HomeMy Public PortalAbout1995_11_14TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 199~
A regular meeting of the Leesburg Town Council was held on November 14, 1995, 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 Webb
SALUTE TO THE FLAG was led by Town Manager Steven C. Brown
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers present
George F. Atwell (absent)
J. Frank Buttery, Jr.
JeweH M. Emswiller
Joseph R. Trocino
Kristen C. Umstattd
William F. Webb
Mayor James E. Clem
Staff members present
Town Manager Steven C. Brown
Director of Engineering and Public Works Thomas A. Mason
Director of Planning, Zoning and Development Michael Tompkins
Assistant Town Manager for Economic Development John Henry King
Contracts Administrator Barry Thompson
Town Attorney George Martin
Town Clerk Barbara Markland
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION:
On motion of Mr. Buttery, seconded by Ms. Umstattd, the regular meeting minutes of October 24, 1995
were approved as'written.
VOTE:
Aye: Councilmembers Buttery, Emswiller, Trocino, Umstattd, Webb and Mayor Clem
Nay: None
Absent: Councilmember Atwell
PETITIONERS
Mr. Michael Jackson, a resident of the Foxridge Subdivision, addressed the Council speaking as a citizen
and as a professional concerned with the health and welfare of the Town of Leesburg's arboreal
environment. He stated, ~the Town is in a very stressful time as far as the town's trees and landscaping.
With the promotion of development in the town the arboreal environment is in serious need of help.
If the town is not careful there will be virtually no trees left. No implementation program exists for
replacing trees either on the town's part or the part of the developers. There is a very minimal effort
now to secure the welfare of trees and landscaping in general. Every development project that impacts
our forest in this area, only one tree is replanted for every six that is taken down. Also~, the old,
established trees are not being preserved or replaced. These issues are not being addressed in a very
conservative effort. From a professional standpoint there have been great failings on everyone's part.
Things are happening that should not be happening. The town's plan review process is a shambles.
There are new plantings in the town of certain species that should not be allowed because they are
unsatisfactory. The new shopping center at the end of Edwards Ferry Road just planted Pin Oaks
underneath power lines. These are 80' trees and the tops are already touching the power lines. Be~nning
next year the tops of these trees will have to be cut to keep them from growing into the power lines.
This is now a layman's headache not only for the town but for the utility company as well. In 15 years
those trees are going to be ugly, malformed, unhealthy and will reflect on our town's appearance. The
same thing has been happening every year and the town is not addressing what is going to happen in the
future. The town is going to double in size before too long. This is not being addressed. In working
with certain agencies in the town - with public works and parks and recreation - they have made it known
that partial funding for an arborist position has been made available and as a town we have not used that
funding. At a conference by the American Arboreal Cultural Society there were no representatives from
the town or the county in attendance. Towns half the size of Leesburg had representatives there because
they are concerned with what is happening. There are many programs that can help alleviate the burden
of financial strain. Dealing with the trees and landscaping does cost a lot of money. Virginia Power is
offering incentives for tree planting programs. The town should be taking advantage of these things. The
reason is because there is nobody there to pick up the banner and run with it. The town needs somebody
to watchdog our trees."
Mayor Clem asked Mr. Brown to respond to Mr. Jackson's comments regarding the planting of Pin Oaks
under power lines on Edwards Ferry Road and whether or not the town was informed of the American
Arboreal Cultural Society's Conference. Also how the town is spending the funds allocated for the
Arborist position.
Mr. Trocino stated this year the Tree Commission is be~nning to take hold of Leesburg as a Tree City
and the responsibilities. The town needs to take a hard look at a full-time staff person.
Mr. Bob Primack, a resident of 217 Shenandoah Street, addressed the Council stating he supports the
comments of Mr. Jackson regarding tree preservation. Mr. Primack offered comments regarding
downtown Leesburg and the recent elections. Regarding the elections, Mr. Primack stated when
discussions were held on the county complex remaining in Leesburg one of the main reasons for retaining
it was to help the downtown business/retail district in downtown Leesburg - to revitalize downtown. He
is in support of the downtown county complex. He stated he was distressed by remarks made by
Counciimember Trocino concerning the bringing of lawyers into the area around the county complex.
Mr. Trocino's remarks were also reiterated by the town's Assistant Town Manager for Economic
Development Mr. King. Mr. King made remarks at a realtor's meeting regarding increasing the rental
fees and building costs because the county complex will increase the value of these buildings. Mr.
Primack stated some members of the Town Council have, in the past, not voted on issues because of
conflicts of interest. The development pressure on Leesburg and Loudoun County is very great. There
is an influence question - a way in which business is done that the town needs to be very careful about.
Mr. Primack expressed concern with the endorsement of Dale Polen Myers by some of the members of
the Town Council. The way that the Council supported Dale Polen Myers in the election was a problem.
Mr. Primack questioned how this was done. 'The town is under tremendous pressure. There is going
to be millions of dollars made in Loudoun County over the nex~ 10 or 20 years. Lets look at what we
do and how we do it and be very careful."
PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION #SE-95-06 ANITA
JENKINS HOME BASED DAY CARE
Mr. Tompkins presented the staff report.
Ms. Emswilicr verified thc hours of operation for the daycare and asked that time limit be set for the
installation of a fence.
Mr. Buttery pointed out that the special exception approval only applies to Ms. Jenkins while she lives
at this residence.
Mr. Tompkins stated that is correct. 1'he special exception docs not run with the land.
Ms. Umstattd referenced condition number 1 of the proposed legislation and suggested adding language
after the word twelve... "during a twenty-four hour period."
Ms. Jenkins, thc applicant, addressed thc Council providing additional comment.
Mr. Buttery asked Ms. Jenkins where she is in the process of obtaining her state license?
Ms. Jenkins stated she is waiting on the special exception approval and that she would expect to receive
her license by November 29, 1995.
Mr. Bob Steeley, a neighbor of Ms. Jenkins', stated his primary concern was the fencing which has now
been addressed.
Ms. Barbara Thompson, addressed the Council, in support of the request.
Ms. Amy Dorsey, addressed the Council, in support of the request.
Mr. Buttery stated he would support the request. He suggested some sort of vehicle which would allow
for ail special exceptions to require and maintain a state license for as long as a person is a daycare
CO 11/14/95 -2-
provider.
Ms. Emswiller stated the town needs to look at a whole program for granting special exceptions for
daycare facilities.
Ms. Umstattd stated she appreciates Mr. Buttery's comments regarding the requirement of a state license,
however, she explained the amount of red tape a person must go through to obtain a state license and
suggested leaving this up to the parents as to whether they want their children's daycare provider to be
state licensed.
Mr. Trocino agreed with Ms. Umstattd.
Mayor Clem agreed that the town needs to review its current ordinance regarding special exceptions and
daycares. He suggested that staff obtain a copy of the state's licensing requirements.
10. (a)
MOTION
On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Ms. EmswiHer, the following ordinance was proposed and adopted.
95-0-30 - ORDINANCE -APPROVING SPECIAL EXCEPTION #SE-95-06 HOME-BASED DAY
CARE, BY ANITA JENKINS
WHEREAS, Anita Jenkins has requested special exception approval to operate a child care
center from a residence at 1013 Forbes Court N.E., Leesburg, Virginia; and
WHEREAS, a child care center is a special exception use in the R-6 zoning district; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 1995, the Planning Commission forwarded #SE-95-06 to Council
with a recommendation of conditional approval; and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 1995, the Town Council held a public hearing on this application;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed use meets the general review criteria set forth in the special exception
regulations of the Zoning Ordinance.
SECTION I. Special exception application #SE-95-06 Home-Based Day Care, by Anita Jenkins,
1013 Forbes Court N.E., as identified in the Loudoun County Tax Records as Tax Map 48T((3)), Parcel
35, is hereby approved subject to the following conditions:
The total number of children cared for shah not exceed twelve during a twenty-four hour
period.
2. The hours of operation shah not be extended beyond the current hours of operation.
The applicant shah enclose the play area within a fence at least three and one-half feet
in height to be installed before the total number of children has increased to twelve.
SECTION II. This ordinance shah be in effect upon its passage.
VOTE:
Aye: Councilmembers Buttery, Emswiller, Trocino, Umstattd, Webb and Mayor Clem
Nay: None
Absent: Councilmember AtweH
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
Ms. EmswiHer appreciated the comments made by Mr. Jackson. She has encouraged the Town Council
to hire a full-time arborist within the planning department. The town needs to hold people accountable
for what they do. She believes the Tree Commission is a step in the right direction.
Ms. Emswiller noted that a roundtable meeting will be held on December 4, at 7:00 p.m., in the Lower
Level of the town building to discuss the concerns of downtown merchants and citizens. She invited
everyone to attend. She stated this will be the first of many meetings.
CO 11/14/95 -3-
Mr. Trocino congratulated Ms. Umstattd on the quality and style of her recent campaign as Chairman
of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors. Mr. Trocino stated it is an honor to share the Town
Council podium with Ms. Umstattd.
Mr. Trocino stated it is nice to see the sidewalk project begin on Edwards Ferry Road.
Ms. Umstattd attended the Military Bash Dance on behalf of the Alzheimer's Respite Center.
Mr. Buttery noted an open house will be held at the Art Gallery at Market Station where renowned artist
P. Buckely Moss will be present to sign her paintings.
Mr. Buttery stated the town's crews will be out in full force due to the whether. He thanked them for
their efforts.
Mr. Webb stated that the members of the Council were elected by the citizens of Leesburg to serve the
citizens to the best of their ability and knowledge. Mr. Webb stated he is discouraged by the recent
criticisms that the councilmembers are doing as a body and individually. There have been criticisms
about some of the members of Council going out on their own and doing things for the citizens. Mr.
Webb stated if he receives a call from a citizen with a problem or concern he will report back to the
citizen. If it is a problem that he can solve on his own, he stated he will solve it and not bring it before
the full Council. If it is a concern that needs to be forwarded to the Town Manager or town staff then
it will be. If it is a concern that needs to come before the full Council then it will. Mr. Webb stated he
will not stop working for the citizens as an individual.
Mr. Webb referenced the right-of-way easement for the right turn lane at Route 621 and stated that the
property owner no longer has access to the field. He also pointed out that there are large rocks in the
drainage ditch near this property that are obstructing drainage. He asked that staff report on these
issues.
Mr. Webb also asked for a definite date of when the traffic signal will be installed at Route 621 and when
the paving will be complete at Edwards Ferry Road and Heritage Way to the Bypass?
Mr. Mason, Director of Engineering and Public Works, addressed all of Mr. Webb's concerns.
Mr. Webb pointed out that Loudoun Ride-On is considering a shuttle bus service during the holidays.
MAYOR'S REPORT
Mayor Clem thanked Mr. Jackson for his comments and stated that a full-time arborist may be in order.
MANAGER'S REPORT
Mr. Brown highlighted items in the Activity Report.
LEGISLATION:
10.(b)
MOTION:
On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Trocino, the following ordinance was proposed and adopted.
95-0-31 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING CHAPTER 8: GARBAGE AND REFUSE, SECTION 8-12Co):
COLLECTION SCHEDULE OF THE LEESBURG TOWN CODE
WHEREAS, based on an initiative of the Business Climate and Infrastructure Committee of the
Economic Development Commi~ion, a change in the garbage and refuse collection schedule was made
for the Old and Historic District effective September l, 1995; and
WHEREAS, after a trial period, it was determined that the change in the collection schedule did
not meet the needs of many of the businesses within the Old and Historic District; and
WHEREAS, an amendment of the Town Code is required to restore the former commercial
garbage and refuse collection schedule:
THEREFORE, ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Lcesburg in Virginia as follows:
CO 11/14/95 -4-
SECTION I. Chapter 8: Garbage and Refuse, Section 8-12(b): Collection Schedule of the
Leesburg Town Code is hereby amended to add delete the following language as uador-lia~ -
lined out: "Garbage and Refuse will be collected by the municipality fi.om all commercial properties on
Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday each week, w!!h ,~' ...... ,;~,. ,.~:,~,,~ ,~ o,,~ sa;~,~,,~,, r~,,~,,, Go_tho_ge
SECTION II. This garbage and refuse collection schedule change for commercial properties
within the Old and Historic District shall be effective December 1, 1995.
Aye: Counci!members Buttery, Emswiller, Trocino, Umstattd, Webb and Mayor Clem
Nay: None
Absent: Councilmember Atwell
IO.(c)
MOTION:
On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Mr. Buttery, the following resolution was proposed and adopted.
95-219 - RESOLUTION - INITIATING AND REFERRING AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZING THE
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO GRANT ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES FROM
BUILDING SETBACKS CONTAINED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE AS AUTHORIT~F.D
BY ,~15.1-491(D) OF THE 1950 CODE OF VIRGINIA, AS AMENDED
WHEREAS, on July 1, 1995 the Code of Virginia was amended to authorize the zoning
administrator to grant administrative variances fi.om any building setback contained in the zoning
regulations pursuant to §15.1-491(D) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended;
WHEREAS, on November 14, 1995, Council considered this amendment and its intent to help
promote the public health, safety and welfare, and facilitate a convenient, attractive and harmonious
community:
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Vir~nia as follows:
SECTION I. An amendment to Section 16A-1(6) of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance is hereby
initiated and referred to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation to include the
text as stated below:
0)
Administrative Variances. The Zoning Administrator may authorize an administrative
variance fi.om any building setback requirements contained in the zoning ordinance, when
the applicant notifies all adjoining property owners by certified mail, and the Zoning
Administrator finds in writing that the administrative variance complies with the
necessary findings of fact provided in §15.1-491(d) of the 1950 Code of Vir~nia, as
amended. The filing fee for an administrative variance shall be $50.00. Should any
adjoining property owner object in writing to the administrative variance request within
twenty-one (21) days of the notice, the application can not be administratively approved.
The applicant may request that the Board of Zoning Appeals consider the variance by
submitting a separate application and fee, as established by the zoning ordinance.
SECTION II. The Planning Commission is authorized to hold a public hearing to consider
DISCUSSIONS:
Ms. Emswiller stated she is not in favor of the amendment, however, she will vote in favor of referring
this matter to the Planning Commission for a public hearing.
Ms. Umstattd clarified that by the Council initiating the amendments in items 10. (c) and (e), the town
would not be forgoing any opportunity for proffers.
Mr. Tompkins answered that is correct. Item 10. (c) only deals with building setbacks and item (e) deals
with variations of lot area and width requirements.
CO 11/14/95 -5-
Ms. Emswiller, stated she did not want to send a message to the Planning Commission that this matter
is being forwarded to them for a public hearing because it is something the Town Council is in favor of.
The Planning Commission should have the ability for a complete review of this matter before it is
returned to the Council.
Mr. Buttery agreed with Ms. Emswiller's comments.
VOTE:
Aye: Councilmembers Buttery, Emswiller, Trocino, Umstattd, Webb and Mayor Clem
Nay: None
Absent: Councilmember Atwell
lO.(d). (e). (f). (~. (h). (i). (i), (m), (o)
MOTION:
On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded Mr. Trocino, the following resolutions were proposed as consent
items and unanimously adopted.
95-220 - RESOLUTION - CANCELLING THE DECEMBER 19, 1995, PLANNING AND ZONING,
ADMINISTRATION AND PUBLIC WORKS AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
MEETINGS AND THE DECEMBER 26, 1995, TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The December 19, 1995, Planning and Zoning, Administration and Public Works and Finance
Committee meetings and the December 26, 1995, Council meeting are cancelled.
95-221 - RESOLUTION -INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 13-75(a) OF THE
SUBDIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, the Variation Study Committee of the Planning Commission studied the validity of
Section 13-75(a) of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations (SLDR); and
WHEREAS, on September 18, 1995 the Deputy Town Attorney recommended that Section 13-
75(a) of the SLDR be deleted; and
WHEREAS, on October 7, 1995 the Planning commission requested that the Town Council
initiate an amendment of the SLDR to delete Section 13-75(a); and
WHEREAS, on November 7, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Committee of the Town Council
endorsed the request made by the Planning Commission.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. An amendment to delete Section 13-75(a) of the SLDR is hereby initiated and
referred to the Planning Commission for a public hearing and recommendation to the Town Council.
95-222 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE
FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED IN PARK VIEW ESTATES
WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public
improvements installed to date in Park View Estates and certified that the value of work performed is
$97,526.95; and
WHEREAS, a letter of credit in the amount of $499,154.10 from Vir~nia First Savings Bank was
provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee installation of public improvements
for Park View Estates, and this letter of credit was reduced to $195,357.75 by Resolution #95-160
adopted on July 25, 1995.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The letter of credit from Virginia First savings Bank in the current amount of
$195,357.75 is reduced to $99,830.82.
SECTION II. The Town Manager shall notify the developer that liability for the letter of credit
CO 11/14/95 -6-
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 Park View Estates.
95-223 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE
FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTSINSTALLED IN KINCAID FOREST PHASE 1, SECTION
6A
WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public
improvements installed to date in Kincaid Forest Phase 1, Section 6A and certified that the value of work
performed is $151,864.13; and
WHEREAS, a corporate surety bond in the amount of $307,717.69 from the American Motorists
Insurance Company was provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee installation
of public improvements for Kincaid Forest Phase 1, Section 6A.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Vir~nia as follows:
SECTION I. The corporate surety bond from the American Motorists Insurance Company in
the amount of $307,717.69 is reduced to $155,853.56.
SECTION II. The Town Manager shah 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 Kincaid Forest Phase 1, Section 6A.
95-224 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE
FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTSINSTALLED IN KINCAID FOREST PHASE 1, SECTION
615
WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public
improvements installed to date in YAncaid Forest Phase 1, Section 6B and certified that the value of work
performed is $588,757.62; and
WHEREAS, a corporate surety bond in the amount of $1,249,854.65 from the American
Motorists Insurance Company was provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee
installation of public improvements for Kincaid Forest Phase 1, Section 6B.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Vir~nia as follows:
SECTION I. The corporate surety bond from the American Motorists Insurance Company in
the amount of $1,249,854.65 is reduced to $661,097.03.
SECTION II. The Town Manager shah notify the developer that Hability 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 Kincaid Forest Phase 1, Section 6B.
95-225 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A REDUCTION OF THE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE
FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED IN KINCAID FOREST PHASE 1., SECTION
10A
WHEREAS, the town's Director of Engineering and Public Works has reviewed the public
improvements installed to date in Kincaid Forest Phase 1, Section 10A and certified that the value of
work performed is $345,760.36; and
WHEREAS, a corporate surety bond in the amount of $433,299.00 from the American Motorists
Insurance Company was provided by the developer and approved by the Council to guarantee installation
of public improvements for Kincaid Forest Phase 1, Section 10A.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The corporate surety bond from the American Motorists Insurance Company in
the amount of $433,299.00 is reduced to $87,538.64.
SECTION II. The Town Manager shah 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
CO 11/14/95 -7-
acceptance of public improvements by the town or relieve the developer of responsibilities outlined in
the contract for public improvements for Kincaid Forest Phase 1, Section 10A.
95-226 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING A TIME EXTENSION FOR COMPLETION OF PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTSAND APPROVINGA PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR EXETER
SECTION 3
WHEREAS, Pulte Home Corporation, the developer of Exeter Section 3, 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 six (6) month time extension to complete the public
improvements; and
WHEREAS, a letter of credit in the amount of $303,051.00 from NationsBank was provided by
the developer to guarantee the installation of the remaining public improvements in Exeter Section 3.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The letter of credit from NationsBank in the amount of $303,051.00 is approved
to guarantee the installation of public improvements in Exeter Section 3.
SECTION II. A time extension to April 29, 1996 for completion of the public improvements is
approved.
95-227 - RESOLUTION - WAIVING RENTAL FEES AT THE IDA LEE RECREATION CENTER
FOR THE LOUDOUN VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL AFTER-PROM PARTY
WHEREAS, the Loudoun Valley High School Parent Support Group has requested a waiver of
the rental fees for the use of the Ida Lee Recreation Center for their After-Prom Party in April 1996;
and
WHEREAS, the event is scheduled after normal operating hours and requires rental fees be paid
to cover operating costs not to exceed $2,000.00; and
WHEREAS, the Loudoun Valley High School Parent Support Group has requested a waiver of
the rental costs; and
WHEREAS, on November 7, 1995, the Town Council Finance Committee recommended waiving
the rental costs for the Loudoun Valley High School After-Prom Party.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The Town Manager is hereby authorized to waive the rental costs not to exceed
$2,000.00 for the After-Prom Party.
SECTION II. The Loudoun Valley High School Parent Support Group is required to pay all staff
costs required for the event.
95-228 - RESOLUTION- APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR LANDSCAPING FOR THE EDWARDS
FERRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
WHEREAS, current funding for the Edwards Ferry Road Improvements project does not include
funding for landscaping beyond normal property restoration; and
and
WHEREAS, a quotation for landscaping was received from the general contractor for the project;
WHEREAS, this quotation was rejected by the Finance Committee at its meeting of October 17,
1995, with advice to staff to secure independent bids for the landscaping; and
WHEREAS, staff secured quotations for landscaping independent of the general contractor for
the project, which, therefore, omitted the contingency allowance and mark-up included in the price
quoted by the general contractor; and
WHEREAS, Overbrook Nurseries, Inc. of Round Hill, Virginia submitted the lowest responsive
bid of $5,570 for the work.
CO 11/14/95-8-
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The Town Manager is authorized to execute, on behalf of the town, a lump sum
contract with Overbrook Nurseries, Inc. for the amount of $5,570 for landscaping of the Edwards Ferry
Road Improvements project.
SECTION II. An appropriation for the work in the amount of $5,570 is made to budget account
902-9209-700-725 from the unappropriated general fund.
95-229 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH GILBANE PROPERTIES,
INC. FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ON CHURCH STREET,
HARRISON STREET, EAST MARKET STREET AND EAST LOUDOUN STREETAT THE
LOUDOUN COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER
WHEREAS, improvements are needed to the portions of Church Street, Harrison Street, East
Market Street, and East Loudoun which are adjacent to the Loudoun County Office Complex which is
currently under construction; and
WHEREAS, the Letter of Understanding between the Town of Leesburg, Gilbane Development
Associates, L.C. and Gilcorp provides that the town may require Gilcorp or Gilbane to undertake the
road improvements and will reimburse Gilbane or Gilcorp for expenditures related to the road
improvements; and
WHEREAS, Gilbane has provided a proposal dated November 14, 1995 to preform the road
improvements for a cost of $325,000.00; and
WHEREAS, Management and Administration of the road improvements by Gilbane, the
developer of the Loudoun County Office Building, will provide better coordination of contractors and
subcontractors and better control on the performance of the work; and
WHEREAS, sufficient funds to pay for the road improvements are included in the adopted FY96
Budget; and
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
The Town Manager is authorized to sign an agreement in a form approved by the Deputy Town
Attorney for road improvements on Church Street, Harrison Street, East Market Street and East
Loudoun Street associated with the Loudoun County Complex Office Building with Gilbane Properties,
Inc., at a cost of $325,000 in accordance with the proposal dated November 14, 1995 from Gilbane
Properties, Inc.
VOTE:
Aye: Councilmembers Buttery, Emswiller, Trocino, Umstattd, Webb and Mayor Clem
Nay: None
Absent: Councilmember Atwell
Abstain: Councilmember Trocino from items 10. (g), (h), (i)
10. (k) was referred to the November 21, 1995 Administration and Public Works Committee meeting for
further consideration of items A. (4) and C.
Ms. Emswiller stated it is important to send the right message, in that the Town Council needs to be
unanimous.
10. (n)
DISCUSSION
Ms. Emswiller pointed out that there is a report, from an arborist contracted by the town, which
recommends that a retaining wall is not needed. Ms. Emswiller voted at the Finance Committee level
not to support building a retaining wall for one private citizen because the town paid money for an expert
opinion and the arborist's recommendation was that the retaining wall is not needed to save the trees.
Ms. Emswiller stated she cannot support spending $15,200 of the citizen's tax dollars for a private
individual.
MOTION:
On motion of Ms. Umstattd, seconded by Mr. Webb, the following resolution was proposed and adopted.
CO 11/14/95 -9-
95-230 - RESOLUTION - APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR A RETAINING WALl. FOR TI-IF.
EDWARDS FERRY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
WHEREAS, a resident on Edwards Ferry Road demanded that the town install a retaining wall
in front of his property to eliminate the necessity for minor grading near a tree in his front yard; and
WHEREAS, a quotation for the retaining wall was received from the general contractor for the
project; and
WHEREAS, the quotation was rejected by the Finance Committee at its meeting of October 17,
1995, with advice to staff to renegotiate the price for the retaining wall with the general contractor; and
WHEREAS, negotiations with the general contractor resulted in a revised bid in the amount of
$15,200.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Vir~nia as follows:
An appropriation for the work in the amount of $15,200 is made to budget account 902-9209-700-
725 from the unappropriated general fund.
DISCUSSION:
Mr. Webb stated the retaining wall would give a better appearance and would help the trees.
Ms. Emswiller reemphasized the fact that the professional opinion received from the arborist was that
the retaining wall is not necessary to save the trees.
Mr. Webb stated, speaking in layman's terms, the retaining wall provides more dirt for the trees.
Ms. Umstattd stated, while she recognizes Counciimember Emswiller's concerns and they are valid, she
is concerned that what will happen if the arborist is wrong and if the trees die the citizen will not have
much recourse for replacing the trees. She stated she will vote for the retaining wall unless there was
guaranteed recourse for the citizen should the arborist prove to be wrong.
Ms. Emswiller stated the town has a policy where if the town works on private property and if a tree dies
then the tree would be replaced by the town within one year. It is possible that the retaining wall be
installed and the tree will still be lost. It doesn't matter whether the retaining wall is erected or not, if
the citizen loses the tree within the time frame the town will replace it.
Mr. Webb stated the town will not replace the tree with another 40 foot tree.
Ms. Emswiller stated, regardless of the size of the tree, the tree would cost less then $15,200 to build a
private citizen a wall.
Mr. Buttery stated, another issue is the grading of a bank on the property in question which would also
be a taking of the citizen's land and would change the characteristics of the land.
Mr. Mason addressed Mr. Buttery's concern with regard to a taking of the land. He stated that the plan
that was let to bid showed a slope in the yard with a ratio of 3 horizontal to 1 vertical which is typically
the steepest slope. This slope will go beyond the fence into the yard and is the slope that the arborist
recommended that would have an influence on the tree. If that slope is not installed and a steeper slope
similar to the one that is on the yard now is installed then the work would be moved away from the tree
and whether it is a steep slope with mulched beds and landscaping or a retaining wall both probably
influence the tree in the same small, if any, amount because they are far away from the roots. In this
case, the landowner whose permission we need to enter the property to construct either the slope or the
retaining wall, prefers the wall. '
Mayor Clem stated, there have been two designs of the road. The initial design showed a wall and that
is what pleased most of the people. Mayor Clem stated he wants some assurance that the trees are not
lost. They are beautiful trees and the caliber of the trees cannot be replaced. The town is in the process
of enhancing that portion of the town. The wall will enhance that intersection tremendously.
Ms. Emswiller stated, she would like to be sure that if the Council votes for the retaining that the Council
votes for an accurate reason and that it is not a taking - which it isn't. Or that it is something that the
town has to do - because it doesn't. It is important that the citizens know why the individual is getting
a retaining wall. The resident is not getting a wall because the arborist recommends it. He is not getting
a wall because it is on his property and the town has to do it.
CO 11/14/95 -10-
VOTE:
Aye: Councilmembers Buttery, Trocino, Umstattd, Webb and Mayor Clem
Nay: Councilmember Emswiller
Absent: Councilmember Atwell
10. (p) was not adopted. A special meeting notice will be prepared for the Mayor's signature to schedule
an inter~ew session on December $, 1995 beginning immediately after the Finance Committee meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
MOTION:
On motion of Mr. Webb, seconded by Ms. Umstattd, thc following resolution was proposed and
unanimously adopted.
95-231 RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT AND APPROVING A
PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR RIVER CREEK
PARKWAY SOUTH, EARLY GRADING AND STRUCTURE PLANS PHASE II IN
POTOMAC STATION
WHEREAS, the construction drawings for River Creek Parkway South, Early Grading and
Structure Plan Phase II have been conditionally approved; and
WHEREAS, the developer, Goose Creek Communities LLC, wishes to proceed with installation
of thc public improvements; and
WHEREAS, the developer proposes to provide a corporate surety bond issued by Fidelity and
Deposit Company in the amount of $470,072.00; and
WHEREAS, the Fidelity and Deposit Company meets the town's requirements for a surety and
the amount of the bond is approved by the Director of Engineering and Public Works; and
WHEREAS, a contract to construct a portion of the work shown on the approved construction
plans was authorized on September 26, 1995 by Resolution #95-199.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows:
SECTION I. The Manager shall execute the contract for public improvements with Goose Creek
Communities LLC and River Creek LLC for the improvements shown on the plans approved by the
Director of Engineering and Public Works for River Creek Parkway South, Early Grading and Structure
Plan Phase II.
SECTION II. The corporate surety bond issued by Fidelity and Deposit Company in the amount
of $470,072.00 is approved to guarantee the installation of public improvements for River Creek Parkway
South, Early Grading and Structure Plan Phase II.
SECTION IlL Thc contract authorized by Resolution #95-199 adopted on September 26, 1995
shall be cancelled when the new contract approved in Section I is in effect.
VOTE:
Aye: Councilmembers Buttery, Emswiller, Trocino, Umstattd, Webb and Mayor Clem
Nay: None
Absent: Counciimember Atwell
Mayor Clem referenced an article in a newspaper and made the following statement. "I think it is
important that we all understand that each and every member of Council at any time has the fight to go
out and work issues and I would hope that they would do that. Please exercise that ability because it
does take the pressure off of the Council as a whole. There are no actions that can be taken by any one
individual. Contrary to what the paper says. All actions have to come back before this body. In the
paper - I've always learned and I learned it back when I was in grade school that the pen is mightier then
the sword. SO you always watch that. It bothers you when you look at references to a letter that the
Mayor may have sent to a developer. The actions of that letter I should explain. The developer
proposed 67 or so townhouses. The Planning Commission did a tremendous job in negotiating down to
19 homes and private streets. Private streets are bi-right but they can come back to haunt you when
those streets start to crumble and thc town has to pick up thc tab. There is no recourse or monies from
CO 11/14/95-11-
Richmond to help support that cost. Thus, I sent a letter to the gentleman and suggested that he may
want to consider developing a subdivision comprised of somewhere between 12 and 16 homes and have
public streets. He has responded back to me saying that he has a plan that he is submitting to the town
that shows 17 lots. At this point all I have been told is that all buffers, setbacks and public streets have
been addressed. It will now be looked at by our town staff and come to the Council to be addressed.
I think of issues as a rock with rough edges and any time if the Mayor or Town Council can smooth some
of those rough edges then get that rock in here and then the Council polish it - it saves a lot of time and
it sets the foundation for a project that everyone in town can be pleased with.
Mr. Buttery and I served on a committee comprised of one meeting to work with the developer that is
developing River Creek and has to build a road from Route 7 back to the river. It had to do with the
access to the new school site which is 35 acres which has been given to the town to be given to the school
board. We had to get access to it. At this juncture it is in the hands of our attorney, town staff and the
developer. When that is all worked out to something reasonable it will then be brought to Council for
Council action.
The Harper House which resides on Route 7 is a stone house owned by the developer and will be moved
by the developer. It has been offered to the County. It has not been offered to the town. It was alluded
to that I had given away a house when it is impossible to give away something you never owned. The
town will get involved when they come forth and ask to have a piece of property rezoned - a half acre
to move that house from its present site up next to Carradoc Hall. I say to the viewers that the Harper
House is going to the County not the town. I had no say. The town had no say. I just wanted to set
those records straight. If the Mayor and the Town Manager or the Mayor or a Councilmember doesn't
get involved from time to time there are things that will not occur in a timely fashion. The school board
needs that 35 acres by the first of the year so they can start their planning and designing and developing
so the school can be opened in the next school year. Not unlike the school that is in Balls Bluff. That
one had come to a halt. Negotiations were not going very far. Mr. Brown and I were invited to come
to a meeting and when we attended that meeting we came back recognizing what the problem was,
contacted the developer's attorney and within hours we were promised that this package would be sent
to California. I am convinced that the package was sent to California, signed and today we all are
enjoying a lovely school at Balls Bluff at the end of Battlefield Parkway. It made it sound in the paper
as if people are going out and doing things at will and without the blessings of Council. I assure you
nothing can occur without the blessing of these seven people and in some cases the 100 parking spaces
that was referenced has to be addressed not only by these people but it has to be addressed and satisfied
by the board of supervisors. There again there was only one meeting to discuss that and that had to do
with in the presence of Kirby Bowers, Joan Rokus, Jay Sneider and myself. That all evolved from a letter
that was sent to the County trying to discourage them from fencing in the Simmones' lot on North Street.
Those documents are on file should any one like to read them. I was quite disappointed to see that kind
of writing in the paper. All issues, I think by all members of this Council are handled with dignity and
grace and we prefer that they continue."
MOTION:
On motion of, and duly seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
//~6mes E. Clem, Mayor
Clerk of Council
CO 11/14/95 -12-