HomeMy Public PortalAbout2010_tcwsmin1108Council Work Session November 8, 2010
Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, 7:30 p.m. Mayor Kristen Umstattd
presiding.
Council Members Present: David S. Butler, Thomas S. Dunn, II, Katie Sheldon
Hammier, Marty Martinez, Ken Reid, Kevin Wright and Mayor Kristen Umstattd.
Council Members Absent: None.
Staff Present: Town Manager John Wells, Town Attorney Jeanette Irby, Deputy
Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Director of Planning and Zoning Susan Berry Hill,
Director of Public Works Tom Mason, Assistant to the Town Manager Kathleen
Leidich, Deputy Director of Planning and Zoning Brian Boucher, Zoning
Administrator Chris Murphy, Deputy Zoning Administrator Wade Burkholder, Chief
of Police Joseph Price, Director of Finance Norm Butts, Traffic Engineer Calvin
Grow, Business Retention Coordinator Debi Parry and Clerk of Council Lee Ann
Green
AGENDA ITEMS
1. Work Session Items for Discussion
a. Sign Ordinance
Wade Burkholder stated that tonight neon signage, window signage,
flags, and downtown kiosks would be discussed. He stated the Board of
Architectural Review (BAR) did meet last Wednesday as recommended by
Council.
Mr. Burkholder stated the proposed ordinance would cover neon signs
in both the H -1 Old and Historic District and the H -2 Corridor District as well
as town -wide. He stated currently the prohibition on neon signs is in place in
the H -1 and only permitted with BAR approval in the H -2 and the remainder
of town. He discussed the options for consideration and noted that the
Planning Commission has recommended that neon signs in the H -1 be limited
to historic neon that can be documented through historic photographs. He
stated the BAR has confirmed this recommendation and further included
Option G, stating if there is to be some kind of neon permissible in the
downtown, that the BAR have the opportunity to develop some guidelines.
He stated some of the options that have been discussed for the H -2 and town
wide have been a maximum size of four square feet, not being included in the
maximum number of signs per business, and open signage in the H -1 as well as
town -wide.
Mayor Umstattd stated the Economic Development Commission
(EDC) would like to weigh in on the proposed regulations. She stated either
the EDC will have to have a special meeting or Council will need to postpone
their vote until December if they want to hear from the EDC. She invited
Paige Buscema to sit at the table and comment as a representative of the
LDBA during this discussion.
11 P c.
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
Council Member Dunn stated he is leaning towards Item E (Permit
open neon signs up to two square feet in the H -1 with BAR approval and
prohibit the use of LED lighting, allow four square feet outside the H -1). He
clarified that he is willing to allow LED open signs and believes that BAR
review is not necessary. He questioned what history is trying to be maintained
with regards to only allowing "historic neon
Mr. Burkholder stated that the basis for not allowing LED is that neon
can be considered historic signage whereas LED is a modern technology.
Council Member Reid stated he supports the LDBA compromise
position.
Council Member Butler stated he supports the Planning Commission
compromise proposal between what is currently permitted and what some
businesses in town want. He stated there is overwhelming lack of support
from the general townspeople for the expanded use of neon.
Council Member Hammler disclosed a phone conversation with Ms.
Buscema earlier and asked that she submit the LDBA's recommendations in
terms of each of the sections under review. She stated she supports the
LDBA's recommended language for the amendment. She stated it is an
important goal in terms of making the downtown more vibrant after dark.
Vice Mayor Wright clarified the BAR agreed with the Planning
Commission.
Mr. Burkholder confirmed this and stated the BAR stated if there is a
desire to open up neon, they would like to be given the opportunity to develop
design guidelines for its use.
Vice Mayor Wright questioned whether the EDC has had an
opportunity to express their opinions.
Mr. Burkholder stated they were on the steering committee.
Debi Parry stated at the last EDC meeting they discussed the fact that
there has been a lot of concern raised recently from the LDBA and other
businesses and that is why the EDC felt it was important for them to take
another look at the issues and make sure all the bases are covered as far as
protecting the businesses interests.
Council Member Dunn thanked Ms. Buscema for the detail in her
comments stating it helps the Council's process. He stated this process has
2IPag
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
been going on for a long time and he does not feel any comments by the EDC
will change Council's course.
Council Member Reid stated he was the liaison and he pushed the
EDC hard to take a position. He stated if the EDC wishes to hold a special
meeting, they can, but he would not be interested in changing the proposed
date of the Council public hearing.
Council Member Butler agreed that the EDC has had five months to
discuss the Planning Commission recommendations, but some of the issues
being discussed go well beyond what the Planning Commission
recommended. Further, he stated given the significant increase in scope of the
sign ordinance, any effort that can be made towards outreach to the general
community, as well as the EDC, would be appropriate.
Mayor Umstattd stated she is comfortable with the LDBA language
which permits continuously lit open neon signs up to two square feet in the H-
1 overlay, prohibit the use of LED open signs, permit neon in the H -1 overlay
when based on historical information with BAR approval and the rest of
Option E as presented.
Council Member Hammler stated she welcomes input from any
economic development commissioners.
Mr. Burkholder stated the next item is window signs, which includes
interior signage. He stated there are four main topics with regards to window
signs. He stated temporary signs would be permitted to cover 50% of the
window up to 32 square feet and permanent window signs would remain the
same at 25% up to 16 square feet. He stated that currently the ordinance limits
window signs to the ground floor and the question is whether Council would
like to allow second and third floor signage and whether they would like to
limit it to the H -1 or allow it town -wide. Further, he stated a third issue would
be related to the set back of a window sign with the current ordinance not
setting a limit on what would be considered a window sign. He stated the
proposal is to cap window sign regulations to those within three feet of the
window. Further, he stated an additional issue surrounds illumination of
window signage. He stated the BAR did not wish to see an increase in the
percentages up to 50% for window signage. He stated they would like to rely
upon consolidated signage and not permit upper level window signage in the
H -1. Further, he stated they would like to develop some sort of design
guidelines for interior window signage.
Council Member Dunn questioned what types of illumination are being
considered.
311 a
g
Council Work Session
November 8, 2010
Mr. Burkholder stated it would be illumination of the entire sign,
whether that be self illumination or light directed at the sign.
Council Member Dunn stated he is leaning towards Council not having
any purview within the store. He stated he leans towards Option H: "unless
affixed or applied to the window Regarding the illumination issue, he
expressed concern over whether illumination of merchandise could be
confused with illumination of a sign.
Council Member Reid stated his agreement with this position. He
stated he is curious about the LDBA proposal.
Ms. Buscema stated originally the business community requested that a
sign be attached to or fixed directly to the surface of a window and in the name
of compromise given the amount of discussion, both at the Council level and
elsewhere, this language was proposed today to give a little more leeway
within bay windows or a window display area, but not well within the business
itself, outside of what is a window usage. She stated she realizes the fear is the
windows would be completely covered with signage if there is no regulation.
Council Member Reid clarified that the LDBA is recommending
second floor signs, but not illumination of those signs.
Ms. Buscema stated that initially their intent was to allow second floor
tenants to have the same types of sign rights that any main floor /ground floor
tenant would have. She stated this recommended language represents a
compromise in the name of reaching out part way to make sure that all the
concerns are met in some regard. She stated if illuminated second floor
business signs are a serious concern, the LDBA would be willing to
compromise. She stated they are looking at this from the perspective of town
wide because businesses could move out of the historic district.
Council Member Reid questioned how Option B would be enforced?
Mr. Boucher stated staff has not had an opportunity to evaluate the
recommendations made by the LDBA, but staff's position is that illumination
of signs on the second floor is an issue. He stated that staffs recommendation
of a window sign is within three feet of the window and he stated there are
legitimate concerns with the three feet designation. He stated if Council is not
willing to regulate the distance inside the window, then illumination will be a
big issue.
Ms. Buscema clarified the recommended compromise language does
not include regulation of signs that are not attached to or hanging inside a bay
window.
1 1,
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
Council Member Reid stated he would support that compromise.
Council Member Butler disagreed stating he does not see that as a
compromise. He stated if the town cannot regulate signs that are one inch
inside the window, then the town would not need a sign ordinance. He stated
allowing any sign, anywhere at whatever size including 100% window
coverage would be devastating to the businesses in town and repel customers.
He stated he hopes Council will not allow this within the town because it
would be the biggest anti business ordinance passed in the last 10 years.
Council Member Dunn asked for clarification as to what is being
discussed.
Council Member Butler stated what is being discussed is allowing
anything as long as it is one inch inside the window. He stated this is not a
compromise.
Council Member Dunn clarified that 50% coverage window signs,
affixed to the window with no illumination, unless it is a neon open sign is
what has been proposed.
Council Member Butler stated he would be okay with this if there is no
illumination.
Council Member Hammler added that second floor signs would be
allowed town -wide as long as they are not illuminated.
Ms. Buscema stated this would be reasonable.
Council Member Butler stated if the sign is back one inch, it would be
allowed to be 100% window coverage under this language. He stated he
would be willing to support B with no illumination and the addition of G.
Council Member Hammler stated this is a reasonable compromised and
an edited merging of B and G, which would be coverage up to 50% with no
illumination, permitting non illuminated window signs above the first floor
anywhere in Leesburg.
Council Member Butler expressed concern with leaving out the three
foot language. He stated he can support Option B with no illumination plus
Option G.
Ms. Buscema stated the LDBA preference for language "attached to or
encased within your window display
5 11 age
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
Council Member Butler noted that this would effectively give 100%
window coverage.
Council Member Reid questioned how many business owners will go
out and purchase neon.
Ms. Buscema stated the reality is that many businesses, both inside and
outside the historic district are vaguely aware that there are even sign
ordinance issues that they have to deal with when they want to put a sign in
their window. She stated you do not drive down the road and see businesses
randomly using chaotic signage covering 100% of their windows because they
are not in the business of repelling customers.
Vice Mayor Wright asked for a report on the BAR discussions
regarding distance of a sign from the window.
Mr. Burkholder stated they did not have a lot of discussion, but they
did question their purview.
Council Member Martinez stated the result of the discussion is the
BAR is looking to do a comprehensive review of their sign guidelines for the
H -1.
Vice Mayor Wright stated he does not have a problem with B plus G,
but he does like the three feet. He stated this allows the town to allow the
signs that are currently existing.
Council Member Martinez stated the BAR exercised its authority on
the Bail Bonds sign. He stated his understanding is the owner never showed
up and the discussion was based on a staff member talking with the applicant
and expressing the concerns the BAR had, and the applicant agreeing to make
the changes. He stated that businesses won't completely cover their windows
because they are in the business of bringing people inside the store. He stated
he will be as supportive to the small businesses as possible and expressed his
belief that this will help them. He stated he believes the large, chain businesses
will be the problem with large, distracting window signs. He stated he would
prefer to err on the side of the small businesses.
Mayor Umstattd questioned whether there is a public safety reason for
recommending a prohibition on illuminated signs above the first level.
Mr. Burkholder stated it goes more towards whom the business is trying
to attract; is it more pedestrian or vehicular? He stated that second floor neon
could be a traffic distraction.
61Pa
Council Member Dunn recapped that the Council consensus is for no
illumination, 50% coverage, and affixed to the window.
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
Mayor Umstattd stated she is comfortable with the LDBA compromise
where nothing is regulated beyond the window. She expressed her belief that
businesses will try to look attractive and are in the best position to decide what
is attractive. She stated having nothing lit up at night downtown creates a
dead zone.
Council Member Hammler stated Council needs to consider this
ordinance will be in effect for a long time. She stated Council knows the
business owners and respect them, but there may come a day when a bad
business owner may come into town and try to work their way around the sign
ordinance.
Council Member Butler cautioned that if one business thinks they need
100% sign coverage, other businesses will need the same to compete and this
will drive business from the downtown. He stated his belief that this will hurt
small business.
Vice Mayor Wright also stated the ordinance will be changed to allow
up to four square feet of neon anywhere outside the H -1 and no neon inside
the H -1. He stated the discussion amongst Council centers around whether
only neon Open signs would be allowed in the H -1. He stated he heard
Council Members support not allowing a neon Open sign to be attached
directly to the window.
Council Member Reid stated a straw vote has already been taken on
this subject and staff needs to come back with the proposed language.
Wade Burkholder stated the next topic revolves around the use of flags.
He displayed three options: 1) retain the language recommended by the
Planning Commission limiting to one flag with the word Open not exceeding
15 square feet in area; 2) allow the language limiting one flag to business
bearing either the word Open or other words depicting the nature of the
business, not exceeding 15 square feet in area, should the flag contain any
corporate logo or text, the flag will be counted as one of the signs permitted per
business; 3) adopt language exempting all flags from permit.
Mr. Burkholder stated that the BAR supports Option B with a few
members not supporting any flags.
Council Member Dunn stated he supports Option C. He stated with
the sign affixed to the window, the Open neon sign, that businesses should be
able to regulate how many indications that the business is open. He stated
flags add more color.
71P age
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
Council Member Reid agreed with Option C, which would allow all
flags of any size or type.
Council Member Butler stated if there will be 100% neon window
coverage that flags should be allowed all over.
Council Member Hammler supported Option B proposed by LDBA
reading: Adopt language exempting one flag per business bearing the word Open or
other text not exceeding 15 square feet in area. Should the flag contain the corporate
logo and /or corporate icon, the flag will be counted as one of the signs permitted per
business.
Vice Mayor Wrights stated he supports Option B as well and clarified
that the Council will not be regulating national or institutional flags. He noted
that the only flags that would be regulated are those that have text or symbols
directly related to the business.
Council Member Martinez questioned whether there is a definition of a
flag in good repair.
Mr. Burkholder stated that is not included.
Council Member Martinez expressed his interest in language requiring
the flag to be in good repair.
Council Member Reid confirmed that "in good repair" can be added to
the language.
Mayor Umstattd stated she likes the LDBA language because the
proposed language indicates either an Open sign or the nature of the business
on a flag. She stated she prefers the LDBA language.
Council Member Martinez pointed out that some businesses don't have
window signage or a window.
Ms. Buscema stated the LDBA could support language allowing all
flags, but felt that the Council was leaning towards Option B.
Mr. Burkholder stated the next issue is a housekeeping issue with
relation to the H -2 sign guidelines.
Council Member Reid stated his preference to avoid a long, protracted
discussion regarding the H -2 guidelines. He stated he wants to see
administrative review of signs in the H -2 from the very beginning.
8 1Pagc
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
Council Member Dunn agreed and stated he supports administrative
review rather than BAR approval for sign in the H -2.
Council Members Butler and Hammler expressed their support for
Option A.
Vice Mayor Wright stated he likes Option A, but he will support
Option C. He stated he does not want the process of Option A to hinder the
administrative review of signs in the H -2.
Mr. Burkholder stated the last item is downtown directional kiosks.
There was Council consensus to discuss these kiosks at a future work
session.
Council Member Hammler stated, in general, she supports the LDBA
recommendations as pertains to final edits coming forward for vote.
b. Extended Free Parking Downtown
Council Member Butler stated the LDBA has weighed in supporting
the extended free parking.
Council Member Dunn commented that there is a cost to free parking.
He stated he supports this, but recommended saying the free parking is
continued indefinitely.
Council Member Reid questioned what will the parking booth
employees do when they are not needed. He questioned whether staff has
considered automating the garage.
Mr. Wells stated for the short term, there are short term assignments
that can be utilized and depending on how the program proceeds, he will
consider their employment. He stated staff is in the process of sending out an
RFP to fully automate the garage.
Council Member Reid questioned how much it will cost to refund the
permit holders.
Mr. Wells stated staff estimates a short term cost of about $40,000. He
stated there are other costs that will be incurred.
Council Member Reid expressed concern that unless the downstairs is
opened up to other than permit holders, he is concerned that there will be
people fighting for space. He suggested moving this for a shorter period of
time.
9IPage
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
Mr. Wells stated he believes that Council Member Butler recommended
free parking above the basement.
Council Member Hammler stated she would be interested to learn how
the town will deal with short term turnover, particularly in spots designated for
shoppers.
Vice Mayor Wright stated he has similar concerns. He stated there
were some mixed reviews from the permit holders. Further, he stated there
needs to be a way to ensure that the first level is not filled by 9 a.m. by office
workers.
Council Member Martinez stated he likes the idea of eliminating the
charge for parking and automating the parking garage.
Council Member Dunn stated there is a cost to free parking and he is
generally not in favor of free parking. He stated we have no data from the
merchants that free parking has increased their business.
Vice Mayor Wright stated that this debate does not apply to the
Holiday Free Parking Program.
Mr. Wells stated he would like the opportunity for staff to follow
through with looking at different rate structures and automation options which
he could bring back as part of the budget process in February.
Council Member Butler stated he is not in favor of automating anything
because he stated whatever the town does, it could create problems for the
businesses.
It was Council consensus to hear what staff has to report in February.
Vice Mayor Wright stated that Council Member Butler requested this
for vote tomorrow night.
c. Closed Session
On a motion by Council Member Reid, the following was proposed:
Pursuant to Section 2.2- 3711(A) (3) and (7) of the Code of Virginia, I
move that the Leesburg Town Council convene in a closed meeting for
the purpose of discussing:
1) State Supreme Court Utility Rate Case Results
2) Linden Hill Project /Property Acquisition
The motion was seconded by Council Member Butler.
101Pag
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
Council Member Dunn stated he does not see the necessity for a closed
session.
Vice Mayor Wright stated his support for the closed session as long as
comments regarding the rate case are constrained as there is a possibility of
appeal. He stated he would appreciate a brief update on Linden Hill.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Hammler, Martinez, Reid and Wright
Nay: Dunn and Mayor Umstattd
Vote: 5 -2
Council convened in Closed Session at 9:08 p.m.
Council reconvened in Open session at 9:26 p.m.
On a motion by Mayor Umstattd, seconded by Vice Mayor Wright, the
following was proposed:
In accordance with Section 2.2 -3712 of the Code of Virginia, I move
that Council certify to the best of each member's knowledge, only
public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting
requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and such
public business matters as were identified in the motion by which the
closed meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered in
the meeting by Council.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
d. Linden Hill Update
Ms. Irby stated the town had made an offer by resolution of $375,000
for the property and that offer was good for 90 days, which has now expired.
She stated no further offer has been authorized by Council.
Council Member Dunn requested a motion at tomorrow night's
meeting to make another offer.
There was Council consensus to wait until the November 30 meeting to
give time for staff to notify the interested parties.
e. Tiered Utility Rate Structure
11 W
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
Mayor Umstattd stated there is a proposed motion for a vote tomorrow
night to have staff develop a tiered rate structure.
Council Member Reid stated he is most concerned about the winter
quarter issue. He requested that Mr. Wells discuss what staff can and cannot
do.
Mr. Wells stated just looking at the winter quarter issue, staff could
model a few alternatives that Council could look at after the beginning of the
calendar year.
Mayor Umstattd stated a tiered structure may take care of the
"snowbird" problem but a more formal analysis may be necessary.
Vice Mayor Wright stated there are two distinct challenges: 1) the
"snowbird" problem, i.e. high usage surcharge based on the winter quarter
usage and 2) the issue of sewer billing structure. He stated there are two ways
to solve those two problems. He stated for the irrigation system users, he likes
a system similar to that used by Loudoun Water which is winter quarter plus
3,000 -5,000 gallons. He stated a tiered rate structure would help the
"snowbirds".
Council Member Dunn stated he would prefer this study be done as
quickly as possible, whether that means staff or URAC. He stated staff is more
experienced and may be the best way to go. He stated he is not sold on a
tiered rate structure, but would like to see the results of the study.
Council Member Reid stated he likes Vice Mayor Wright's suggestions.
He stated this is something that needs to be done as soon as possible because if
people hold back on water consumption to save money, the Utility Fund will
be in worse shape. He stated the economy will force many customers to cut
costs this coming year.
Council Member Butler stated there is an additional issue with the
winter quarter in that when the 45% surcharge is added, it is added to the
entire bill, not just the excess. He stated staff can do a lot of the heavy lifting
with regards to taking on the winter quarter and a tiered rate structure. He
stated a full rate study up is probably not necessary right away since there is a
lot of data from the past studies, but a consultant to give feedback on the
different scenarios that are developed might be warranted. He stated
regardless of the scenario, some users will come out better and some will come
out worse and the URAC can weed through the scenarios.
Council Member Hammler stated Council will be fairly representing all
customers and Council needs to understand that there will be significant
political and financial risks if all the feedback is not taken into account. She
12 1Page
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
stated she would support the URAC looking into these issues. She stated that
staff may want to look at monthly billing because it gives users greater
flexibility for adjusting water usage. She also suggested voluntary donations
like the Washington Area Fuel Fund to help those that are unable to pay their
bills.
Vice Mayor Wright stated there is a way to address the problem for
"snowbirds" as they can request a calculated winter quarter. He requested
data regarding a winter plus policy including cost impact and the data if the
surcharge is only applied to the excess. He stated time is of the essence, but it
is also important to keep URAC involved.
Council Member Martinez stated this is a good opportunity to get
URAC back into the mix. He stated Council needs to understand that URAC
has two out of town residents who have input. He agreed with the need to do
this quickly. He agreed that the town needs to look at levelized billing.
Council Member Dunn stated looking at rates as a sole solution is not
the only way to go. He stated looking at availability fees as well is a good
idea. He questioned what efforts have been made to recruit additional
businesses to the town. He stated looking at early retirements is a cost saving
idea that needs to be looked at again as well as selling water outside the town
limits. He questioned whether there is an opportunity to join with the county
to form a Leesburg /Loudoun water partnership. He stated the town cannot
just look at rates, but look at other opportunities that can be taken advantage
of.
Council Member Butler stated that Council Member Dunn has
mischaracterized his statements. He stated that Council Member Dunn has
not brought forth any resolutions.
Mayor Umstattd stated that Council Member Hammier has made a
valid point about monthly billing versus quarterly billing. She stated she
would be interested in seeing how much administration of a monthly billing
program would cost the town. She stated a critical problem is the problem of
the "snowbirds" because they are being hit very hard. She stated there are
quite a few of them. She stated she was not in favor of URAC to begin with
and does not feel that URAC is any more helpful than town staff. She stated
looking at what the Supreme Court considered important in 2005 Council
did a study on the water rate structure and the consultant recommended a
different structure. She stated she would support staff hiring a consultant to
analyze any rate structure. She stated she would like to go back to the 2005
rate structure with the 100% out of town surcharge as that is what the people
of Leesburg expect. She stated it is not fair to charge at the highest tier rates
for every gallon. She agreed that when Council helps one group, it will hurt
another group. Further, she stated she believes the town has an excellently run
13 1Page
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
utilities system with no major cost savings. She does not believe that
consolidation with Loudoun Water will achieve any cost savings because
someone will have to continue to run all the facilities because no one facility
has the capacity to carry all the users.
Mayor Umstattd further stated that the plant's current capacity will be
80% used once the currently approved development comes on line. She stated
once the town reaches 85 an expansion will be required as per Department
of Environmental Quality (DEQ) standards. She stated as the economy
improves, plant capacity will be reached within 5 -10 years.
Council Member Hammier stated it is critical to think about setting the
tone with respect to the out of town customers. She stated the 50% surcharge
seems fair to others and it is important that Council be seen to be fair. She
stated there are fiscal risks involved with raising the stakes. She stated there
may be retaliation at the county level, which could cause town taxes to have to
be raised. Further, she stated the risks at the state level could cost the town its
ability to set its own water rates. She stated it is in the best interest of the town
to work with the out of town customers to create a new level of trust.
Council Member Reid stated it is important for the town's residents to
understand the ramifications of the actions of the Board of Supervisors and the
General Assembly. He requested a resolution to have staff look at the winter
quarter discount and "snowbird" fees generating the same overall system
revenue and providing Council with ways to lower costs. He stated URAC
needs to be directed to start working on the winter quarter discount in January.
Council Member Dunn stated he agrees with Council Member Butler
that there is no need for a consultant as staff has plenty of information to work
with. He stated even with the out of town surcharge, the Utilities Fund was
still running at a deficit. He stated he disagrees that the plant will be at
capacity in a few years. He stated he does not want to see URAC slow down
the process of moving things forward. Further, he stated he was opposed to
any water rate increase until all the options are reviewed and he will continue
to vote that way.
Council Member Butler noted when he was on the URAC, they met
every week for four months and the Trails Committee met every week for six
months, so he does not believe the work load will be a problem for the URAC.
He stated staff can do a lot of the heavy lifting, but it is not staff's responsibility
to decide how the deficit can be made up.
Vice Mayor Wright stated he likes Council Member Reid's revision as
there are some challenges with the current rate structure that can be adjusted.
He stated there is an expectation of a revenue number with the rate study that
was performed. He stated the estimated to the actual has not been seen yet
14 1 age
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
and would caution that more revenue may have been generated than was
estimated and changes can be made to address the fairness issue.
Council Member Martinez stated a levelized billing system could utilize
direct deposit without monthly billing resulting in no extra cost to the town.
f. Pedestrian /Bike Crossings (&,Bypass
Council Member Hammler stated she feels this will be more
appropriate under the context of the bike accessibility plan that staff is working
on.
Mr. Wells stated this is coming to December 13t meeting.
Council Member Butler agreed.
Council Member Reid stated he would like a crosswalk at Battlefield
and Route 15 near Potomac Crossing, but he is not in favor of the other
suggested crossings.
It was Council consensus to defer this discussion to December 13.
g. CDBG Grant Application
Kaj Dentler stated that last year, an application was submitted for Plaza
Street sidewalk. He stated that staff recommends re- submittal with 20%
matching funds.
It was Council consensus to support this item and put it on the Consent
Agenda for Tuesday night's meeting.
2. Items for Future Council Meetings
Council Member Butler requested an initiation for a zoning ordinance
amendment to allow houses of worship in the I -1 under certain circumstances. He
stated some of the smaller houses of worship cannot afford a special exception and
have very little impact on surrounding properties.
Council Member Martinez stated he has a recycling initiative that he would
like to have staff look into. He stated it is an incentive program for recycling.
Council Member Reid stated his nominee to the EAC has resigned, so he is
looking for an EAC nominee. He requested a discussion at the December work
session on making the town vehicle sticker either permanent or having them last
longer than one year.
Council Member Dunn requested information regarding what the waived
tipping fees at the landfill were for the past year. He also requested a discussion on
Form Based Code and the status of the H -2 overlay district. He stated he would like
15 IPage
Council Work Session November 8, 2010
to put forward a resolution for a new offer on 1 Country Club Drive for property
acquisition for the Linden Hill access road at the second November Council meeting.
He requested a formal discussion on the water authority co- operative /partnership.
He requested a resolution to initiate an even -year change in the election at the next
Council meeting.
Vice Mayor Wright questioned whether the discussion on the utility rates
would be getting into a significant amount of workload for staff.
Ms. Irby stated it would be a significant amount of work and would require
outside expertise to discuss joining with an outside authority.
3. Adjournment
On the motion of Council Member Martinez, seconded by Vice Mayor
Wright, the niting was adjourned at 10:38 p.m.
i
Clerk of Cpun
2010 tcwsmin11
16 1Pag