The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About1991_09_10TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1991 A regular meeting of the Leesburg Town Council was held on September 10, 1991, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 25, West Market Street, Leesburg, Virginia. The meeting was called to order by the Mayor. INVOCATION was given by Councilmember Donald A. Kimball. SALUTE TO THE FLAG was led by Councilmember William F. Webb. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present Georgia W. Bange James E. Clem Christine M. Forester Donald A. Kimball Claxton E. Lovin William F. Webb Mayor Robert E. Sevila Staff members present Town Manager Steven C. Brown Assistant Town Manager for Economic Development and Administration Peter Stephenson Director of Finance Paul E. York Director of Engineering and Public Works Thomas A. Mason Director of Utilities Randolph W. Shoemaker Director of Planning, Zoning and Development Michael Tompkins Director of Parks and Recreation Gary Huff Engineer Aref Etemadi Officer Doug Taylor Public Information Officer Susan Farmer Town Attorney George Martin Clerk of Council Barbara Markland APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Ms. Bange, the special meeting minutes of July 31, 1991 and August 6, 1991, were approved as written. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION AND PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Sevila read the following proclamation: PROCLAMATION CRIME PREVENTION MONTH 1991 WHEREAS, it has been proven that community crime and drug prevention efforts are reducing victimization and helping to rebuild a sense of mutual responsibility and shared pride in communities; and WHEREAS, crime and drug prevention depends on effective partnerships among law enforcement, concerned individuals, governmental agencies, schools, community groups, businesses, and Minutes of September 10, 1991 neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, crime and drug prevention are more than serf-protection and security, but encompass the promotion of positive alternatives to delinquency and drug use among young people and encourage youth to recognize their personal stake in their schools and neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, it is essential to raise public awareness of crime and drug prevention and increase involvement in crime prevention and related community service programs: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: I, Robert E. Sevila, Mayor, do hereby proclaim October 1991 as Crime Prevention Month in the Town of Leesburg and call upon all citizens, governmental agencies, public and private institutions, and businesses to increase their participation in our community's crime and drug prevention efforts. MOTION On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Clem, the proclamation was proposed and unanimously adopted. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None Mayor Sevila presented the proclamation to Officer Doug Taylor and Mr. Dennis McVeen of the Leesburg Crime Prevention Council. Mayor Sevila stated that for the past 30 days the town has had an exchange student from Germany who has been staying at Steve Brown's house. Mr. Brown introduced Miss Christine Rendler. Mayor Sevila and Mr. Brown presented Miss Rendler with a Key to the Town of Leesburg to take back to her hometown of Oberkirch, Germany. PETITIONERS Mr. A. C. Echols, 101 King Street, S.W., addressed the Council. Mr. Echols statement rifled '~VAL- MART et al IN LEESBURG" is attached and made a part of the official record. Mr. Kenneth Robinson, Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, addressed the Council reading a resolution in support of funding and development of Phase II of Ida Lee Park. The resolution is attached and made a part of the official record. Mr. John Yarborough, a resident of the Exeter Subdivision, addressed the Council with regard to the funds being considered as a result of Dodona Manor. 'We have been dealing with a fire house requirement for over 5 years. We most recently, at the direction of Council, went through a process of identifying the preferred location for a new fire house. As a result of the eight month effort, Council has received the recommendations of the ad hoc committee and that a preferred site has been identified known as the Honicon site. The opportunity to provide an indication that funding is available to further this number one priority is timely. The fact that Dodona Manor dollars are now being considered for many well deserved activities, I feel that funding should be made available as the Council can. The funding through the fire house is available as required and the requirement is now. Rather then postponing or developing an alternative approach." Mr. Peter Chopivsky, a resident of 306 West Market Street, addressed the Council with regard to the proposed revision of the definition of a bed and breakfast. He urged Council's support and passage of the unanimously passed Planning Commission version of the definition which would restrict the use to not more then five guest rooms and to restrict the commercial uses for rental of the property for business meetings, seminars, receptions, etc. Mr. Chopivsky submitted additional petitions and augmentation of a petition that has already been submitted, polling members of the WestgTeen community. Seven of the nine properties were opposed to the Hillcrest adaptive reuse as a commercial meeting center. The petition is attached and made a part of the official record. PUBLIC HEARING: REGARDING THE IMPOSITION OF NEW WATER AND SEWER FEE~q Minutes of September 10, 1991 Mr. Brown stated that the town has e~smiued its infrastructure needs in the utility department and have taken some considerable steps to expand the town's water pollution control facility. As a result the town has selected a consultant to assist with a rate study. The consulting firm of Deloitte Touche was selected. Mr. Brian Anderson, with Deloitte Touche is present this evening. Mr. York addressed the Council stating that the purpose of the public hearing is in conjunction with Section 15.1-29.14 of the Code of Virginia. To consider increases in the town's utility fees for water and sewer user fees, availability fees and other utility system fees and charges. The firm of Deloitte and Touche was retained to prepare a comprehensive analysis of its water and wastewater system and to prepare a cost of service rate design study. Mr. York reviewed the study. The rate study recommends rates for water and sewer user fees effective July 1, 1991 of $2.37 per 1000 gallons of water, $2.85 per 1000 gallons for sewer. These are based on metered usage. The rates are increasing from $1.58/water and $1.90/sewer. It is estimated that the average quarterly bill for Leesburg water and sewer customers totals 35,000 gallons per quarter. The effect of these increases would be an increase of water from $56.88 per quarter to $85.32 and $68.40 per quarter to $102.60 for sewer. Mr. York explained that even with the proposed increase Leesburg would remain competitive with other localities, particularly those in Loudoun County. The study also recommends increases in the town's availability fees which are charged for development related activity in Leesburg. This is a form of capital recovery where the town can recover some of the costs of its capital investment for its infrastructure. For example the WWTP expansion scheduled for next year is a $22.3 million project. Those costs will largely be recovered through these increased availability fees. These increases compare with those of the Loudoun County Sanitation Authority. Other utility related fees that the town is proposing changes to under the new rate design are connection fees for water and sewer connections both those installed by the town and those installed by the contractors. Deposits charged for new customers, staff is recommending an increase in water from $30.00 to $50.00. Commercial would remain the same. The accounts that are disconnected for non-payment, staff is proposing an increased fee of $20.00. Connection fees for sewer accounts the current 4" connection fee is $700.00 we are proposing an increase of $1,300.00. Staff is proposing a $10.00 service charge for sewer connections. The town does not currently have a deposit requirement for sewer customers. A $60.00 deposit is proposed and 200 percent of estimated quarterly use for commercial users. The town does not currently assess a late payment fee for those individuals who do not pay their bill on time. A 10 percent late charge is proposed to be imposed for delinquent bills. The town obtained a water and sewer model which provides services to the developers. The town is currently not charging for this analysis and in order to recover some of the town's investment in the model as well as staff time, a $150.00 fee is proposed per request. Mr. Brian Anderson, representing Deloitte & Touche, addressed the Council further detailing the proposed utility fee increases. Mr. Anderson stated that the scope of the project was to review the cost structure of the utility fund, the current cost structure coupled with the cost structure as it would stand for additional expenditures required to expand and upgrade the system. Based on those costs, determine the revenue that would be required to recover the cost. The utility system provides water and sewer services to approximately 4800 commercial and residential connections. The water and sewer systems will be expanded over the next five years due to growth compliance with required state and federal pollution control regulations. Those compliance requirements will require significant capital expenditures. The other significant aspect in looking at the utility fund is the population trend. From 1985 to 1990 the town's population grew at a very fast rate. A 2.5 percent growth in population was used for this study which is a conservative number. From the financial standpoint, operating costs have exceeded the user fee revenues. These deficits have been steadily increasing since 1989. Availability and connection fees have also declined significantly. Rates for basic water and sewer services have not been increased since 1983. The significant cost driving the need for increases in rates are the capital outlays that will be required in accordance with the CIP. Much of this will be funded by a general obligation bond offering. Minutes of September 10, 1991 A 50 percent rate increase for basic user fees for water and sewer services would produce additional revenues of $134,000,000. This initial increase would likely be followed by subsequent increases to maintain the fund and a sound financial condition. This would happen year by year. The charge for availability fees represents an allocation of the cost of future capacity of the system. Based on the costs, a significant increase is initially required. Mr. Brown stated that the town operates a top quality water and sewer system that meets all of the regulatory requirements. However, to maintain this level of service and provide for the expansion and upgrade necessary to offer continued economic development, rate increases are necessary at least to a comparable level of the surrounding jurisdictions. Mr. Suazo, a resident of the Leesburg Mobile Park, addressed the Council. He stated that the owner of the mobile park has continued to increase the resident's rent using the reason that the town's water rates have been raised. Mr. Suazo asked if there was a way that the tenants of the mobile park could have individual water meters. He also stated that the tenants of the mobile park are not capable of having cable television. Mayor Sevila asked that Mr. Brown consider the issue of cable television availability to the mobile park. It may be that the landlord has refused to grant the necessary underground easements to have cable installed into the park. Mr. Webb addressed Mr. Suazo with regard to the availability of cable in the mobile park. He stated that the property is privately owned and multivision would have to obtain a right-of-way from the owner to install the cable. The owner has never given permission. Mr. Ying-Chung Chiang. general partner and developer of Leesburg Gateway Condominiums, addressed the Council with regard to the proposed rate increase for availability fees. He stated that he is a civil engineer. He stated that he sympathizes with the town for the need to raise rates in order to balance the town's budget. He raised concern with the timing of the increase in rates. Banks and developers are facing tremendously difficult economic times. For the size of the project which is 156 units the increase of availability fees equals $375,000.00. This is an up front fee that must be paid even before construction can begin. The per unit prices have been set and published. Every penny is accounted for and now the proposed increase is 71.6 percent. This could force the project to stop. He urged the Council to examine the amounts of the increases that are proposed and the timing of the increases. He asked that the people who have already committed their resources, prices and energy and who have received final approval of their site plan be grandfathered under the current fees. Mayor Sevila asked Mr. Chiang if he has already paid the availability fees on his entire project. Mr. Chiang stated that he has paid only a portion of the fees. He stated that this is a big project. Each building has 12 to 24 units. The fees are paid when the building is ready to be built - each individual building. Mr. Terry Jones, a resident of 805 Anne Street, S.W., addressed the Council raising concern with the fifty percent rate increase. This is too much of a bite to swallow for the citizen of Leesburg. The increases should be smaller and must be spread over a longer period. Mr. A. C. Echols, representing Gateway Development, addressed the Council. He stated that in 1989 and 1990 the water and sewer fund has had a deficit of approximately $1 million. He noted that there has been transfers from the water and sewer fund to the general fund of $1 million. He asked what the transfer, to the general fund, was? Were they for water and sewer user fee costs or other costs? Mr. York addressed Mr. Echols stating that they were legitimate water and sewer expenditures. Mr. Echols questioned the 70 percent allocated for the water pollution control facility and asked what water pollution was? Mr. York stated that the 70 percent is to build/expand the town's water pollution control facility. Mr. Echols stated that the town experienced a tremendous growth in 1986 through 1989. Approximately 7 percent growth per year. Approximately 1244 of that was rental apartments, condominiums and townhouses. An increase in availability fees of $2500.00 and $1000.00 in connection fees equals $3500.00 per unit. That is significant to a single-family house that costs $250,000 to $350,000. He agreed with Mr. Chiang, in that, an increase of $3500.00 may very well break the camel's back and literally stop any real development in Leesburg. We have to look at what this would do to the development community and the economy. When we study water and sewer we should also study the affect on the development community, and the rate increases on the elderly and people on fixed incomes. We are comparing ourselves to Round Hill, Purcellville and Hamilton. That is not a valid comparison given that those Minutes of September 10, 1991 communities are much smaller. The smaller the community the less efficient. Also all three of those communities have a notorious water problem and bad sewerage problems. These communities have also had a stopped real estate development economy. We should compare ourselves to Middleburg and Vienna. The people who are already into building their projects are deserving of some type of sliding scale or grandfathering, as opposed to the developers that are just starting to file their site plan. Mr. Echols asked why the town went from 1982, the boom years, until now to raise the fees? Mayor Sevila stated that the town is not in a position where it has the option of continuing to sell available sewer and water at the same rate or increase. The town's option is if we do not do the necessary planning and expansion at the wastewater treatment plant, there will not be any sewer availability to sell. Mayor Sevila asked Mr. Shoemaker how much available capacity the town has at the sewer plant now? Mr. Shoemaker addressed the Mayor stating that the town's wastewater treatment plant is currently sized at 2.5 million gallons per day (MGD). The town's current utilization of the plant is at about 2.1 MGD which leaves an available capacity of 400,000 gallons. That equates to 1000 residential units, not counting commercial units and those units that will be connecting to the town's system soon. If the town does not proceed with the expansion of the plant to 4.85 MGD with the number of housing units coming on line per year, the town would shortly run out of available capacity. The expansion will take about 3 years from completion of design which has not yet been initiated. It will be about four years before having additional capacity on line and available to the development community. The currently approved development plans are in excess of the 1000 units that the town has available. Mayor Sevila stated that if the system is not expanded the town does not necessarily have to incur these additional costs. The 50 percent rate increase can be reduced along with the sewer and water availability fees. The other side of that coin is there is no additional availability for continued growth and development. Part of the upgrade to the plant is to meet current effluent requirements. Mr. Shoemaker explained that Congress's reauthorization of the Clean Water Act a few years ago put additional conditions upon the state government for developing regulations on water quality. They recently established approximately 180 water quality criteria which the town's plant must meet in discharging treated wastewater effluent to the Tuscarora Creek. Regardless of whether the plant is expanded for any additional capacity, the town still faces a significant financial cost for upgrading the plant to meet the more stringent standards. The cost escalation is an important factor in the plant's expansion. The $2.3 million estimate for expansion of the plant at this time includes a cost escalation factor of about $2.1 million to 1993 to the mid-construction point. The longer the construction is delayed the more cost the town will have on the escalation of construction costs. The town is currently operating on a special order which allows the town less stringent discharge limits, although the SWCB could invoke the dulles policy at any time. As part of the town's discharge permit includes a clause which states that with 30 days notice the State Water Control Board can enforce the full Dulles Policy. The town would then have to submit plans for meeting those additional limits that would be placed on the plant. Mayor Sevila stated that the bottom line is if the town does not engage in the expansion now, which would not come on line for four years, the answer to Mr. Chiang, Mr. Echols and other developers is there will not be any availability. Ms. Kedenzae Lee Carpentre, a resident of 85 Leesburg Mobile Park, addressed the Council representing eight residents. She raised concern with the recent increase of 25 percent for excessive water usage by the residents of the mobile park and the proposed 50 percent increase of water and sewer user fees proposed by the town. She opposed the 50 percent increase. Mr. Richard Herndon, a resident of 144 Prospect Drive and owner of the Village Bakery and Cafeteria, addressed the Council with regard to the proposed 50 percent increase in water and sewer rates. He stated that he finds it inexcusable that it is necessary. "Somebody was not watching the shop if there has not been any rate increases since 1983 and now the town is asking for a 50 percent increase." It is also inexcusable that the town would try to get the million dollar shortfan back in such a short time. We are somewhat dependent on water in the restaurant business. A 50 percent increase will mean an additional expense of $1000 to $1200 per year. This will be passed onto the customers along with the additional meals tax recently passed. This will severely cripple the restaurant business in Leesburg. He encouraged the Council to look harder for cutbacks and not depress the economy any further. Mr, Bill Fiss~l, 602 South King Street, representing the NVBIA, addressed the Council. He stated that members of the NVBIA did review the utility rate study and generally share the concerns raised by Minutes of September 10, 1991 NVBIA member Eric Zicht in his memo to Steve Brown dated September 9, 1991. Mr. Fissel raised the additional following concerns: 1. We have concerns regarding some of the flow assumptions and other assumptions used for the basis of the study which results in the fee structures. 2. On page 5 of the report - the basis for the availability fees is 350 gpd for residential water/sewer connections. On page 4 the report states that the average water bill per quarter was computed using 36,000 gallons per quarter. That equates to 395 gpd. The town's Water and Sewer Master Plan did a study of several hundred residential connections and found a consumption of 237 gpd per unit. There is a difference between 237 gpd versus 350 gpd that was used in the report. This is a significant difference. 3. How were the commercial and industrial flows incorporated into the study and what increases are proposed for those availability fees? 4. In general, the study is very involved and complicated. We are having difficulty understanding the assumptions used in the basis of the study. Mr. Fissel requested the opportunity to discuss the issues and questions raised, including those in Mr. Zicht's memo, with town staff prior to adoption. Mr. Dave Culbert, a resident of 808 Haliyard Court, S.E., addressed the Council. He stated that there are three types of fees dealing with this issue. Availability fees, user fees and general operating funds for taxes. The availability fees will pay for the fair share of capital improvements attributable to the growth represented by the people with tap requests. These funds should be set aside for capital improvements. The user fees pay for the current operating expenses of the system and maybe for a portion of the depreciating capital investment. The general operating funds of taxes - they pay for the basic governmental services - police, roads, Ida Lee. These funds need to be kept discrete and separate to be able to trace them. The authority to use availability fees and users fees for general revenue purposes is questionable. We need to distinguish between co-mingling funds and borrowing against funds. There are some benefits in being able to maintain and distinguish these separate accounts. Mayor Sevila stated that these fees are maintained in separate accounts and the ledger entries can be found in both the town's budget and CIP. He stated that Finance Director Paul York would be happy to review those with Mr. Culbert. The town can account, very carefully, for every time utility funds are used to pay general fund expenditures. Mr. Michael Saba, representing Richmond American Homes of Virginia, addressed the Council regarding the proposed increases in the water and sewer availability fees. He expressed concern with the numbers that appear in the utility rate study. Specifically the figure of 350 gpd per residential connection. It appears to be an erroneous figure. The industry norm is closer to 230 gpd. If this figure is applied to the numbers shown in the rate study, the proposed increase becomes very palatable. A thorough reevaluation of this figure is appropriate. With regard to the town's population projections - the decreases are real due to the economic downturn and decreases in consumer spending. Therefore, there appears to be a real need to make up these deficits. However, an unusually large pointed fee increase is not the right way to acquire this much needed revenue. A review of the town's operating expenses or delay of proposed capital improvements would be more appropriate. The town should consider a more gentle phase of increases. Like a 10 to 20 percent increase per year. The proposed water use increase is almost three fold in the first year alone. A review committee could be formed to further research these numbers - the actual usage, the operating requirements, capital improvements, as well as a further review of the report received from Land Services Group. Mayor Sevila closed the public hearing and thanked all of the speakers who addressed the Council. He asked that staff to look into the model assumptions that were used and make sure that they hold up for the long term. If some of those assumptions are adjusted downward then maybe some of the costs could be likewise adjusted downward. Also the feasibility of flattening the increase out over a five year period rather then spiking it in the early years and lowering it in the later years. Finally, the need for a provision for grandfathering. Minutes of September 10, 1991 MOTION On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Mr. Webb, this matter was referred to the September 17, 1991, Administration and Public Works Committee meeting for further consideration and discussion. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS Mr. Webb noted that an application is on file with the town for additional cable franchise. The cable commission held lengthy discussions on this matter. Mr. Lovin attended the Dry Mill Road sidewalk ceremony. He expressed his appreciation to the residents for attending this event. Mr. Clem asked that staff prepare a resolution of respect for Mr. E. B. White. Mr. Kimball had no comment. Mrs. Forester reminded the public of the dedication of Tolbert Lane at 6:00 p.m., tomorrow evening. Loudoun County High School will soon be selling tickets for the Meadow Muffin Mega Bucks to raise funds for the all night graduation party. Ms. Bange attended the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting this morning and reported the concerns of the commission, in that~ they would like the Council to consider the continuation of funding for Phase II. MANAGER'S REPORT Mr. Brown noted that the Council did receive a copy of the written Activity Report. He thanked the Mayor for the excellent job as Master of Ceremonies at Ms. Resen's retirement dinner. LEGISLATION 11. (a), 11. (b), 11. (i) Mr. Brown briefly explained the difference between each proposed legislation. Mr. Tompkins stated that bed and breakfast inns are permitted bi-right in the B-1 District~ and by special exception in the R-l, R-2 and the RHD Districts of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Tompkins pointed out that item 11. (k) is a companion to items 11. a, b, and j. Item 11. (k) initiates an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to provide for a revocation of a special exception process. Staff recommends Council's initiation. Mayor Sevila explained that this would enable the town to revoke special exceptions where there is a cause consisting of a violation of conditions or a violation of the terms under which the special exception was granted. MOTION On motion of Mr. Kimball, seconded by Mrs. Forester, the following ordinance was proposed and denied. AMENDING ARTICLE 18 OF THE LEESBURG ZONING ORDINANCE TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF A BED AND BREAKF~T INN WHEREAS, the Town Council expressed a concern that the present definition of a bed and breakfast inn, as set forth in Article 18 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance, permits the provision of food and lodging but does not expressly provide for the allowance of appropriate, related ancillary uses; and Minutes of September 10, 1991 WHEREAS, the Town Council initiated and referred an amendment to the Planning Commission on March 12, 1991, which defines a bed and breakfast inn and provides for certain ancillary uses subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 25, 1991, to consider the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, on May 16, 1991, the Planning Commission recommended the language of the amendment be modified and forwarded to the Town Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, on July 23, 1991, the Town Council held a public hearing on this amendment; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that the definition for a bed and breakfast inn should expressly provide for the allowance of appropriate related uses: THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia, as follows: SECTION I. Article 18 - Definitions of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended to include the fonowing definition: Article 18 - Definitions. BED AND BREAKFAST INN A private residence, in which lodging and food are provided by the owner or operator for profit to one or more transient guests. Bed and breakfast inns shall not include more than eight guest rooms, and may provide rooms for meetings, seminars, receptions and similar social events if authorized by the Town Council by Special Exception subject to conditions. The owner or operator shall be a resident of the inn. SECTION II. All prior ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION III. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the decision shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any remaining provisions of the zoning ordinance. SECTION IV. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. DISCUSSION Mr. Webb asked what the Fire Marshal's requirements were on this type of project. Mr. Tompkins stated that this was controlled by the BOCA Code. Mayor Sevila stated that approving 11. (a), authorizes the granting of a special exception subject to conditions without having in the Zoning Ordinance criteria for the approval or denial of these kinds of operations. His concern is that any denial could be challenged as exceeding the town's discretion or being arbitrary. To avoid that, if the town had the criteria that addresses the issues then approval or denial by reference to those criteria might be more sustainable and enforceable. Mr. Tompkins stated that he has discussed the Mayor's concern with the Deputy Town Attorney and has arrived at language that the town could possibly use. He proposed the following:. 1. The hours and days of operation shall be determined by Council based upon the merits of the application for a special exception. 2. Lighting. A lighting plan shall be submitted to verify that all lighting fixtures are directed onto the site and will not impact adjacent properties or roadways. 3. All lighting fixtures used to illuminate outdoor areas shall be designed to avoid glare in surrounding areas. The use shall be lit only during set hours of operation except for necessary security lighting. 4. Parking. Council may consider special parking provisions for this special exception use provided Minutes of September 10, 1991 that such provisions do not adverse the impact adjacent properties or roadways. 5. Frequency of use. In consideration of an application for a special exception Council shall determine the type, frequency of occurrence, and mi= of uses. 6. Buffering and screening. In consideration of an application for a special exception Council shall consider and establish requirements for buffering and screening of the use from adjacent properties or roadways. Mr. Tompkins stated that Deputy Town Attorney Deborah Welsh recommends that the adoption of standards should occur simultaneohsly with the adoption of the ordinance that grants the special exception right. Mr. Tompkins stated that Mrs. Welsh also recommends that the Council could adopt 11. (a) in concept and as a matter of procedure take the recommendations as listed above to the Planning and Zoning Committee to be finalized. Mr. Clem stated that before he would vote on this, the proposed recommendations would also have to be in place. Mrs. Forester stated that if the msjority of the Council feels that this is the correct definition then she agreed to send this item to the committee to discuss the conditions to be imposed. If the m~jority of the Council does not feel that this is a proper definition then 11. (a) should be denied and we should move on to 11. (b). Mr. Lovin stated that he is prepared to vote on the issue. He stated that he has always supported bed and breakfast and meetings but cannot support a~x~liary uses. He will vote no on 11. (a). Ms. Bange agreed that 11. (a) should go back to committee in order to allow the recommendations of Mr. Tompkins to be put into place. She stated that she does not want to hinder business nor hurt neighborhoods but the overall picture needs to be looked at. She would support ll.(a) with 11. (k) in place. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Kimball Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Item 11. (a) was denied by a vote of 1-6. 11. (b) MOTION On motion of Mr. Lovin, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following ordinance was proposed and adopted. 91-0-36 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING ARTICLE 18 OF THE LEESBURG ZONING ORDINANCE TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF A BED AND BREAKFAST INN WHEREAS, the Town Council expressed a concern that the present definition of a bed and breakfast inn, as set forth in Article 18 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance, permits the provision of food and lodging but does not expressly provide for the allowance of appropriate, related ancillary uses; and WHEREAS, the Town Council initiated and referred an amendment to the Planning Commission on March 12, 1991, which defines a bed and breakfast inn and provides for certain ancillary uses subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 25, 1991, to consider the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, on May 16, 1991, the Planning Commission recommended the language of the amendment be modified and forwarded to the Town Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, on July 23, 1991, the Town Council held a public hearing on this amendment; and WHEREAS, the Town Council endorses the modified language of the amendment as Minutes of September 10, 1991 recommended by the Planning Commission on May 16, 1991: THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Article 18 - Definitions of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended to include the following definitions: BED AND BKEAKFAST INN A private residence in which lodging and food are provided by the owner or operator for profit to one or more transient guests~ Bed and breakfast inns shall not include more than c!gkt five guest rooms. Commercial use or rental of the property, for business meetings, seminars, receptions, and similar events or activities shall not be permitted. The owner or operator shall be a resident of the inn. SECTION II. All prior ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION Ill. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the decision shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any remaining provisions of the zoning ordinance. SECTION IV. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. DISCUSSION Mayor Sevila stated that this ordinance readopts the language currently in the Zoning Ordinance but makes it certain that the kinds of uses that were proposed at Hillcrest will not be permitted by special exception or otherwise. Bed and breakfast inns remain available by special exception in those zoning districts as talked about earlier, for only overnight guests and not for commercial uses of business meetings, seminars, receptions and similar events and activities. This Council has on many occasions expressed its desire and concern about protecting existing neighborhoods from encroaching uses. This is a use that, as it is defined to us, is an incompatible use with those neighborhoods. Mayor Sevila stated that he felt constrained, absent the conditions or criteria that would make this use compatible in established neighborhoods, to vote against it because he views it as allowing, by special exception, a commercial use in a residential district. We are pledged and committed to the preservation and protection of those districts. Mr. Lovin stated that this application has three planks. The bed and breakfast, the executive meetings and a~]~liary uses. It is a residential area and all of these planks have a commercial theme to them. Mrs. Forester stated that she win reluctantly support this legislation. We have had the problem with trying to separate the definition of bed and breakfast and the Hillcrest application. She does not support all of the requests made by Hillcrest. We are now losing the flexibility in the Zoning Ordinance to open up the possibilities to allowing that kind of activity anywhere in the Town of Leesburg. The town's Zoning Ordinance amendments were to add that flexibility. To encourage business to have the flexibility and to give the Council and the Planning Commission flexibility to do things, ff this legislation is adopted we are drawing at the last straw. It is the only option we have open to us, therefore, we are stuck with it until another request comes in. Unfortunately the definition has gone hand and hand with an application that has a lot of problems in its neighborhood. That affected the Council's looking at this definition from a clearer standpoint as to how it affects the town in an overall position. Mayor Sevila agreed with the point made by Councilmember Forester. Mr. Clem stated that if ll.(k) had been in place and the recommendations made by Mr. Tompkins had been on record then the legislation might have had a different view. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Clem, Forester, Lovin and Mayor Sevila Nay: Councilmembers Bange, Kimball and Webb n. Minutes of September 10, 1991 MOTION On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Mr. Webb, the following ordinance was proposed and adopted by a role call vote of 6-1. 91-0-37 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 87-0-27 AND RESOLUTION NO. 88-93, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 88-0-35 TO ALLOCATE A PORTION OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE TOWN OF LEESBURG GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS FOR HIGHWAY, ROAD AND STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS V~~, The Town Council ("Council") of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia ("Town") adopted Ordinance No. 87-0-27 ("Bond Ordinance") on October 14, 1987, authorizing the issuance of not to exceed $10,000,000 general obligation bonds of the Town to finance the acquisition, construction, equipping and improvement of various public improvements, including a municipal government center and parking complex, an aquatic center and gymnasium, the public works complex and the Phase 'vi Storm Drainage Project; and WHEREAS, the Town issued its $5,000,000 General Obligation Public Improvements Bonds, Series 1987 ("Series 1987 Bonds") pursuant to the Bond Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Town issued its $5,000,000 General Obligation Public Improvement bonds, Series 1988 ("Series 1988 Bonds") pursuant to the Bond Ordinance and Resolution No. 88-93 adopted May 11, 1988 ("Bond Resolution"); and WHEREAS, the Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 88-0-35 amending the Bond Resolution and the Bond Ordinance and now proposes to further amend the foregoing;, and WHERFu~, during the public hearing and subsequent discussions, several uses of the $460,000 in remaining bond funds have been considered including. Prqiect Amount Edwards Ferry Road widening Dry Mill Road sidewalk Street lights Hospital ouffall drainage project Country Club turn-lane Peer Manor drainage project $185,000 42,000 8,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. At the option of the Town Council, the Bond Ordinance and the Bond Resolution, as amended by Ordinance No. 88-0-35, are amended to authorize the use of proceeds of the Series 1987 Bonds and the Series 1988 Bonds (i) in the amount of approximately $335,000 to finance certain highway and road improvements, and (ii) in the amount of approximately $125,000 to finance certain storm drainage improvements. SECTION II. The appropriate officers and agents of the Town are authorized and directed to take such further action as they deem necessary to implement the amendment set forth in this Ordinance and all such actions previously taken are hereby ratified and confirmed. SECTION l/I. Except as amended by this Ordinance, the Bond Ordinance and the Bond Resolution shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION IV. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately. DISCUSSION Mr. Clem stated that these are estimates and bids are coming into the town with very fair, cost saving prices, thereby, leftover monies can be targeted for the fire station site or for parks and recreation. He stated that he supports the fire station site but does not support the dollar value. It is grossly overpriced and the town is in no position to make an offer until after the town has a public hearing to see if the people want it in that area. Minutes of September 10, 1991 Mr. Lovin stated that he does not support $42,000 for Dry Mill Road. He stated that during last year's budget discussions, the Council said that this project would be completed irregardless of getting any money back from Dodona Manor. He expressed concern with not giving Ida Lee Park any money when the original bond proceeds stated that funds would go to the park. He will vote no on this issue because it does not include any money for Ida Lee Park. Mr. Brown stated that the total funds set aside was $4 million for phase I. Staff suggested, during the spring budget workshops, that Dodona Manor funds could be reallocated to Ida Lee Park without public hearing, however, due to the fiscal constraints the town was under it was received negatively that this be done. Ms. Bange asked where these funds would come from if the Dodona Manor funds were not used? Mr. York stated that if these bond funds are not used then the town does not have the funds. The Dry Mill Road sidewalk project was included in a memo to Council before the adoption of the budget that these funds be used to fund that particular project. The money used for the construction of Dry Mill Road was construction money that was available for the Route 15 bypass widening project. If the Dodona Manor funds were not there, the money would have had to been taken from another capital project. Mayor Sevila suggested that any funds leftover from any of these projects be diverted to Ida Lee Park for the initiation of Phase II improvements. VOTE Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Webb and Mayor Sevila Councilmember Lovin 11. (d) Ms. Vecchio addressed the Council briefly summarizing the proposed ordinance. She stated that the proffers have been modified, by the applicant, to be more equitably distributed among the entire project to reflect the Town Plan recommendations relative to cost per unit of land use. Staff is satisfied with the modifications. The applicant is present to answer any questions. MOTION On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Lovin, the following ordinance was proposed and adopted. 91-0-38 - ORDINANCE - APPROVING THE REZONING APPLICATION AND AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP FOR #ZM-121 - LEESBURG CORNER BY LEESBURG EAST II ASSOCIATES WHEREAS, on June 27, 1990, the Town Council received and referred to the Planning Commission an application for rezoning approximately 94.05 acres located at the northeast quadrant of the intersection of the Route 7/15 Bypass and Route 7 from R-1 to R-2 to a Planned Employment Center (PEC) District; and WHEREAS, on August 8, 1990, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider this application and proposal for approximately 1,105,422 square feet of office/commercial/warehouse development; and WHEREAS, on March 7, 1991, the Planning Commission approved, without prejudice, removing a 22.57-acre parcel of property from the rezoning application, pursuant to Section 13A-78 of the Town Zoning Ordinance and in accordance with the applicant's request; and WHEREAS, on March 28, 1991, the Planning Commission recommended denial of this rezoning application; and WHEREAS, on May 28, 1991, the Town Council held a public hearing to consider this rezoning application; and WHE~, this 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: Minutes of September 10, 1991 SECTION I. Rezoning Application ~ZM-121 by Leesburg East II Associates is approved. The Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is amended to revise the Zoning District Map to change a 71.48-acre parcel of land from R-1 and R-2 to Planned Employment Center (PEC) in accordance with the Rezoning Plan prepared by EDAW dated May 24, 1991 (Exhibit B). This parcel of land bounded on the south by Route 7, on the west by the Route 7/15 Bypass, on the north by Fort Evans Road, and on the east by land of Establishment Forestier and further identified as Loudoun County Tax Map 49, parcel 17. This approval is subject to the following conditions proffered in writing by the applicant in accordance with Section 15.1- 491(a) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended: Permitted Uses. When the Town adopts an ordinance approving the rezoning of the Property to the PEC category, approving the Applicants' Rezoning Plan, and approving the permitted, secondary, and special exception uses described below the Applicant agrees as follows: All of the permitted uses stated in Section 6A-17(2) of the Planned District Regulations adopted by the Town as of the date of approval of #ZM-121 may be developed on the Property, except public school facilities; bo All of the secondary uses stated in Section 6A-17(3) of the Planned District Regulations adopted by the Town as of the date of approval of #ZM-121 may be developed on the Property, except free-standing restaurants and free-standing convenience retail stores; The following special uses listed as "permitted uses" or "special exception uses" in Section 4E-2 of the Town Zoning Ordinance, which will be subject to the special exception approval procedures set forth in the Town Zoning Ordinance, may be developed on the Property: (i) lumber and/or building material sales facilities, (ii) emergency care facilities, (iii) electric and/or plumbing supply facilities, (iv) research and development uses, (v) warehousing, (vi) child care centers, and (vii) private parking structures. Notwithstanding the foregoing, warehousing and industrial uses shall not be developed on Parcel B of the Property and the following uses will not be developed on any portion of the Property: (i) manufacturing, processing, fabrication, or assembly of drugs, medicines, pharmaceuticals, die- cut paperboard, cardboard, bags, containers, and sanitary paper products; (ii) commercial automobile or truck repair garage; (iii) dry cleaning plant; and (iv) the storage, manufacture, or disposal of hazardous materials as defined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 9601, et seq. Rezoning Plan. Development of the Property shall be in general conformity with the Rezoning Plan which shall control the overall density and the general layout of development and roadways on the Property with reasonable allowance for minor adjustments for engineering design at the time of preliminary subdivision or preliminary development plan approval for lots or parcels. The parcels shown as "A", "B", and "C" on the attached Rezoning Plan are shown as approximate development parcels. Preliminary development plan and preliminary subdivision plan approval is subject to the requirements of applicable subdivision and zoning ordinance provisions, unless expressly excluded in the motion for approval. Transportation Improvements. As the Property is developed in accordance with the phasing described below, the Applicant shall, construct and dedicate in fee simple without liens or encumbrances or any cost to the Town, the on-site and off-site streets, roadway improvements, acceleration and deceleration lanes, signalization, and necessary turning lanes as generally shown on Exhibit "B" and described in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. The costs of transportation improvements shall be limited to dedicated land free of all liens and encumbrances, actual construction costs, surveying and engineering fees, permit fees, and any bonding costs. For the purposes of these Proffers "traffic improvements" are defined as roadways and related improvements which are constructed bn the Property or which provide or facilitate access to or from the Property, such as roadways, turn lanes, acceleration or deceleration lanes, and traffic signals which are reasonably related to the development proposed on the Property and are listed on Exhibit C attached hereto. All traffic improvements shall utilize lanes that are at least twelve- feet wide. All roadways constructed on the Property shall be connected to a dedicated public thoroughfare. The Applicant shall dedicate all transportation improvements at the earlier of record subdivision plat approval or final development plan approval of the various sections of the Property. Development Density. The Property may be developed with no more than a total of 859,352 gross square feet of building construction. In the event building construction on a portion of Minutes of September 10, 1991 Parcel A of the Property does not utilize all of the permitted, secondary, or special uses which may be constructed on such portion of the Property, any excess building capacity and any permitted, secondary, or special uses may be averaged on to any other portion of Parcel A, so long as the total development on Parcel A of the Property does not exceed 698,937 gross square feet or a .31 FAR. Prior to submission of any preliminary development plan for any portion of Parcel A, the Applicants shall calculate the available development density for Parcel A and shall provide such calculation to the Town. Parcel A shall be developed so that no lot~ except a common area open space lot~ is deprived of any development density. The 55,000 gross square foot development density limitation described below for Parcel B, may be increased, but not in excess of a .30 FAR, by transferring development density from Parcel A so long as such increased development density on Parcel B is not accessed directly from Route 7. All secondary uses in any buildings developed on Parcel B shall be located in the same buildings as the principal uses primarily served and shall occupy in combination not more than ten percent (10%) of the gross floor area of the building. o Transportation Improvements. Parcels A and C of the Property may be developed with up to 278,415 gross square feet of buildings after receipt of final development plan and/or record subdivision plat approval for any portion of the Property, issuance of requisite zoning permits, and contribution to the Town or VDOT of the following improvements: Dedication in fee simple, free from liens and other encumbrances, to the Town or VDOT for public roadway purposes, of approximately 6.24 acres of the Property located at the southwest corner of the Property at the intersection of Route 7 and the Leesburg Bypass as shown on Exhibit B. bo Contribution of to up to One Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars ($120,000) to the Town for provision of traffic signalization for the intersection of Fort Evans Road with the Leesburg Bypass, if such signalization is warranted by the Town and is not contributed by others. Co As portions of the Property abutting such transportation improvements are developed, the following improvements will be constructed or bonded for construction and dedicated in fee simple, free from liens or other encumbrances: (i) a four-lane undivided 52-foot wide pavement section of Fort Evans Road as illustrated on the "Fort Evans Road South Side Improvements" and "Fort Evans Road North Side Improvements" prepared by Huntley, Nyce & Associates, dated February 22, 1989, from the Route 15 Bypass intersection east to the intersection of such roadway with the Leesburg Corner Spine Road, or if necessary for the development and construction of buildings on Parcel C of the Property, a half section of such roadway from the Leesburg Corner Spine Road to the point of ingress and egress from Fort Evans Road; (ii) one right turn deceleration lane from the Route 15 Bypass to Fort Evans Road; (iii) one right turn deceleration lane from Fort Evans Road westbound to the Route 15 Bypass; (iv) one right turn deceleration lane from Fort Evans eastbound to the Leesburg Corner Spine Road; (v) the Fort Evans Road and Route 15 Bypass intersection improvements necessitated in accordance with Town standards by 278,415 gross square feet of buildings on Parcels A and C of the Property; (vi) one additional Route 7 westbound travel lane including new directional signage and one right turn lane at the existing Route 15 Bypass northbound ramp; and (vii) up to Eighty Thousand Dollars ($80,000) will be contributed to the Town for provision of traffic signalization for the intersection of Route 7 with the existing northbound Leesburg Bypass on-ramp. A limited access CL/A") line from the Leesburg Bypass to the Route 7 median crossover opposite the FAA site will be established at first preliminary subdivision plan approval along the Route 7 frontage. The L/A line will be extended to its eastern Route 7 Property line at the earlier of submission of construction plans for closure of any interim Route 7 access for Parcel B, or when alternative access to Parcel B is constructed. In addition to the 278,415 gross square feet of buildings which may be developed on Parcels A and C of the Property, an additional 234,361 gross square feet of buildings may be developed on Parcels A and C of the Property after final development plan and/or record subdivision plat approval, issuance of requisite zoning permits and contribution to the Town or VDOT in accordance with Town and VDOT standards of double left turn lanes from the southbound Leesburg 15 Bypass off-ramp to eastbound Route 7. In the alternative, an equivalent amount of funding as is listed on Exhibit C shall be contributed to the Town upon request by the Town to be used for construction of the Minutes of September 10, 1991 ultimate Leesburg Bypass southwest quadrant loop ramp. Transportation Improvements. Parcels A and B of the property may be developed with up to 263,083 gross square feet of buildings by construction of the improvements set forth above in Paragraphs 5(a), 5(c)(vi), and 5(c)(vii) and of the following improvements: ao bo A fifty-two foot wide pavement section in a 70-foot wide right-of-way of Cardinal Park Drive Extended from Route 7 to a location which is approximately 550 feet north of the current northern edge of Route 7 pavement; A 52-foot wide pavement section in a 70-foot wide right-of-way of a roadway parallel to Route 7 from such portion of Cardinal Park Drive Extended to the Leesburg Corner Spine Road; c. A Route 7 westbound deceleration lane to northbound Cardinal Park Drive Extended; do Necessary signal modifications at the Route 7 intersection of Cardinal Park Drive, an extension of the existing eastbound left turn lane, and an additional eastbound travel lane on Route 7 which extends approximately five hundred feet from the intersection of Cardinal Park Drive. eo Pavement restripping and necessary roadway widening of the existing northbound Cardinal Park Drive approach to Route 7 to provide for two twelve-foot travel lanes and one left turn lane. Hereinafter all of the improvements described above in paragraphs (a) through (e) are collectively referred to as the "Cardinal Park Drive Improvements." Transportation Improvements. Up to 55,000 gross square feet of buildings may be developed solely on Parcel B of the Property by construction of the following interim improvements for access solely to Parcel B, which upon request by the Town and VDOT will be removed at no cost to the Town and will be relinquished by the applicant or its successor and assigns at such time as the northeast loop ramp at Route 7 and the Leesburg Bypass is constructed by others, or at such time as alternate access to Route 7 from Parcel B is provided via Cardinal Park Drive or Battlefield Parkway: ao Improved access from Parcel B to Route 7 at the location of the existing cross-over across from the entrance to the Federal Aviation Administration (F.A.A.); b. Construction of a Route 7 eastbound left turn lane at the F.A.A. median cross-over; c. Construction of a traffic signal at the F.A.A. cross-over when warranted by VDOT; Construction of one additional Route 7 westbound travel lane across the frontage of the Property and one right turn lane at the existing Route 15 Bypass northbound ramp; eo The Applicants will contribute up to Eighty Thousand Dollars ($80,000) for traffic signalization of the intersection of Route 7 with the existing northbound Leesburg Bypass on ramp; and At the time of receipt of final development plan and/or record subdivision plat approval for any portion of Parcel B, the Applicant or its assign will dedicate in fee simple, free from liens or other encumbrances, to the Town or VDOT for public roadway purposes, of approximately 6.24 acres of the Property located at the southwest corner of the Property at the intersection of Route 7 and the Leesburg Bypass as shown on Exhibit B. In lieu of provision of the above-described interim access to Parcel B at the F.A.A. crossover, the Applicant may develop up to 55,000 gross square feet of buildings on Parcel B by constructing the Cardinal Park Drive Improvements. Transportation Improvements. The Property may developed with up to 824,433 gross square feet of buildings after final development plan and/or record subdivision plat approval, issuance of requisite zoning permits and contribution to the Town or VDOT in accordance with Town or VDOT standards of the improvements described above in Paragraphs 5 and 6 and construction and dedication in accordance with Town or VDOT standards of the full four-lane Leesburg Corner Spine Road and a four-lane 70-foot section of Cardinal Park Drive Extended from the Minutes of September 10, 1991 intersection of Cardinal Park Drive and Route 7, north across that certain parcel of land owned by others which is described as Tax Map 49, Parcel 20A, to the intersection of such roadway with Road '~', or to the parallel access road described above in the Cardinal Park Drive Improvements. In the alternative, if permission to construct an access to Route 7 across the land described as Tax Map 49, Parcel 20A is not available, up to 824,433 gross square feet of buildings may be developed on the property after obtaining final development plan and/or record subdivision plat approval, issuance of requisite zoning permits, and contribution to the Town or VDOT in accordance with Town or VDOT standards of the improvements described above in Paragraph 5 and construction of a four-lane pavement section of Fort Evans Road or Road 'T" from the Property to the Battlefield Parkway and of a half section of Battlefield Parkway from Fort Evans Road or Road '¥' to Route 7 together with necessary related turn lanes, at-grade intersection improvements at Route 7 including signalization at the intersection of Route 7 and East Battlefield Parkway and at the intersection of Road '~' and the Leesburg Corner Spine Road. Transportation Improvements. Up to 859,352 square feet of buildings may be developed on the Property after obtaining final development plan and/or record subdivision plat approval, issuance of requisite zoning permits, and contribution to the Town or VDOT in accordance with Town or VDOT standards of the following improvements: The improvements stated above in Paragraph 8 provided that improved access via Fort Evans Road or Road "¥' is available east of the Property to East Battlefield Parkway. b. The East Battlefield Parkway improvements described in Paragraph 8 are constructed. Co If sufficient access to the Property is available via a two-lane half section of East Battlefield Parkway and East Battlefield Parkway is constructed between Route 7 and Edwards Ferry Road, the Applicant agrees to not oppose construction of a cul-de-sac of Fort Evans Road per the Town's Route 7 Corridor Study, which shall be accomplished at no cost to the Town. 10. Off-Site Transportation Improvements. The Applicant will contribute in the form of cash or the dedicated traffic improvements listed on Exhibit C attached hereto up to the aggregate sum of One Million Seven Hundred Forty-Seven Thousand Two Hundred Ten Dollars ($1,747,210) (based on the projected 753,937 gross square feet of office and commercial space and 105,415 gross square feet of warehouse building space) under the terms and conditions stated herein, as its pro-rata, non-refundable, contribution toward the cost of regional roadway improvements within the area of the Town including, but not limited to, the construction and dedication of the Town's Route 7 Corridor Study improvements described above. This monetary contribution shall be equal to Two and 20/100 ($2.20) per gross square foot of office and commercial space and Eighty-four Cents ($0.84) per gross square foot of warehouse space constructed on the Property. These funds shall be paid into an escrow account established by the Town for the specific purpose of financing the construction of regional transportation improvements such as Battlefield Parkway. The first 507,477 gross square feet of office and commercial space and 105,415 gross square feet of warehouse building space shall be developed without payment of any such monetary contribution based on the credits listed on Exhibit C. The 246,460 gross square feet balance of office and commercial space shall be developed after payment into the above-described escrow account of Two and 20/100 Dollars ($2.20) per gross square foot of office and commercial space prior to issuance of zoning permits for such office and commercial space. 11. Prelimina .ry Development Plan Review. Upon review and approval of preliminary development plans for each portion of the Property by the Town Planning Commission and Town Council, the Property shall be developed in accordance with the standards stated on the Rezoning Plan attached as Exhibit B and in accordance with the following design guidelines: ao Buildings developed on Parcels A, B, and C of the Property will incorporate compatible design elements, building materials, elevations and roof forms. b° Building colors of buildings developed on Parcels A, B, and C will be from the same color palette and will be complementary. Co Buildings developed on Parcels .% B, and C will be designed to relate to each other and to common vehicular and pedestrian corridors. Minutes of September 10, 1991 do Site planning for parcels developed on the Property will incorporate pedestrian circulation throughout the parcel and the Property as a whole. The preliminary development plan for Parcel A of the Property, which shall be reviewed by the Planning Commi~ion and approved by the Town Council, shall include a common open space area to provide open space credit for individual development lots or parcels of Parcel A. Construction by the Applicant or its assigns of the pedestrian trail shown on Exhibit "B" and of any common open space parcel shall be phased as adjacent lots are developed. Any such common area open space must be improved with landscaping, which shall be installed concurrently with the development of the parcel of Property which is to receive an open space credit. The parking setback differential described below in subparagraph (h) (e.g., the twenty ((20)) feet along the Leesburg Bypass) shall be aggregated to create a park that is at least one and one-haft contiguous acres in size on Parcel A, which will be accessible to users of office buildings located on Parcel A. Architectural elevations and a comprehensive signage plan for Parcels A, B, and C shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission and Town Council at such time as the first preliminary development plan or subdivision plan is submitted for any such parcel. Directional and tenant signage shall be consistent throughout the Property and shall be consistent with Article 10 of the Town's Zoning Ordinance. As shown on Exhibit B, a one hundred (100) foot building setback will be observed along Route 7 and along the Leesburg Bypass and a forty (40) foot building setback will be observed along Fort Evans Road. As shown on Exhibit B, a one hundred (100) foot parking setback will be observed along Route 7, an eighty (80) foot parking setback will be observed along the Bypass and a forty (40) foot parking setback will be observed along Fort Evans Road. Parking areas shall not be located exclusively at the front of building sites and when possible, will be located at the sides or rear of a building. Ail off-street parking areas will be separated from roads, open space areas, sidewalks and traffic arterials by hedges, plantings, earthen berms, changes in grade, or w~ll~.~ The one hundred (100) foot building setback areas along Route 7 and the Leesburg Bypass, the eighty (80) foot building setback areas along the Leesburg Bypass, and the forty (40) foot building setback areas along Fort Evans Road shall not be used for parking. Typical landscaping depicted on Exhibit C-1 and C-2 may be used to delineate vehicular and pedestrian circulation patterns, preserving mature or specimen trees where possible. Best efforts shall be used to preserve or replace with a like species of hardwood trees which will grow to an equivalent stature, any mature or specimen trees located within the perimeter setback areas of the Property, and on open space areas of any common area lot of Parcel A. Pedestrian paths will be paved with hard, even surface materials such as brick, concrete or asphalt rather than loose gravel or individual stepping stones, and will be designed to create a comfortable attractive pedestrian environment. Paving materials for sidewalks and foot paths, seating, fountains, lawns and landscaping will be consistent throughout the Property. No materials, supplies, equipment~ or finished products shall be stored outside of any building on the Property unless such areas are visually screened from public walkways or thoroughfares by architectural or landscaped screening. 12. Fire and Rescue. Immediately prior to obtaining zoning permits for individual buildings constructed on the Property, Twenty Cents ($0.20) per gross square foot of each building actually constructed on the Property shall be paid to the Town, as a donation to the fire and rescue facility providing service to the property. The amount of contributions for fire and rescue shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the Consumer Price Index for Loudoun County, Virginia. SECTION II. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. DISCUSSION Mr. Kimball stated that he would oppose this ordinance because of the access to Route 7. Minutes of September 10, 1991 Mrs. Forester thonlted the applicant for clearing up the issue of uses discussed on the parcels. She suggested, with regard to proffer 12, to turn the money over to the town to set up a fund for the possibility acquisition of a fire station site. If the money is not needed for acquisition then the money would be turned over to the fire department. There may be an opportunity to provide funding for this kind of acquisition through the proffer system. She suggested that the applicant alter the wording in proffer 12 to accommodate her suggestion. Mr. Lovin commended the applicant for clarifying a very complex rezoning application. He will support this application. Mr. Banzhaf, representing the applicant~ addressed the Council stating that the language in proffer 12 is broad enough to allow the town to accommodate the suggestion made by Councilmember Forester. He stated that he would clarify this with a letter subsequent to the adoption of the ordinance. Mayor Sevila stated that it would be a good idea to have a letter from the applicant stating that the applicant has no objection to the town using that money for fire and rescue capital projects. Mr. Clem stated that any proffer money should be targeted for either equipment, development of buildings, etc., but never relinquished to a fire or rescue department for day to day operations. VOTE Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Councilmember Kimball 11. MOTION On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Ms. Bange, the following ordinance was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-0-39 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING CHAPTER 5.2, SECTION 5.2-1 OF THE LEESBURG TOWN CODE, REGARDING THE COMPOSITION OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHE~, on July 15, 1991, the Town Council directed the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC) to examine its Charter and to provide recommendations for possible amendments which would expand and strengthen the town's economic development efforts; and WHEREAS, on August 21, 1991, the EDAC recommended enlarging the membership, allowing for the appointment of non-residents, and staggering terms; and WHEREAS, these recommendations and other suggestions were discussed at the September 3, 1991 Administration and Public Works Committee of the Town Council: THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Chapter 5.2, Seat,'on 5.2-1 of the Leesburg Town Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 5.2-1. Committee established; general composition; meetings. (a) The Leesburg Economic Development Advisory Committee is hereby established. The committee shall consist of ~nc fifteen members who shall either be residents of the town, town property, owners, or anyone employed in the town. One of the members shall be a member of the council, appointed by the council, whose term of office shall correspond to his official tenure of office as a councilmember. One of the members shall be the ~wn ~=n=gcr assistant town manager for economic development and administration. The remaining ccvcn thirteen members shall be appointed by the council. Members reappointed in 1991 shall serve terms of three years beginning on July first of the year of appointment. New members appointed in 1991 shall serve terms of two years beginning on July first of the year of appointment~ and thereafter shall be eligible for reappointment for terms of three years. (b) The committee shall elect its chairman annually and the t~::'n m--n~gcr, er .~ds ~^~'~' assistant town manager for economic development and administration shall serve as secretary. The committee shall meet monthly or more often as determined by the committee. The chairman has the authority t~ require a member t~ resign if the said member is absent from three consecutive monthly meetings. Minutes of September 10, 1991 SECTION II. The Clerk of Council is hereby authorized to advertise pubhc announcements which solicit the application of interested individuals who are eligible for appointment to the Committee, including town residents, property owners, and employees. SECTION BI. The Town Council hereby appropriates the additional funding for fiscal year 1991- 1992 required to provide for the established monetary compensation for EDAC members, as a result of the expanded membership, as follows: (a) $2,700.00 into account #8105-100-090 for additional committee compensation; and (b) $ 207.00 into account #8105-200-011 for additional FICA payments. SECTION IV. Once all Town Council reappointments and appointments to the committee have been made, the committee is hereby directed to reexamine Section 5.2-2 of the Town Code, Powers and Duties, and to provide recommendations to Town Council for possible amendments as appropriate. VOTE 11. SECTION V. All prior ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed. SECTION VI. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage. Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila None Mr. Brown addressed the Council briefly summarizing the proposed ordinance. He stated that this amendment is needed to keep the Town Code current with state code. It does provide for additional grievances available. The state code requires local jurisdictions to comply with the grievance procedures. MOTION On motion of Mr. Kimball, seconded by Mr. Lovin, the following ordinance was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-0-40 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING CHAPTER 12.1, ARTICLE 21, OF THE LEESBURG TOWN CODE OF THE TOWN OF LEESBURG PERSONNEL MANUAL REGARDING GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE WHE~, the 1991 Virginia General Assembly adopted an act to amend and re-enact Sections 15.1-7.1 and 15.1-7.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, relating to local government grievance procedures; and WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg is required to adopt the enclosed amendments to Article 21 of the town's personnel manual no later than October 1, 1991; and WHEREAS, the enclosed amendments have been reviewed and recommended for adoption by the Deputy Town Attorney; and WHEREAS, the Administration and Public Works Committee of the Town Council reviewed the amendments on September 8, 1991. THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Chapter 12.1 of the Leesburg Town Code, Article 21 of the Town of Leesburg Personnel Manual is hereby amended to read as follows: ARTICLE 21 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE Sec. 12.1-53. Intent and Application Minutes of September 10, 1991 (a) For the purposes of this grievance procedure, a grievance shall be construed as a complaint or dispute by an employee relating to his or her employment, including, but not necessarily limited to: (1) disciplinary actions :-r. vcl;~.ng including dismissals, demotions, and suspensions provided that dismissals shall be grievable whenever resulting from formal discipline or unsatisfactory job performance; (2) c concerns regarding the application, meaning or interpretation of these personnel policies, procedures, rules, regulations, ordinances and statutes; (3) acts of reprisal as the result of utilization of the grievance procedure or participation in the grievance of another town employee; (4) complaints of discrimination on the basis of race, color, creed, sex, handicap, disability, age, national origin or political affiliation; and (5) reprisal on the part of the town as a result of an employee's participation in the grievance of another employee; (6) acts of retaliation because the employee has complied with any law of the United States or the Commonwealth has reported any violation of such law to a governmental authority, or has sought any change in law before the Congress of the United States or the governmental authority. (b) Complaints are not grievable where they involve: (1) establishment and revision of wages or salaries, position classifications or general benefits; (2) work activity accepted by the employee as a condition of employment or work activity which may be reasonably expected to be a part of the job content, however the measurement and assessment of work activity through a performance evaluation shall not be grievable except where the employee can show that the evaluation was arbitrary or capricious; (3) the contents or ordinances, these rules, or other established procedures and regulations; (4) failure to promote except where the employee can show established promotional policies or procedures were not followed or applied fairly; (5) the methods, means and personnel by which such work activities are to be carried on; (6) except where such action affects an employee who has been reinstated within the previous six months as the result of the final determination of a grievance, discharge, layoff, demotion, or suspension from duties because of lack of work, reduction in work force, or job abolition; (7) the hiring, promotion, transfer, assignment and retention of employees within the agency (provided such actions do not constitute disciplinary actions); or (8) the relief from normal duties in emergencies. In any grievance brought under the exception to Section 12.1-53 Co) (6), the action shall be upheld upon a showing by the town that; (1) there was a valid business reason for the action, and (2) the employee was notified of such reason in writing prior to the effective date of the action. (c) Questions of grievability shall be resolved by the Town Manager. When either the town or the grievant so requests, the Town Manager shall decide, within (5) work days of the request~ whether or not a matter is grievable. The decision of grievability shall be made subsequent to the reduction of the grievance to writing but prior to the panel hearing and a copy of the decisions shall be sent to the grievant. The issue of grievability shall be decided prior to the panel hearing or it shall be deemed to be waived. Decisions of the Town Manager concerning the issue of grievability may be appealed to the Loudoun County Circuit Court for a hearing de novo on the issue of grievability. Proceeding for review of the decision of the Town Manager shall be instituted by filing a notice of appeal with the Town Manager within five (5) work days of the date of the decision. Within five (5) work days thereafter, the Town Manager shall transmit to the clerk of the Circuit court a copy of his decision, a copy of the notice of appeal, and the exhibits, with copies to the grievant. Within thirty (30) days of receipt by the clerk of such records, the Court, sitting without a jury, shall hear the appeal on the record transmitted by the Town Manager and any additional evidence as may be necessary to resolve any controversy as to the correctness of the record. The Court may affirm the decision of the Town Manager or may reverse or modify the decision. The decision of the Court is final and not appealable. (d) of positions: This grievance procedure shall apply only to the following persons, positions, and categories (1) Career service employees with the exception of the Clerk of Council. (2) Uniformed police officers except those who elect to resolve grievances in accordance with Section 12.1-56:1 et seq. of this article. (3) Any citizen grievance based on alleged violation of federal, state or local "handicapped discrimination" laws governed by Sec. 12.1-54, (c), (d), (e), (fl of Article 21. Sec. 12.1-54. Procedure. (a) Step 1. The grievant shall verbally present the facts surrounding the grievance to his immediate supervisor within thirty (30) days of the grievance or dispute occurred. The supervisor shall render his decision to the grievant within five (5) working days from the day the grievance was presented. Minutes of September 10, 1991 CO) Step 2. If the grievance is not resolved in Step 1, the employee shall reduce the grievance to writing within five (5) days and present it to the appropriate department head. It shall include a statement of the grievance and the facts involved, alleged violation of these rules, the initial decision of the immediate supervisor and the remedy requested by the grievant. Within five (5) days the department head shall arrange a meeting with the grievant and his immediate supervisor where applicable to review the facts and shall notify the grievant of his decision in writing within three working days of such meeting. Step 2 and Step 3 shall be waived if the Town Manager serves as the grievant's immediate supervisor. (c) Step 3. If the grievance is not resolved in Step 2, the grievant may ask the Town Manager for a meeting to discuss the grievance further. Such request must be made within five (5) working days following receipt of the Department head's reply. Such meeting shall be held within two working days of the date of the request and shall be attended by the grievant, such representatives as he may sele~ the Department Head and the immediate supervisor. If the grievant is represented by legal counsel, management likewise has the option of being represented by counsel. The Town Manager shall provide a written decision to the grievant with a copy to all other attendees, within three working days of the date of the meeting. This section shall not be construed as limiting the Town Manager's authority to require additional meetings with only the grievant present to discuss matters pertaining to the grievance. Witness may be called on either side and shall be present only while providing testimony. (d) Step 4. If the Town Manager's decision does not resolve the grievance, the grievant may proceed by requesting a panel hearing with the Board of Grievance Commissioners. Such a request must be received by the board within seven (7) working days of the grievant's receipt of the Town Manager's decision. (e) After the initial filing of a written grievance, failure of either party to comply with all substantial procedural requirements without just cause will result in a decision in favor of the other party on any grievable issue, provided the party not in compliance fails to correct the noncompliance within five (5) work days of receipt of written notification of the compliance violation. Such written notification by the grievant shall be made to the Town Manager. Failure of either party without just cause to comply with all substantial procedural requirements at the panel hearing shall result in a decision in favor of the other party. Town Manager may require a clear explanation of the basis for just cause extensions or exceptions. The Town Manager shall determine the compliance issues. Compliance determinations made by the Town Manager shall be left to judicial review by filing a petition with the Circuit Court within 30 days of the compliance determination. Sec. 12.1-55. Board of Grievance Commissioners The Board of Grievance Commissioners is hereby created. (a) Organization. The Board of Grievance Commissioners shall consist of 12 members who shall be annually appointed by the Town Council, based upon the following:. (1) Six members shall be selected from full-time, non-supervisory town employees, evenly divided between office and outside personnel. (2) Three members shall be selected from among full-time supervisory town employees excluding the Town Manager and Clerk of Council. (3) Three members shall be selected from town residents of responsible character and not employed by the town. (4) Vacancies on the commission created by resignation or ineligibility shall be filled for the unexpired term in accordance with the above criteria. Co) Panel Selection. The panel shall be composed of three members chosen from among the Board of Grievance Commissioners as follows: (1) A member shall be selected by the Town Manager. (2) A member shall be selected by the Grievant. (3) The remaining member shall be selected by the first two appointments. (4) The following relatives of a participant in the grievance process or a participant's Minutes of September 10, 1991 spouse are prohibited from serving as panel members: Spouse, parent~ child, descendants of a child, sibling, niece, nephew and first cousin. No attorney having direct involvement with the subject manner of the grievance, nor a partner, associate, employee or co-employee of such an attorney shall serve as a panel member. (5) Refusal to serve on a panel without cause shall be construed as resignation from the commission. None of the commissioners selected to form the panel to hear the specific grievance may have been involved in an earlier phase of said grievance. (c) Conduct of Investigation (1) The panel member appointed pursuant Sec. 12.1-55 (b) (3) shall be the chairperson of the panel and the panel shall establish a hearing date no more than ten working days from receipt of the grievance. (2) The grievant may have a representative or legal counsel present at this meeting at his own expense. (3) The Personnel Director shall insure that all copies of written correspondence generated and related to the grievance and the grievance record are delivered to the panel prior to the hearing. The Personnel Director shall provide to the grievant a list of the documents furnished to the panel. The grievant and his attorney shall be allowed access to and copies of the relevant files introduced to be used in the grievance procedure. (4) The panel shall determine the propriety of attendance at the hearing of persons not having a direct interest in the hearing. (5) The panel may at the beginning of the hearing ask for a statement clarifying the issues involved. (6) Exhibits, when offered, may be received in evidence by the panel, and when so received, shall be marked and made part of the record. (7) The grievant and Town Manager, or their representative, shall then present their claim and proofs and witnesses who shall submit to questions or other examinations. The panel may, ~ :~ a: .... ~ ....... ~u: ...... a .... shall have the authority to determine the admission of evidence without regard to the burden of proof or the order of presentation of evidence, but shall afford full equal opportunity to all parties and witnesses for presentation of any material or relevant proofs. Documents, exhibits and lists of witnesses must be exchanged between the parties in advance of the hearing. Parties may offer evidence and shall produce such additional evidence as the panel may deem necessary to an understanding and determination of the dispute. The panel shall be the judge of relevancy and materiality of the evidence offered. All evidence shall be taken in the presence of the panel and of the parties, except by mutual consent. (10) The Panel Chairman shall specifically inquire of all parties whether they have any further proofs to offer or witnesses to be heard. Upon receiving negative replies, the Chairman shall declare the hearing closed. All representatives may examine, cross examine, question and present evidence at the hearing. (11) The panel hearing may be reopened on its own motion or upon allegation of either party which demonstrates that additional information or evidence is available of a significant value to effect a forthcoming decision. (II) (12) The maioriW panel's decision shall be in writing and signed by the chairman and Minutes of September 10, 1991 filed with the Town Manager not later than 15 working days following the completion of the first panel hearing. Copies of the decision shall be transmitted to all hearing attendees and the Town Council. (d) Powers. (1) The panel is vested with the responsibility and application of these rules as they relate to each However, it is not empowered to change said rules. authority to interpret the specific case before them. (2) The m~jority decision of the panel shall be final and binding in all of its determinations, and shall be consistent with the provisions of law and written policies. The Manager shall enforce all decisions of the panel and the grievant may petition the circuit court for implementation of the panel's decision if the manager fails to act on the panel's decision. Sec. 12.1-56. General Rights of Management. The grievance procedure established herein shall not circumscribe or modify the existing right of the Town to do the following, provided, however, that none of these rights may be exercised in an arbitrary or capricious manner: (1) Direct the work of its employees, as well as establish and revise wages, salaries, positions classifications, and general employee benefits; (2) Hire, promote, transfer, assign, and retain employees in positions within the town; (3) Relieve employees from duties of the town in emergencies; (4) Maintain the efficiency of governmental operations; (5) Determine the methods, means and personnel by which operations are to be carried on; (6) Establish and revise personnel policies as provided by law and these rules. Sec. 12.1-56.1. Police Investigation Procedure. Whenever an investigation by the town focuses on matters which could lead to the dismissal, demotion, suspension or transfer for punitive reasons of a uniformed police officer, the following conditions shall apply: (a) Any questioning of the police officer shall take place at a reasonable time and place as designated by the investigating officer or individual, preferably when the officer under investigation is on duty, unless circumstances dictate otherwise. (b) Prior to the officer being questioned, he or she shall be informed of the name and rank of the investigating officer, if applicable, and of any individual to be present during the questioning and the nature of the investigation. Sec. 12.1-56.2. Notice of Charges. Before any dismissal, demotion, suspension without pay or transfer for punitive reasons is imposed, the town shall provide the officer under investigation a statement in writing of the charges, the basis therefore, the action which may be taken, and an opportunity to respond to the charges, the basis therefore, the action which may be taken, and an opportunity to respond to the charges, both orally and in writing, within five (5) calendar days. In preparing his or her response, the officer may be assisted by counsel at his or hew own expenses. Sec. 12.1-56.3. Hearing. Whenever a police officer is dismissed, demoted, suspended or transferred for punitive reasons, he or she may, within five calendar days, request a hearing. At the hearing, the officer and the town shall be afforded the opportunity to present evidence and examine and cross-examine the witnesses. The town Minutes of September 10, 1991 and the officer may both be represented by counsel. The panel conducting the hearing shall rule on the admissibility of the evidence ~nd a record shall be made of the hearing. Sec. 12.1-56.4. Panel Composition. The hearing panel shall consist of one member from the career officers of the town police department not involved in the investigation selected by the grievant officer, one member from the career officers of the town police department not involved in the investigation, at the same or no more than two ranks above the grievant officer, selected by the Town Manager, and a third member from the town's career service excluding the police department selected by the first two members. Sec. 12.1-56.5. Immediate Suspension Authorized. Nothing in this article shall prevent the immediate suspension without pay of any police officer whose continued presence on the job is deemed to be a substantial and immediate threat to the welfare of the town, nor shall anything in this article prevent the suspension of a police officer for refusing to obey a direct order issued in conformance with the town's written and disseminated rules and regulations. In such case, the police officer shall, upon reques~ be afforded the rights provided under this article in a reasonable amount of time. Sec. 12.1-56.6. Hearing is Advisory.. The recommendations of the panel, and the reasons therefore, shall be in writing, shall be transmitted promptly to the grievant officer, to the chief of police, Town Manager and personnel director. Such recommendation shall be advisory only, but shall be accorded significant weight. Sec. 12.1-56-7. Oral Reprimand Not Prohibited. Nothing in this article shall be construed to prohibit the formal counseling of a police officer by a supervisor in reference to a minor infraction of policy or procedure which does not result in disciplinary action. SECTION II. All prior ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed. SECTION III. This ordinance shall be in effect upon passage. DISCUSSION Mrs. Forester suggested amending Sec. 12.1-55 (c) 3, third line to read: . . . panel prior to the hearing. The Personnel Director shall provide to the grievant a list of the documents furnished to the panel .... Mrs. Forester questioned the wording in Sec. 12.1-55 (c) (10), last sentence which reads:... All may be examined, cross examined, question and present evidence at the hearing. Mayor Sevila suggested that staff take a look at the state code to correct this matter to comply with state law. Ms. Bange raised concern with Section 12.1-53 (c), first sentence. "Questions of grievability shall be resolved by the Town Manager." She stated that she understood that a change would take place, whereby, three members of the appointed commission could review and make a determination. This would be much fairer - a three member panel from the commission could determine questions of grievability rather then the town manager. She asked that staff pursue this matter. Mr. Stephenson addressed Ms. Bange, stating that the state code currently provides that the chief administrative officer makes the determination. Mayor Sevila suggested that the Council go ahead and adopt this legislation with instructions that if the Council does not like the procedures in the state code and VML is not including it in its legislative packet that maybe the Council could do that. Ms. Bange agreed to the Mayor's suggestion. VOTE Aye' Nay: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila None 11. (g) Minutes of September 10, 1991 Mr. Brown briefly summarized the following ordinance. He stated that in order for the town to continue to receive the recently increased fines for Class 1, 2, and 4 misdemeanors staff has been advised by the Commonwealth Attorney to adopt misdemeanor amendments which enforce the new fine amounts. MOTION On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following ordinance was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-0-41 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING CHAPTER 1, SECTION 1-13 OF THE LEESBURG TOWN CODE, REGARDING MISDEMEANOR PENALTIES WHEREAS, the 1990 Virginia General Assembly adopted amendments to State Code Section 18.2- 11 regarding punishments or penalties for the conviction of a misdemeanor; and WHEREAS, Section 18.2-11 of the State Code, which is referenced in Section 1-13 of the Town Code, increased the existing fines for Class 1, 2, and 4 misdemeanors; and WHEREAS, the Commonwealth Attorney has advised local governments to formally adopt the misdemeanor amendments in order to enforce the new fine amounts; and WHEREAS, the enclosed amendments have been recommended for adoption by the Town Attorney: THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Chapter 1, Section 1-13 of the Town Code of Leesburg, Virginia is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 1-13. General and specific penalty; continuing violations. Wherever in this Code, or in any ordinance or resolution of the town, or rule or regulation or order promulgated by any officer or agency of the town under authority duly vested in him or it~ any act is prohibited or is declared to be unlawful or an offense or a misdemeanor, or the doing of any act is required or the failure to do any act is declared to be unlawful or an offense or a misdemeanor, and no specific penalty is provided for the violation thereof, the violation of any such provision of the Code or any such ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation or order shall be punished as if guilty of a class I misdemeanor, as defined in section 18.2-11 of the Code of Virginia (1950) as amended; provided, however, that such penalty shall not exceed the penalty prescribed by the Code of Virginia for a like offense. Specific penalties prescribed for violation of other provisions of this Code shall also not exceed the penalties prescribed by general law for a like offense and must not be any less than such penalties. Each day any violation of this Code, or any such ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation or order continues shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION II. Consistent with Section 18.2-11 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, the following punishments or fines for the conviction of a misdemeanor shall apply: (a) For Class 1 misdemeanors, confinement in jail for not more than twelve months and a fine of not more than $2,500, either or both. (b) For Class 2 misdemeanors, confinement in jail for not more than six months and a fine of not more than $1,000, either or both. (c) For Class 3 misdemeanors, a fine of not more than $500. (d) For Class 4 misdemeanors, a fine of not more than $250. SECTION HI. All prior ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed. SECTION IV. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None 11. Minutes of September 10, 1991 Mr. Brown summarized the proposed ordinance by Stating that this amendment provides for the opportunity to select, retain, evaluate and compensate employees who are part-time regular employees of the town but not career employees - non-seasonal. MOTION On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following ordinance was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-0-42 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING CHAPTER 12.1 OF THE TOWN CODE REGARDING PERSONNEL MANUAL TO INCLUDE PROVISIONS FOR NON-SEASONAL, PART'- TIME EMPLOYEES WHEREAS, the town's personnel manual currently does not provide for non-seasonal part-time employees; and WHEREAS, the ~,~ng of Ida Lee Recreation Center and the town parking facility requires the recruitment, selection and retention of quolified and capable career part-time employees; and WHEREAS, career oriented part-time employees offer the sufficient flexibility required to provide stable, effective and efficient public service at two of the town's msjor installation. THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Section 12.1-2 (q) (v) of the Town Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 12.1-2. Definitions. Where used within the context of these rules the following words and terms shall have the meaning indicated below: (q) Part-time employee - A~ A non-seasonal employee whose regular work week is less than 36 hours. (v) Seasonal employee - An employee whose continuous employment does not exceed six months during any one year period ~-~ '"" ...... ~- *~ ..... ' ....... ~ ..... '- rcqu'~rcd ~^~ SECTION Il. Section 12.1-17 (d) (5) of the Town Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 12.1-17. Pay Determination. (d) (5) Merit. New full-time and part-time non-seasonal employees who complete 6 months of town service are eligible for permanent pay adjustments in the form of merit increases of up to 5% of their current gross salary. Merit increases are awarded based on the same performance criteria established in Section 12.1-17 (c) of these rules. SECTION III. Section 12.1-44 (b) of the Town Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 12.1-44. Application. (b) Part-time and seasonal employees. SECTION IV. Section 12.1-46 (b) (3) of the Town Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 12.1-46. Application. (b) (3) The terms of this Article shall not apply to the following positions and categories of positions: (3) ~"'"~ ~-~ ......... ~-~' employees. SECTION V. All prior ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed. Minutes of September 10, 1991 SECTION VI. This ordinance shall be in effect upon passage. VOTE Nay: 11. (i) Councilmembers Bsnge, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila None Mr. Brown summarized the proposed ordinance stating that this amendment will included those non- seasonal employees in the pay plan. MOTION On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following ordinance was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-0-43 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING CHAPTER 12.1 OF THE TOWN CODE REGARDING REVISED PAY AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN WHE~, the town's pay and classification plan does not currently provide for non-seasonal part- time employees; and WHEREAS, the career oriented non-seasonal part-time employees offer the sufficient flexibility required to provide stable, effective and efficient public service. THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Section 12.1-10 of the Town Code, classification of town employees by occupational group and pay grades, is amended to read as follows: Sec. 12.1-10. Classification of town employees by 0ccuoatiooA] grouos and pay grades. Employees in the town service are classified in the following occupational groups and pay grades: Occupational Groups Position Pay Grade Executive-Managerial # # Law Enforcement Administrative-Clerical Superv~ory Dir. of Engineering 27 & Public Works Chief of Plan Review 24 Director of Utilities 26 Director of Finance 26 Director of Planning, Zoning 26 and Development Assistant Town Manager 21 for Economic Development & Admin. Chief of Police 26 Director of Parks and Recreation 24 Parking Control Officer 2 Police Officer 13 Police Officer 1st Class 14 Corporal 15 Sergeant 17 Lieutenant 20 Captain 22 Investigator 15 Clerk Typist 4 Data Entry Clerk 3 Secretary 5 Accounting Clerk I 4 Accounting Clerk II 5 Administrative Secretary 7 Zoning & Development As~ 10 Executive Secretary 10 Clerk of Council 11 Personnel Officer 9 Public Information Officer 8 Desk Clerk 2 Parking Attendant 2 Supt. Equipment Maintenance 15 Water Supply Superintendent 18 Superintendent Bldgs. 17 Grounds and Maintenance ~i2ut~s of September 10, 1991 Technical Professional Construction/Maintenance Utility Lines Superintendent WPCF Superintendent 18 Parks & Marketing Coordinator 15 Recreation Coordinator 15 Recreation Supervisor 12 Aquatics Supervisor 12 Center Supervisor 12 Asst. Utility Plant Mechanic 5 Heavy Equip. Operator 7 Utility Billing Technician 8 Asst. Streets, Bldg. & Grounds 13 Asst. Superintendent Eq. Maint. 13 Senior Operator 12 Operator I 11 Operator II 10 Operator III 7 Operator IV 4 Asst. Ut. Lines Superintendent 13 Maintenance Senior Inspector 14 Senior Utility Plant Mechanic 11 Asst. Water Supply Supt. 13 Capital Projects Representative 19 Capital Projects Coordinator 14 Asst. WPCF Superintendent 13 Facility Inspector 13 Asst. Zoning Administrator 14 Systems Technician 8 Meter Technician 5 Recreation Attendants n/a Lifeguard n/a Instructors n/a Chief of Operations & 18 Inspections Engineer H 18 Traffic Engineer 18 Engineer I 15 Chief of Current Planning 21 Planner I 15 Planner II 17 Principal Planner 18 Asst~ Director of Finance 15 Zoning Administrator 19 Laborer 1 Maintenance Worker H' 7 Maintenance Worker I 5 Mechanic I 5 ($5.50-8.00 per hour) ($6.00-10.00 per hour) ($10.00-20.00 per hour) SECTION H. SECTION KI. VOTE Aye: Nay: All prior ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed. This ordinance shall be in effect upon passage. Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila None 11. (m), (n) MOTION On motion of Mr. Kimball, seconded by Ms. Bange, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-182 - RESOLUTION - SUSPENDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PARKING FEES FOR THE DOWNTOWN PARKING FACILITY UNTIL JANUARY 2, 1992 WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 91-0-19 amended the Town Code to establish procedures and fees for operating the downtown parking facility; and WHEREAS, to promote the new parking facility, fees were suspended through the end of September, 1991; and WHEREAS, the town's Ad Hoc Parking Committee recommends suspending implementation of fees until January 2, 1992; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has offered free parking in Leesburg during the holiday season in Minutes of September 10, 1991 the past; and WHEREAS, the suspension of parking fees for the rest of the calendar year will offer an additional promotional opportunity to increese the use of the facility and stimulate business in Leesburg. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: Parking fees for the downtown parking facility are hereby suspended until January 2, 1991. DISCUSSION Mayor Sevila stated that lost revenue would amount to about $5,000.00, a small contribution back to the downtown merchants that the town can make for the coming Christmas season which will begin to compensate them for the inconvenience and lost revenues of last Christmas season. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None 11. {m} was removed from the asrenda with the adoption of 11. 11. Mr. Shoemaker addressed the Council noting the changes in the proposed resolution. He stated that in Section Il, second line referring to Section 5.05 this has now been updated to Section 3.11. Also in Section II (d), it was brought to staff's attention that PPPI purchased the lot as a finished lot, therefore, (d) should read: PPI or its assigns shall pay its .... Section II (i), should read: The agreement shall run for the period the occupied structure is utihzed or connection can be made to a sewage facility as approved by the Town of Leesburg. MOTION On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Ms. Bange, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-183 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING AGREEMENTS FOR PUMPING AND HAULING OF SEWAGE FROM THE PROPOSED PATOWMACK POWER PARTNERS, INC., FACILITY WITHIN LEE CENTER BUSINESS PARK WHEREAS, Patowmack Power Partners, Inc. (PPPI), has requested the town enter into a contract to provide pump and haul service and treatment facilities for sewage disposal incident to the operation of an electric power generating facility within Lee Center Business Park; and WHEREAS, the Annexation Area Development Policies entered into between Leesburg and the County of Loudoun, effective on January 1, 1984, makes specific provision that the property upon which the PPPI Facility is proposed to be located is within Leesburg's service area for public utilities; and WHEREAS, this Council's approval of this request reasonably accommodates an economically appropriate use of the property: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. The town manager is authorized to enter into a contract with the Virginia Department of Health setting forth that the town will provide pump and haul services, either directly or through a private contractor holding a sewage handling permit, from the Patowmack Power Partners, Inc., Facility. The town manager shall give appropriate assurances to the Virginia Department of Health that provisions of the sewage handling and disposal regulations shall be met in the operation of the pump and haul sewage disposal service under the auspices of the town. SECTION II. The town manager is authorized to enter into necessary and appropriate contracts, pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Sewage Handling and Disposal Regulations of the Virginia Department of Minutes of September 10, 1991 Health in forms approved by the town attorney, to provide pump and haul sewage disposal from the PPPI Facility under general terms and conditions as follows: (a) Co) (c) (d) (e) (h) (i) Pump and haul services for the PPPI Facility shall be performed by a private contractor selected by PPPI and approved by the town manager. The services of the contractor shall be scheduled and supervised by the town manager in cooperation with PPPI. PPPI shall pay sewer availability fees prior to zoning permit issuance as determined under Section 15-14 of the Town Code. PPPI or its assigns shall pay its allocable share of "off-site" sanitary sewer system development fees for extension of the town's sanitary sewer system to serve the Lee Center Business Park. The contractor performing pump and haul services shall bill PPPI directly for the services and look only to PPPI for payment of any and all charges, costs or fees relating to the services provided. PPPI agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the town for any liability to third parties arising out of the services provided. PPPI shall pay to the town a sewer service fee per 1,000 gallons of effluent delivered to the wastewater treatment plant based on the schedule of sewage treatment charges in effect as of the date of the service provided. In addition to this charge, a per truck load charge of $15.00 shall be paid. The manager is authorized to increase the per truck load charge as necessary to fully recover all costs to the town for providing this service. PPPI shall connect to the public sewer at such time as the sewer lines are constructed in a public street which abuts PPPI's property. The agreement shall run for the period the occupied structure is utilized or connection can be made to a sewerage facility as approved by the Town of Leesburg. SECTION IlL Any pump and haul permit approved for this project will not relieve the applicants from any other requirements, laws and regulations imposed by the Town of Leesburg for new construction. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None n. (x) Mr. Brown briefly summarized the proposed legislation. MOTION On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Mrs. Forester, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-184 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING A LEASE WITH LOUDOUN COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION FOR TOWN-OWNED OFFICE SPACE WHEREAS, limited office space owned by the town is available for occupancy by a compatible organization; and WHEREAS, Loudoun County Transportation Association is an organization that works to enhance the quality of life of Leesburg citizens by offering community-wide bus transportation; and WHEREAS, Loudoun County Transportation Association has been removed from its present quarters and requires part-time use of office space for nine months to continue its needed service; and WHEREAS, the town currently assists with this needed service by providing fuel and vehicle maintenance. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: The town manager is authorized and directed to prepare a lease of town-owned office space for use by the Loudoun County Transportation with no rent. The term of the lease shall be nine months with unilateral cancellation by either party with thirty days notice. Terms of said lease shall be reviewed and Minutes of September 10, 1991 approved by the town attorney. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None 11. Mr. Tomokins stated that the proposed legislation was not prepared solely for the previous application. Council may find this legislation helpful in dealing with special exceptions that may not need conditions. MOTION On motion of Mr. Clem, seconded by Mr. Webb, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-185 - RESOLUTION - INITIATING AN AM]~NT TO THE LEESBURG ZONING ORDINANCE SECTI.ON 11A-4(13) TO PROVIDE A PROCESS FOR THE REVOCATION OF SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AUTHORIZED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL WHEREAS, Section llA-1 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance provides that certain uses should be approved by the Town Council by special exception; and WHEREAS, the Town Council may impose certain conditions to the special exception approval; and WHEREAS, the conditions of approval attached to the special exception may not be complied with by the owner or operator; and WHE~, a clear legislative and administrative process to correct potential problems that may arise from the approval of a special exception should be provided as part of the special exception process; and WHEREAS, the existing text of the Zoning Ordinance does not provide for a specific means of revoking a special exception for failure of the owner or operator to comply with the conditions of the special exception: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. An amendment to the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance, adding Section 11A-4(13) as shown below, is hereby initiated and referred to the Planning Commission for public hearing and recommendation under Chapter 11, Title 15,1-431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended: Section llA-4. Application, Review and Enforcement Procedures. (13) Revocation of a Special Exception. A special exception approval may be revoked by the Town Council upon non-compliance and/or violation of any condition attached to the special exception, after notice and a public hearing pursuant to Section 15.1-431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as smended. SECTION Il. The Planning Commission shall reports its recommendation to the Town Council on the proposed amendment within 60 days pursuant to Chapter 11, Title 15.1-431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia as amended. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None 11. Mr. Brown stated that the proposed legislation will accommodate the request of the ad hoc committee for locating a fire station site that gives a public process to determining where on the Town Plan the fire station site should be located. Minutes of September 10, 1991 MOTION On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-186 - RESOLUTION - INITIATING AND REFERRING AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1986 TOWN PLAN, AS REVISED, FOR PUBLIC HEARING PURSUANT TO SECTION 15.1-431 OF THE 1950 CODE OF VIRGINIA, AS AMENDED WHEREAS, the Ad Hoc Fire Station Committee has presented a final report to the Council identifying the "Honicon" site, located at the southeast corner of Edwards Ferry Road and Heritage Way and the proffered site on the Edwards Landing parcel as suitable for a future fire sub-station; and WHE~, Map 4, Community Facilities Policy Map of the Town Plan does not presently illustrate a fire station at either of these sites; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 1990, the Town Council denied an amendment to Map 4, Community Facilities Policy Map of the Town Plan to illustrate a fire station on the public facility site in the Exeter Planned Residential Neighborhood; and WI-IE~, the Council desires to receive public input from the neighborhoods surrounding the proposed fire station locations prior to amending the Town Plan to illustrate this facility: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: An amendment to the 1986 Town Plan, as revised, to locate a fire station site at the Honicon site and the Edwards Landing site is initiated. This amendment is 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· DISCUSSION Mr. Clem suggested revising the proposed legislation as follows: last paragraph, second sentence to read: ·.. site and the Edwards Landing... He suggested adding the proposed fire station site at the Stowers tract in the Town Plan also. It has been proffered out. The Council could conduct a public hearing on it now and post the property to make everyone aware. VOTE Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila None 11. (o) MOTION Mrs. Forester moved that this item be referred back to the September 17, 1992, Administration and Public Works Committee for further discussion. Based upon the new guidelines adopted tonight for the EDAC, non-resident individuals are now able to apply. This new criteria should be advertised. 11. (o) MOTION On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Ms. Bange, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-187 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING FUNDING FOR LEESBURG RENAISSANCE WI-IE~, Council adopted on June 27, 1990, Resolution No. 90-160, which established Leesburg Renaissance and the conditions required for matching town funding;, and Minutes of September 10, 1991 VTHE~, as one of the conditions of funding, Leesburg Renaissance must receive Council authorization of programs that are to be initiated and implemented; and WHEREAS, the Leesburg Renaissance has conducted promotional programs such as A Taste of Leesburg; and WHEREAS, active promotion of Leesburg during difficult economic conditions is necessary and welcome by town businesses and citizens; and WHEREAS, the Leesburg Renaissance Board of Directors adopted its short-term objectives and presented them at the February 5, 1991, Administration and Public Works Committee meeting and provided the Town Council with a projected cost of future events and programs to meet these objectives; and WHEREAS, Leesburg Renaissance continues to implement its comprehensive plan, Planning for Progress: 1990 and Beyond, to promote the economic development of the Town of Leesbur~. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: The fiscal year 1991 final request for matching funding in the amount of $9,795 for Leesburg Renaissance expenditures through June 30, 1991, is hereby authorized. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None 11. (a), (s). (u), (.v), (z). (aa), (bb), (cc), (dd), (ee). (fD, (gg). (hh) MOTION On motion of Mrs. Forester, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following resolutions were proposed as consent items and unanimously adopted. 91-188 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LEASE BETWEEN THE TOWN AND THE LOUDOUN MUSEUM FOR THE USE OF THE LOG CABIN AT 14 LOUDOUN STREET, S.W. and WHEREAS, Retrospect terminated its lease for use of the log cabin with the town on May 1, 1991; WHEREAS, the disposition of the log cabin has been the subject of some discussion since the Spring budget workshops; and WHEREAS, the Loudoun Museum has proposed a use of the log cabin that depicts life in Leesburg during the 18th Century and includes a museum/retail shop; and WHEREAS, town staff has discussed the in-kind contribution of the log cabin to the Convention and Visitor's Bureau (CAVB) to establish a tourism presence in downtown Leesburg plus the Museum's proposed use with representatives of both organizations; and WHEREAS, Town Council authorized $33,000 plus a level of town staff commitment to assist the CAVB; and WHEREAS, representatives of the Loudoun Restoration and Preservation Society indicated at the August 6, 1991, Council's Administration and Public Works Committee meeting that the town had committed in the past to keeping the log cabin open and available to the public; and WHEREAS, the CAVB has determined that additional resources would be required to staff a tourism center at the log cabin; and WHEREAS, the Museum has proposed sufficient staffing and programs to create a tourism attraction at the log cabin. Minutes of September 10, 1991 THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: The mayor is authorized to enter into a lease with the Loudoun Museum for the use of the log cabin at 14 Loudoun Street, S.W. for a period of four years. The log cabin shall be used in accordance with the proposal submitted to Town Council on July 27, 1991. 91-189 - RESOLUTION - PROPOSED BOND ISSUE FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION AND INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REGULATIONS WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia (the town) has determined that it is necessary and desirable to undertake the expansion and improvement of the town's wastewater treatment plant ("project") with a total cost of approximately $22,300,000 of which approximately $20,000,000 will be financed with tax-exempt or taxable bonds. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Statement of Intent. The town presently intends, at one time or from time to time, to finance the project with tax-exempt or taxable bonds or other obligations (the ~bonds") and to reimburse capital expenditures paid by the town, including expenditures previously paid by the town to the extent permitted by law, in connection with the project before the issuance of the bonds. SECTION II. Source of Interim Financing and Payment of Bonds. The town expects to pay the capital expenditures related to the project and incurred before the issuance of the bonds with an interfund loan or loans from the town's general fund or from temporary appropriations or loans from its capital projects fund. The town expects to pay debt service on the bonds from its utility fund consisting of utility fund revenues. SECTION III. Effective Date; Public Inspection. This resolution is adopted for the purposes of complying with proposed Treasury Regulation #1.103-17 or any successor regulation and shall be in full force and effect upon its adoption. The Clerk of Council is instructed to file a copy of this resolution in the records of the town within 10 days after its adoption and thereafter keep it continuously available for inspection by the general public during the town's normal business hours. 91-190 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PHILLIPS NICKELS WELL LOT BOUNDARY LINE VACATION WITHIN THE MAYFA1R SUBDMSION RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: A notice of public hearing to consider vacation of a well lot, initiated by the town, shall be published in the Loudoun Times-Mirror on September 18, 1991 and September 25, 1991 for public hearing on October 8, 1991 at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, Leesburg, Virginia. 91-191 - RESOLUTION - AMENDING POSITIONS AND NUMBERS OF EMPLOYEES IN THE TOWN'S SERVICE WHEREAS, the fiscal year 1992 budget currently does not provide for the Ida Lee Recreation Center non-seasonal part-time instructors in the positions and number of employees in the town's service; and WHEREAS, the career oriented part-time employees offer the sufficient flexibility required to provide stable, effective and efficient public service. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. The positions and number of employees in the town services established for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991 are amended as follows: LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT Clerk of Council EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT Number of Full-Time Equivalent Positions Available Manager 1 Minutes of September 10, 1991 Assistant Town Manager for Economic Development and Administration Executive Secretary Personnel Officer Public Infomation Officer Clerk Typist FINANCE DEPARTMENT Director of Finance Assistant Director of Finance Accounting Clerk H Accounting Clerk I Systems Technician Utility Billing Technician POLICE DEPARTMENT Chief of Police Captain Lieutenant Sergeant Corporal Police Officer Police Office 1st Class Administrative Secretary Secretary Parking Control Officer Data Entry Clerk ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION Director of Engineering and Public Works Traffic Engineer Administrative Secretary ENGINEERING AND INSPECTIONS Chief of Plan Review Chief of Operations/Inspections Engineer II Engineer I Capital Projects Coordinator Capital Projects Representative Senior Inspector Facility Inspector STREET MAINTENANCE Superintendent Asst. Superintendent Maintenance Worker II Maintenance Worker I Laborer EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE Superintendent Asst. Superintendent Heavy Equipment Operator Mechanic I Laborer PARKING METERS AND LOTS 1 2 1 10 3 11 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 5 8 1 1 1 1 1 Parking Attendant (part-time) 1.5 Minutes of September 10, 1991 PLANNING, ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT Dir. Planning, Zoning & Development Chief of Current Planning Zoning Administrator Principal Planner Planner II Planner I Assistant Zoning Administrator Zoning and Development Assistant Administrative Secretary Secretary PARKS AND RECREATION Director of Parks and Recreation Administrative Secretary Recreation Coordinator Recreation Supervisor Parks & Marketing Coordinator Center Supervisor Aquatics Supervisor Desk Clerk Recreation Attendant (part-time) Lifeguard (part-time) Instructors - determined by class registration UTILITIES ADMINISTRATION Director of Utilities Engineer II Senior Utility Plant Mechanic Administrative Secretary AsSt. Utility Plant Mechanic WATER POLLUTION CONTROL Superintendent Asst. Superintendent Senior Operator Operator I Operator III Equipment Operator Laborer UTILITY LINES Superintendent Asst. Superintendent Maintenance Maintenance Worker H Maintenance Worker I Meter Technician Laborer WATER SUPPLY Superintendent Operator I Operator II Operator III Operator IV TOTAL PERSONNEL AUTHORIZED 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 3.4 9 n/a 1 1 3 1 1 2 Full-time Equivalent 162.9 Minutes of September 10, 1991 Part-time 13.4 91-192 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONING APPLICATION #ZM~131 POTOMAC CROSSING PLANNED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY (PRC) RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: A notice of public hearing to consider rezoning application #ZM-131, a town initiated amendment to rezoning application #ZM-66 Potomac Crossing Planned Residential Community (PRC) shall be published in the Loudoun Times Mirror on September 18, 1991 and September 25, 1991 for public hearing on October 8, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street~ Leesburg, Virginia. 91-193 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INSTALI.ATION IN THE BATTLEFIELD SHOPPING CENTER WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public improvements installed to date in the Battlefield Shopping Center and certified that the value of work performed is $541,831.00; and WHEREAS, a letter of credit from Sovran Bank N.A. in the amount of $737,000.00 has been provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee installation of public improvements for the Battlefield Shopping Center. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I.The letter of credit from Sovran Bank N.A. in the amount of $737,000.00 is reduced to $195,169.00. SECTION II. The Town Manager shall notify the developer that liability for the letter of credit has been reduced as outlined in Section I of this resolution, and that this reduction does not constitute acceptance of public improvements by the town or relieve the developer of responsibilities outlined in the contract for public improvements for the Battlefield Shopping Center. 91-194 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INSTAI.LATION FOR THE BATTLEFIELD SHOPPING CENTER SANITARY SEWER OUTFALL WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public improvements installed to date for the Battlefield Shopping Center Sanitary Sewer Outfall and certified that the value of work performed is $163,200.00; and WHERFu~, a letter of credit from Sovran Bank N.A. in the amount of $204,000.00 has been provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee installation of public improvements for the Battlefield Shopping Center Sanitary Sewer Outfall. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I.The letter of credit from Sovran Bank N.A. in the amount of $204,000.00 is reduced to $40,800.00. SECTION II. The Town Manager shall notify the developer that liability for the letter of credit has been reduced as outlined in Section I of this resolution, and that this reduction does not constitute acceptance of public improvements by the town or relieve the developer of responsibilities outlined in the contract for public improvements for the Battlefield Shopping Center Sanitary Sewer Outfall. 91-195 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INSTAI.L&TION FOR THE EDWARDS FERRY ROAD/ROUTE 15 BYPASS IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public improvements installed to date for the Edwards Ferry Road/Route 15 Bypass Improvements and certified that the value of work performed is $750,000.00; and WHEREAS, a letter of credit from Sovran Bank N.A. in the amount of $2,500,000.00 has been provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee installation of public improvements for the Edwards Ferry Road/Route 15 Bypass Improvements. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: Minutes of September 10, 1991 SECTION I.The letter of credit from Sovran Bank N.A. in the amount of $2,500,000.00 is reduced to $1,750,000.00. SECTION II. The Town Manager shall notify the developer that liability for the letter of credit has been reduced as outlined in Section I of this resolution, and that this reduction does not constitute acceptance of public improvements by the town or relieve the developer of responsibilities outlined in the contract for public improvements for the Edwards Ferry RoadfRoute 15 Bypass Improvements. 91-196 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLATION IN EXETER SECTION 5 WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public improvements installed to date in Exeter Section 5 and certified that the value of work performed is $714,141.00; and WHEREAS, a letter of credit from First American Bank in the amount of $1,715.436.00 has been provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee installation of public improvements for Exeter Section 5. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I.The letter of credit from First American Bank in the amount of $1,715,436.00 is reduced to $1,001,295.00. SECTION H. The Town Manager shall notify the developer that liability for the letter of credit has been reduced as outlined in Section I of this resolution, and that this reduction does not constitute acceptance of public improvements by the town or relieve the developer of responsibilities outlined in the contract for public improvements for Exeter Section 5. 91-197 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLATION IN EXETER SECTION 8 WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public improvements installed to date in Exeter Section 8 and certified that the value of work performed is $175,475.00; and WHEREAS, a letter of credit from First American Bank in the amount of $367,283.00 has been provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee installation of public improvements for Exeter Section 8. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I.The letter of credit from First American Bank in the amount of $367,283.00 is reduced to $191,808.00. SECTION II. The Town Manager shall notify the developer that liability for the letter of credit has been reduced as outlined in Section I of this resolution, and that this reduction does not constitute acceptance of public improvements by the town or relieve the developer of responsibilities outlined in the contract for public improvements for Exeter Section 8. 91-198 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLATION IN EXETER SECTION 9 WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public improvements installed to date in Exeter Section 9 and certified that the value of work performed is $542,511.00; and WHE~, a letter of credit from First American Bank in the amount of $1,566,803.00 has been provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee installation of public improvements for Exeter Section 9. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I.The letter of credit from First American Bank in the amount of $1,566,803.00 is reduced to $1,024,292.00. SECTION II. The Town Manager shall notify the developer that liability for the letter of credit has been reduced as outlined in Section I of this resolution, and that this reduction does not constitute Minutes of September 10, 1991 acceptance of public improvements by the town or relieve the developer of responsibilities outlined in the contract for public improvements for Exeter Section 9. 91-199 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INSTAI.LATION FOR BATTLEFIELD PARKWAY PHASE II IN EXETER WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public improvements installed to date in Battlefield Parkway Phase II in Exeter and cert/fied that the value of work performed is $365,293.00; and WHERF_J~, a letter of credit from First American B_~nk in the amount of $717,530.00 has been provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee installation of public improvements for Battlefield Parkway Phase II in Exeter. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I.The letter of credit from First American Bank in the amount of $717,530.00 is reduced to $352,237.00. SECTION H. The Town Manager shall notify the developer that liability for the letter of credit has been reduced as outlined in Section I of this resolution, and that this reduction does not constitute acceptance of public improvements by the town or relieve the developer of responsibilities outlined in the contract for public improvements for Battlefield Parkway Phase H in Exeter. 91-200 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING A TIME EXTENSION FOR INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVING A PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR TAVISTOCK FARMS SECTION 2 WHEREAS, Trafalgar House, the developers of Tavistock Farms Section 2, has not completed all the required public improvements in accordance with the approved construction drawings and town standards within the two year period agreed to in the contract for public improvements; and WHEREAS, the developer has requested a one year time extension to complete the public improvements; and WHEREAS, the corporate surety bond from American Home Assurance Company, which guarantees the installation of public improvements in Tavistock Farms Section 2 in the amount of $35,319.00, automatically renews for additional one year periods; and WHEREAS, the Director of Engineering and Public Works has approved the amount of $35,319.00 to guarantee installation of the remaining public improvements in Tavistock Farms Section 2. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: l~newal of the corporate surety bond from American Home Assurance Company in the amount of $35,319.00 in a form approved by the Town Attorney and a time extension of one year for the installation of public improvements are hereby approved for Tavistock Farms Section 2. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevfla Nay: None Mr. Brown addressed the Council briefly summarizing the proposed legislation. MOTION On motion of Mr. Kimball, seconded by Mrs. Forester, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-201 - RESOLUTION - INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LEESBUR(~ ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING THE STORAGE AND USE OF RECREATION EQUIPME~NT IN RESIDENTIAl, NEIGHBORHOODS. WHE~, public necessity, general welfare, and good zoning practice require the evaluation of existing ordinances to ensure that they continue to address the needs of the community; and Minutes of September 10, 1991 WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will regulate the storage and use of recreational vehicles in residential neighborhoods to preserve the neighborhood's character and integrity; and WHE~, the proposed amendment will minimize the adverse effect on residents and property values caused by the unsightly appearance of improperly stored recreational vehicles; and WHERF_u~, the proposed amendment will not deprive private property owners the right to own and store recreational vehicles in residential neighborhoods. THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. An amendment to Article 7, Article 17, and Article 18 of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is hereby initiated to include the new sections shown below: Section 7A-13. Recreation Equipment ( 1 ) Use, Generally. No recreation equipment shall be used for living, sleeping or other occupancy when parked or stored on a residential lot or in any other location not approved for such use. ( 2 ) Parking or Storage. Recreation equipment that is not parked or stored in a garage, carport or accessory building a. Shall be located in the side or rear yard; b.Shall be located at least three feet from all buildings; and c. Shall be screened from all public streets and a4jacent residential properties as provided in Section 7A-5(f). Article 17. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Section 17B-4 APPLICATION OF CML PENALTIES (18)Storage and Use of Recreation Equipment Article 18. Definitions RECREATION EQUIPMENT Boats, boat trailers, motorized dwellings, pickup truck campers (not mounted), tent trailers, travel trailers and similar recreational vehicles/equipment intended for use as portable recreational housing. SECTION II. Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing and consider these amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, and report its recommendation to the Town Council pursuant to Chapter 11, Title 15.1-431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. DISCUSSION Mr. Clem asked what someone would do if they could not park their vehicle on the side or in the back yard? Mayor Sevila suggested holding any debate until the public hearing. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None 11. (v) Mr. Brown summarized the proposed legislation. MOTION On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. Minutes of September 10, 1991 91-202 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING THE CHARGE-OFF OF UNCOLLECTIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES FOR 1986 WHEREAS, the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, Section 58.1-39-40 provides for collection of local personal property taxes to be enforceable for only five years following December 31 of the year for which such taxes were assessed; and WHEREAS, the town's financial records contain outstanding personal property taxes for the year 1986: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: The Director of Finance is authorized to charge-off from the town's financial records the attached list of all outstanding personal property taxes for the year 1986. DISCUSSION Mr. Webb suggested turning the uncollected accounts over to a collection agency. Mr. York explained that these taxes are being written off because the town cannot, by state law, force collection on personal property taxes five years old or older. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None MOT[ON On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Clem, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously adopted. 91-203 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING THE CHARGE-OFF OF UNCOLLECTIBLE WATER AND SEWER ACCOUNTS WHEREAS, the town each year identifies those water and sewer utility and other accounts that are past due and considered uncollectible; and WHEREAS, a listing of those accounts for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1991, is hereby attached: THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: The attached listing of delinquent water and sewer accounts and returned checks have been identified to be uncollectible and authority is given for the accounts to be written-off the town's books and records as uncollectible accounts. VOTE Aye: Councilmembers Bange, Clem, Forester, Kimball, Lovin, Webb and Mayor Sevila Nay: None On motion of, and duly seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 1:00 a.m. Robert E Sev~la, Mayor Clerk of Council