator may revoke a permit or approval
if it is found that there has been concealment or misrepresentation of
material facts in either the application or plans.
Section 10A-19. TEMPO~Y SIGN PERMIT PROCEDURES
All signs requiring the issuance of a Temporary Sign Permit, as established in Section
10A-7, shall submit all information requested by the Zoning Administrator prior to the
issuance of such permit. The approved permit shall include the expiration date of the
temporary permit. The applicant may request extensions of said permit for good cause.
Temporary signs remaining after the expiration of the permit shall be considered an
obsolete sign.
Section 10A-20. EXPIRATION OF SIGN PERMITS; SIGNS NOT CONSTRUCTED
A Sign Permit shall expire and become null and void if the approved sign is not erected
within a period of 12 months from the date the permit was originally issued. The
Zoning Administrator may grant one extension of the Sign Permit for a period of six
months, but in no case shall a permit be valid for more than a total of eight months.
Extensions may be granted only when the proposed sign is in compliance with all
current applicable regulations.
Scct;.cn !OA 2!. VAp. t-~-NCES TO SIGN REGtjt--~.T!ONS NOT PER!¢!TTED
Scs+ACh !OA 22. P~-¥-OV.~! OF !LLEG-~! SIGNS
Section 10A-22 has moved to Section 10A-10(5).
SECTION II. The Planning Commission shall report its recommendation to the Town Council
on the proposed amendment pursuant to Chapter 11, Title 15.1-431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as
amended.
90-305 - RESOLUTION - APPROVING CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 WITH CH2M HILL
SOUTHEAST, INC., FOR ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES IN THE
UPGRADE/EXPANSION OF THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY
WHEREAS, the town is currently under contract with CH2M Hill Southeast, Inc., for design
and construction engineering services relating to the upgrade and expansion of the Water Pollution
Control Facility to a capacity of 6.0 MGD; and
WHEREAS, preliminary design services for expansion to 6.0 MGD, completed in May 1990,
identified an estimated design and construction cost in excess of $30 million; and
WHEREAS, the estimated cost and capacity are beyond the town's present financial capability
and needs; and
WHEREAS, cost reduction alternatives totaling $10-12 million were approved for evaluation at
a September 1990 Council workshop, including a reduction in proposed plant capacity to 5.0 MGD; and
WHEREAS, amendment of the September 12, 1989 contract is necessary for evaluation and
incorporation of these cost reduction alternatives into a "Revised Preliminary Design Report":
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The acting town manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute contract amendment no.
1, in the amount of $129,610.00, to the engineering services contract with CH2M Hill Southeast, Inc.,
dated September 12, 1989, for the Water Pollution Control Facility upgrade and expansion.
90-306 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
AND PROCEEDING WITH THE PHASE II RECYCLING PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Waste Management requires that all cities, towns and
counties submit by July 1, 1991, a Solid Waste Management Plan that meets the state mandated
Minutes of December 12, 1990
recycling rates of 10% by 1991, 15% by 1993 and 25% by 1995; and
WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Waste Management, the Loudoun County Department
of Engineering and Grayson Refuse Services have offered assistance to the town to prepare the Solid
Waste Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, Phase I of the town's recycling program offers voluntary recycling centers that
accept aluminum, newsprint, clear, brown and green glass; and
WHEREAS, the recycling centers plus other recycling efforts have resulted in only a 4%
recycling rate in Leesburg; and
WHEREAS, Phase II, offered by Grayson Refuse Services for six months at no cost, which
includes voluntary curbside recycling of aluminum, newsprint, dear, brown and green glass in the
Country Club Subdivision and at a multi-family location plus the continuation of the drop-off centers
is expected to produce a recycling rate of 18%; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Advisory Commission has unanimously endorsed the program:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The Town Council authorizes the Acting Town Manager to submit by July 1,
1991, a Solid Waste Management Plan for the Town of Leesburg utilizing the assistance of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, the Loudoun County Department of Engineering, and Grayson Refuse
Services.
SECTION II. The Town Council authorizes the Acting Town Manager to proceed with
publication and implementation of Phase II of the recycling program in January 1991.
90-307 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF A LANDSCAPE PLAN TO THE
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FOR THE INSTAIJJATION OF
SCREENING BETWEEN CHESTERFIELD PLACE AND LIBERTY STREET PARKING
LOT
WHEREAS, the former town shop buildings were razed in February, 1990 to allow the
construction of the Liberty Street parking facility; and
WHEREAS, residents of Chesterfield Place submitted a petition to the Mayor in October, 1990
requesting additional screening between Chesterfield and the parking lot; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Engineering and Public Works determined the amount of screening
required by the town zoning ordinance and met with the Chesterfield residents; and
WHEREAS, the installation of eight white pine trees and six holly shrubs will satisfy the zoning
ordinance requirements and the residents' requests at a cost of $650 to $800 which is available in the
town's parking lots and meters accounts; and
WHEREAS, because the property is located in the Historic District~ Board of Architectural
Review approval of a landscaping plan is required.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The acting town manager is authorized to submit a landscaping plan for Board of Architectural
Review approval for the installation of trees and shrubs on the west side of the town's Liberty Street
lot to serve as screening of the parking lot for Chesterfield Place residents.
90-308 - RESOLUTION - INITIATING AMENDMENTS TO THE LEESBURG ZONING ORDINANCE
REGARDING ARTICLE 5C - FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, changes in the rules which govern the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
require the Town to amend the Floodplain District Regulations to ensure continued flood insurance
coverage; and
WHEREAS, the Floodplain District Regulations should be extended to those areas annexed by
the Town to promote a consistent review process; and
WHEREAS, these amendments will further promote the public health, safety and welfare of
the Town of Leesbur~.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. An amendment to Article 5C of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance las shown below,
is hereby received and referred to the Planning Commission for a public hearing and recommendation
under Chapter 11, Tiffs 15,1-481 of the Code of Virginia, as amended,
ARTICLE 5C "F-l" FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Minutes of December 12, 1990
Section 5C-1. DISTRICT PROVISIONS
All uses, activities and development occurring within any FEMA (Federal Emergency
Management Agen .cy) designated or approximated one-hundred (100) year floodplain
district which includes the floodway and flood fringe district, herein referred to as the
F-1 floodplain district shall be undertaken only upon the issuance of a zoning permit.
Such development shall be undertaken only in strict compliance with the provisions of
this ordinance and with all other applicable codes and ordinances including the Virginia
Uniform Statewide Building Code. Prior to the issuance of any such permit, the Zoning
Administrator shall require all a_~n applicant 5cn~ to verify !nc!udc compliance with all
applicable State and Federal laws, and the Town of Leesburg's Design and Construction
Standards Manual.
Under no circumstance s shall any use, activity and/or development adversely affect the
existing 100-year water surface elevation or capacity of the channels or floodways of any
watercourse, drainage ditch or any drainage facility or system.
Approval shall be obtained from the U.S. Corp of Engineers, the Virginia State Water
Control Board, and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission prior to any proposed
alteration or relocation of any channels, watercourse or stream within the town.
Notification of any such proposal shall be given to all affected adjacent municipalities,
the Division of Soil and Water Conservation (Department of Conservation and
Recreation), and the Ccp!cc cf such nc~fi~ticn ~?_A kc fcr::ardc~ *~ the S+~+~ Water
Contrcl Bc~r~, *~...v __~e*"*" -v,-------~---r~"~"'~'~^~* ^~ .... !n~rgcvcrn.'r..cn~ za,~;~_.~ Federal Insurance
Administration.
Section 5C-2. PERMITTED USES
No development shall be permitted in the floodplain district except where the effect of
such development on flood heights is fully offset by accompanying improvements which
have been approved by all appropriate authorities. The placement of new or
substantially improved manufactured home(s) within any identified flood plain district
is prohibited.any
manufacturc~ ~' ...... ~' ..... ~;~;^" i~ ~;~';+~
The following uses are permitted in the F-1 Floodplain District provided that they are
not prohibited by any other applicable ordinance and provided that they do not require
structures, fill or storage materials and equipment:
(1)
Agricultural uses such as general farming, pasturing, grazing outdoor plant
nurseries, horticulture, truck farming, forestry, sod farming, and wild crop
harvesting.
(2)
Public and private recreational uses and activities such as parks, day camps,
picnic, grounds, goff courses, boat launching and swimming areas, hiking and
horseback riding trails, wildlife and nature preserves, game farms, fish
hatcheries and fishing areas.
(3)
Accessory residential uses such as gardens, play areas, and pervious loading
areas.
(4)
Accessory industrial and commercial uses such as pervious parking and loading
areas.
Section 5C-3. CONDITIONAL USES WHEN AUTHORIZED AS A SPECLAT
EXCEPTION BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
The following uses are conditionally permitted in the F-1 Floodplain District when
authorized ~ a ~Fc~.~ c~cp~cn by the Board of Zoning Appeals provided that they
comply with the provisions of this ordinance and any other applicable ordinance and
regulation, and are not prohibited by this or any other ordinance.
(1)
Non-residential structures, except for mcbflc homes manufactured homes,
accessory to the uses and activities in Section 5C-23.
(2)
Utilities and public facilities and improvements such as streets, bridges, and
transmission lines, pipe lines and other similar uses; provided howeveL that
such uses are designed, located, and constructed to minimize or eliminate
,infiltration of flood waters, discharge of sewage, and flood damages to these uses
and surrounding properties.
(3) Temporary uses such as circuses, carnivals and similar activities.
(4)
Storage of materials and equipment provided that they are not buoyant,
flammable or explosive, and are not subject to major damage by flooding, or
provided that such material and equipment is firmly anchored to prevent
Minutes of December 12, 1990
flotation or movement~ and/or can be readily removed from the area within the
time available after flood warning.
(5)
Other similar uses and activities provided they cause no increase in flood heights
and/or velocities. All uses, activities, and structural developments shall be
undertaken in strict compliance with the flood-proofing provisions contained in
all other applicable codes and ordinances.
Section 5C-4. CONDITIONAL USES AND VARIANCES--ADDITIONAL FACTORS TO
BE SATISFIED
In passing upon applications for Conditional Uses and Variances, the Board of Zoning
Appeals shall satisfy all relevant factors and procedures specified in other sections of the
Zoning Ordinance and the following factors:
(1) The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities
caused by encroachments. No conditional use or variance shall be granted for
any proposed use, development or activity within the floodplain district that will
cause any increase in flood levels during the one hundred (100) year flood.
(2)
The danger that materials may be swept on to other lands or downstream to
the injury of others.
(3)
The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these
systems to withstand the 100 year flood to prevent disease, contamination and
unsanitary conditions.
(4)
The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and
the effect of such damage on the individual owners.
(5)
The importance of the services provided to the community by the proposed
facility.
(6) The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location.
(7)
The availability of alternative locations for the proposed use not subject to
flooding.
(8) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and
development anticipated in the foreseeable future.
(9)
The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and floodplain
management program for the area.
(10)
The safety of access to the property for ordinary and emergency vehicles in time
of flood.
(11)
(12)
The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of
the flood waters expected at the site.
Such other factors which are relevant to the purposes of this Ordinance.
(13)
The repair or rehabilitation of historic structures upon a determination from the
Board of Architectural Review (BAR) that the proposed repair or rehabilitation
will not preclude the structure's continued designation as a historic structure
and the variance is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character
and design of the structure.
(14)
The Board of Zoning Appeals may refer any application and accompanying
documentation pertaining to any request for a conditional use or variance to any
engineer or other qualified person or agency for technical assistance in
evaluating the proposed project in relation to flood heights and velocities, and
the adequacy of the plans for protection and other related matters.
(15)
Conditional uses and/or variances shall only be issued after the Board of Zoning
Appeals k~ determines that the granting of such will not result in:
a. Unacceptable or prohibited increases in flood heights.
b. Additional threats to public safety.
c. Extraordinary public expense.
d. Nuisances.
e. Fraud or victimization of the public.
Minutes of December 12, 1990
Conflict with local law or ordinances.
(16)
Con'ditional uses and/or variances shall only be issued after the board has
determined that the conditional use and/or variance will be the minimum reliefs
to any hardship.
(17)
The Board shall notify the applicant for a conditional use and/or variance, in
writing, that the issuance of a conditional use and/or variance to construct a
structure below the one hundred (100) year flood elevation:
a. Increases risks tn life and property.
b. Will result in increased premium rates for flood insurance.
(18)
A record of the above notification as well as all variance actions, including
justification for their issuance, shall be maintained and any variances which are
issued shall be noted in the annual report submitted to the Federal Insurance
Administrator.
Section 5C-5. EXISTING STRUCTURES IN THE FLOODPLAIN DISTRICTS
A structure or use of a structure or premises which lawfldly existed before the
enactment of these provisions, but which is not in conformity with these provisions, may
be continued subject to the following conditions:
(1)
Existing structures and/or uses located in the floodplain district shall not be
expanded or enlarged (unless the effect of the proposed expansion or
enlargement on flood heights is fully offset by accompanying improvements).
(2)
Any modification, alteration, repair reconstruction or improvement of any kind
to a structure and/or use located in any floodplain district to an extent or
amount of leas than fifty (50) percent of its market value, shall be elevated
and/or flood-proofed.
(3)
Any modification, alteration, repair, reconstruction or improvement of any kind
to a structure and/or use in a floodplain district to an extent or amount of fifty
(50) percent or more of its market value shall be undertaken only in full
compliance with the provisions of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code.
Section 5C-6. DELINEATION OF "F-r' FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT
The various floodplain districts shall include areas sub. iect to inundation by waters of
the one hundred (100)-year flood. The basis for the delineation of these districts shall
be the Flood Insurance Study for The Town of Leesburg and Loudoun County prepared
by the Federal Emergency. Management Agency., Federal Insurance Administration,
dated March 30, 1982 and November 1, 1985, as amended. For areas where the 100
year flood profiles or elevations have not been established, information from federal,
state, and other acceptable sources shall be used, when available. Where the specific
one hundred (100) year flood elevation cannot be determined for this area using other
sources of data, such as the U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers Floodplain Information
Reports, U.S. Geological Survey Flood-Prone Quadrangles, etc., then the applicant for
the proposed use, development and/or activity shall determine this elevation in
accordance with hydrologic and hydraulic engineering techniques. Hydrologic and
hydraulic analyses shall be undertaken only by professional engineers or others of
demonstrated qualifications, who shall certify that the technical methods used correctly
reflect currently accepted technical concepts. Studies, analyses, computations, etc., shall
be submitted in sufficient detail to allow a thorough review by the Town of Leesburg.
Section 5C-7. INTERPRETATION OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
The Floodplain District boundaries shown on the Zoning Map are generally consistent
with the boundaries depicted on the applicable "Flood Insurance Rate Map". The specific
bounda~, for determining areas within the floodplain are contained in the supporting
documentation accompanying those maps. The initial interpretations of the boundaries
of the floodplain district shall be made by the Zoning Administrator based on the
applicant mapping the area in question at a sufficient scale to accurately depict the
Minutes of December 12, 1990
floodplain boundaries. Should a disoute arise concerning the boundaries of any of the
Districts, the Board of Zoning Appeals shall make the necessary determination. The
person questioning or contesting the location of the District boundary shall be ziven a
reasonable opportunit? to present his case to the Board and to submit his own technical
evidence if he so desires.
Section 5C-78. "F-l" FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT BOD-NDARY CHANGES
The Floodplain District may be revised in accordance with the provisions of Article 13
and consistent with the criteria contained in the Town of Leesburg's Design and
Construction Manual where natural or man-made changes have occurred and/or more
detailed studies conducted or undertaken by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or other
qualified agency or individual document the advisability of such change. However,
approval must be obtained from the Federal Insurance Administration prior to any such
change.
SECTION II. The Planning Commission shall report its recommendation to the Town Council
on the proposed amendment pursuant to Chapter 11, Title 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia, as
amended.
90-309 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL FOR
SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION SE-90-07 GATEWAY, LOT 1 BY ALTON
ECHOLS~ JR., 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:
A notice of public hearing to consider special exception application #SE-90-07 to consider
permitting a townhouse development in the B-2 zoning district shall be published in the Loudoun
Times-Mirror on December 26, 1990 and January 2, 1991, for the public hearing on January 8, 1991,
at 7:30 p.m., in the lower level Council Committee meeting room, 25 West Market Street, S.W.,
Leesburg, Virginia 22075.
90-310 - RESOLUTION - RECEIVING AND REFERRING APPLICATION #ZM-129 AND SE-90-08
LEEGATE BY FIRST POTOMAC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR REVISION
OF THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP 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-129 by First Potomac Development Corporation for revision of the
Zoning District Map from I-1 (Industrial Research Park) to B-3 (Community Retail/Commercial) and
special exception #SE-90-08 to permit vehicle sales facilities is received and referred to the Planning
Commission for public hearing and recommendation under Chapter 11, Title 15.12 of the 1950 Code
of Virginia, as amended.
90-311 - RESOLUTION - ENDORSING THE AIRPORT COMMISSION 1991 GOALS
WHEREAS, the Airport Commission has developed a comprehensive list of goals for 1991; and
WHEREAS, these goals are summarized as follows:
1. Design and publish an updated marketing brochure for the airport.
2. Promote the extension of the Dulles Toll Road to Leesburg and monitor
its alignment to ensure a positive effect on the airport.
3. Actively market and publicize the benefit of the airport. Inform the
citizenry regarding the effect of expanded activity at the airport.
4. Monitor construction activity at the airport including localizer, automated
weather station and landing lights, and projects such as the Loudoun
County Government Center.
5. Maintain an effective working relationship with the FAA, Virginia
Department of Aviation and Airport Users Group.
6. Update Airport Rules and Regulations.
7. Acquire land for the installation of the Instrument Landing System.
8. Work with Leesburg and Loudoun County planning st_~ff-~ to establish
an airport overlay zone in accordance with state mandate.
WHEREAS, Council has reviewed these goals and is in complete agreement as to their
Minutes of December 12, 1990
Appropriateness:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The Airport Commission's 1991 goals are hereby supported and endorsed as being consistent
with the airport related objectives of the town.
90-312 - RESOLUTION - ENDORSING THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 1991 GOALS
WHE~, the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) has developed a comprehensive list of
goals for 1991; and
WHEREAS, these goals are summarized as follows:
1. Complete and approve BAR Bylaws.
2. Evaluate and clarify all BAR policies.
3. Consider whether Leesburg should apply for Certified Local Government status.
4. Consider advertising BAR agendas.
5. Assist with the historic preservation and urban design section of the Town Plan update.
6. Assist in revising the Preservation Ordinance.
7. Assist in revising and updating the Preservation Index.
8. Participate in preservation training programs and conferences.
9. Assist in writing new design guidelines for the Old and Historic District.
WHEREAS, Council has reviewed these goals and is in complete agreement as to their
appropriateness:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The Board of Architectural Review's 1991 goals are hereby supported and endorsed as being
consistent with objectives of the town.
90-313 - RESOLUTION - ENDORSING THE CABLE TELEVISION ADVISORY COMMISSION 1991
GOALS
WHEREAS, the Cable Television Advisory Commission has developed a comprehensive list of
goals for 1991; and
WHEREAS, these goals are summarized as follows:
1. Encourage local origination programming to better serve the citizens of Leesburg.
2. Expedite cable television service to new communities, specifically Beauregard Estates
and Tavistock Farms.
3. Encourage the upgrading of equipment and the installation of
addressable converters.
4. Maintain quality programming on government access channel 15.
5. Monitor federal actions regarding cable rate regulation.
WHEREAS, Council has reviewed these goals and is in complete agreement as to their
appropriateness:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The Cable Television Advisory Commission's 1991 goals are hereby supported and
endorsed as being consistent with objectives of the town.
90-314 - RESOLUTION - ENDORSING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY
COMMISSION 1991 GOALS
WHEREAS, the Economic Development Advisory Commission (EDAC) has developed a
comprehensive list of goals for 1991; and
WHEREAS, these goals are summarized as follows:
Minutes of December 12, 1990
1. Promote the Town Council's position to retain the County Government
Center in Leesburg.
2. Promote the extension of the Dulles Toll Road to Leesburg.
3. Continue promoting Leesburg's attractiveness for quality economic
development and as a good place to purchase goods and services.
4. Maint~n spesker's forum for EDAC monthly meetings.
5. Lend support to the Airport Commission's efforts to republish the
Leesburg Airport Marketing Brochure.
6. Maintain a working relationship with Leesburg Renaissance.
7. Expand industry visitation program to include new business and retail
and service businesses.
8. Promote economic development consistent with the Town Plan for Route
7 and airport areas.
8. Provide speakers to local groups.
10. Establish and maintain active media relations in the area of economic
development.
11. Improve display unit to include tourism and Ida Lee Park.
12. Co-sponsor and organize events in conjunction with the Chamber of
Commerce, Leesburg Business Association and Loudoun County
Economic Development Advisory Commission.
13. Promote the Town Council's position regarding the preservation of
Dodona Manor.
WHEREAS, Council has reviewed these goals and is in complete agreement as to their
appropriateness:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The Economic Development Advisory Commission's 1991 goals are hereby supported and
endorsed as being consistent with the airport related objectives of the town.
90-315 - RESOLUTION - ENDORSING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COMMISSION 1991
GOALS
WHE~, the Environmental Advisory Commission has developed a comprehensive list of
goals for 1991; and
WHEREAS, these goals are summarized as follows:
1. Reapply for Tree City USA status.
2. Conduct the annual EAC awards program.
3. Sponsor the annual Arbor Day celebration.
4. Assist with the initiation of an experimental curbside recycling program.
5. Promote participation in the Adopt-A-Spot program.
6. Sponsor the EAC Clean-Up Day during the Keep Loudoun Beautiful
Clean-Up Campaign.
7. Continue tree inventory within the town.
8. Monitor the following areas within the town.
ao
Dodona Manor
Zoning enforcement
Impact of shopping centers
Tree preservation
Smoking regulations
Architectural control
Streetscape improvements
Attraction of clean industries
Minutes of December 12, 1990
i. Open space protection
j. Greenways
WHEREAS, Council has reviewed these goals and is in complete agreement as to their
appropriateness:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The Environmental Advisory Commission's 1991 goals are hereby supported and endorsed as
being consistent with objectives of the town.
90-316 - RESOLUTION - ENDORSING THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION
1991 GOALS
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission has developed a comprehensive list
of goals for 1991; and
WHEREAS, these goals are summarized as follows:
1. Assist with the annual Arbor Day celebration.
2. Present to Town Council the status of parks and recreation.
3. Review the Greenway/Trail Master Plan development.
4. Tour and inspect town parks.
5. Assist with the development of a strategic plan for parks and recreation.
6. Assist with the development of a park standards manual.
7. Assist with the selection of the parks and recreation volunteers of the
year.
8. Review and approve scholarship applications for Ida Lee Park Recreation
Center.
9. Assist with the park section update of the Town Plan.
WHEREAS, Council has reviewed these goals and is in complete agreement as to their
appropriateness:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission's 1991 goals are hereby supported and
endorsed as being consistent with parks and recreation objectives of the town.
90-317 - RESOLUTION - ENDORSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION 1991 GOALS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has developed a comprehensive list of goals for 1991; and
WHEREAS, these goals are summarized as follows:
1. Take a more active and interested role in formulation of the CIP.
Monitor all stormwater plans and activities in the Town.
2. Work with staff to develop an in-house orientation and training program
for new commissioners.
3. Work on Town Plan update.
4. Complete evaluation of transportation growth and road usage in the
Town. Determine if future trends are adequately provided for by the
Town Plan. Monitor and review County, regional and State
transportation planning programs to ensure consistency with the goals
and objectives of the Town Plan.
5. Evaluate status of non-conforming lots. Determine if future revisions
to the ordinances are required.
6. Review and revise operating procedures and processes as appropriate.
7. Complete research and if necessary initiate legislation on revisions to
pipestem lots.
WHEREAS, Council has reviewed these goals and is in complete agreement as to their
Hoq
Minutes of December 12, 1990
appropriateness:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The Planning Commission's 1991 goals are hereby supported and endorsed as being consistent
with objectives of the town.
90-318 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT AND APPROVING A PERFORMANCE
GUARANTEE AND WATER AND SEWER EXTENSION PERMITS FOR EXETER
SECTION 11
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The acting town manager shah execute the contract for public improvements for
the improvements shown on the plans approved by the Director of Engineering and Public Works for
Exeter Section 11.
SECTION H. The extension of municipal water and sewer for Exeter Section 11 is approved
in accordance with Sections 15-9 and 19-18 of the Town Code.
SECTION III. The letter of credit from the Riggs National Bank in the amount of
$1,219,000.00 in a form approved by the town attorney is approved as security to guarantee installation
of the public improvements shown on plans approved by the Director of Engineering and Public Works
for Exeter Section 11.
90-319 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT AND APPROVING A PERFORMANCE
GUARANTEE AND A WATER AND SEWER EXTENSION PERMITS FOR THE C&P
BUILDING AT HIGHPOINT
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The acting town manager shall execute the contract for public improvements for
the improvements shown on the plans approved by the Director of Engineering and Public Works for .
the C&P Building at Highpoint.
SECTION II. The extension of municipal water and sewer for the C&P Building at Highpoint
is approved in accordance with Sections 15-9 and 19-18 of the Town Code.
SECTION III. The corporate surety from the International Fidelity Insurance Company in the
amount of $158,349.00 in a form approved by the town attorney is approved as security to guarantee
installation of the public improvements shown on plans approved by the Director of Engineering and
Public Works for the C&P Building at Highpoint.
90-320 - RESOLUTION - RELEASING THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR THE PHASE I
SPECIAL AGREEMENT FOR STAR PONTIAC VEHICLE STORAGE FACILITY
WHEREAS, the Council by Resolution #89-231 authorized an agreement and performance
guarantee in the amount of $80,250.00 for the public improvements associated with the development
plan for the Star Pontiac Vehicle SWrage Facility; and
WHEREAS, the owner desired to phase the improvements, rather than bear the total cost for
all the required work at one time; and
W~IE~, on
agreement and approved
Storage Facility; and
July 25, 1990 the Council by Resolution #90-193 authorized a special
a substitute performance guarantee for Phase I of the Star Pontiac Vehicle
WHEREAS, the owner provided a letter of credit from Farmers and Merchants National Bank
in the amount of $21,000 for Phase I to guarantee the installation of the landscaping, fence and swale
as shown on the plans approved by the Director of Engineering and Public Works for the Star Pontiac
Vehicle SWrage Facility; and
WHEKEAS, the length of the Phase I performance guarantee is six months at which time all
work would be completed; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Council Resolution #90-193 adopted July 25, 1990 the owner is
required to enter into an agreement to complete all public improvements and provide the $80,250.00
performance guarantee approved by Resolution #89-231 on or before January 25, 1991, or remove all
vehicles from the gravel vehicle storage facility; and
WHEREAS, the installation of the landscaping, fence and swale have been completed and
approved.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The letter of credit from First American Bank in the amount of $21,000.00 which guarantees
Minutes of December 12, 1990
the installation of the landscaping, swale and fence in Phase I of the Star Pontiac Vehicle Storage
Facility is released.
Proposed legislation item numbers 10. (b) and (c) were referred back to committee.
Aye: Councilmembers Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
Ms. Imhoff presented a brief staff report on the following ordinance. She stated that this was
an amendment to a previously approved planned residential neighborhood. Previously approved for 60
single-family dwelling condominium units and one single-family unit. It has now been revised to 37
single-family units. There have been significant changes to the amenities as previously proffered. The
clubhouse, pool, poolhouse and tennis courts have been deleted in lieu of a natural Wail, a connection
to the bike trail, proffered contributions for offsite trail improvement as well as proffered contributions
to Ida Lee Park. There has been a tree preservation plan added to this project and fire and rescue
proffers as well.
On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Mrs. Forester, the following ordinance was proposed and
adopted.
90-0-42 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING THE LINDEN HILL PLANNED RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT #ZM-60 FOR LINHAB DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
WHEREAS, an ordinance amendment to the Linden Hill Planned Development was initiated
on February 27, 1990, and a joint public hearing was held on March 27, 1990; and
WHEREAS, at the public hearing the applicant presented information indicating substantial
changes to the approved concept plan for this planned development which had not been available on
February 27, 1990; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 19, 1990, to consider the
revised application; and
WHEREAS, on October 25, 1990 the Planning Commission recommended conditional approval
of this rezoning application; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council held a public hearing on December 12, 1990 to consider this
rezoning application; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is consistent with the Town Plan goals and policies for
this property and is compatible with surrounding zoning and development; and
WHEREAS, the rezoning request is in the interest of public necessity, convenience, general
welfare and good zoning practice:
THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. Rezoning application #ZM-117 Linden Hill PRN by Linhab Development
Corporation is hereby approved and the Zoning District map is hereby amended to adopted the amended
proffers and concept plan for the Linden Hill PRN, further described as Tax Map 48 Parcel 68, subject
to the following conditions proffered in writing by the property owner on December 12, 1990, in
accordance with the provisions of Section 15.1-49(a) of the 1950 Code of Virginia as amended:
Development Plan. The development of the subject property shall be in substantial conformity with
the Rezoning #ZM-117/Concept Plan/Rezoning Plan dated August 23, 1990, and revised through
November 29, 1990, prepared by Paciulli, Simmons & Associates, Ltd., "Concept Plan." The
swimming pool, pool house, and tennis courts which were shown on the Concept Plan/Preliminaw
Development Plan approved as part of #ZM-60 shall be eliminated.
Setback from Route 15. The Applicant agrees to maintain a 70-foot building setback from Route
15, and has constructed a barrier fence along the eastern property line in accordance with the
original proffers for #ZM-60.
o
Sidewalk and Frontage Improvements. The Applicant has constructed a deceleration lane in
accordance with the original proffers for #ZM-60 and has extended curb and gutter along the
eastern frontage of the property to the Country Club entrance.
4. Buffer for Country Club and Greenway Property. Lines.
ao
The Applicant or its successor in interest shall construct an eight-foot solid wood barrier
fence along the northern property line adjacent to developed lots, connecting with the
already constructed fence in Phase I and extending to the western terminus of the existing
fence on lot 78 in the Country Club subdivision, as shown on the Concept Plan, to be
bonded, constructed and completed as part of the Phase II improvements, and to maintain
a minimum 20-foot building setback from these lots.
Minutes of December 12, 1990
o
10.
11.
bo
The Applicant or its successor in interest shall install a split rail fence along the southern
boundary line of lots 20 through 27, and a split rail fence or buffer of low evergreen shrubs
along the balance of the southern property line.
Contribution for Ida Lee Park. The Applicant or its successor in interest shall contribute to the
Town of Leesburg a lump-sum payment of $10,000.00 to be applied toward improvements at the
Ida Lee Park. Such payment shall be made prior to the receipt of the first zoning permit for a
dwelling unit in Phase II, as identified on the Concept Plan. Thereafter, applicant shall contribute
two hundred dollars ($200.00) to the Town prior to the issuance of a zoning permit for each unit
to be constructed at Linden Hill, for the same purpose.
Active Recreation/Trail System.
The Applicant or its successor in interest shall construct to Town of Leesburg standards
a concrete sidewalk as shown on the Concept Plan to be bonded, constructed and completed
as part of the Phase II improvements. Applicant shall further provide a connection to the
Greenway trail system between lots 27 and 28 as shown on the Concept Plan. The trail
system shall be bonded, constructed and completed as part of the Phase II improvements.
bo
The Applicant or its successor in interest shall contribute $3,000.00 to the Town to be
applied toward the construction of an off-site public trail to connect from the Linden Hill
trail to the Greenway trail system as generally shown on the Concept Plan. Such payment
shall be made prior to the receipt of the first zoning permit for a dwelling unit in Phase
II.
The Applicant or its successor in interest shall provide a nature walk which connects the
lots to the open space on the western end of the property, to be approved by the Director
of Parks and Recreation prior to final plat approval. The open space area shall be cleaned
to make it accessible to the residents, and shall be maintained by the Linden Hill
Homeowners' Association.
Stormwater Detention. The Applicant has constructed an on-site stormwater management facility
in connection with Phase I. Prior to the approval of Phase H construction drawings, the Applicant
or its successor in interest shall submit calculations demonstrating compliance with the Town of
Leesburg Stormwater Management Master Plan, and the Design and Construction Standards
Manual. ff these calculations establish that the facility will not be adequate to handle Phase II
runoff, the Applicant will contribute to the Town a lump-sum payment in an Amount equal to the
cost of constructing a stormwater management pond on site to meet the requirements of the
Stormwater Management Plan and Design and Construction Standards Manual. Said contribution
to be made prior to the time of the issuance of the first zoning permit for Phase H.
Tree Preservation. The Applicant has provided a tree preservation plan on the Concept Plan
identifying and labelling specific trees to be preserved, with special but not exclusive attention to
the linden trees and the mature wooded area along the rear of the site. If any of the trees so
identified should be destroyed during construction, the Applicant or its successor in interest shall
replace them in accordance with the provisions of the Design and Construction Standards Manual,
prior to the release of the bond for Phase II improvements.
Water Line. In order to protect the oak tree located within the existing water line easement on
lot 77 of Country Club subdivision and to meet the requirement of Section 2~122(4)(H) of the Town
of Leesburg Design and Construction Manual that a water line of more than 600' cannot end in
a dead end, the Applicant or its successor in interest shall, in order to allow for the looping of the
Linden Hill water system to the Greenway Farm water system, provide a stubout on the southern
boundary with Greenway as shown on the Concept Plan. This stubout will be permitted by the
Town, provided that adequate domestic and fire flow demands and pressures can be achieved on
the Linden Hill system prior to connection to the Greenway system. In addition, the Applicant or
its successor in interest shall post a cash escrow, in the amount of $17,000.00 to be applied toward
the completion of such connection, at the time of the issuance of the first zoning permit for Phase
II. Upon the recordation of the record plat for Phase H, Applicant or its successor in interest shall
execute a deed relinquishing the rights to the water easement through lot 77 of the Country Club
subdivision.
Architectural/Roofing Materials. The roofing materials for the units in Phase H shall be cedar
shake, standing seam metal, or material of an equivalent quality. Chimneys shall be of masonry
construction, which shall include stone, brick or stucco. The architectural design and materials for
homes constructed in Phase H shall be in general conformity with the Concept Plan, and of an
architectural style compatible with the already constructed homes in Phase I; the materials shall
include stucco, stone and wood siding.
Fire Marshal Requirements/Fire and Rescue Contribution. Applicant agrees to meet the Fire
Marshal's requirements for the width of Linden Hill Way. Applicant or its successor in interest
shall contribute $100.00 per dwelling unit to the Town prior to the issuance of a zoning permit for
such dwelling, for fire and rescue services.
12. Homeowners' Association. A homeowner's association, with appropriate covenants, will be
Minutes of December 12, 1990
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 dedicated to the Town of
Leesburg. The Association's charter and accompanying documents shall be reviewed and approved
by the Town Attorney before recordation.
13.
Annexation Area Development Policies. The Applicant acknowledges that under the Annexation
Area Development Policies (AADP's) agreed to between the Town and the County of Loudoun, once
zoning permits are issued for 30 units, the Applicant or its successor in interest will be assessed
a charge of $1,750.00 for each subsequent zoning permit, which represents the ~excess development
fee" amount, to be payable to the County of Loudoun, prior to the issuance of a zoning permit for
any unit after the 30th unit.
14.
Escalation Clause. The monetary contributions set out in paragraphs 5, 6, 9 and 11 shall be subject
to adjustment from the date of final rezoning approval at a rate equal to any increases in the
Consumer Price Index (C.P.I.) from the date of final rezoning approval, as provided by the Director
of Finance. In no event shall said contributions be reduced.
SECTION II. Final plat and construction drawings are subject to the terms and conditions of the
applicable subdivision and zoning ordinances as well as Town engineering and construction standards.
Concept Plan approval does not express or imply any waiver or modification of the requirements set forth
except as specifically cited by ordinance section and paragraph in the motion approving this rezoning.
SECTION III. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage.
Mr. Clem stated that this package kept coming back to Council piece-meal. The best thing that
this Council ever did was ask that the application come back to Council as a whole package. The
development on a whole looks very nice.
Mrs. Forester wished to echo the comments of the citizens that spoke to the fact that the developer,
his representatives, the citizens in Country Club, staff and the Planning Commission have done a
magnificent job in pulling together the different proposals.
Mayor Sevila concurred with Mrs. Forester's comments. This is the way the process should work.
People negotiating in good faith to try to achieve a good result. This plan makes a number of
remarkable changes in the original rezoningo
Aye: Councilmembers Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following resolution was proposed.
RESOLUTION - ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO MAP 4, COMMUNITY FACILITIES POLICY OF
THE LEESBURG TOWN PLAN
WHEREAS, the Leesburg Volunteer Fire Department has requested a fire station location on the
public facility site within the Exeter Planned Residential Neighborhood development; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg supports this proposal, consistent with the Exeter Planned
Development and proffers, to permit a public safety facility on the 10 acre public facility site in the
Exeter Planned Residential Neighborhood development; and
WHEREAS, a location for a fire station at Exeter is in keeping with good planning practices; and
WHEREAS, Map 4, Community Facilities Policy does not presently illustrate a fire station on this
site; and
WHEREAS, an amendment to Map 4, Community Facilities Policy of the Town Plan to locate a
fire station at the Exeter site was initiated on February 13, 1990 and referred to the Planning
Commission for public hearing, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended denial of this amendment to Town Council
on May 24, 1990, following the public hearing;, and
WHEREAS, the Town Council held a public hearing on September 26, 1990 to consider this
amendment:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
Map 4, Community Facilities Policy of the Town Plan is hereby amended to formally illustrate a
fire station on the public facility site in the Exeter Planned Residential Neighborhood development.
Mr. Clem wished to thank Mr. Yarborough. I have been able to talk with him and I have known
his position right up front. He has not been in favor of it. yet he was not adamant. He listened and
I think he feels that the fire company and myself would do our best to "pull a rabbit out of the hat" -
Minutes of December 12, 1990
but I think we are short of doing that. However, we do need a site in that area. Knowing the
importance of the fire service and as you sort through the information that got on the streets - some of
it was misleading. You have to set that aside, do your surveys and go to the various communities. I
have found a lot of stations next to schools and it did not seem to matter whether it was high school
or elementary. A couple of the schools in Montgomery County have walking kids. I felt, after talking
with a couple of the principals, that safety was not as big an issue as it was being played. I have looked
at the safety issue and I feel that the good of the fire company in a neighborhood out weighs the bad
which might be the traffic issue. The fire company has done studies of Edward's Landing. We spent
$7,000.00 to determine that Edwards Landing would violate most every issue brought up by Mrs.
Malacarne. Issues such as tremendous slopes, poor soils, rock blasting, etc. Only preliminary studies
were done on the other site and it was determined that a school could be built there.
On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Lovin, the following resolution was proposed and
adopted.
90-303 - RESOLUTION - DENYING AN AMENDM[ENT TO MAP 4, COMMUNITY FACILITIES
POLICY OF THE LEESBURG TOWN PLAN
WHEREAS, the Leesburg Volunteer Fire Department has requested a fire station location on the
public facility site within the Exeter Planned Residential Neighborhood development; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg does not support a fire station on the Exeter public facility site,
because of its proximity to the Leesburg Elementary School and Exeter recreation center, and
WHEREAS, Map 4, Community Facilities Policy does not presently illustrate a fire station on this
site; and
WHEREAS, an amendment to Map 4, Community Facilities Policy of the Town Plan to locate a
fire station at the Exeter site was initiated on February 13, 1990 and referred to the Planning
Commission for a public hearing, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended denial of this amendment to the Town
Council on May 24, 1990, following the public hearing;, and
WHEREAS, the Town Council held a public hearing on September 26, 1990 to consider this
amendment:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
An amendment to Map 4, Community Facilities Policy of the Town Plan, to illustrate a fire station
on the public facility site in the Exeter Planned Residential Neighborhood development is hereby denied.
Mr. Lovin recalled a comment made by the fire company, at an earlier public hearing, that they
were not under any time frame from an insurance point of view or a rating point of view of getting this
substation sight. Of course that does not address the question of response time. I am for voting on this
issue this evening.
Mr. Kimball asked to amend the motion to defer this matter back to committee for further
discussion.
Mayor Sevila stated that everyone needs some certainty, some decisiveness on this issue. The
Council has spoken tonight and said that they don't want to amend the Town Plan to put this substation
there. My suggestion is to go ahead and make the decision rather than leave up in the air the possibility
that it will be there. We will never completely remove that possibility until we have built another
substation in the northeast quadrant. But what we will be doing tonight is saying we are redirecting
our focus and making a serious effort to find another site. If that other site is not forthcoming or is not
found then we are going to be forced to go back and look at this site.
Mrs. Forester stated that she believes that part of the problem with trying to find another viable
site is the fact that this site is kind of hanging out there as the "carrot." If this site is always there, are
we really going to be honestly putting our joint efforts, fire company, citizens and town, to finding that
other more appropriate site.
We had two joint public hearings tonight, one on Linden Hill and one on Edwards Landing because
our legal counsel advised us that it had been so long since we had public hearings on those issues prior
to this. Tabling this and looking for a site and coming down the road in another six to nine months -
I would seriously question, as a councilmember, if we should not have to go through another public
hearing in order to make sure that we have the current public input on whatever sites we are
considering. I am for taking a vote on this issue tonight and then forming the ad hoc committee as
quickly as we can to start looking at what is before us.
Mr. Clem stated that the ad hoc committee is desperately needed and should be formed immediately
after the first of the year with a timetable for their response back to the Council. Not only for the sites
that are available but also the means or avenues that can be explored for payment. Mrs. Forester agreed
completely. Mr. Clem stated that Mrs. Forester made reference to the fact that the Planning
Commission voted unanimously against the site - we never had any representation there. We went to
Minutes of December 12, 1990
the first hearing and were never informed of the others.
Aye: Councilmembers Forester, Kimball, Lovin and Mayor Sevila
Nay: Councilmembers Clem and Webb
Absent: Bange
Mayor Sevila asked that the ad hoc committee be placed on the January 2, 1991, committee agenda.
He thanked the members of the fire company and the citizens for their participation.
On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Mr. Webb, the following resolution was proposed and adopted.
90-322 - RESOLUTION - REQUESTING THE VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO ADOPT THE
TOWN'S 1991 LEGISLATIVE POLICY STATEMENT
WHERF_u~, the Town of Leesburg generally supports the 1991 Legislative Program adopted by the
Virginia Municipal League; and
WHEREAS, the town supports actions by the General Assembly that will particularly benefit the
citizens of Leesburg such as changes in the method of allocating sales tax revenue, estimating population
of towns, allocating seized assets to the local government making the seizure and providing the town with
the authority to deny business licenses to businesses owing delinquent taxes; and
WHEREAS, the town opposes any restriction on land use authority such as vesting of zoning rights:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The Leesburg Town Council respectfully requests the General Assembly to adopt legislation
consistent with the Town of Leesburg Legislative Policy Statement and the Virginia Municipal League's
Legislative Program.
Mr. Lovin stated that Leesburg is one of four towns that is a member of the Northern Virginia
Planning District Commission (NVPDC). There is a provision that the General Assembly may look at
to give the towns that are members of a county to receive a discount on the county tax rate to the
citizens. Mayor Rust of Herndon tried to get support from the NVPDC but this did not pass.
Aye: Councilmembers, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following resolution was proposed and adopted.
90-323 - RESOLUTION - REVISING THE ROLE OF THE TOWN'S AD HOC COMMITTEE TO
ADVISE THE COUNCIL ON DOWNTOWN PARKING AND OTHER ISSUES
ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARKING STRUCTURE AND
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
WHEREAS, with the support of the Downtown Business Association, the Council authorized
construction of a new 371-space parking structure in downtown Leesburg on July 22, 1987; and
WHEREAS, during the parking facility's construction period, problems specifically related to
downtown Leesburg have been addressed by an ad hoc committee established on July 25, 1990, by
Council Resolution No. 90-197; and
WHEREAS, the downtown business community continues to offer m~ior contributions toward
identifying measures which will help mitigate the adverse effects of the loss of downtown parking during
construction; and
WHEREAS, this Council wishes to grant the request of the committee to expand its role to work
more closely with the downtown business community to identify and implement creative solutions to
maintain the vitality of downtown Leesburg:.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The purpose of the Ad Hoc Committee to Advise the Council on Downtown Parking and Other
Issues is expanded to authorize the committee to work with the Council and the community to identify
and help implement solutions to problems associated with the construction of the new municipal parking
facility and recommend specific actions to the Council to ensure that Leesburg's historic district continues
to play a vital role in Leesburg's economic and cultural life throughout this decade and into the next
century.
Aye: Councilmembers, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Lovin, the following resolution was proposed and
adopted.
Minutes of December 12, 1990
90-324 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES
OF VIRGINIA, INC., FOR A TEMPORARY SALES INFORMATION CENTER
WHEREAS, Richmond American Homes of Virginia, Inc., has requested to use approximately
8,800 square feet of town owned property dedicated as the northwest quadrant of the future Battlefield
Parkway and Route 15 Bypass Interchange; and
WHEREAS, Richmond American Homes of Virginia, Inc., intends to use the site for a temporary
sales information center during the first year of their single-family home sales in the Exeter Planned
Development; and
WHERF_u~, Richmond American Homes of Virginia, Inc., will provide the necessary parking area,
signage and landscaping for the center.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The Acting Town Manager is authorized and directed to prepare an agreement for use of
approximately 8,800 square feet of town property by Richmond American Homes of Virginia, Inc. The
term of the agreement shall be twelve months, with a unilateral cancellation by either party with thirty
days notice. Terms of said agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Attorney. Execution
of said agreement must be preceded by acquisition by Richmond American Homes of Virginia, Inc., of
the necessary permits including a trailer permit and a right-of-way permit.
Aye: Councilmembers, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Levin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
Mr. Mason gave a brief staff report on the following resolution.
On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Webb, the following resolution was proposed and
adopted.
90-325 - RESOLUTION - REI,EASING THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE AND ACCEPTING
STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE TRAIL
IN POTOMAC CROSSING SECTION 1G
WHEREAS, on October 24, 1990 the Council by Resolution No. #90-270 accepted the public
improvements, except for the storm drainage improvements along the pedestrian and bike trail, released
the performance guarantee for public improvements and accepted a maintenance guarantee at PotOmh-8'
Crossing Section 1G; and
WHEREAS, Potomac Crossing Corporation provided a letter of credit from United Federal Savings
Bank in the amount of $10,000.00 to guarantee completion of the storm drainage improvements along
the pedestrian and bike trail in Section 1G; and
WHEREAS, the maintenance guarantee amount for these improvements is already included in the
maintenance guarantee for Section 1G.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The irrevocable letter from United Federal Savings Bank in the amount of $10,000.00
which guarantees the installation of the storm drainage improvements along the bike and pedestrian trail
in Potomac Crossing Section 1G is hereby released.
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 and charges.
Aye: Councilmembers, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Lovin, the following resolution was proposed and adopted.
90-326 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING A TIME EXTENSION FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
INST;,I,I,ATION IN POTOMAC CROSSING SECTION lB2
WHEREAS, Richmond American Homes, the developers of Potomac Crossing Section lB2 has
completed the majority of the public improvements for this section; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Engineering and Public Works is in the process of generating a
punchlist of all outstanding work which remain to be completed; and
WHEREAS, the street system has been completely paved and the sidewalks are in place; and
WHEREAS, Richmond American Homes has not received the punchlist and has requested a time
Minutes of December 12, 1990
extension of six months to complete the remaining work; and
WHEREAS, the corporate surety from the Reliance Insurance Company dated February 19, 1988,
which guarantees the installation of public improvements in the amount of $79,000.00, expired on
December 8, 1990; and
WHEREAS, Richmond American has provided an extension of the $79,000.00 surety from the
Reliance Insurance Company for an additional 6 months.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The corporate surety bond from Reliance Insurance Company in the amount of $79,000.00 in a form
approved by the town attorney and a six month time extension for the installation of public
improvements in Potomac Crossing Section lB2 are hereby approved.
Aye: Councilmembers, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
New Business
On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Mr. Webb, the following resolutions were proposed and
adopted.
90-327 - RESOLUTION - ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASING THE PERFORMANCE
GUARANTEE AND APPROVING A MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE FOR PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS AT PLAZA COURT LOT 4
WHEREAS, Mr. John A. Wallace, Jr., developer of Plaza Court Lot 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 cash bond in the amount of $19,016.00 is released, and a new surety in a form
approved by the town attorney for a maintenance guarantee in the amount of $950.80 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.
90-328 - RESOLUTION - ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASING THE PERFORMANCE
GUARANTEE AND APPROVING A MAINTENANCE GU~TEE FOR PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS AT PIER ONE IMPORTS
WHEREAS, Mr. John A. Wallace, Jr., developer of Pier I Imports 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 cash bond in the amount of $16,640.00 is released, and a new surety in a form
approved by the town attorney for a maintenance guarantee in the amount of $832.00 is approved, and
shall be in effect for a period of one year from this date.
SECTION H. This release is contingent upon delivery of a properly executed instrument conveying
unto the town ail such improvements and easements free of any liens or charges.
Aye: Councilmembers, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila
Nay: None
Absent: Bange
On motion of, and duly seconded, the meeting was adjourned.
Robert E. Sevila, l~Iayor
Town of Leesburg
ATTEST:
,~ Clerk of Council