HomeMy Public PortalAbout2005_08_08Council Work Session
August 8, 2005
7:00 p.m. Briefing - Airport Master Plan Alternatives
Ms. Cindi Martin stated in October 2003 the master plan process began and
work was awarded to Campbell and Paris. She introduced Mr. George Paris,
President of Campbell and Paris Engineers, P.C.
Mr. George Paris stated the current distance between the runway and taxiway
is 260-feet; however, with the installation of the instrument landing system (ILS) the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires a separation of 400-feet. He
presented five alternatives for airfield development strategies and outlined them as
follows: (1) maintain existing runway location; (2) shift runway 400-feet west; (3)
relocate and reorient the runway; (4) construct a parallel runway; (5a) relocate
taxiway alpha 140 feet east and (5b) work with the Peterson Company to acquire
more property to the west to relocate the hangers displaced by moving the taxiway.
IVlr. Paris outlined the efforts and funds that would be required for each of the
alternatives. He stated analysis shows options 5a and 5b seem to have more merit
than the other alternatives.
Councilmember Home asked when the Airport Commission will forward their
recommendation.
Steve Axeman, Chairman of the Leesburg Airport Commission, stated the
Airport Commission recommends options 5a and 5b. Mr. Axeman stated this
redevelopment is needed for the installation of the TLS and outlined the recent
crashes over the last few years stating pilot error and medical occurrences account
for most of the incidents.
Councilmember Horne stated we need to meet with Peterson Company to
discuss their application as it relates to the airport. She asked if the Airport
Commission has provided a briefing to the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors.
IVlr. Axeman stated the Board has been receptive to the airport's needs and
the Commission is keeping the Board informed. He stated they have told the Board
that they do not believe a residential use is appropriate for the Peterson Property.
Councilmember Zoldos asked if we would become ineligible for AIP funds if we
fail to meet FAA standards for the runway distance.
Mr. Paris stated when he asked the FAA that question he was told that they
would probably let the Town operate the airport like it has for a long time; however,
any change in district office personnel would present the option for the FAA to
discontinue funding until the 400-feet distance is met.
Councilmember Zoldos stated his support for a full instrument approach to
the runway. Further, he asked that Ms. Martin provide an update on the
environmental assessment.
Ms. Martin stated the FAA has to re-scope and re-bid the project which will
add six months to the process; however, the design of the instrument landing
Town Council Work Session Minutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page 2
system will continue. She stated she would have a briefing for Council in a couple of
weeks.
Councilmember Zoldos stated it was his understanding that there would be a
two year delay because of environmental issues and the ALP was only conditionally
approved.
Ms. Martin stated the ALP was signed and a new ALP will come out of this
alternative. She stated the delay has nothing to do with the airport as the FAA did
not scope the project properly.
Council Work Session
August 8, 2005
Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, 7:48 p.m. Mayor Umstattd presiding.
Councilmembers Present: Kathryn Sheldon Hammler, Susan B. Horne, Marry
Martinez, Bob Zoldos and Mayor Umstattd.
Councilmembers Absent: Kelly Burk and Melinda Kramer
Staff Members Present: Town Manager .John Wells, Interim Town Attorney
Elizabeth Whiting, Assistant to the Town Manager Nicole Ard, Assistant to the Town
Manager Kathy Leidich, Chief of Police .Joe Price, Airport Director Cindi Martin,
Director of Engineering and Public Works Tom Mason, Director of Planning, Zoning
and Development Susan Swift, Chief of Comprehensive Planning David Fuller,
Planner Steve McGregor, Planner Nick Colonna, Planner Bruce Douglas, Planner
Wade Burkholder, Management Intern Tami Watkins and Assistant to the Clerk of
Council Debi Parry.
AGENDA ITEMS
Council Meeting of August 9, 2005
Special Exception TLSE-2003-0007 - 3erry's Leesburg Ford, to
permit outside storage of new vehicle inventory at 9 Cardinal
Park Drive, SE - public hearing
There was no discussion of this item.
b. ZOAM-2005-0001 - Section 7.9 Noise limitations and
enforcement - public hearing
Susan Swift stated this would codify decibel based standards and allow
staff to enforce them. She stated two staff members have received
training on the equipment.
Councilmember Horne asked if staff has met with the Leesburg
Downtown Business Association.
Ms. Swift stated she met with the owners of the Birkby House as
requested and they had no concerns. Further, she stated Lisa Capraro
has informed the downtown businesses of the public hearing.
Mr. Wells stated the type of concerns that would be raised by a loud
event would be covered by the Town Code; however, this ordinance would
Town Council Work Session Minutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page 3
cover ongoing stationary noise. Further, he stated we shouldn't have a
problem with existing businesses.
Consideration of rezoning application TLZM-2004-0007 -
Cornerstone Chapel Church expansion - public hearing
There was no discussion of this item.
d. Consideration of Special Exception application TLSE-2004-0030
Cornerstone Chapel Church expansion - public hearing
Mayor Umstattd verified the Planning Commission recommended
approval of this special exception and zoning amendment for the church
expansion.
Amending Chapter 6 of the Town Code regarding Leesburg
voting precincts to reflect Loudoun County precinct changes -
public hearing.
There was no discussion of this item.
f. Authorizing a street resurfacing program for FY 2006
There was no discussion of this item.
Approving a supplemental appropriation for a Virginia
Department of Aviation (DOAV) grant of $2,579 to purchase
additional airport terminal furniture
Mr. Wells stated no matching funds are required for this item.
h. Approving Town Plan Amendment TLTA-2004-0002 amendment
of the 1997 Town Plan Transportation Map 8.1 to permit a
redesign of the East Market Street/River Creek
Parkway/Crosstrail Boulevard interchange from a cloverleaf to
a diamond interchange.
Mr. Randy Greehan stated he has spoken with Mr. Banzhaf regarding
concerns that the approval of this Town Plan amendment could lead to a
claim of vested rights. Further, he stated he is waiting for an additional
letter from the applicant assuring the Town they would not try to claim
vested rights.
Councilmember Horne stated her support for the diamond interchange
and expressed her concern regarding the issue of vested rights.
Councilmember Zoldos stated he would not support deferring the vote.
Mr. Greehan stated he would recommend voting tomorrow if he had
assurance that the applicant would not try to use the approval to claim
vested rights.
i. Making appointments to the Loudoun Street Task Force
Mr. Wells stated at the Task Force's last meeting a number of people
felt the need to withdraw since it was Council direction that anyone who
might attempt to participate in the design competition should not
participate in the development of guidelines for the competition. He stated
individuals have been recommended by the Council and Councilmember
Town Council Work Session Minutes for August 8, 2005 Page 4
Horne for appointment to fill the vacancies. Further, he stated the first
meeting of the second phase is scheduled for Friday morning at 7:30 a.m.
j. :Znitiating amendments to Zoning Ordinance Article 3 Review
and Approval Procedures, Article 7 Overlay and Special Purpose
Districts and Article 15 Sign Regulations to permit
administrative approval of signs in the Old and Historic District
Ms. Swift stated this would initiate a text amendment which would
have a public hearing at the Planning Commission and Council levels.
Further, she stated staff will also present the item to the Board of
Architectural Review.
Councilmember Zoldos stated staff should seek Board of Architectural
Review approval before asking Council to initiate this amendment.
k. Making an appointment to the Cable Commission
Councilmember Zoldos stated he would like to nominate ,1.B. Anderson
for appointment to the Cable Commission.
I. Making an appointment to the Planning Commission
Councilmember Horne stated she would like to nominate Chad Moore
for appointment to the Planning Commission.
m. Making an appointment to the Airport Commission
Councilmember Hammler stated she would like to nominate Mr. ~lim
Haynes for appointment to the Airport Commission. She stated she has
received an outpouring of support from various civic leaders and asked
Council to support this nomination.
For consideration and discussion:
1. Police Response and Policies
Chief Price stated the police received a call on June 26th at :~:00 p.m. from the
residence of Mr. Tim Bigler. He stated this was an unfortunate and freighting event
for the Bigler family; however, the Commonwealth Attorney's office has determined
that there was no evidence in this case to prove criminal intent and therefore no
arrest should have been made. Further, he stated the Commonwealth Attorney,
Chief Magistrate for our district and the Chief Legal Instructor for the Northern
Virginia Regional Training Academy each independently reviewed the police report
and Mr. Bigler's statement and confirmed the officer's actions were proper as the
required criteria of criminal intent did not exist.
Councilmember Zoldos stated he would like for Mr. Bigler to be given the
opportunity to speak.
Mr. Tim Bigler stated there was a crime scene, an accuser, forced entry
through a barricaded door and a confession. He stated the intruder sat in his car for
nine minutes before the police arrived and could've stashed any weapon he might
have had in the car.
Councilmember Zoldos asked Mr. Bigler to describe the forced entry to his
house.
Town Council Work Session Minutes for August 8, 2005 Page
Chief Price stated the officer found no evidence of forced entry.
2. Town Plan Work Session
Mayor Umstattd verified the staff matrix includes all concerns raised by the
public and Council at the public hearing.
Councilmember Hammler stated she forwarded five pages of comments to
Council with eight specific suggested revisions.
CommentNumber DraftNumberPage Topic I Source Comment
Introduction
1. INT-8 (How to Plan EAC, July Add a statement to emphasize the importance of
Use the Plan) implementation 26 memo environmental protection throughout the planning
process.
Staff Response: The language proposed by the Environmental Advisory Commission would make the
point explicit.
Revision: ADD a new paragraph after the second paragraph under the heading "How to Use the Plan" to
state: "Environmental protection is a theme found in several elements, with major emphasis in the Natural
Resources element. While there is no element with the term "environment" in the title, it is an important
concept in the Plan. Land use planning and development should progress with consideration for the
protection and restoration of ecologically valuable land, and concern for environmental health that impacts
the well-being of the Town's residents as well as its natural systems."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include this revision.
NatUral ResOurces
1. NR-5 (obj 1) Wetlands Gem The Town Plan should provide the location of
Bingol, wetlands in the Town.
July 26
testimony
Staff Response: While it would be useful for the Town Plan to include a map of wetlands in the Town, it
is doubtful that reliable and comprehensive field data exits to make such a map. Wetland areas are listed as
part of the Town's green infrastructure, and it is an objective of the Town Plan to preserve them through the
stream corridor policy. When the Town evaluates possible tools to implement this policy after Town Plan
adoption, it is possible that we may promulgate a wetland delineation requirement for new development to
ensure that the policy is implemented.
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include this revision.
2. Green Watershed Gem A recommendation that the Town Plan include a
Infrastructure boundaries Bingol, map of watershed boundaries.
Policy Map testimony
7/26
Staff Response: There has been much interest in the watershed boundaries, and showing them provides
some environmental information. Therefore, the boundaries could be added to the Green Infrastructure
Policy Map.
Revision: ADD watershed boundary lines to the Green Infrastructure Policy Map.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to add this revision.
Heritage Resources
1. HR-2 (Objectives Properties Robert The owner of properties addressed as 504, 508,
discussion); identified as Reck, et 604, 608 West Market and 2 Pershing Drive
Heritage Resources appropriate for al, July 25 request that these properties not be included in the
Policy Map H-1 designation petition; list of properties eligible for H-1 district
July 26 designation.
testimony
Town Council Work Session Minutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page 6
Comment Draft Page I
Number Number Topic Source Comment
Staff Response: The section of thc tc×t that lists these properties is not a policy, but a statement of fact
that these properties have been found to be eligible for the H-1 district by previous studies. Deleting these
properties from the list will not change the fact that they are among a list that has been found to be eligible
for inclusion in the H-1. Inclusion on the list does not require or ensure that the Town will rezone the
properties to H- 1, nor does absence from the list prevent the Town from attempting to rezone them to H- 1.
Any designation to H-I would require separate public hearings to be designated. Therefore, the text and
map should not be changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revision would
accomplish it. DELETE the 6* and 7~ bullets from the list at the bottom of the right-hand column of HRo2.
REVISE the Heritage Resources Policy Map to reclassify 504, 508, 604, 608 West Market and 2 Pershing
Drive from "H-1 Old & Historic Districts, Existing & Eligible" (part of label #1) to "H-2 Districts."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include this revision.
2. Heritage Resources Old Carolina Council Revise to place label "38" (Old Carolina Road) on
Policy Map Road member Rt. 15 rather than Evergreen Mill Road.
Home,
June 27
work
session
Staff Response: According to the Loudoun County Transportation Plan, Evergreen Mill Road is part of
the "Old Carolina Road."
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include this revision.
3. Heritage Resources Indian mound on Council Add the Indian mound located on Rt. 15 near
Policy Map Rt. 15 member Foxfield Lane.
Home,
June 27
work
session
Staff Response: Bob Jolley, the Northern Region Archeologist for the Virginia Department of Historic
Resources, has no record of an Indian mound in that location. Although that does not mean that an Indian
mound is definitely not located there, he expressed serious doubt that that is the case because Indian
mounds are found in West Virginia, Ohio, and southern Virginia, but not in northern Virginia.
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus to include the revision.
Land Use
1. LU-5 (General Fiscal impact Charlie Require fiscal impact studies on all large-scaled
Land Use obi 3.c) analysis King, July projects.
26
testimony
Staff Response: The Planning Commission considered a similar comment in preparing the May 13 draft
Town Plan and added item #8 to the action program for community facilities and services stating, "Develop
a method for calculating fiscal impacts that can be applied to development applications." When that task is
completed, staff will prepare fiscal analyses for major proposals, which will be prepared with a consistent
set of assumptions and calculations. Until the task is completed, applicants for rezonings will complete
fiscal impact studies, in accordance with the Town Zoning Ordinance; such studies are prepared by the
applicant and reviewed by staff. Therefore, the text should not be changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revision would
accomplish it. REVISE General Land Use objective 3.c to state: "Provide a mixture of types of
development so that no more than 45 percent of general fund revenues are generated from residential
sources. Independent fiscal analyses should be prepared for all major development proposals."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
Town Council Work Session Minutes for August 8, 2005 Page 7
Comment Draft Page Topic Source Comment
Number Number
2. LU-5 (General Residential areas Mayor Plan objectives that relate to development in the
obis); LU-8 in Downtown Umstattd, Downtown land use category do not adequately
(Central Sector June 27 protect established residential areas from the
obis); LU- 16 (Land work intrusion of commercial or mixed use
Use Policy Map session, development.
section, Downtown July 20
category) email, July
25 work
session,
July 26
hearing
Staff Response: The Planning Commission considered the comments from residents regarding this issue
and the Downtown land use category section was completely revised to include the text, "These
[residential] areas are planned to remain as they are, with compatible residential infill." (LU-16). In the
Central Sector, objective 5 states, "Take advantage of redevelopment opportunities outside of residential
areas .... "In the General Objectives section, objective 2 states, "Development and redevelopment shall be
compatible with the Town's character in terms of land use and design." There are, however, other pertinent
objectives that could be interpreted as meaning to deemphasize the importance of protecting residential
areas from the intrusion of non-residential uses. In the General Objectives, LU-5, objective 6 states, "Use
the mixed use concept as designated in the planning sectors and in some land use categories to increase
walkability and help reduce traffic." In the Central Sector, LU-8, objective 2 states, "Encourage retail,
personal and professional services uses for daily and weekly needs of residents of the Central Sector in
locations where they are lacking." Both of these latter objectives can and should be revised to make it clear
that established residential areas should be completely protected fi'om the intrusion of non-residential uses
or mixed use development.
Revision: REVISE objective 6 of the General objectives, to add a sentence, "This type of development is
not appropriate in established residential areas." REVISE objective 2 of the Central Sector objectives to
add a sentence, "Such uses are not appropriate in established residential areas."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the revision.
3. LU-8, (Central Pad sites Staff The Planning Commission's position regarding
Sector obi 3); LU- the planning for pad sites was not fully reflected
10 (Northeast in their resolution and should be corrected.
Sector obi 2)
Staff Response: The intent of the Planning Commission was to indicate that pad sites are only appropriate
in commercial land use categories, not office categories. Therefore, objective 3 in the Central Sector
should be revised to be consistent with the latest decision of the Planning Commission on pad sites in the
Regional Retail and Community Commercial land use categories, and objective 2 in the Northeast Sector
should be deleted since it was superseded by the latest decision of the Commission on pad sites in the
retail/commercial and office land use categories.
Revision: REVISE LU-8, Central Sector objective 3, "Pad sites should not have direct access to abutting
major streets and should be located within 300 feet of the primary buildings, with sidewalks and
landscaping to encourage walking." DELETE: LU-11, Northeast Sector, objective 2 (and renumber the
following objectives).
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the revision.
4. LU-9 (Central School on North Council The conditions should be deleted that limit the
Sector obi 8.b & King Street member development of a school on the land in the
8.e) Robert UGA/JLMA on the western side of North King
Zoldos, Street north of Ida Lee Park by setting a
July 25 maximum of 800 students and prohibiting lighted
email athletic facilities.
Town Council Work Session Minutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page
Comment Draft Page I Topic Source
Comment
Number Number
Staff Response: Throughout the writing of the draft Town Plan, members of the public spoke of the
special character of North King Street and its importance as the northern gateway into Town. In order to
protect that situation, objective 8 and the related objectives were written as an attempt to ensure that
development of the site would respect its rural character and sensitive environmental features, including a
stream, springs, and wooded areas, as well as Morven Park and views from North King Street. The
Planning Commission was aware of interest in the property by Loudoun County Public Schools and a
private school; several people had also suggested that the site would be appropriate for a performing arts
center. While the intent of the Community Facilities and Services element of the Plan is to accept
community facilities, such as public schools, on land throughout the Town, it is reasonable in this instance
to specifically state in the Central Sector objectives that such facilities should be allowed provided the
character of the site is maintained.
Recently Town Council has been in discussions with the school board, which has firmed up its plans to
develop a portion of the site. Those plans include a student body of 1,800 and lighted athletic facilities.
Council has indicated that it is amenable to those aspects of the development. With the deletion of the
student capacity and lighting guidelines, as suggested in the comment, other wording in the objective would
give direction for sensitive development of the property referred to in the objective. Therefore, a revision
of the objectives would reflect recent Council decisions while still providing significant protection of the
site's major characteristics.
Revision: REVISE Central Sector objective 8.b to state: "If community facilities are considered for the
site, they should be developed at a scale commensurate with the rural residential use planned for this
property and designed in a way to protect sensitive environmental features of the property." DELETE
Central Sector 8.e.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the revision.
5. LU-11 (Northeast Community Deborah Designation of Community Office for the vacant
Sector obi 4); Land Office on Welsh, parcel east of Costco on Edwards Ferry Road
Use Policy Map Edwards Ferry July 26 should be changed to Community Commercial.
Road testimony
Staff Response: This comment was made to the Planning Commission as it considered the draft Town
Plan. The Planning Commission recognized the negative impacts on the adjacent residences when the
regional retail uses were recently constructed. Regarding this 1 O-acre parcel located between regional retail
and low residential use the Planning Commission decided that the Community Office designation with a
low FAR provides more protection for the neighborhood. In addition, the draft Plan already provides for
sufficient community commercial uses for the Northeast planning sector along Battlefield Parkway. For
these reasons, the designation should not be changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revisions would
accomplish it DELETE: objective 4 in the Northeast Sector, and renumber the following objectives;
REVISE: Land Use Policy Map to designate Community Commercial use for the site.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
6. LU-13 (Southeast Approved Mayor How does the Community Office/Light Industrial
Sector obis) building height in Umstattd, designation affect the maximum height
Oaklawn July 25 requirement, as contained in the proffer for the
work Oaklawn development, which allows maximum
session 80-foot-tall buildings, at Tolbert Lane and Dulles
Greenway?
Staff Response: The Community Office/Light Industrial category does not set height limitations, which
would be contained in applicable zoning regulations. The height limitations in the Oaklawn development's
approved proffers are controlling, as long as the applicant continues to develop the property under the
approved rezoning concept plan. See also item #21 in which Brian Cullen requests Regional Office
designation.
Revision: No revision is recommended. See also item #21, in which Brian Cullen requests Regional
Office.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
Town Council Work Session Minutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page 9
Comment Draft Page Topic Source Comment
Number Number
7. LU-14 (Southeast Community Ben Leigh, 1) Ben Leigh requests that the option described in
Sector, obj. 10'); Office on Sycolin Pat the objective be removed and that the Land Use
Land Use Policy Road Horrocks, Policy Map reflect the existing zoning. 2) Pat
Map July 26 Horrocks says single access condition is too
testimony limiting and zoning of her property should be
comparable to the O-1 and B-3 zoning on the
adjacent parcels.
Staff Response: The Planning Commission gave careful consideration of these two properties, along with
a third property, that front the eastern side of Sycolin Road between Lawson Road and the Rt. 7/15 Bypass.
Despite a similar request by at least one of the property owners, the Commission believed that the best way
to encourage suitable development of these properties is as presented in the draft Town Plan. Because of
the significant problems with access, steep slopes, and floodplains on these narrow parcels adjacent to
existing residential subdivisions, the Low Density Residential category is appropriate. The draft Plan
encourages a joint resolution rather than piecemeal answers for each property separately. If the problems
can be resolved, then the Community Office category is acceptable, without the need for a Plan
amendment. The Commission acknowledged that Mr. Leigh can develop his property according to existing
zoning, despite the draft Plan's designation for it. Therefore, the designation should not be changed so that
if an application is submitted, the Town can use the draft Plan's vision to evaluate it.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revision would
accomplish it. REVISE objective 10' of the Southeast Sector by adding: "Land fronting on the eastern
side of Sycolin Road between the Route 15 Bypass and the planned Battlefield Parkway is appropriate for
development consistent with the Low Density Residential land use category, as shown on the Land Use
Policy Map. As an option, use consistent with the Community Office land use category may be considered
if a 50-foot vegetative buffer area is provided adjacent to any residential development. Under this option,
structured parking is strongly encouraged because of the character of the land's natural resources."
Council Consensus: Mr. Leigh addressed Council in support of his suggested revision. It was the
consensus of Council to defer this item to a later date.
8. LU-14 (Southwest Leesburg South Mayor Add an objective calling for the 300 acres
Sector obis) parcel Umstattd, bounded by Rt. 15, Evergreen Mill Road, and
July 20 Masons Lane to be developed at a density of no
email; more than 1 dwelling unit per acre.
Charlie
King, Ann
Bollinger,
July 26
testimony
Staff Response: The Planning Commission considered this alternative in its deliberations but decided not
to include such a provision. The Commission's discussion of this property included the possibility of a
density of 1 dwelling unit per acre. Information before the Commission included that this density would
not be consistent with surrounding densities in the Town, where a variety of community facilities and
services are provided at a level to support more intensive use than is found in rural areas of the County. In
particular, three public schools and a major Town park are within walking distance of the site, and Town
sewer and water lines already exist next to and on the site. Mitigation of other impacts of the development
at the draft 1-4 dwelling units per acre are addressed in the draft Plan, as well as current Town regulations.
In addition, the density for the site in the draft Plan helps to meet other objectives of the draft Plan, in
particular those for housing for future population. Finally, the density policy for the draft Town Plan is
consistent with long-standing policies for the site, including the Leesburg Area Management Plan (1982),
the 1986 Town Plan, the Annexation Area Development Policies (1991), and the 1997 Town Plan.
Therefore, the text (or Land Use Policy Map) should not be changed.
Town Council Work Session IVlinutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page 10
Comment Draft Page ]
Number Number Topic Source Comment
I
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revision would
accomplish it. ADD a new objective 2 (and renumber subsequent objectives) to state: "The 300 acre site
bounded by Rt. 15, Evergreen Mill Road, and Masons Lane should be developed at a residential density of
1 dwelling unit per acre."
Alternative Revision: If Council is not comfortable with either the draft Plan language or the revision
immediately below, an alternative revision is included. This alternative, by including a range of densities,
would allow the Town to seek additional commitments to offset impacts and public benefits that would
fulfill additional objectives of the Plan (as listed in the Plan's density criteria if an applicant desires higher
density development--see item #16, below). ADD a new objective 2 (and renumber subsequent
objectives) to state: "The 300 acre site bounded by Rt. 15, Evergreen Mill Road, and Masons Lane should
be developed at a residential density of 1 to 2 (or 1 to 3) dwelling units per acre."
Alternative Revision: CREATE a new land use category for this property on the Land Use Policy Map.
REVISE accompanying "Table 1: Residential" in the Land Use Policy Map text, Residential land use
category, to include a new residential category, "One Acre" with a density of"l du/ac" and a building type
of "Single family detached," following the "Rural" category. (The name and density may need to change,
depending on how Council decides on the two alternatives above.)
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the first revision of one unit per acre.
9. LU-14 (Southwest Leesburg South Peter The density for the 300 acres bounded by Rt. 15,
Sector obis) parcel Kalaris, Evergreen Mill Road, and Masons Lane should
July 26 not be lowered with the addition of an objective.
testimony
Staff Response: See response to item #8, above.
Revision: No revision would be necessary to satisfy the comment.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to defer this item to a later date.
10. LU-14 (Southwest Leesburg South Numa Beyond the grocery, a second tenant of 20,000 to
Sector obi 1) parcel Jerome, 30,000 square feet should be allowed.
July 26
testimony
Staff Response: This comment was raised before the Planning Commission, which decided to leave this
provision out. Although something larger than the 10,000-square-foot maximum may be appropriate
(perhaps a drug store), numerous uses could be accommodated in a 20,000- or 30,000-square-foot (such as
a chain bookstore) that would not be appropriate for a community commercial area serving the Southwest
planning sector. Therefore, the text should not be revised.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revision would
accomplish it. ADD a new objective 1.c (and renumber subsequent objectives) to state: "A second tenant
of no more than 30,000 square feet may be provided."
Council Consensus: Mike Banzhaf addressed Council regarding the need for the expanded retail at this
location given the number of homes proposed as part of the Meadowbrook proposal. It was the consensus
of Council to defer this matter to a later date.
11. LU-14 (Southwest Leesburg South Peter The 150,000-square-foot maximum on
Sector obi 1.a*) parcel Kalaris, nonresidential development should be raised.
Numa
Jerome,
July 26
testimony
Staff Response: The Planning Commission spent much time deliberating the appropriate maximum size
for this community commercial area, serving the Southwest planning sector. In earlier drafts of this
objective, the Commission considered 250,000 and 100,000 maximum amounts of building area before
deciding on 150,000 square feet as appropriate for this planning sector. Therefore, the text should not be
changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revision would
accomplish it. REVISE objective 1 .a to state: "Development should not exceed x square feet."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to defer this matter to a later date.
Town Council Work Session lVlinutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page l !
Comment Draft Page Topic Source Comment
Number Number
12. LU-14 (Southwest Journey Through Mayor The objective should reflect the resolution
Sector obj 3) Hallowed Umstattd, adopted by Town Council on June 14, 2005.
Ground June 27
work
session
Staff Response: The Town Council resolution approved a budget transfer to designate $25,000 to be used
for community workshops and programming for a web-based support system. These activities should help
ensure that design considerations called for in objective 3 are met.
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: A clarification was made that Council had passed a resolution in support of the
Journey Through Hallowed Ground, but had not appropriated any funds. It was the consensus of Council
to strike the term "traffic calming" from Objective 3. Further, it was also the consensus of Council to add
this language in the General Objectives section.
13. LU-14 (Southwest Journey Through Ken Reid, ADD the words "future commercial" after the
Sector obj 3) Hallowed July 26 word "residential."
Ground testimony
Staff Response: This revision would provide additional landscaping for the corridor.
Revision: REVISE the first sentence of objective 3 to state: "Design South King Street (Route 15) with
consideration given to its being a gateway to the town, an essential segment of the Journey Through
Hallowed Ground corridor, and a multi-modal route bordering residential and commercial areas."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council that this was addressed in item #12 above.
14. Land Use Policy Residential Mayor The plan appears to endorse a higher residential
Map development Umstattd, growth scenario for the Town in general and
July 20, particularly along the Route 7 where there is a
email; July major deviation from the current Plan
25 work classification of this area being a premier regional
session office corridor.
Town Council Work Session Minutes for August 8, 2005 Page 12
Comment Draft Page
___Number Number Topic Source Comment
Staff Response: Thc draft Town Plan docs not increase thc area covered by residential dcsi§nations in thc
1997 Town Plan (except between Dulles Greenway and Evergreen Mill Road, which has been substantially
subdivided and developed with large-lot residences). To the extent that the draft Plan includes Major
Institutional and Major Open Space on the Land Use Policy Map, residential areas are less than those
shown in the 1997 Plan. The draft Plan reduces densities from the 1997 Plan's guidelines in the following
ways:
· The draft Plan's Rural Density areas (in parts of the UGA/JLMA), the density is 1 dwelling unit per 20
acres, compared to the 1997 Plan's 1-4 dwellings per acre.
· The draft's Low Density land use category, which is the largest area designated residential, the density
is lowered from the current Plan's 1-5 dwellings per acre to 1-4 dwellings per acre. (See also Plan text
for density criteria in item #15, below).
Regarding residential uses in other land use categories, the 1997 Plan encourages residential use in the infill
area (called Downtown in the draft Plan), and calls for mixed use, which would include residential uses,
virtually anywhere outside the Bypass. Instead of that broad call for mixed uses, the draft Plan calls for
residential uses in only 3 areas that are designated other than residential on the Land Use Policy Map:
· within the Regional Office as an optional use (along the southern side of Rt. 7), where residences are
limited to no more than 25 percent ora project's total square feet, if the Town deems that option to be
acceptable;
· in the Northeast planning sector's Community Commercial area; and
· in the Downtown area.
Finally, the residential uses called for in the Business II areas as classified by the 1997 Plan are eliminated
in the draft Plan (except for the Business II area west of Dulles Greenway that the draft Plan classifies as
Rural Residential).
The residential use shown on the Land Use Policy Map on the north side of Route 7 east of the Harper
School in part reflects the two existing schools and the existing retail and residential development in the
Potomac Station PRC zoning. For four small parcels fronting on Route 7 in this area, which are classified
as Low-Density Residential use on the Land Use Policy Map, the Planning Commission has included text
to allow an option for Community Office under certain conditions. Thus non-residential use is available on
all the land in this area that is not already developed for residential use.
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council not to include the revision.
15. LU-16 (Land Use Residential Mayor The Plan should state that "where a range of
Policy Map text, density ranges Umstattd, residential densities is outlined, the lowest density
Residential July 20 is considered the most appropriate."
section) email;
Charlie
King, July
26
testimony
Staff Response: The revision below is the same as the one presented at Town Council's work session on
July 25 (except that criterion #9 has been added) and will accomplish the intent of the comment.
Town Council Work Session Minutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page 13
Comment Draft Page I
Number Number Topic Source Comment
I
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revision would
accomplish it. REPLACE the second paragraph and list under the heading "Residential" with the
following:
"When the Town Plan states a range of densities for a residential land use category, it is the Town
Council's position that the low end of the stated range provides the most appropriate use of the property.
Clear justification is needed before development at a higher density is warranted or appropriate.
"If a residential density range is stated, even the low end of the range requires at a minimum, justification
showing that ordinance requirements are met under the proposed zoning. Consideration of a density above
the low end of the range should be based on the extent to which applicable objectives in the Town Plan are
not just fulfilled, but exceeded in a manner that justifies special consideration. Included in such objectives
are, but are not limit to, the following:
1. Protection of natural resources, including green infrastructure and tree save areas.
2. Protection of heritage resources.
3. Provision of community facilities, including transportation.
4. Offset of community facilities costs, such as related to schools, fire and rescue facilities.
5. Provision of park and recreation facilities.
6. Provision of the highest-quality design amenities, including landscaping, streetscaping, setbacks or
berming along major roads.
7. Provision of affordable housing.
8. Compatibility with the surrounding area.
9. Commitment to provide appropriately phased development, including necessary infrastructure before
__ the actual occupancy of uses."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the revision.
16. LU-17 (Regional Retail in office Gem The maximum amount of retail square feet should
Office, Intensity, land use Bingol, be 10%, not 20% for the Regional Office and
#2); LU-19 categories July 26 Community Office land use categories.
(Community testimony
Office, Intensity,
#2)
Staff Response: The Planning Commission considered the issue and decided that a 10% cap on retail use
does not provide sufficient space to make it financially viable. Therefore, the text should not be changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revisions would
accomplish it. REVISE LU-17, Land Use Policy Map Text, Regional Office Category, Intensity # 2 to
state 10%; REVISE LU- 19 Land Use Policy Map Text Community Office Category, Intensity #2 to state
10%
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
17. LU-18 (Land Use Residential Gem In the Rt. 7 corridor, residential use should be
Policy Map Bingol, limited to the Regional Office option and
section, Regional July 26 designed only to be vertically integrated with the
Office, Optional testimony other uses allowed for the option.
Uses and Design)
Staff Response: The Planning Commission considered the residential issue in the Rt. 7 corridor at several
meetings. After prohibiting residential use there, the Commission decided that residential use would be
appropriate as part of an option that combined office, retail, and residential uses with numerous design
guidelines. The Commission recognized the advantages of a vertical mix of residential and non-residential
uses but also determined that an area of only residential use allowed near Tuscarora Creek would provide a
good transition from non-residential uses near Rt. 7 to the existing residential communities on the opposite
side of Tuscarora Creek. Therefore, the text should not be changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revision would
accomplish it. REVISE #7 to Regional Office, Optional Uses and Design by adding language to state:
"Residential uses should only be vertically integrated with non-residential uses."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
Town Council Work Session Minutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page 14
Comment Draft Page Topic Source Comment
Number Number
18. LU-18 (Land Use Land Use Colleen l) Phasing should reflect market demands, but
Policy Map Snow, July mixed-use projects should always remain mixed-
section, Regional 26 use projects. 2) Mixed-use projects should be
Office, Optional testimony vertically and horizontally integrated. 3) Density
Uses and Design) should be concentrated along major corridors.
Staff Response: 1) The Plan text objective states that the office component of a project should be the
predominant use as construction occurs. Without this objective, retail or residential uses could be
developed and stand alone for an indeterminate time period. That would not implement the vision
described in this option. One of the purposes of the option is to maintain the office as the primary character
of development. The objective may mean that no development occurs until office use is marketable, which
is not problematic in terms of the stated vision for development. Staff recommends no change. 2)
Paragraph//7 under the Optional Uses and Design section states that "...a project should combine uses
vertically or horizontally to achieve convenience and walkability." Therefore, no revision is needed to
address the comment. 3) The more intense land uses in Town are proposed to be along major corridors.
Therefore, no revision is necessar~ to address the comment.
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: Ms. Colleen Snow addressed Council to urge them to consider her proposed
amendment to allow flexibility in the plan. It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
19. LU-21 (Land Use Editorial Staff Clarify that the maximum tenant size in the
Policy Map text, Regional Retail land use category applies only to
Regional Retail retail uses.
section, Intensity
//2)
Staff Response: The revision would allow offices to exceed 150,000 square feet.
Revision: REVISE item #2 to state: "Individual retail tenant size should not exceed 150,000 square feet."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the revision.
20. LU-21, (Land Use Pad sites Gem Pad sites are not appropriate in the Town.
Policy Map text, Bingol,
Regional Retail July 26
category, Site testimony
Design and
Location, #2); LU-
23 (Community
Commercial
category, Site
Design and
Location,//2)
Staff Response: The Planning Commission paid special attention to the issue of pad sites. After much
discussion, the Commission decided on allowing pad sites, with certain design criteria to help minimize
negative impacts, in the Regional Retail and Community Commercial land use categories but prohibiting
them in the Regional Office and Community Office categories. The Commission's reasoning was that pad
sites provide necessary services; they should, however, be limited to planned commercial areas. For these
reasons, the text should not be changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revisions would
accomplish it. REVISE: LU-21, Land Use Policy Map text, Regional Retail category, Site Design and
Location, #2, to read "Pad sites are not appropriate."
REVISE: LU-23, Community Commercial category, Site Design and Location,//9, to state: "Pad sites are
not appropriate."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
21. Land Use Policy Oaklawn Brian Designate this area Regional Office.
Map Cullen,
July 26
testimony
Town Council Work Session Minutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page
Comment DraftPage J [
Number Number Topic Source Comment
Staff Response: The property has low density residential development adjacent to it, and is in part already
approved for residential development. The Planning Commission reviewed the designation for this area
and concluded that the Regional Office category was not appropriate here. Similarly, the Commission
decided that light industrial uses would be appropriate so near the airport. It should also be noted that the
non-residential FAR approved for the Oaklawn property is within the range for the Community Office
category. Therefore, the designation of Community Office/Light Industrial should not be changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revisions would
accomplish it. REVISE the Land Use Policy Map to show the area north of Tolbert Lane, east of the Dulles
Greenway, west of Sycolin Road, and south of the Stowers development as Regional Office.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the revision.
22. Land Use Policy Land use Paul This property has significant environmental
Map designation for Arnone, features including a large area of Goose Creek
the area bounded testimony stream valley. It should be planned for single-
by Goose Creek 7/26 family residential development rather than Light
Country Club, Industrial use.
Goose Creek,
Corcoran Mill
Road, and the
W&OD Trail.
Response: The property is adjacent to a stone quarry and other heavy industrial uses. It is currently
planned for industrial and business uses on both the 1997 Town Plan and the current Loudoun County
General Plan. It is our understanding that the quarry has a 40-year permit. Based on the adjacent uses and
the planning history, the map should not be changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revision would
accomplish it. REVISE the Land Use Policy Map to show the area bounded by the Goose Creek Country
Club, Goose Creek, Corcoran Mill Road, and the W & OD Trail as Low Density Residential, or another
category to be chosen by the Council.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to defer this item to a later time.
Housing
1. H-3 (obi 2) Housing quality Mayor Concerned that housing objectives imposing
Umstattd, regulations to maintain private property may lead
July 26 to hardships for residents.
testimony
Staff Response: Objective 2 does not contain any measures that impose further regulations regarding
maintenances of residences. This regulation falls under the County's building and house maintenance
codes. Objectives 2 addresses how to assist residents in maintaining housing quality and infrastructure by
using tools such as the Community Development Block Grant and the newly created Community
Enhancement Team. Therefore, the revision should not be accepted.
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
Economic Development
1. ED-2 (obi 1) Editorial Staff Correct an editorial error by replacing original
objective 1.
Staff Response: Objective 1 states the Town's policy toward tourism, but it should be objective 1.a. A
broader statement that covers all the economic development policies in objectives 1 .a through 1 .g is needed
for objective 1; such language was in the February 4 draft of the Town Plan but was inadvertently deleted.
Revision: REVISE objective 1 to state: "Promote economic development that builds upon the strengths of
the Town and region." ADD objective 1.a (and re-letter the following objectives) to state: "Promote
tourist-oriented business development, based on the historical, cultural, and natural attractions of the Town
and the surrounding area."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the revision.
Transportation
Town Council Work Session Minutes for August 8, 2005 Page 16
Comment Draft Page Topic Source Comment
Number Number
l. TR-5 (obi 3) Roundabouts VDOT Consider the use of roundabouts as an alternative
staff, July to traditional intersections on collector roads and,
5 letter on a project-by-project basis, on arterial roads.
Staff Response: As mentioned in the objective, the Town has a Standing Residential Traffic Committee
that reviews the need for traffic calming devices. Now that the Virginia Department of Transportation has
accepted roundabouts as a traffic-calming device under appropriate circumstances, such facilities are
available for the Town to consider on state-maintained streets.
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the revision.
2. TR-6 (obi 3.k) Journey Mayor The objective should reflect the resolution adopted
Through Umstattd, by Town Council on June 14.
Hallowed June 27
Ground work
session
Staff Response: The Town Council resolution approved a budget transfer to designate $25,000 to be used
for community workshops and programming for a web-based support system. These activities should help
ensure that design considerations called for in objective 3 are met.
Revision: No revision would be necessary to satisfy the comment.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council that this revision has already been addressed.
3. TR-6 (obj 3.k) Rt. 15 traffic Ken Reid, By referring to "any improvements," this
calming July 26 objective will be used to block the four-laning of
testimony South King Street.
Staff Response: The objective seeks to ensure that improvements to Rt. 15 are done sensitively, given the
historic importance of the Journey Through Hallowed Ground. It is certainly possible that a four-lane
cross-section can be designed with such sensitivity. Therefore, the text should not be changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revisions would
accomplish it. REVISE objective 3.k to state: "Consider Rt. 15 in Leesburg as an essential segment of the
Journey Through Hallowed Ground corridor. This aspect of Rt. 15 should be taken into consideration when
proposed improvements to traffic flow and capacity are evaluated."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council that this revision has already been addressed.
4. TR-7 (obi 7.a) Phasing of Charlie Road improvements should be provided before for
improvements King, July any/all developments are constructed.
26
testimony
Staff Response: The Planning Commission considered this comment when reviewing the draft Town Plan
but decided that the approved wording of objective 7.a is appropriate. Objective 7.a of the draft Plan
addresses the provision of transportation improvements by developers. Generally, by-right development
provides improvements upfront. The timing of improvements related to special exceptions and rezonings is
subject to the negotiation of each special exception and rezoning. Therefore, the text should not be
changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revisions would
accomplish it. REVISE objective 7.a to state: "Seek proffers and conditions of approval to mitigate the
transportation impacts of new development and redevelopment. Any necessary improvements should be
provided prior to the construction of any approved development."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision plan.
Town Council Work Session Minutes for August 8, 2005 Paqe l?
Comment Draft Page I
Number Number Topic Source Comment
I
5. Roadway Network Diamond VDOT Specifying an interchange type other than a
Policy Map interchanges staff, July 5 cloverleaf is contrary to a long-standing policy
letter; Ken under which an assumed cloverleaf interchange
Reid, July would provide for the proffer of an optimal
26 interchange in the absence of supporting data for
testimony an alternative design that is operationally
equivalent. It may lead to the lack of available
right-of-way should a larger interchange type be
necessary and is not supported by VDOT.
Staff Response: The Planning Commission considered the implications of revising the draR Plan to call
for diamond rather than cloverleaf interchanges. The Commission decided that Town policy should call for
diamonds, in part based on the favorable traffic analysis of a diamond interchange proposed for Rt. 7/Cross
Creek Parkway. The Commission understands that VDOT has permit approval of interchanges on Rt. 7
and Rt. 15 Bypass and that such approval will include an analysis of the traffic capacity of the interchange.
In addition, we note that land has been reserved for cloverleaf ramps at two quadrants of the proposed the
Rt. 7/Cross Creek Parkway interchange, one quadrant of the proposed Rt. 7/Battlefield Parkway
interchange, and all quadrants of the proposed Rt. 15 Bypass/Battlefield Parkway interchange. Therefore,
the map should not be changed.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revisions would
accomplish it. REVISE the Roadway Network Map to indicate cloverleaf interchanges on Rt. 7 at Cross
Creek Parkway and Battlefield Parkway, and on Rt. 15 Bypass at Battlefield Parkway.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
6. Roadway Network Flyover on Ken Reid, Provide a flyover where Evergreen Mill Road and
Policy Map Evergreen Mill July 26 Battlefield Parkway will intersect.
Road testimony
Response: Due to the proximity of the interchange to be located, the Dulles Greenway and Battlefield
Parkway, both the Virginia Department of Transportation and Town Engineering staff have concluded that
a fly over is not warranted at Evergreen Mills Road and Battlefield Parkway intersection.
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
7. Road Network Rt. 15 Bypass/ VDOT A cloverleaf design should be used for this
Policy Map Business staff, July interchange.
intersection 5 letter
Response: The designation of the interchange on the Road Network Policy Map is that contained in the
1997 Town Plan. A Town-wide transportation study has not been conducted since the 1997 Plan's
adoption, but the draft Plan calls for such a study (objective 1.h). That study will provide the basis for
reconsidering the interchange.
Revision: No revision recommended.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
8. Roadway Network Alignment of Mayor The road network and bicycle/pedestrian maps are
Policy Map Battlefield Umstattd, inconsistent in relation to the planned route of
Parkway July 20 Battlefield Parkway north of Mason's Lane.
email
Staff Response: This comment is correct.
Revision: REVISE the Roadway Network Policy Map to indicate the alignment of Battlefield Parkway
consistent with that shown in the Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities Policy Map.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the revision.
9. Bicycle/ Multi-use VDOT The widths of multi-use paths on various corridors
Pedestrian paths staff, July should be specified, unless they are to be uniform
Facilities Policy 5 letter throughout the Town.
Map
Staff Response: The Town's present policy is to require multi-use paths to be 10 feet wide. Therefore,
there is no need to indicate variable widths on the Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities Policy Map.
Town Council Work Session Minutes for Auqust 8, 2005 Page 18
Comment Draft Page
Number Number Topic Source Comment
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
Community FaCilitieS and Services
I. CFS-3 (obj. 4) Transmission Mayor The objective should state that all transmission lines
Lines Umstattd, above or below ground should not be located in or
June 27 near the Town.
work
session
Staff Response: The Planning Commission had considered proscriptive language similar to the suggested
change, but agreed to the language as written in the draft Plan because it provides a basis for working with
the State Corporation Commission (SCC) to try to protect the interests of the Town. The SCC makes
decisions about the location of electrical transmission lines. It should be noted that the SCC solicits the
opinions of citizens and governments potentially impacted by transmission line placement decisions but is
not required to follow them.
Revision: If it is the Council's decision to make the requested change, the following revisions would
accomplish it. REVISE objective 4.b, deleting reference to transmission lines, to read: "Encourage the
selection of locations for towers and monopoles which are outside the Town limits, or collocated with
existing towers." ADD a new 4.c (and re-letter the following objectives) to read: "Electrical transmission
lines whether above or below sround should not be located in or near the Town."
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to include the revision.
Miscellaneous
1. Entire document Complexity of Hub The draft Town Plan is much too complex. A
the draft Town Turner, simplified, shorter version should be written.
Plan July 27
testimony
Response: The draft Town Plan represents the input of hundreds of citizens, several of the Town's
advisory commissions, the Town staff, land owners, the Planning Commission, and the Town Council. It is
not easy to distill divergent views and complex, integrated issues, but we believe the Town Plan does a
good job. Toward that end, the background reports are separate documents from the Town Plan, with the
intent to make the Plan shorter and easier to use in the land use and development process.
Revision: No revision is recommended.
Council Consensus: It was the consensus of Council to not include the revision.
Mayor Umstattd stated there is an additional proposal to consider an
amendment initiated by Staff to add a footnote in Section TR-10 "Road Design" to
state, "The decision of whether roads will be divided rests with the Town."
It was the consensus of Council to include that revision.
Mr. Wells stated the vote is scheduled for September 13 and staff will prepare
a compilation of what was decided tonight.
Councilmember Zoldos asked that an additional work session be scheduled.
It was the consensus of Council to schedule an additional work session for
September 6th.
3. Police Relationship with the Sheriff's Office/Public Safety Commission
Councilmember Zoldos stated his concern regarding a report in the media
regarding assistance the Town might need from the Sheriff's Office. He asked what
assistance or resources does the Town need from the Sheriff's office and how long
will that assistance be required.
Town Council Work Session Minutes for August 8, 2005 Page
Chief Price stated the LPD has established a memorandum of understanding
with the Loudoun County Sheriff's office to assure there is a smooth handoff. He
stated we share resources all the time and stated the report in the press that the
County is handling all felony investigations is incorrect. Further, he stated there
have only been three instances where investigations were handed off to the County.
Vice Mayor Martinez commented on the turn over in the Police Department
and how that is attributable to the officers moving on to higher level positions with
other agencies. Further, he asked if the need for assistance from the Sheriff's
Department is a temporary need.
Chief Price stated this memorandum of understanding is standard operating
procedure and the Town will call on the County as necessary.
Councilmember Zoldos asked if the Sheriff's Deputies could patrol the
Town or provide school resource officers.
Chief Price stated that would be the decision of the Sheriff. Further, he stated
our officers provide resources to the two high schools and three middle schools in
Town.
Mayor Umstattd asked Chief Price to address his strategic plan for
establishing a citizen commission.
Chief Price stated during the strategic plan discussion in April a number of
objectives were identified for the next three years. He stated in year one the
police department is looking to establish two advisory groups to assist the police
in establishing a conduit of communication with the community. Further, he
stated the other objectives would be a Crime Prevention Council and a Youth
Advisory Committee.
Councilmember Zoldos stated his recommendation for a Public Safety
Commission to have oversight regarding fire, rescue and police.
Mayor Umstattd advised we would not have oversight ability with the fire and
rescue; however, it might work if there were no public officials involved.
stated
Preparation for the 3oint Planning Meeting with the Loudoun County
Board of Supervisors
Mr. Wells verified September 29th is a good date for the joint meeting. He
no decision has been made regarding the location or time for the meeting.
Councilmember Zoldos recommended the Town host the meeting at Tda
Lee at 6:30 p.m.
Mayor Umstattd asked Mr. Wells to contact the County to see if they would
prefer to host the meeting.
Councilmember Hammler asked Planning Commission Chairman Kevin Wright
to provide an update on the Planning Subcommittee.
Mr. Wright stated the Planning Commission Subcommittee met last Thursday
to lay the ground work for joint planning on the CPAMs. He stated additional
Town Council Work Session Minutes for August 8, 2005 Page 20
meetings are scheduled for the next two Thursdays. Further, he stated they have
been in contact with the County's subcommittee and are working to set a date for
the first joint meeting.
For information only:
Preview Ttems for September 12, 2005 work session
a. Community Agencies guidelines
Mr. Wells stated Council members had asked that staff establish
guidelines and criteria dealing with funding for community agency requests.
New Business:
a. Downtown Parking Enforcement
Councilmember Horne stated she would like to bring forward a motion
tomorrow night to convert the one-hour meters on King and Market Streets to
two-hours. Further, she stated Council should specifically look at the staff
level and solicit public input to see how we can make our new parking
strategies build goodwill in the Town.
Adjournment
On a motion by Councilmember Zoldos, seconded by Vice Mayor Martinez the
meeting was adjourned at :12:17 a.m. on Tuesday, August 9, 2005.
~/Clerk of Council
2005_tcwsmin0808