Loading...
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-