Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2009_tcwsmin0511 Council Work Session May 11, 2009 Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, 7:30 p.m. Mayor Umstattd presiding. Council Members Present: David Butler, Thomas Dunn, II, Katie Sheldon Hammier, Ken Reid, Kevin Wright and Mayor Kristen Umstattd Council Members Absent: Marty Martinez Staff Present: Town Manager John Wells, Deputy Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Town Attorney Jeanette Irby, Director of Public Works Tom Mason, Director of Planning and Zoning Susan Berry Hill, Deputy Director of Planning and Zoning Brian Boucher, Economic Development Manager Marantha Edwards, Assistant to the Town Manager Scott Parker, Zoning Administrator Chris Murphy, and Management Specialist/Deputy Clerk of Council Debi Parry AGENDA ITEMS 1. Work Session Items for Discussion: a. North King Street Drainage CIP IScope of work Kaj Dentler stated staff received a request from a resident on North King Street between Union Street and Union Cemetery to extend sidewalk, curb and gutter for this area as part of the North King Street Drainage Improvement project. He stated the reason this portion was not included previously was because of two trees which have since been removed at the recommendation of our Urban Forester. He stated no engineering work has been done on this portion and the estimated cost is $225,000 to $300,000. He stated funds are available in the Capital Projects Fund from the savings on other projects. He stated that traditionally the brick sidewalks are only extended to the end of the Historic District; however, he recommended extending them slightly further in front of the last house to Ida Lee Trail where this would convert to an asphalt trail. He stated this would also improve the cemetery's drainage. He suggested adding this to the existing project stating it would be an improvement to this entrance to Town. Council Member Reid stated so it is not really going all the way from Union Street, it is going from this house. Mr. Dentler stated there is a concrete sidewalk in front of one of the homes which staff recommends removing and replacing with the brick sidewalk with curb and gutter. Council Member Reid asked don't some people park their cars on the gravel area there, wouldn't you be obliterating that. Mr. Dentler stated currently the residents do park there. He stated staff has spoken with the residents and family members of the middle homes who support this improvement. Council Member Reid stated he is all for this and for extending the sidewalk. He stated if we are going to be going in there and doing the drainage project this is the time to do it. He stated he likes the idea of the regular Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Paqe 2 asphalt trail when you get over to Ida Lee and asked if curb and gutter is needed there too. Mr. Dentler stated it is part of the drainage improvements. Council Member Reid stated the thing that always concerns me is that we are going to have, in this case, a concrete sidewalk, brick and then asphalt. He stated he wishes there could be some flexibility in the policy for this. He stated brick is more expensive, probably in the scale of things it is not that much more, but he wishes there is something we could do to just make it concrete and then do the asphalt when you get out to the Ida Lee area. Council Member Butler asked how much less this additional section will cost by doing it now rather than prioritizing this as a separate project through our normal process. Mr. Dentler stated the cost would be significantly less since staff is mobilized and we already have design work. He stated he could not give an exact number, but it would be cheaper to do now. Council Member Butler verified the cost is estimated between $225,000 and $300,000. He stated if the difference will be about $10,000 then he would rather wait and prioritize the project; however, if the cost is significantly higher then he would rather do it now because of the savings and because it seems like a good idea. He stated he needs to know approximately how much cheaper it is to do the project now. Mr. Dentler stated he is comfortable in saying it will be more than a $10,000 difference. He stated if you look at the current project, there will be a missing link when it is completed and we have the opportunity to move forward to reduce storm drainage now. He stated we have residents who have asked for this sidewalk which was the genesis of this project. He stated had it not been for the trees in the beginning, he is sure that this section would have been part of the original project. Council Member Wright verified the original project scope did not call for installing the improvements up to the trees in this block. He asked what was happening in this block of North King Street that expedited the need to remove the trees. Mr. Dentler stated when Urban Forester Jay Banks evaluated the trees he felt the condition of the trees needed to be dealt with now. He stated these Ash trees, susceptible to ash borer disease, needed to come down. He stated there was a little coincidence in the timing. Council Member Wright verified there was not going to be work in the street as part of the drainage project and stated this is a true extension of the project. He stated he is all for this project and would rather deal with this now. He stated he walked this area this weekend and this is a safety need. Council Member Dunn asked if the brick sidewalk on this side of North King Street would extend just as far as the brick sidewalk on the other side of the street or would it be extended further. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Paqe 3 Mr. Dentler stated the brick sidewalk would be extended in front of the last house on the west side of the street where it will meet the asphalt trail, which is slightly further than on the east side. Council Member Reid stated so there is no concrete. Mr. Dentler stated there will be no concrete on the west side; however, there is concrete on the east side. Council Member Dunn asked where the improvements in the current CIP project would end. Mr. Dentler stated the project would end at Union Street. Council Member Dunn verified the portion beyond Union Street is all new and asked where that portion is located in the CIP. Mr. Dentler stated that portion of North King Street is not currently in the CIP. He stated this is an additional request from one resident and there are four homes in the block of North King Street from Union Street to the cemetery. Council Member Dunn asked where these residents will park. Mr. Dentler stated they have driveways. He stated the owner of the tollhouse on the end has a very small driveway access and staff has not spoken with that owner yet. Council Member Dunn stated staff has mentioned that they do not have any design work completed on this section at all; however, when justifying the project staff said that they have design work and asked if staff meant they have design work up to Union Street. Mr. Dentler stated that is correct, we have not designed this portion of the project. He stated staff does have a baseline of information that is already done and we could take advantage of that information by starting now versus starting over later. Council Member Dunn stated his main concern is similar to Council Member Butler's in that we know what the additional cost is today; however, we do not know what the future holds. He stated the fact that we are looking to spend over $200,000 today when there are sidewalks across the street and we have portions of Town where there are no sidewalks for residents. He stated Council has often said they are concerned about adding items to the CIP on the fly, which is what this is, while there are still items on the waiting list that keeps getting pushed back. Further, he stated he appreciates wanting to extend the project on; however, he is hesitant as we need to set our priorities somewhere and that is what the CIP is for. Mayor Umstattd stated depending on what we hear from the other residents, she would probably favor moving forward with this extension to the current project rather than waiting. She stated we want to make sure that we do not get a lot of opposition from the other residents. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 4 Mr. Dentler stated staff has contacted two residents already. He stated the house on the corner already has a sidewalk, so the only change for them would be the brick sidewalk and the curb and gutter. He stated the tollhouse on the end is a rental home. Further, he stated staff will speak with all four home owners and provide a report to Council. Council Member Reid stated so we are going to move forward on the sidewalks as there seems to be a consensus. Mr. Wells stated staff will need to prepare a resolution to expand the scope and direct the appropriate funds to be moved. He stated this will be brought back in two weeks. Vice Mayor Hammier stated Council Member Dunn made a good point about top priority sidewalk projects that a number of Council member's have raised and asked that staff bring forward the opportunity cost matrix for sidewalks that need to be constructed in Town. b. George Mason University Study/Planning for Enhanced Public Higher Education in Loudoun County Jerry Coughter, George Mason University, outlined the history of interjurisdictional partnership formed to fund this study and the working group established to create the Scope of Work document. He stated the input from the community has been very important and mentioned the overall importance of establishing the site criteria for a permanent GMU campus in Loudoun as well as a future second NOVA campus and additional learning center locations. He stated the main goal of the Working Group was to oversee the work of the consultants and provided background information. He stated a series of stakeholder meetings were held with various groups to get input. Further, he outlined the purpose of the report in creating the RFI, the demographic projections of the 14 county area included, projections for major occupation groups and the growth expected in those occupations. Mr. Coughter outlined four possible scenarios including; (1) no new public higher education campuses established, (2) new GMU campus with no NOVA presence, (3) new NOVA campus with a GMU presence and (4) a combination of scenarios 2 and 3, which was the preferred option. He outlined what academic programs are offered at the individual institutions, what could be offered if the two institutions were to work closely together and what programs would be contingent on various factors. He outlined the campus type opportunities and the elements of each including undergraduate campus, local professional campus, high-tech campus and comprehensive campus blending academic, recreational, cultural and civic uses. He stated the general consensus was to favor the comprehensive campus blending a traditional undergraduate campus with a local professional campus and high-tech campus. Mr. Coughter outlined potential campus site possibilities including a suburban, urban, transit-centered or a local professional campus as part of a medical research center or part of a hospital. He stated the report indicates that the only location in the County where any of the four of these opportunities could take place would be Leesburg east and into South Riding. He stated he would take proposals and expressions of interest from anyone regardless of where they Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 5 are. He stated clearly everyone involved in the process feel that the area outlined is the likely place for this to happen. Mayor Umstattd stated it would be logical for the presence of metro rail to be a very attractive incentive for building in a particular location. She stated Leesburg is not apt to get rail for quite some time; however, is connected by various bus systems to the West Falls Church Metro and Washington, DC. She asked how important it will be for students to be able to access this campus through public transportation. Mr. Coughter stated access and infrastructure are critically important, but access is very broadly defined. He stated the projected service area for a campus in Loudoun, and particularly in Leesburg, is north and west from here. He stated the flip side is that having access to the metro so students can go into Washington, DC is a benefit. He stated he is sure that he will receive proposals for properties along the metro, but they will not come with the things a Leesburg proposal comes with. Further, Mr. Coughter outlined the decision matrix that will be used to compare locations stating he envisions student housing on a Loudoun campus would be run by the private sector as most of the housing is at the Fairfax Campus. Council Member Reid asked if the owner of the student housing in Fairfax pays property taxes or if they are exempt. Mr. Coughter stated the housing is university owned in Fairfax, but operated by the private sector. Mr. Coughter outlined the next steps including a Board of Supervisors work session on May 19, public input sessions at the Loudoun County Public Schools building on June 1 and a future input session in Leesburg. He stated there will also be a School Board briefing on June 9 and the RFI is expected to be issued around June 22 with consideration of responses beginning around August 3. Dr. Dana Kauffman with NOVA stated the questions they have been asked recently include how this will be paid for and what will the traffic impact be. He stated we cannot answer that at this time. He stated this study sets the stage and we are waiting for the private sector to now come forward with their creative proposals for how best to proceed. Vice Mayor Hammier asked if there is a way to estimate the number of students or the amount of space envisioned and a time continuum for getting something up and running. She stated another related question is based on the operational projections, could the process be described whereby as public educational institutions you go to the state, where the funding comes from and how you make requests for funding and sources of revenue. Dr. Kauffman stated the basic size of their campus is between 7,000 to 10,000 students. He stated in terms of funding, whether it is separate or joint with George Mason, will be difficult as they have to rely primarily on state funding. He stated this is difficult because it is both operations and capital. He stated they will be up against all other projects state-wide and it could be five or ten years out. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 6 Vice Mayor Hammier stated she is looking more for their own internal academic projections for the number of students and how much space is needed. Mr. Coughter stated a lot of this will be driven by the types of proposals they get. Vice Mayor Hammier asked if existing infrastructure were available and capital expenses not required would there be operational funding coming in? Mr. Coughter stated one would assume that to be the case, but that is a dangerous assumption given the way the state budget is right now. He stated there is recognition that more students are coming through the college system and there is need for more seats. He stated GMU President Merten has made it clear that the university would be willing to grow from 31,000 to 45,000 if the appropriate funding comes along with that. He stated in-state students pay less than half of what it takes to educate them and the state pays a little less than half of what it costs. Vice Mayor Hammier asked if that is determined by the legislature or a certain arm of a state agency. Mr. Coughter stated there is a process through the legislature and the administration. He stated there is an expectation that if you have more students, you have more money, but that is not necessarily the case. He stated it is hard to believe that this could be anything other than a public/private partnership. Vice Mayor Hammier asked who will prepare the RFI and when are final decisions expected. Mr. Coughter stated the RFI review process will go through the working group and the executive committee group. He stated the ultimate decision will be made by the Board of Visitors of the two institutions. He stated the goal is to get to consensus and if we are not at that point it will be difficult for this to happen. Dr. Kauffman stated in looking at the matrix and feasibility of the project, they do not want to be part of a difficult land use case. Vice Mayor Hammier stated this reaffirms what many of us have in terms of a shared vision for this tremendous opportunity. She stated we made the assumption early on that there would not be a golden pot of money at the end of the legislature, rather we would look to creatively align with economic drivers the state cares about. She stated last week at the Science and Technology Cabinet meeting one of the presentations hit just right on in reinforcing how the state needs to stand up and innovate from an education perspective linking public/private partnerships. She stated it is going to be public/private partnerships that make a difference here aligned with a driver the state cares about and having education drive job growth and drive the economic engine. She stated we are visualizing that Leesburg would be the epicenter of a tremendous academic village connected to that and we need an economic anchor to make that happen, particularly in the life sciences sector. She stated Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 7 she is extremely excited that all of the objectives we are looking to in the coming fiscal year that hinge on this type of opportunity in the downtown to bring in another aspect that could diversify the tax base and reenergize the downtown. Mr. Coughter stated when we talk about access, we are talking about making the cost feasible for residents to send their children to the combined institution. He stated one of the values of the university and community college working together is to reduce the cost of some portion of the educational process. He stated one of the ways we do that is to drive more of the work to the high schools to give students to start taking courses while still in high school and also to provide technologies for distance education. Vice Mayor Hammier stated she has recognized the spirit of cooperation and collaboration in working with other higher educational institutions and she stated the Town sees there will be other requirements around the County and thus will end up being a win-win. Mr. Coughter stated they are also working on a model for multiple locations to offer other learning centers through online distance or telework facilities. He stated realistically the time frame is two to five years to get the first component going with 1,000-1,200 students the first year and building to 5,000-6,000 in 15 years. He stated what is important is what is in the proposals which will open up different models. Vice Mayor stated if she thinks about what would be tremendous for Leesburg would be an anchor business enterprise institute, an incubator so that when we bring in these creative opportunities anchored in education we will be able to deliver on the promise to create spin-off companies and anchor major companies as well that will both serve and be served. Mr. Coughter stated Council will receive more information on the incubator project in a couple of weeks. He stated the campus project and incubator project are separate but going down parallel tracks. He stated there is as much demand for a business incubator in Loudoun County as there is for an additional higher education campus. Council Member Reid stated "in the report it states the traditional four year liberal arts university is not feasible, but in various press accounts you talk about a four year college, but you are really talking about a professional campus, professional school a la Prince William first and then over 5 to 10 years it would be undergrad, or no." Mr. Coughter stated if the chosen model is an undergraduate campus or a comprehensive campus it will offer a four year undergraduate with a new spin of using the community college and university together. Council Member Reid stated therefore it was written somewhere that NOVA could give you 40 acres right now in sterling and asked why not do that. Dr. Kauffman stated one of the challenges in looking back once you allow someone to play soccer in your back yard, they stay in your back yard. He stated the challenge we put forth to Loudoun County is if you continue to wish to Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Paqe 8 use this facility, you should make it a higher and better use and work with to leverage space elsewhere. He stated they have the 47-acre back piece, but they cannot kick the soccer mom's out without higher implications at the state and local level. Council Member Reid stated so therefore it is being used for fields. Dr. Kauffman stated it is not optimally used either. He stated this could be a higher regional facility as opposed to just 16 fields. Council Member Reid stated the Mayor said in an email that a developer offering land for GMU would be looking for up-zoning and asked if that would be residential development or student housing. Dr. Kauffman stated one of the things they have said is that they do not want to be part of a developer's plan to get more residential units. He stated it may be that the developer wants to be able to count the university presence as office space as opposed to residential units. Council Member Reid stated the map on page 13 of the report seems to emphasize the presence of a rail line and he would like to get back to the Mayor's excellent point about the advent of Dulles Rail. He stated he does not believe it will get out to Loudoun County when the state has indicated; rather, he believes it will not get to Weihle Avenue till 2016 and that is when it is targeted for Loudoun County. He stated the report states, [The population and employment in Loudoun County is heavily concentrated in the eastern portion of the County. The trend will continue as long as current planning and zoning parameters are followed] meaning western Loudoun. He stated his conclusion is that they want a suburban campus near a population center and therefore wouldn't Moorefield Station give them all that and a rail station. He stated they are looking to jumpstart that development. Mr. Coughter stated that goes back to criteria number two and what are the possibilities of the development not happening. He stated what guarantees are there that this development will happen. Council Member Reid stated it does not matter because there is more population there right now than there is in Leesburg, so why would you not just consider eastern Loudoun. Mr. Coughter stated there are a lot of good reasons to consider it and there are also a lot of good reasons to consider Leesburg. Council Member Reid stated so the Times-Mirror is incorrect when it quotes Mr. Coughter as saying, "analysts came to the conclusion that a comprehensive campus [in the east] is what people want to see." Mr. Coughter stated if he said that, it is not what he meant; however, he does not think that he said it. He stated the area outlined earlier is the area we are talking about. He stressed that it is not just him, but also everyone that has been involved. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Paqe 9 Dr. Kauffman stated he believes what was driving that was a strong reaction to something being in a rural protected area, but looking at it again over time, if there is an opportunity to align a facility with GMU in looking at a future campus 20 years out, he does not know of anything that preclude the regional park authority and NOVA from combining on a facility similar to Reston. He stated it might be a green campus that would fit into jobs that fit an association near a park. He stated governing bodies being what governing bodies are; we need to look at this as an immediate land use case or a long range economic development plan. Council Member Reid asked if a PPEA was discussed at the last meeting. Mr. Coughter stated if it was discussed at all, it was discussed very broadly. He stated he anticipates that the only way this can work is through a public/private partnership. Council Member Reid asked what is the current undergraduate enrollment at GMU's Fairfax campus. Mr. Coughter stated university wide there are 31,000 total students. He stated the undergraduate is between 23,000 and 24,000. Council Member Reid stated he is just referring to the Fairfax campus. Mr. Coughter stated almost all of the undergraduates are at the Fairfax campus. He stated approximately 30 percent of them live on campus. He stated they open new beds every semester and they are on their way to 40 percent housing on the campus. Council Member Reid stated the report states "The economic development impact of new campuses is substantial." He stated it does not say what that potential would be for Loudoun County or Leesburg. He stated this report here talks about the impact to Northern Virginia, but it is not specific to the City of Fairfax. He asked if there is any information on what the economic development impact is for GMU Fairfax on the City of Fairfax and what the Prince William campus is on Prince William County. Mr. Coughter stated he does not know if that information is available that specifically, but he can try to find that information. He stated there is a fair amount of literature out there on the economic impact of campuses on their communities. Council Member Reid stated there is a question of scale and you are not talking about 22,000 students in Loudoun County, you are talking about a max of 10,000 and initially of 1,200 the gradually moving upward. He stated this was presented to us as an economic development engine, that is how it was presented to the Town of Leesburg and he wants to figure out what that would be if the campus were here. He asked how much acreage would be needed for 10,000 students, GMU plus NOVA. He stated you have 600 acres in Fairfax right now and if you have half as many, we can assume you need 200 or 300 for future expansion. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 10 Mr. Coughter stated he does not believe that you could assume that. He stated they currently have several thousand students on seven acres in Arlington. Council Member Reid verified they are all commuter students. He asked in terms of economic impact, is not the economic impact greater when a college has residents living there as opposed to commuting. Mr. Coughter stated this is not his area of expertise, but it sounds right. He stated it is not just the students spending, but university spending as well as well as faculty and staff living nearby and the people who come to be near the university. He stated different places will have different impacts too such as a campus with fly-in executive education with a hotel adjacent. Council Member Reid asked what if the Town of Leesburg were to provide you right now with 100 to 200 acres, would you cancel looking at the other sites. Mr. Coughter stated we are too far into this process. He stated we have had over the last five or six months multiple developers offer land, cost of land rolled into buildings, long term leases on the buildings with unbelievably low financing. Council Member Reid asked like 100 acres or 200 acres. Mr. Coughter stated yes. Council Member Reid stated you have had that offer. He asked if it was located in the Town of Leesubrg. Mr. Coughter stated aside from that we are in this partnership and want everyone to come to consensus, he does not believe a Leesburg campus has to be 100 acres, rather it could be 10 acres with housing off site, access to Ida Lee, a performing arts center built off campus and that is it. He stated but it also could be 125 acres starting in a greenfield and that is why we need to get the proposals and review them. Council Member Reid asked what the Town paid for this study. Mr. Wells stated our share was $17,000. Council Member Reid stated we did not ask to see the scope of work or anything. Mr. Wells stated the scope of work was presented. Council Member Reid stated he is concerned that we only have two votes on this executive committee. Mayor Umstattd stated it is not a voting committee, rather it is a research- type exploration committee. Vice Mayor Hammier stated we are going to do well by creative energy through an innovative approach. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 11 Council Member Reid stated he is concerned that we are just one town and if you are telling me that there are developers offering you 100 or 200 acres, there are only one or two parcels in Leesburg that would meet that requirement. He stated he is wondering how much of a partner we will be at the end. Mr. Coughter stressed that this is completely open and there are no pre- decisions. He stated there really has been this sense of figuring this out and coming up with something that works for everybody. He stated that might be a high rise at Moorefield Station or it might be 125 acres elsewhere. Council Member Reid stated Moorefield Station owns hundreds of acres. Mr. Coughter stated their selling point is being on the metro. Council Member Reid stated you are looking very hard to get the government center, they are looking very hard for something to jump start that property and the powers that be at the County are gung-ho on that rail line coming in here. He stated his concern is that Moorefield Station has the potential to become a major competitor to Leesburg and to suck the vitality out of this Town if the County does not step up to the plate with a positive economic environment. Vice Mayor Hammier stated a lot of the research that has been presented looks at drawing students from the local area and asked if GMU has looked at the possibility of evolving the perception of its brand as being an on-campus kind of school versus the general perception of a commuter school. Mr. Coughter stated that is a changing perception. He stated a high percentage of 25 or 30 live on-campus, which puts us in what you think of as universities that are on campus and not commuter schools. He stated 40 percent would put them above almost every state university in the country as far as students living on campus. He stated the modern way of doing this now is most students live off campus after their freshman year. He stated off-campus means a lot of different things in different locations. He stated one of the opportunities here is for housing off-campus, but adjacent to campus, that keeps the students in the tax base. He stated the idea that GMU is a commuter school is very outdated. Council Member Butler stated when reading the possible scenarios, Mr. Coughter quickly blipped over scenario number one regarding "no new higher education campus is established". He stated his first thought was that is the odds on favorite really. He stated after the discussion he is getting the impression that one of the scenarios outlined under two, three and four is inevitable and it is just a matter of time whether they will occur or not. Mr. Coughter stated that is fair. He stated the way nothing happens is the university makes the decision to build more in Fairfax rather than somewhere else or the state decides not to fund community colleges at the level that they ought to. He stated realistically with the number of people coming through the system there is a huge demand in Loudoun County for adult education and professionals going back to school. Dr. Kauffman stated the high school classes coming out now are the largest in history. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 12 Mr. Coughter stated the high school senior classes coming out right now are the smallest classes in the present system and kindergarten is the largest. Council Member Butler stated given some of the decisions that have been coming out of Richmond lately and they do not seem to want to build any roads. He stated whether they decide to fund additional colleges in Northern Virginia to the perceived detriment to the rest of Virginia remains to be seen. Mr. Coughter stated there is a model that can be developed with low infrastructure cost that will help sell this to Richmond. Council Member Butler stated Leesburg is the western most point of the outlined area and it was mentioned that a campus in Leesburg would have a market north and west of the campus. Mr. Coughter stated that is the primary service area. Dr. Kauffman stated the area outlined is where you have existing land use language that would accommodate something like this. Mr. Coughter stated there are about 2,500 students at George Mason now that have home addresses in Loudoun County. He stated he would not suggest that all of them would come to a Loudoun campus as opposed to the Fairfax campus, but if they are the average GMU student then about 70 percent of them do not live on campus. He stated NOVA has about 8,000 or 9,000 students at their Sterling location now. Council Member Butler asked if the Sterling or South Riding service area would be the same as Leesburg's. Mr. Coughter stated the service area for a Loudoun campus is north and west, not just for the Leesburg campus. He stated with a sterling campus you may also attract some people closer on the eastern side. Council Member Butler stated Leesburg would probably be more attractive to the north and west the more that we grow and the fewer roads that Richmond builds increasing the time it takes to get from Leesburg to Moorefield Station, Sterling or South Riding. He stated in the decision matrix under the features where is the potential service area for the different locations. Mr. Coughter stated that is not represented there. He stated it could generally fit in access. Council Member Butler suggested adding a feature "Is close to a service area we are targeting", giving a good advantage to Leesburg. Council Member Wright stated he was going to ask what the likelihood is of this coming to Leesburg; however, it seems the answer given earlier is the goal is to develop a consensus proposal of the overall working group and the Board of Visitors. He stated so really the likelihood is based on several factors and is anybody's game at this point. Town Council Work Session of Mav 11. 2009 Page 13 Mr. Coughter stated it is absolutely anyone's game and clearly there are benefits to being in the Town of Leesburg such as access to the hospital and access to the government as opposed to access to the metro. Council Member Wright stated it seems what the Town needs to do to make that happen is highlight those benefits and also, since we are a little more compact and can move more quickly in land use issues, we can work with developers who come up with land use proposals to shape the package. He stated the other advantage that we have is that since we are a part of the County we can work together to create a win-win. He stated he understands, based on what has been said, that the size and capacity and the proposed target campus is in general undefined based on the proposals and the style received. He stated we have spoken about metro a couple of times and it is important to keep in mind that the metro station at Moorefield Station will be more of a commuting starting point than a destination. He stated there may be more options in Leesburg than we think and different ways of accomplishing this. He stated one point that Council Member Butler also discussed is that the options are in Leesburg and in his mind that gives a fairly good bonus. Council Member Dunn stated initially he was a little disappointed and was expecting more from the study. He stated essentially it was what was presented to begin with, but a few gaps were filled in. He stated about 1,000 to 1,200 students was mentioned initially and asked what would be the makeup of those students and what would be the course of study. Dr. Kauffman stated it depends on where and what industry is nearby. Mr. Coughter stated there are 400 students at the GMU campus in Sterling right now and more than half are executive MBA students. He stated there are also engineering programs and various undergraduate offerings. He stated it is market driven and evaluated every semester. He stated his mission is to get more students at this Sterling campus and he is continually talking to individuals at the Fairfax campus about programs that should be offered. He stated there is no intention to have a new campus focused on one thing; rather, it would be a broad based campus with a focus on a few things. Council Member Dunn stated we are looking at a more professional campus. Mr. Coughter stated that might be true to start with; however, the goal is to expand overtime to allow students to come for four years and stay. He stated there is no possible model where we open with that. Council Member Dunn stated obviously models are run by the university and asked if we start with a professional campus, when would the university expand to the four year model. He asked in other words what does GMU want. Mr. Coughter stated it really is the goal of the project is to reach a compromise where we can be what the community wants and where the community wants what we want. He stated at this point it is the comprehensive four year campus with housing. He stated as Supervisor Burton asked, "How are you going to pay for that?", and we do not know how we are going to pay for that. He stated the proposals that come from different developers will help to answer that question. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 14 Dr. Kauffman stated you will see a group of studies done over a five year period all sewn back together and that first level of funding is what you get. He stated the key parts of that whole multi page study will come down to the academic program and activity matrix. He stated this is the path to say here are the program options and valid matrix, which will tell you what you are going to get and the proposals will be evaluated to see what fits best. Mr. Coughter stated this is to get everyone on the same path so that we are not in the situation of a couple of years ago where the university comes with a plan and nobody likes it. He stated we are all going down the path together and we had to go through a process to convince you that the proposals will be judged fairly. Council Member Dunn stated there is a goal here to be in Loudoun County and somewhere someone has said that you want to be in Loudoun County and here is what you want. Mr. Coughter stated GMU wants to be in Loudoun County with a campus that supports 5,000-10,000 students, has a broad educational mission, works with the local business sector, that the politicians can get behind, will help serve the community, relieves pressure on the Fairfax campus and relieves pressure at NOVA. He stated the question is how we get to that. Dr. Kauffman stated the first approach you see to wanting higher education in Loudoun is the 14 separate institutions scattered along Route 7. He stated this is a big brother and little brother institution linking up to be here. Council Member Dunn stated it is important for us as an elected body to sit down and provide our models of what we would like here, whereas right now we seem to be willing to just take what is given to us. He stated he has some items that he would like to see the Town get from a school of higher learning. Further, he said don't forget that we had a higher education facility in Town and now they have left Town and moved east with the other institutions. Mayor Umstattd stated her preference for a focus for the campus is international business given that Dulles Airport is close by and Leesburg attracts a growing number of foreign visitors every year. She stated she also wondered if there is a chance that the Loudoun Center might offer students an opportunity to telecommute versus to traveling to Fairfax. She stated it would be worth including Virginia Regional Transit in these discussions as they move quickly to fill a perceived need when it arises in public transportation. She stated she spoke with Ned Waterhouse from Loudoun County Public Schools regarding whether GMU would want to work with one feeder school as a magnet or would rather work with all of the public schools as feeders. She stated GMU's approach is that is more affordable for students if GMU courses are available in every school; whereas, the County feels they cannot guarantee enough interest in every school to make this a viable program. She stated he also said that if GMU and NOVA wanted to provide a teacher for every school, then it could work. Mr. Coughter stated there are many ways through the use of technology to make this happen. He stated his concern in favoring dispersal is to reach as many students as possible. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Paqe 15 Mayor Umstattd stated that would be a great conversation for GMU and NOVA to have with Loudoun County public Schools. Mr. Coughter discussed NOVA's duel admissions program. Council Member Reid stated the report references Broadlands Regional Medical Center as "proposed" and asked if any questions on this were posed by the Board because that is not going to happen. Mr. Coughter stated they wanted to include hospital systems and locations and did not want to take a side in that debate as it had not been concluded at that point. Vice Mayor Hammier mentioned many of the benefits of a campus in Leesburg and stated another important partner that has a preexisting relationship with GMU is the Paxton Loudoun ARC program. She stated it will be very interesting to see how these things come together. She stated the federal stimulus dollars are pouring in to some very specific programs that could be very attractive, not only to NOVA and GMU, but to students and their long-term career plans. c. Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Family Entertainment Uses in the 1-1 Zoning District Council Member Butler stated the report indicates that an existing building in this zoning district with more than 50 percent family entertainment use would require a special exception and asked why that is. Chris Murphy stated the 2005 Town Plan suggests that new uses be added to the Regional Office Land Use category along Route 7. He stated staff created criteria to allow family entertainment uses for 50 percent or less of the building to encourage it as a subordinate use. He stated a special exception clause was added if the use is 100 percent of the building or if a new building is constructed. He stated this allows the Town Council to add conditions to that use or decide if it is appropriate depending on the location. Council Member Reid stated he does not support the 50 percent. He praised Council Member Butler for pushing this forward as it is specifically designed for one property owner. He stated we need to reexamine the entire 1-1 District stating the use tables that will be discussed tomorrow night for the other Zoning Ordinance item really concern him. He stated he does not understand why a stable would be by-right but having outdoor storage of cars is a special exception. He stated we should go one step further and reexamine all of these requirements that require applicants to come to the Town to get approval. He stated there needs to be some justification for all of this and the idea of making somebody who wants to rent an existing building come back to the Town if he wants to use 50 percent of it is just another example of the overreach of government. He stated we are overreaching here as well with some of these other things. He stated his synagogue is in this district and he does not know if a special exception was required for it. He stated he bets they just moved right in, but maybe there was a special exception and maybe someone has institutional memory on this, he would like to see Council do this. He stated you don't need a special exception for a park and asked who is going to put a park in the 1-1 District except the government, so the government does not want to go through a special exception for itself but it is going to make everyone Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 16 else go through a special exception. He stated if you want to put an electric or plumbing supply place, you need a special exception. He stated he would like to see a show of hands of people that would like to a step further; however, he does not like the 50 percent and thinks it should be all or nothing. Mayor Umstattd stated the way to bog this down is to require a larger look at it. Council Member Reid stated not as part of this, but second. He stated he would like to see a zoning rewrite which he has been waiting for, for two years now. Mayor Umstattd stated she does not have a problem looking at it comprehensively. She stated we have a business that would probably be ready to go as soon as we can get them permission. She stated it seems like a compatible business with another business in that general area and it is a family friendly business where you can bring your kids and have fun, which would be advantageous to the Town in general. Council Member Reid stated it is just like "Pump It Up" and they did not have a 50 percent requirement. Mayor Umstattd stated she is not saying that there should be a 50 percent requirement necessarily; however, whatever we can do to get this business up and running faster is a good idea. Council Member Wright stated one of the things this highlights is that there is not a problem with the 1-1; rather the 1-1 is not where it should be. He stated if you look at the zoning map and where 1-1 is it is basically south of Route 7 with a couple of exceptions; however, when you look at our planning map it calls for that area to be regional office. He stated this is one of those things where it is zoned wrong and we either need to find a low density zoning that allows for more complimentary uses or we can continue to amend the 1-1. He stated he supports amending the 1-1 and has the same reservations about the 50 percent special exception requirement and suggested vetting through the reservations to see if that is something Council would want to amend as part of the final ordinance change. He stated he feels Council needs to do something. He stated we allowed for these existing uses to stand in the Town Plan stating that we want to migrate to the appropriate uses and it was never the intent to have buildings sitting vacant and unused, so we have to balance what we ultimately want and a family entertainment or recreation use is not a harmful use. He stated we need to work towards the plan while allowing intermediate uses. Council Member Dunn stated the Town Plan is our plan, we are the ones who write it and we tie our own hands sometimes. He stated why can we not write the Town Plan to indicate what will happen on a certain lot or lots. He stated we would have the overall plan and then the details in the planning districts and we can be as detailed as we want. He stated he is not thrilled about the 50 percent; however, he is hesitant when we amend the zoning districts to help someone and then slide in a few more restrictions. He stated he would yield to more flexibility up front and more restrictions later as needed. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 17 Mr. Murphy stated staff wanted to emphasize that the subordinate use is there to give Council to give the ability to render the decisions. He stated once you let the use in you cannot come back and change it. He stated if Council feels 50 percent is too high it can be scaled back. Council Member Dunn stated he would like less regulation and the work towards more if needed. Council Member Reid stated he thinks there is a consensus that what we need to do is have an amendment to Section One saying "establish a recreational facility as a by-right use in the 1-1 District' and then take out 'subject to specific use standards". Council Member Wright stated you would want the use standards in there if you are going to reduce the special exception to have the outline up front. Council Member Reid stated 50 percent is not in the resolution, but I think there must be something here that we can give a sense of Council that we support this as a by-right use. He stated that is what he would like to offer as an amendment. Council Member Dunn stated you have to have the uses in there at some point. He stated he would rather have the uses up front and have it broader. Council Member Reid stated but you have the uses here. Council Member Wright stated a use standard sets forth the minimum amount of conditions we want for that use, similar to a special exception. He stated he is not as concerned about the resolution because it allows us to initiate the action, vet through the issues and possibly come back with something other than the 50 percent. Council Member Reid stated the Planning Commission could come back with a resolution or regulation that says if you go beyond 50 percent you have to get a special exception. He stated then it will be advertised that way and then we will be stuck with 50 percent. Council Member Wright stated if you make it less restrictive then you are fine. Council Member Reid stated he would like a Section Three added that we would like to see a full review of the 1-1 zoning categories and what is by-right and what is special use. He stated it would not be dependent on this, that will come first, but since we are voting on this tomorrow night we might as well send a charge to the Planning Commission and staff to reexamine these various tables that I just mentioned. Council Member Wright stated the 1-1 tables are not necessarily the problem; rather, the problem is the areas that are zoned 1-1. He stated I would leave this alone to address an immediate business issue and would focus on where we are at zoning properties more consistent with the Town Plan. He stated that is the better way to address it rather than continuing to broaden what is allowed in the 1-1, which makes that district more encompassed. He stated we want to move Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 18 the 1-1 district out and away from the areas that we do not want zoned for industrial anymore. Council Member Reid stated the thing is though this is the last area of developed parcels that gives an entrepreneur the ability to open up shop. He stated this is the second time we have had someone come to use who wants a special use and does not want to spend the time or money to go through an arduous special exception process. Council Member Wright stated that is why we should zone the area to a low density "B" to give a base by-right that is low density and tolerable. He stated then if you want to rezone to a higher density of regional office you can. He stated Council Member Reid is right that this area needs to be addressed; however, it does not need to be addressed by rewriting the 1-1, rather it needs to be addressed by introducing a low density. Council Member Reid stated that is fine as long as we reevaluate these things. He stated he has received a complaint from one car dealer that he has to go through a special exception to store cars. He stated this is an area that has very low rents, it has good access to transportation and it is an area that, yes, maybe the Town Plan wanted to push those industrial uses out, but that is not what we are talking about here. He stated you make industrial use a special exception; but for someone who wants to open a plumbing place, why should he have to go through a special exception. He stated there has to be some rationale to these tables so if Council is willing we can have a separate track on that and it would be a great thing. He stated he was actually hoping to see this as part of the Zoning Ordinance amendments. Council Member Dunn asked the timeline for doing this right and letting the business in. He asked if the business would be delayed dramatically if we want to really do this amendment right. Mayor Umstattd stated as a business man you want to get started right away. She stated anything we can do to make that happen is a good thing. Council Member Dunn asked if this business is ready to go right away. Council Member Butler stated they would like to open in the fall. Council Member Dunn asked how much longer if we worked on this. Mayor Umstattd stated it would get bogged down. She stated if we try to make this something bigger than what is proposed it could get bogged down for an additional six months to a year. She stated she would rather allow this business to open his needed service in the Town as soon as we can let it happen and deal with the bigger problems separately. Council Member Reid asked Council Member Wright to "clarify his suggestion." Council Member Wright stated we would reexamine the zoning as opposed to the 1-1. He stated the 1-1 is not the problem; the problem is that it is intended for more of a "B" use. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Paqe 19 Council Member Reid stated he is talking about the other parcels in that area, the whole Cardinal Park area. Council Member Wright stated this is what he is referring to. He stated if you look at the zoning map it is wrong when you compare it to the Town Plan. Council Member Reid stated that is what I think we should be doing on a separate track, but we need to initiate that. Council Member Wright stated that has already been initiated, that has been an objective for two years to sync up the zoning. Mr. Wells stated the question is what Council wants staff to do first among several topics. He stated it is not a question of whether we can or cannot do it, it is a question of what is the best order of business. Council Member Wright stated the best way to address the broader question is to have a work session on it. Council Member Reid stated that is fine with him as long as Council has a discussion of why some are "p"s and why some are "S"s on a separate track. He stated for tomorrow we can just go ahead and deal with this item, even though he does not like it when businesses have to go to Council Members to get their projects approved, he would much rather have them deal with this administratively. He stated that is what is going on here that someone has taken the initiative to meet with Council Members on this and that is why we are initiating it for him and not anyone else. He stated he would like to make sure that we do this for other people as well. Mr. Wells stated we will have this item for consideration tomorrow and at a time to be determined at Council's desire we can have the broader discussion. Council Member Reid stated there could be some justification for this that he is not aware of. d. Affordable Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendment Mr. Wells stated there has been a slight change dealing with the scheduling and rather than a joint public hearing, the Planning Commission will have a public hearing on May 21 and Council can have their own public hearing on the May 27. He stated the nature of the changes require Council action. He stated the Memorandum of Understanding has been worked through with the County and we are working on the administrative pieces so the potential affordable units can be accepted and put into the system based on proffers included in the PMW Farms rezoning. Vice Mayor Hammier stated she would feel more comfortable in taking a step back as she has a sense from discussions with other governments that these affordable dwelling unit programs do not work and that they are impossible to oversee. She stated she wonders where they have been successful and are we willing going down the right track here. Council Member Reid stated he thought he saw something related to affordable dwelling units in the legislative package. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Paqe 20 Ms. Irby stated it pertains to workforce housing, which is a different program. Council Member Reid stated he thinks the Vice Mayor is correct. He stated the biggest problem is for seniors who need to have not owned a home in order to be eligible and they have to give all the criteria to those who are eligible first. He stated there are seniors out there who would love to move into one of these places, but cannot because they have owned a house. He stated the County did not want to change their standards and he believes we have used the County's standards. Mr. Irby stated the County has to administer the program because we are not in a position to do that. She stated part of the agreement is that the Town Council can suggest someone to appoint to the affordable dwelling board and Council can then have their input as to what the standards could be. Council Member Reid stated that would be good, thank you. Council Member Wright stated he is comfortable with the changes and is mindful that if we do nothing, we are letting the developer off the hook for a proffer that we actively sought. He stated we need to do this, if for nothing else than to satisfy the proffer we already have and then we can have the broader discussion later. Council Member Dunn asked if the Affordable Dwelling Units are mandated by the state. Ms. Irby stated the Town went through a charter change in order to be able to participate in the affordable dwelling unit program. She stated the program is administered through the state and the County has a board that specifically takes care of this process. She stated there is not a lot of leeway as to what the Town can do with this program. She stated if we do not participate in this agreement and take care of this prior to the proffer expiring, then we lose the affordable dwelling units and the developer will have received increased density without having to provide these units. She stated this agreement does limit the number of affordable dwelling units to 40 and if we want to put more in we can renegotiate with the County. She stated this does leave us open to negotiate with developers for workforce housing instead of the affordable dwelling units. Council Member Dunn asked what will replace the affordable dwelling units if Council does not move forward. Mr. Irby stated they will not be replaced; the developer can sell them as market units. Council Member Dunn stated so the developer has to put in 40 units of some type. Ms. Irby stated this is for 30 units and the developer will be able to put in whatever he likes and sell them for market price. e. State Legislative Changes Vice Mayor Hammier asked if this listing is the bills that have passed. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 21 Debi Parry stated these are the bills that have passed which she and the Town Attorney have identified as having an effect on the Town or items that the Town might want to implement. She stated the directors are currently reviewing this list and providing her with their recommendations which will be presented to Council at their next work session. Mr. Wells stated this provides a heads up as to what the state has done and where that leaves us. He stated we can either take the opportunity to enact these things based on what the state has done, or if they have done something to use we need to make sure the code matches up to what that might be. Council Member Wright verified this is more introductory as to what is coming and in two weeks information will be provided as to what action we are taking. Vice Mayor Hammier stated it might be interesting to add a column for an after action report as to if there were things we should have been more involved in or may have missed the boat on, just so we can anticipate future action. She stated we are implementing our own code changes and asked if Mr. Terry Young's previous comments on the fowl issue would enter into this relative to the County having enabling legislation and our ability to then act on whatever the County has. She stated she is unclear as to how we can help Mr. Young address his issue. Ms. Irby stated Loudoun County follows the Right to Farm Act and their zoning does not limit chickens on any lot size as long as they are penned up. She stated she reviewed all of the uses and the only thing they limit is livestock if the parcel is less than five acres. She stated the Town Code states that chickens have to be penned up and are not allowed in residential subdivisions. She stated the County Animal Control Officer will be the one to enforce this Code and she does not know how effective they will be with respect to this issue. Vice Mayor Hammier asked why they would not enforce it since it is part of our code. Ms. Irby stated we are more restrictive than the County's code which follows the State's code. Vice Mayor Hammier stated therefore we need to go the extra step to insure the County aligns with our ordinance. Ms. Irby stated Loudoun County is still considered an agricultural county. Vice Mayor Hammier stated the demarcation lays in the prohibition from subdivisions verses rural areas. Ms. Irby stated subdivisions can have five acre parcels. Council Member Wright stated it seems Ms. Irby is saying that we do not need the County to take a legislative action; rather, we need them to hopefully take an administrative action to direct the Animal Control Officers to enforce our Town Code as it relates to fowl within the Town Limits. Vice Mayor Hammier asked so we cannot enforce our own code. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 22 Ms. Irby stated we do not have our own Animal Control Officers as that is a County function. Vice Mayor Hammier verified the issue of police citations has been addressed in the Code. Council Member Reid stated this is an excellent matrix and he would like to publically thank Ms. Parry for doing this. He stated this is probably the best legislative report that I have seen in my years on Council. He stated it lays it all out and he was not aware that the General Assembly passed so much legislation that effects us, as he usually finds this out by reading the Virginia Municipal League magazine. He stated from his standpoint, priority number one, is if we can allow our municipality to create a special taxing district to cover the cost of undergrounding transmission lines. He stated this is something that we should adopt sooner rather than later. He stated who knows, maybe some of those property owners are willing to pay an assessment. He stated the expedited review is already a given and we do not have to do anything except put that in our DCSM. Mr. Wells stated there might be an ordinance change, but it is all within our own ability to put this in place. Council Member Reid stated he likes proffer amendments a lot. He stated he does not think that in our Town, or zoning ordinance does not allow for any proffer amendment; rather, you have to go through a rezoning. He stated this is something we should do; we should allow for amendments completely, not just minor amendments. Council Member Butler stated he would like an implementation estimate for the items that staff thinks would be a good thing to do. Mr. Wells stated for the items that are required, staff will provide a timeline for implementation. He stated for the items that are optional, staff will provide a recommendation, but that is really a Council discussion. Council Member Dunn stated he would like to know for the items that are required, who are they required by. Mr. Wells stated that is what we will be clear on. He stated over the years this step has not been kept up and that is why the Town Code is out of date. He stated at minimum we will make sure this process is kept up so that we can ensure the Town Code is up to date appropriately. f. Drive Less Summit Council Member Butler stated back in February, Council received a presentation on Leesburg demographics including a section on commuting. He stated there was a lot of information provided on how many people drive to work, the average commute time and where Leesburg residents work. He stated the consensus was that collectively we spend a lot of time in our cars and perhaps there is a way to encourage people to not spend so much time in their cars. He stated the idea is how do we take that to the next step, do we have a brainstorming session at the Council level or something like the parking summit where we get input from the public. Further, he stated then we can shape a Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 23 plan going forward to encourage people to spend less time in their cars, which is less pollution. Vice Mayor Hammier stated this is a great idea as a lot of people have been trying to come up with solutions along this regard. She stated one idea would be to go to the CEO cabinet to try and encourage CEOs to implement policies in which they could create incentives for their employees in Leesburg and the County. She stated if the Town is serious about this, then we as a Council need to explore what are we willing to do in terms of incentives to influence "drive- less" behavior. She stated perhaps it could be things like if people are willing to pledge to ride a bike to the store as opposed to driving to the store then perhaps there may be a certain number of Ida Lee memberships we may be willing to allocate. Council Member Reid stated he always supports anything related to transportation and this is certainly in that category. He stated he would like to suggest that we contact the Transportation Planning Board as they have folks down there who have done these summits across the region. He stated they have a lot of regional data, they have a lot of man power that could help with this and they have a citizen's advisory committee which consists of people who represent the Washington Area Bicyclist's Association so those folks should be clued in. He stated the Telework Coalition is based here in Leesburg, their office is here so they should be clued in and that way you will not have to reinvent the wheel. Council Member Wright stated he likes the idea and there are a couple of ways to go at it. He stated one is the different resources that Vice Mayor Hammier and Council Member Reid have already mentioned. He stated the other way is through different events, so if there is a bike to work event we push that. He stated the last thing is also looking at things we are doing that prevents residents from being able to bike or walk. He stated there have been discussions in the past about bikes on sidewalks and whether or not if it is appropriate to allow this outside the Historic District for certain ages such as 14 and under with a parent. He stated this is one of the things that keep some of the parents from putting all of their kids on bikes and heading downtown because technically they are supposed to be on the street. Further, trying to look at things in our Town Code may help with some of the quick items we can focus on. Mayor Umstattd stated she believes that staff is already looking at some of those issues. Vice Mayor Hammier stated like where we can paint bike lanes and how we are going to do that comprehensively. Mr. Wells stated those are all possibilities and what is being suggested is to bring those thoughts together and brining in additional resources as there may be other ideas that we have not thought of. He stated the question is what format do we want to use and when would they like to do it. Council Member Reid stated summer is a bad time as you will not get a good tu rnout. Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 24 Council Member Dunn stated his concern is that he does not want this to be like the parking summit where we went in with the greatest of intentions and it did not turn out as we had hoped. He stated we already have committees working on many of these items such as the SRTC, Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, Economic Development Commission and Environmental Advisory Commission. He stated there is also the private sector who are working on telework centers or temporary executive office suites. He stated the other thing is you cannot regulate behavior; however, what we are looking at is creating the atmosphere to promote positive behavior. Further, he stated this is a good idea and he would like to look at other resources and what we have done in the past to create a substantive discussion. Council Member Reid suggested contacting John Z. Wetmore with perilsforpedestrians.org or .com. He stated he does movies about how Town's mess up their sidewalks and the dumb things they do. Further, he stated have him go around with Council Member Butler and film it. 2. Additions to Future Council Meetings Mayor Umstattd stated Council Member Reid has asked that we do the Dominion Power closed session tonight. Council Member Wright asked that the zoning designation discussion be placed on a future work session. Council Member Dunn stated he sent an email stating his feeling that the closed session for the school should not be one of our closed session. He stated we would be going into a closed session for something where we are not spending money, purchasing land or selling land and there is no legal aspect to it. He stated he believes closed sessions should be few and far between and we should be operating under the sunlight the residents deserve. Council Member Reid stated he "does not believe many Council Members will be able to go to the County-wide Transportation Plan discussion on May 19 as it is the same night as the Business Appreciation Awards. He stated it would be a good idea to have someone from the planning department to come before Council to discuss the plan because he went to the meeting at Ida Lee and we need to weigh in on Crosstrail Boulevard again and he would like his Lucketts Bypass resolution discussed again. He stated this could take place in June or the next work session. He stated he would like a memo on Station Auto Wash and what is going on with that. Further, he stated he would like to see if there is any interest in changing our ordinance on political signs." 3. Closed Session On a motion by Mayor Umstattd, seconded by Council Member Reid the following was proposed: Town Council Work Session of May 11. 2009 Page 25 MOTION Pursuant to Section 2.2-3711(A)(3) and Section 2.2-3711(A)(7) of the Code of Virginia I move that the Leesburg Town Council convene in a closed meeting to discuss real estate matters related to Dominion Power and legal matters. The motion passed by the following vote: Aye: Dunn, Hammier, Reid, Wright and Mayor Umstattd Nay: Butler Vote: 5-1-1 (Martinez absent) The Council convened in closed session at 10: 12 p.m. The Council reconvened in open session at 10:48 p.m. On a motion by Mayor Umstattd, seconded by Vice Mayor Hammier the following was proposed: MOTION In accordance with Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia, I move that Council certify that to the best of each member's knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and such public business matters as were identified in the motion by which the closed meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered in the meeting by Council. The motion was approved by the following roll call vote: Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammier, Reid, Wright and Mayor Umstattd Nay: None Vote: 6-0-1 (Martinez absent) Adjournment On a motion by Council Member Wright, seconded by Vice Mayor Hammier, the meeting was adjourned at 10:49 p.m. 2009_tcwsmin0511