HomeMy Public PortalAbout2011_tcmin1025COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, 7:30 p.m. Mayor Umstattd presiding.
Council Members Present: David Butler, Thomas Dunn, Katie Sheldon Hammler,
Fernando "Marty" Martinez, Kenneth "Ken" Reid, Kevin D. Wright, and Mayor
Umstattd.
Council Members Absent: None.
Staff Present: Town Manager John Wells, Town Attorney Jeanette Irby, Deputy Town
Manager Kaj Dentler, Director of Planning and Zoning Susan Berry Hill, Deputy
Director of Planning and Zoning Brian Boucher, Deputy Director of Utilities Aref
Etemadi, Director of Parks and Recreation Richard Williams, Senior Planner Delane
Parks, Senior Engineer Cecil Jones, and Clerk of Council Lee Ann Green
AGENDA ITEMS
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION: Council Member Hammler
3. SALUTE TO THE FLAG: Council Member Dunn
4. ROLL CALL: Showing all members present.
5. MINUTES
a. Work Session Minutes of September 26, 2011
On a motion by Council Member Reid, seconded by Council Member
Butler, the minutes of the work session of September 26, 2011 were approved 6 -0-
1 (Dunn abstaining)
b. Regular Session Minutes of September 27, 2011
On a motion by Council Member Butler, seconded by Council Member
Reid, the minutes of the September 27 regular session were approved 7 -0.
6. ADOPTING THE MEETING AGENDA
On a motion by Vice Mayor Wright, seconded by Council Member Martinez, the
meeting agenda was approved as presented by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
7. PRESENTATIONS
a. Proclamation — NAACP Banquet
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member
Reid, the following was proclaimed:
1 I Pzhc
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
PROCLAMA TION
Loudoun NAACP 71' Anniversary
WHEREAS, on February 12, 1909 the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People was founded by a multiracial group of
activists; and
WHEREAS, for more than nine decades the NAACP has been the
largest and most recognized volunteer organization nationwide dedicated to
winning the struggle to obtain racial justice for all Americans; and
WHEREAS, the NAACP stands faithfully, with courage and
determination to show a willingness to do what is right, to seek justice, and a
commitment to end the unjust system that dehumanizes the beauty and
sacredness of human equality; and
WHEREAS, this year marks the 711h anniversary of the Loudoun
County Branch of the NAACP; and
WHEREAS, the Loudoun County Branch of the NAACP provides
local programs to nurture and foster the growth of young people through
mentoring, tutoring and its recognition of high school students who
demonstrate excellence in academics; and
WHEREAS, the Loudoun County Branch of the NAACP further
supports the community through active committees that address religious
affairs, legal redress, housing education, health education, economic
development, and political action; and
WHEREAS, the United States Department of Justice, Leesburg Police
Department and the Loudoun County Branch of the NAACP signed a
covenant to work towards a cooperative relationship including a diversified
and culturally sensitive police force.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Council of the Town of
Leesburg, in Virginia hereby congratulates the Loudoun County Branch of
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People on the
occasion of their 711h anniversary and their annual banquet and expresses the
deepest gratitude to the many volunteers who have worked tirelessly through
this organization to bring racial harmony and equality to our nation.
PROCLAIMED this 11th day of October, 2011.
b. Certificates of Appreciation — National Night Out
2 �agc
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member
Reid, Certificates of Appreciation were presented to the following for their
participation in the 2011 National Night Out:
Target California Tortilla
Best Buy Beezer Homes
Brooke Rental Center R.O.C.K. Program
Leesburg Police Citizens Support Team
Leesburg Police Explorer Post 1041
C. Proclamation — American Archives Month
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member
Reid, the following was proclaimed:
PROCLAMATION
American Archives Month
The Power of Collaboration
WHEREAS, our town's future is shaped by the shared experiences
of its citizens, past and present; and
WHEREAS, much of our community's rich and diverse heritage is
contained in documents and records created by and for its people; and
WHEREAS, archives have been established throughout the
Commonwealth of Virginia as a means of preserving our history; and
WHEREAS, these archives collectively contain over 400 years of
unique materials, ranging from hand - written letters and diaries to
typewritten manuscripts, photographs, videotapes, and modern
electronic data systems; and
WHEREAS, The Town of Leesburg's Thomas Balch Library is a
repository preserving the historical record of Leesburg and Loudoun
County,
WHEREAS through these archives, future generations can more
accurately study the past, learn from accomplishments of predecessors,
trace ancestors, understand a community's pride of place, confirm
31
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
property rights, and maintain laws, while celebrating the history of state
and local communities.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Mayor and Council of
the Town of Leesburg in Virginia proclaim October 2011, American
Archives Month and encourage all residents of Leesburg, Virginia, to
explore their history by visiting an archives collection nearby.
d. Proclamation — 1501" Anniversary of the Battle of Balls Bluff
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member
Reid, the following was proclaimed:
PROCLAMATION
150a' ANNIVERSARY OF THE BATTLE OF BALL'S
BLUFF OCTOBER 21, 2011
WHEREAS, the opposing sides of a divided nation met in battle at
Leesburg, Virginia on October 21, 1861; and
WHEREAS, the 1501h Anniversary of this Civil War engagement known
as the Battle of Ball's Bluff or the Battle of Leesburg will occur later this month;
and
WHEREAS, the battle was the first major Civil War action following
the Battle of First Manassas in the Eastern Theater of the war, and the first and
largest of several military actions that would occur in Leesburg during the
conflict; and
WHEREAS, Union forces commanded by Colonel Edward D. Baker
numbered approximately 2,000 soldiers and included infantry regiments raised
in Pennsylvania, New York and Massachusetts; and
WHEREAS, Confederate forces commanded by Colonel Nathan G.
Evans numbered approximately 1,800 soldiers and included three infantry
regiments from Mississippi and the 8th Virginia Infantry raised mostly in
Loudoun County, including Company H, the Potomac Greys, from Leesburg;
and 300 cavalry including Company K of the 6 " Virginia Cavalry known as the
Leesburg Cavalry; and
WHEREAS, Union forces crossed the Potomac River from Maryland
into Virginia in an effort to drive Confederate forces out of Leesburg and to
secure this strategic Town for the Union cause; and
4 1 ►> ;�
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
WHEREAS, the fighting commenced at 7:30 in the morning and by the
time it ended after nightfall, at least 223 Union and 36 Confederate soldiers had
given their lives; hundreds of Union and Confederate soldiers had been
wounded, and 553 Union soldiers were made prisoner; and
WHEREAS, notable figures in American history participated in the
battle, including Colonel Edward Baker, the first United States Senator from
Oregon and a close friend of President Abraham Lincoln who fell while leading
his troops, the only sitting U.S. Senator ever to die in combat; and Lieutenant
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., later a U.S. Supreme Court justice and one of the
most influential American jurists; and
WHEREAS, the people of Leesburg were directly affected by the battle
and learned firsthand the true cost of the Civil War, yet they opened their
houses and public buildings to care for the wounded from both sides, while the
courthouse lawn became a temporary prison for captured Union soldiers; and
WHEREAS, the strategic significance of the Battle is still debated but its
political impact on how the North would thereafter prosecute the war was great
and led directly to the creation by the United States Congress of the Joint
Committee on the Conduct of the War to investigate all aspects of the war,
including military leadership.
THEREFORE, the Mayor and Council in the Town of Leesburg in
Virginia proclaim the 150th Anniversary of the Battle of Ball's Bluff, October 21,
2011 and encourage all residents of Leesburg, Virginia to remember those
Americans who fought courageously on this hallowed ground, and in particular
those men who gave their last full measure of devotion on that day to preserve
these United States. Further, residents are invited to visit the Battlefield which
has been preserved for future generations and includes monuments, interpretive
markers and trails, and a U.S. National cemetery containing the graves of 54
Union soldiers who fell on this most tragic, courageous and memorable day.
PASSED this 11th day of October, 2011
e. Raspberry Falls Water Study
Aref Etemadi introduced Bruce Pearsof, Hazen Sawyer; Dale
Hammes, Loudoun Water; Aaron Duke, Hazen Sawyer; and Fred Jennings,
Loudoun Water.
Dale Hammes: We have about 20 minutes of presentation that walks
us through the considerations and findings of the study. As Mr. Etemadi
said, after that, we will be happy to try to address any questions you might
have.
Bruce Pierstorff: I'm going to go over some technical issues associated
with the study and give you the results. Current to the background
information, in November of 2010, DEH determined that while PW 1 at
5 f� <1
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Raspberry Falls was groundwater under the direct influence of surface water.
That prompted them to get some directives to Loudoun Water to do some
things out at that particular site. That then stimulated a board resolution
from Loudoun Water as well as the Board of Supervisors from the County.
The directions that we were given for the studies were to objectively evaluate
and determine technically feasible options for dealing with the situation, to
provide a mechanism for an informed decision making process, help
determine appropriate solutions as well as look at a pipeline study to compare
with treatment options. In terms of additional background, the studies were
designed to be objective, data centric breakdowns of potential long term
solutions. The emphasis was on providing good finished water quality, look
at the relative costs and the implementation time of the options. There are a
few things that the studies were not designed to do. They were not designed
to determine whether a pipeline option was indeed needed, but to provide the
background information to allow stakeholders to make that determination in
the future and they were not intended to be a direct comparison of each other,
but we put the two studies on common cost framework so you could see what
the relative cost for each option. Let's start with the treatment study.
December 9, 2010, Board resolution was passed directing staff to develop a
facility plan for the three options, which included water treatment plant at the
Raspberry Falls System that would treat all three wells and to serve the
Raspberry Falls System. Staff was also directed to look at an option of a
water treatment plant to serve Selma Estates as well since it is in a similar
type of geologic setting and some point in the future that might be something
that needed to be looked at. Finally, we were directed to look at a water
treatment plant that would serve both systems as a single system at a single
water treatment plant. A bit of background on the differences between the
surface water supplies and ground water supplies. Surface water is more
susceptible to sudden changes in water quality. Reasons for that is it responds
to rainwater events, runoff, and as a consequence, materials can be washed
into a surface water supply to create turbidity, taste and odors as well as
organic matter that can be flushed off the ground surface into a water supply
as well as pathogens, organisms and other microbes that may be on the
ground surface can also be washed into the water supply. Ground water
tends to be more consistent because we have slow percolation of water that
falls upon the ground surface into the ground and actually performs a sort of
treatment process as the water flows through the ground. As a consequence,
it tends to be much more consistent. It can be high in certain minerals, iron
for example. Phosphates in certain parts of the country as well as dissolved
gases. Typically, ground water has low turbidity and low microbe content.
This table illustrates the differences between the ground water supply and the
surface water supplies that we are talking about here. Items that I would like
to point out is we talked about turbidity and how ground water tends to be
lower... if you look at the top line on this table, you will see relatively low
levels for both Raspberry Falls and Selma Estates and much higher levels for
the Potomac River. Fifth line down, POC that's naturally occurring carbon,
organic carbon in the water supply... ground waters tend to be very low in
6 f'agc
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
that ... surface water has some organic content. I'll get back to that further
when we discuss the pipeline option. Finally, total coliforms, which is an
indicator of the microbial content of the water. Ground waters tend to be
very low. Surface waters tend to have much higher and much more variable
levels of coliforms. If you look at the treated values for various supplies, you
will see they are very similar in terms of the quality that is presented. All
three of the supplies meet the Safe Drinking Water Act requirements and
provide potable water to users. Treatment options that we
considered... looking at the treatment supplies, we looked at various
considerations. Different types of water worked better different types of
treatment facilities so if you take a look at what is the raw water quality, what
works best for the type of water you are dealing with. Obviously, you want to
deliver finished good quality water to the customers and deal with the
appropriate regulatory requirements, operational requirements ... the ability to
modify a facility if in the future EPA develops new criteria that needs to be
addressed as well as cost effective and reliable and ultimately have VDH
approval. Looking at the universe of treatment options, we narrowed it down
to three which appeared to offer the best promise and they included
membrane filtration, a process called absorption and clarification with media
filtration and another process called direct filtration. After subjecting these to
further analysis of the criteria I mentioned in the previous slide, we
determined the preferred treatment option would be Membrane filtration.
First of all, it's a proven technology for Goudy water systems. It is an
absolute barrier to particle passage. It is automated and therefore requires less
operator attention on a full time basis. Uses less chemicals and it's adaptable
to any potential changes in EPA or VDH regulations. This slide shows that
VDH has accepted this treatment process. It shows a number of systems out
in the western part of the state. Currently there are at least 32 permitted
inground systems in the state of Virginia and this, is only a sampling of the
possible systems. Costs and Implementation schedule... cost estimates were
looked at for the three options we were asked to investigate. First of all, we
looked at capital costs. Those include major cost items such as equipment,
labor, site work to install the facility. We looked at escalation factors during
the course of construction and throughout completion of the project that
included engineering, legal and administrative costs. We also looked at
estimated annual operating costs which included major cost items such as
pumping and electricity to drive the pumps, chemicals, labor to operate the
facilities throughout the years of operation. We then combined those two
into what is called an estimated lifecycle cost evaluation. We looked a
combination of capital costs, operating costs over a specified period of time,
we looked at major equipment that needs to be replaced over time ... to make
sure we factored that in. In this particular analysis, we used a 50 year
lifecycle cost basis and a real discount rate of 2.7 %. So for the Raspberry
Falls only system capital costs were around $4 million, estimated annual costs
were around $100,000 per year, which resulted in a $7.3 million lifecycle cost.
Selma Estates was a little less expensive to construct, but more expensive to
operate so as a consequence, the lifecycle cost came out very close to the
7 fag
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Raspberry Falls system only. The combined system at a total capital cost
estimated around $8 million, annual operating around $220,000 a year
yielding a life cycle cost estimate of $14.3 million. Implementation time line.
We estimated it will take approximately two years from concept approval to
system start up. The schedule includes first of all getting VDH regulatory
review and approval, completing the preliminary and detailed design, bidding
award which will take about a year and then another year to construct, which
gives us a two year time frame. Let's move on to the pipeline study. In
January of this year, the Board of Supervisors requested that Loudoun Water
look at pipeline extension option to Raspberry Falls. Following that request,
the Loudoun Board passed a resolution to study the pipeline option. The
intent was to evaluate this as an alternative to traditional treatment.
Emphasis again was on relative cost, length of time to implement and the
finished water quality. One key consideration here is that based on the
current general plan without policy changes such an extension cannot be
made. It requires action both by the Board of Supervisors as well as
yourselves. Let's go back and refresh the water quality. I mentioned I was
going to come back to carbon. We pointed out earlier that surface water
supplies tend to have higher organic carbon and even after treatment, you can
look at the total organic carbon, there is still some amount left, still within
safe drinking water standards; however, when you add chlorine as a
disinfectant to any water supply, it will react with any organic carbon that
happens to be in the water and as a consequence you form disinfection by
products. The bottom line here are two of those disinfection by
products ... one is trihalomethanes and the other acids. In any case, they
are regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act and we need to keep the
levels down to acceptable numbers over the Safe Drinking Water Act. As you
depart the plant, the levels are 31 to 17 respectively, but as you move further
out into the distribution system, the action of carbon and chlorine continues
so we need to be cognizant of that and maintain water quality throughout the
distribution system. Pipeline options. Pipeline considerations first and
foremost is finished water quality including chlorine residual at the point at
which the water enters the Raspberry Falls system as well as the BPPs that I
just discussed, constructability, property acquisition, environmental impacts
through cost effectiveness. We developed four primary options, which
included two gravity feed options and two pump feed options. There is one
gravity feed option tying into the town's main zone connect to the town
system near the high school and run out to Raspberry Falls primarily along
Route 15. I was going to show you a map of that a little bit later. Also, we
looked at possibility of tying into the western zone. This is a higher pressure
zone and the hope there is you will gain some benefit from the higher pressure
in the western zone. That, however, had a bit longer pipeline run and cross
country routes that would require additional easements and so forth.
Alternate three is the first pumping option tying into the town's main zone
near Tuscarora High School, running up Route 15 to Raspberry Falls. We
also looked at pumping out of the town's western zone to see if there is
advantage of coming out of the higher pressure zone with a pumping type
8�4'<n�
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
system. After subjecting the alternatives to the considerations that I
mentioned a couple of slides ago, we narrowed down to two
alternatives ... alternative two, which was tying into the higher pressure zone,
the western zone, which allowed service via pumping and provided a bit more
benefit from the pressure at Raspberry Falls. Alternate three, which included
pumping coming out of the main zone was the other option that we noted for
further consideration because it had the shortest distance in pumping the
water which gives you even better pressure at Raspberry Falls. Here is a map
that illustrates alternate two. The dashed lines that you see are the boundaries
of the town's current distribution system over to the left, as you face it, you
will see a green dashed line... that is the western zone. The red dashed line is
the boundaries of the main zone. The red line that runs from the western
zone... you see running vertically up the page there is the pipe line extension
to Raspberry Falls by graphic. This is alternate three, which is the pump zone
coming out of the main zone. Pipe line as you can see, is shorter running up
Route 15 and then coming over to Raspberry Falls here. Our preferred option
was alternate three because it had the shortest pipeline length and minimizes
constructability issues if a good portion can be constructed in the right of way
of Route 15, which leads to reduced potential easement acquisition, had the
shortest implementation time, and lowest capital cost. So, looking at the cost
and implementation plan for this option, again we looked at capital operating
and lifecycle costs, major costs to do a pipeline include the site work, _ of
the pipeline and ancillary equipment that goes with it. Again, we included
the appropriate escalation factors, contingency, legal and administrative costs.
Total estimated capital costs was about $7.5 million. The operating costs, as I
mentioned, was provided to us by the town staff, were additional treatment
costs at the plant to serve this area as well as the pumping costs associated
with the pumping of the water out to the system and the operation
maintenance on an annual basis of a little over $400,000 yielding an estimated
lifecycle cost of about $18.9 million.
Reid: But this operating cost... that doesn't include the rates paid by
the residents, does it? Is that what the residents would be paying to operate
it ... or is that our cost? That's our cost?
Etemadi: All the equipment, chemicals...
Reid: So, what's the revenue to the town? Is that it ... 418, based on
out of town rates?
Etemadi: It would be out of town rates and would be... with the
number of homes that you are considering out there, the revenues would not
offset the operating costs.
Reid: It won't? Even at the out of town rate? Thank you.
91 Pa
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Pearsof: In terms of implementation schedule, that's estimated at
approximately 2 '/Z years from project start to system start up. The 2 '/Z year
time frame requires that certain things be done prior to initiating the actual
work. It assumes that a General Plan revision must occur. Commission
permit approval must be granted by the Loudoun Board of Supervisors and
you would have to also approve this option. Once this is all done, however
long that takes, we then get into the 2 '/2 years to complete the work. Two
and a half years to get easement acquisition, appropriate permits to do the
design and a year for construction.
Butler: Excuse me... I have a quick question and maybe I missed it
but would the pipe handle both Raspberry Falls and Selma Estates, or just
Raspberry Falls?
Pierstorff: The cost that we gave you was to connect to Raspberry
Falls, but it could be extended to Selma.
Butler: It would be interesting to have that cost so we could do a real
apples to apples comparison, right? Because, I mean if you are going to
build... put a pipeline out to Raspberry Falls, you would certainly take the
presumably much, much less additional cost to extend it to Selma and include
all those homes as well. Then, we might get a different answer to Council
Member Reid's question, right? Is there a plan to do that, or do we have to go
to the Board of Supervisors and do another resolution?
: We responded to the Board of Supervisor's specific request
of us and they have not yet indicated or requested that we extend that study to
include Selma.
Butler: Did they specifically request the membrane option for Selma
Estates?
: That is our option in the fact that they are both under our
community systems.
Butler: Okay, I understand perfectly well. Thank you very much.
Mayor: Maybe it would be helpful to Council if you could go back to
the slides that showed the option to Raspberry Falls alone and then the
Raspberry Falls plus Selma just to refresh our memories a little bit.
: The treatment options?
Mayor: The membrane... the slide that shows the construction
costs ... the operating costs...
Was it combined, or each individual one as well?
10111ag
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Mayor: Dave, of course, was interested in both. We don't yet have
the pipeline cost on both. We just have it to Raspberry, so if you did both
through pipeline, it would be more expensive, I assume, than what you are
showing... there we have got, I guess, the best figure?
that's the combined.
Martinez: when... from what I understand the Board of Supervisors
requested you to do a study on the filtration systems for both Selma and
Raspberry Falls. The pipeline from Leesburg was only to Raspberry Falls,
that was their request?
Hammes: Yes, but the Board of Supervisors didn't ask us to do the
filtration study... our board authorized that.
Martinez: Okay, you did that on your own. With that filtration
system, you felt the need to include Selma. Now, what I would like to have
seen is a map to where Selma versus Raspberry and the three wells are
located. Do you have that anywhere?
Not in this presentation.
Martinez: I just wanted to clarify who requested what. From what I
understand our resolution just requested you to look at from Leesburg to
Raspberry Falls.
That is correct. The treatment facility is here and the wells
are in this general vicinity.
Martinez: We don't need to do that now. But if we could have it laid
out for us, that would be great.
Mayor: Just to clarify ... I think all of these slides were in the packets
that you all provided to Council, so I think we have hard copies already of all
of these slides, so we can go back and look at all those, if we have other
comparisons that we want to do.
Pierstorff: I have one more slide. We were also asked to look at what
the projects would mean on a per lot basis. That would mean annualizing the
capital costs and the O &M costs. Annualizing the capital costs over a 20 year
period and 20 years of. .... on an annual basis the preferred option for
membrane filtration for Raspberry Falls only is $1800 per dwelling unit.
Selma Estates dropped $1300 and combined a little less than $1600 per year.
Then the preferred pipeline option for alternate three Raspberry Falls only
was a little over $4000 per year to cover the capital plus the operating costs.
That was my last slide.
11 Pa e
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
: We just have a couple of more slides ... I wanted to go over
briefly the study release vehicles. Of course, we are in the throes of that right
now in presenting this study to you, but we did hold a briefing for the
reporters... the Loudoun Times Mirror, Washington Post, Leesburg Today.
There was coverage. That was about a month ago and our Chairman had a
guest opinion in the Loudoun Times Mirror regarding the subject. We did
post the studies on our website and we have pages for Raspberry Falls and
Selma Estates along with the studies, some frequently asked questions and
news coverage did carry the request for comments from the public. We do
have quite a bit of questions that we received... oh in the last week to ten
days ... about 90 questions, actually. We can answer most of those. Most of
those are technical and fair questions. We have direct contact with Raspberry
Falls through a contact in the HOA and emailed as many email addresses that
we have in the community with the fact that the studies were out there and
available on our website. In summary, we have found that both the pipeline
option and the treatment option are technically viable options. We have a
preferred treatment technology. A preferred pipeline alignment that Bruce
mentioned. We know that membrane filtration systems are effective for
Goudy supplies and there are some 32 different wells across the state ... well,
probably more but we know in the Shenandoah Valley, there are 32 different
Goudy wells that use this technology effectively and of course, the pipeline
alternative three was the one that rose to the top based on shortest pipeline
length, minimal constructability issues and less costs. But of course, we all
recognize that legislative action is needed as Bruce mentioned, by the bodies
to move forward with that option. So, that's our summary. We would be
happy to answer any more questions that you might have.
Mayor: Thank you all, very much.
Dunn: I would first recommend that this be taken up in more detail at
a work session rather than a lot of detail tonight because it sounds like a lot to
go over to try to squeeze in under one sitting; however, I do have a few
questions. Let's see... unfortunately it is hard to know what slide number you
were at, but there is a chart showing the water quality and I wanted to know
do you have a chart showing the water quality ... I think currently... then you
showed one with the membrane system. Now this is... can you go back to
the chart showing the water quality currently? That is their current situation?
Do you have one showing the estimate with the membrane?
We don't have one of those, no.
Dunn: That would be nice to know. Do you have... I believe you
showed then the one with Leesburg water being piped in. That was the one
with all the dashes over on the far right, where generally good water...
12 1 1,agc
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Well the dashes were to indicate what the water quality was
at the point of connection.
Dunn: At the point of connection, okay.
You can estimate, BPP formation over time if...
Dunn: That's basically giving you the results down there under ... that
was the 31.17 that you mentioned. As you get farther away...
that's coming out of the plant.
Dunn: Okay.
Over to the right is what we estimate it would be at the point of
connection.
Dunn: So, we are talking about at the town line.
: The point where it connects to Raspberry Falls.
Dunn: Oh, so going from the pipes until... so not at the town line.
About what would it be... what would you estimate it at the town line?
: Probably some place in between those two. Maybe less than
half of that. It all depends on how the water flows through the system and
how long it takes to get to that point.
Dunn: I'm just interested because I live there because I want to know
how my water is decreasing in quality as it gets further away from the plant.
Since I would be making in part a decision for how that quality would
continue on to somebody else, it's nice to know where mine is at. Now, the
folks from Raspberry Falls, they didn't seem like they were in favor of the
membrane system. Did you find that through... I think you mentioned some
recent questions... did you find that to be the case? Were they favoring one
system over another?
Hammes: Just in general terms, I think if you look at the information
that we have prior to the study release, there was probably a preference for the
pipeline... that may still be present from those we have heard from. I know of
one contact where there was an assumption that, or an intuition that the pipe
would be cheaper than the treatment option. We just don't know whether
that is the overall sentiment or not.
Dunn: Let's see... you showed the cost of the infrastructure. The
alternate three... is this showing... is this alternate three ... go back one,
_ . please... is this alternate three, by the way? Okay. Now you mentioned to
13 1 Pa t
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
make this happen, it is going to take legislative action. Did you all consider
the different options of legislative action that could be?
: At a minimum we know...
Dunn: You are showing us graphs. You have got distances. You got
costs. But for example, I think from what you have said, the assumption was
that this would be a cost to the town of Leesburg. Town of Leesburg laying
pipe. Town of Leesburg getting easements. Is that what your assumption is?
: first, there has to be a General Plan revision for the county for
this. Appropriate permits, approval by the Board of Supervisors and you all
need to agree to it as well. We haven't gotten into who is going to approve
what. I would assume that would be a decision made jointly between you
and the Board of Supervisors.
Dunn: So, at this point, you are just saying here is the cost. Board of
Supervisors, Leesburg Town Council, you get to pound it out as to who is
going to be the cost?
We have laid out what we believe the costs are.
Dunn: My recommendation would be that this still be Loudoun
Water. That we have one customer in this game and our customer is
Loudoun Water. It's the County. That the County pay for the pipe. We sell
you the water and you can sell it back to Raspberry Falls at whatever cost or
price you want to do that way the county or the town is... we are just selling
water to the county and it's going through your pipes ... it's your land and you
deal with the easements. That's my recommendation. It seems like a cleaner
process for the Town of Leesburg. That's something I would recommend you
all look into too. I would like to see ... and again, maybe we can... as I said
maybe take this up in a work session that we get to roll up our sleeves in a
little more detail on this. Because there are a few more charts I would like to
see and analysis on this but I do appreciate your presentation. I have got your
binder here. A lot of information and I look forward to working with you on
this.
Reid: Very good report. Very detailed. The thing that concerns me is
I decided to watch the Board of Supervisors presentation on webcast and
there was a comment by... or question that was not answered by Supervisor
Miller about a very large well on the Wright farm, that was not looked at for
this study, which is very close to Raspberry Falls. Is that not a viable option,
that well? Is that a polluted well?
: We don't know anything about that well at this time. One of
the things we do know is that similar legislative processes would be required
to go off site of the existing service area of Raspberry Falls to connect or
14 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
develop another well off site, but we don't know... that's the first I heard of
that well.
Reid: You are with Loudoun Water?
Yes. It's a private well, I assume.
Reid: There was no response to Mr. Miller's question. So, you are
saying you don't know about the well and whether it is large enough to
service a community like Raspberry Falls.
: I know nothing about the well. That's the first I have ever
heard of it.
Reid: Nobody else does? Okay. I'm a little concerned, Aref, about
what you said earlier. You said that this cost... these operating costs for the
pipeline option would be a money losing situation for the town? So, at
what... how high would the rates have to be for the town to ... not only recoup
the cost... it's actually Loudoun Water that will be paying this $18 million,
right?
Etemadi: There will be a cost associated with capital expenditure that
has to be tacked on like a special tax district to each home. Then there is also
user rates. Assuming every home uses 400 gallons and nobody goes over the
peak use charge...
Reid: 400 gallons?
Etemadi: Per day per house. I come up with $120,000 in revenue just
for Raspberry Falls. That's almost a fourth of the operating expense.
Reid: So, the rates would have to quadruple.
Etemadi: The rates would have to go way beyond. I know the
homeowners out there use more than 400 gallons. I didn't go through those
details, but assuming what the average usage is in town for our customers —
300 -400 gallons. It will probably be 150, maybe 200,000, but it's still not
going to recover... it's not going to pay for itself. The only viable option ... we
are in business to make money and bring more revenue, the best option is
what Mr. Dunn suggested.
Reid: Which is?
Etemadi: We are wholesale water. We sell outside the town
boundary. That's pure revenue.
15 1 Pa,c°
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Reid: Well, we sell the water, but then they pay for... you are saying
that...
Etemadi: Yeah, Loudoun Water will take it on and it will be just like
an extension of one of their systems...
Reid: And that's not here in this book?
Etemadi: That's not one of the options the Board had requested.
Reid: You know, that's what really concerns me is that the Board of
Supervisors made it so narrow ... that they didn't ask you to look at that, they
didn't ask you to look at other wells. You know...
Etemadi: Honestly, wells are not an option. You know, with the
Karst geology out there, you know... we used to have 10 wells in Leesburg.
Now we are down to one. Some are high nitrates, some were high bacteria.
Some just went dry, collapsed. That is eventually going to happen, so you
spend $4 million, $7 million, $10 million to treat the water, what happens
when it goes dry.
Reid: Then the other issue, which is probably a question for the town
attorney, is that if we pass all those communities with a pipeline we are
obligated, what under law, or is it a supreme court decision to allow people to
tap in? What's the rule, Madam Counselor?
Irby: Well, it's a combination, however, that some of that would have
to be answered when permits are obtained in what our service area is going to
be. So that type of question and that analysis would have to be done in
conjunction with Loudoun Water, the county, the town and our water
department in determining what service area is going to be because the way it
stands right now, it's not our service area, but would probably be a global
look by the state to see what the area would need to be.
Etemadi: Honestly, if you are crossing my property and you are going
to tell me that I am not going to give you water, though I have an easement,
that's going to be very tough. Very tough.
Reid: But still this option of just providing water, which I think Mr.
Wells and I discussed with the Raspberry residents two years ago in your
office, was not really studied in depth. You would still have to have a
pipeline. That means Loudoun Water would have to pay for that
infrastructure cost.
Water.
Etemadi: Somebody has to, yeah, either the homeowners or Loudoun
16
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Reid: Well the homeowners... it's going to be Raspberry Falls or
Selma Estates or both that would end up paying the infrastructure costs, so...
Thanks for your time, thanks for being here.
Wright: A couple of questions. As far as the legislative requirements,
I know that both the County and the Town would have to mutually agree to a
change in the service area. The county's current comprehensive General Plan
in that area, what does it say as far as water service, as far as what you are
currently bound by... I believe you have a restriction that it needs to be onsite
water... is that correct, or can you clarify?
: That is correct. It would require a CPAM modification to the
Comprehensive Plan in order to route a pipeline and serve that rural policy
area from outside.
Wright: so, the current comprehensive plan requires that any water
service in that particular area of the county is on site and local to the
particular development, is that correct? The reason I ask that question, is
when the question was brought up about the possibility of a wall, an off site
well, that also seemed to generate another need for a CPAM in that you were
bringing water from off site within that current service area to Raspberry
Falls. I'm just trying to understand.
: I think ... well, I'm not the expert on the County planning
policies, but I do believe that ... what I do know is that a service area is
established when the subdivision is approved and the water system
commission permit is also obtained at that time. That legislative action
establishes the service area and the water system is contained to that service
area. Whenever we go off site of a service area, and we are putting a utility in
an area that is not a service area, then a CPAM is typically required; if on the
other hand, we are connecting two service areas like a Selma and a
Raspberry, which abut, that requires a commission permit, not a CPAM, but
the same issues that relate to a pipeline coming from a disconnected service
area from the town of Leesburg would also be in play for connecting to a well
that was not in the service area.
Wright: So, if I understand, the county's comprehensive plan in this
area does not designate that whole area between Leesburg and say, Raspberry
Falls and Selma as Loudoun Water's service area, but rather Raspberry Falls
and Selma are two distinct and separate service areas and outside of that is
well or bring your own water from your own site as opposed to a treatment
option. Is that correct?
: that's correct. Going outside of those service areas does require
that legislative action.
17�Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Wright: That answers that. Any idea of the number of customers in
Raspberry Falls and Selma, either separately or combined?
Hammes: Raspberry Falls is not built out nor is Selma. In general
terms about 220 potential in Raspberry Falls and about 250 in Selma.
Wright: Within this current study, there has obviously been, if you
kind of follow the story in the media, there has been a lot of comments or
concerns about water quality. There has been indications from Loudoun
Water that we are meeting the Water quality requirements. There is
indications from the homes that they are not being met. Was there any... has
there been any study of the current infrastructure ... so be it, the membrane
option or the pipeline option, I assume at some point we are going to be
hooking up to pipes that are already in the community. Has there been any
study of the current infrastructure to rule out infiltration or contamination
within that infrastructure or would we just be... the concern I would have is if
town of Leesburg is going to connect to that current infrastructure have we
ruled out any faults within that infrastructure that may continue some issues
with contamination?
Hammes: We have never collected a sample from the distribution
system that has not met the water quality standards. There is no indication of
concern in that area.
Wright: Thank you, sir. The western zone, it looked like as you went
through the process, that the western zone as far as an alternative had been
eliminated from consideration, is that accurate to say?
Pierstorff: It came down to one of the final two options, either the
pipeline primarily... (inaudible).
Wright: Okay, the other thing is looking at the particular map, you
shows that you are going to have a big hole in that pipe because part of it is
going over a conservation easement that I don't think you will get through.
Okay, so good. That solves that problem. Then, finally, this area is ... as we
have already talked about, this is Loudoun Water's service area. I assume the
process going forward is Loudoun Water is going to make a recommendation
as how best you can address your service area. Is that... does the way
Loudoun Water operates as an authority... do you need approval from the
Board as to which... either approval or consent from the Board as to which
route you would go ... barring the other legislative actions as far as which route
you would pursue, is it within Loudoun Water's discretion of hey, we think
we should go the membrane treatment route, or we think we should go the
pipeline route and then from that decision making process you would go to
the board and ask for either support for legislative changes or does the board
need to endorse whatever way Loudoun Water wants to go?
18 E�.�
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Jennings: Loudoun Water has ultimate responsibility for that service
territory within the purview and legislative right that we are granted as an
authority. That translates to answering your question. We have the ability
without requesting the Board of Supervisors' approval to put in membrane
treatment or any other option that we would feel ... that's why we have hired
the engineers and we think that it is an appropriate treatment regimen if we
want to go forward. We cannot go forward with the pipeline for the reasons
that have been expressed here without legislative action and a clear direction.
In the absence of a decision by the Board and you, the town, in concert with
the residents that they want pipeline and are willing to pay for a premium on
that, the option is left in those areas that we have control and responsibility,
and that would come back to membrane or any other treatment we have
control over ... we can exercise.
Wright: Thank you, sir.
Martinez: Just so we have a better understanding what surface versus
ground water, what are the depths you would consider to be surface water
versus ground water. How deep do you have to go to hit ground water?
: Potentially below the ground's surface.
Martinez: Is it anywhere between 1 -10 feet that you consider it surface
and then from 10 feet below, or deeper, as groundwater or how do you
categorize that?
Pierstorff: Any below the ground surface is ultimately ground water.
Typically the groundwater table varies from inches to feet below the ground's
surface.
Martinez: So, as soon as the water starts filtering down, it's
considered groundwater no matter what the...
Pierstorff: Ground water is at the point of (inaudible) inches of the
ground's surface.
Martinez: One of the things on the pipeline that had me concerned,
and you didn't talk about it, and ...but with a pipe that long, you have to
monthly flush out the system, am I right?
Etemadi: That's one of the reasons the cost estimate is so high. It's
going to require additional staff because you most likely have to flush
thousands in addition to additional treatment. You have to do some
additional flushing so you would be wasting water. That comes to play in the
cost... adds to the cost.
Martinez: You could sell that to the golf course out there...
19 1 11agC
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Etemadi: You can put it in the ponds and use it for irrigation.
Martinez: That is one of the concerns that wasn't mentioned that is
part of the costs that you would have to include.
Etemadi: Right now, one of our trouble areas is the Marion Dupont
Equine Center. Because it is the end of the system... it's a deadend system.
We flush weekly during the summer months just to keep that water fresh.
You can just imagine taking this another two miles ... there goes your
trihalomethane concentration, you know water quality becomes your biggest
issue when you go that far out.
Martinez; My other concern is capacity and that if we ... if the decision
was ultimately to run a pipeline out there, we would want to limit the
capacity of the water we are supplying. Would that be an issue?
Etemadi: For the number of homes we are looking at here, no, that
would not be an issue. The bigger picture is what about others?
Martinez: More development. Well, I guess what I don't want is I
don't want developers thinking that we have a pipe into Raspberry Falls, now
we could add another 500 homes.
Etemadi: That's a concern that somehow has to be dealt with given
that process. How do you do it?
Martinez: If you are going to be doing a membrane filtration system,
say instead of the pipe or whatever your decision is. Would you guys also be
increasing your capacity or are you pretty much fixed for what you can
provide out there.
Pierstorff: We are fixed by the capacity of the (inaudible).
Martinez: So, in other words, if Loudoun Water wanted to provide
more capacity, they would just dig another well?
: As long as the wells continued to provide the appropriate
supply.
Martinez: And could be filtered. That is all I got. I do want to thank
you guys for coming out and giving us some info.
Hammler: I, too, very much appreciate the report. I think this is a
good initial overview and I support the sentiment but more directly following
up primarily because what we need, John, is more direct analysis about this
report as relates to the benefits or costs to Leesburg. Clearly, we are looking
20 1 t) a g
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
at a specific number of homes. We are beginning to address what are clearly
going to be significant issues that will impact us either directly or indirectly,
which would be a significant pressure for additional houses, which as county
residents would have enormous costs in terms of schools and other things. I
don't even know if there are issues relative to viewshed. I don't know about
pumping systems, if that becomes an option if you are not using a gravity
extension and so forth... despite the fact that I could probably editorialize
about a lot of things regarding this report tonight, to me that is the main point
that we need to look at this through the Leesburg taxpayer's glasses and that
which we have responsibility for on this dais and you know, I would certainly
like to follow -up just because I have friends in Raspberry Falls and I am
curious about things such as the timing for the membrane, because clearly
there is a water quality issue and it takes at least 2 '/z years to go through this
process. How are you addressing what is a water quality problem in the
meantime. But, I look forward to following up after tonight's session.
Butler: Thank you, Madam Mayor. A few things. One is I suspect
that our estimates of water per day per lot are probably low because they do
in fact have estate sized lawns out there. They are very large homes and
lawns and significantly sized and they are all quite expensive compared to the
average in Leesburg, certainly. One question I had was why wasn't the cost
ascertained for the extension of the pipeline to Selma Estates? It just seems
like that would have been a logical thing to do in order to get an apples to
apples comparison.
Jennings: The sensitivity about extending a pipeline into rural policy
area, I think, is pretty well understood. For us to take that upon ourselves
without explicit direction from the Board of Supervisors could have been
misconstrued as affecting land use policy or going in a direction and
providing information that was not specifically requested and for that reason,
we stayed pretty strictly within the exact term of the resolution by the Board
of Supervisors and followed that. They are aware... I don't think anyone is
unaware that there is an economy. There is a different set of denominators
that would affect the cost on a per lot basis. We have not, to this point, been
requested to continue... and augment the study with that piece. When we
are, we would be delighted to continue that.
Butler: Okay, but you could have done it without their express
authority.
Jennings: Our Board has been fairly clear and strict about all efforts in
staying within the boundary of the direction of the board and we really don't
violate that very far.
Butler: But, you did the membranes for both of them without any
authority from the Board at all.
21 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Jennings: They are both our service territory and without the Board
and without any other party, we own the responsibility for safe delivery of
water to them. We have to look at those two systems and provide
contingency plans.
Butler: Alright, but I find it quite objectionable that given the obvious
apples to oranges comparison that you produced that you didn't at least go
back and ask the Board to clarify and say would you like us to do this as well,
because it seemed blindingly obvious to anybody who is doing the study that
in order to do a real comparison you would have had to do it. I am
personally disappointed in Loudoun Water that they didn't and I understand
exactly why you didn't do it. So, I am... if the Council doesn't wish to do it, I
will be personally sending a letter to the Board of Supervisors asking them to
authorize it because I think it's something you have to do in order to make
the right decision. The decision may end up being the same decision that you
would make whether you did it or not, but it is an obvious thing in order to
come up with a real decision. I think this should be about water quality and
the satisfaction of the residents and doing what is right by them and not about
politics. The second thing, is the fact that I find myself in tremendous
agreement with Council Member Dunn on a couple of points and one is not
presenting estimates of water quality with the membranes. So, we have the
water quality with the pipeline but we don't have a water quality with the
membranes. We have a cost for just Raspberry Falls for the pipeline, but we
have the cost for Selma Estates and Raspberry Falls with the membranes.
Those are two decidedly major points that we need in order to come up with
any viable comparison between the two options. The third item was
mentioned, I forget by whom, about what is the estimated life time of the
wells out there. My understanding is that there has been at least 18 -20
attempts at wells in Raspberry Falls and there have been very few successes.
Just recently, we had one that was shut down or temporarily shut down or
something and another one had to be drilled and it just seems to me that the
whole idea of drilling wells in that area given the underground is basically a
losing proposition long term. What I would hate to see is to spend $14
million on a couple of membranes and then in a few years find that the wells
become non - viable and we are continually drilling more wells until finally
you have to build a pipeline because there is no other way to get them water.
I think that is a significant item that should be looked at. The last thing to
address some estimates of our costs and their costs and Leesburg costs and
everything else, I think it would be a very simple matter to just estimate what
our costs will be and draw up a contract with Loudoun Water to make sure
that we are whole. Then, if Raspberry Falls agrees, that's fine. If they don't
agree, that's also fine. But, I don't think that we have to worry about special
water rates for Raspberry Falls or anything else, you just draw up a contract
with Loudoun Water and you are done. That is certainly within our purview
and something that can be done and would be my recommendation.
22 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Mayor: Thanks, Dave. The vice mayor has suggested that I ask
you... because he knows I can never think of questions on my own so he tries
to help out here. Did you, and you may not want to even answer this, but did
you get any sense whether there was any strong interest on the Board of
Supervisors to amend the service area or did they not really get into that
discussion at all when you did your presentation, or other presentations? I
know you have done multiple presentations to various members of the Board.
I am not picking up personally, a huge interest on the Board, as a body, to
amend the service area, but then I am not over there every day either. I see
Dale is just writing notes, so I am going assume that you are going to take
that under advisement.
Hammes: The answer is no.
Mayor: That would tend to end the discussion right then and there, I
would think. On the water quality with the use of membrane technology,
what I am picking up from this presentation is that the water quality even
from a Goudy well, is going to be higher when it gets to the home tap with
membrane technology than it would be through a pipeline?
Hammes: I wouldn't say that necessarily. It's different parameters.
Going back to the comment about the lack of data with the membrane. The
membrane is an absolute barrier to particle passage. Without doing a site
specific pilot, and running it through the membrane on the site, you can't
have data necessarily, but you do know that a bunch of Goudy systems, it's
going to have very, very low turbidity and very low minerals, alright. So that
will work. So that there isn't a specific table for it, alright, and the numbers
are blank because it's not currently sampled because the turbidity is low in the
ground water system. With the membrane on it, it would be even lower.
Now, as far as the water quality, you will have very good water quality. The
thing with ground water is you don't have the organics, so you don't have
high disinfection by products because the trade off... on that surface water
site, you had disinfection by products. You are in regulatory compliance in
your system is there is an issue with water age going out to Raspberry Falls,
that distance. So you have to manage that and that's where the costs come
from and the operational complexity of flushing the lines and doing
treatment... possibly other types of treatment to get the levels down for
Raspberry Falls where you wouldn't have to do it for your own customers
right now. So, to say it is going to be better or worse ... the water quality is
what is on the table... it will all meet the regs with operational flexibility and
the procedures put into place.
Mayor: Okay, alright. Now, I know Council Member Butler had
referred to the shut down of one of the wells out there. My understanding
was that was determined by the state to be under the direct influence of
surface water and it was shut down for that reason rather than the idea that it
went dry. Am I correct in that? So, that well was still a producing well...
23 1 1) a ;
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
didn't go dry, but because of the Goudy influence and the lack of membrane
technology there currently, you guys had to shut it down, go to your back up
well and then start digging another well. Okay, I think ... I mean I agree with
a lot of the comments I have heard up here that if for any reason there were to
be a pipe built up to that area ... I mean I haven't heard anybody up here say
that Leesburg residents should pay for it. What I am hearing up here is that
Leesburg rate payers should not have to pay anything more to provide water
to Raspberry Falls, if indeed the Board even was interested... the Board of
Supervisors was interested in amending the service areas, which right now it
appears they probably are not. It does look to me the cost of the pipeline is
the most expensive option no matter who is going to be paying for it. I think
in relation to Council Member Butler's question, extending a pipeline or
sizing a pipeline not just for Raspberry Falls, but also then for Selma would be
even more expensive an option relative to the other options you have looked
at. So, if I had to pay for that pipeline, I sure wouldn't want to be the one
shelling out the money for it. It sounds like your membrane technology is
going to be the most effective for both pollution control and in the end, cost.
But, I appreciate your being here. You have done a lot of good work.
Dunn: Can I ask a couple of questions? The... you mentioned that
there were no problems when you did tests... you said there were no
problems. Let me ask a question about the existing pipes. I think it was Vice
Mayor Wright asked a question about the existing infrastructure in the
neighborhood ... that when you did tests you found no additional problems.
That does not mean that you did not find issues with the water quality in the
area, you just didn't find that the existing pipes did not add to the problems
that you already knew about. Is that correct? Or are you saying that you
have not really found a need for doing any of this because you found no
problems out there, because I don't think that is the case. I think that through
previous reports that I have seen that you have recognized that there are water
quality issues in Raspberry Falls. Go ahead ... we are all friends.
Hammes: There is a lot more to this. There is a lawsuit. There are
certain things I should not talk about. We have a protective order to talk
about the studies. I will say, and stand by what I have said before that there
has never been a water quality problem in the water that is served to the
customers. All of our testing has confirmed that. All the data that we have
collected has been reviewed by the Virginia Department of Health and the
EPA and they have confirmed what I just said. I have said before in public,
and I will say now, where we have found water quality concerns, it's down in
the ground. It's not after treatment. We do disinfect the water and that
effectively deals with the water quality issues that have been found in the
ground. Our concern is that... we have had one well that went Goudy and we
can't use it anymore. The reason it went Goudy was because of elevated total
coliform bacteria. What if additional wells go Goudy? Then we are losing
water supply. That is our concern. The risk of that occurring in the future.
Membrane treatment on all of the wells is a solution to that. We would bring
24 1 P
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
back the well that turned Goudy and use it as a potable drinking water supply
if membrane treatment was in place. So, that is like the other 32 wells that
was presented in the state. That's what membrane treatment would do for the
existing concern over water quality down in the ground, but not up in the
pipes in the distribution system.
Dunn: It was interesting too, that you mention those 32. How come
there weren't wells or systems being used east of say... the mountains? They
all seem to be out in the more mountainous areas. Is there a reason why they
are not used in the eastern part of the state?
Pierstorff: There can be. But that's a high prevalence of groundwater
utilization and those we contacted... the Lexington and Aberdeen field offices
of VDH because those are the two field offices that have the highest
concentration of Goudy supplies in the state, so we went to them saying you
guys are the Goudy experts in the state for the Virginia Department of Health,
what do you guys recommend? What do you guys have? They said of the 35
that they have, 32 were membrane filtration and the ones that weren't, they
wouldn't approve it again.
Dunn: About this service area ... you mentioned that there was no real
enthusiasm by the Board for increasing the service area. If you are already
servicing through membrane, and you are now going to go from buying water
from Leesburg and laying down pipe to an area that you are already servicing,
is that really an increase in your service area?
Jennings: The concern as I understand it, is the land between the point
of connection, at the town boundary and the border of the existing service
area. It's that inbetween land that now becomes a potential for a service area.
Dunn: Where you are not providing any type of service... it's all
private well, in essence? Okay. Do you know if there is any legislation in the
state, this may be something since we have the legislative agenda coming up
later in our meeting ... that it may be something that we have to approach
Richmond on ... whereby communities can provide water to a single source
customer and thereby it not being required to be tapped into in route. Do you
know if there is any type of legislation or situations elsewhere in the state? If
you can find that out, if you don't know right now, that's fine. If you can find
that out, I would like to know if there are any situations in the state whereby a
community provides water to a single source customer, i.e. Leesburg to the
County and therefore there can be no additional tapping into the pipes
because it is a single source customer. If it doesn't exist, we may want to see
about adding something like that to our legislation because that can help
reduce the concerns over additional properties. Currently, the homes that are
not built in Raspberry and Selma, they are on the books to be built, but using
the existing well system. So, pipeline or not, should the developer decide to
go forward, the developer can go forward under the current water system, if
25 t ><��
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
they chose to do so. They are not bound by a new system whether it be
membrane or piping, correct?
Pierstorff: That's correct.
Dunn: Here's one for you. With legislative approval, how quickly can
you act? In other words, you said it would take 2 '/Z years. So, if you had
legislative approval with this Board and the County Board ... were to do their
pen strokes next week, you could go into immediate action?
Pierstorff: The pipeline option, a 2 '/2 year time frame was to get all
the permitting and design and construction. We can't do that without
legislative approval. We had estimated two years.
Dunn: Membrane, you don't need legislative action, two years. With
pipeline, 2 '/Z years because of easements and then...
Pierstorff: Plus whatever time it takes to get the legislative action... a
year?
Dunn: Okay, so you can act as fast as you can, barring legislative
approval. Okay. The issue you mentioned about the flushing of the water
and the quality. Is there any other type of additional facility that you see
having to be implemented to do that between the town and the end
user... Raspberry? Or is that just something that you do here at our plant or is
it using their existing system that they already have over at Raspberry?
Etemadi: Well, we use our own system. We have areas in our system
that we have to do the additional flushing to keep the water quality within
acceptable ranges.
Dunn: If there is a cost to that, that again is just something we would
pass along to our customer, which would be Loudoun County.
Etemadi: Right now, it is added to all the customers.
Reid: I feel like I am hearing a conflict here in what Loudoun Water is
saying and what you are saying, Are£ On the one hand, you are saying, Aref
is that the wells are basically dissipated because of Karst Limestone... that
wells are really not a good option. Then you are saying that membrane
technology can save them. But if that is the case, are we not dealing with a
bandage approach, like what Council Member Butler said, and we are going
to be back five -ten years from now with having to do the pipeline approach.
Is this membrane technology really going to be viable given the limestone in
the area?
26 1 pa
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Etemadi: I was saying ... I wasn't talking about the treatment options.
Possibility of ground water drying up ... you know wells collapse. Membrane
technology, I believe is the top technology available. I don't think there is
anything better out there to treat surface or groundwater in any other
treatments that are existing. So, the treatment scheme of membrane is
acceptable. It is a good treatment. I was just talking about the water
quantity. That it might dry up, because that seems to be the trend in
Loudoun County with the wells eventually going dry or collapsing.
Reid: Therefore, how long would the membrane system work?
Etemadi: Membranes can work for several years. I don't know
exactly how many years but they have a life span of...
Pierstorff: The membranes would be replaced every 10 years per the
lifecycle cost, but the lifetime of the wells would be something that Emory
and Garrett studied ... the separate consultant.
Reid: I'm sorry? The life of the well is what?
Hammes: The life of the well is evaluated by the hydrogeologist and
those experts in the county that we use have advised us that they do not see a
high risk of the well collapse or other issues associated with the Karst. It's not
a zero risk, let's be honest, but...
Reid: It's not a bandage approach... truly not a bandage...
Hammes: I think that would mischaracterize it... to leave you with
that thought.
Reid: So, it could last a long time?
Hammes: Yes. And the facilities are long lived assets and the
cassettes ... the actual membrane units themselves are replaced on a periodic
basis.
Mayor: Very good. Everybody set? I want to thank you all very, very
much for coming out. Thanks to Charles Yut for sitting back there. We
really appreciate all your work.
8. PETITIONERS
The petitioner's section was opened at 7:46 p.m.
Mark Allen, state he and his wife own a Leesburg based moving company. He
stated his understanding is the ordinance is now a four hour limit for on street parking
for commercial vehicles. He stated that would negatively impact his business. He stated
it occasionally takes longer than four hours for a three man crew to unload a truck. He
27�F��
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
stated sometimes when they have a pack and move, it can take 10 hours or more. He
stated occasionally the customer's belongings are left on the truck overnight and for
security reasons, they prefer to park the truck either in front of the customer's house or
their own house.
It was determined that this would be added to the next work session agenda.
The petitioner's section was recessed at 7:50 p.m.
The petitioner's section was re- opened at 9:05 p.m.
Wendy Overton, thanked the Council Members who have walked the
neighborhood and stated she looks forward to the official town tour. She stated it will
give the neighbors a chance to show the Council what their concerns are.
The petitioner's section was closed at 9:06 p.m.
9. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member Reid,
the following items were moved for approval as part of the Consent Agenda:
a. Accepting a Grant from the Virginia Department of Aviation and
Amending the FY 2012 -2017 Airport Fund Capital Improvements Program to
Include a North End Access Road Project for Repair and Reconstruction at the
Leesburg Executive Airport
RESOLUTION 2011 -121
Accepting a Grant from the Virginia Department of Aviation and
Amending the FY 2012 -2017 Airport Fund Capital Improvements
Program to Include a North End Access Road Project for Repair and
Reconstruction at the Leesburg Executive Airport
b. Accepting a Grant from the Virginia Department of Aviation and
Amending the FY 2012 -2017 Airport Fund Capital Improvements Program to
Include a Project for Three Helipads at Leesburg Executive Airport
RESOLUTION 2011 -122
Accepting a Grant from the Virginia Department of Aviation and
Amending the FY 2012 -2017 Airport Fund Capital Improvements
Program to Include a Project for Three Helpads at Leesburg Executive
Airport
C. Virginia Department of Transportation Six -Year Plan
RESOLUTION 2011 -123
Requsting the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Funding
for Highway Projects within the Town of Leesburg in the Virginia
28 r
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Department of Transportation Six Year Improvement Plan for Fiscal
years 2013 -2018
d. Approving a Contract with Tyler Technologies for MUNIS
MOTION 2011 -035
I move that the Town Council approve the Application and Service
Provider Agreement between Tyler Technologies, Inc. and the Town of
Leesburg (as reflected in Attachment 1) to transfer in -house software
system maintenance and support to a hosted vendor solution
e. Town Hall Art Gallery — Approval of the Next Art Exhibit by the Town of
Leesburg Employ
RESOLUTION 2011 -126
Town Hall Art Gallery — Approval of the Next Art Exhibit by Town of
Leesburg Employees
The Consent Agenda was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. State Mandated Water Supply Plan
The public hearing was opened at 9:18 p.m.
Aref Etemadi: This is infrastructure information about 22 jurisdictions in
Northern Virginia. Back in 2003, I believe it was, Governor Warner, Mark
Warner mandated to the Department of Environmental Quality to look into a
regional, you know, make sure the drought that we were facing back then... that
Virginia has ample enough water to supply ... you know, the present and the
future ... that was passed on to the Department of Environmental Quality. In
2005, the policy was adopted and a five year time frame was given to all the
jurisdictions to submit either an individual water supply plan or a regional water
supply plan. The 22 jurisdictions that have joined together are all members of
Northern Virginia Regional Commission. NVRC basically stepped up and said
they would take on the task of preparing this report. Over the last five years, all
of the jurisdictions have submitted their supply plans ... what their present
conditions are, what their future needs and what their future plans are. The
report ... all the information has been gathered into a booklet, which is very, very
large and by November 2nd of this year, the plan is supposed to be adopted
through a public hearing and submitted to DEQ for review. The plan has been
reviewed by staff ..we have made our changes to the plan. There are no surprises
in here. There are no new initiatives. It is basically what we know we have
- today, what we plan to have in the future, what our predictions are, what our
29 [� a
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
water supply conditions are, what our permit conditions... so for us, it's very basic
and simple set of information that we provided. So with that, I won't bore you
all with the whole report. As I said, there is nothing glaring. There is nothing
unusual in the report. (inaudible) all the jurisdictions that are involved. This
map pretty much shows you all the region that have signed up to be part of this
plan and all of the jurisdictions have submitted their studies. With that, I'll open
up for questions. If you have any questions, I will be more than happy to answer
you.
Dunn: Just ... maybe hopefully speed this up ... it's mandated, so it really
means that there are two things to do. Say yes or the consequences of saying no,
which are what?
Etemadi: Probably ... I don't know. I guess DEQ will be... you know,
fines maybe. I'm not sure exactly what the penalties are for not providing the
information to the state. Usually if you don't comply with their mandates there
are some kind of penalties associated with that. I'm sure that will be the case
here.
Wright: Aref, I think I heard you say that there is nothing in here that is
having us to do a requirement for additional cost or capital improvements beyond
what we have already done?
Etemadi: Correct, there is none.
Martinez: It was great reading material.
Etemadi: They did have Raspberry Falls under us. We had to make that
correction.
Hammler: Aref, I guess I'll ask the same question, a different way that the
Vice Mayor asked. This will not be construed as an unfunded mandate in that
case. There are no specific cost associated with this.
Etemadi: There has been no cost. Our membership that we pay to
Northern Virginia Regional Commission covers the costs associated with this, so
we have... other than staff time to prepare and review, there has been no
additional costs. No additional improvements or capital projects or anything.
Butler: Is it easy in this report to break out what we submitted?
Etemadi: Yes.
Butler: Did you send it to us, or did I just miss it?
Etemadi: We put the whole package on Sharepoint and a link to the
website at the Northern Virginia Regional Commission. It's on the town's
30� j
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
website also for public presentation. But, if you like I will be more than happy.
It will not be a big task to separate those.
Butler: Is there anything there that makes any assumptions about ... there
must be some kind of assumptions about future growth, right?
Etemadi: It's projections... the numbers are gathered from population
projections. We had to make some corrections... there was stuff in there ... we
basically used what was in the Town Plan rather than COGS number, because
they were showing the town's population in the 80,000 range. We had to make
some of those corrections to bring it in line with the plans that are ... you know,
currently under review.
Butler: How often will this be updated?
Etemadi: Every five years.
Butler: So, are there any penalties for... if we are really wrong?
Etemadi: I'm hoping we are not really wrong. Do you want me to send
those separately to you?
Butler: No, if it's on the town website, I'll find it.
There were no speakers for this public hearing.
The public hearing was closed at 9:27 p.m.
On a motion by Council Member Reid, seconded by Council Member
Martinez, the following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2011 -127
Adopting a Water Supply Plan for Northern Virginia and Leesburg as
Mandated by the Governor's Office
Reid: We did discuss this at NVRC and there was a period, I think, two
summers ago when Purcellville had a water main break and the town had to
jump in and help them. This sort of really codifies the situation between the
communities that are affected. It is a really good thing.
Etemadi: We help Lovettsville a lot.
Reid: There could be a time when we need Loudoun Water and they
have to help us.
Etemadi: They do pay for services. We charge them and they do pay for
the time and...
31 Pa c
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Reid: It's just an example of some of the things that the NVRC does and I
(inaudible) this little packet.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
11. ORDINANCES
a. None
12. RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS
a. Making An Appointment to the Commission on Public Art
On a motion by Council Member Dunn, seconded by Vice Mayor Wright,
the following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2011 -125
Making an Appointment to the Commission on Public Art
Dunn: I'd like to make a motion for it as it is for Mr. O'Neil to be
appointed to the Public Art Commission.
Hammler: Just why was it removed from Consent?
Dunn: I'm getting to that, Ms. Hammler. I just wanted to bring up the
appointment process. This was one that I was not notified by my exiting
commissioner that they were exiting and I did not receive any notification from
the Chair of the Art Commission that they were exiting. I did get an email from
Lee Ann that she showed where notice was sent to Council that there was an
advertisement going out for this, but I don't recall that it being "this is Council
Member Dunn's ", so when I saw a slot, I was like "well, who's is that ? ". I didn't
even think to question it. So, it was surprising to me when there were four or five
nominations being brought up a few weeks ago that Vice Mayor Wright said,
well Mr. Dunn maybe would want to do it since it's his person. I'm like "oh,
really ? ". That was the first I had heard of it. So, I think that if we could get some
better notification that this is such and such person who is leaving... also, last
time I had submitted the name of Ms. Bello to be on the Commission, there was
questions about her residency. She was recently moved to Leesburg. Had lived
in Leesburg a number of years, but unfortunately she is experiencing some health
issues and opted not to be on the Commission, but it is an honor for me to have
Mr. O'Neil serve on the Commission.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
32 1 P <,
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Nay: None.
Vote: 7 -0
b. County Legislative Agenda
On a motion by Council Member Hammler, seconded by Vice Mayor
Wright, the following was proposed:
MOTION 2011 -036
I move that the Town Council adopt the following issues as their
Legislative Agenda for discussion with the County Board of Supervisors
Elect:
1. Initiate Annexation Discussion
2. Proffers
3. Utility Dates
4. Partnership to support Local Cable TV Production
Studio
3. Financial Support for Balch Library
Hammler: My opening comments would specifically be regarding number
2 and 3, my understanding is that's what Supervisor Kurtz wanted to address. It
certainly was not our priority as a council to address those two items. I dare say
they will probably be part of an agenda, but I don't think we need to focus on
them based on our direction. I don't think we need to micromanage this, but
technically, I would add words, initiate annexation discussion, partnership to
support local cable TV production studios and financial support for Balch
Library, but if we could address those just as we are moving forward, that would
be fine.
Dunn: The only thing that I would add, and I realize that we haven't had
a chance to discuss this in detail, but as I mentioned with the previous
presentation, if there is any precedent for what I mentioned about the ... even
within the county, a single source customer for our water, if that is something
that Council is willing to put on there, if not now, then at the next agenda. But, I
think that might be an important thing for us to bring up with the County. I
don't know if there is any desire to add that now ... more discussion later? That's
fine.
Butler: One, I just want to mention, Council Member Dunn, I think
Fairfax Water already provides a direct pipe and water to Loudoun County, so I
am not sure if we were going to do the same thing to Loudoun County, I'm not
sure it would be any different.
Hammler: Point of order, Madam Mayor, because we are really not
discussing that one because we are not adding it and we haven't approved it for
the motion and the second.
33 1 Page:
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Butler: I would submit that, okay, are we comfortable with then ... if we
are going to just remove items that we haven't initiated to put on the agenda,
then are we comfortable with just having a combined agenda that whatever we
list, we will have an agenda and then if they list those things, we will just add
them and have a joint agenda. Or, I think it was my understanding that both
bodies would have to approve the same items.
Wright: I think as a clarification, this is not items to go down to the state.
This is items that we, the town council, want to discuss with the board of
Supervisors. So, this is our wish list to talk to the Board of Supervisors, not like
what we did last year, where the County and the Town had a joint list that they
sent down.
Butler: No, I understand it perfectly. All I am saying is that if they come
up with aren't we trying to attempt to have a joint list so that we both have the
same list so we both go in with the same expectations? Or...
Hammler: Madam Mayor, if I may? If the Board would like to submit
their list, then therefore we would approve ... at some point it's going to be a
logistic issue. There is only going to be so many items. But, I would suggest that
this is our legislative agenda and we haven't received any input from the County
so other than one specific direction from one board of supervisor, I don't think
we can make that assumption.
Butler: Well, as far as I can tell, they have already told us what they want
to discuss. In fact, they just wanted to have a meeting with just items 2 and 3, so
for us to say we want to have a completely separate list and not even address
items 2 and 3, I think is disingenuous on our part and shows a complete lack
of ..I don't know what's a good word? Working together? Although that's not
the word I was looking for ... so, I would have to oppose this. Thanks.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Dunn, Hammler, Reid, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: Butler and Martinez
Vote: 5 -2
C. Approving a License Agreement with Northern Virginia Regional Park
Authority for Raflo Park
Butler: I re- looked at and my attempt at other language just doesn't fit in
so I am good with it the way that it is. So, I'll move it.
On a motion by Council Member Butler, seconded by Council Member
Reid, the following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2011 -124
34 1 Pa c
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Authorizing the Town Manager to Execute a License Agreement Between
the Town of Leesburg and the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority
for Trail Amenities to be Installed at Raflo Park
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
d. Renaming the Holiday Parade
On a motion by Mayor Umstattd, seconded by Council Member Reid, the
following was proposed:
MOTION 2011 -037
I move that the Leesburg Town Council rename the annual Holiday
Parade to the "Christmas and Holiday Parade"
Hammler: Madam Mayor, I thought it was going to be the Christmas and
Hanukah Parade. Why are we also adding the word "holiday ". Just in terms of
the gentleman who has come forward to talk about this several times, I thought
the whole point was not to put the word "holiday" in because all parades are
really "holiday" parades. I'm just asking the question rhetorically. I'll support
what Council directs.
Reid: If there is anybody with a Hanukah float out there, that you want to
have, you are welcome to. I kind of doubt that it's going to happen, so I would
think Christmas and Holiday parade would be fine. I will also try to be very brief
with the menorah lighting this year.
Dunn: I'm going to support this; however, I recognize that we changed
the name of the Christmas Tree Lighting because it's a Christmas tree and not an
end of fall season tree or beginning of winter times tree or isn't this a great time to
do shopping tree, but it is recognized as a Christmas Tree; however, our Holiday
parade does not fall on a particular day. Most parades that are on a particular
day are named after that day. This parade actually falls closer to Thanksgiving
than it does to Christmas. I think that it is a celebration of the holidays that are
in the late fall and early winter time. I also feel that as a Christian, the parade
while it does have some Christian emphasis is actually more of a
commercialization of my religion and is more of a holiday parade than it is a
Christian parade. If we were to have a Christmas parade and start dictating that
it has to have certain religious symbols in it, it could be more of a Christmas
parade in my view. Also, the god of Israel, the creator of this universe, his son,
the savior of all mankind does not need the Town Council to be doing h is
bidding for him. So, I am going to support this because there has been a request
but it ... I'm not overly thrilled about it, but I'll go ahead and say okay, we will
have a Christmas parade, but I don't think that it is really needed.
35 1 [1
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Butler: I will not be supporting this. I'll be honest, I'm absolutely stunned
that the Council would even be considering it. Especially... the name of the
Holiday parade, as it is today, and changing the name of the tree lighting was
Council Member Reid's idea last year and now he is backing off on it, which I
find very interesting. It's not something I can respect. But, I find that this is ... it's
a holiday parade. It's not a Christmas parade. All faiths are invited to have
floats. Everyone is invited to attend. It's not celebrating a specific holiday, nor
should it. We have many faiths within this community and we have no
intention ... I don't think we have any intention of having a Dwali festival, a
Festival of Lights celebration or celebrating the Ramadan within this town but
those are the things that could legitimately be asked of the town and if we say no,
aren't we elevating one religion over another? We have a legal opinion that
basically says this is a really stupid idea for us to do this, but we are going to do it
anyway. Based on the request of one person, who does not even live in the town.
One person, who does not even live in the town is forcing us to do this. The
biggest reason for not doing it, is we clearly have not learned the lessons from the
county and what is going to happen and I will almost guarantee it's happened
because I have already heard noise from at least one group ... that it will ruin this
parade because this parade ... there is no upside to making this change. No
upside. The parade is a wonderful parade. It is one of the best events in the
Town of Leesburg. But this fall, or if not this fall, next fall we will have folks and
arrangements of ... and the parade is going to look like the Courthouse lawn.
And we will deserve it. We will absolutely deserve it if our parade looks like the
Courthouse lawn and what I see is then people instead... instead of people
cheering and clapping at everything that goes past, people will start to boo and
hiss and protest and signs and everything else and it will be much worse
experience for the town. If we are lucky the parade will continue on. This will
peter out after a few years. Worst case, we will get disgusted with it and we will
end the parade because it was ruined by people who don't like ... but we will have
nobody but ourselves to blame right here. So here is something that is not
broken ... it is absolutely not broken. Just a wonderful event and we have stayed
away from the controversies that have plagued the courthouse lawn for the last
two years and so I strongly recommend the Council to say, look, we cannot put
one of the best events in Leesburg at risk because of the request of one person
who does not even live in the town.
Martinez: Well I'm happy to disagree with everybody. I would say that
precedence for me is the fact that this started as a Christmas parade, I don't know
how many years ago. It has always been based on the Christmas season. I know
that when I go with my fellow knights and we put the float... it is Christian based.
I want to say ... I'm not going to say that we should focus on that ... I mean the
point is that everybody should have an opportunity to participate. I do remember
back when it used to be the Christmas parade and we changed it Holiday, we had
these same fears. We are going to change to Holiday and nobody is going to
want to come in ... guess what? It didn't die. People are there in the Christmas
season for celebration whether you are Jewish or Christian or you're Catholic or
you're Muslim... whatever you are, it's a time for celebration and you know
36
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
what? Again, you know you throw all this stuff out there and you know what?
Why can't we just get along and be nice about it. Be calm and compassionate.
It's going to embrace everybody and I don't think that this is going to be any dire
straits that we are going to be in. Hey, you know what? I have always wanted it
to be the Christmas parade. I have never ... you know said anything about that.
Whenever it was changed to Holiday ... I would love to see what my vote was,
because I don't think I supported it back then.
Mayor: I'm not sure that Council actually took that vote.
Martinez: So, anyway ... all I know is I see no harm. It covers everybody
and I'm going to support it.
Wright: I guess just one clarification... I am reading my staff report and
according to my staff report, we never called it the Christmas Parade. Could
someone clarify?
Richard Williams: Vice Mayor Wright, in the research we did try to find
historical evidence on the parade. Earliest we found that it relates to the
department was in 1994. We have reference to what was the Holiday Parade at
that point.
Wright: Don't go anywhere because I'm not done torturing you yet. The
other question, or I guess, point, I believe a lot of the advertising materials
u_ including Leesburg at Leisure and a lot of the materials associated with the
Christmas Tree lighting and Holiday parade, all of that has already been printed
so this change would not necessarily be completely reflected consistently in our
advertising?
Williams: Leesburg at Leisure is already printed for the winter season.
Adjustments could be made for flyers, rack cards and any newspaper printed
media.
Wright: So, the main inconsistency would be the Leesburg at Leisure.
Williams: Correct.
Wright: In general, I don't have a problem calling it the Christmas and
Holiday Parade. I really didn't have a problem calling it the Holiday Parade. I
appreciate that we acknowledge the Christmas Tree, what we always called the
Christmas Tree. I do have a sensitivity it is not (inaudible) because I pretty much
hear from the person I lovingly refer to as Constituent #1, my wife, depending on
the day ... pretty much every day she has to drive out of town past the Courthouse
lawn with the ongoing exhibits that are there that we took something that we had
a seasonal holiday exhibit that was reflective of the community and now we have
kind of ongoing, and in some cases, in your face exhibits that I don't feel are
respectful of the community and I certainly don't want to see those same tones
37 1 1'agc
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
going into celebrating the Christmas and Holiday season. So, I'm kind of torn at
this point. I guess we will find out here in a couple of seconds how I vote,
because I'm not really sure but my main concern is I don't want to invite more
trouble. I want to be respectful of the Christmas season and I don't want to invite
further disparagement like we have seen on the Courthouse lawn based on the
county's tinkering.
Martinez: Kevin, you may be right about it not being called the Christmas
Parade, but I will say since I have been in Leesburg in 1993, whenever you talk to
you anybody, it was always the Christmas Parade. We may not have known it
officially as that, but it was always known as the Christmas... that's what I have
always known it as. Thank you for the correction.
Hammler: I guess to echo another point that Kevin just made, I am
looking at this quite frankly just from a pragmatic point, whether it was just one
person who came forward at the end of the day ... to me it is like ... what is it?
Let's just try to call it what it is and ultimately, I think the point will stand at the
end of it. So, in some symbolic way clearly it represents Christmas, but I think to
the extent it's a Holiday ... I think it's broad enough and I also think we will be
safe. I'm optimistic that it will be in good spirits no matter what we are
celebrating. Whether there is commercialism overtones to whatever additional
religious (inaudible) that we will all be...
Reid: As I recall last year, just to correct my colleagues, I was against
suspending the rule, but then I thought the Mayor had brought it up and I
thought that we had resolved this. I really do not see a problem after further
discussion in renaming it Christmas Holiday or Christmas and Holiday parade.
The situation with the Courthouse grounds displays was of great concern last
year because they were reliving that whole controversy, but you know again that
could have been avoided ... that committee... the Courthouse grounds committee
met right before Thanksgiving and they made this decision to ban the Christmas
Tree and the Creche. Supervisor Burk was actually at that meeting and some
people said she was either for... it was a county policy to ban all displays... it was
not just the courthouse. They were trying to implement County policy and it is
unclear whether she spoke up or not, but the fact is that there was a controversy
that ensued and that's what ended 50 years of a good thing and that's why we
have those big billboards and the County has atheist displays that Mr. Wright
correctly points out are indeed of concern, but the County has revisited. I don't
think we are going to have the problem here as Marty noted. I think people
know it as a Christmas parade. According to staff report, there are five religious
based, faith based organizations that participate. As I recall, Marty, the Knights
of Columbus lead the parade with the Creche and they are singing very clearly
religious songs and that is a good thing. I promise you, Dave, if I do a Hanukah
mobile, I will throw you some latkes. I'll be throwing it nicely.
Butler: The concern isn't with the current people in the parade. It's that
now we will have ... I almost guarantee it ... we will have people who come out of
38 1 11 a e
COUNCIL MEETING
October 25, 2011
the woodwork with outrageous displays and unless they are not specifically
illegal, let us try to keep them out of the parade ... we won't be able to. I will
almost guarantee you 100% that the parade will be less good this year than it has
been in the past, only because we are sticking Christmas right in their face, into
their nose ... it's like poking them in the eye.
Reid: Dave, I don't if the atheists really have the guts to stand and parade
and be carrying banners like that with hundreds and thousands of people looking
at them.
Martinez: Can I move the question, Madam Mayor?
Mayor: Let me just get to Tom and then Katie and then yes.
Dunn: For thousands of years, man has tried to kill the Judao- Christian
religion and he has not succeeded. I don't think that the efforts of a few people
will kill the Christian spirit, regardless of what we name the parade, for those that
truly believe. I don't fear the naysayers. I don't fear people who want to carry
signs and show that they do not believe in God being in the parade. I think in the
true Christmas spirit, they will receive the same claps and tootsie rolls and candy
canes being tossed to them that everyone else will. I also know that in the Bible it
says that greater is he that is in need than that which is in the world. So, we are
not going to stop God in his actions. I will say, though, in closing, that Christ
said do this in remembrance of me. He didn't say have a parade in remembrance
of me. So, I think that we tend to make a bigger thing out of this than what needs
to be. I can live with Holiday Parade because I know my God is stronger than
whatever you want to name this thing. So, I can go with the flow on this because
I know this is a small thing that we do.
Hammler: Mine is not a reaction to any specific religious points;
however, I think if you read the letter to the editor about any parades where there
has been specific criticism, citizens prefer that the politicians not be part of any of
our parades, so present company withstanding, that might be considering having
political floats, that those are not appreciated, at least by several citizens.
Mayor: I'm just going to close it out ... just saying that I like a lot of the
things that Marty had said. I like the Christmas season. Whether you are
waiting for Santa to come down the chimney, or whether you are approaching it
as a spiritual time of year, I will love the word "Christmas" and would like to see
it as part of the name of this parade. For those who are concerned that it is not
being tolerant of other faiths, I think that is why we have the term "and Holiday"
in there. This is the Christmas season because of Christmas. We have the parade
because of Christmas. The White House recognizes Christmas. The whole
country recognizes Christmas. Some folks recognize it as a secular or
commercialized holiday. Many of us recognize it as a spiritual time, but I think
this is the right way to go.
39 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: Butler
Vote: 6 -1
Reid: I voted "ho- ho -ho ", just so as you know.
e. Direction on Residential Parking / Clarification from Work Session
On a motion by Council Member Dunn, seconded by Council Member
Martinez, the following was proposed:
MOTION
I move to direct staff and the Planning Commission to draft a work scope
and timeframe to conduct a comprehensive parking strategy for
consideration by the Town Council. This work scope and timeframe
should be accomplished and brought back to Town Council for a work
session on November 28.
Mayor: Let me get a sense from the Planning Commission whether that is
too short a time frame, which I fear it may be.
Mary Harper: You would like a timeline, scope and all our
recommendations by November 28?
Dunn: It's our last meeting in November.
Mayor: Or just the time frame, Tom, and the work scope, but not the
recommendations? You just want the work scope and time frame, right?
Dunn: However this is written here. Does it say recommendations?
Mayor: No, it doesn't.
Dunn: Did I say recommendations?
Mary Harper: Yes, you did, so that is what I was questioning. The
reason we have been ... we have been so persistent on this topic is we think it's a
stepping stone for the revitalization of downtown. The feet on the street, that we
keep hearing about all the time where there is going to be mixed use. There is
going to be form based code. We are not an employment center. People are
going to be forced to have cars, drive to where they work. So we have to find
some sort of adequate plan to take care of this situation and not continually band -
aid it as each application comes forward. So, I think we just wanted you to
understand where we were coming from. You will be having to do that. I just
wanted to know if Council Member Martinez wanted a transportation piece to
that? Transit piece, I'm sorry.
401 Pa E
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Martinez: Well, I was going to make a friendly amendment, but I decided
what I will do is leave it as is and hope that when you are doing this parking plan,
if you are going to talk about parking, you need to talk about transportation, bus
--- routes, how to get people back and forth.
Harper: Move them around.
Martinez: Move them around ... so I'm not going to make that friendly
amendment. I'm just hoping that in your deliberations that you guys consider
that.
Mayor: Let me just clarify from Tom and Marty. Tom, are you willing to
agree with leaving the recommendations out of your originally stated motion, just
stick with the motion as drafted? Marty, are you comfortable with that?
Reid: The scope of this does not get into any of the zoning. We are not
dealing with transportation parking as far as I'm concerned ... as far as I was told.
We can have a big parking summit and we can talk about the policy things as
long as we want. We are dealing strictly with the zoning facets of these small lots,
am I not mistaken?
Harper: That would be part of it. Perhaps Susan would like to....
Reid: So, I respect Mr. Martinez' comments, but I don't think that is part
of the scope of this.
Harper: That was not what we originally discussed initially. That was
something that....
Reid: It was strictly was zoning changes ... the zoning change dealing with
small lots and whether we should require $10,000 in lieu of parking...
Harper: Whether we should accept payment in lieu of, if we should let
them all be built with density for no onsite parking and so forth.
Reid: And it's limited to that one area in the historic district, not the
entire historic district.
Harper: We wanted to kind of take an overview of... and we were going
to ask Mr. Murphy as well as Ms. Berry -Hill the number of available lots that can
be built on because they may be outside the that little, I understand, small area
was suggested to you by Mr. Murphy at his last presentation and some of these
buildable lots were infill or just vacant now, might be outside that little area. So,
that's what we are only doing...
Reid: I didn't want to get off base and get into other areas. We can talk
about umpteen number of things that deal with the situation.
41 a
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Martinez: My only concern is if they are going to recommend zoning that
reduces the number of parking in the town how we are going to get people in and
out. That's why I'm not making a friendly amendment, because I didn't want to
add that yet, but if the recommendation is going to be reduced parking in the
historic district, at least have that as a consideration.
Wells: If I may before Susan answers. I think the more specific question
is ... I think there is an important point from the work load perspective overall in
terms of direction that the Council has provided to priorities for the Planning
Commission and staff and that is the form based code. I am not weighing in on
any of the options other than just to point that even bringing back a scope of
work is going to take some effort to research. I think the discussion we are
having here this evening reflects that it's not an easy conversation to have just as
simply the scope of work. All that being said, what I would is that Council
reconsider the start time of this until after the form based code comes to Council.
Reid: When is that?
Wells: March. It is a significant... all I am saying is it is a significant
effort and I think you pay me to tell you what we have staff to cover. I don't
want to not meet that deadline. That's something that Council has said is job one
and if it were simply saying it would be XY and Z, I wouldn't be sitting here
telling you something that is contrary to what you are trying to do. I'm not trying
to butt in, but I think I have an obligation to tell you what we can and can't do.
Dunn: There were a couple of things in selecting that date. One is I think
it is of the utmost importance that the Planning Commission be the planning
body for the town of Leesburg. Not the Town Council ... but the Planning
Commission. So, when things come to us and there is changes, I feel they
should... significant changes, be going back to the Planning Commission for
review before it comes to Town Council. I'll use an example of the Paxton, Arc
of Loudoun that we approved. There were a large percent of the changes in that,
that you all had not seen. You had denied that project. We turned around and
approved it even though you had seen the changes. I know that we rushed
through trying to get it approved in a certain time limit, but we shouldn't be in
those types of situations. I think that there is a ... you only come up with wording
that says there is a certain percentage of changes that are allowed, but if there are
changes made by staff over a certain amount, they need to come back to Planning
before being brought to Council and then we have to approve that. Secondly, I
picked this date because I don't want this to slow down ... be just another
mechanism of keep going back and forth. I want things to move along in a quick
fashion. So, this was ready for us to come to a vote and approve it tonight. In
other words, I would like to go back to Planning, but I don't want you all to be
sitting on it for weeks. Let's go ahead and get this set the way you want it and
let's move forward quickly so that business can move forward in Leesburg.
42 1 Pa
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Harper: We have a meeting next week on the 20 ". Emails have been sent
out to invite you to come and participate if you can work it into your schedule.
You are more than welcome, Mr. Wells, please feel free if you would like to join
us. We had planned to come up with a time line for sure and just kind of talk
about what some of the options are. You would be asked ... I would be sending
an email to Susan to ask for the number of lots that would be affected by this no
on site parking because we have a very finite number of parking spaces in the
parking garage. My feeling and I don't speak for the whole Council because this
hasn't been discussed yet together, but you can charge a fee in lieu of and
that ... you are going to run out of spaces sooner or later anyway and what are you
going to do. There is only a finite number of parking spots and then the public
isn't going to be able to utilize the garage because you have town employees
parking, you have business owners that currently have bought parking spots from
the town and then if you did fee in lieu for everything that is available... that I
think is available, and that's why I am asking Susan for the number, we are
talking about some of these residential units, there is only a finite number of
parking spaces in that garage so there would have to be other options to be
looked at.
Dunn: In my last comment, or my opening comment, again I would
rather see it in reference to John, with all respect, I would not want to have this
wait until March. If that is what you are telling me to do, then you are going to
force me to have to change ... to make a vote on this tonight and I don't think it is.
I would rather have it by stretch and planning in staff's mind to go back and
know there is an urgency to get this done the way you all want it to bring it back
to us for a work session at the end of March, so we can move forth. Not to make
a whole lot of extra work for staff, but let's get the issues done quickly and then
move forward much like the way you have to make decisions with the BAR over
the last few years ... we don't want you all sitting on these projects. Go ahead and
move it forward ... as I said, let's get business moving forward in Leesburg, not
slow it down.
Reid: I agree with my colleague. I respect you for saying it, John, but
there could be several property owners who are sort of sitting on the fence
waiting for Town Council and the town to do something. I am looking here at
this Town Plan amendment consume a lot of time and that's just a policy
document and you have this on a quick schedule for Commission adoption by
the end of the year. Unless there is a legal reason why we have to do that. I
would like to stick with Council Member Dunn's time line. If the Town Plan
thing has to be put off of the work plan, so be it. Unless there is some legal
reason why we have to have this adopted by the end of the year.
Irby: The town is required by the code to update the Town Plan every five
years. We are already late.
Reid: Is there a penalty?
43 1 P
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Irby: There is not a penalty, but whatever...
Reid: The penalty will be for the property owners who want to develop
their small lots and they have to wait until March. So, I agree with Council
Member Dunn ... I think we should stick with his resolution, John.
Wright: Based on the comments I have heard so far, I don't think you
guys have actually moved what you actually want to move. What Council had
discussed at our last work session was kind of a range of options, one was do
nothing. One was to address specifically the residential parking question on its
own absent of dealing with a more comprehensive review and then the other one,
which had not had a lot of support, at least in the last discussion at Council level,
was a comprehensive view of the parking requirements in downtown to include
the residential issue, but the residential issue, the payment in lieu cost,
commercial parking requirements, all of it. The comments that I am hearing, is
we need to quickly address the issue that came up. The only thing ready for a
vote tonight was to initiate which way Council wanted to go. The concern I am
hearing, it sounds like we want to initiate saying we are doing something
comprehensive, but then we want to quickly address the residential issue, that's
two different things. If we want to do a comprehensive review of the parking
requirements and do it correctly, I believe we need to afford Planning
Commission and planning staff the appropriate time to do that, so the confusion I
have is I am hearing two different conversations happening at the same time. So,
the first thing I would like to do is as you look at this scope of work with both
form based code and the Town Plan amendment, is there any other applications
that are also in cycle?
Susan Berry Hill: Yes, we have a number of applications. Lowes is one
of them. Several at Village at Leesburg, so there are a number of land
development applications that are taking some time with staff too, so we want to
make sure we aren't spreading ourselves too thin on the things that are currently
being worked on.
Wright: So, with that, I would like to make a motion to amend the
current motion on the floor and to replace the last sentence of the motion which
currently reads this work scope and time frame should be accomplished and
brought back to the Council for a work session by... and I believe it was the last
meeting in November... to have that sentence simply read this work scope and
time frame should be initiated by March of 2012.
Butler: Second.
Dunn: Again, I don't want to see these things become and for a lack of a
better phrase and please don't take it because these dates are just thrust upon us,
John, thank you. I don't want to have these things be stalling tactics for whatever
issues somebody might have about a particular project or about growth or a
particular business. I want to know that we are moving forward. I think that
44 1 P
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
basically a month and a half of working on this... something that you just got
finished working on.
Harper: We haven't even..we haven't even worked on it yet. We have
been trying to get this on our agenda, but it has been removed twice.
Dunn: So you are telling me that this was brought to us, Susan, and the
Planning Commission has not addressed this at all?
Berry Hill: I just want to make sure we are all on the same understanding
here. When Council met on this on the 26` ", what came to you and what you
decided at that meeting, at least what staff took away from that meeting, was that
you wanted to proceed with what was called Option 5, and that allowed for some
increase on feet on the street on that issue, in the respect that we would relax the
residential parking requirements in certain circumstances for lots which are 4000
square feet or smaller and which are within 500 feet of a public parking facility,
garage or surface lot. So that would limit it, as Mary had said, limit it to a certain
area of the H -1 district. We are going ahead with that. Staff has included that in
our 2011 batch. We are starting work on it and the Planning Commission will
see that zoning ordinance revision sometime in the beginning of the new year;
however, I think the question before you tonight, which Planning Commission
has wanted to press is maybe we need not look at that in such a small scope. We
need to look at it in a bigger scope in terms of what are the parking implications
for the downtown, if we are going to relax the residential parking for certain
__. circumstances, what will be the implication on existing parking facilities?
Hammler: I would like to make a motion to postpone this actual motion
until the 25 "', which will allow the Planning Commission to make a
recommendation about the motion at our next Council meeting. It strikes me
that we are turning this very motion into an entire work session. It gives all of us
an opportunity, because we will be at this meeting, to determine what the scope
is, how much time we need, and then it will be a very simple motion to make on
the 25 "'
Reid: Second.
Mayor: Alright, I now have three live motions on the floor.
Hammler: I think mine takes precedence.
Dunn: Point of inquiry. Has the second motion, made by Vice Mayor
Wright received a second?
Mayor: Yes, it did.
45 1 1, a <_,
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Dunn: So that motion was in the discussion process. At this time then,
we have another motion to postpone this until another date. Tabling can only be
done within the same meeting.
Hammler: Mine takes precedence.
Reid: I think it's advisable to do what Ms. Hammler wants. That's what
the Planning Commission said in their email anyway. I don't think another week
is going to kill anybody, but I do support a quicker time frame.
Dunn: What was the postpone date to?
Hammler: October 25. There will be a meeting on the 201", that we will
all be participating in.
Dunn: What are we going to accomplish by postponing it to the 25`h.
Hammler: We will accomplish not having a laborious continuing
discussion on the dais about all of the facets of things that would be in the
comprehensive plan, how much time Planning Commission and Staff needs,
therefore we will have a very clear motion in two weeks.
Reid: In fact, we were invited to that meeting.
Harper: Yes, you were invited to come and participate in that meeting.
We haven't had a meeting about this topic yet. It has been taken off our agenda.
After the initial Council Option 5.
Dunn: Does so Ms. Hammler ... is your motion really in effect the first
motion that is on our agenda tonight. To me, it looks like it is saying the same
thing.
Wright: No, actually that's a different motion.
Hammler: Completely different.
Dunn: Okay, so you are basically saying we don't want to address any
part of this until our next work session. Is that what your motion is?
Hammler: We will address... essentially what will be the motion on the
table and the time frame but we will have a comprehensive answer to why that
time frame makes sense and what's involved so that we have a very simple
motion without an additional half hour discussion about the motion.
Dunn: Okay, thank you.
46 rare
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Wright: Two issues. I'm trying to temper my comments. I'm a little
concerned. We had a work session discussion, which there are no actions or
decisions taken out of a work session discussion but there is an indication that it
appeared a majority of Council was leaning towards Option 5, but even as recent
as the following evening, the Mayor indicated there was questions both as far as
where the majority of Council was and there was a question on staff, so I am
concerned about how Option 5 is already in a batch when there was no vote to
initiate. So, that's issue one. Issue two is just through the course of the
discussion, I think that there are multiple perceptions of what this motion
actually does, which is why I would support Katie's motion because I think
hopefully between the Planning work session on the 20"' and the opportunity for
staff to provide a more full staff report when we vote on something everyone will
agree on what we voted for or against and there won't be dispute as to what the
scope of it was because I have heard that dispute already here in the discussion.
Martinez: I just don't get it. I thought we had this pretty much figured
out and now everybody is ... I mean... I think what we need to do is I get so sick
of all this discussion during the Council meeting that should have been done
during the working session and we should not be having 30 minutes of discussion
on what we are going to do and what we are not going to do. Do it in the
working session so we can do business here instead of all this talk. Alright? I am
really frustrated with that. Also, what I am hearing is a lot of concern with the
Planning Commission having enough people to do the work they are doing now.
What I would like to see, John, any time we throw more stuff at the Planning
Commission, tell us what we are going to do without or give us a choice of Plan
amendments, applications ... what are we going to miss out on. I'm not going to
vote for anything unless we can really do the job. Right now, I am hearing that
John has said that we are having our people stretched thin and I was already
complaining about that last Council session. We need to get a grip on this
because we are throwing stuff out there and we are expecting people to do the job
and if we haven't got the people to do the job, then we need to do something
about it.
Butler: Just a couple of quick ones. I definitely agree with Council
Member Martinez that we have to expect ... we cannot expect them to come back
in November with anything because they already have other things to do. We
have laid off a good part of staff, so we have to understand with cutting the
budget there are consequences and these are some of the consequences, that we
are not going to get a comprehensive parking plan in probably a year. We have
to understand that and live with it or figure out another alternative. I do agree
with Council Member Wright, we need some more clarification because while I
am absolutely delighted that you are moving forward with Option 5, I see a
motion that basically places Option 5 or something similar to it on the Council's
agenda. So, that's a little bit confusing. I'm going to vote to defer.
47 1 Pa c
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Dunn: This action would have required planning commission review,
correct? Could it have been passed by Council on its own without the Planning
Commission.
Berry Hill: The issue of a comprehensive parking strategy? Is that what
you are referring to?
Dunn: Yes.
Berry Hill: It depends on what the scope of that is. If it involves
ordinance changes and so forth, yes, it would go through the Planning
Commission. If that parking strategy involved other things such as you know
what are the fees that we would charge for metered parking or for the parking
garage parking or those types of things, those are really not within the purview of
the Planning and Zoning Department or the Planning Commission, necessarily.
That falls within the Director of Finance's area of expertise. It depends on what
that work scope is.
Dunn: As I said before, I would rather have the Planning Commission be
the Planning body for the town and not the Town Council. And I was surprised
to hear that the Planning Commission had not seen any of this. I would
recommend that there is no need to move forward on this until the Planning
Commission has brought forward their recommendations, which are (inaudible),
so yeah, I don't have any issue with tabling it. I don't even know if tabling it
until October next meeting is even time enough. What really would we
accomplish at that point if the Planning Commission doesn't have a chance to
review it.
Harper: You would have a time line, roughly by ... you would have some
comments. What the issue is, when we were doing, I believe the same meeting
that we did the Shocktoberfest thing for Paxton, we looked at various parking
options. The Planning Commission, out of all of the options presented liked 45,
but we never moved to accept #5, and it was at that time, we talked about
looking at other options ... look at what other towns our size might be doing and
how they are accommodating their parking ... you know, problems. Whether or
not, according to the parking summit that was held in 2009, there is no parking
problem downtown; however, there is, according to the Downtown Business
Association a perceived parking problem. You and I both know what perception
is and that's one reason why we decided to get into this in a little more depth.
We have completed most of our work with the exception of the public hearing on
adopting the Town Plan. All the components of the Town Plan have been
looked at. If that sets some people's minds at ease.
Dunn: I have another question for the Planning Commission chair. The
date that the Council Member Hammler has set. Do you feel that is now
sufficient for you to bring something back to us or do you feel that you need more
time.
48 1 Pa c
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Harper: Well, we are obviously going to need a little bit more time to gel,
to flesh out the whole the thing, but you will have at least a time line and you will
have topic ... you will have a bullet point of different topics and possible solutions.
What the challenges are, what the opportunities are and so forth. That will come
to you on the 25th. There won't be any decision made about anything on October
25 ', seeing that we are just sitting down and discussing this. We want to work
with you and don't want to feel like we are working against you.
Dunn: I don't think we want that and I think everyone recognizes the
importance that you may have called other Council Members. I know I have
received a couple of calls. For Commissioner Bames to be up past 9:15 that's a
very important issue for him.
Harper: It has been a very important issue for our entire commission and
we appreciate you taking a look at it, those of you who could make the meeting,
to participate. We appreciate that as well.
Dunn: I don't have any problem supporting the motion to postpone this
until October, I actually feel that a little more time might be in order because I
think in two weeks, it might be kind of quick, but if you feel you can get it done
in two weeks, that's fine.
Hammler: Madam Mayor, can I just make my final comment? What's
interesting about this entire debate on the dais, the way it started and the way it's
about to end is in fact we never needed to discuss this at all because you already
have exactly what this motion is that we have now tabled, that we are deferring
for two weeks on your Planning Commission agenda. So, on your agenda,
which didn't require any action of Council, you in fact are going to do a time line
and come back with how long or what the scope is and how long you need to
come back with the actual plan. Therefore, we got ourselves tangled up tonight
thinking about you might be coming back with the actual plan. The bottom line
is we are now essentially, if you will, the essence moving the fact that you already
have something on your agenda, which we never needed to do in the first place,
so my only point now is I look forward to the discussion we will all have with
you on the 201'. I very much appreciate all your leadership and your time this
evening, certainly waiting until this late hour to discuss this and I think we are all
good with the fact that we will discuss the basics next time, you will move
forward comprehensively and look forward to finding out how much time we
need to do it.
The motion to postpone until October 25 was approved by the following
vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
49 1 t����
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
£ Initiating a Town Plan Update
On a motion by Vice Mayor Wright, seconded by Council Member
Butler, the following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2011 -128
Initiating a Town Plan Amendment to Update the Plan consistent with
Section 15.2 -2233 of the Code of Virginia and Section 3.16 (Town Plan
Amendments) of the Leesburg Zoning Ordinance
Wright: I look forward to seeing this back at Public Hearing after
Planning Commission review.
Reid: Again, this is the first time that I have actually gone through
something so comprehensive. Would it not be prudent for us to have a work
session discussion at Council to deal with some things. Because there are a lot of
things that don't seem to be addressed in Transportation and I am wondering if
we are going to have an opportunity in January, or whatever, to deal with that. It
seems that they have dealt with a lot environmental issues, but the
Transportation component seems to be very thin. I am very concerned that...
Mayor: Of course, the Town Council ... this is just the initiation and the
Council...
Reid: Oh, it's the initiation? It looks like the Commission has already
gone through this language, haven't they? This is a Commission report.
Berry Hill: That's what the state code requires them to do, is go through
the plan and recommend to you ... the community what changes are proposed.
So, they will hold a public hearing on that, and then when it comes to you, you
will hold a public hearing as well.
Reid: By then, we are going to be limited. I am very concerned when I
see this document. This is the first time I have seen it, that the transportation
component ... I don't see any reference to new right of way or disposal of right of
way or anything like that at all. It seems like a lot has been done in the
environmental area and the preservation area. I really think we need to have a
look at this at a work session. Again, I don't see this as being as important as
regulatory or deregulatory moves like the town is trying to do with the parking.
Mayor: Jeanette, Ken raises a question. Is the Council going to be
limited in the way it might want to expand the transportation section by any of
the public hearing ad language?
Irby: Well, I would anticipate this would take more than one public
hearing. It's a pretty big deal. So, this is the beginning of the process and
certainly Council may want to devote one or two entire work sessions just to the
50 1 E1agc
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
transportation component. This is the beginning of the process. Even though the
Planning Commission has been looking at it, Council ... you may have a public
hearing for public comment, but no one would expect there to be one public
hearing and you would pass it. Planning Commission will have to make their
recommendations. Council will review, make their recommendations. It will go
back to the Planning Commission. This just starts the process.
Reid: It is at the end of the process. Because if you look at your time
period here... commission adoption December 1 -15. That's only two months
from now. The reason why I am concerned about this, colleagues, is because in
2005, I don't believe, that the transportation component was really studied in
great detail. I think that there were downgrades to interchanges, which have
turned out to be okay from an aesthetic standpoint, but if this is going to guide us
for the next couple of years, preserving the right of way, looking at ways to make
traffic move and looking at transit alternatives is very important. That's the most
important thing. That's one thing that has some teeth in our comprehensive
plan. All of this other stuff is really policy. It's policy. I just think that the
Council should have at least a work session on this in December or November to
look at this document and discuss it and also look at the transportation
component in detail, in particular, because that I think looking at this document
has not been given enough and addressed really very accurately if this is all that it
is. I'm sorry. I mean we have the next five years to be adding another 3,000
residents, maybe more. More traffic. More cars on the road. I just think that we
really need to have a work session on this and I don't see why it can't be deferred.
As Ms. Irby told us, there is no penalty for us to not adopt this.
Martinez: Are you going to make a motion to postpone or table?
Reid: I'd like to make a motion to postpone or table.
Hammler: I will second.
Mayor: Okay, nondebatable. Goes immediately to a vote.
The motion to table failed on the following vote:
Aye: Hammler and Reid
Nay: Butler, Dunn, Martinez, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Vote: 2 -5
Dunn: Once again, I don't think Council Member Reid, you wanted to
table this to a later time in this meeting. Tabling it is probably ... you want to
postpone it.
Reid: If you want to make a motion to postpone, go ahead.
Dunn: I don't have a desire to postpone it. But you...
51 ar
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Reid: There is not going to be a difference in the vote.
Mayor: We do have the underlying motion still with us made by Kevin,
seconded by Dave. Are there any more comments before I go to Kevin for final
comments.
Reid: Yes, I don't believe that this is a good document. I believe that the
transportation component has been short shrifted. I believe that we are doing a
disservice by going ahead and just adopting this as is and initiating it. I don't
believe the commission or the staff are going to spend significant time to look at
the road network and it's the same mistake that we made in 2005, I'm sorry. So,
I can't support this.
Wright: I believe, just like the town plan, the Council can hold its public
hearings and conduct as much review as they see fit. I believe last go round
Council saw fit to send particular items back to make sure that's what adopted or
reflected Council's intent. So, to steal a phrase from my colleague Council
Member Dunn from the previous discussion, let the Planning Commission do
their job. Let them recommend something up to us. That's why we are initiating
this. Then when it gets up to us, let us do our job and review it and make the
final adoption.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: Reid
Vote: 6 -1
13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. None
14. NEW BUSINESS
a. Information Update — Virginia Regional Transit Bus to the Sycolin Road
Park and Ride Lot /Status
Wells: Madam Mayor, I think the memo was fairly self explanatory.
From questions at previous work session where Council asked this to be put on a
future meeting. We have been able to determine that there is not a study
underway at the County staff level identifying extending routes between
downtown and the park and ride lot. The current Sycolin Road route does
provide for the Park and Ride lot upon request and that is reflected in the
brochure that is put out; however, that does one way. Council Member Butler's
point is somebody took the bus out from downtown and wanted to go the other
way and I think that's our challenge. You can get from downtown to the Park
and Ride Lot, but if you happen to take the bus from downtown, you are stuck.
It is the short answer. There was also questions as to the current route times are.
They do run from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and that's daily. So, there is access to the lot
going one way, but it's on a demand basis. What staff is doing to follow up is
getting some ridership request numbers from Virginia Regional Transit to find
52 1 E� �.
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
out from any of the drivers if they are getting requests at the Park and Ride lot to
how do I get downtown. Try to get that basic information . As we normally do
coordinate town staff and Virginia Regional Transit and then we can go to the
Standing Residential Traffic Committee. So that, based on your questions, is
what we would normally do. If you have any questions.
Reid: This idea came to me from a lady named Dr. Christmas Hale who
lives on South King Street because the Park and Ride lot is filling up and there
could be demand for a jitney, as she called it, that goes from downtown Leesburg
to the Park and Ride and back. Her husband is a commuter. I just hope that staff
doesn't spend a lot of time ... I hope that VRTA...
Wells: Yes, this is mostly going to be VRTA work. Again, there is a
way ... that's part of the reason I wanted to say something rather than just to say
it's in the memo, if you take the Leesburg / Sycolin Road route, you can get to the
Park and Ride lot, just simply say to the driver, I want to go there. It's on the
brochure. There is a dot on the map and you can get to the Ride lot, I suspect if
you go one way and tell the driver you are coming back, they will make sure
there is a way to communicate that, but I am going to double check that.
Reid: I think the concern that she had is a Monday through Friday jitney
that would go from the Government Center and go to the Park and Ride from
points downtown.
Wells: This does do that. It's on a longer route.
Reid: I think that she was referring to something more direct. I don't
know if there is feasibility, but when you think about it, it is going to be two years
before Sycolin Road is improved, the way we want it, at least from Tavistock
Drive. And if we can get some people out of their cars going to that park and
ride lot, back and forth, it's going to help a lot. Because right now, you can't
even take a left turn because there is a caravan of cars coming out of the Park and
Ride lot going north. So, not that every motorist is going to do it. It may not be
feasible. I thought that it would be a good idea.
Wells: We will get some numbers and bring them back.
Reid: Thank you very much for doing this,
Martinez: Well, I feel short shrifted in talking, but I think I am going to
pass.
Butler: Just wanted to say that I would be a little skeptical with their
ridership numbers because if somebody can only go one way on a bus and not
back the other way, then it's less likely that they are going to take it.
Wells: We are taking that into account. If you can only go one way...
53 1 .�
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Butler: If we have a route out there, somebody could stay on the bus...
Wells: Not to extend the conversation, but I think the question I would
have when I see the ridership numbers or even without them, is why doesn't the
regular route just go to the Park and Ride Lot. It goes to the County garage
already so it's like three dots on their brochure. Why not just go the whole way?
15. CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Umstattd made the following motion:
Pursuant to Section 2.2- 3711(A)(3) and (7) of the Code of Virginia, I move that
the Leesburg Town Council convene in a closed meeting for the purpose of
receiving information and discussion regarding:
a. Dominion Power Substation
b. Red Cross Property
The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Wright and approved by the following
vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Reid, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: Martinez
Vote: 6 -1
The Council met in closed session at 10:30 p.m.
The Council reconvened in open session at 11:11 p.m.
Mayor Umstattd made the following motion:
In accordance with Section 2.2 -3712 of the Code of Virginia, I move that Council
certify to the best of each member's knowledge, only public business matters
lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom
of Information Act and such public business matters as were identified in the
motion by which the closed meeting was convened were heard, discussed or
considered in meeting by Council.
The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Wright and approved by the following
vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
16. COUNCIL COM LENTS
Council Member Reid disclosed that he met with representatives of the Village at
Leesburg.
17. MAYOR'S COMNIENTS
54 1 Pa c
COUNCIL MEETING October 25, 2011
Mayor Umstattd disclosed that she met with representatives of the Village at
Leesburg.
18. MANAGER'S COMMENTS
None.
19. ADJOURNMENT
On a motion by Vice Mayor Wright, seconded by Council Member Martinez, the
meeting was adjourned at 11:12 p.m.
isfen C. U �stattd, Mayor
Town of Leesburg
AT ES
Clerk of Cou C
2011 tcmin1025
55 E a n