Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2022_tcmin0111 COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 Council Chamber, 25 West Market Street, 7:00 p.m. Mayor Kelly Burk presiding. Council Members Present: Ara Bagdasarian, Zach Cummings, Suzanne Fox, Vice Mayor Marty Martinez, Kari Nacy, Neil Steinberg, and Mayor Kelly Burk. Council Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Town Attorney Christopher Spera, Deputy Town Manager Keith Markel, Director of Public Works and Capital Projects Renee LaFollette, Director, Director of Finance and Administrative Services Clark Case, Director of Plan Review Bill Ackman, Director of Economic Development Russell Seymour, Director of Planning& Zoning Susan Berry Hill, Deputy Director of Planning& Zoning Brian Boucher, Zoning Administrator Mike Watkins, Preservation Planner Lauren Murphy, Leesburg Police Captain Jaime Sanford, Chief Procurement Officer Octavia Andrew, Assistant Town Attorney Jessica Arena and Clerk of Council Eileen Boeing. AGENDA ITEMS 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. INVOCATION was given by Council Member Fox. 3. SALUTE TO THE FLAG was led by Council Member Bagdasarian. 4. ROLL CALL a. Electronic Participation for Vice Mayor Martinez Vice Mayor Martinez requested to participate electronically in the January 11, 2022, Council Meeting as he was out of town. Mayor Burk, Council Member Bagdasarian, Council Member Cummings, Council Member Nacy, Council Member Fox, and Council Member Steinberg were physically present at the meeting. MOTION2022-001 On a motion by Council Member Cummings, seconded by Council Member Steinberg, the following was proposed: To allow Vice Mayor Martinez to electronically participate in the January 11, 2022, Town Council Meeting. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Fox, Nacy, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 6-0-1 (Vice Mayor Martinez abstain) 1 I Page _ COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 5. MINUTES a. Work Session Minutes of December 13, 2021 MOTION2022-002 On a motion by Council Member Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Fox, the minutes of the Work Session of December 13, 2021, were moved for approval. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 b. Regular Session Minutes of December 14, 2021 MOTION 2022-003 On a motion by Council Member Nacy, seconded by Council Member Bagdasarian, the minutes of the Regular Session of December 14, 2021, were moved for approval. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 6. ADOPTING THE MEETING AGENDA Council Member Steinberg requested item 13.b. —Motion to Rescind Resolution 2021-154 be removed from the agenda. MOTION2022-004 On a motion by Council Member Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Cummings, the following was proposed: To remove item 13.b. —Motion to Rescind Resolution 2021-154from the agenda Council discussed the motion. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Vice Mayor Martinez, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Nay: Fox and Nacy Vote: 5-2 2IPage COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 MOTION 2022-005 On a motion by Council Member Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Cummings, the following was proposed: To adopt the meeting agenda with item 13.b. —Motion to Rescind Resolution 2021-154 removed The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 7. CERTIFICATES OF RECOGNITION a. None. 8. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATIONS None. 9. PRESENTATIONS a. None. 10. REGIONAL COMMISSION REPORTS Mayor Burk reported that she met with Supervisor Umstattd and a summary of the meeting was provided to Council. Mayor Burk made a correction to her summary regarding revenue sharing noting it was the Board of Supervisors that was not interested in revenue sharing and not the other way around. 11. PETITIONERS The Petitioner's Section was opened at 7:08 p.m. Michael Rivera. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Bob Jones. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Eva Brzezinski. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Drew Bacallao. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Michael Kucher. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Debbie Cloud. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Joe Mobley. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Julie Bolthouse. Spoke to Council in opposition of the Virginia Village application. 3 I Page COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 Mark Baldino. Spoke to Council in support of the Virginia Village application. Paul Coyer. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Marjory Serrano. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Chris Cloud. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Gigi Robinson. Spoke to Council in opposition of the Virginia Village application. Jenny Hall. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Jim Sisley. Spoke to Council in support of the Virginia Village application. Michael Miller. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Stephen Frost. Spoke to Council in support of the vaccine mandate and the Virginia Village application. Dane Yezek. Spoke in opposition of the Virginia Village application. Cheryl Williams. Spoke to Council in opposition of the Virginia Village application. Sharon William. Spoke to Council in opposition of the Virginia Village application. Amber Becker. Spoke to Council in support of the Virginia Village application. Zack Yezek. Spoke to Council in opposition of the Virginia Village application. Bonnie McLean. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. Sarah Richardson. Spoke to Council in opposition of the Virginia Village application. Gem Bingol. Spoke to Council in opposition of the Virginia Village application. Rusty Edwards. Spoke to Council in opposition of the vaccine mandate. The Petitioner's Section was closed at 8:16 p.m. 12. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA MOTION 2022-006 On a motion by Council Member Cummings, seconded by Council Member Bagdasarian, the following consent agenda was proposed: 4 I Page COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 a. Regional Surface Transportation Program Funding for the Route 15 Bypass Interchange at Edwards Ferry Road and Fort Evans Road Project RESOLUTION2022-001 Endorsing a Request in the amount of$2 Million for Regional Surface Transportation Program Funding from the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority for Fiscal Year 2028 for the Route 15 Bypass Interchange at Edwards Ferry Road and Fort Evans Road Project b. Requesting Virginia Department of Transportation to Accept Certain Streets RESOLUTION2022-002 Requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to Accept Certain Streets c. Appointment to the Commission on Public Art RESOL UTION2022-003 Appointing Leah Fallon to the Commission on Public Art d. Appointment to the Tree Commission RESOLUTION2022-004 Appointing Joseph Garnreiter to the Tree Commission e. Removing Ron Platt from the Tree Commission RESOLUTION2022-005 Removing Ron Platt from the Tree Commission f. Motion to Approve the Proclamation for Tuscarora Mill Restaurant Celebrating their 36th Year Business Anniversary MOTION I move to approve the Proclamation for Tuscarora Mill Restaurant 36th Year Business Celebration to be presented on January 18, 2022. g. Procurement Policy Revisions RESOL UTION2022-006 Adopting Procurement Policy and Design-Build and Construction Management Procedures 5 I Page COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 h. Amending Resolution 2021-187-Setting the 2022 Calendar Year Council Calendar to Remove Election Day Conflict RESOL UTION2021-187 Amended Setting the Calendar Year 2022 Town Council Meeting Schedule and Authority to Reset the Day or Days to which a Regular Meeting shall be continued in the Event of Indement Weather The Consent Agenda was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy, Steinberg, and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 13. RESOLUTIONS /ORDINANCES / MOTIONS a. Virginia Village MOTION 2022-007 On a motion by Council Member Cummings, seconded by Council Member Bagdasarian, the following was proposed: I move to approve the proposed resolution for Town Plan Amendment application TLTA-2019-0001, Virginia Village, on the basis the amendment meets the approval criteria of TLZO Section 3.3.16 and will serve the public necessity, convenience,general welfare and good planning practice based on the findings as provided in the November 23, 2021, Town Council Staff report. RESOLUTION2022-007 Adopting Town Plan Amendment TLTA-2019-0001 to Amend the Planned Land Use Policy Map, the Crescent District Land Use Policy Map, the Crescent District Building Height Policy Map, and the Crescent District Future Streets Policy Map Council and staff discussed the proposed resolution. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy Nay: Fox, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Vote: 4-3 6 I Page COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 MOTION On a motion by Council Member Cummings, seconded by Council Member Bagdasarian, the following was proposed: I move to approve the ordinance for rezoning application TLZM-2019-0001 subject to the Concept Development Plan dated October 27, 2019 and Proffers dated January 7, 2022, on the basis that the approval criteria of Zoning Ordinance Section 3.3.15 have been satisfied and that the proposal would serve the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice. ORDINANCE Approving`TLZM-2019-0001, Virginia Village, to Rezone 18.48 Acres from R-22, Multifamily Residential, CD-MUR, Crescent District—Mixed-Use Residential, CD- CC, Crescent District—Commercial Corridor, and Gateway District(Overlay), to CD- RH, Crescent District—Residential High Density and CD-CC, Crescent District— Corridor Commercial District Council and staff discussed the proposed Ordinance. The motion was amended to reflect the correct date of the most recent proffer statement date of January 10, 2022. MOTION 2022-008 On a motion by Council Member Cummings, seconded by Council Member Bagdasarian, the following was proposed: I move to approve the ordinance for rezoning application TLZM-2019-0001 subject to the Concept Development Plan dated October 27, 2019 and Proffers dated January 10, 2022, on the basis that the approval criteria of Zoning Ordinance Section 3.3.15 have been satisfied and that the proposal would serve the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice. ORDINANCE 2022-0-001 Approving TLZM-2019-0001, Virginia Village, to Rezone 18.48 Acres from R-22, Multifamily Residential, CD 1VIUR, Crescent District—Mixed-Use Residential, CD- CC, Crescent District—Commercial Corridor, and Gateway District(Overlay), to CD- RH, Crescent District—Residential High Density and CD-CC, Crescent District— Corridor Commercial District The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy Nay: Fox, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Vote: 4-3 7 I Page COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 MOTION2022-009 On a motion by Council Member Cummings, seconded by Council Member Bagdasarian, the following was proposed: I move to approve the proposed resolution for special exception application TLSE-2020- 0004, Virginia Village Floodplain Alteration, subject to the conditions of approval as enumerated in the November 23, 2021 Town Council Staff report on the basis that the Approval Criteria of Zoning Ordinance Section 3.4.12 have been satisfied and that the proposal would serve the public necessity, convenience,general welfare and good zoning practice. RESOL UTION2022-008 Approving Special Exception TLSE-2020-0004, Virginia Village Floodplain Alteration to Allow the Alteration of the Floodplain Boundaries in the Northeast Quadrant of the Property along Town Branch Council and staff discussed the proposed Resolution. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy Nay: Fox, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Vote: 4-3 b. Motion to Rescind Resolution 2021-154 This item was removed from the agenda. Council took a recess from 9:07 p.m. to 9:11 p.m. 14. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. TLOA-2021-0005, Administrative Approval of COAs in H-1 Old and Historic District The Public Hearing was opened at 9:12 p.m. Ms. Lauren Murphy presented Council with the proposed administrative process to expand the allowable list of uses which can be administratively approved by the Preservation Planner in the Old and Historic District or H-1 if they are consistent with the Old and Historic District guidelines adopted by Council. Council and staff discussed the item. Public Speakers: There were no speakers wishing to address this public hearing. The public hearing was closed at 9:18 p.m. 8 I Page COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 MOTION2022-010 On a motion by Council Member Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Cummings, the following was proposed: I move approval of the ordinance in Attachment 1 amending Article 7.5.6 of the Zoning Ordinance for Administrative Review of Certificates of Appropriateness. ORDINANCE 2022-0-002 Amending Zoning Ordinance Article 7.5.6 Administrative Review of Certificates of Appropriateness to Amend the Allowable Projects for Administrative Review in the Old and Historic District The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 b. TLOA-2021-0001 Batch Zoning Text Amendments The Public Hearing was opened at 9:19 p.m. Mr. Michael Watkins presented Council with the proposed annual batch of Zoning Ordinance text amendments to comply with annual State Code changes, implement Town Plan goals and objectives, to include determinations and requests by residents and businesses and changes to assist with enforcement efforts. The proposed amendments • include: • Reduce separation requirements for accessory structures from principal structures • Define and permit Portable Sheds • Clarify restrictions for enclosed decks • Clarify certain architectural elements • Create use standards for Accessory Kitchens • Clarify/amend use standards for Family Day Homes • Amend the validity period for pending special exception approvals • Create ATM Signs and clarify signage for banks • Amend submission requirements for Zoning Permits Council and staff discussed the amendments. Public Speakers: Bob White. Spoke to Council in support of the proposed amendment for amending the validity period for pending special exception approvals. The public hearing was closed at 9:33 p.m. 9 I Page COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 MOTION On a motion by Mayor Burk, seconded by Council Member Nacy, the following was proposed: I'll move to approve TLOA-2021-001 Winter Batch Zoning Text Amendments, with the exclusion of accessory kitchen, on the basis that the zoning text amendment further the objectives of the town plan, serve the public necessity, convenience,general welfare, and good zoning practices. ORDINANCE 2022-0-003 Amending the Town of Leesburg Zoning Ordinance Articles 3, 9, 10, 15, and 18 as part of the Winter 2021 "Batch"Amendments excluding the use standards for accessory kitchens Council and staff discussed the proposed amendments for the use standards for accessory kitchens. Mayor Burk amended the motion with agreement from Council Member Nacy after staff noted that the proposed amendment did not govern whether or not they were allowed as they are already a permitted use. MOTION 2022-011 On a motion by Mayor Burk, seconded by Council Member Nacy, the following was proposed: ORDINANCE 2022-0-003 Amending the Town of Leesburg Zoning Ordinance Articles 3, 9, 10, 15, and 18 as part of the Winter 2021 "Batch"Amendments The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 c.- Off-duty Employment of Police Officers The Public Hearing was opened at 9:37 p.m. Ms. Jessica Arena presented Council with a proposal to adopt an ordinance for officer off-duty employment related to for-hire public services performed in the community. The purpose of the ordinance is to assure conformance with State Code regarding the town's authorization of providing such services. Council and staff discussed the ordinance. Public Speakers: There were no speakers wishing to address this public hearing. The public hearing was closed at 9:44 p.m. 10 I Page COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 MOTION 2022-012 On a motion by Council Member Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Fox, the following was prop osed.• I move to approve the proposed ordinance permitting Town Law Enforcement Officers to Engage in Ofduty Employment. ORDINANCE 2022-0-004 Permitting Town Law Enforcement Officers to Engage in Off-Duty Employment which may Occasionally Require the Use of their Police Powers in the Performance of Such Employment The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cummings, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. None. 16. NEW BUSINESS a. None. 17. COUNCIL DISCLOSURES AND COMMENTS / ADDITIONS TO FUTURE MEETINGS Council Member Cummings disclosed he met with Mr. Brian Cullen with Keane Enterprises regarding the Virginia Village application. Council Member Bagdasarian disclosed he met with Mr. Brian Cullen regarding the Virginia Village application. Vice Mayor Martinez disclosed he met with Mr. Brian Cullen to discuss the Virginia Village application. Council Member Steinberg disclosed he met with Mr. Truett Young with Stanley Martin regarding the Tuscarora Village community. 18. MAYOR DISCLOSURES AND COMMENTS /ADDITIONS TO FUTURE MEETINGS Mayor Burk disclosed she met with Mr. Brian Cullen regarding the Virginia Village project and with Mr. Truett Young with Stanley Martin regarding the Tuscarora Village community. 111 19. TOWN MANAGER COMMENTS a. None. I l Page COUNCIL MEETING January 11, 2022 20. CLOSED SESSION a. Leesburg Mobile Park b. Land Acquisition MOTION2022-013 On a motion by Mayor Burk, seconded by Council Member Nacy, the following was proposed: I move pursuant to Va. Code Section§2.2-3711(A)(8)and P.2-3711(A)(3)of the Code of Virginia that the Leesburg Town Council convene in a dosed meeting for the purpose of consulting with legal counsel regarding specific legal matters related to the Leesburg Mobile Park and for the purpose of discussion and receiving information regarding the potential acquisition of real properties for a public purpose. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Fox, Vice Mayor Martinez, Nacy, Steinberg and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 6-0-1 (Cummings absent) Council convened in a closed session at 9:48 p.m. Council convened in an open session at 10:36 p.m. MOTION2022-014 On a motion by Mayor Burk, the following was proposed: In accordance with Section sr 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 Virginia Freedom of Information Act and such public business matters for the purpose identified in the motion by which the dosed meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered in the meeting by Council. (ROLL CALL VOTE) Fox—aye, Steinberg—aye, Cummings—aye, Vice Mayor Martinez—aye, Bagdasarian—aye, Nacy—aye, Mayor Burk—aye. Vote 7-0 21. ADJOURNMENT On a motion by Vice Mayor Martinez, seconded by Council Member Steinberg, the meeting was adjourned at 10:37 p.m. Kell urk, ayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: alto ialez.itzp Clerk of Council 2022 tcmin0111 12 I Page January 11, 2022 Dear Mayor Burk and Council Members, My name is Bob Howard, and my wife Susie and I have been residents of Leesburg since 1998,and we live at 604 Buchanan Court in Tavistock Farms. We chose Leesburg over neighboring towns because of its unique historic downtown district,the W&OD trail that we often use to run, bike or walk; and the many restaurants and stores that blanket the town. I am writing to you to support the Virginia Village redevelopment plan. Susie and I have been part of the sports community in Leesburg since 2003,volunteering and coaching in Central Loudoun's Baseball and Basketball leagues,where all three of our sons have played. They have made many lifelong friendships that would be even stronger if these young professionals were able to live in Leesburg. Unfortunately, most of them move to Arlington or Reston,where they can afford to live with friends,taking away their discretionary spending to somewhere other than Leesburg. The transformation of downtown Leesburg over the last several years has been great! Our two older boys, now 24 and 22,coordinate meeting with their childhood friends in Leesburg every so often,and they always mention how much they love it here! It's too bad they can't afford to live in the area. The redevelopment plan will not only extend the historic district but will provide viable housing options for these young professionals. These young adults will live, eat and drink in Leesburg,generating additional revenue for our small businesses. As they grow and mature, my hope is that my three sons can afford to put their roots in Leesburg,where selfishly, Susie and I can be close and watch them and their future families grow. Leesburg is already a great town,as you know. Let's take it up a notch and approve the plan! Thank you. Sincerely, Bob Howard Eileen Boeing rom: BOB HOWARD <BHOWARD33@msn.com> ent: Tuesday,January 11, 2022 3:59 PM o: Council Subject: Virginia Village Redevelopment Meeting Attachments: Virginia Village Letter.docx Good afternoon Mayor Burk and Council Members, My name is Bob Howard and I am a Leesburg resident for 23 years. I will not be able to attend tonight's meeting but would like to request that the attached letter be read and entered into the record. I am in favor of the Virginia Redevelopment plan and would appreciate being heard (in abesntia). Thank you for your condsideration. Regards, Bob Howard 1 January 11, 2022—Town Council Meeting (Note: This is a transcript prepared by a Town contractor based on the video of the meeting. It may not be entirely accurate. For greater accuracy,we encourage you to review the video of the meeting that is on the Town's Web site—www.Ieesburgva.gov or refer to the approved Council meeting minutes. Council meeting videos are retained for three calendar years after a meeting per Library of Virginia Records Retention guidelines.) Mayor Kelly Burk: Meeting tonight. If anyone in the room needs hearing assistance, please see the Clerk. Council Member Fox will be giving the invocation followed by Council Member Bagdasarian will lead us in the pledge. Council Member Suzanne Fox: Please join me. Father in heaven I'm grateful today for the privilege of being here and for the privileges serving this Town. I'm thankful for this beautiful country, our Town and I'm thankful for the liberties afforded me as a US citizen. It is my specific and humble prayer again this evening that we act to preserve and protect individual liberty and free agency in this Town.We also so ask a special blessing on those who are suffering at this time. I'd also like you to take a moment to reflect on what you're grateful for as well. Thank you. Mayor Burk:All right. Please join us in the pledge. All: I pledge [inaudible]for which it stands[inaudible]justice for all. Mayor Burk: All right. I need a motion to allow Vice Mayor Martinez to electronically participate in the January 11th, 2022 Town Council meeting. Council Member Zach Cummings: So moved. Mayor Burk: Moved by Council Member Cummings, seconded by Council Member Steinberg. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? That passes six-zero-one. Mr. Martinez, you are now part of the meeting. I have work session minutes from December 13th,2021. Do I have a motion?So moved by Mr.Steinberg. Second? Council Member Fox: Second. Mayor Burk: By Council Member Fox. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? How are we going to ask Mr. Martinez if he opposes? He said he was going to be on mute. How do we get him to vote? Vice Mayor Fernando"Marty" Martinez:Yay. Mayor Burk: Yay. Thank you. [laughs] Okay. Stay on because you got another one here. Regular session minutes of December 14th, 2021. Council Member Kari Nacy: So moved. Mayor Burk: So moved by Council Member Nacy, second? Council Member Ara Bagdasarian: Second. Mayor Burk: By Council Member Bagdasarian.All in favor indicate by saying aye. Page 1 I January 11, 2022 Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed?That passes seven-zero. Do I have a motion to adopt the meeting agenda? Council Member Neil Steinberg: Madam Mayor, I'd like a motion to remove item 13 B from the agenda, please. Mayor Burk: 13 B Council Member Steinberg. Is there a second? Council Member Cummings: Second. Mayor Burk: Council Member Cummings. Council Member Fox: Madam Mayor, point of order? Mayor Burk: I'm sorry? Council Member Fox: I have a point of order, please. Mayor Burk: Yes, ma'am. Council Member Fox: The approval of the agenda is debatable as well as any modifications or amendments to that agenda so we need to open it for debate. Mayor Burk: Oh,there's no problem. I was going to give you a few moments to speak. Is there anyone who does want to speak?Yes, Ms. Nacy. Council Member Nacy:Am I first? Mayor Burk: Yes. Council Member Nacy: Oh,sorry.Yes I just want to make one last plea on today the end of the vaccine mandate for the Town to say please reconsider this mandate. We have already lost and are going to lose additional employees. I believe there is guidance coming from the incoming Governor that will change potentially what is happening with this vaccine mandate. I would hate to lose these employees and then turn around and it's been something where they didn't need to leave. Please reconsider. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Ms. Fox? Council Member Fox: Thank you. I agree with Council Member Nacy. We've been at this for a little while and what has been bothering me and what has wanted most on Council after listening last time is compliance. I heard that at our last meeting as we visited this subject. Well, we've learned about compliance, and if everybody's complaint that I don't understand why we're still concerned. I have to point out that when people are threatened with their livelihood, you get your way so go figure that one too. We do have employees who have quit over this.They are real people who matter. They have lives,they have families that they support and they were important to us as a Town or we would never have hired them. Dismissing them as a statistic is dehumanizing and disingenuous. Moreover, what none of the data that the Town Manager has offered can tell us is how many of our employees think less of us as an employer as a result of this policy. Moreover, what none of the statistics reveal is the number of employees remaining who feel a little bit bullied or feel like their privacy has actually been violated. My colleagues have stated that they have not heard from any of these employees and that all the feedback they've received has been positive but we haven't stopped to consider that this might be because the employees who oppose this policy don't feel safe to speak their mind, and so they didn't come to you. They came to me and Council Member Nacy. Now, we can't know how many remaining employees fall into this category. It could be a small number. Page 2 1 January 11, 2022 From what I can tell you, there's definitely some because they reached out to me. I've spoken to them. While these employees needed their job too much to risk the penalty of non-compliance, they're not happy. I don't know what ramifications might have been that they would be unknown, an unnamed percentage of our workforce who feels intimidated by us, but I believe there will be ramifications. Some of us notwithstanding,this Council saw them as disposable and were willing to let them go rather than make their own medical decisions. I think we assumed that all of the workforce would be accepting of this policy. In hindsight, we were wrong. We assumed that we were on the right side of the law that all mandates would be upheld. In hindsight,we were wrong.We assumed that a vaccine mandate was necessary and thought that with the new wave of Omicron coming that this was the only way to protect the workforce, and with hindsight,we were wrong. All of these assumptions this Council based on their decision had been wrong, and I believe we should and can course-correct and adjust accordingly or we can just double down on our ideological intransigence and continue to make this policy that I believe is a mistake. I think that we'll have very real consequences from it. My request and my hope is that we reverse it today. Thank you. Mayor Burk: All right. Anyone else have anything to say at this point? All right. We have a motion to delete 13B from the agenda.All in favor indicate by saying aye. Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: Mr. Martinez? Vice Mayor Martinez: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? Members: Nay. Mayor Burk: Okay.That passes five-two.Adopting. I need a motion now to adopt the meeting agenda. Council Member Steinberg: [unintelligible]. Excuse me. Mayor Burk: [chuckles] Council Member Steinberg, second? Council Member Cummings: Second. Mayor Burk: Council Member Cummings?All in favor indicate by saying aye. Members:Aye. Mayor Burk:Anybody opposed? Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: Is everybody an aye?I didn't hear everybody's aye.Yes?Okay.Seven-zero.That passes. All right.We have no certificates of recognition or proclamations nor presentations. Does anybody have any regional reports at this point? I did send one out concerning my meeting with Supervisor Umstattd and I think there was a miscommunication. It is the Board of Supervisors that has informed us that they are not interested in revenue sharing,not the other way around. Petitioners,we are now at the petitioner section. One of the first orders of business is to hear from the public.All members of the public are welcome to address the Council on any item, matter, or issue. Please identify yourself and if comfortable doing so, give your address for the taped record. Any public speaker will be requested to state their name and spell it for the purpose of closed captioning. In the interest of fairness,we also ask that you observe the Page 3 I January 11, 2022 three-minute time limit. The green light on the timer will turn yellow at the end of one minute indicating that you have one minute remaining. At that time, we would appreciate your summing up and yielding the floor when the bell indicates your time has expired. Under the rules of orders adopted by this Council,the three-minute time limit applies to all. I do need to read in a statement that any emails received requesting the email be read into the record has been given to the Clerk and will be part of the official minutes.All right. Here's our list. Our first speaker tonight is Michael Rivera followed by Bob Jones. Michael Rivera: Does it matter which microphone or either one or? Mayor Burk: No, right in the middle. Michael Rivera: Right in the middle,okay.I'm here today to speak in opposition to the vaccine mandate. In October of 2021,the Town Council--I'll spell my name at the end of my statement--the Town Council passed a resolution forcing Town employees to get a vaccine or suffer the fate of unemployment. Not only does that mandate reek of tyranny, but it shows a clear disdain for the very people the Council was elected to represent.The fact that it is still being discussed is a testament that it was not a good decision and it was politically driven and needs to be reversed. I would appreciate, ma'am, if you gave me your attention, ma'am? Mayor Burk: You have my attention. Please continue. Michael Rivera: Let's go over some facts. The vaccine does not prevent one from catching and spreading COVID, period. Infected vaccinated and unvaccinated persons are equally infectious.Across the country, vaccine mandates have devastated entire industries and small businesses by forcing free Americans to choose between their jobs and medical autonomy. Biden is on record as having said he realizes vax mandates may not be legal, but that he will implement them because it will take some time for the courts to catch up. Leesburg Police lost close to 11 officers because of the vaccine mandate, even though the Town played it down saying some officers were already planning to leave. Let me tell you, my agency took some of your officers in,they were all planning to leave because of the vaccine mandates.The vaccines available in the US are not FDA approved, I repeat,not FDA approved, which is why they remain under emergency use authorization.According to the FDA,an individual does not have to take an EUA drug once made aware of the risks. The alleged FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccine BioNTech Comirnaty is not available in the United States. Forcing people to choose between their livelihood or being injected by an experimental therapeutic is criminal and unconstitutional. Hospitalization numbers are inflated and death numbers are inflated because there are financial incentives in the healthcare industry to log COVID cases. The CDC has already admitted to this. I'm not giving you my facts. I'm giving you the facts.This is a small list from a myriad of scientific and data- driven facts that are being conveniently ignored by non-medical, unprofessional political bureaucrats that serve as local elected officials. My painful conversations with the alleged County Health Director Dr. Goodfriend, the Loudoun Board of Supervisors and the woefully inept LCPS Board have yielded nothing but political virtue signaling, mainstream media parroting, and an absolute display of incompetence. There is a reason why citizens in Loudoun and across the United States are revolting against their local, state, and Federal tyranny and that is because mandates and rules are guidelines, not laws,and they have circumvented the legal process. Everyone on the Council needs to remember that you are elected officials, whose duty is to serve all the people of Loudoun County, and not pledge unwavering fealty to their political party. Repeal the mandate, it is harmful, period. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Rivera. Bob Jones followed by Eva Brzezinski. Please, spell your name for the record for the closed captioning. Bob Jones: Absolutely. Page 4 l January 11,2022 Mayor Burk:Thank you. Bob Jones: My name. B-O-B J-O-N-E-S. Welcome. It is inevitable during these discussions that a debate breaks out over the fact that these so-called vaccines are emergency use authorized.While the cold hard reality that an actual FDA-approved vaccine for COVID is not available in the United States is a true statement. It is also irrelevant. Why because the 1914 US law established in Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital that every human being of adult years and sound mind has the right to determine what shall be done with their own bodies. This court's decision makes no exception for medical procedures being approved or not, it's irrelevant. In the case of US v. Stanley in 1987, the Supreme Court upheld this decision and also validated that the Nuremberg Code applies within the United States to both soldiers, as well as civilians and that voluntary consent of human subjects is absolutely essential. While mandates are clearly unconstitutional, and a violation of US and international law, we have learned that legal protection cannot be counted on.A study of history has shown again and again that laws have been used to allow the execution of unjust and oppressive acts. Even laws for the greater good, have turned out to be laws for the good of those who believe themselves greater than the general public, over and over again. Remember, slavery itself was once legal in the great state of Virginia, and also remember that making slavery illegal was opposed many times with the excuse that it would harm the greater good. Instead of law,we must turn to morality and common sense. Fact,vaccines do not prevent anyone from acquiring the spread of illness. Fact, vaccines doesn't reduce the symptoms as demonstrated that 7 out of 10 hospitalizations are vaxxed individuals. VAERS shows more than 21,000 deaths and a million adverse events from the job. Medical authorities have already confessed that the death count was highly manipulated. It has been proven that the PCR tests have greater than 95%false-positive result rates. The positive results rates are actually positive results, not actual sick people are called cases and this is only exclusive to COVID. In every other illness,you have to be sick to be called a case.Wearing masks do not prevent the spread. Scientifically, proven masks create many physical and emotional health issues. I ask, do you really believe that any of these mandates make sense? Do you really believe it is moral to impose them on the people? When leaders depart from morality and common sense it's a signal to all that they have been compromised and have become slaves to someone else. Today is your chance to declare that you are not the slave,but instead a free human that stands for free humanity.So I ask,will you seize this chance or will you live by the phrase, yes, master,for the rest of your existence? Mayor Burk:Thank you, Mr. Jones. Eva Brzezinski, followed by Drew Bacallao. Eva Brzezinski: Hi, my name is Eva Brzezinski. That's E-V-A last name B-R-Z-E-Z-I-N-S-K-I. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Eva Brzezinski: For the last two years, the world has been caught up in a massive game of let's pretend. Indeed, we are gathered here tonight to continue to play this game. Let's pretend that COVID doesn't have a 99.8% survival rate. Let's pretend that safe and effective early treatment isn't available. Let's pretend that we all don't know that the government has admitted that the numbers given include people who died with COVID and not of COVID. Let's pretend that an FDA-approved vax is available to the American people. Let's pretend that VAERS does not show more than 20,000 deaths from people who have received this injection. Let's pretend that we don't know that the PCR test has a 95%false-positive rate. Let's pretend we don't know that masks don't stop the spread. Let's pretend we don't know that masks cause significant physical and emotional health issues. Let's pretend that mandates do not violate US international and moral codes. Lastly, let's pretend that getting injected with 50 billion sets of instructions that will hijack the protein production centers of our body is safer and more effective than letting some viral particles enter our system in the course of normal life when both require our immune system to mount a response. Page 5 I January 11, 2022 At no point in history have the people forcing others into compliance been the good guys. The welfare of humanity has always been the alibi of tyrants.What will you tell your grandchildren?Will you tell them you didn't know?Will you tell them you were just following orders? Know that the manufacturers and doctors have bulletproof immunity so anyone you're mandating this to who gets hurt will be coming for you because you're the ones obliging them to do it. Or do you want to pretend no jab, no job is not coercion.We're adults, and let's pretend it's a child's game. It is time that our leadership stop acting like children playing let's pretend. It's time to act like adults and make the only sensible and mature decision here. No to the mandates, and no more let's pretend. Mayor Burk:Thank you. Ms. Brzezinski. Drew Bacallao. I'm probably pronouncing that incorrectly and followed by Michael Kucher. Drew Bacallao: Hello, my name is Drew Bacallao. D-R-E-W B-A-C-A-L-L-A-O. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Drew Bacallao: I'm basically here to say that a vaccine mandate just doesn't make sense. People are losing their jobs not because they did anything wrong, but because they're not getting a vaccine that has proven that it hurts people basically. That's all I wanted to say. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Bacallao. Michael Kucher followed by Debbie Cloud. Michael Kucher: Good evening, I'm Michael Kucher. K-U-C-H-E-R. There's much to discuss tonight about the medical misinformation that's been spread by so-called authorities and mainstream media. I hope that other speakers today will convey enough of it to loosen the grip of mass psychosis that has got so many in its grip. I'm not going there today. I'm going to speak to the heart of the issue before us. The question decided tonight is a question of individual self-determination. The question before us is also simple, are some people better than others? Does any human have the natural right to take ownership of another and dictate the course of their life will take or the actions they must perform? Does any person have the natural rights to control, direct or punish individual self-determination? The term mandate itself stems from the misinformation that an individual or group of individuals can elevate power and authority they do not possibly possess to others. As one of the we of the people, I do not have the authority to require anyone to wear a mask,to take a medical intervention, or to interfere with another's right to self-determination. How could any authority, elected by us, we the people have been granted such authority over human determination? Self-determination? The answer is simple. We can't. Since we do not delegate power, we don't have, you care if we don't possess it either. Something you would do well to remember today. As you sit here in the position of authority, I challenge you to remember that you're a human being, no better, no worse than any other. No special pixie dust has ascended you with superhuman status, regardless of your feelings on any subject. It's neither your right nor your responsibility to interfere with the lives of legal citizens. I submit to everyone that can hear me, that has a conscience and a soul that the psychotic belief that some humans are somehow better than others and will allow a concept of mandate. If this authority issues a false mandate, then they will validate to all as individuals that you hold yourselves higher and better than we the people. It will not only be the right but the duty to all to disregard and to put aside any such mandates, as well as the so-called authority that issued them. Let's go, Brandon. Mayor Burk:All right. Thank you, Mr. Kucher. Debbie Cloud followed by Joe Mobley. Debbie Cloud: My name is Debbie Cloud D-E-B-B-I-E C-L-O-U-D. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Debbie Cloud: I am here to shed light on the risks of this mandate from my personal experience. My mother is my hero, and the hero of many, let me,explain.As a young psychotherapist in the'70s with a Page 6 I January 11,2022 PhD and two masters, she pushed the envelope ensuring not only the rights of her colleagues but also the rights of her patients. She supported women in both Congress and the Senate since the 1980s. She was a claimant in Cap v. Rank, testified in McMartin's preschool case and one PhD writes in the international psychoanalytic analytic. My mother graduated LICE as one of the first psychoanalytic schools of PhD's in this country.She's presented over 50 international papers on cutting-edge concepts of false memories and PTSD. Her treatment program in the'90s for adult dual this sorry, dual diagnosis became one of the first homes for adult autistics. Upon retirement, she started an NGO working with the military for victims in terror zones around the world. Pre-COVID, her plan was a master's in intelligence at Georgetown. Her CV is over 24 pages long. As I said, she's my hero and inspiration. COVID hit and she isolated in our cottage on hold, like the rest of the world. Per her training, she waited for the first vaccine to come out. Immediately following her second shot. It was like somebody turned off a switch. This strongly independent woman who had overcome every single obstacle in her life became 100%dependent and unable to care for herself. This right here is her medical book since May 19th. She sits in a wheelchair frozen and trapped in her body. Our genetics have a longevity. Her compliance at age 78 has erased all of her future options. Today, she would question research and make the best decision for her own future. Safety is important but government misinformation and overreach is dangerous. Medical freedom is the right of self- determination. Your mandate is not a law.The government is protected, but you are not, and sooner or later hell will be paid regarding all of this. My mother is not alone. Over 20,000 have died and another million are injured. My hero will not remain silent. This travesty will be addressed. History will show that the actions of you today, the damage is irreversible-- Mayor Burk: Thank you, Ms. Cloud. Debbie Cloud: May I say one sentence? Mayor Burk: Ms. Cloud,thank you very--Finish up. Debbie Cloud:What will you choose?My request is to listen,stop, not to choose to actively inflict harm, instead, support the right to choose. Stop the mandate. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Ms. Cloud. Mr. Mobley followed by Julie Bolthouse. Joe Mobley:All right.Third times the charm. I'm Joe Mobley. I live in Potomac Station,Leesburg.That's J-O-E, M-O-B-L-E-Y.We live in the greatest nation in the world,widely regarded as the greatest nation in the history of the world. With that, we can look to the past to understand and craft a vision for the future,which is what your jobs are. That's what your mandate is.With this in mind, let's look at George Washington's farewell address,just the last paragraph, and a couple of warnings. The speech is substantial. It's the only speech in the history of the world that is read every session of Congress on the Senate floor.They look back to this wisdom. He warned about the importance of unity, which is lacking in this country, in this State, in this Council, in this city. He warned about the harmful effects of political parties, which I think that we all are feeling the effects of, and he also warned about foreign entanglements,which is an issue for us today. When we look at what Washington was looking forward to a man that they wanted to be king, who turned it down,who said, "This is not what's good for me,for you, for the people, for this nation,for the world." Looking to today, looking to the influence that we've projected into the world. He said that, "He looked forward to the sweet enjoyment of partaking in the midst of my fellow citizens, the benign influence of good laws under a free government, the ever-favorite object of my heart, and a happy reward as I trust of our mutual cares labors and dangers." There isn't a leader like that in this room, in this state, or in this country, unfortunately. Read this, go back, and read it. If you hold yourself in the same regard as George Washington, then you should resign. You should write your resignation and tender it immediately. As an American, I should feel the Page 7 I January 11,2022 freeness of my autonomy. I should feel the benign influence of good laws under a good government. I shouldn't have a daily interaction with the government. I don't live in communist China. When I just kick it with the government every day, that's a sign that something is wrong. I'm charged by God to pursue Him, to love and pursue my wife, to teach my kids, to lead my family, in all of those things I labor over. I need to flush out the wisdom and discernment, not you, not anyone else. Mandate should be foreign to any American. I served in the military for 11 years. I'm 312%disabled because the VA does some kind of crazy ratings. I've served in law enforcement and I continue to serve in every way I can. For me to be under a mandate is extremely foreign. I'm bringing you these words. I bring you George Washington's wisdom as a plea, not for me, but from him to consider that history has its eyes on you. What happens in here and decide to make a bigger impact on your constituents by impacting them less, not more. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mobley. Julie Bolthouse,followed by Mark Baldino. Julie Bolthouse:Good evening,Mayor Burk and Council Members. I am speaking today on the Virginia Village Development Proposal. My name is Julie Bolthouse J-U-L-I-E, B-O-L-T-H-O-U-S-E. I live on Madison Court. I wear many hats, but at this hearing, I am speaking as a resident of Madison Court. I commented at the Planning Commission level and honestly have not had time or energy to comment again since then. I wish I had. I am happy to see that some of the issues such as the ADA accessible pedestrian connection to the Madison House is now included in the proffers. However, I remain concerned about the following aspects of the project. Modification, number 35,which decreases the ordinance standard of 40% non- residential to only 21% non-residential. The phasing, which only ensures that 52% of the proposed commercial will be completed by the time the last occupancy permit is done. I prefer to see the phase 2C moved up to 2A as the Economic Development Commission recommended to you recently. Restaurants with drive-throughs should have been proffered out as they are not compatible with mixed- use pedestrian-oriented environment and there is no reason to even entertain such a use. The proffer regarding the farmer's market seems like a reverse proffer to me committing the Town to permitting the applicant to operate a farmer's market, festival,fair,food vendors,food trucks, or similar activity on the property. As a nearby resident, I am concerned about exactly what this allows and if the restrictions on noise, lighting, hours of operation, etc.will be in place. I fully support the applicant committing to a permanent dedicated space such as a pavilion at the Ours Park for the farmer's market but not a free-for-all on events. I also have concerns about the adequacy of the parking. The residents of Madison Court currently have plenty of parking because we use the cul-de-sac at the end of the road for extra vehicles. I would like to ask that they change the way that they've done the parking and the townhouse section closest to our street so that it's not parallel, but it's perpendicular parking so that you could quadruple the number of spaces so that we still have a place to park. Smaller units closer to Madison Court would allow for more affordability,three stories going up to four stories,that was something I suggested earlier, more parking for bicycles. 42 bike spots is not enough for a 646 unit development next to the WOD. Finally, I believe modification 32 which more than doubles the allowable density should only be approved if the applicant commits to at least 10% affordable housing in the multifamily area. I support the Planning Commission's recommendation and I ask that you not approve this development until these issues are fully addressed. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Ms. Botlhouse. Mark Baldino followed by Paul Coyer. Mark Baldino: Hi, I'm Mark Baldino. I own Baldino's Lock& Key over on Harrison Street, grown up in Leesburg area, Loudoun County. Mayor Burk: Could you spell your name for-- Page 8 I January 11,2022 Mark: Mark Baldino. B-A-L-D-I-N-O. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mark Baldino: I'm in favor of Virginia Village. I mean I've seen throughout the whole metropolitan area growing up here where I've seen rundown shopping areas, shopping centers. I can use Route 1 over in Fairfax County as an example. Honestly from Alexandria South all the way through Woodbridge you wouldn't want to really go there although there's still shopping and people living there, but this is a chance to have a vibrant Town center and it would match perfectly with the old Town area that we have right now on Market Street. I just think it would be a missed opportunity if you don't allow this to proceed. It would allow Leesburg to be the center of Loudoun County again versus the server vault areas and Dulles Airport. I think you couldn't go wrong and if you don't, you're just going to have a rundown shopping center in another 10 years that you're going to do the same thing that they're talking about doing today. Just join in on what could happen and you don't want to miss this opportunity. Thank you. Mayor Burk: All right. Thank you, Mr. Baldino. Paul Coyer followed by Marjory. Marjory, I can't read your last name, I assume you know who I'm-- Is Marjory there somewhere? Paul Coyer: Serrano. Mayor Burk: You'll spell it. Paul Coyer: Good evening, my name is Paul Coyer. P-A-U-L C-O-Y-E-R. As you all are aware I'm a professor, a historian, and a resident of Leesburg. I serve on the advisory commission for the Thomas Balch Library. I joined the commission due to my love of community service and love of history. The vax mandate threatens my ability to serve my community, however.We've heard in previous meetings from Town employees begging you not to do this.We know that it's had a big impact and a very negative one on the police as we've heard from other speakers as well as in other employees. When you choose to lose local talent due to a total focus on forcing your views on others and by using community health as an excuse for controlling people's lives, it may help you to achieve your short-term goal of forcing a greater number of people to take this particular vax. In the end, it's extremely short- sighted as you lose vital talent you could've otherwise drawn upon and frankly alienate good people and lessen the amount of goodwill in our community at a time in which it's desperately needed. Such public policy decisions should be based upon good data and sound reasoning. We've already established in previous discussions that this body did not consider any data, much less a significant body of data prior to making a decision. I was surprised at the December meeting to hear the Mayor say that she'd been approached by so many people, employees expressing gratitude for this body, basically for forcing people to choose between the vax that they did not want and their livelihoods and ability to support their families. Numerous employees have privately said as Council Member Fox and Nancy have noted that they're afraid to speak up publicly for fear of losing their jobs. This illustrates a point I made in my initial talk on this topic that such coercive mandates engender frustration,threaten people's livelihoods and divide an already deeply divided community and create a segregated society of vaccinated and unvaccinated with those in the latter category clearly being placed in the position of being second class citizens. Illustrating this point,we even have the current occupant to the White House wishing this past Christmas "severe illness and death to the unvaccinated". We have coming up this weekend, the inauguration of the new government in Richmond, which has promised a very different approach to COVID. Glenn Youngkin has said that he opposes businesses firing workers for not getting vaccinated and has promised to revoke mandates for state employees. He's also promised to appoint a new State Health Commissioner and has promised "strong support for Attorney General-elect Jason Miyares efforts to oppose Biden administration mandates for businesses firing employees for refusing the vax". Page 9 I January 11, 2022 He said, "I trust you to make decisions with regards to your own family." In short, he has promised to completely change the state's legal and regulatory framework with regards to vaccine and mask mandates. It would be legally problematic for Leesburg Town Council to ignore this and to pursue their political agenda heedless of this fact. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Coyer. Marjory followed by Chris Cloud. Marjory Serrano: My name is Marjory Serrano. I am Concertmaster of the Loudoun Symphony Orchestra. Mayor Burk:Will you please spell your name? Marjory Serrano: M-A-R-J-O-R-Y S-E-R-R-A-N-O. Life is full of choices and when we are in a leadership position, the only difference is that the choice that we make should be for the benefit of all. Sometimes I have to make decisions that some musicians don't like, but hey,we look and sound really good. The problem is that when we force people to make decisions about a sensitive area of their life based on our own point of view, we have to be careful that we are not becoming an oppressor. Being Venezuelan-born, raised by a Cuban family, I wish I could have more than 3 minutes to talk about what being oppressed means. One day, when I was driving to go to my orchestra rehearsal, I listened to an interview of Australian athlete Janine Shepherd. Have you heard about her? She had a terrible accident that made her paraplegic for two years. Due to that life transformation incident, she changed her career from an Olympic skier to a pilot instructor. In that podcast, she got a really good question which was, if you have to describe your values as an Australian,what could be those values that you really cherished? Her answer was contentedness, togetherness, and caring for each other. It sounds wonderful. Right? Well,that interview was in February 2021.Are you aware of what has occurred in Australia since then? The awful riots because of a vaccine mandate. Police visiting homes of people who question the mandates on social media. Something that I was thankful about the year 2020 was that it brought out the empathy and resilience of the people,that caring of each other that Ms.Shepherd was talking about. I wish government leaders could give more and better messages about hope. We Americans are a strong and free society that fights, but no we're still divided. Do you really think that by imposing a mandate,you are taking away the fear of the people from getting sick or even dying? Have you ever thought about the people who have lost their jobs because of your decision?What are you afraid of?Are you afraid that if you change your decisions some people will call you weak? Because let me tell you from my own experience.A mandate is a sign of weakness. I am not here to change your mind. I am here to remind everyone in this room, including myself, that there are no positive results when you make decisions based on oppression,the hope or results never last long and the consequences in a long term can be devastating. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Chris Cloud followed by Gigi Robinson. Chris Cloud:Good evening,and good evening. Chris Cloud, C-H-R-I-S C-L-O-U-D. It's interesting how the same folks who rattle on about trust the science are the same folks who used to shake their little fists about questioning authority. Whatever happened to my body my choice. We hear all this talk of mandates, directives of sanctions, decrees, injunctions, dictates, edicts, rulings, regulations, proclamations, pronouncements, orders, imperatives, and commands. Interestingly, what we never hear of are laws. All this nonsense is presented with a finesse veneer of legitimacy while none of it holds one iota of constitutionality or weight of the law. Why is that? Because this is a kangaroo court that does not enjoy the legitimacy of law.The good news is, contrary to current popular belief, the United States of America is exceptional enough so that it will survive even the concerted attacks of bought and paid-for bureaucrats and elected servants. No other nation on the planet contends with people desperate enough to enter that they swim there. We will survive this and we will thrive. Come back to impose your partisan political will upon us once you have Page 10 I January 11,2022 the legitimacy of law behind you. Until then, get out of the adults'way.We have a nation to rebuild. Let's go, Brandon. Mayor Burk: Ms. Robinson, Gigi Robinson is followed by Jenny Hall. Gigi Robinson: Good evening, my name is Gigi Robinson, R-O-B-I-N-S-O-N. I'm talking to you tonight about Virginia Village as a citizen. I come to you as a citizen of this fine Town, a Town that has character and warmth. These are the reasons that most come to reside here. Virginia Village, an application you will vote on tonight will not enhance the character nor add to the warmth. The Planning Commission spent months considering the application and trying to work with the developer to no avail. The Council spent work sessions in December asking the developer if he would alter items to no avail. This is designated by the current Town Plan as the Crescent District. This area of the Crescent District is being rezoned to Crescent District Commercial Corridor. Yet all of the development only contains 21%of non-residential, really? Parking is short over 250 spaces.The flux parking arrangement in the staff report will not accommodate that overage, probably not even 20%of it.The lack of overnight parking will cause problems in this area of Town. The economic return is going to be very little until the office buildings are built 147,000 for all the residential.The remaining net of 379,000 associated with commercial will take a long time to appear. 18 acres of commercial returning a pathetic 147,000 per year. Phasing is another concern, why? Because the developer needs to have an existing rental stream to pay expenses. Okay, then why not change buildings B and C to E. The developer then has 81 townhouses, 244 rentals for a total of 326 over 50% of the 643 dwellings. Building E would front on Catoctin and be filled with non-residential, good advertising for the commercial corridor. Thus the last building to be constructed would be the remaining 266 of the residential units, works for the Town. This development is very developer-friendly. It is not an investment in the Town. It is a concept plan that takes 30 zoning exceptions and still doesn't fit commercial corridor concept.You took an oath to protect the welfare of this Town. If this application remains unaltered, we really need you to do it now. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Ms. Robinson followed by Jenny Hall who will be followed by Jim Sisley. • Jenny Hall: Jenny Hall, J-E-N-N-Y H-A- L-L. I ask that you rescind the vaccination testing program. I've been here discussing this with you all since October, and what I want to continue to stress is that you are interfering with an individual's right to select the medication they take on a timeline that they decide for themselves. In this case, of course, I'm talking about an mRNA vaccine. I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt. Let's say two years into us living with coronavirus variance,the following points are true.A treatment is available that 100% prevents infection and transmission, stopping the spread. There are no other treatments available or in development, long-term safety data of treatments is available, and natural immunity does not exist or help people. Well, none of those things are true. If they were true, I would be having a different conversation in what I've written down. The vaccines available do not 100% prevent infection or transmission of the virus. This is supported anecdotally and with data, there are other treatments aside from vaccines available to avoid hospitalization and to save lives. There are zero long-term studies of the mRNA vaccine in human populations. Lastly, natural immunity has been shown to be helpful. Your mandate is not necessary. It has led to unnecessary resignations. It has resulted in unnecessary confusion and anxiety in employees. It's divided the Town, and it has wasted all of our time. Regarding the option, employees have to test regularly. Should they decide not to vaccinate? I'd like to challenge that with a question.What is the point of mandating regular testing on the unvaccinated when vaccinated individuals may also test positive and spread the virus? I've asked that question in the past multiple times, but I have not heard or read an answer to that so I would like you to answer that now. Page 11 I January 11,2022 Whether you think getting vaccinated is a good idea or not, rescinding this program will be reflective that you respect an employee's wishes,that you will stay out of their medical decisions and that you will stop spreading the falsehood that only unvaccinated people contribute to the spread of the virus and that they pose a danger to others. Rescinding it will signal that we can respectfully agree that future decisions on medical procedures will be left in the capable hands of the individual, and not our local government. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Ms. Hall. Jim Sisley followed by Michael Miller. Jim Sisley: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, good evening. I don't envy your jobs tonight or ever. My name is Jim Sisley. I'm a 26-year citizen of the Town of Leesburg. My name is spelled J-I-M S-I-S-L-E-Y. I own several businesses in the Town of Leesburg. I'll save you my resume, but suffice to say that for more than 15 years, I've cooperated and been a part of Leesburg's government, either through appointments and/or volunteering for different aspects within the Town. In the 26 years that I've been in the Town of Leesburg, things have changed dramatically, although, we're in 18 years, I believe my calculation is this Town to be 300 years old. I think the question before you tonight regarding Leesburg Village is what do you want the Town to look like financially? How resilient do you want the Town to be? Because without the approval of this application, it will be less resilient. It will be less financially successful. The citizens of the community will unfortunately not have the types of services or housing choices that this project can bring to the Town. One of my favorite sayings from Greek philosophers is no man steps into the same river twice for it is not the same man and it is not the same river. This is a testament to change. Every time we put our foot down,we change the Town that we are in. I've been changing the Town for 26 years. The people that are on the dais tonight have helped with that change. I request that you approve an application before you that is likely the very best application that you will see for the redevelopment of one of the largest opportunities in our Town. That application was submitted with the understanding that it was greatly in compliance with both the Comprehensive Plan for the Town and the Zoning Ordinance for the Town. So much so that rarely, or rare, again, we have support from Town staff to approve the project. I will, in the little bit of time that I have left, give you a couple of stats.We currently have more than 250,000 square feet of vacant office. That's out of 1,270,000 square feet of commercial office space in the Town of Leesburg, that's 22%. Holding this application up for phasing that delivers unneeded, additional office is ridiculous. What I would request of you is to reconsider your positions, approve this project. This is the very best opportunity you have for the redevelopment of Leesburg Village and you're not likely to see something this good again in the future. This is what private support of the public enterprise looks like.Applicants come with well-funded projects. This may take a while to fully deliver but that's a pace that the Town can support. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Sisley. Jim Sisley: I request that you approve the project, thank you. Mayor Burk: Michael Miller, followed by Stephen Frost. Michael Miller: Good evening, Council. My name is Michael Miller, M-I-C-H-A-E-L M-I-L-L-E-R. I wanted to talk this evening just about the vaccine mandate. The number one question you should be asking yourself this evening when it comes to the mandate is, is this Constitutional? Not just according to the Virginia Constitution, but the highest law of the land, the US Constitution. I haven't heard a lot of discussion about that particular aspect of your decision. Ask yourself, does your mandate remove the individual rights for the citizens who worked for the city of Leesburg? I think that's a clear yes, it does violate their rights. Then what gives you the authority to force a medical decision upon somebody, especially after hearing many citizens come forward to speak against it? I haven't heard anybody talk for a vaccine mandate, everybody here has been talking against a vaccine mandate? What gives you the authority to force Page 12 I January 11, 2022 your preference on the body of an individual? Do you own their body? Does the Constitution give you the authority to deprive qualified employees of their livelihood just because you don't approve of their medical decisions? The fact that these questions are being discussed right now in the Supreme Court should at least give you pause to move forward with any sort of vaccine mandate. I'd like to also ask from a medical perspective, are any of you medical doctors? Have any of you practiced medicine professionally,taken the Hippocratic Oath, and licensed as a medical practitioner? If that's the case that you're not then what gives you the qualification to tell any individual what is in their best medical interest? If you were to go to a doctor today, and you were to tell them, I would like to get the vaccine, there would be a discussion with your doctor, who would then, if you decide yes, to move forward with it, you would have to sign an informed consent form. There would be no doctor holding you down, strapping you to the table, and forcing the vaccine on somebody because that's illegal. If it's illegal for them to do it, what gives you the idea that you can do that as well? Sure, maybe you're not actually strapping somebody down to a table and giving them the needle to give them the vaccine but you are doing it in a more sadistic way with a pen and a piece of paper behind your comfortable desks and your comfortable office secluded away from the lives of the individuals that you're impacting through this decision. Did you know that the daily allowance of vitamins each day is a recommendation, just like a recommendation from a doctor to get a vaccine, any vaccine? If the Leesburg Council determines employees are not getting their daily recommended allowance of vitamins, are you going to mandate that everybody take a multivitamin?The only motivation that makes sense behind your decision is if it's politically motivated. The question is why are you being driven by politics for decisions that impact real lives and real families and real people? I think we know the answer. You must not have principles or values. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Miller. Stephen Frost is followed by Dane. I think this is Y-E-Z-E-K. Stephen Frost: Greetings Mayor and Council. Pleased to be here. My name is Stephen Frost, S-T-E- P-H-E-N last name Frost F-R-O-S-T. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Stephen Frost: I would first like to say that I am in support of the adjustments to the agenda that have been made tonight. I further want to let folks know that my principal reason for being here is I am the president of the property owners association of Crescent Place. I'm also here in support of the Virginia Village redevelopment project. I know that that has been under development work for a number of years. I know that they have been working significantly with the Council as well as with the Planning Commission and with the Town and that the Town staff largely supports the Virginia Village and I would like to say that I am also in support of the Virginia Village redevelopment. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Dane followed by Cheryl Williams. Dane Yezek: Spelling is D-A-N-E, last name is Y-E-Z-E-K. I'm pretty much just here to say I agree with the people who oppose this particular Virginia Village redevelopment. I live a mile down the street from it, I enjoyed walking to the farmers market every weekend and visiting the local businesses there. I feel that this redevelopment with its five and six-story buildings in cramming in many, many houses would not be in fitting with the character of this Town. Having grown up in Manassas,Woodbridge area, I was used to quite a bit of sprawl where I lived at. That said, there were local businesses like Hechinger's and [unintelligible]that I enjoyed visiting that were destroyed by redevelopments later on. I would not like to see the same happen to my particular little neck of the woods. Reston Town Center with its traffic problems, its crowding problems, its expensive housing is not something I'm in favor of. We have to consider the slippery slope here. You build up that area, you build up another area,the rents rise,the older folks move out because they can't afford it, the young families move away because the housing is no longer affordable where they currently are. Page 13 I January 11, 2022 Who exactly are we drawing in with this particular proposal?Where I work at now in Fairfax County,we have houses that are listed as from the low seven hundreds, the low nine hundreds. Do we really want this right in the middle of downtown? How is that affordable? My HOA met last week and mentioned several of the Planning Commission elements that are currently listed as concerns for reasons for denying the application to redevelop the Virginia Village. I'll briefly list those. The financial build-out would be less than $1 million a year, which appears rather inadequate. The commercial space as the ratio to residential is fairly low for a commercial district. The phasing of the amenities isn't until a 95% build-out. How is this going to benefit the current residents in the area when we're waiting for years for pedestrian improvements? The architecture, rather intimidating, insufficient parking.Anyone who's been to a farmers market on a busy Saturday can obviously notice there's quite a parking problem already, which is only going to get worse. High density and of course,traffic assumptions that the growth is about 1%for Loudoun County,which we all know was a joke. In conclusion, I oppose this and many others likely do as well but did not have the balls to show here. Thank you for your time. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Could you say your last name for me again, Yezek? Dane Yezek: Y-E-Z-E-K. Mayor Burk: You say it how? Cheryl Williams,followed by Sharon Williams. Cheryl Williams: Good evening. My name is Cheryl Williams. C-H-E-R-Y-L. Williams, W-I-L-L-I-A-M- S. I'm here to oppose the Virginia Village. I live on West Market Street, and I petition this Council to reject this application. It is one,too imposing for the corner of King Street and Catoctin,two, it contains way too many residences, 643. Three,there is not enough parking as it is and entire southeast section of the Town will be a mess to drive through which it already is. Number four, the desire for more retail in Leesburg is already satiated and we don't need more especially if you can't park near the store. Five. while Leesburg is no longer one-horse Town, this is way too densely urban for us. Six, there's no transit for the lack of parking. Not everyone works from home, me I go to Tyson's. Really, I would petition this Council to reject this. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Ms.Williams. Sharon Williams followed by Amber Becker. Sharon Williams: Good evening. My name is Sharon Williams, S-H-A-R-O-N W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S. I live on West Market Street, Leesburg. I had not anticipated coming here this evening as I thought the Town Council would have listened to the Planning Commission,which voted five to zero to reject the building application for the Virginia Village site. I have talked to several of my neighbors who have heard nothing about what is going on and now they do know and are against moving forward. I understand that there will be 643 units built on the Virginia Village site. To accommodate that number of units the buildings will have to be about five to six stories high. They will be some of the tallest buildings in Leesburg. Leesburg will lose its charm of being a cozy little Town and will be an overcrowded suburban metropolis.That is what happened to Vienna,where I lived previously. 643 units on that site will cause a traffic nightmare. King Street and Catoctin Street will be deadlocked.Traffic is bad enough now without adding that many more cars,and will potentially increase the number of accidents.Also, I understand there will be over 250 units that will have no parking spots. Where will those people park their cars? Safeway is not going to provide parking for them. Where will they go? Frankly, I can see people moving out of Leesburg to avoid the congestion. That is one of the reasons we moved from Vienna 11 years ago to come to live in my husband's grandfather's home here on Market Street. Having a meeting on December 17 when everyone was busy with the holidays and then having another meeting January 11 to pass this application appears as if you were trying to push the application through. I strongly suggest that you reject this application. Page 14 I January 11, 2022 Mayor Burk: Thank you, Ms. Williams.Amber Becker followed by Zach. Yes. Sorry. Amber Becker: Hi, my name is Amber Becker, A-M-B-E-R B-E-C-K-E-R. Thank you for letting me speak. It's good to see you all again. I think it was at the last meeting you had. I'm on the Board of Directors with the Leesburg Farmers Market. The Loudoun Valley Homegrown Markets Cooperative, which is what we're known as, and Keane Enterprises have worked closely together for many years now.Our most popular Farmers Market is at Virginia Village on Saturday mornings.The success of this market is partly due to our positive working relationship with the Keane folks who have treated us as an important part of their community. We are humbled by the level of consideration they have given the market during the proposed period of redevelopment. Keane has detailed for us three potential market structures once redevelopment is complete, and plan for continued market operations at all phases of redevelopment. Because of this extra consideration, we have never worried about market operations being negatively affected by the proposed construction, and the Cooperative highly supports the redevelopment effort. In addition, the co-op is especially thankful to Keane for their support these last two years during the pandemic. Our ability to remain open during this time kept more than 50 farms and small businesses in operation with minimal impact from COVID. Thank you very much. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Zack followed by Bonnie McLean. Zack Yezek: Hello. My name is Zack Yezek,Z-A-C-K Y-E-Z-E-K. I'm here to oppose the redevelopment as currently proposed for Virginia Village. I don't oppose developing the area in principle and improving it, fixing it up, making modifications. The problem fundamentally I have with this proposal is that your own Planning committee has considered it multiple times and the last time they considered it, they rejected it unanimously. Usually as a matter of parliamentary procedure, when a subcommittee of a body rejects something with an overwhelming negative vote, it doesn't even make it to the full body let alone get pushed multiple times through or at least attempted to be. Besides the problems with the parking and the fact that the area will be overly dense compared to the rest of the Town, I don't quite get the rationale for why we need to develop this so radically and so densely. We already have multiple areas near the Town or even within the Town's corporate limits proper that have a fair bit of available space both residential and commercial. Yes, I know the County is growing and the Town is growing with it but nothing grows to the sky. Not every tree becomes a Sequoia. The fact is that the economy is not going to continue to be overheated forever. People learned this to their chagrin in 2007. Odds are with the pandemic and the after-effects of the pandemic growth is going to at least level.We are not going to be the central metropolis of this County. Not unless we want to compete directly with Dulles Airport. I don't think anybody who lives here does. We have office space.We have residential space.We don't need to cram them all into one part of Town that is already a fairly small area and low impact. It wouldn't just be the businesses that are affected by this. The residents are too. One of the issues would be that not only is this area going to be torn up for a long period of time should this proposal go through, but the assumption that will replace it will end up being an improvement. The worry is I know from some of the area won't become rundown and the developer once he gets annoyed will move on and you will have a longer-term problem. The converse of that is not always do you build it and they will come. You may just end up with an area that's overly built up and still ends up being a drain on the tax base. I would at least ask for further consideration on this and not put off any consideration of redeveloping the area eventually. Don't use this plan and don't rush it through just because you want to get something done. Haste has never usually been considered a virtue in retrospect. Mayor Burk:Ah, like my mother. Thank you. Bonnie McLean,followed by Sarah Richardson. Bonnie McLean: Bonnie McLean, B-O-N-N-I-E M-C-L-E-A-N. Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, I am speaking in support of Item 13B to rescind the Town's vaccination mandate despite the fact that it's been deleted from the agenda. There are religious objections for many reasons. The end does not justify the means. No human life should be killed in his or her mother's womb, and then used Page 15 I January 11, 2022 for medical research.A just civilization should not use the unwanted to find treatments or cures for the wanted.You are, in essence, mandating abortion-tainted products.This is but one of the religious faced objections. You are discriminating against religious persons by putting Town employees in a position of conflict between their faith and right to privacy and their employment. I will remind this body that during the discussion on October 12th, it was suggested that the Town of Leesburg had no intentions of allowing religious or other exemptions for long and eventually planned on getting rid of employees who had exemptions. In other words, the Town of Leesburg is purging Christians and other religious persons from the workplace. I will end sharing what Chief Judge Jeffrey Satin of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals said. I quote, "It is one thing to tell a worker to don a mask at the start of a hazard-filled shift and off it at the end. It is quite another to tell a worker to vaccinate on the basis of a risk that exists whether he is on the clock or off. That amounts to a medical procedure that cannot be removed at the end of the shift. Confirming the point, the Secretary of Labor has never imposed vaccine mandates, or for that matter, a vaccinate or test mandate on American workers. The Occupational Safety and Health Act does not clearly give the Secretary power to regulate all health risks and all new health hazards largely through off-site medical procedures, so long as the individual goes to work and may face the hazard in the course of the workday." Mayor Burk: Thank you. Thank you. Sarah Richardson followed by Gem Bingol. Sarah Richardson: Good evening. Sarah Richardson, S-A-R-A-H R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N. I am here tonight representing myself and a couple of neighbors who couldn't be here based on their previous commitments and the weather and COVID. I would just like to say that I urge you to deny the application or the rezoning. I think this high-density rezoning you're trading away an opportunity in the commercial corridor. Really, I've heard more reasons to oppose this application tonight and I urge you to consider them. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Thank you very much. Gem Bingol. Gem Bingo): Mayor Burk, Ms. Bingo)sent in a presentation that she would like to share within her three minutes.Will you allow that? Mayor Burk: Does anybody have any objections? No? Okay. Gem Bingol: Understanding that three minutes is a very short time, I did send it to you in advance. Mayor Burk: Can you just walk us? We do have someone that objects here on Council. Would you mind just walking through it and we'll look at it? Gem Bingo): I'm glad to, yes. Thank you. I am speaking to you. My name is Gem Bingol, G-E-M B-I- N-G-O-L. I'm representing the Piedmont Environmental Council concerning the Virginia Village application. After reviewing the Council's discussions at the December meeting, it seemed to me that there are clearly some concerns that were mentioned that need resolution including preserving the envisioned 40%commercial for the site and utilizing the hub zone designation to encourage businesses to come to the Town. The excessive residential versus the Crescent District designations of uses in the corridor and on the site. Sorry. The traffic impacts and inadequate parking creating problems on-site and for adjacent streets and intersections, the visual impact, and the fact that the housing as I indicated in the chart that I gave you, will not accommodate a majority of young service workers who live and work in this area because the salaries that they have are over what qualifies for the ADU program, the Affordable Dwelling Unit program, but those salaries are not equal to what would allow them to use only 30%of their income for housing. Basically, out of 11 positions or types of jobs that I surveyed, three could be qualified for the ADU program and two could rent market-rate units. The other six couldn't. Page 16 January 11, 2022 As I looked at this issue, I don't know that there's a resolution here unless the developer is willing to put more affordable housing into this project. There is a solution, if you are willing to push for it, that the spaces on the second and third floors of building A and building E could be converted to office instead of residential. That would change the formula and allow more split of the parking so that daytime office users could use the parking and at night there would be the potential for the residential tenants to use the parking. Then the other thing was building B,which according to the plan should be 50%commercial on the first floor and residential above. I hope you'll look at those points that I made and consider pushing for those. Thank you. Mayor Burk:Thank you.Thank you very much.We did get that today.Thank you. Gem Bingol was the last person that signed up. Is there anybody in the audience that did not sign up that would like to speak at this point?Yes, sir. Come forward. Spell your name for the record for the closed captioning. Rusty Edwards: Rusty Edwards, R-U-S-T-Y E-D-W-A-R-D-S. I would say I'm not a religious person, but in my life I've come to see the real basic truth that there's only two kind of people; those who play God and those who don't. Our Constitution, though it was created largely by Christian men, but they allowed for anybody that thought differently, so there's no tyranny of the majority and there's no tyranny of the minority. The way our system works is laws have to be created. There is no law on this. There's none. A couple of people mentioned that already. It's just mandates, which is really a request and on top of everything else, the"science" behind this is absurd. It's not a vaccine as it's been pointed out, and that's not my opinion. I know people with PhDs and doctors and I've read enough stuff that gets hidden from general public view. It's not a vaccine. It's a genome therapy. In reality then we shouldn't impose it even if it was valid. To make it worse, it's not even valid. This is nonsense. I personally know people who have died. I personally know people who are in wheelchairs and such from this nonsense. To tell people that they're going to lose a job, what country do I live in? I think I've said enough. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mr. Edwards, are you a Leesburg resident? Rusty Edwards: [inaudible] Mayor Burk: Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to speak that didn't get a chance at this point? All right, I will close the petitioner section. Thank you, all, very much. We move on to the approval of the consent agenda. I will read the items and ask if anybody wants anything removed at that point. 12A is the Regional Surface Transportation Program Funding for Route 15 Bypass Interchange at Edward Ferry Road and Fort Evans Road Project. Requesting Virginia Department of Transportation to Accept Certain Streets. Appointing a Commissioner of Public Arts, that's for Council Member Nacy. Appointing a Tree Commissioner,that's Council Member Cummings. Removing Ron Platt from the Tree Commission Due to Illness. F, Motion to Approve the Proclamation for Tuscarora Mill Restaurant Celebrating their 36th Year in Business Anniversary. G is Procurement Policy Revisions and H is Amending the Resolution 2021-187 Setting the 2022 Calendar Year Council Calendar to Remove Election Day Conflict. Is there any item anybody would like to have removed? Do I have a motion to accept this? Council Member Cummings: So moved. Mayor Burk: So moved by Council Member Cummings. Second? Council Member Bagdasarian: I'll second. Mayor Burk: Councilmember Bagdasarian. All in favor. Members:Aye. Page 17 I January 11, 2022 Mayor Burk: Opposed? That's seven-zero. Takes us to our resolutions and ordinances and motions. The first resolution is Adopting the Town Plan TLTA2019-0001,to Amend the Planned land Use Policy Map, the Crescent District Land Use Policy Map,the Crescent District building Heights Policy Map and the Crescent District Future Streets Policy Map. Do I have a motion? Council Member Cummings: Madam Mayor, I move to approve the proposed resolution for Town Plan Amendment Application TLTA-2019-0001,Virginia Village,on the basis the amendment meets the approval criteria of TLZO Section 3.3.16 and will serve the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good planning practices based on the findings as provided in the November 23rd, 2021 Town Council staff report. Mayor Burk: Mr.Spera, I'm a little confused.We have Resolution A and then there's another resolution but it's not B.What resolution are we? Is this all one? Chris Spera: I am not sure why these have been consolidated together, but I assume it's because they're all part of the Virginia Village. Mayor Burk: You thought they were what? Chris Spera: It is unclear to me why these are all grouped together.We've got the resolution to amend the map, then the rezoning ordinance is the second piece, the special exception. These are the three Virginia Village items. They've all been aggregated together. Mayor Burk: His motion is to--Because these are a little confusing. By voting on this are we approving the whole concept? Chris Spera: I'm looking for Mr. Boucher. Eileen Boeing: Mr. Spera, did Mr. Cummings read the draft motion as it was presented in the staff report? Chris Spera: That is what I understood, correct, yes. Eileen Boeing:There's three individual draft motions in the staff report. Chris Spera: I'm looking for Mr. Boucher since he prepared this. Maybe Mr. Boucher can answer the question, because he prepared the motions. Brian Boucher: What is the question? Mayor Burk: We are confused because we have Resolution A and then we have another resolution and then an ordinance. These are all together. Brian Boucher: Yes-- Mayor Burk:All three of them together. Brian Boucher:Well,the application there's three separate actions. One's the Town Plan amendment, which requires Council action on a resolution. The second is the rezoning itself, which is an ordinance which requires Council action. The third is a resolution on the special exception that they've requested as part of this which would be to build a structure in the flood plain. It's three separate, three separate applications. Mayor Burk:All right, so his first motion is for the first resolution. Brian Boucher: Yes. Mayor Burk: The one that he read? Page 18 1 January 11, 2022 Brian Boucher: Yes. That's what-- Mayor Burk: All right, this is Resolution A that you are addressing. Thank you, appreciate that. Mr. Cummings, you made the resolution. Is there a second? Council Member Bagdasarian: I'll second. Mayor Burk: Council Member Bagdasarian.Any comments at this point? Okay, all in favor indicate by saying aye. Opposed? Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? Members: Nay. Mayor Burk: In favor was Cummings, Bagdasarian, Nacy. Opposed was, Burk, Steinberg and Fox. I don't know where Mr. Martinez is. Vice Mayor Martinez: Oh, you didn't hear my yes. Mayor Burk: Pardon me? Vice Mayor Martinez:Aye. Mayor Burk:Aye. Okay, Mr. Martinez is in favor of that one.We'll have a motion on the ordinance. Council Member Cummings: I have a motion, Mayor. Mayor Burk: You're going to do them all Mr. Cummings. Okay. Council Member Cummings: I move to approve the Ordinance for Rezoning Application TLZM 2019- 001 subject to the Concept Development Plan dated October 27th, 2019, and proffers dated January 7th,2022, on the basis that the approval criteria of Zoning Ordinance section 3.3.15 have been satisfied and that the proposal would serve the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice. Mayor Burk:All right, is there a second? Council Member Bagdasarian: I'll second. Mayor Burk: Okay, is there any discussion on this one? Ms. Fox. Council Member Fox:Yes. I think this is the appropriate section to go ahead and make my comments. I have some lengthy comments, so I may need that extra three minutes later on. I wanted to go over what I liked about this application and that would be the newness and the freshness of an area that is in desperate need of redevelopment. The addition of the ADUs in the area where attainable housing is a challenge here in Leesburg. It looks like out of the 643, it's going to be 35 ADUs, about 5%. Supply of housing is increased which is a step in the right direction if we want to try and pull the pricing down a little bit. I'm not sure if that's going to work in the near term, but maybe in the long term. I actually appreciated the comments of Mrs. Becker who said that the applicant was coordinating with the farmers market. I do have some issues with the application and I'm going to start with parking and then go through those issues just to have it on record. Of course,we've seen the many emails and the many of many speakers tonight from homeowners and adjacent neighborhoods are worried about the encroachment of the parking on their neighborhoods because we are underparked by about 279 spaces. I feel like that's a valid concern. Page 191 January 11,2022 I feel like also we should learn from the numerous requests for special permit parking that have come to us over the years and has created a balloon effect of restricting cars in one area. They're displaced to another area. It indicates to me that the density factor we're considering could be an issue with that as well, because it does indicate an overcrowding problem. I don't intend to create or contribute to the creation of another parking issue in Town.We have so many. Traffic. The traffic study is in my opinion not comprehensive enough. We'd be adding about 2,500 people, give or take,and we'll add cars to the road all throughout the Town, not just in this area, but mainly on South King Street and East Market Street where we already have bottlenecks. Saying that there will be less traffic seems a bit disingenuous to me. This project will produce much more traffic and will have an impact. We do know better about that, but I think we're pretending not to. Also, this is rezoning. This is a request to use land for a different purpose than what it was zoned for in order to increase revenue for the developer. Whenever an application to rezone comes before us, the major factor that goes into my decision is whether the applicant is mitigating their impact to the Town. That's always what I look at first. At this point, I don't believe that the proffer is sufficient to mitigate at least the traffic impact. There are other impacts as well but the traffic impact is what I'm focused on here. The phasing, most of us up here have asked about, or have addressed the office space issue.We've heard a lot about the office space issue. I don't believe that the applicant has a stake in the ground that triggers that office building to be built. It's way out there. It's nebulous. There's nothing that says I'm going to do this when we have to trust that he'll do so and it's not that the applicant's not trustworthy, but I feel like we also have to verify that. What will happen when the placeholder park, where that building is supposed to go, what will happen to it when it's razed and the office building does replace it if, in fact, that does happen?What do you think the existing residents who've moved into this area will say, and what do you think the Council will hear? If anything,we should have learned from other projects here in Town that when we allow residential to be built before commercial, developers will tell those residents to take any of their concerns to the Council, or they'll hold out on amenities until they get built what they want to have built. We can point to Oaklawn and Leegate which is now Tuscarora Crossing for that. When residential goes in first, and in this case about 90%residential compared to 30%commercial in the first two phases, it's the residents who will be vocal to keep things the way they want it and they're going to want to keep that park. Massing. The project looks nothing like this extension of downtown. I know that's what it's supposed to be. It's massive and it's overbearing for that location and it does not fit the character of the Town. Density, the Economic Development Commission estimates about 2,500 people give or take who live at Virginia Village at full buildout, so the traffic claim in my opinion is a non-starter. They're asking to go from 24 units per acre to over 50 and I don't feel like that's an indication that CDD guidelines are being followed. I feel like that's overbearing. Affordability.Want me to keep going or just wait till--? Mayor Burk: Finish your comments and then we'll let everybody finish their comment as well. Council Member Fox:Affordability; I'm happy with the offer of the ADUs. I really honestly am. However, as always, when ADUs are built other units in the project increase in price to compensate for the difference in the lost revenue of the ADU builds. The applicant has conceded that they don't know the price point yet on the different types of dwelling so we really have no indication yet of how affordable these units will really be. Economic development; replacing commercial for residential has been a trend and as you can see now,we're looking at 40%to 21% in this application and the EDC advises that we stop this trend. Building houses and not commercial and office space will virtually guarantee that we will have less of a chance to bring in business to Leesburg where that's been our goal,and that's been the EDCs so they're very concerned about that. When asked by the EDC what would happen if the application was not passed tonight?The response was that Virginia Village will continue to operate just as it is today. Office space; I took a real quick look at something that we got.We have a 15% vacancy rate so I don't know how many square feet that amounts to, but it is down from 30%.We do need this office space. Page 20 I January 11,2022 This is a HUBZone area and there is a demand, especially in that area. Planning Commission; after a very thorough four months of vetting and studying this application, a 5-0-2 vote to deny the application was recorded. Not one Commissioner thinks this application should be passed as is and I agree with that. There are 35 modifications, and it's not an indication that the CDD guidelines have been followed. Passing this application without the suggested changes from both the Planning Commission and the EDC in my opinion is a misstep. This is a prime commercial location.We probably shouldn't go ahead and we need to stop this, changing the commercial to residential all the time. This is a prime location. It's not obscure. It's not something that's hard to build a commercial on. This is prime and I think it should stay that way. This application takes into consideration some assumptions, but not evidence. Assumption 1, people who live in Virginia Village will not have cars or not as many cars anyway. How can we possibly know that?We have no mass transportation here and until we do, we are not an urban Town, no matter how much we want to be one. Some people want to be one. Assumption 2, those who live in Virginia Village will work and play in Leesburg. Where's the evidence of that?We've had a clear guidance from two important Commissions. I believe we should heed what they are advising. Mayor Burk: Okay, Ms. Fox. I am going to interrupt you now. I gave you the three minutes. We can come back if everybody has finished their comments. Mr. Cummings. Council Member Cummings: I'll jump in now,too, as well. Chris Spera: Madam Mayor, if I could interrupt before Mr. Cummings starts. I just wanted to point out that I believe in Mr. Cummings' motion. He read what was written out in the staff report referring to the January 7 proffers and you all received an amended set of proffers on the 10th. My question, Mr. Cummings, is whether or not he might want to amend his motion to refer to the more recent set of proffers. Council Member Cummings: Absolutely. Let's amend it for the 10th of January's proffers. Thanks. Mayor Burk: Mr. Bagdasarian?You accept that? Council Member Bagdasarian:Yes. Council Member Fox: I have a question about that. Is there a rule with proffers being submitted late in the game like that,that they have to go through some kind of process so that we can consider that? Mayor Burk: I know we did that at the County when I was at the County, but I don't think we had that happen here. Chris Spera: The applicant is free to amend its proffers at any point. That's essentially what you're doing in this process is you're asking them to amend what they proffered to them. Council Member Fox: Well, I don't mind the amendments of the proffers. What I need to know is the submission time.We have time to take a look at them and consider them. Mayor Burk: You got them January-- Council Member Fox: Yesterday. Chris Spera: Gather for Mr. Boucher, I believe I saw an email this morning so that's for each of you to decide if you had adequate time. Mayor Burk: Okay, thank you. I think that is something we should look at in the future. Go ahead, Mr. Cummings, I'm sorry. Council Member Cummings: Thank you. That's all right. This redevelopment complements the Comprehensive Town Plan's aim of creating a community in which its residents can live,work and play. The application takes an outdated auto-focused strip mall and brings it into the future along with Page 21 I January 11,2022 increasing revenue to the Town nearly 10 times.COVID has changed the office landscape. More people are working from home over a wider variety of job sectors. Some of the largest companies in the DC Metro area have downsized their offices and are rolling out new work schedules to accommodate this lifestyle change. I believe Virginia Village will provide an ideal opportunity to provide residents with a community designed to function in our new normal. We cannot simply ignore the traffic study performed by professionals and using the Virginia Department of Transportation's guidelines, or say the study is wrong because we don't agree. If we begin to cast doubt on the work performed by experts with whom we trust our day-to-day operations, how can we make any informed decisions on this dais? The same must be said of the parking at the new Virginia Village. The applicant has a huge stake in designing a space where people will want to live and visit. Furthermore, previous Town Councils voted to approve the Church and Market and Village at Leesburg developments using these same parking ratios. What has changed to put us into a different position? This application is pioneering. With a nearly $200 million-plus investment into Leesburg, the 35 proffered affordable dwelling units are the most ever built here in Leesburg. Our Overlook and High Street parks will provide additional green space in what is now a paved parking lot. The bridge connecting Virginia Village with Harrison Street will positively impact our Town's walkability, which is also in the Town Plan. Not only will a new Virginia Village bring a wider range of available housing to Leesburg, it will bring opportunity for more businesses to start and expand here. This investment provides Leesburg with more revenue, allowing us the opportunity to keep property taxes low for everyone. This development will simply strengthen Leesburg, not make it weaker. I see the potential and I'm excited for the opportunity to see Leesburg prosper with an investment of this nature. We're kind of broken up here, but I would urge my fellow Council members to support this application because of the benefits it'll bring to the Town. Thanks. Mayor Burk:All right. Mr. Bagdasarian. Council Member Bagdasarian: Yes. Thank you. Madam Mayor, would it make for Mr. Boucher to share the updated proffers so we're all on the same page because I just came in this afternoon? Mayor Burk: Yes. [laughs] Council Member Bagdasarian: Let's do it. Mayor Burk: I'm sorry. I was thinking, yes. I just didn't say it. Council Member Bagdasarian: I think it's important too. Brian Boucher: Briefly, there were six changes to the proffers from the December meeting and I'll go through them real quickly. One was a revision to specify that garage conversions cannot happen, that the garage spaces in the townhouses and stack townhouses must remain open for parking of cars. A second revision was they increased the number of affordable dwelling units from 33 to 35 and they made a commitment that they'll build 35 dwelling units, even they don't build the maximum 643 residential units that are proposed. The third was a revision to proffer 20 to parking to add a statement about smart parking technologies. That is so when people come to one of these garages where there's public parking, there'll be technology that tells them what spaces are open so they don't have to mill around. The fourth proffer really goes to phasing and it's the office building. Phase 2C is the office building,the last phase.They've amended the proffer to say that nothing will prevent them from building that sooner in the phasing process. It could jump ahead of the last phase. It's not a commitment to build it at any time sooner, but they're removing the proffer or they could actually put it as the very last phase. Should the need be there,they have a right to build it sooner without coming back to the Council to amend these proffers. Page 22 I January 11,2022 The fifth is another change to the proffer 20 parking and the added statement that there will be a minimum of 20 electric vehicle charging stations spread throughout the parking garages. There could be more. They also will offer to the residents of the townhouses and the stacked townhouses when they're being built,that's the initial purchaser,that they will install the electric chargers in those garages. Even if people turn that down,they will put in an electrical infrastructure that will make it easier to update to electric chargers in the future. Finally, the last revision is, again, to proffer 20 parking, and it's the addition of commitment of 95 more parking spaces to the residential units in the development. They're asking for in the modification to get what we have downtown, for example, one-bedroom units. Instead of one and a half spaces, they're asking in the Modification 47 for one space per unit. They're now asking for one point two five spaces per unit.What they've done, if you go back to the last meeting,there was a discussion by the applicant that they had certain flex spaces in the garage. There are spaces that will already be built but they may not be necessary for commercial users. Doing the analysis, they found that they had at least 95 additional parking spaces. Take the worst-case scenario to park non-residential. That's 50,000 square feet of restaurant and 100,000 square feet of office. They have extra spaces. So in this proffer they're committing to take those 95 spaces and put them towards the one-bedroom units. Again, it essentially changes the modification for one-bedroom units to not one space per unit to 1.25 dedicated spaces per unit, and that's the final change. Mayor Burk: This doesn't have to go back to the Planning Commission? Brian Boucher: I think this is along the line of what was being asked for was an increase in the available parking and I think if that's done it's along the lines of what the Commission was asking for, so it's a step in that direction. I'll ask the Town Attorney but from my knowledge, it's not the type of thing [unintelligible]. Chris Spera: These are all responsive to things that the Council has asked for, after consideration of the Planning Commission-- No is the short answer. Mayor Burk: All right. Council Member Bagdasarian: Great, thank you very much. I do have a thought here and, to that point, I know we've had a number of meetings with Keane since our last meeting, and incorporated this into it. Back in 2006, I was serving as Chair of the Town's Economic Development Commission and we participated in and endorsed this thing here,this old relic called the Crescent District Master Plan from June 27'h, 2006. It was a collaboration between Council, Planning Commission, EDC, EAC, BAR the Leesburg Crossroads, I don't know if Mr. Sisley is still here, really to service as a vehicle to realize the 2003 economic development strategy to expand the downtown and the Crescent District and Market East. We had a shared vision for a vibrant downtown that was a destination for arts, entertainment, and dining, an ideal place to live, work and play. A downtown that grew outward from the historic district core, and that's what makes this particular location important. We're building a density closer to the core of the Town rather than on external farms around dispersed areas. Tonight we're at an inflection point in realizing this aspiration. But here's the thing, change is scary and there's uncertainties ahead. We don't know what exactly is going to happen ahead of us, and I'd just like to share a story about change. About 10 years ago,we supported,the EDC supported,and the Town supported widening the sidewalks for the addition of outdoor dining on King Street. There were both supporting and opposing opinions about the project. Many people believed that removing the parking from King Street will be the final nail in the coffin of a declining downtown area. You think back 10 years ago, things have changed quite a bit. Others believed that expanding the sidewalk would offer new opportunities for people to gather, build a sense of place, and help realize this vision for downtown. The thing is though,we had different opinions and despite those differences of opinion, the Town benefited at the end. Page 23 I January 11, 2022 Like I said, change is scary, it's uncertain, unless change is proactive and deliberate. This is a major decision for the Town.A change at this level is disconcerting. Obviously,this is not something that we're all on the same page. I don't know if we ever would be at this level. There are many unknowns and there are many, many opinions, and there's so much speculation. I know that all of us here have heard and listened to many, many, many opinions regarding this project, different viewpoints, different perspectives. I have an opinion. I have an opinion about this project. My wife has an opinion about this project. My neighbors have opinions. I know Zach's got opinions about it. The Mayor has opinions. We all have opinions about this project. However,as representatives elected by the people of Leesburg, we must process all these perspectives on this project and render our best judgment on what is best for the Town.We must carefully consider the input by the Commissions, and we appreciate all the work you're doing, the stakeholders, and conclusions made by staff. This judgment needs not to be only influenced by opinions, but also by data and statistical trends. First of all, it must be aligned with the Town Plan and it must conform with requirements defined by the Town and this project does check all the boxes. But there are certainly differences in opinions on different aspects like Council Member Fox mentioned. The massing, some folks think this is much too big. The number of units, the phasing, parking adequacy,the style of the buildings, the location of the buildings, and everyone has different predictions about what the future will look like. How will people live, work, and play in 10 or 20 years and that's why we should plan for 2050, not 1950. The world is constantly changing. People desire a walkable community. That's in our Town Plan. With fewer trips in the car, being able to walk to work or walk home, walk to pick up a gallon of milk or pick up a prescription from the pharmacy or have more public amenities and transportation opportunities. I'm not going to go through all the different aspects of this, but, like I said, when elected to this position I made it clear that decisions made need to align with the Town Plan. As custodians for the Town's future our vote tonight will impact the initiation of a project that will objectively comply with the regulatory requirements, aligns with the Town Plan, and realizes the vision we documented in the Crescent District Master Plan. We all have different perspectives on what the future will look like.We all want to maintain the character of the Town. We all want a more walkable community. We all want plenty of parking and manageable traffic. Traffic is a regional issue and we need to address that, not just in the Town of Leesburg, but regionally. It's not just what's happening here. Rather than try to predict the future, we have an opportunity to build the future, a future that has been envisioned by our community for decades. I encourage a vote in support of this project. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Nacy. Council Member Nacy: Thank you. Having sat on Planning Commission, I understand the amount of hard work that goes into every tiny detail of an application before it reaches Council. A vote from Planning is something we truly consider with great weight. That being said, now that I've sat in both seats, I've also seen that by the time an application reaches Council, it may have changed a few times or several times to address concerns that Planning Commission may have noted or to improve the application further in the cases where it may have been denied by Planning Commission. This has happened as staff just noted a little bit ago. Apart from the density issue that Planning Commission had, most of the concerns have been satisfactorily addressed by the applicant. What we are faced with here is a conflict in what we are presenting in our design standards and ordinances and our Town Plan to the development community and then what we say we want. If we truly don't want the things being offered in these plans,we need to change or get rid of the Crescent Design District altogether. Otherwise, it's hard to say no from a planning perspective to something that matches the policy and guidelines that have been created.What we want and what our policies say should absolutely match. The plan calls for six-story buildings in the Crescent Design District. It calls for covered parking garages. It calls for mixed-use centers. I've done a lot of due diligence on this application, as everyone up here has, we've talked to a lot of residents, I've talked to many that have lived here a very long time and Page 24 1 January 11, 2022 some who haven't. The overwhelming majority have been in support of this application, which has surprised me. I understand the concerns of those opposed. I myself have had to do some soul searching as well because it's a huge change. Change is difficult as Councilman mentioned, and as someone who was born and raised here, I have very fond memories of the shopping center as it exists right now.Video Den on Friday and Saturday nights to rent a VHS, Ben Franklin with the Santa house out front waiting in line as a kid just to get your picture taken and tell Santa what you wanted,the sport shop that sat next to Ketterman's where I would go buy my equipment for the sports I played. Little Caesars Pizza. Anyone remember that? That sat in the little nook where the swim shop is. I could go on with the nostalgia but if I may be brutally honest, as of right now,there's a new generation of people being raised in Leesburg who will never get to experience stuff like that because the shopping center remains stagnant, no offense [chuckles]. It needs a breath of life. It needs a place for people to gather and create new memories for the future of Leesburg. This won't be built out immediately. It's going to probably take maybe close to 10 years from now. What will have happened if it's just left to remain the same? We have a responsibility to Leesburg not only to maintain the wonderful place we already live in but to assist in helping revitalize and ensure that the future of this Town that we all love is just as bright or better for the generations growing up here now. Last few meetings ago, when we heard public comments on this, I wrote down a comment that really resonated with me. It was a gentleman who said it's never easy and it's never popular to make a pioneering decision like this one. It made me think, if Mr. Ours hadn't done it 50 years ago,what would it look like now? We need to be able to look forward.While we don't have a crystal ball,we can just do our best to make the best decisions we can. Lastly, but most importantly, I want to address the concerns about this application changing the small Town feel of our beautiful Town. In the last 39 years I've been here, Leesburg has grown from about 8,000 people to over 53,000 people. In that huge growth and in that huge boom of businesses and population,we have managed to maintain the incredible small Town feel that brings people here to live,to work and to play. Our small Town feel is because of the people, because of our residents, the warm and kind and welcoming culture we've all helped create. It's not attached to buildings. It's because of the incredible people who call Leesburg home.As long as we as leaders and all of our residents foster that warmness and kindness and set the example we will continue to have that small Town feeling we all love so much. Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg, do you have anything you want to say. Council Member Steinberg: Thank you. This is certainly an interesting discussion and I think I have an idea of where this thing is going but nevertheless. First of all I want to say I appreciate all the people who came forward to express their opinions and also all the emails that were received regarding this project. I want to stress how much I appreciate both the Planning Commission and the EDC. I know the Planning Commission worked many months on this project and theirs and the Economic Development Commission's level of dedication and expertise provides us with a lot of information that we don't necessarily have time to gather for ourselves. Oftentimes we see these things for a much shorter period of time than the commissions do. With that in mind, it concerned me that certain members of the Council berated us the last meeting because we wanted a little more time for consideration. Interestingly enough, that time for more consideration, a mere 30 days,which I don't believe cost the applicant anything especially over the holidays has actually in the minds of people sitting here improved the project. I think that 30 days was very valuable and indicates why rush to judgment is not always the most advisable way to go. That said, in this context, I've spent the last month doing a certain amount of research, part of which was visiting other types of developments,One Loudoun,for example,Village of Leesburg, Reston Town Center, all of which are pretty successful more or less, each with certain issues, especially Village at Leesburg perhaps with some issues at retail. One of the things about all three of those developments is they sprang up in the middle of empty fields with no context. There's no, there there, at least not yet. Page 25 I January 11,2022 Maybe there will be at some point in the future but not yet. The second thing about all three of those developments is they are served with very robust road networks. One Loudon and Village at Leesburg, you have Loudoun County Parkway, Russell Branch Parkway, Route 7, Crosstrail Boulevard,that allow the traffic inside the developments to freely move in and out. This is not true with downtown Leesburg, and the location of this particular development. I appreciate the traffic study, although I confess I have yet to see a traffic study that did not support the application. That being said, I appreciate the traffic study. I'm not sure I can take it on face value given what we know to be the situation on the ground right now and also what we may come to expect with subsequent other developments, Crescent Park, Meadowbrook when it comes to fruition, and Oakwood. It is my opinion that all of those are going to help exacerbate this situation. I would also point out somebody made reference to US1 and I appreciate US1. I've lived here and in this area for a long time. I guess I don't appreciate US1, honestly. This is not US1. This is not a comparable situation, so that comparison does just doesn't work for me although I certainly appreciate the fact that the person made the observation. Now in the Crescent Design District, the commercial designation calls for the possibility of residential. It doesn't guarantee it.While I've had long conversations with staff and I know they've worked long and hard on this as has the application I have no doubt, but I find the comparison to another Walmart not disingenuous but a misrepresentation. That would not be the intention of this project. Meaning it's not like you would build another big box in the middle of this thing. There are ways to get this done. Right now we're looking at six-story buildings that are primarily residential. Arguments have been made by our own economic development advisor,who says there is a market in Leesburg for certain kinds of commercial. Leesburg is a desirable place to live.We also want Leesburg to be a desirable place to work and unless we have employment centers that provide that, we have a problem. We will always be taxing our transportation systems and we will never achieve what we're looking for. There were 34 changes to make this application come forward which is not exactly the original intent of the Crescent Design District in the first place. I appreciate the give and take but it isn't what was particularly envisioned initially in the Crescent Design District. The proposed rents will not meet affordable metrics with the sheer amount of residential, and some people consider that we may lose a HUBZone altogether because the average rents in the ZIP code will go up and that will be the end of the HUBZone for the people who are concerned about HUBZone. A different approach might have been to do less residential and more commercial on second and third floors, perhaps.That could certainly be an option. Phasing is certainly an issue and a lot of people have talked about building B. It's no surprise that oftentimes these commercial components become elusive especially when residents get used to not having them there.What if we allowed residential in building B and building B became phase 2A? So you build phase 1A and then you build building B with a commercial component but overall you may be reducing residential altogether. Then that leaves building E and building C and D and that would certainly be up to the applicant how those come. In the meantime the infrastructure has to happen for Tuscarora Creek. That would be a different way of looking at the project overall. I'm not afraid of change. I welcome change. I'm into technology, I like all kinds of cool gadgets, but when I ran for election the first time, one of the first things I heard was quality of life in this Town. It's how you get there that makes you successful, and there shouldn't be fear in putting aside a particular--There's no panic here.There shouldn't be fear in putting aside something and reconsidering in order to get something that could be better. Virginia Village isn't going to disappear. Yes, I appreciate it's a little tired. I've been in this Town since 1975. I knew John Ours, and I even worked in a bike shop in that shopping center, so I'm very familiar with it, even though it was only half the size. Change should be coming, but again, I offer, we should get the best deal we can. That's the job of this Council, to get the best deal we can [crosstalk]-- Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg-- Council Member Steinberg: I'm done. Thank you. Page 26 I January 11, 2022 Mayor Burk: [chuckles]All right. Thank you. Mr. Martinez.Are you still there? Vice Mayor Martinez: Yes, I am. Mayor Burk: Did you have anything you wanted to--? Vice Mayor Martinez: Yes. I appreciate all the comments. I do want to echo Kari, Ara, and Zach's comments. I think they're appropriate, and I agree with them. I know that we have made several decisions that are--You really have to work out all the details in your head in what you're doing, and I believe that this is something that is a vision that you have to move forward on. I remember the other thing that we had to make a decision on, as Ara said, the downtown improvement. We spent years debating it, and when we finally made the decision, it end up being a good one and really helped the Town move forward, and I think this will too. I've talked to several people in the downtown area that are looking forward to this project to help sustain the way the downtown is working today, and keep on moving forward. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to speak. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Martinez. I've been making land-use decisions for many years. I've been on the Council since 2004. When I heard about the Virginia Village Shopping Center, because I live in that area, I was very excited. I was incredibly happy.The possibilities were exciting, and I'm still looking forward to seeing the plans. I know that redevelopment is the next phase for Leesburg and its future, and the development community is extremely interested in Leesburg. Part of that interest comes from the changes that this Council and others have put in place. Leesburg is a desirable place to live and play. Part of that desirability is the history, the arts, and the character of our big/small Town. We must integrate the old with the new, and we should be doing it the right way. We should be demanding that everything comes to Leesburg would be worthy of the people that live here now, and welcoming for the people that live here in the future. This development has many good things to offer-- More apartments renting at market value housing, more updated retail, a bridge to connect Harrison Street. Its garage is hidden by the buildings. It's got nice architecture, but it has issues that will be impacting people that live here now. There is a parking garage, but the parking is under-parked. I'm glad to see the developer was willing to make additional parking spaces available, but it's still under-parked. 1.25- car spaces for bedroom unit is not going to meet the needs of the people. We all know that many of those units will be couples that have their own cars, so where do they go? Developers always tell me, and I want to tell you,they always tell me that, "No one wants to drive cars anymore. People are all working from home,they do not need cars. People bike to work,"etc.,etc.That may be true in some places, but we don't have the urban infrastructure to support 562 multifamily units with the parking that's planned for this development. In my estimate,we are shortsighted on the parking spaces.We have no bus service, we have no trolley, we have no Metro.We have cars, and cars need someplace to park.This is what's lacking.This is an impact to the close neighborhoods, and they're the older neighborhoods that have very little parking, and this is where people will go to find parking for their cars for this development. The commercial development is an extremely vital component to any development. This site right now is all commercial, but it's being rezoned to a mixed-use, but with commercial retail and office components, yet there is no proper timeline for the commercial. There is no trigger that sets up the commercial to be built. Actually, commercial was the last thing that was going to be built. I don't know if it will ever get built. We've got current development projects such as--The Brickyard had office was zoned for office/retail. It is now zoned for 59 townhomes. East Quarter was office/retail,62 townhomes. Oaklawn at Stratford was office/flex, it's now 186 townhomes. Marketplace at Potomac Station, that was office and retail,that's 158 townhomes and condos. The office buildings at the Village of Leesburg Building X is now 60 apartments. The Towns at Kincaid, the neighborhood retail center is now 38 townhomes. Tuscarora Village was supposed to be all flex and industrial, it's 468 townhomes. The Crescent Park was supposed to be 43 Page 27 I January 11, 2022 townhomes, it is now 344 townhomes. Crescent Place at Harrison Park was supposed to be 300--That one was the only one that was any good, because it was supposed to be 352 condos, and it ended up being 212 townhomes. The rezoning for our commercial development is dramatic. We are losing the ability to have people come and live here and work here because we don't have the spaces for them. That is a component that is very, very important to me. I've been always committed to making business a component that was very significant,and that I would always support. The fact that this--When I took office, I worked to make Leesburg a vibrant place to live, play, and work. I'm immensely proud that we've accomplished a great deal in the area of play and living, but we have fallen so far behind in the work. So few people that live in this project would be able to work here. Relying on retail to support people living in this project is not logically possible, so we have people that will be living here, but they will not be working here. One of our goals has always been--As a Council, has been to make sure that people can live here, and play here, and work here, and this really is one thing that has really concerned me. The size and the mass of the development is huge. Six-story buildings right up to the street are great in high urban locations like Arlington and DC, but Leesburg is not that urbanized, at least not yet. We, again, do not have the infrastructure to support the traffic and the services this project will require. This development will make Catoctin Circle a canyon of large residential buildings where people must go to other locations to work, because by approving,the commitment to creating job opportunities that would allow people in the development to work locally is going to be gone. I also have problems with lack of open space. During the pandemic, we learned how important it is to have someplace to recreate. Right now, 428 units will be constructed before the main site will start. Where the commercial office building is planned will be a temporary park, and then at the end of the project,the park will be converted to office space, I'm sure the residents will be grateful for that. For me, there were changes that could have warranted my support, and I would have liked to have been able to support this.The Planning Commission asked for changes,and when they were not able to get them, they voted a recommendation to deny this project, and the Economic Development Commission stated their support for the project if the commercial phasing was moved up. I'm standing with the residents and the Commissioners who said that this is not quite good enough for Leesburg. I will always demand that what is in the best interest of the residents is no exception. Therefore, I will not be supporting this project, and I'm very disappointed that I'm not going to be able to at this point.That takes us to our vote on this, Mr. Cummings has made a motion--Not that I can find the paper--Has made the motion,and it was seconded by Mr. Bagdasarian.All in favor of the ordinance, please indicate by saying aye. Vice Mayor Martinez:Aye. Council Member Bagdasarian:Aye. Council Member Cummings:Aye. Council Member Nacy:Aye. Mayor Burk: That's Mr. Martinez, Mr. Bagdasarian, Mr. Cummings, and Ms. Nacy. Opposed? Council Member Fox: Nay. Council Member Steinberg: Nay. Mayor Burk:That's Ms. Burk, Ms. Fox, and Mr. Steinberg.There is a resolution to allow Virginia Village floodplain alteration, to allow the alteration of the floodplain boundaries on the northeast quadrant of this property along Town Branch. Is there a motion for that? Council Member Cummings: Yes, Mayor. I move to approve the proposed resolution for special exception application TLSE-2020-0004 Virginia Village Floodplain alteration subject to the conditions of approval as enumerated in the November 23rd, 2021 Town Council staff report on the basis that the Page 28 I January 11, 2022 approval criteria of Zoning Ordinance section 3.4.12 have been satisfied, and that the proposal would serve the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice. Mayor Burk: Is there a second? Council Member Bagdasarian: Second. Mayor Burk:You two went all the way through, okay. Is there any comments or anything at this point? Yes, Ms. Fox? Council Member Fox: I'll go ahead and finish my comments, which should take like two seconds. Mayor Burk: Okay. Council Member Fox: First, I want to say, I kept hearing tonight that this aligns with the Town Plan, and we should just consider that. However, we just adopted a resolution with four components for the amendment of the Town Plan. We just adopted the rezoning, and we're going to--We're considering the special exception. That is not in alignment in my opinion. The one thing that I will say in closing is, it needs further consideration. I don't think this is a bad thing to do, but we've heard from our Commissioners, there's just been no support for this, except for what we want to do. I would love to have a solid application based on data, taking into consideration what the Planning Commission and the EDC have made, the requests that they made. There are too many hypothetical assumptions for me to move forward, at least at this point for me as well. Thank you. Mayor Burk: All right. Mr. Steinberg? Council Member Steinberg: One thing I didn't get a chance to mention in considering the rephasing of Building B would be, if that were to happen, the applicant would not have to go to the expense of creating a hardscape park or the time to do that, and then the Town would get the commercial component that much sooner. Thank you. Mayor Burk:All right. Any other comments?All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: That was Ms. Nacy, Mr. Martinez, Mr. Cummings, Mr. Bagdasarian. Council Member Bagdasarian:Yes. Mayor Burk: Opposed? Members: Nay. Mayor Burk: Ms. Fox, Mr. Steinberg, and Ms. Burk. All right, gentlemen, you got your development going.All right, that takes us to the public hearing. TLOA-2021--And I do want to thank everybody who came out tonight. 2021-- [unintelligible background conversation] Mayor Burk: Okay. TLOA-2021-005, Administrative Approval of the COAs in the H-1 Old and Historic District. Do we want to take a five-minute break while people clear out?All right,we'll take a five-minute break. Come back at 10-after. Council took a recess from 9:07 p.m.to 9:11 p.m. Mayor Burk: Okay, I want to call to order this January 11th, 2022 public hearing in the Leesburg Town Council. Unless there's an objection, I will dispense with the reading and the advertisement. If you wish Page 29 I January 11,2022 to speak,we ask that you either sign up at the sheet in the hallway outside the Council Chamber, but if you did not get the opportunity to sign up,we will give you the opportunity to speak. In the interest of fairness, we also ask that you observe the five-minute time limit. The green light in front of you will turn yellow at the end of four minutes, indicating that you have one minute remaining. At that time, we would appreciate you summing up and yielding the floor when the bell indicates your time has expired. Under the rules of order adopted by this Council, the five-minute time limit applies to all citizens. However, rather than have numerous citizens present remarks on behalf of the group, the Council will allow a spokesperson for the group a few extra minutes. In that instance, we would ask speakers when they sign up to indicate their status as spokesperson,the group they represent, and the request for additional time. Our procedure for the public hearing is as follows--First,there's a brief presentation by staff on the item before us. Second,the members of the public that have signed up to speak will be called and given five minutes to make their comments. Public hearing item on the agenda for tonight is TLOA-2021-0005, administrative approval of COAs in the H-1 Old and Historic District. Lauren, are you doing this one? Lauren Murphy: I sure am.Thank you, Madam Mayor. I am Lauren Murphy,the Preservation Planner for the Town of Leesburg. As you've noted, this item is TLOA-2021-0005 for Administrative Approvals of Certificates of Appropriateness Applications in the Old and Historic District. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance amendment is to expand the allowable list of uses which can be administratively approved by the preservation planner in the Old and Historic District or H-1 if they are consistent with the Old and Historic District guidelines which have been adopted by the Council. As a brief background on this item, Council initiated amendments in June 2021 in several topical areas, including amendments to approve COAs that have already been issued by the Board of Architectural Review,alterations to architectural details, gutters and downspouts,awnings,walkways and landscape features, in-kind replacements, and small cells. That list was developed by staff after a review of our consent agenda items over the last two years of Board of Architectural Review meetings, and also by comparing our ordinances to administrative approval ordinances for neighboring jurisdictions. The Board of Architectural Review recommended approval of the amendments that are in front of you tonight in October, and the Planning Commission recommended approval of the same amendments in November. In general, the proposed text amendments increase the allowed actions eligible for administrative review.They include all of the topical areas which were established by the Council in that June 2021 initiation.Altogether,the changes provide better flexibility for homeowners and applicants in the Old and Historic District, and they continue to require that all applications that are approved administratively are fully consistent with the Old and Historic District guidelines. I want to be clear that when an item is not consistent with the guidelines, it's then forwarded to the Board of Architectural Review for traditional review, so it doesn't mean that the application can't move forward. It would just move forward as part of a public certificate of appropriateness public hearing process. So staff, based on the BAR recommendation and the Planning Commission recommendation, and the Council's action to initiate these items, is recommending approval of the ordinance,which is in Attachment 1 of your packets tonight. I am happy to answer any questions, but that concludes my brief presentation. Mayor Burk:All right.Are there any questions? Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings:Thank you. I just have one quick question. In the ordinance,it recognizes that the only administrative approval is from the Preservation Planner, correct? Lauren Murphy: I'm sorry, can you say it again? Council Member Cummings: I remember an issue with the BAR was ensuring that administration approval is not going to be by the Zoning Administrator. They want the Preservation Planner or whomever is our preservation specialist at the time-- Page 30 I January 11, 2022 Lauren Murphy: Yes, you're correct. That question was raised during the Board of Architectural Review's initial review of the item.We had added a line item which specifically said that they would only be done by the Preservation Planner.Absence of Preservation Planner, those items would then come to the BAR regardless. However, when the BAR made their final recommendation, they actually recommended that that piece of text was removed. That's not in the draft that's in front of you because the BAR actually ended up removing it from their draft. Council Member Cummings: Perfect. I just wanted to make sure I knew why. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Ms. Fox? Council Member Fox: Quick question-- Unfortunately, my laptop would not-- It would download the agenda, but not the entire packet.You went over what you could administratively approve before,what exactly are the changes?Are they too many to name, or can you name them? Lauren Murphy: There are a lot to name-- I'll let you know that it almost triples the number of items that could be administratively approved now. Some of those are relatively minor. For example, right now, the ordinance allows residential walkways to be a approved administratively, but not commercial. The revised ordinance would make it eligible for both residential or commercial walkways to be approved administratively, so some of them are relatively minor. There are some that are completely new. For example, small accessory buildings of-- I honestly forget the actual size limitation that we have on there. I can look it up for you, but of a certain square footage size-- Less than 100 square feet, and I think it's less than 10 feet in height-- Didn't we have a height limit? Chris Spera: 15 was the height. Lauren Murphy: 15 feet. Right now, no accessory structures can be approved administratively. That's a relatively big change for the Board of Architectural Review, that some of these smaller kind of little sheds might eventually be able to be approved administratively. I'd be happy to go over them individually if you'd like, but they are numerous. Council Member Fox: [unintelligible]. How about things like-- I've always had the issue of public art being okay for the Town, but not for the residents.What about that issue? Lauren Murphy: Sorry, for public art? Council Member Fox:Yes,the art question. Murals, things like that. Lauren Murphy: The ordinance actually exempts public art from requiring a certificate of appropriateness, provided that it follows the public art guidelines. Council Member Fox: Right, but what about for private residences? Lauren Murphy:This amendment would not address public art because that's currently exempted from requiring a certificate of appropriateness. Council Member Fox: Okay,thank you. Mayor Burk:Anyone else?Okay.We had nobody sign up, is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak?All right,there's nobody--Oh, Mr. Martinez, did you--Do I need to ask him? Mr. Martinez, did you want to say something? Vice Mayor Martinez: Yes, but not about that. I'm okay. [laughter] Page 31 1 January 11, 2022 Mayor Burk: Okay then, I will close this public hearing. Is there a motion? Council Member Steinberg: So moved. Mayor Burk: So moved doesn't do it. [laughs] Council Member Steinberg: I just read this thing? Council Member Cummings: It's right up there. Council Member Steinberg: I move approval of the ordinance in Attachment 1, amending article 7.5.6 of the[inaudible]There we go.Thank you. I move approval of the ordinance in Attachment 1,amending article 7.5.6 of the Zoning Ordinance for administrative review of certificates of appropriateness. Mayor Burk: Is there a second? Council Member Cummings: I second. Mayor Burk: Seconded by Council Member Cummings.Any discussion?All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: Okay, that passes 7-0. Next one is-- I call to order this January 11th public hearing of the Leesburg Town Council. Unless there's an objection, I will dispense with the reading of the advertisement. If you wish to speak,we ask that you either sign up on the sheet in the hallway outside Council Chambers, but if you did not get the opportunity to sign up, we'll give you the opportunity to speak. In the interest of fairness, we ask that you observe the five-minute time limit. The green light in front of you will turn yellow at the end of four minutes, indicating you have one minute remaining. At that time,we would appreciate you summing up and yielding the floor when the bell indicates your time has expired. Under the rules of order adopted by this Council,the five-minute time limit applies to all. However,rather than having numerous citizens present remarks on behalf of the group, the Council will allow a spokesperson for the group a few extra minutes. In that instance, we would ask speakers when they sign up to indicate their status as spokesperson,the group they represent,and the request for additional time. Our procedure will be, first, a brief presentation by staff on this item. Second, members of the public who have signed up to speak will be called and given five minutes. The public hearing item on the agenda is TLOA-2021-0001, Batch Zoning Amendment Text Amendment--Our favorite topic. Mike Watkins: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, good evening. I apologize in advance, these batch text amendments are text-heavy. There's lots of text on these slides, so bear with me through this. This evening, you've got an annual process of where we are bringing items forwarded to Council. The purpose of these amendments are to comply with State Code changes,implement Town Plan goals and objectives, include requests by residents and businesses, and include determinations and changes to assist with enforcement efforts. Lots on this page, I'm going to break it down into just bite-sized chunks.Accessory structures, portable sheds, decks, enclosed decks, architectural elements, accessory kitchens, family day homes, validity periods for special exceptions, signs for banks, and amend the submission requirements for zoning permits. The Planning Commission held this public hearing twice, one in September, one in November. The second meeting in November was due to an addition that was not previously advertised, strictly for the portable sheds. The Planning Commission wanted to introduce portable sheds. There were no public Page 32 January 11, 2022 speakers at either public hearing, and again, notable discussion by the Planning Commission included exemptions for portable sheds, and then amending the use standards for accessory kitchens. The commission voted 5-0-2--There were two absent commissioners--To approve these amendments. The first one is for accessory structures. The issue here is that we want to create a new exempt accessory structure called portable shed. I've got a picture of those-- That's what they look like. Currently, they're not in the ordinance, so we wanted to put in a provision for this common feature that you find on residential properties.The second one was a clarification of enclosed deck. Encroachments into required yards is not clear for enclosed decks. I get this question almost every single day. The current requirements, they can't extend into required yards, and there's language in the Zoning Ordinance that's not clear. This is an effort to make sure that we're communicating to the public what the requirements are. Just to give you-- I do have one color example in here. The image on the left is a lot where the building consumes most of the building envelope. There's no room for an extension,whereas the graphic on the right shows, behind the dwelling, there's ample room for an addition.What happens when we discover this?The box in red is an illegal addition, and that box in green is a lawful addition. What happens most often in this scenario is, the resident builds a pergola--Again, this clarification in the ordinance is just to communicate what the ordinance requirements are. The second is to add definitions for undefined architectural elements, so a porch or a stoop. Again, these have limiting encroachments, but we wanted to communicate to the public what these are, so it's an educational effort for the most part. Accessory kitchen--This is one where the majority of our issues come through enforcement, whether it's a complaint for excessive occupancy, or when we go to do an inspection for another improvement and we discover this. It was a needed clarification of the ordinance.The idea here was to establish clear use standards for accessory kitchens. Not prohibit them, but establish clear use standards for them. The highlights of this amendment would be to establish location requirements,establish size limitations, limit the number of accessory kitchens, note permitting requirements, and requiring more or less an affidavit or an acknowledgement that if you create an accessory kitchen, you're not creating an illegal dwelling unit. Family day home--This was a result of changes with the State Code.What we discovered was that the appeal process that we have in the ordinance was not clear. Through the administration of the ordinance,we felt that,just generally speaking,we could format the ordinance so it's a little bit clearer. Here, the highlights of this amendment--We currently had more restrictive requirements, an FDH is a family day home for six to nine children. The ordinance was ambiguous in its appeal process, and then we had a minimum lot size requirement for 6,000 square feet. In some instances, townhomes were given permits that are less than 6,000 square feet, so we're catching up and modernizing the ordinance to catch this accessory use in townhouse lots. Again, the amendment addresses a by-right[crosstalk]- Mayor Burk: Can I ask this--? Mike Watkins:Yes, ma'am. Mayor Burk: Does that mean that townhouses will not be allowed to have daycare? Mike Watkins: The proposal is to permit them by special exception for townhouse lots. Mayor Burk:All right. Thank you. Mike Watkins: Again, the amendments would address the 5 to 12 children as a by-right use, clarifies the appeal process, and adds a special exception for family day homes and townhouses that have 5 or more. The State Code is pretty clear, five children at a dwelling unit is a by-right use. We can't require any more restrictive ordinance requirements for that by-right use.Again,this is complying with the State Code, preserving those by-right uses, and just educating the public again. Page 33 I January 11,2022 Another thing that we found, and it's most prevalent post-COVID now, is the difficulty in going through the entitlement process for a special exception. Right now,there's a lot of rigmarole in meeting certain milestones to secure the validity of your special exception. What this does is it says you get five years, period. There's not a requirement for you to get the special exception, then another year for you to submit your site plan, and then hopefully, get through the site planning process, and then get to the point where you're securing your zoning permit. This just says your special exception is good for five years. It's common through the Commonwealth,and we're just keeping up with the Joneses so to speak. ATM signage--Again, this is one where we've issued permits for this, but there's nothing in the Zoning Ordinance,so we're capturing what's occurring,and making clear use standards for ATM signage.Then I think this is the last one, is the floor plan zoning requirements. Again, the permitting process, more often than not,we're asking for floor plans so that we can confirm compliance with the ordinance. Right now, it's in a hidden section of the ordinance. We're making it a more prominent location. I've got a suggested motion for you to consider, I'm happy to answer questions you may have. Mayor Burk:Anyone have any questions? Ms. Nacy? Council Member Nacy: I just have two quick questions. What is an accessory kitchen? Mike Watkins: An accessory kitchen would be-- For instance, your first floor-- Let's say it's a three- level home where the two floors are above, and you got the basement.An accessory kitchen will allow you to put a small kitchenette in your basement, so if you didn't want to go all the way upstairs to cook your hot wings,or this,that, and the other for the football game,you can do something in the basement. Or, let's just say that you have a large extended family, sometimes the principal kitchen is just not large enough, so you can have that accessory kitchen in the basement. Council Member Nacy: Okay. Then just a clarification on the family day home, you said by-right is 5, and we're doing 5 to 12, unless it's a townhome. Is that what the amendment is? Mike Watkins: Yes ma'am. Council Member Nacy: Okay. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Anyone else? I have a question on the accessory kitchen. Is that a full kitchen? Is that with a stove and a dishwasher? Mike Watkins: It can be, yes, ma'am. Mayor Burk: It can be? Mike Watkins:Yes. Mayor Burk: Interesting, okay. Alright, there is a motion. Does somebody want to make a motion on this? Council Member Fox: I'll make a motion [unintelligible] Oh,that's right. [chuckles] Mayor Burk: Oh,that's right. I'm sorry. Public comment. Oops--Mr. Martinez. Thank you. Vice Mayor Martinez: Whoever's reminding the Mayor, I thank you. You know, the problem with me not being there,you haven't got somebody to just jump in and make the motion, so I'll make the motion. Mayor Burk:Well, I have to close the public hearing first. I have to ask if there's anybody that wants to speak. Nobody is here to speak--Anybody in the audience that wants to speak? Okay, come forward. Five minutes. Bob White: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm Bob White. I'm one of the two managing members of the Church &Market Project and Courthouse SQ LLC,that owns it. I just came here to tell • Page 34 I January 11,2022 you very briefly,in support of your consideration of the extension of time for special exceptions, I wanted to share a few milestones with you, because I know that you see these projects going into the cycle, but you don't always know what happens once we're in the cycle and how long it took. This is not a blame game, but rather, the result of the many different legs of this approval process, and the number of individuals and number of plan submissions that it takes to get there. We hired Bowman Consulting Group on November 17th of 2017 once we decided to make the turn toward residential and away from office at the subject property. Once we hired Bowman,we began the design process in earnest without interruption,and it took 43 and a half months to get to conditional site plan approval. Along the way, we spent much of the early period of time working on our special exception application for obvious reasons, because we had structured parking. We made the special exception application on April 23 of 2018, so about a year and a bit later. It took 16 months to get the special exception approved on August 18th, 2019. The apartment building BAR approval was rendered on February 19th of 2020,and that came,obviously, after the special exception process. Ultimately, in between special exception approval and conditional site plan approval, we consumed 22 and a half months. We now stand at approximately 29 months following special exception approval that was issued August 18th of 2019, despite every opportunity that we exhausted in advancing the project and working it out with the Town. We clearly believe that the three-year lock on the special exception process is insufficient, particularly in light of what has happened since we began this process that we all regard as the pandemic. I hope you'll give the motion your fondest support, and I can tell you that it will result in a better project for anybody who has the additional time. Thank you very much for hearing us out on that. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Ms. Fox? Council Member Fox: I have no comments. I was just going to move it. Mayor Burk: Okay. I have a question, if there's one that I want removed, I'd like to vote on all of them but one, can I take one of them out? Mike Watkins: Yes, ma'am.You would need to amend the suggested motion, but[crosstalk]-- Mayor Burk:We haven't had a motion yet, so--Okay, go ahead. Mike Watkins: The motion-maker can basically read the slide, "I move to approve TLOA-2021-0001 Winter Batch amendments, excluding X on the basis of--" Mayor Burk: And it's for the accessory kitchen--Okay, then I'll move to [crosstalk]-- Eileen Boeing: You need to close the public hearing. Mayor Burk: Pardon? Chris Spera: You need to close the public hearing. Mayor Burk: I thought I did, but okay--Close the public hearing, and I'll move to approve TLOA-2021- 001 Winter Batch Zoning Text Amendments,with the exclusion of accessory kitchen, on the basis that the zoning text amendment further the objectives of the Town Plan, serve the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practices. Is there a second? Council Member Nacy: I second. Mayor Burk: Second by Ms. Nacy.All in favor? Members:Aye. Page 35 I January 11, 2022 Mayor Burk: Anybody want a discussion then?Yes--[chuckles] Right. Council Member Cummings: Oh, I'm sorry. Not to prolog it. Just curious why you're removing--Your reason to remove the accessory kitchen. Mayor Burk: I'm concerned that you're going to end up creating situations where there'll be multiple families, multiple people living in one dwelling, so they'll end up-- One family home will end up being a two or three-family home, and then you'll have the overcrowding issues and the parking issues. Chris Spera: Madam Mayor, can staff be heard briefly on your concern? Mayor Burk: Pardon me? Chris Spera: Could staff be heard briefly on your concern there? Mayor Burk: Sure. Chris Spera: Mr.Watkins and I were just conferring here--Accessory kitchen is already in the Zoning Ordinance, and so what Mr. Watkins' proposed amendment did was clarify the definition. Accessory kitchen is already there, so we're trying to figure out your concern, and I think it's different than-- Mayor Burk: What's stated here, I guess is what you're saying.Well, my concern is just what I stated, that if we allow multiple kitchens in single-family homes, we then end up with overcrowding issues, because you have multiple families living in a single-family home. Mike Watkins: One of the discussion points with the Planning Commission was the size of the accessory kitchen.Staff suggestion was to limit the size so that it was significantly less than the principal kitchen. That helps to reduce the opportunity for illegal dwelling units. Even with the ordinance requirements,we're still going to face issues where nobody's paying attention to the ordinance and just does that, but one of the things that was discussed at the Planning Commission was the size. That could be an opportunity for you to address--To help address your concern, but the conversation we did have at the Planning Commission level was, the tool that we're asking for is to create use standards that will help us with enforcement. Mayor Burk: You're saying that this would make it better for you to be able to enforce it, but we're still going to have multiple kitchens in multiple floors with multiple-- Mr.Watkins: Yes, ma'am. Mayor Burk: Okay.Well, okay, I'll[crosstalk]--All right, I won't take it out. [chuckles] Chris Spera:Who seconded--Who was the second? Council Member Nacy: That's me. Mayor Burk: Ms. Nacy. Chris Spera: Okay, so we just have to see if you accept it— Mayor Burk: Okay. Chris Spera: Since you're amending the motion, it's been accepted. Mayor Burk: I don't know. Maybe I won't vote for any of it now-- No. [chuckles] All right. Any other discussion?All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Members:Aye. Page 36 I January 11, 2022 Mayor Burk: Reluctantly, aye-- [laughter] Mayor Burk:Aye, 7-0, this passes. Council Member Fox: I have a quick question. Did we go back to this motion that we just voted on? Is that what-- Mayor Burk: Yes. Council Member Fox: Okay. I just didn't hear that. Mayor Burk: I took it out, and then Kari agreed. Council Member Fox: Okay, got you. Chris Spera: The maker amended her motion, the seconder accepted the amendment, so we're all good. Mayor Burk:All right. Thank you, gentlemen. The next one--All right, I call on this January 11th public hearing of the Leesburg Town Council. Unless there's an objection, I'll dispense with the reading of the advertisement. If you wish to speak,we ask that you to either sign up on the sheet in the hallway outside of the Council Chambers. If you did not get the opportunity to sign up,we'll give you an opportunity to speak. In the interest of fairness, we also ask that you observe the five-minute time limit. The green light in front of you will turn yellow at the end of four minutes, indicating you have one minute remaining. At that time, we would appreciate you summing up and yielding the floor when the bell indicates your time has expired. Under the rules order adopted by this Council,the five-minute time limit applies to all citizens. However, rather than having numerous citizens present remarks on behalf of the Council, the group will allow a spokesperson for the group a few extra minutes. In that instance, we would ask speakers when they sign up to indicate their status as the spokesperson,the group they represent,and request for additional time. Our procedure for the public hearing is as follows--First,there is a brief presentation by staff about the item before us. Second,the members of the public that have signed up have the right to speak and get five minutes for their comments.The public hearing item on the agenda tonight is off to the employment of police officers. Jessica Arena: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council Members. My name is Jessica Arena, and I'm the Assistant Town Attorney. Captain Sanford is also here if you should have any questions for her as well at the end of this presentation. I'm here today to present the proposal to adopt an ordinance for officer off-duty employment. By way of background, the Leesburg Police Department makes available to the public services of off-duty officers at an hourly rate.The services generally fall under traffic control and visual presence. The LPD General Order 403 currently governs the rules and regulations for this off-duty employment. The purpose of this proposed ordinance is to assure conformance with State Code regarding the Town's authorization of providing such services. As you can see here,the authority for the adoption of this ordinance is 15.2-17.Over here,the language proposed is under its own section,24-3, and simply states that the Town allows officers to serve as off- duty under off-duty employment. It simply states that, and also that the Chief of Police can promulgate rules and regulations for such employment. The staff requests that this Council adopt this ordinance under its suggested Motion Number 1. If you have any questions for me or Captain Sanford-- Mayor Burk: Does anybody have any questions? Mr. Martinez, I'm going to go with you first. Do you have any questions? Page 37 I January 11,2022 Vice Mayor Martinez:Why is this coming up? I thought the police officers were already doing off-duty work. Jessica Arena:Yes,they are, but we are just making sure that the authorization is also in conformance with State Code. Vice Mayor Martinez: Okay, thank you. That's all I got. Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg? Council Member Steinberg:First of all,when did we actually discuss this previously? I don't remember this conversation, but we're in a public hearing for it, so I'm just asking for someone to refresh my memory on that. Mayor Burk: When we allowed the officers to have [crosstalk]-- Council Member Steinberg: No.When did we discuss this to a point where we decided it was coming forward to the public hearing? Or was that not a necessary step? It's not? Okay,fine. Chris Spera: This was a staff-initiated item, but the Council agreed. [crosstalk]-- Council Member Steinberg: Okay, that's fine. Chris Spera:We initiated this because we became aware [crosstalk]-- Council Member Steinberg: Appreciate it. My only question then is regarding phrase police powers, what is the officers'or the Town's liability in situations like this?I know there's limited immunity in certain cases, so to what extent do typical law enforcement rules and regulations apply to an individual who's providing off-duty police or off-duty law enforcement,what have you? Jaime Sanford: Typically,we're not hired in a capacity where our officers are intended to be out there and they have to use their police powers. We're typically used as a visual presence to deter criminal activity. Should something criminal occur in their presence, then they would roll into the role of being a police officer.We would act as we normally would in our on-duty capacity. Council Member Steinberg:You're saying, in a given situation, the police powers begin to apply, and then all of--That basically is the umbrella for every action that takes place after that. Jaime Sanford: Yes, sir. Council Member Steinberg: Okay, thanks. Mayor Burk: Ms. Fox? Council Member Fox: That was my exact question, but I want to take it one step further. Has there ever been any issues that the Town-- Has anything ever come back on the Town liability-wise? Jaime Sanford: Not in the time that I've been supervising. I've been doing the special events for over two years now. Typically, our events involve-- There have been, let's say, arrests, or something like that, a secondary situation that occurs in an off-duty event,they've just been kind of the typical stuff that we deal with. Maybe a drunk in public where they have to then enact into that role into that law enforcement, "Let's go ahead and take them into custody for their own safety and for everybody else." It's rare, I'll be honest with you. Typically, our off-duty events are traffic control-- Cornerstone on Sundays, a lot of the high school athletic events, just really a visual deterrent that we're there and everybody keeps the peace. Page 38 I January 11, 2022 Council Member Fox: For the attorneys,what would happen if somebody said,"I'm sorry,but the Town is liable." How would that work? I'm sure it could happen. Chris Spera: It would depend upon the context in which it arose. If the officer was acting in his or her capacity of enforcing the law-- For example, if there was a disorderly person. We're out there doing traffic control, but someone's disorderly, or they disobey a lawful command from a law enforcement officer, then, as Captain Sanford alluded to, now, all of a sudden, we move from directing traffic to enforcement, and now we're immune-- Council Member Fox: They're kind of'on the clock.' Chris Spera: Exactly. Council Member Fox: Okay, got you. Chris Spera: You're acting in your capacity as a police officer, and all the immunities and protections apply. Council Member Fox: Okay. Thanks. Mayor Burk: So it makes it safer for the police officers. Captain Sanford: It does, and if I can add to it, that all of our off-duty employment is approved by the Chief or his designee before it goes out for any of the guys to fill. Mayor Burk: Okay, great. Thank you.Anyone else? Council Member Bagdasarian: Yes, quick question-- Just curious, the off-duty service, is that plainclothes or is that uniformed? Jaime Sanford: It's typically uniformed for us. It's very rare that we would approve any plainclothes, it would have to be very a specific detail. Council Member Bagdasarian: Got it. Thank you. Jaime Sanford:Yes, sir. Mayor Burk: All right. There is nobody who has signed up to speak. Is there anybody in the audience that wants to come up and speak? No?You're sure?Okay.Then I will close this public hearing. Is there a motion? I don't see one-- Council Member Steinberg: [unintelligible] Mayor Burk: Okay. Council Member Steinberg: Do we need anything more than, "I move to approve the proposed ordinance permitting Town Law Enforcement Officers to Engage in Off-duty Employment?" Is that the extent? Chris Spera: That is sufficient. Council Member Steinberg: Then I do. • Council Member Fox: I'll second. Mayor Burk: Okay, and seconded by Ms. Fox-- Mr. Steinberg and Ms. Fox-- Any questions? All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Page 39 I January 11,2022 Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: All right, it passes 7-0. Okay, do we want to take Council's disclosures after our closed session, or do we want to do it now? [silence] Mayor Burk:Where are you going? Council Member Steinberg: [unintelligible] Mayor Burk: Did you say-- [laughs] I mean,wait a minute-- [laughter] Mayor Burk: Okay. [laughs] Sorry, I didn't mean it like that. I just meant-- Okay, why don't we try to keep it brief.Anybody have anything new they want to put on the agenda,or any disclosures?Ms. Fox? Council Member Fox: Nope. Mayor Burk: Okay, Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings: Just one disclosure. I had a phone call last week with Brian Cullen and Keane Enterprises. Mayor Burk:All right. Ms. Nacy? Council Member Nacy: I have none. Mayor Burk: Mr. Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Yes, one disclosure. On Friday, I had a meeting with Mr. Cullen to discuss some of the final issues with the project,that's it. Mayor Burk: I would disclose that I met with Mr. Cullen on January 7th to also talk about the project, and on the 5th, I met with Truett Young from Stanley Martin, with Mr. Steinberg and Mr. Todd Cimino- Johnson from the-- It's not Leegate, what is it called now? Council Member Bagdasarian: Tuscarora Village. Mayor Burk: Tuscarora Village, to talk about the issues that the people are having that live there by the project not being completed.We don't know about Mr.--We'll come back to him. Mr.--God, I'm tired. Mr. Dentler? Kaj Dentler: No comments. Mayor Burk: No comments, all right. Chris Spera: Did you ask Mr. Martinez if he had any disclosures? Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mr. Martinez, do you have any comments? I'm telling you, if you're not here, I don't even remember you. Vice Mayor Martinez: I do have a disclosure that I had a discussion with Brian Cullen on the project while I was on vacation, and that's about it. Thank you. Mayor Burk: All right, thank you. Mr. Steinberg, do you have any disclosures? Page 40 I January 11, 2022 Council Member Steinberg: No. Mayor Burk: You did meet with Truett Young from Stanley Martin? [laughter] Council Member Steinberg: [unintelligible] Mayor Burk: Okay. All right. Does anybody want to take a pause at this point? No? Okay. I move pursuant to Virginia Code Section 5.2-3711(A)(8) and 2.2-3711(A)(3) of the Code of Virginia that Leesburg Town Council convened in a closed meeting for the purpose of consulting with the legal counsel regarding specific legal matters related to Leesburg Mobile Park, and for the purpose of discussion and receiving information regarding the potential acquisition of real properties for a public purpose. Chris Spera: You need a second. Council Member Nacy: [unintelligible] second. Mayor Burk: Okay,thank you. [laughs] I'm like, uh-oh. All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed?Will Mr. Martinez be joining us? Vice Mayor Martinez:Aye. Mayor Burk: You're staying with us, right, Mr. Martinez? Vice Mayor Martinez: I am staying for the duration. Mayor Burk: Okay. Chris Spera:Yes, it's 6-0-1. Mayor Burk: Oh, okay. It was 6-0-1, sorry. Thank you for catching that. Okay-- Vice Mayor Martinez: Excuse me, I'm here and I voted aye. Chris Spera: You weren't the one.What you couldn't see, Mr. Martinez, is Mr. Cummings went to the restroom, so he's the one. We counted you in the six. You were counted. Vice Mayor Martinez: Oh, okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. [chuckles] Council convened in a Closed Session from 9:48 p.m.to 10:36 p.m. Eileen Boeing: We're live. Mayor Burk: We're live. All right. In accordance with section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia, I move the Council certified to the best of each member's knowledge. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirement under Virginia Freedom of Information Act, and such public business matters for the purpose identified by the motion in the motion by which the closed meeting was convened, or heard, discussed, or considered in the meeting by Council. Ms. Fox. Council Member Fox: Aye. Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg. Page 41 I January 11, 2022 Council Member Steinberg:Aye. Mayor Burk: Mr. Cummings. Council Member Cummings:Yes. Mayor Burk: Mr. Martinez. Council Member Martinez:Aye. Mayor Burk: Mr. Bagdasarian. Council Member Bagdasarian:Aye. Mayor Burk: Ms. Nacy. Council Member Nacy:Aye. Mayor Burk: Ms. Burk.All right. Do I have a motion to adjourn? Members: Yes. Mayor Burk: Okay.All in favor? Members:Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed?All right. Page 42 1 January 11, 2022