HomeMy Public PortalAbout2016_tcmin0209 COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, 7:30 p.m. Mayor Butler presiding.
Council Members Present: Kelly Burk, Thomas Dunn, II, Katie Sheldon Hammier,
Fernando "Marty" Martinez, Suzanne Fox, and Mayor Butler.
Council Members Absent: None.
Staff Present: Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Town Attorney Barbara Notar, Deputy
Town Manager Keith Markel, Director of Planning and Zoning Susan Berry Hill, Senior
Planner Delane Parks, Senior Planner Irish Grandfield, Captain Vanessa Grigsby,
Airport Manager Scott Coffman, Paralegal Carmen Smith, and Clerk of Council Lee
Ann Green
AGENDA ITEMS
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION was led by Council Member Hammier
3. SALUTE TO THE FLAG was led by Cub Scout Pack 1168
4. ROLL CALL showing all members present.
5. MINUTES
a. Work Session Minutes of January 11, 2016
On a motion by Council Member Hammler, seconded by Council Member
Fox, the work session minutes of January 11, 2016 were approved by a vote of 6-0.
b. Regular Session Minutes of January 12, 2016
On a motion by Council Member Hammier, seconded by Council Member
Dunn, the regular session minutes of January 12, 2016 were approved by a vote of 6-0.
c. Emergency Electronic Meeting Minutes of January 25, 2016
On a motion by Council Member Dunn, seconded by Council Member Hammler,
the emergency electronic meeting minutes of January 25, 2016 were approved by a vote of 6-
0.
d. Emergency Electronic Meeting Minutes of J nuary 29, 2016
On a motion by Council Member Dunn, seconded by Council Member Fox, the
emergency electronic meeting minutes of January 29, 2016 were approved by a vote of 6-
0.
6. ADOPTING THE MEETING AGENDA
On a motion by Council Member Hammier, seconded by Council Member Dunn, the
meeting agenda was adopted after moving Item 9a to Section 7 by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Fox Hammler, Martinez, and Vice Mayor Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 6-0
1 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
7. PRESENTATIONS
a. Black History Month Proclamation
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member Fox,
the following was proclaimed:
PRO CLPROCLANIA. TION
BLACK HISTORY MONTH
FEBRUARY 2016
WHEREAS, in February of 1926, sixty-one years after the ratification of
the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution, Dr. Carter Woodson, a
noted historian, desired to recognize the achievements and contributions of Black
Americans in this country; and
WHEREAS, the month of February was appropriately chosen to recognize
the achievements of Black Americans as it contained the birth anniversaries of
Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass; and
WHEREAS, the traditional one-week observance was expanded in 1976 to
include the entire month of February; and
WHEREAS, Black History Month allows us to honor the achievements of
and celebrate the heritage of Black Americans while recalling the courage of their
struggle to achieve equality; and
WHEREAS, historically Black Americans, such as Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr., Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Medgar Evers, Jessie Jackson, Dred Scott,
W.E.B. DuBois, and Mary McLeod Bethune have worked to lay the very
foundation for the free and diverse society that we as Americans enjoy today; and
WHEREAS, this year marks the 52'anniversary of the signing of the 1964
Civil Rights Act that gave all citizens of the United States equal rights under the
law.
THEREFORE, the Mayor and Council of the Town of Leesburg in
Virginia hereby proclaim the month of February of the Year 2016 as Black History
Month in the Town of Leesburg and urge the citizens of Leesburg to join in
recognizing the contributions made by the Loudoun Chapter of the NAACP and
other community organizations to preserve and remember the accomplishments of
Black Americans throughout the history of our nation.
PROCLAIMED this 9th day of February 2016.
2 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
b. Catoctin Elementary School Request
Fourth Grade students from Catoctin Elementary School requested that
they be allowed to place a collection box at Ida Lee Recreation Center to collect
items to make care packages for pediatric patients and their families undergoing
cancer treatments at local hospitals.
On a motion by Council Member Hammler, seconded by Vice Mayor Burk, the
following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2016-010
Authorizing the Catoctin Elementary School Fourth Grade Students to Place a
Donation Box in the Lobby at Ida Lee Recreation Center to Collect Care Packages
for Children Receiving Cancer Treatments in Area Hospitals.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Dunn, Fox, Hammler, Martinez and Mayor Butler
Nay: None.
Vote: 6-0
c. Presentation—Planning Commission Annual Report
Former Planning Commission Chair, Mary Harper, gave a brief
presentation on the activities of the Planning Commission.
Key Points:
• 20 meetings during 2015.
• 4 Special Exceptions, 9 rezonings/proffer amendments, 6 Town
Plan/Zoning Ordinance amendments.
• 4 cases were carried over for additional meetings — Crescent Parke, Village
at Leesburg Land Bay C, Potomac Station Marketplace Rezoning, and
Patriot Self-Storage.
• Discussed bikeways, applicant initiated town plan amendments,
watershed and tree commission presentations.
• Annual retreat.
• Applications to be heard in the coming year— Leesburg South
(Meadowbrook), Crescent Parke, South King Street multifamily,
Montfaire (Sycolin Commons), River Creek age restricted housing and
Brown's Car Sales.
8. PETITIONERS
The Petitioners section was opened at 7:48 p.m.
Andrew Borgquist: My name is Andrew Borgquist. I am sure you guys know
who I am. First, I want to say congratulations to Council Member Butler. I see you are
the mayor now. So, I am glad to see that. So, I am coming and speaking on the issue I
have been bringing on numerous, numerous, numerous times before this Council. So, I
have been here for many meetings and I am here again tonight because I am angry. I
3 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
have worked for this town for 14 plus years and then one night two years ago, I had a
bad experience with a Leesburg police officer. Chief Price has come before this council
many times talking about his community policing approach, telling how his officers get
to know the residents and understand their needs. Well, that was not my experience
that night. That night, I think Leesburg police did not act as they should. I don't think
it was a very good attitude. I have expressed that I felt they were needlessly aggressive.
This was not really that big of an issue to me at the end of the day. I was okay; however,
I did voice my disagreement with the way I was treated that night. No one should ever
feel they cannot express how they perceive a situation when there is reasonable and
justifiable basis and manner for doing so. The town of Leesburg management and the
officer in question learned of the disagreement I had expressed. I have come to this
council many, many times and we have had a bunch of different discussions and there
has been a lot talk about what it is. So, I brought a visual at this time. I feel like I was
treated like a piece of trash. So, you have a visual to help you understand exactly how I
felt about the way it occurred and the way I was treated. Specifically, there was a report
that was created by the Director of Parks and Recreation, Rich Williams, and I felt that
it was made sure that I was afforded no courtesy and [inaudible] bias and severity that
should concern this council and that I had brought many, many, many times before this
council with no avail yet. So, allow me to then express a little bit of how I feel about
some of the communication that has occurred from the town of Leesburg and some of
the reasons that I have been given for the way I was treated and the way this occurred.
[inaudible]. I have been given excuses and reasons that just don't sum up. And I am not
okay. And your manager, Mr. Dentler, disrepects me by his refusal to acknowledge the
poor manner in which I was treated by Mr. Williams. Certain members of this council
have attempted to avoid discussion by citing personnel issues. I just really don't
understand that. Being treated with dignity, fairness, transparency, and respect are not
issues for the Council? I think they are. In which case, if bringing those before the
council, you know, I felt as though my issue was a little bit with management, but I will
say that I guess if the council doesn't feel it a council issue, then maybe my issue is with
certain members of this council that aren't going to stand up for this kind of thing. But, I
like Mr. Dentler and I understand why this council is loathe to either reprimand Mr.
Dentler or take action that would bring around that this kind of thing doesn't occur—
people aren't treated this way, but I just don't see that Mr. Dentler has shown leadership
or taken action when it was necessary. I feel if Mr. Dentler continues to refuses to act,
his contract should not be renewed. The town of Leesburg can do better. Residents of
Leesburg deserve better.
Michael Banzhaf, 122 Chesterfield Place, SW. Congratulations on your
election. As you may know, I do zoning work in the town and I also do it in the county
and I am familiar with the county zoning regulations as well as the town. There are two
text amendments that I thought were a good idea. Some of these are born from county
experience. In the county, you can have a by right basis in non-residential districts like
PD-IP, PD-OP, PD-RDP and retail— a commuter parking lot by right. In the town, you
can only have that in B-3. B-3 is a retail district which you have up and down Market
Street. The county would like to have a commuter lot over across from Wegmans.
Most of the parking is under the power lines —that is what is proposed. It doesn't take
office use or any warehouse use either, particularly. It would be a lot that would help
4 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
people get from the town over to the new Silver Line, is the idea. The county, I think, is
in contact with Kettler, the owner of Landbay B, and they would like to be able to
construct that lot. I am not sure who is building it. I think Kettler would build it on
behalf of the county. Both parties are interested in having this move forward. Another
way of doing it is to rezone it B-3, which you can do, but that's not really what's called
for in that district. I-1 is probably the right district for that area. A by right use makes
sense there. If you are concerned about proliferation of these lots, you could limit it and
say it is permitted by right if it is within so many feet distance, whatever, of a grade
separated interchange, which would be a logical nexus, if you will. That would work
over there. The only other place I know it would work would be Battlefield Parkway
and Market Street. If you wanted to have one there, it wouldn't be a bad use either,
frankly. Or out on Petersen's piece right there where Battlefield Parkway is and the
Greenway. That would be a logical place too on a by right basis—if you want to limit it
like that. Anything else would be a special exception. I've talked to staff—I wrote you a
letter just to identify what I had in mind. Happy to talk to whomever about it. This
seems to make sense to me. It is kind of a simple matter but I know text amendments
are always kind of dicey. There is no timeline to them. I've heard Mary Harper say
how much is on her plate. I get that and staff, too, has a lot going on. So, it is one of
many things to be considered, but this one has a timeliness element to it and if you think
it is a good idea, I wish you would initiate that and move forward. The other one has to
do with PRC mixed use centers. There are only three of those that I am aware of in the
town. The zoning regulations for mixed use center has a ratio in the 2.5 retail to 1
office. It has been that way for many, many years. When we took the Potomac Station
rezoning forward, that ratio came up and staff is saying we really can't modify that. We
don't necessarily agree that it has to be that way, but you may not modify that. So, my
thought was why not make it discretionary on the part of Council, if they want to
modify, they may. Which is the way your B-4 regulations work. B-4—Village at
Leesburg has some of that—that allows a mixture of uses on the north half of the retail
area. You could do the same kind of language in the PRC mixed use. The County just
did something similar to that with t heir MUB district—their mixed use business district
to allow greater flexibility for over/under uses and that was well received. The board of
supervisors adopted that in December. I just thought it makes sense to take what you
have in B-4 and put it in PRC/Mixed Use. That's the other letter I sent you. That also
requires a text amendment because according to staff that's one of those that while you
can modify district regulations in a planned district, you can't modify that ratio
according to staff. So, rather than meet that issue again, I thought it was better to
change the text. That's why I am here tonight. I'd be happy to answer questions or I'll
talk to staff about it later.
Bob Sevila: I, too, am here tonight seeking initiation of a text amendment to the
zoning ordinance. I represent a company called St. John's Properties and with me
tonight is Matt Holbrook of St. John's and Kevin Goeller who has been representing us
as a realtor from KLMB. We are here tonight because we have had several meeting
with staff regarding a 17 acre parcel of land that is located right across Sycolin from the
airport. It has been zoned now for 27 years and has never developed. The current
zoning is I-1. Mr. Holbrook and his company became interested in this parcel, we
approached the town. We were going to have a pre-application conference to discuss
5 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
the possibility of building a product that Mr. Holbrook and his company build and
operate successfully, not just in Virginia, DC and Maryland, but in eight states, up to 18
million square feet of property. And what it basically is, is a flex-industrial product.
When it came to Leesburg and we had our meeting with staff to discuss the possibility of
160,000 square feet on this parcel, it was determined that it would not be possible to put
all the various uses that he locates typically in his flex industrial sites throughout the area
and also here in Loudoun County as 600,000 square feet of such space here in the
county. It allows great flexibility in locating tenants. I wrote all of you a letter. I hope
you have had a chance to read it. I have cited numerous examples in that letter of why a
product like this might be useful here in the Town of Leesburg. The reason that Kevin is
here, is he is a realtor and he finds himself frequently trying to locate tenants in Leesburg
and in Loudoun County and it is difficult to do that because you discover, as we did,
many of the uses you want to locate in such a facility require a special exception at
considerable expense, some time delay and in many cases, tenants aren't willing to file
for special exception, locate for example in the Town of Leesburg, when they might just
go right across the town line into the county and locate there, which is enabled under the
very ordinance that Mike Banzhaf just mentioned to you a minute ago which is the
mixed us, I think it's MUB. But anyway, they actually allow flex industrial. They
redefined their ordinance. We are urging the town to do the same thing. After our
second meeting with the town, we got a very thorough report. I brought with me an
exhibit—I know you can't read it, but it is color coded and exhibits all the proposed uses
that Matt Holbrook told staff that he might want to locate. In the columns out here,
staff took the time to say which ones you could do by right, which ones require special
exception and we certainly began to see that a real problem was emerging and Brandon
White of Susan's staff, the planning staff, wrote up a nice memorandum in which he
said basically, if you want to do what you propose to do here, you've got three choices.
One is work with the ordinance that you've got right now and file as many as 9-10
special exceptions for the various uses that you'd like to have in there. Blanket special
exception, as of right now, doesn't exist or is not favored by staff, I'd say. The second
thing we could do is just file proffer amendments and special exceptions for those uses
under the existing regulations. Finally, we could come before the council and ask the
council to initiate a process by which a special exception for this mixed use business
could be engaged here in the town under our existing ordinances. I think staff concurs
that is probably the best preferable way to proceed. So, that's why we wrote a letter to
you and shared that with the staff. I think if Ms. Berry Hill was called on tonight, she
would let you know that we have thoroughly examined possibilities and come to a
mutual belief that a zoning ordinance amendment to allow that in the Town of Leesburg
zoning ordinance is a very appropriate thing to do and will provide the numerous
examples of benefit to the town. Until then, it is just lost opportunity, lost revenue, lost
possibilities for locating businesses in the town. So, hope you will consider seriously
that request and if possible, I can only tell you right now you have an applicant before
you here in the room tonight. He is not an applicant yet, but we have been to two pre-
apps to try to get into a position where he might file an application that is going to
provide some very valuable mixed use space here.
Kevin Goeller, 907 Rolling Holly Drive, Great Falls, VA. I have conducted
business in Leesburg for the past 45 years. I live in Fairfax County; however, I work in
6 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
Loudoun County and the Town of Leesburg. I am a broker with KLNB Commercial
Real Estate and for the past 30 years, I have made a living leasing space to tenants.
Today, my inventory is probably 3 million square feet of which 2.9 million is in the
county and 100,000 square feet is in the Town of Leesburg. I am here to verbalize my
support for both of the previous petitioners for some text amendments and I think as
Mike Banzhaf was talking, the I-1 district—that's a perfect example of not moving
forward with rezonings in the I-1 district. But more than that, a lot of these uses that are
allowed by right in the county—we need to go through the whole process of special
exceptions to get these uses in the Town. And we have got some under abundance of
that flex product that we need to really—if we are going to produce more economic
development and grab some of these tenants, we have to pay attention to that. I fully
support the text amendments. I am available for any questions.
The Petitioners section was closed at 8:04 p.m.
9. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Council Member Hammler, seconded by Council Member Dunn, the
following consent agenda was proposed:
a. Reduction of the Performance Guarantee for Public Improvements Installed at
Oaklawn at Stratford Landbay D(TLPF 2006-0018)
RESOLUTION2016-011
Making a Reduction of the Performance Guarantee for Public Improvements at
Oaklawn at Stratford Landbay D(TLPF 2006-0018)
b. Construction Contract for the Route 15(South King Street) Widening Phase II
Project
RESOLUTION2016-012
Awarding the Construction Contract for the Route 15(South King Street)
Widening Phase II Project to General Excavation, Inc. in the Amount of
$5,806,309.50.
c. Professional Airport Planning, Engineering and Architectural Continuing Services
Contract for the Leesburg Executive Airport
RESOLUTION 2016-013
Awarding a Professional Airport Planning, Engineering, and Architectural
Continuing Services Contract for the Leesburg Executive Airport to Talbert and
Bright, Inc.
d. Contract for Access Control Security on Entrance Gates and Buildings for the
Water Pollution Control Facility and the Utility Maintenance Building Project
RESOLUTION2016-014
7IPage
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
Awarding the Access Control Security Contract for the Water Pollution Control
Facility and Utility Maintenance Building Security Fences and Gates Project to
CTSI
e. Art Exhibit by Sharon Saknit
RESOLUTION2016-015
Approval of a Public Art Exhibit at Town Hall by Sharon Saknit
f. Town Council Consent to Declaration of Local Emergency
RESOLUTION 2016-016
Consent for the January 2016 'Declaration of Local Emergency"
The Consent Agenda was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Fox, Hammier, Martinez, and Vice Mayor Burk
Nay: None
Vote: 6-0
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. TLZM 2015-0009 Village at Leesburg Child Care Center
The public hearing was opened at 8:06 p.m.
Delane Parks gave a presentation on the application for a child care center
in Land Bay B of the Village at Leesburg.
Key Points:
• Request is to amend the Village at Leesburg Concept plan and proffers
which is in the PRC to allow a 4,480 square foot child care center use in
Building M for a maximum of 86 children and a supporting 3500 square
foot outside recreation area.
• This use would normally be allowed under the PRC zoning; however, it
was proffered out with the original land use map.
• All residents of the apartments overlooking the recreation yard were
notified as per the conditions set by the Planning Commission. No
complaints have been received.
Council Comments/Questions:
• Fox: Thank you for the report. I just have a couple of questions. The one
about the residential notification, that was just asked and answered or
answered just for me. Parking, you said that there is —you mentioned an
ADA accessibility pathway and you mentioned parking in conjunction
with that. Does that, I believe I attended the Commission meeting where
they were discussing the parking. Is there parking that is going to be right
adjacent for ADA folks who might need it?
8 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
Staff answer: Yes, in this particular diagram, the area in the orange—
there is five regular parking places there and two handicapped parking
spaces.
• Fox: So, this is not in the garage, correct?
Staff answer: No, this is not in the garage. The idea was that if you were
dropping off your child, you could pull into one of those spaces and drop
them off immediately adjacent to the day care. Now, what potentially
could happen was something that Planning Commission wanted to
address—what happens if everybody is coming at the same time and there
is simply not enough parking spaces? So, the applicant has agreed to
provide a parking plan. In essence what would be done is persons would
be directed through either the pamphlet or information that each person
who has a child in day care would get. They would have information
knowing where to drive to. So, if there is not an available space here, they
would drive down the street and actually I think I have a diagram over
here. They would actually continue to drive down the street. You see
where 1609 is? Instead of turning in there into one of those parking
spaces, they would continue down Russell Branch Parkway, turn right
onto Balch Drive and then turn right again on Red Hawk Lane and into
the Parking Garage. And then you see the dashed line. That would be the
direction that they could walk down into the building. Now, that's only if
there is not parking spaces available for drop off, but as the case is
sometimes with schools and so on, you pull in, drop off and leave. So,
there are usually spaces that do become available so if they do want to
stop and stay longer, that is the option in the garage. This is an urban
environment, so you don't always get afforded the sort of suburban lay
out.
• Fox: Just one more quick question. You mentioned open space—the
green space below the apartments is going to be used for the recreation
area of this day care. Is there any issue with using open space for business
use?
Staff answer: No. As long as they met the overall open space
requirement, which they do. They have provided it on the overall Village
at Leesburg.
• Hammier: Thank you for the report. Could I just clarify— did you say
that the notification was sent out January 28?
Staff answer: Actually they sent out a notification in January in
preparation for the previous meeting public hearing that was snowed out
and then they readvertised because the meeting date changed. So, they
did send two mailings out—certified mailings that included not only the
adjoining property owners, but also as a result of the conditions —the plan
conditions, all the renters in the apartments above the recreation area.
• Hammier: And certified means someone signs for the residents. Just for
the record. I certainly would be interested to know if we have anyone
coming to public hearing to speak on this because at least when I was
looking at the calendar, it struck me if the letters went out on the 28th, that
is not very much time for people to reflect on— a letter just came in—and
9 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
actually think about the possible impact if their decks are literally above
where the children would be playing. In terms of the fence, I mean,just as
a parent, I would certainly get concerned that a pool is so close to where
children are playing. Are there other locked, like opening gates between
either of these fences that...
Staff answer: Yes, the recreation area has to be completely enclosed. The
fencing completely encloses the recreation area.
• Hammier: And what safety review from a regulatory perspective— does
the town conduct any of that relative to— say in this case it's that a child
care center literally in front of a really busy intersection for instance or
anything that sort of—kind of the letter of the law and I guess we have to
sort of look at common sense.
Staff answer: As far as day care uses, they have to be completely enclosed
and they have provided a fence that would meet our requirements. There
is security in terms that they have to meet the day care requirements from
the state as far as having adults out there at all times with the children.
They have also provided—one of the additional things they have provided
as part of the process was the access door to and from the recreation area
was a completely solid door before. Now it is a door that you can see
through and see out into the recreation area. They have provided a
number of additional things that we have requested—the town has
requested and it is also required by the state.
• Hammier: Okay, and my final question—that are the actual hours that
the children can be dropped. Could you say it quickly—well we can go
over it during that then. Of course, I am absolutely looking forward to
hearing from the public.
• Burk: The proffers —with this amendment, how do they change?
Staff answer: The two parts about the proffers that I brought up—one just
changing dates and references to the revised concept plan. Probably the
most significant one had to do with the language where they agreed to
provide an arrival and departure plan. So, prior to the issuance of the
occupancy permit for a child care use, the applicant will submit to the
Zoning Administrator an arrival and departure procedure that will be
given to parents of the children attending the facility and they will identify
the areas and process of loading and unloading. The is probably the most
significant change to the proffers.
• Burk: And that is in addition to the old proffers?
Staff answer: Yes, oh yes. No proffers were removed.
• Burk: Okay and then the drop offs. Are they going to be marked as drop
offs, or are they going to be public parking?
Staff answer: Well, they will be in the plan so people will have that
information. I would suspect and the handicapped spaces have to be
marked as handicapped spaces. I am not sure if they will be marked as
such—the regular spaces.
Applicant answer: The five spaces outside of the handicapped spaces are
designated for the Montessori school use and are just that. They are just
10 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
additional spaces that we are adding to the center. We aren't removing
any.
• Dunn: Just wanted to first check on my scout endurance time. Are you
all doing okay? Only three more hours, guys, then you get that merit
badge. A couple things. I know, Mike, you talked to me about this earlier
today. I don't think there is going to be a problem with going forward
with a child care because it is definitely needed. I did have a couple of
questions, though. I felt that the playground area was a little on the
narrow side. Do you have any numbers as far as the maximum children
allowed at any one time in that area? What is that?
Staff answer: Yes, actually I think in the original portion, I mentioned
they could have a maximum of 86 children, but they could only have I
think about half that at any one time in the playground. I think they were
going to be doing it in two stages so at any one time they could have 44.
Applicant answer: The maximum we could have out there at any given
time is 75 square feet per child. That's about 3800 square feet, so roughly
the maximum we could have is 50 at one time, all supervised obviously.
Depending on the classes that we have enrolled on any given day or hour
or time, we will bring them out by classes though, so it will be anywhere
between a handful and 50 at the max.
• Dunn: Then the other question I had is—I imagine that the village
needed a certain amount of green space with their project. Does this still
fall even though the nature of the green space is now changing to
designated just for the child care. Does that still fall within what was the
original requirements for green space for the Villages?
Boucher: There is a trade off here. If you went down this little access
road today to get back to the garage, there is actually parking on the
opposite side of the road from where the daycare is proposed. They are
taking that out and putting it on this side, so they are restoring green space
on the side nearest the pool, so they keep the balance throughout the
community because yeah, it's pretty tight, needless to say, on greenspace,
but they are making up for it on the other side of the road. Kind of a quid
pro quo.
• Dunn: And it's equal?
Boucher: Yeah,just about.
• Dunn: The only other real issue I had, especially when dealing with kids
and day cares and drop offs is this is getting ready to be a major east west
road when completed. There is no stop light here and my concern is that
there are only so many parking spaces and as much as it is nice to say we
would like you to take the long way around and go into the parking
garage, I am not going to do it. I am going to wait and I am probably like
most folks as scary as that might sound. I am concerned that might be
something you might end up finding you have to work on a little bit as
•
time progresses and that road becomes busier. That the drop off times
might have to be staggered in order to meet your customer's needs. That's
all I have. I am interested in hearing if there is anyone from the public to
come out and the applicant's presentation.
11lPage
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
• Butler: I just had one question. You said the planning commission vote
was 5-1-1, so one opposed. Can you tell us about what the primary reason
was that one commissioner opposed?
Staff answer: I can say that she didn't specifically mention the reason.
But she did—at the meeting—but I do believe there was some reference to
at the time the ADA accessibility, but again in an urban setting you don't
always have the opportunity to have all the parking spaces immediately
adjacent to those entrances. She acknowledged that.
Mike Banzhaf and Rob Lucas presented the application for the child care
center at the Village at Leesburg.
Key points:
• Corner is next to Eggspectation and was always meant to be a retail
corner. This will allow this use instead.
• Same amount of FAR and fewer trips with this use.
• Rental units have 2 bedroom apartments and there are families with
children who live there—it is convenient for them to take their children
there.
• Also will provide day care for the office uses and soon to be developed
townhomes.
• Garages were designed for the retail use, which produces more vehicles.
• Traffic lane adjacent to the use is a turn lane—westbound movement
should not be hampered by the turn in/turn out movement.
Council Comments/Questions:
• Fox: Just one quick question about the neighbors, not residents, but
residents and businesses. Have you had any feedback, positive or negative
about it?
Banzhaf: I haven't heard anything from anybody. We gave them certified
mail letter, by your zoning ordinance and state standards too. We did all
of that and we didn't receive any comments back. I haven't anyways.
• Fox: Nothing at all?
Banzhaf: No.
• Hammier: I was listening for this and maybe I just missed it, but what are
the hours of the daycare center?
Banzhaf: I'd have to ask the operator.
• Hammier: Okay, as part of the operation did you, for the new use submit
comparisons between an economic impact perspective for the town for
extending retail versus an alternate use?
Banzhaf: They are both fiscally positive.
• Hammier: Just the net difference between one versus the other.
Banzhaf: I couldn't tell you that off the top of my head. They both add
taxes to the town. They are both fiscally positive.
• Hammier: Okay, I'll have to figure out if there is a way that we can get
that net difference, because I would appreciate that.
12 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
Operator: The hours are Monday through Friday. Drop off begins at 7
a.m. and would go from 7 to 8:30 a.m. to help with the drop off time.
Pick ups would go from approximately 2 to 6:30 at night.
There were no members of the public wishing to address this public
hearing.
The public hearing was closed at 8:31 p.m.
On a motion by Council Member Dunn, seconded by Council Member Fox, the
following was proposed:
ORDINANCE 2016-0-002
Approving Concept Plan and Proffer Amendment TLZM2015-0009 Village at
Leesburg Child Care Center, Amending TLZM2014-0006 to Allow a 4,480
Square Foot Child Care Center in a Portion of Building M in Land Bay B
Council Comments:
• Hammier: Just a couple of comments. From a personal perspective it
strikes me as much as I appreciate the comments about, you know,
obviously people living and working right there where you sort of look at
cars whizzing by at a high rate of speed. It certainly from a common
sense perspective it would be raising a red flag. From a safety perspective
and from a business perspective, one would think it would make more
sense just like for us representing downtown retail that we try to extend
first floor retail versus other types of uses that don't allow pedestrian
access and kind of mitigating factors to keep pedestrians from moving
down from a retail perspective. My general concern, although somewhat
alleviated by the fact that we had to reschedule the meeting, is that at least
there were two mailing sent out. Otherwise I would have requested that
we postpone this vote because I officially would want to make proactive
phone calls to make sure that the neighbors were aware of what is
happening but given that there were two letters. So, bottom line as far as I
can tell, you know, this ultimately is a family and a business decision for
Villages at Leesburg, so I'll be supporting it. A family decision relative to
families choosing to send their kids to this day care.
• Dunn: I think this is a good use here. I think that while there could have
been other business uses that may have generated possibly more taxes to
the town such as a restaurant going in or if there were a retail
establishment that was generating sales tax, I don't want to be in a
position of dictating who a landowner can rent to in order to advance their
business efforts. So, I think this is a good use and it sounds like a need is
going to be served. Happy to support this.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Dunn, Fox, Hammier, Martinez, and Mayor Butler
Nay: None.
13 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
Vote: 6--0
b. Loudoun County Courthouse Expansion
i. TLZM 2015-0002 Loudoun County Courthouse Expansion
ii. Town Plan Amendment Application TLTA 2015-0001 Pennington
Lot Land Use
iii. TLZM 2015-0003 Pennington Lot Parking Garage
The three public hearings were opened simultaneously at 8:34 p.m.
Irish Grandfield gave a presentation on the three applications.
Key Points:
• All three pieces of legislation are necessary for the courthouse expansion
project to move forward.
• Expansion site is 2 North Church Street, which is the former site of the jail.
• Semones lot is on Slack Lane at Cornwall Street and is currently used for
parking and will continue to be used for parking.
• Pennington Lot is a 9.9 acre lot located on North Street.
• A 92,000 square foot courts building is proposed at 2 North Church Street
(corner of Edwards Ferry and Church Street, N.E.)
• Four-story parking garage is proposed for the Pennington Lot.
• Reconfiguration of the Semones lot for accessible parking causing a decrease
in the total number of spaces.
• Improved sidewalk between the Pennington Lot and the Semones Lot.
• Extension of Church Street from North Street to the Pennington Lot.
• TLZM 2015-0002 rezoning amends TLZM 1998-155, which approved a
60,000 square foot courthouse at 2 North Church Street.
• TLTA 2015-0001 amends the Town Plan Policy Map from low density
residential to Downtown.
• TLZM 2015-0003 rezones the Pennington Lot from R-6 (existing) to GC
(government center) to allow the four story parking garage.
• Pennington Lot rezoning provides the required parking for the 92,000 square
foot courts expansion as well as some additional parking—Courthouse
expansion rezoning cannot be approved without meeting the parking
requirement.
• Pennington Lot rezoning can only be accomplished if it is in concurrence
with the policies and objectives of the Town Plan, requiring the town plan
amendment.
• Applicant is requesting 10 site specific design criteria:
o Proximity of required parking more than 500 feet from the building—
Pennington Lot is 900 feet from the building.
o Less than four loading spaces for this office use.
o Modification of building height from 45 to 55 feet.
o Modification of the lighting level at property boundary—more than 0.5
foot candles (along Church Street—across from the existing courthouse).
14 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
o Lighting fixtures may need to be closer than 10 feet from the property
boundary along Church Street for security purposes.
o Elimination of required yards and setbacks to accommodate the facility on
a one acre lot.
o Proposing no 20 year tree canopy requirement—typically a 10 percent
requirement; however, the ordinance does recognize that law enforcement
use is an acceptable reason not to meet the tree canopy requirement.
o Buffer modifications.
o Street trees typically required by the zoning ordinance as one per every 40
feet—proposing street trees on Edwards Ferry at one per 100 feet, and
none along Church Street.
• Site specific design criteria are approved by Council as part of the rezoning.
• Required parking is 707 spaces — applicant is proposing 938 spaces— 727 at
Pennington Lot garage, 147 Pennington surface lot, 6 spaces currently below
the courthouse, 9 additional below grade, 36 accessible spaces in the Semones
lot.
• Development will be accomplished in stages to ensure adequate parking
during construction.
• Traffic studies meet the town's requirement for level of service "C" or better,
except the east bound approach of North at North King Street, which
currently is level of service "D".
• Offsite transportation contribution proffers include off site improvements and
on-site improvements including signals at North and King and Edwards Ferry
and Catoctin Circle.
• Pedestrian improvements in response to public comment made at the
Planning Commission public hearing including driver feedback signage
specifically for North Street and Harrison Street.
• Proffering to provide information to visitors on available parking.
• Utilities will be undergrounded.
• Construction will not begin until 8 a.m. on weekdays in response to Planning
Commission request.
• Outstanding issue: North and King Street signal—staff recommends
construction rather than an insufficient contribution.
• Outstanding issue: Contribution to Catoctin and Edwards Ferry
improvement is insufficient.
• Staff supports approval pending resolution of the two outstanding issues.
• Issues raised by speakers at the Planning Commission public hearing included
issues related to the Pennington Lot parking garage.
Council Comments/Questions:
• Burk: So, are you saying if we have an issue with the size of the garage, this
is not the time to talk about it?
Staff answer: I am not saying that and I will get into a little more detail on
that. I am not saying that because they are proposing well in excess of what is
required for parking. So, you could talk about the size of the garage and
15IPage
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
reducing parking spaces and they could still meet their zoning ordinance
requirement for the number of spaces that is needed for the courthouse.
• Butler: What is the current building height?
Staff answer: 55 feet in height is what they are proposing. The existing
courthouse—I don't know the height of the existing courthouse. The limit
would be 45 feet, otherwise for the GC zoning district.
Rich Brittingham of Dewberry represented the County's application. He
noted that this has been a collaborative effort between staff, stakeholders,judges, the
public and the Planning Commission.
Key Points:
• 92,000 square foot proposed.
• Common green will mirror existing green.
• Pedestrian access to the facility is on Church Street.
• Secure tunnel beneath Church Street to move employees and prisoners
between the two buildings.
• Requesting a new modification for building height as a result of discussions
with the Board of Architectural Review.
• Tree canopy requirements may be able to be met; however, they would like to
keep the modification request in the event that security reviews require a
slightly lower level of tree canopy.
• Street tree modification request was made because of input received by the
Board of Architectural Review. Will add three additional street trees on the
west side of Church Street.
• Buffer modification between the project and residential properties meet all
tree canopy requirements for canopy and evergreen trees. Reduced width
would be supplemented by an 8' wall which would provide screening and
additional security.
• Utilities will be undergrounded along property frontages.
• Semones lot currently is 69 spaces and 4 accessible spaces—application
reduces the total number of spaces to 36 and provides 16 accessible spaces.
• Four reserved spaces long the west side of the lot are reserved for the residents
of the two homes without private driveways.
• Cornwall Street sidewalk will be improved to a 4 foot brick sidewalk that
meets ADA requirements.
• Pennington lot egress onto North Street has been eliminated and is only for
emergency access and maintenance for the stormwater filter.
• Construction of Church Street extended which includes bringing everything
up to town standards and construction of a half cul-de-sac and sidewalk
improvements.
• All required buffers around the perimeter of the property will be provided.
• Re-routing of storm sewer down to North Street allowed removal of storm
pipe along the interior of the site, which allowed for additional landscaping.
• Will be supplementing the four acre tree save area with additional evergreens.
• Height is comparable to what could be built as a residential structure.
16 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
• Light has to meet lighting standards for safety and security.
• Top parking deck will be for county vehicles only—lights will only be on until
7 o'clock in the winter, 5 o'clock in the summer and operated by motion
detectors after that point.
• If motion sensor lights are triggered after closing hours, security will be
notified.
• Worked closely with the Board of Architectural Review on Certificates of
Appropriateness for the courts building and the garage.
Council Comments/Questions:
• Dunn: In looking at the parking needs, was there any review or study of the
existing on street parking in Leesburg that might be available for courthouse
use?
Staff answer: There is on street parking that is not dedicated to the court use
so it could not be counted towards meeting the zoning ordinance
requirement.
• Dunn: Okay, but we have done that for other applicants in the past. I guess
you are saying that we did not give any consideration for that.
Staff answer: We did not in this situation.
• Dunn: I haven't heard from the public yet, their concerns. It sounds like
most of it is around the parking garage. But, I guess looking at the numbers,
and I don't know if you have a slide that you can bring up that shows that,
but deals with the 938 parking spaces that is being proposed for a need of 717,
correct? So, we are over parking by 120 spaces. We have a four level garage
with 180 spaces per level. To my math—please be patient, I am from
Arkansas, but to my math, there is a different of only 60 spaces, then why
could we not consider reducing on of the levels of the parking garage.
Staff answer: I think that is a question for the applicant.
• Dunn: Bring it on.
Applicant answer: My name is Peter [inaudible]. I am a design manager
working on this project. Irish did a really good job of going through the
parking numbers for the garage. The additional level really is a product—it
really is for both the courthouse use as well as a government use. Back in, I
think it was late 2014, we lost 43 spots on the property just adjacent to the
government center. That parking garage being pretty much at capacity all day
long, we were able to find parking for those lost 43 stalls as well as to help
relieve the current government parking garage. So, that number is defined as
being 100 stalls, plus or minus. The other factor that hasn't been included is
the growth factor. There have been a number of studies that have been done
from 1997 to 2011 that have gone through and looked at the courthouse in
terms of its growth and that growth has moved anywhere from 120,000
square feet to 230,000 square feet. So, that has moved all over the place.
That equates to anywhere from 100 additional stalls to in excess of 325
additional stalls. We don't deny that it is going to grow. We are just trying to
anticipate to the best of our ability how much it is going to grow so accounts—
we have identified that 100 stall need, it was easier to not just build 100 stalls,
17 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
but build 180, which is essentially one level. So, that is why we added to the
parking count.
• Dunn: I know that the town, over the years has worked with the county as
far as parking lots for the county and very often in our discussions about
parking in downtown Leesburg, while we feel that we have maxed it out, we
have often looked at those county lots and wondered why they are so often
empty or very lightly used. My concern here is in our anticipation of future
growth, we will have the same results at a great inconvenience to the citizens
of the area. Do we have 20 foot light poles on our garage?
Staff answer: Not on our garage, but our garage also doesn't meet the lighting
standards that they are trying to meet.
• Dunn: Set by who?
Applicant answer; It is the international engineering society— or illumination
engineering society of North America.
• Dunn: Well, we wouldn't want to inconvenience them would we? Okay, so
say we inconvenience them? Can we do that?
Applicant answer: it is a liability issue.
• Dunn: Who cares?
Applicant answer: It is a safety situation. It is required by code. It is also
required by the security—the officers of the Sheriff's department who are
going to be watching this facility. One of their requirements is it needs to be
lit. If you have people accessing that deck, first of all they need to see where
they are going, but secondly, if they are in trouble, they need to get out and
the county needs to be able to see them.
• Dunn: Okay. What's the height of each deck level?
Applicant answer: About 12 foot.
• Dunn: So, if we only went with three levels instead of four, so we've got our
55 foot deck— our garage and 25 foot poles. Is that correct?
Applicant answer: It is 36 feet on the west side of the garage, 24 feet on the
east side of the garage because of the slope of the land.
• Dunn: Right, but on the highest level?
Applicant answer: On the highest level is it 36 feet to the [inaudible].
• Dunn: And the poles are 25 foot poles?
Applicant answer: yes.
• Dunn: So, if we took one level off then that would reduce the maximum
height of those lights by 15 feet.
Applicant answer: 12 feet.
• Dunn: Was there any discussion or desire by the two property owners and
they might be here—I am not sure—who are losing their parking on Church
Street. Was there any desire or discussion about them actually giving them
access to the back of their property to allow them to park on their property
versus having those reserved spaces in the parking lot.
Applicant answer: We have discussed that with them. One of them would
not want anything, but they prefer the spot we have given them.
• Dunn: The other one?
18 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
Applicant answer: Neutral. Again, we have three information meetings. The
most recent being back in July of 2015. They were in attendance.
[inaudible].
• Dunn: The only reason I ask is like most parking spaces, even if they say
reserved, somebody could decide to park there. They may get ticketed, but
that doesn't help the person—it doesn't help you if somebody is in those spots
and they can't park at their house. But if they don't want anything more than
what is being offered, then I guess it is okay. I am willing to consider other
things, or request other things, if they so desire. How many housing units,
just out of curiosity, could go here in the R-6 on the total acreage?
Staff answer: Probably 55 —between 50 and 60 housing units could go there.
It depends on how you laid out the public road access and those types of
things.
• Dunn: Just looking at my notes—during our discussions when we first had
the county come to us proposing this, it was brought up that the government
center over a period of time would be moving out of Leesburg. When was
that date proposed?
Staff answer: For the government center to move out of Leesburg?
• Dunn: That was one of the threats. So, graciously sent to us by the Board of
Supervisors. It was actually—the anticipation was that the county would
outgrow that building and then have to move elsewhere. When is that date.
Applicant answer: I am unaware of that date. I don't recall hearing that date.
• Dunn: Well, I know that [inaudible] is here. I think you were involved in
that discussion. I am sorry. [inaudible] that mistake. Do you know what
that date was?
Applicant answer: In 2030, there is going to be expansion of the government
center in 2030.
• Dunn: Of this center or expanding elsewhere?
Applicant answer: [inaudible] in that location and then expand elsewhere.
• Dunn: Let's see. I think that's all the questions I have right now. I am very
interested in hearing from the public.
• Burk: I am interested in hearing from the public also, but I have a couple of
things I want to just clarify. Was there ever an economic development study
done on this project?
Applicant answer: We did not do a fiscal impact analysis.
• Burk: The top deck is not part of the courthouse need. The top deck—what
you are telling me, what I am hearing you say, is the top deck is going to be
county cars that will be parked there—county vehicles, so it not part of the
courthouse project. It is a nice little addition for the county to be able to have
those spaces up there to store the vehicles.
Applicant answer: For all intents and purposes, correct.
• Burk: But this is in the historic—right border, right on the historic district and
so, I think as I spoke to you before, the four levels—the one of which is not
part of this whole development. It's not part of this expansion. It's not part
of it. It is just a nice addition. That's not the town's responsibility to have
that. Our only responsibility is to look at what is going to be impacted—what
19 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
the courthouse needs are. So, that fourth floor, to me, is an addition that you
would like, but I don't see as being part of the whole courthouse expansion
process. Then, you had a number of pictures like the one you had up there
that have lovely trees on them, but I don't think those trees are there now.
Am I incorrect about that? Are they there now?
Applicant answer: A lot of those trees are there now. I can pull up a plan
view that does show the existing trees. There is a significant tree stand just to
the north of sort of the eastern three homes. The renderings that are shown
also incorporate our proposed buffer plantings and...
• Burk: You are going to plant trees that size?
Applicant answer: This simulation shows a ten year growth and the existing
trees, there are some images I think I do have in there. They are significant.
They are 40 feet tall.
• Burk: So, these are illustrative for 10 years from now?
Applicant answer: They accurately represent a ten year growth for our
proposed plantings. Yes.
• Burk: Okay. Thank you. I will have more comments and questions after the
public speakers.
• Hammler: A couple —two things that I was going to ask—was that was the
first thing that popped in my head as I saw the picture is how long will it take
until we see that growth. So, thank you for asking that and both Council
Member Dunn and Burk have raised the same issue that I was going to ask
relative to the top level of the garage. Certainly the suggestion would be
because we have so often actively tried to partner with the county on creative
ways we could park things together—there is so much surface parking that
could be within an easy shuttle ride and you have done such a creative job
when you have needed parking and I work with Telos—full disclosure—but
you have an agreement with Telos to borrow parking and pay and lease
parking in other places even from private sector entities, so I would certainly
encourage that could be an option for your government vehicles that you are
currently planning for that level of the garage. I do know that there was
certain discussions that happened early on relative to how could we take
literally two levels of that garage and actually negotiate a win/win with the
county and locate it in the part of the town where we desperately need the
parking based on our parking study which was around Market Station, or in
that general area. I don't know if tonight someone could very briefly or at an
appropriate time give us an update on that, but that is what I would be
seeking, how can we get creative to create a win/win. Certainly what I am
anticipating—you know, neighbors relative to that fourth floor. I will say that
as much as, in a related note, you know we have struggled with the fact that
Kristen left as our mayor. We have had a really hard time dealing with that
transition, but from your perspective, when I think of that height, you are
probably pretty happy she is not on the dais because she would probably go
apoplectic talking about building heights because she typically has always
done that, but we will do our best to work through that. I appreciated the fact
that you mentioned how the sloping and grading changes—a couple of just
basic questions. I will try to be relatively quick because I definitely want to
20IPage
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
hear from our citizens. What has happened with relocating the historic
houses?
Applicant answer: Right now, it is pretty much on hold. We haven't done
anything with it at this point.
• Hammler: So, it is still open for relocating them—
Applicant answer: It is still open. If someone would want to come and take
any one of those houses, they are able to do that.
• Hammler: Excellent. So,just glad to get that update. In terms of facts, what
is the anticipated number of daily visitors that are projected to the courthouse
complex. We didn't get the economic impact but just any sort of reference
metrics.
Applicant answer: I can pull up from the traffic study. I am not sure if that is
the same number.
• Hammler: We can come back to that just so that we keep things moving
along.
Applicant answer: Yeah, I'm not sure that we have that. We might have to
get that to you—I don't want to give you a false number.
• Hammier: In terms of the trees—the 40 foot versus the spacing of 100 feet.
Certainly respect possibly where the BAR is coming—my common sense is
telling me that it would not be preferable to reduce the number of street trees,
so I don't know if we'd want to get a second opinion or at least take a harder
look at that, but I raised that as a red flag. You have addressed the
construction hours. I appreciate that you increased the blasting notification,
but what is the anticipated start like date and end date because being able to
hopefully proffer trying to, you know, consolidate the time versus I know we
are saving—I appreciate the fact that during weekends and daily hours, we
don't want to start too early, but are you going to be sensitive to ultimately
trying to be on time—what is that duration?
Applicant answer: Well, we would like to start construction of the parking
structure sometime in the mid-summer. We will allow anywhere from 12 -15
months for the construction of the parking structure. When that is complete,
we would like to begin the construction on the courthouse.
• Hammier: Which will take about how long?
Applicant answer: Probably three years and then after that, we would then
get into the renovation of the existing courthouse.
• Hammier: Got it. Just so you know, I do have some questions on—you
mentioned your analysis about specifically not agreeing with the design/build
and it sort of seemed ironic that it is such a massive project—getting down to
$10,000-20,000 here or there, but when you mentioned that it seemed too
high to you, did it not take into account that it is in an H-1 district, that
estimate may have required that—I'm just curious. Because, at some point I
certainly would support staff on a design build and just basically given to the
extra $70k on the Edwards Ferry/Catoctin and I just had some basic
questions while we are sort of nit picking on those issues at the end of this
kind of massive project. So, I'll stop there and give Suzanne a chance. I'll
look forward to hearing from the public.
211 Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
• Fox: I echo Katie's sentiment about the design/build proffer there -$400
versus the $470k. I wondered that as well and I would support staff s
recommendation as well. It is actually the Planning Commission's
recommendation and staff's recommendation; however, most questions have
been asked and answered. That's the beauty of going last. But, I wanted to
ask real quick. You mentioned you did a traffic analysis and the need for a
signal at King and North is there. I was wondering if you did any kind of
traffic study for the impact—an impact study—because it seems to me if we
put a signal there, it would really impact traffic on North King Street. Has
anything been done about that?
Applicant answer: Our traffic consultant isn't here today, but when they
studied those intersections, it really just talked about that level of service being
used at that intersection—the back up north, I am assuming you are talking
about north up King Street.
• Fox: Yes, coming up toward Ida Lee.
Applicant answer: Sure, the impacts of a signal there do not seem to —in my
understanding, do not seem to impact anything further north—from Ida Lee
and further north. I don't believe that there would be a back up. Again, I am
not the traffic consultant, but I believe that all levels of service there are still
maintained with the addition of a signal.
• Fox: And has your traffic consultant said anything to you as the impact. I
mean, I know what you believe. I want to know what he believes.
Applicant answer: We'd have to get back to you on what his thoughts are in
more detail about impacts further north.
• Fox: Okay and the other question I had was about the buffering. Everybody
has had comments about buffering. But I noticed you put the bulk of the
coniferous trees to the north side and to the west—I'm sorry, the east side of
the building where the majority of houses are not. The more deciduous trees
where we would need more evergreens. So, I was just wondering why you
made that decision.
Applicant answer: wondering why we put more evergreens here?
• Fox: Yeah, you have a tree area save and then you have a line of evergreens
kind of where the tree area save is. But up in this other buffering you had
three evergreens right by the garage, but everything else from what your
renderings look like was deciduous.
Applicant answer: This graph doesn't get into detail, but we did the required
buffer along the entire perimeter, specifically along the southern property line.
There is evergreens within that buffer. There is a requirement for [inaudible]
into the mix of the trees. So, there are evergreens within that required buffer
along the south. The evergreens that I highlighted specifically are
supplemental plantings —they are not required by the zoning ordinance. So,
they are above and beyond. We have strategically located them along the
perimeter of the tree save area to sort of firm up that edge with any resident
concern that they are just a hardwood tree stand so in the winter time without
leaves—now we are able to show that on top of that width of dense, mature
trees, we now have an evergreen line at the edge. The same thing along the
east side. Then we additionally added those evergreen trees along the
22 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
west/south side of the garage façade up close to supplement the perimeter
landscaping so now we have a depth of field of landscaping trying to create
that whole comprehensive buffer. So, if you are asking me why aren't there
any evergreen trees along the south—there actually are. There are per the
ordinance within that buffer.
• Fox: Okay and when you presented to the Planning Commission and you
had public comment with the planning commission, what were the concerns
of the citizens at that point?
Applicant answer: Their concerns, and Irish can chime in with anything I
miss. Most of their concerns really at the first public hearing were about the
access that was provided on North Street. We had an exit only out of the
garage on North Street. They expressed a lot of concern about safety for their
children and you know, their neighborhood of cars pulling out and going
down Harrison and that volume of traffic coming out of that exit. It wasn't
necessarily the site distance reasons. The location—the design of that
entrance would have to be to VDOT and county standards—precluded a lot
of the landscaping that we needed. We weren't able to provide required
landscaping to the west on the Moxie property. We weren't able to save
many trees to the east of that entrance. Their concerns all really centered
around that. There was also some discussion about garage architecture and
we have now made [inaudible] to that. We worked through at work session
and you have seen the latest iteration today. During public speech, they can
address anything I have forgotten, but that was the prime comments that we
[inaudible].
• Fox: Not so much height of the garage and lighting?
Staff applicant: Those were issues identified by the public during the planning
commission public hearing.
• Butler: I'd like to clarify what I heard about the lights. The infamous 25 foot
light poles. At what point are those lights on?
Applicant answer: They are on at—well, they can go on at 5 in the morning,
but I think that would be predicated at least on time of day. But they would
be on at 5 in the morning and then go off at 7 o'clock in the winter and 9
o'clock in the summer. They would go off and switch to operational controls
where they would be motion activated.
• Butler: Why are the lights needed to be on during the day?
Applicant answer: I believe they wouldn't be on during the day light. I am
not exactly sure of the...
• Butler: Well, you said they came on at 5 o'clock and they went off at 7 —
that's during the day.
Applicant answer: They can be on during those hours. 5 in the morning may
be needed for, you know, people that are accessing the garage early in the
morning—whether those county government vehicles or what not.
Sometimes in the winter time it is dark at 5 in the morning. But during the
day, I believe they would go off.
Other speaker: They would have lights sensors to them, much like you have
in street lights when the ambient light from the sun is sufficient, then they cut
off. Then they would come on again as the sun starts to go down, much like
23 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
a street light works, but then at 7 o'clock at night in the winter time, they
would cut off completely. 9 o'clock in the summer time they cut off
completely.
• Butler: So, they would be off from 7 p.m. until 5 a.m. regardless of whether
there was traffic or not up there?
Applicant answer: Right—if something is moving on the deck, they would
come on.
• Butler: Okay, so in general, let's say it is a cloudy day. Then the lights would
be on during the day and then they would be off at night unless there is
motion?
Applicant answer: It would have to be a very cloudy day for it to be dark
enough for those lights to turn on.
• Butler: Okay, so then in general the lights are off during the day.
Applicant answer: Correct.
• Butler: Okay, so from 5 a.m. to 7 p.m., generally the lights are off. From 7
p.m. to 5 a.m., I'm talking winter hours here, from 7 p.m. to 5 a.m., the lights
only come on when there is motion.
Applicant answer: Correct.
• Butler: Okay, the time is 9 p.m. during the summer. During the summer
from 5 a.m. to 9 p.m., the lights are off— and from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m., the lights
are off unless there is motion.
Applicant answer: Correct.
• Butler: Okay, what vehicles are being parked—would be parked on the top
level?
Applicant answer: There could be county vehicles parked on the top level.
• Butler: County vehicles?
Charles Yudd: I just want to clarify, the parking on the top deck would be for
the employees. That message may be getting confused by our proffered
accommodation. We have control over the employee access. That is why
there would be a key card and security access. But the bottom line is we need
that parking because we are short. Not only do we have to provide the
judicial needs for the community, but we have to provide the parking that
comes with it. Our existing garage right by our government center, we have a
deficit right now. If you go back over time, there was to be a possible
utilization of the parking lot down on Harrison Street. That property has
been developed, so there are times when our employees arrive in the morning
and there are no parking spaces in the government center garage. So, we have
an existing deficit right now and we are trying to accommodate that in the
Pennington lot. The accommodation that we have made allows for employee
parking on that top level.
• Butler: Okay, at what times during the day do you generally have a deficit
where people would be parking in the Pennington Lot?
Yudd: We have situations where any time after 9 o'clock— 9:30 in the
morning we have employees coming in looking for spaces in our garage. It is
—when court is in session, a lot of folks that use our garage for court purposes
24 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
currently and our employees, including me, might come a little bit late, have
to drive over to the Pennington Lot and park there.
• Butler: Okay and this deficit would go from about 9 a.m. to approximately
when?
Yudd: Later on in the day. I would say until [inaudible].
• Butler: Okay, so what I am hearing—between 7 pm in the winter and 9 pm in
the summer to 5 in the morning. How often would there be a deficit in this
current county parking garage?
Yudd: If you are talking 7 a.m.?
• Butler: PM to 5 a.m.
Yudd: 7 p.m. The overflow is a sheer number of parking spaces that we
need. If we don't allow it on the top deck, which we have offered as an
accommodation, then it has to be parked somewhere else in that Pennington
Garage. If you look at that graph right there, we are providing a number of
spaces—maybe the overage is about 140. If you take that away, that garage—
that top level away, that garage would have to get bigger.
• Butler: Understand. I think maybe I misstated my question. Here is the
bottom line. How many county cars are going to be parking there generally
or county vehicles are going to be parking there?
Yudd: They would be county employees. It would be employee parking.
• Butler: How many vehicles will be parked on that deck of that garage
between 7 or 9 p.m. and 5 a.m., generally?
Yudd: Well, I don't think we have the exact number of it. The deck
accommodates 590 spaces and if you look at the Pennington Lot now off
hours, in that particular time frame, you see a small number of fleet and then
you'd see small number of employee vehicles, employee's own vehicles that
would be parked there should they have need to park there because they
needed the overflow or they needed to pick up one of those fleet vehicles and
travel off site for county business, so I don't think we have an exact number.
• Butler: Okay, but that's talking 7 p.m. to 5 a.m. Okay. What I am trying to
get at is how often...these lights are going be off during the day and they are
going to be on at night only when there is activity. How often is going to be
activity between 7 or 9 p.m. and 5 a.m.? What I am trying to get at is how
often are the lights on?
Yudd: If you are saying how many vehicles will go there to trigger the lights
coming on, not very many.
• Butler: Because if the lights are off, except hardly ever at night, then the
question becomes why do we care? That's where I am trying to get to because
if the parking garage itself, assume if there were no lights on the top deck.
And I know that you can't do that for safety reasons. But let's assume that
there was no lights, for instance, then the entire parking garage, you said is
about as tall as a house.
Yudd: Right.
• Butler: So, it is the light poles that create the 25 foot extra height, but these
light poles, it sounds to me that those lights are not going to be on very often,
ever.
25 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
Yudd: If you isolated the issue between the lights coming on and that being a
concern or an issue, they wouldn't come on that often. If you isolated the
issue of the total amount of parking and the need for the upper level, then we
know that you need that total number and I think we have made an
accommodation to say when used in the evening, the lights won't come on
that often.
• Butler: So, during the day, you need those spots and if you don't have those
spots, then they are currently parking in the Pennington Lot now or
distributed somewhere else.
Yudd: Plus the need that we are going to experience for the 92,000 square
feet courthouse.
• Butler: Right. Okay. Let's see what else I had. The parking for the
government center people that are going to be parking in the Pennington Lot
—it's the Pennington garage would be 900 feet away from the Courthouse, so
it is going to be farther than that to the Government center. How many of
those people are actually going to be parking in the Pennington Lot and are
they going to you know, a quarter of a mile to the Government center?
Applicant answer: Actually this was brought up at Planning Commission, so
I have those distances. The Pennington Lot to the government center is 1500
linear feet. As has been said, people are already making that lot when they
get to work at the government center, you know, can't find a place to park.
So, that's already something that is working for them. If I can expand on
that, the question was brought up about the other alternative lots in the town
and you know, can those be utilized. Specifically was the Liberty Lot. The
distance from that lot to the government center is 1800 feet, further away.
Then the Harrison lot is just a little bit closer, but that's no longer available.
It's 1300 linear feet. So, some of those alternative surface lots that we had
explored are a similar distance away.
• Butler: And the Liberty Lot—just not that many spaces that it will hold now.
Okay, and so in this particular rezoning, the planning commission was 5-1-1
on this?
Staff answer: On the Pennington lot rezoning, that's correct.
• Butler: So, once we got done and went through all these facts and figures,
planning commission was fine with the four stories, 5-1-1?
Staff answer: Conditionally. They had conditions. The storm water being
rerouted, and that, you, town council, found the screening and the
architecture acceptable. Those were the conditions supporting approval.
JD Norman, 207 North Street, NE. Good evening. I appreciate you all's
time. I live directly across North Street from the proposed parking garage. I wanted
to first thank you guys for making the accommodation and the change on the egress
on to North Street. That was one of the requests that we had at the last meeting and
making that an emergency exit is very much appreciated. I do have here a petition
that I did circulate with many of our neighbors who unfortunately can't be here and
my grandmother and my son petitioned as well. But I do want to, if you don't
mind, take a moment and brief the petition. Some of this is no longer relevant
saying that the change in the egress, but I'll read it anyway. Dear Leesburg Town
26IPage
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
1111 11L
Council, while I will agree that the Courts expansion project will be a good thing for
downtown Leesburg, I have major concerns over the development of the
Pennington Lot garage. Development of the Pennington Lot garage will greatly
increase the amount of traffic on North Street and Harrison potentially causing
serious back ups at King and Edwards Ferry Road with North Street and Harrison
Street already suffer from excessive "cut through" traffic, especially during rush
hour when drivers tend to ignore the posted speed limit signs. There are numerous
families with small children. Three in one and one in route, who live on North
Street and Harrison Street and the development of the Pennington Lot garage will
significantly worsen the traffic situation. [inaudible] a four story garage including
the top deck lighting is inappropriate for a historic neighborhood. This structure
will dwarf the surrounding neighborhood. I am concerned that the construction of
this garage will negatively impact housing values, be an eyesore for the historic
neighborhood and be a safety hazard for our children. The [inaudible] egress from
the garage onto North Street near the intersection—I'll skip that section since
[inaudible] now. Leesburg Town Council, I urge you that you take the following
actions— seriously consider any and all other options to either eliminate or
supplement the Pennington lot garage, at a very minimum exploiting the 900 plus
referenced spots between two or more parking locations in downtown Leesburg will
greatly reduce the negative impact the garage will have on our neighborhood, as
well as relocate more potential passersby to restaurants and shops in downtown
Leesburg. If, after thorough examination of the options, it is decided that the
Pennington lot garage must be built, [inaudible] consider alternative plans to lower
the height of the project. This could be accomplished by either building parking
underground or limiting the parking garage to two or three levels and retaining the
foot print of the garage to keep the same number of spaces. Additionally, I urge the
Council to consider eliminating the lighting on the top level of the garage. We
thank you for the consideration of this petition and urge you to seriously consider
these requests. In the petition, some of our neighbors were able to make a comment
and I will read a handful of comments to you now. The first comment is from Ed
on Woodberry Road: The location is too far from the courthouse. The current
parking lot doesn't even get used. Why build another one that will sit empty.
Location should be closer to the courthouse. Rebecca on Cornwall Street: I would
like to add that if this project moves forward, the town needs to consider being
proactive enforcing traffic laws in the area to keep its residents safe. I would also
like to request permit parking 24/7 on Cornwall Street from Slack to King Street.
[inaudible] on Harrison Street: I [inaudible] the garage because the roads
surrounding the garage are essentially residential. I don't see how they can
accommodate an increased volume of traffic from this commercial parking garage.
And this is my personal favorite, Tristan who lives on Harrison Street says please
don't build a parking garage here. I play outside here and cars go too fast already.
Also, Pennington is where I go sledding when it snows. I do appreciate Mr. Dunn
and Mrs. Burk—some of your concerns with the overall size of the garage and you
[km have the local resident's support there. I believe Mrs. Hammier, you mentioned
getting creative and finding other alternatives to supplement the parking garage.
We also would very much support that. There are open lots —there are large lots
behind the Loudoun Times Mirror Building near the Cajun Experience. I don't
27 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
know what is going on with the development project there, but it seems like it would
be a prime opportunity to work with those folks to try to at least supplement, if not
replace the Pennington garage. So, Mayor, if you don't mind, I'd like to give you
these petitions.
Damon Schaeffer, 104 Harrison Street, NE. Right downtown, within view of
the Pennington garage. Quick shout out to Leesburg. I just retired 24 years in the
Army— [inaudible] special operations and have lived in just horrible places around
the world but also some very beautiful places too, so it took about four years for us
to decide to retire here in Leesburg and [inaudible] my wife is literally about to pop.
I've got a phone right here just in case she calls, I am ready to go. I just want to say
for those of you who grew up here, have lived in this town your whole life, you may
not—I hope you understand the rarity and beauty of this town that's historic. Not
just the historic segment that you have here, but essentially the people here are
excellent and I commend the town design team. You guys, this is phenomenal
itself. Especially the courthouse and the way it just kind of rounds down the street
from the original courthouse. That design is just phenomenal and flawless with the
attention to detail is excellent. It is really going to look good and make our town so
much better. I have some serious issues about Pennington garage. Especially, the
location of that emergency lane. I hope it stays an emergency lane. It would be just
so easy just make that an extra lane a few years from now. I hope it just kind of
stays an emergency lane. I wanted to say thank you, gentlemen, for including those
design changes— [inaudible] what the town was asking for and you made those
changes almost exactly how we wanted. I do appreciate that, being here last time.
That really did save us 37 to 59 homes that we pointed out that it was going to affect
negatively. I think I can make a recommendation—an operable recommendation
for the pennington garage would be to possibly drop the upper deck, if we possibly
could, but if we can't do that, I would like to recommend pushing the lighting out a
little bit so we can drop it down a little more. I know it's not that considerate, but if
you are going to redesign the whole thing to drop one deck off of it, I guess you
could push the lighting to the exterior ring more and use directional lighting on the
interior of the deck instead of omni directional lighting that would just kind of shine
up on the rest of the residents. If that is within the code. I'm just asking if you
could possibly consider that. If you could do any design changes. Then, comment
was made last time we had this discussion about these three inter-related projects
and one project can't be changed without cancelling or significantly making changes
to the other projects and I have seen where officials were unable to budge on
[inaudible] especially the Pennington garage and it seems like tonight that there is a
possibility—there is hope for us for some budging will happen. So, it is a fact that
Harrison Street and North Street have already become saturated with traffic and just
like race tracks and I am so concerned for my toddlers running out in the street in
front of traffic. It is so difficult to control [inaudible] there are other alternatives for
parking. We pass a lot of them every day. The Northwest corner of Church and
Loudoun, there is a lot that we pass all the time. It seems to kind of go back and
forth between different projects what it might be. I thought that would be a great
opportunity to snatch that up somehow and you know, it is not looking very good
right now. It really needs some beautification, but it would be great if we could turn
28 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
that into some type of overflow parking or maybe a secondary two level garage. 180
parking spaces there, 360 if it is a two story. I think that would make a phenomenal
addition to the downtown, plus we could get all the shops— anybody parking there
could certainly hit all the restaurants and shops that are downtown. That is all I am
going to say. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Chris Mallin, 206 Andover Court, NE. I appreciate the time to speak to you
all tonight. So, I wanted to pass along some concerns that I had—was the mass and
the size of the garage is still a concern and we have certainly talked about that at
length. I would hope that some additional considerations for some vegetative wall
systems or something else would be considered other than planting some evergreens
that will take about 10 years to come in. Doing a quick check on Google Earth, I
did look at the trees that are existing and some of the renderings there—they are not
all there, at least in that regard. Also, keep in mind that whatever vegetative system
that could be added, most trees around there are not going to have leaves for five or
six months, so you will see that garage for a substantial period of the year. So,
please do consider another system that will hang down in the garage, still maintain
safety standards, etc. I have seen other examples of that—in fact Dewberry has
done some of those garages. I have seen them in their portfolios. So, perhaps you
want to go back and look at those options. Secondly, related to height
considerations, although there is cost impact, the first level of the garage could be
located below grade, something that should certainly be considered as a means to
address the concerns that have been brought up. Finally, a [inaudible] that came up
tonight related to the construction—that being the construction hours. It was sort of
flashed up there very quickly, but I saw 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays. In a
residential area, that's not acceptable. I don't know what the town allows for, but I
can tell you that many localities and I certainly don't want to compare ourselves to
the district of Columbia, but if you are in any residential area there in town, you are
not working past 7 o'clock. Sundays are included. I think it allowed for Sunday
work. That can be very disruptive, not just the construction work, but keep in mind
you are going to have deliveries— forklifts, trucks and traffic happening throughout
the town going to that construction site, so please do consider that when you are
looking at all the options here. Those are all the comments I have. I appreciate the
comments on the trees —the additional trees and 40 foot versus 100 feet. I would
like to hear why the architecture review committee actually encouraged less trees.
That seems a bit odd, so I would like to understand that a bit further. But we do
need more trees in town. Thank you for your time.
Larr Kelly, 404 Edwards Ferry Road, NE. My concern is the traffic signal,
once again, coming into Edwards Ferry Road and Catoctin Circle. We have been
dealing with this since probably before 1998, but I know that in 1998 the town got
the county to proffer to put a signal in there that is not needed and it hasn't been
there and the four way stop sign has continued to work. Then we were told we
were going need a signal when we open up Catoctin Circle to the north. And we
didn't need it and we don't have it and the four way stop sign continues to work. It
is a fabulous, fabulous traffic calming device. Something that a signal can never be.
Because when you've got a signal, you got people coming down. Green light, I'm
29 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
going to go. Yellow light, I've got to beat it. Speed limits on Edwards Ferry Road
are not respected in that situation. We had that problem before the four way stop
and then the four way stop has done a tremendous job of calming the traffic on
Edwards Ferry Road. That said, I don't know what is going to be needed in the
year 2040. Neither do you, really. What I am suggesting tonight and giving you for
consideration is that you take that proffer, or you ask the county to take that proffer
that says it will give you cash for intersection improvements at Edwards Ferry
Road and Catoctin Circle and make it a little more flexible so that the town could
possibly use that money in some other location, which may present itself as more
urgent and I pointed out Harrison Street really should go through the funeral parlor
and the Marshall Foundation property. That would solve a lot of transportation
problems downtown. [inaudible] where Edwards Ferry, Market and Church Street
come together, which at times is a failing intersection. I can't believe that passes
anybody's traffic study unless they are not looking at it at the right times. It gets an
"F". So, anyway, that's my suggestion. I would urge you to make that proffer
more flexible so that the town can use that money somewhere else, because I don't
think you are going to need it at Edwards Ferry Road and Catoctin Circle.
Rebecca Fleck, 14 Cornwall Street, N.E. I'm the driveway across from the
renovation—the first renovation of the Courthouse. First of all, I want to apologize
for my appearance. I balance a full time job, two kids, a snow day. I am [inaudible]
this meeting and I wanted to be here regardless. I want to tell you that I moved here
four years ago from Reston because Reston was being overbuilt and I moved to a
quiet street in a lovely downtown, bought a 125 year old home. Not a mansion.
Not [inaudible]. These were all very precise decisions made by my husband and I.
And we love living downtown. We love walking to the parades, love going to
China King and knowing that they know that Robert is order dumplings and Lisa is
going to order Chicken and Broccoli and that's why we love living here, but the
reality here is it is incredibly hard to live by the courthouse in its current state let
alone a 92,000 square foot addition. The thing about a 92,000 square foot addition
looking over my 2400 square foot home is overwhelming as a parent and I feel my
neighbor's safety concern. Despite the town's giving us 9-5 permit parking only, I
battle with parking on my street. I know that the Pennington Lot is empty because I
park there with two kids and a car full of groceries once a week. It is empty, no one
is using it. To think about that too, the town is going to compromise residents who
pay taxes, who [inaudible] property values, who are building a future here, we are
the youngest people on my part of Cornwall. That means everyone around us is in
their second phase of life—retiring, moving. I want downtown Leesburg to be a
place where young families want to come and move. When I look at this parking
garage and the way traffic is going to flow, I wish there were more business owners
here saying where is the traffic coming in front of my store front. We just talked
about that with the Village at Leesburg, not putting a retail on a first level
opportunity in the Village at Leesburg. Where it the traffic consideration for foot
traffic for our downtown businesses that are sitting empty and struggling every
single day. We are becoming a 9-5 banker hour town and now we are going to
build a huge parking structure that is going to sit empty on the weekends. It is going
to be empty. My parents will have a place to park when they come to visit from
30 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
New Jersey. It is going to be empty and it is going to attract crime when it sits
empty on the weekend. It is going to attract unnecessary crime or activity that
historic downtown Leesburg doesn't need. I also want to give you a little bit—when
I look at the renderings and I look at the people walking. They are not showing
Jessie with her three kids or [inaudible] with her three kids or me with my two kids
trying to navigate the very busy intersection of people who are going to be rushed to
get to work and to get to court. People who are going to work are not in a good
mood. People who are going to court are not in a good mood. It is becoming
stressful to live downtown. As much as we all cherish the businesses that are
downtown, we should cherish our residents.
Jay Gillman, 124 Harrison Street, N.E. I am actually the house that is
directly across from the now—emergency exit for the parking garage. While I
support my fellow neighbors and don't want to waste too much time sort of echoing
their same sentiments, I think that the three things I really want to call out were the
criticality around the change of that new sort of emergency exit. I think it is very
easy to say this is now an emergency exit. It is potentially an emergency ingress, I
believe I heard as well in sort of a circumstance where somebody would need access
to that parking garage. I would worry that would [inaudible] or even in a short
period of time, it suddenly becomes a sort of convenience to have sort of an
allowance of second floor, I believe it was, exiting from that parking garage out into
a very busy blind hill street that already has a lot of speed going that area of North
Street. The second thing was a great call by one of the other neighbors, was the 7 to
10 work in terms of the hours that are going to be processed for the actual build. I
think 10 o'clock is absolutely absurd. That is probably an hour after we are already
in bed and I am literally right across the street from it. I know that it is not just my
[inaudible] but I can imagine if you were in your neighborhood and see large trucks,
large deliveries, potential for blasting, although it might not be that late, but just
general loud noise with pouring concrete etc., it would be a very big concern. Then
the last thing. I believe it was Council member Dunn actually brought up was the
exceptional math that is actually being looked at. So, there is a mandate for 717
parking spaces. That garage I believe was at 727. There is also 138, I believe, it is
now parking spaces that is in the Pennington surface lot and there is an additional
36 spaces that are going to be reconfigured in the lot that is sort of currently right
there. That math to me is about 720, which means if you sort of shave that top
deck, I don't think there is any need whatsoever for a fourth level. I think you could
easily have three levels. You drop that structure from 37 feet on the west end and
24 on the east end to all of a sudden 25 and 12. I think the neighbors start to feel a
little bit better about a huge monstrosity overwhelming their houses nearby.
[inaudible]. Thank you very much.
The public hearing was closed at 10:41 p.m.
Council Comments/Questions:
• Hammler: I would suggest that we move this to a work session. There are
clearly a lot of issues. That is the first time that Town Council has had a
311 Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
chance to hear in a public session format and hear from the public some
extremely important issues that we have to resolve.
Council Member Hammier made a motion to move this item to a work session for
further discussion. The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor Burk.
Council Comments/Questions:
• Hammier: Some of the things that I do think we clearly need to address are
working very closely and creatively with the county on the parking garage,
specifically. A lot of the gray areas have come up tonight, so I certainly won't
reiterate them all. I also appreciated Lars bringing up the issue of traffic
calming and being creative with that proffer and how that could be worded. I
thought that was an exceptional idea. In terms of the landscaping,just
realizing that waiting 10 years for the ultimate screen, we should be looking
again how we could use vegetative walls. The construction hours, asking
BAR why and getting a second opinion on the street trees. The issue of quite
frankly even getting additional sheriff's support for some of the traffic
calming. Those are just a few of the kind of notes that I took. I will leave it at
that until closing comments. There is obviously a lot of things to thank you
for and complement the project about, but that would be the purpose of the
work session.
• Burk: I would also like to see wording there about the emergency lane,
definitely. But I think we have some issues here. I do appreciate the fact that
you guys have worked really hard on this. The Planning Commission and the
BAR all of you working together have made the courthouse, at least, I mean
it is much, much better than when it first came in. I really appreciate that.
But, I think we still have issues here.
• Fox: I think there is some decent planning going on here considering the
scope of this project. I have been working with the BAR. I think the
architecture is beautiful. I think it is a beautiful project. The opportunities—
there are opportunities with the garage. I take very seriously some public
input and some of the ideas that came out of that and I want to see—I would
support a work session too just to see if we can trouble shoot some of these
problems and maybe implement some of the suggestions.
• Martinez: I have to tell the residents, that I really feel for you. I think it is a
crime that you guys are getting built around. There is certainly not a lot of
consideration for what you want and what you need to have. We have had
these kind of situations throughout the town on different projects, but overall
the developer has done a lot in improving what the application is. I kind of
have to go, but I still think the scope of the project is a little too much for the
property it is on. I agree with Kelly and others on the parking level. I think
we could work with that a little bit. But, [inaudible] it looks like I don't have a
lot of questions. That's because a lot of times I have them already answered.
I am just glad to see that you came out and voiced your concerns. I really
appreciate that. I think the odds of this project going forward are probably
pretty good. I just wish there was some way we could get you more
consideration on the loss of the neighborhood that you are going to lose.
32 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
• Dunn: Couple of issues for the work session. I would like to hear more about
lighting options. I would like to also see what other similar government
security needs there are that we currently have and what lighting options are
being used there. I would also like to really explore the possibility of reducing
the height one level. I do think that we are projecting more spaces than
needed, especially since the courthouse while being fully built today, the
expectation is that the courtrooms are not going to even be needed...I forget
what the date was—it is like eight years out from now or 15 years out from
now. In addition to the biggest concern for all of this was the fact that the
impact from losing, potentially losing the courthouse and or the government
center from downtown Leesburg—what would that be and yet we are finding
that the intention is from the county to be moving part of the government
center out anyway. I want to make sure that while this train is full speed
moving ahead, it wasn't too long ago that we created that a few years ago and
it is not meeting the needs. Now we are ready to go forward—this is it. We
got it this time. I want to make sure that is the case. I'd like to know about
the lighting. I'd like to know about the height. I also want to find out more
about, especially with the lighting, today's plan about addressing the security
and how often the lights will be coming off and on. I would like to know
what the intention is for these government vehicles to be up there and do we
have to put government levels on the top level or can government vehicles be
put into a ground level that doesn't have lights coming off and on throughout
the night or as some citizens have suggested, what is the cost of going
underground and putting the government vehicles down there and then the
top deck can be just roofed and there is no need for any lights. And also
dealing with that, going back to the security issue of we have a number of
government facilities all over the town, never mind the county, are they being
lit at the same level. So, I'd really like to hear more about the desperate need
that we have for this amount of security and I don't want to say this wrong, so
I'll just say it the best way that I can—what is the minimum level of good
security that we can have. There were some suggestions made about different
types of lighting. Again, I'd like to hear that. I'd also like to know and again
to expand on it a little bit clearer, is I'd like to know what in 15 years...it
sounds like 2030 seems like a long way away, doesn't it, but 2000 doesn't
seem that far back. So, we are only 15 years. I'd like to know what the plan
is for what departments, what numbers of county personnel are going to be
leaving the government center. Because the big concern initially when you
came in, the big furor was we are going to lose the courts. We are going to
lose the courts. No. No. If we don't go forward with this, the courts move
down to the government center and the government center moves somewhere
else, and yet they are already going to be doing that in 15 years. So, why?
Why all this? Are there alternatives? I know that the train has left the station
and we are going down that path. But as you said, Irish. This is an all or
nothing deal. We approve this, one or approve all. Or if you deny one, you
lose all. I want to make sure we are making the right decision today and not
just doing it because we feel we need to be doing it. Do, we have a work
33 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
session—we have decided already what this is going to be or are we going to
hear from the staffs as to how long it will take them to get this information?
• Butler: My understanding is the next work session is available for this.
• Dunn: Is it? And you all feel you can come forward with this?
• Butler: Just one clarification—county you can correct me if I am wrong. My
understanding is that there is no intent to move out of the government center.
It is just that the expansion of the government center will take place
somewhere else.
Applicant answer: Correct.
• Hammier: [inaudible] that the one proffer that I was going to bring up, which
was the proffer that you will be doing snow removal on Church street, I was
going to request that the County Administrator provide snow removal on
every sidewalk and every street in Leesburg given what we have dealt with in
the recent blizzard, but we won't tackle that one. Just in closing,just again
want to thank all of you for coming out this evening. Mrs. Flick, for
example, I thought you just so eloquently brought up just really important
things that we have to think about. You know, we will talk about the fourth
floor of the garage, but quite frankly the point that you made about ensuring
that we are bringing the foot traffic to really leverage what the ultimate goal
is, which is the vitality of downtown and making sure that we are maximizing
that has got to be part of what we are accomplishing. Again, Larr, bringing
up the proffer and giving us the idea that hey, maybe we should be looking at
how we can work creatively with the county on that, if we save $470,000
maybe there is some leeway on how we can save those historic houses and
relocate them and put that money towards something like that. So, appreciate
how you are under grounding utilities, for the tree save, so many great things.
I know we will have so many opportunities to say thank you, not the least of
which I know our staff has kept us on track since Council has asked to
greenlight this given how important it is. It is one of the most important
decisions we as a council will make for future generations as well as you
know, as short and mid-term economic vitality. But, I try not to be long
winded, but in particular tonight I want to make sure Mr. Schaeffer gets
home, very quickly and best of luck. We will look forward to good news.
The motion to move these applications to a work session passed by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Dunn, Fox, Hammler, Martinez, and Mayor Butler
Nay: None.
Vote: 6-0
c. Tunnel Lease for Courthouse Expansion Project
The public hearing was opened at 10:54 p.m.
Barbara Notar gave a short explanation of the tunnel lease request.
Key Points:
• 40 year lease for a tunnel underneath Church Street.
34 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
• Tunnel will be for prisoners, security staff and the judges.
• Permit will need to be obtained by the town from the town for the street
closure during construction.
• Church Street will be closed 4-6 weeks for construction of the tunnel.
• Insurance provisions are within the lease agreement.
Council Comments/Questions:
• Fox: Just one question—I am seeing here that the lease amount is $1
annually. Is that correct?
Staff answer: Yes.
• Fox: How much is it going to cost the town for a permit to close the
street?
Staff answer: I think it is $100. There is no cost to this lease, in other
words. There is minimal cost to this lease.
• Hammier: No questions. I know that this was a very big issue relative to
the county's willingness from a safety perspective to locate here. So,
whatever we can do to support it.
• Dunn: Just real quick, what was the amount of time to construct. I was
trying to find that in here.
Staff answer: 4-6 weeks.
• Dunn: And that is going to be going on simultaneous with the courthouse
construction?
Staff answer: Yes.
• Dunn: So, any road closures that could result are going to be the result of
the courthouse anyway?
Staff answer: That is correct.
Rebecca Flick, 14 Cornwall Street, N.E. What is the plan for accessing—
emergency vehicles access my section of Cornwall Street at this time because
Cornwall Street is one way. I don't see how emergency vehicles like an
ambulance or a fire truck can navigate Slack Lane in order to get to me on a one
way street. I ask the council to please look into this.
Kaj Dentler: The quick answer I would give you is we will coordinate
that emergency response with county emergency officials as we would do with
any type of construction or development that occurs so they would be well aware
of that and have all their alternate routes and training in place.
The public hearing was closed at 10:59 p.m.
On a motion by Council Member Hammier, seconded by Mayor Butler, the
following was proposed:
ORDINANCE 2016-003
Approving and Authorizing a 40 year Lease of a Portion of Real Property Owned
by the Town of Leesburg, Virginia to Loudoun County, Virginia for a Tunnel
35IPage
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
Underneath Church Street, N.E., to Connect the Existing Courthouse with the
Proposed Courthouse Expansion Project
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Dunn, Fox, Hammier, Martinez, and Mayor Butler
Nay: None.
Vote: 6-0
11. RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS
a. Selection of Council Representatives—Joint Meeting with Board of
Supervisors, Loudoun Sheriff, and Leesburg Police Chief: Potential
Efficiencies
On a motion by Council Member Fox, seconded by Council Member Hammier, the
following was proposed with Council Members Dunn and Hammler proposed as the
Council's representatives:
RESOLUTION 2016-017
Appointment of Town Council Representatives and Confirmation of Primary
Discussion Topics for Joint Task Force with County of Loudoun on Potential
Efficiencies between Leesburg Police Department and County of Loudoun Sheriff's
Office
Council Comments:
• Hammier: The only thing I would add is reiterating the issue that we need
to find ways that may not be typical relative to how we could get, you
know, speeding support as relates to traffic calming. I just thought that
was a good idea that came up in the last public hearing. I hope we are
open to additional suggestions that come forward.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Dunn, Fox, Hammler, and Mayor Butler
Nay: None
Vote: 5-0-1 (Martinez absent)
b. Airport Rules, Regulations and Minimum Standards
On a motion by Council Member Fox, seconded by Council Member Hammler, the
following was proposed:
RESOLUTION 2016-018
Adopting the Revised Rules, Regulations and Minimum Standards for the
Leesburg Executive Airport
Council Comments:
• Fox: I just wanted to say that I looked through the changes and the
changes make a lot of sense and I totally support going forward with the
motion.
36 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
• Hammler: Just thank our official appointee and everyone who works on
the commission and all their service to Leesburg.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Dunn, Fox, Hammier, Martinez, and Mayor Butler
Nay: None.
Vote: 6-0
c. Town Attorney's Performance Evaluation and Compensation
On a motion by Council Member Hammier, seconded by Council Member
Martinez, the following was proposed:
MOTION 2016-002
I move that the Town Attorney receive a 3%pay increase as additional
compensation in accordance with the Town Attorney's contract.
Council Comments:
• Hammier: Just appreciate how Barbara has hit the ground running and
has done a great job serving all of us, does great research and comes back
with very thoughtful answers. It is sort of appropo that we are talking
about the courthouse tonight because you were so well changed by our
now Circuit Court, previous town attorney. Just appreciate your service
to Leesburg, Barbara.
• Martinez: I would like to approve even more, but [inaudible]. I also want
to say that one of the things that I like about her and I don't like about her
is she doesn't always agree with me. That ain't right, but that's okay.
• Burk: I'm happy to support this.
• Dunn: I won't be able to support this. I feel that the town's legal
positions could be better served.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Hammier, Martinez, and Mayor Butler
Nay: Dunn and Fox
Vote: 4-2
12. ORDINANCES
a. None.
13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. None.
14. NEW BUSINESS
a. None.
15. CLOSED SESSION
37 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
a. None.
16. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council Member Dunn: Actually, I was going to see if we could get something
added to new business or brought up at our next work session. Would that require
[inaudible]. It is a request for the text amendments to be expedited to have staff start
working on the text amendments that were mentioned this evening. There are three all
together. I would request that rather than waiting to our next work session that staff
could actually bring it forward and we could actually possibly work on it by our next
work session.
There was consensus to add this to the next work session.
Dunn: I made a note that I was looking at a more standardized system to
expedite this process.
Vice Mayor Burk: I want to congratulate the new interim Mayor. There is an
old Irish saying that says, I hope that you govern with wit and wisdom. Thanks to
everyone who came out and put their names forward for the interim mayor position.
Thanks to those that showed up last night. While the process was messy, your being
here showed your interest and commitment to the town and I thank you for that.
Thanks to all that came out tonight. On Thursday, February 4, I met with Charles Yudd
and the county and the people at Dewberry about the courthouse complex. It was a very
exhaustive review of the complex and I want to thank the members of our planning
commission for all of their long and difficult negotiations with the county to make
changes to the project. It made it so much better. They really put their effort into it and
it really showed and I truly appreciate all their hard work. There are still major issues,
obviously, because we are going to continue to talk about it, but I think the garage and
the height are something we are really going to have to look at. We heard other issues
from the public tonight. I had the opportunity to go to the Loudoun County Day School
pre-kindergarten class. This is Mrs. Horvath's class and the students learn about local
government. They created this book with pictures and a line of what they would do if
they were Mayor. Unfortunately, there was no time to put it on the agenda for tonight,
but I wanted to show—I wanted to read some of them because they are really darling. I
won't take but a couple of minutes. From Quinn O'Hara, she said if she was mayor, she
would take care of all of the animals in the world. I do think that definitely looks like
me, so I am cool with that. And, James said if I were mayor, I would help people who
were poor find a home. Such thoughtful little kids at such an age, I thought it was very
impressive and then the last one I will read to you, is that people have fire, I would make
sure they are okay. That was Ellery Ritenour. But it is really darling and it showed us
that these little kids most certainly have a lot compassion and understanding and it was
really great that their teacher goes through that whole process of teaching them about
government and what the Mayor and Council does so it was really exciting and a great
opportunity. And finally, I want to thank Mr. Terry Titus for being willing to consider
the position of the interim mayor. If you are not from here or you have not lived here
very long, you may not realize that the Titus family have contributed their time and
talent and services to this town and this county for decades. Anyone who reduces the
38 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
Titus' to an R or a D doesn't know Leesburg and Loudoun County history, so I want to
publically thank Terry for his willingness to serve and thank the Titus family. They truly
are patriots and we are very lucky to have them.
Council Member Martinez: Congratulations to your new mayorship, Mr.
Mayor. I also want to—Kelly said it well about Mr. Titus. Very well respected
gentleman and I sure do respect him. I think he would have done a great job. The other
thing is I do have a disclosure form—Mr. Banzhaf text amendments today a phone call.
I am trying to think if there was anything else. Thank you to the boy scouts for showing
up. I always enjoy that. Thank you, Doris, 35 years next weekend.
Council Member Hammier: Happy anniversary, Marty and Doris. That's
wonderful. I have a few disclosures. I had a call from Mike Banzhaf. I think we
haven't had a meeting in a while—January 14. I have a disclosure that I saw Taylor
[Chess] from the Petersen Companies. He showed up to meet me at the EDAC meeting
to discuss possible ways that he could, I guess,just work with Leesburg and Marantha
was going to follow up with that. I had a call from Mike Banzhaf also about the special
exception that we discussed tonight on the 25th I don't think I ever disclosed the rescue
banquet, so I wanted to make sure that I did that publically and there was a value that I
will put on the disclosure form. But, that was an exceptional banquet and it was so great
that so many council members were there and we had an opportunity to—given
everything that we have worked together for the skate park and other things to be with
them as they celebrate all their special awards and Kelly did a great job that night. I also
wanted to disclose that I did attend the Cooper's Hawk opening last Saturday. I saw
members of the Leesburg community, Gwen Pangle, Rusty, others. So, it was a
wonderful opportunity to see so many people and I did see a gentleman—I will formally
disclose that because some town business came up. I am just getting—I didn't write
everything down in my iPhone. [inaudible] I have no idea what that is. Congratulations
to Coach Burnett—looking forward to bringing him in for a certificate for his huge
award for Coach of the Year. It is pretty awesome. I wanted to thank everybody in
Leesburg who helped all their neighbors dig out from the snow storm. It was really
incredible to see people taking shovels, helping whoever needed help,just getting
together to get the job done. I know we will be doing official debriefs, but that was to
me the great part of being in Leesburg and the fun that came from the huge piles and the
kids got to have sledding places where they didn't have them on the corner of their
streets. So, I know we are going to learn from this and keep doing better the next time
we get 35 inches of snow in 24 hours, but I do appreciate the great sense of community.
Finally, I wanted to add my congratulations to our new interim mayor.
Council Member Fox: Congratulations to you and congratulations to our new
interim chief of police as well. We are excited to have you. I do have one disclosure
and I did get a call from Mr. Banzhaf as well about the Village at Leesburg Child Care
Center and the commuter lot across —or the potential of the commuter lot across from
the Village at Leesburg. Last thing that I wanted to note was there is this packet in our
folders tonight. Maybe it was in my in mailbox. Anyway, I wanted to acknowledge
Scott Coffman who manages the airport. I wish I had done it while he was still here, but
he debriefed the airport commission about what happened during the snowstorm and he
39 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
was there from Friday to Monday, nonstop. He stayed there and I took a look at the
pictures. They handled that situation very, very well over there. I think they had one
complaint and it was from a guy in Florida. I just wanted to acknowledge him and tell
him that he did a nice job.
17. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
I do have a few things. A couple of quickies. I also wanted to congratulate
Captain Grigsby on the future interim position that happens the first of March. That's
wonderful—well deserved. I have a seat here, if anybody wants to move here before we
select a seventh council member, let me know. We won't be doing any wholesale
changes—that will be for the new mayor—whoever wins in November. If anybody
wants the seat, you are welcome to it. Just let me know. I do have a letter—I forgot to
read this. I'm not going to read this whole thing—highlights—that I received—
somebody wanted it in the public record. Couldn't make it today. But it was about the
snow removal. "Dear Vice Mayor— this is from Greg Adams on Wildman Street. He
said Dear Vice Mayor Burk and members of the Town Council. I have lived in the
Town of Leesburg for 28 years and I have experienced the town's response to both
forecast and unexpected to snow and other events of nature. In all my years of living
here, I have never experienced anything quite like the recent snowfall that blanketed our
town. Times have changed and our town has grown. Still, over the years, we worked
together to solve our problems. While we seem to have lost a bit of what made this
town special. Such is the case with the recent blizzard that impacted our town, despite
the fact that there were many that tirelessly responded in this effort, my wife and I were
saddened that there was finger pointing and public roasting in the media towards
employees of the Public Works division. I urge this council to publicly acknowledge the
manager and the employees of the Public Works division and all others involved during
this event for their sacrifice and dedication. Letters of appreciation should be issued. As
our town has grown, it's resources have at times been strained—more is often asked of
all of us. At the end of the day, it is my humble opinion that we did best that we could
with a snow removal protocol and the resources at our disposal. Friends, family and
neighbors all pulled together to help each other out. The town has responsibilities to do
the same. It is what families do. Respectfully and sincerely, Greg Adams, Wildman
Street. Let me echo my thanks and appreciation for the Public Works employees. They
worked their tails off removing the snow. Hopefully it will be quite a while before we
get a storm of that magnitude again.
Council Member Martinez: If I may also add, Paige and Avis put together
goodie bags for all the hard workers on our public works crew and I think that is very
commendable and I really appreciate them taking care of our guys like that.
Butler: Absolutely. Two other things that are a little bit different. One is that I
will be sending out emails to each Council member. I would like to set up a bi-weekly
half hour chat by phone. Probably the Wednesday before the Council meeting. I will be
meeting with Kaj on, I think, Mondays, the non-council weeks. I will be meeting with
Kaj the Tuesday on the non-Council weeks and then I would like to have a half an hour
with each Council member on Wednesdays, if you chose, then I can go over what the
proposed agenda is and you can give me any concerns or questions or comments on that
40 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING February 9, 2016
agenda and I can relay them to town staff before it gets published on Thursday. Then,
another thing is I have been in discussions with Kaj about a council room and he
suggested council room 3 in the basement. This could be used for a couple of different
things. It could be used anytime you are having meetings with developers or other folks.
You could always use that room and schedule it so we wouldn't necessarily need to
meet in coffee shops or the lobby. We would always have a room that was more or less
dedicated to Council or at least Council would have first priority. Also, any Council
member who wishes and I would be trying to do this, is we could actually set up the
equivalent of office hours, perhaps. Bring a lap top, be there for a couple of hours a
couple times a week and then allow the public to come in and speak to the mayor or vice
mayor or a council member if they choose. We could publish those hours and then
people could just walk in and talk. What it would not be used for—you know, it's in the
basement. It's out of the way. You can't see anybody. It would not be used for
directing staff in any way. It would be for the convenience of the public primarily. So,
that's something that we are working on— any feedback on that would be appreciated.
Then, I agree with Marty's comments about Terry. Terry is a great guy. He served on
Council for two or three months four years ago. I forget exactly how long it was, but he
did a fantastic job and he is just a nice guy. I've seen him around town sometimes and
you know, high praise for Terry. Then last, thank you for your congratulations. I would
suspect Vice Mayor that I'll be more successful with wit than wisdom, but we will give it
our best.
18. MANAGER'S COMMENTS
Kaj Dentler had no comments.
19. ADJOURNMENT
On a motion by Council Member Fox, seconded by Council Member Hammier,
the meeting was adjourned at 11:21 p.m.
David S. Butler, Mayor
Town of Leesburg
ATTE T:
N(1-
Clerk of Council
2016_tcmin02(k.:
411 Page