HomeMy Public PortalAbout2023_03_27_Work_Session_Agenda_Packet
TOWN OF LEESBURG
Town Hall, 25 West Market Street
AGENDA
Town Council Work Session
March 27, 2023
7:00 PM
Council Chamber
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
a. Liberty Street Parking Lot – Remediation Study Contract Award (Renee
LaFollette)
b. Liberty Street Parking Lot – Redevelopment Proposal (Keith Markel)
c. Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 – Final Mark-up Session (Cole
Fazenbaker)
3. ADDITIONS TO FUTURE MEETINGS
a. Future Council Meetings and Agenda Topics
4. ADJOURNMENT
5. INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
a. Monthly Board and Commission Report – Activity and Attendance
6. UPCOMING EVENTS
April 1 - Easter Egg Hunt, Ida Lee Park, 12 - 3 p.m.
April 2 – Reagan’s War Stories, Thomas Balch Library, 2 – 4 p.m.
April 6 – Researching Court Records, Thomas Balch Library, 10 a.m. – 12 p.m.
April 7 – Mayor and Town Council Service Recognition Month Open House, Town Hall, 5:30 – 7 p.m.
April 7 – First Friday, Historic Downtown, 6 p.m.
April 15 – 16 – 33rd Flower and Garden Festival, Downtown Leesburg
April 22 – Keep Leesburg Beautiful EAC Event, Raflo Park, 10 a.m.
May 20 – Leesburg Kids to Parks Day
ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEM
Qualified individuals with a disability who require a reasonable accommodation to attend and/or participate
in this meeting should contact the Clerk of Council at eboeing@leesburgva.gov or 703-771-2733 to request the
accommodation. Three days advance notice is requested. Meetings are broadcast live on the Town’s local
government access cable TV channel (Comcast 67 and Verizon 35) and streamed live on the website at
www.leesburgva.gov/webcasts. All Town Council, Board and Commission meetings are recorded and can be
found on the Town’s Web site at www.leesburgva.gov.
1
-2-
REGULARLY SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETINGS
Citizens are invited to attend and participate in Town Council meetings. The petitioner’s portion of the meeting and
scheduled public hearings offer the public two opportunities to present its views to the Council during its meeting.
Petitioners
The petitioners’ portion of the Council agenda is the first item addressed by the Council following proclamations,
certificates of appreciation, regional commission reports and presentations. This part of the meeting gives individuals
the opportunity to address the Council on any matter not scheduled for a public hearing. Prior to the meeting, citizens
wishing to speak should sign up on the Town’s Web site at https://www.leesburgva.gov/government/mayor-
council/current-council-agenda by 4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting or on the signup sheet in the hallway outside of
the Council Chamber the night of the meeting. The Mayor will give anyone the opportunity to speak that did not get
a chance to sign up. Petitioners’ comments are limited to between three and five minutes at the Mayor’s discretion.
Public Hearings
Certain Town business items can only be conducted after the Town Council holds an advertised public hearing.
Certain major issues affecting the Town’s government can also be scheduled for public hearing at Council’s discretion.
Adoption of the Town budget, rezonings, special exceptions and amendments to the Town’s subdivision and zoning
ordinances all require a public hearing. Prior to the meeting, citizens wishing to speak at a public hearing may sign
up on the Town’s Web site at https://www.leesburgva.gov/government/mayor-council/current-council-agenda by
4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting or on the signup sheet in the hallway outside of the Council Chamber the night of
the meeting. The Mayor will give anyone the opportunity to speak who did not get a chance to sign up. Public hearing
comments should be limited to the topic of the public hearing and speakers will be given between three and five
minutes at the Mayor’s discretion. If you wish to speak at more than one public hearing, you must sign up for each
hearing separately.
Decorum
A person addressing the Council as a petitioner, or during a public hearing, should advance to the podium when
recognized by the Mayor and state and spell his or her name for the purpose of closed captioning. If comfortable
doing so, speakers should provide their address for the record. Persons should also indicate whether they are
representing anyone other than themselves. Decorum will be maintained. Statements, which are demeaning or
defamatory to members of the public, the staff or the Council, are inappropriate and out of order.
OTHER COUNCIL MEETINGS
Work Sessions
Council meets twice per month, or more often as necessary, to discuss items that are placed on the agenda at the desire
of the majority of Council present. Items are typically discussed at a meeting at least two weeks into the future but
items may be added in a shorter time frame in accordance with Council’s adopted rules and procedures.
Closed Sessions
Under certain circumstances, the Virginia Freedom of Information Act permits the Town Council to meet in a session
where the public is excluded. This may be a discussion of personnel matters, legal matters, the acquisition or sale of
property and other selected topics. The Council can only go into closed session to discuss topics specifically exempted
from the open meeting requirements and all closed sessions must be properly noticed and appropriate Code sections
cited as to the specific statutory authority to go into closed session. The notice must also include the general topics to
be discussed. Only those matters in the adopted motion to go into closed session can be discussed and members in
attendance must certify that only those topics were discussed when they return to an open session.
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MATERIALS
Council agenda materials are available to citizens by end of day Wednesday immediately preceding the set of Council
Meetings. Council agenda materials are posted to the Town Web site at
https://www.leesburgva.gov/government/mayor-council/current-council-agenda. Meeting agenda packets are
available for public inspection in the lobby of Town Hall on Wednesdays prior to the scheduled meeting. Council
agendas can also be viewed on the Town’s Web site at https://www.leesburgva.gov/government/mayor-
council/current-council-agenda.
2
Council Meeting Date: March 28, 2023
TOWN OF LEESBURG
TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Subject: Liberty Street Parking Lot – Remediation Study Contract Award
Staff Contact: Renée M. LaFollette, P.E., Director, Public Works & Capital Projects
Keith Markel, Deputy Town Manager
Council Action Requested: (1) Authorize the Town Manager to sign the task order with WSP USA
Environment & Infrastructure Inc. (WSP) in the amount of $130,961 to investigate and characterize
the material contained in the old Town dump located under the Liberty Street Parking Lot. (2)
Authorize a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $164,000 to cover the cost of the task
order inclusive of a 25% contingency.
Staff Recommendation: Authorization of a task order with WSP in the amount of $130,961 to
investigate and characterize the material contained in the old Town dump located under the Liberty
Street Parking Lot. This study will also include providing the Town an order of magnitude cost
estimate to remediate the old landfill site and to dispose of the material in an approved landfill. The
draft resolution includes authorizing a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $164,000 to
fully fund the task order inclusive of a 25% contingency given the uncertainty of this exploratory
work.
Staff also recommends applying for grant funding from the Site Assessment and Planning Grant
that is available through the Virginia Department of Economic Development in partnership with
the Department of Environmental Quality to help off-set the costs associated with the study.
Commission Recommendation: Not applicable.
Fiscal Impact: The proposed task order with WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc. (WSP)
to investigate, characterize, identify, and quantify the materials contained in the old Town dump is
$164,000, inclusive of a 25% contingency for any unforeseen conditions that are encountered during
the study work. A supplemental appropriation in the amount of $164,000 from the Unassigned Fund
Balance is necessary as this is an unbudgeted project in the Fiscal Year 2023 budget.
The Virginia Department of Economic Development, in partnership with the Department of
Environmental Quality, provides a Site Assessment and Planning Grant up to $50,000 that focuses
on the environmental assessment and development plans for a local site. These grants are used to
help finance environmental projects. The grant program requires a 1:1 local match and is a rolling
grant so the Town may apply at any time. If the Town is successful with the application for the
grant funding, a Council agenda item will be prepared to appropriate any funding received from the
state.
3
Item a.
Liberty Street Parking Lot – Remediation Study Contract Award
March 28, 2023
Page 2
Work Plan Impact: Minimal work plan impact. This project would add additional site and report
review to the engineering staff.
Town Plan Impact: One of the Legacy Leesburg guiding principles is to look at Character and
Authenticity in order to retain the historic core of Leesburg and to provide a high quality brand and
sense of place that stretches through the entire community. The Liberty Lot site is in the core of
downtown and could support the quality redevelopment. In addition, Strategy 5.2.7 addresses
environmental contamination issues related to the remediation of soil and groundwater
contamination and the investigation into and taking the necessary steps to identify the potential and
suspected contamination issues which this proposed study of the Liberty Lot will do. Chapter Four:
Place Based Recommendations, has identified the Liberty Street Lot as Opportunity Area #6 as an
example of a downtown infill redevelopment opportunity.
Executive Summary: Over the last few years there has been interest in the redevelopment of the
Liberty Street Lot. Past uses of this property include the site serving as a municipal dump on the
southern half of the property from the 1940s to the mid-1950s. Regardless of the type of future use
on the site, a remediation study is an appropriate step for the Town to take to quantify and identify
the types of municipal wastes that exist in the old dump under the Liberty Street Parking Lot. As
part of the study, the consultant would provide the Town with an order of magnitude cost estimate
to remediate the dump and dispose of the material in a modern landfill.
In 2003, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality performed a Site Screening Report
(SSR) as part of the Brownfields Program by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ). The agency evaluated the history and the analytical data related to the site. The SSR
presented the results of the Brownfields site assessment conducted under the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Targeted Brownfields Assessment (TBA) Program, at no cost to the local
jurisdiction with the ultimate goal of promoting cleanup and redevelopment of the site.
Since the Site Screening Report was completed, some of the regulations related to materials and
chemicals found in the soils from the municipal landfill have changed in how they are handled for
remediation and/or disposal. The recommendations of the 2003 SSR were:
A site-specific risk assessment should be performed prior to any subsurface construction work
on the site.
Redevelopment of the property should consider waste hauling and disposal issues of
excavated materials.
Existing and future site uses and/or excavations should consider the potential safety and
health issues caused by methane gas generated by the landfill.
The possible impact that the landfill may have on the surface water and sediment should be
evaluated.
The proposed study by WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc. (WSP) will specifically
evaluate the four bulleted points from the 2003 SSR as listed above. See Attachment #2. Ground
penetrating radar (GPR) will be utilized to determine the limits of the landfill portion of the Liberty
Lot site. The GPR work will be followed by Electronic Magnetic Surveys (EM) to further refine the
limits of the landfill and to further define any potential buried metals and larger buried debris. The
4
Item a.
Liberty Street Parking Lot – Remediation Study Contract Award
March 28, 2023
Page 3
analysis of the soils and materials located in the landfill portion will be evaluated by utilizing drilled
shafts that will allow soil sampling, gas sampling, and water sampling.
In addition to the drilled shafts, soil borings and water monitoring wells will also be included. The
water monitoring wells will be left in place for 30 – 45 days. The testing of the materials will be
analyzed and those results will be utilized to quantify the amount of material in the landfill and the
types of material to determine how best to dispose the material if the site were to be fully remediated.
The proposal will also provide an order of magnitude cost for the remediation of the site that the
Town can utilize for budgeting purposes.
Background: The Liberty Street Lot is a 2.37-acre site that is made up of three parcels (Loudoun
County MCPI #231-37-4615, 4841, and 3304) that are owned by the Town of Leesburg. The current
site is utilized as a public parking lot and Public Works facility that includes outside storage and two
buildings used for maintenance activities. The property is bounded by residential properties along
Wirt Street SW to the east, Town Branch to the south, the residential Chesterfield Place community
to the west, and Royal Street to the north.
Over the years, the Liberty Street Parking Lot property has had a variety of uses, including: a water
distribution facility in the 1930’s. The southern half of the property was a municipal dump from the
1940’s to the mid-1950’s, From the mid-1950’s to the mid 1980’s, the site has been a Public Works
storage and maintenance facility. In the mid-1980’s to present, the site has also served as a public
parking lot. The current parking lot has 116 parking spaces.
Due to the history on the property, primarily the municipal dump, and potential redevelopment
interest, Council directed staff to engage an engineering firm with environmental and geotechnical
experience in investigating old municipal landfills. The purpose of the potential study is to quantify
and qualify the materials that exist at the site and provide an order of magnitude budgeting number
for remediation and cleanup.
Proposed Legislation:
RESOLUTION
Authorize the Town Manager to Sign a Task Order with WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure
Inc. in the amount of $130,961 for the Liberty Street Public Parking Lot Remediation Study and
Authorize a Supplemental Appropriation in the amount of $164,000 to Establish a Project Budget
Draft Motions:
1. I move to approve the proposed resolution authorizing the Town Manager to sign a task order
with WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc. in the amount of $130,961 for the Liberty
Street Public Parking Lot Remediation Study and to authorize a supplemental appropriation in
the amount of $164,000 to establish a project budget.
2. I move to deny the proposed resolution authorizing the Town Manager to sign a task order with
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc. in the amount of $130,961 for the Liberty Street
Public Parking Lot Remediation Study and to authorize a supplemental appropriation in the
amount of $164,000 to establish a project budget.
5
Item a.
Liberty Street Parking Lot – Remediation Study Contract Award
March 28, 2023
Page 4
OR
3. I move an alternate motion.
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution
2. WSP Proposal dated March 8, 2023
3. DEQ Report Executive Summary
2023/01
6
Item a.
PRESENTED: March 28, 2023
RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: _____________
A RESOLUTION : AUTHORIZE THE TOWN MANAGER TO SIGN A TASK
ORDER WITH WSP USA ENVIRONMENT &
INFRASTRUCTURE INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $130,961 FOR
THE LIBERTY STREET PUBLIC PARKING LOT
REMEDIATION STUDY AND AUTHORIZE A
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF
$164,000 TO ESTABLISH A PROJECT BUDGET
WHEREAS, over the last few years there has been interest in the redevelopment of the
Liberty Street Public Parking Lot; and
WHEREAS, the Liberty Street Parking Lot site is located in the core of the downtown
and has redevelopment potential; and
WHEREAS, the Liberty Street Parking Lot is a 2.37-acre site that is made up of three
parcels that are owned by the Town of Leesburg; and
WHEREAS, the past uses of this property as a municipal dump during the mid-1900s;
and
WHEREAS, a previous environmental site review was conducted in 2003 by the
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends the authorization of a task order with WSP USA
Environment & Infrastructure, Inc in the amount of $130,961 to investigate and characterize
the material contained in the old Town dump located under the Liberty Street Public Parking
Lot; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works and Capital Projects recommends approval
of the task order; and
WHEREAS, a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $164,000 that includes a
25% contingency amount for any unforeseen conditions that are encountered during the study
work would be required from the Unassigned Fund Balance.
7
Item a.
A RESOLUTION: AUTHORIZE THE TOWN MANAGER TO SIGN A TASK ORDER
WITH WSP USA ENVIRONMENT & INFRASTRUCTURE INC. IN
THE AMOUNT OF $130,961 FOR THE LIBERTY STREET
PARKING LOT REMEDIATION STUDY AND AUTHORIZE A
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF
$164,000
-2-
2023/01
THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as
follows:
1. The Town Manager is authorized to sign a task order with WSP USA Environment
& Infrastructure Inc. in the amount of $130,961 for the Liberty Street Public Parking
Lot Remediation Study.
2. A supplemental appropriation is authorized in the amount of $164,000 to include a
25% contingency from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Capital Projects Division
in the General Fund for fiscal year beginning July 1, 2022 and ending June 30, 2023
for any unforseen conditions that are encounrted during the study work. Any unusued
appropriation may be carried over to subsequent fiscal years.
3. The Town Manager is authorized to submit for a Site Assessment and Planning
Grant available through the Virginia Department of Economic Development in
partnership with the Department of Environmental Quality and to sign all
paperwork related to the grant and the application.
PASSED this 28th of March 2023.
______________________________
Kelly Burk, Mayor
Town of Leesburg
ATTEST:
______________________________
Clerk of Council
8
Item a.
Proposed Scope of Work
Town of Leesburg Liberty Street Lot Landfill Investigation & Characterization
March 8, 2023 (v.3)
Prepared by: John Mittauer, PG, Senior Project Manager Reviewed by: Andrew Shust, Senior Associate WSP Environment & Infrastructure Inc. (571) 215-9265 John.mittauer@wsp.com SCOPE OF WORK
WSP Environment & Infrastructure Inc. (WSP, formerly Wood) will provide professional environmental consulting services to the Town of Leesburg (Town) in investigating and characterizing historic landfill materials beneath the Liberty Street Lot. We understand that the Town plans to redevelop the lot for construction of a potential performing arts
center and affordable housing. Through conversations with the Town, the Town’s representatives, and review of a site-specific Brownfields Site Screening Report (VDEQ, 2003), WSP understands the following information pertinent to this proposal:
• The southern portion of the Liberty Street Lot is underlain by a municipal landfill that operated in the 1940s and 1950s.
• Buried landfill materials consist of municipal waste and are anticipated to be
present at depths down to 25 feet below grade.
• During a prior investigation (2003), soil borings were advanced to depths of approximately 20 feet below grade for soil sample collection. Sample analysis
identified concentrations of metals and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) above VDEQ Tier II residential screening levels.
• High concentrations of methane gas were encountered during soil borings in 2003, however, the methane concentrations dropped quickly after a short period
of venting.
• Depth to groundwater is estimated to be 25-30 feet below grade. The objective of this scope-of-work is to: 1) investigate the dimensions of the buried
waste materials, 2) characterize the nature of the waste materials, and 3) evaluate
potential contaminant impacts to soil and groundwater beneath the landfill. The findings of the investigation will be used to support decision making by the Town and allow
9
Item a.
Town of Leesburg Liberty Lot Landfill Investigation & Characterization – Proposal
March 8, 2023
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc.
Page 2
development of cost estimates for site redevelopment and potential removal of waste materials.
Our proposal has included assumptions and estimated quantities to support our proposed level of effort and subcontractor estimates. The Town will be immediately notified if our assumptions are not valid or if estimated quantities are exceeded. Proposed tasks are as follows:
TASK 1 Project Kickoff, Procurement and Coordination
TASK 2 Ground Penetrating Radar and Electromagnetic Survey
TASK 3 Drilled Shaft Installation and Sampling
TASK 4 Soil Boring and Well Installations
TASK 5 Transportation and Disposal of Stockpile Materials
TASK 6 Reporting, Project Management & Consulting
TASK 7 Cost Estimating and Consultation
1. Project Kickoff, Procurement and Coordination WSP will participate in a project kickoff meeting with the Town and their representatives
to discuss logistics, schedule, site access, and coordination. WSP will procure our subcontractors and develop a schedule for project implementation. In addition, WSP will prepare a site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) for the activities to be conducted by WSP and our subcontractors. In general, the HASP will
discuss worker’s qualifications, potential hazards that may be encountered, hazard mitigation procedures, safe operations and clearances for heavy equipment operation, personal protective equipment, and contingency planning. The HASP will describe the procedures and equipment for monitoring and controlling methane and other gases that may emanate during drilling.
2. Ground Penetrating Radar and Electronic Magnetic Surveys WSP will subcontract with Forrest Environmental Services, Inc. (FES) of Oak Hill, VA to conduct a geophysical survey of Liberty Street Lot. The geophysical investigation will
consist of an electromagnetic (EM) and ground penetrating radar (GPR) survey to locate suspected buried metal and non-metal debris. The EM survey will be conducted using an EM-31 induction meter to measure the apparent conductivity of the subsurface. The EM survey is frequently used to identify USTs, UST pits, 55-gallon drums, and nonmetal debris.
The GPR survey will confirm the results of the EM survey. GPR profiles will be
10
Item a.
Town of Leesburg Liberty Lot Landfill Investigation & Characterization – Proposal
March 8, 2023
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc.
Page 3
conducted using a RAMAC GPR system with 250 MHZ shielded antenna. Contrasts in electrical properties of materials in the earth cause reflections of the radar signal. These reflections occur at different soil strata, soil/rock interfaces, rock/air interfaces
(voids), fractures, manmade objects (drums, USTs, trenches, pits), or any interface that can create a contrast in the dielectric properties. 3. Drilled Shaft Installation and Sampling
To characterize the nature of the buried waste materials and to allow the collection of soil samples that may be mixed with the wastes, WSP will subcontract with H&H Concrete Construction, Inc. (H&H) from Mt. Airy, MD to advance drilled shafts into the landfill. H&H will mobilize an excavator and support equipment to complete up to eight (8) drilled shifts over a three-day period. After removing asphalt, H&H will excavate a
shallow test pit into the underlying soil to approximately 4 feet below grade. Then H&H will advance drilled shifts using a rotary auger attachment that is powered by the excavator. The drilled shifts will be approximately 2-feet in diameter and will extend to depths of approximately 22 feet below grade. If possible, H&H will extend the shafts below 22 feet to attempt to reach original grade if it can be done safely. Shaft depths
may be less if obstructions are encountered. Drilling locations will be spaced to provide a representative sampling of materials from the landfill. The location of the test pit/shaft locations will be reviewed and agreed upon between the Town and WSP prior to work commencing.
Recovered soil and waste materials will be placed on plastic sheeting for visual inspection and screening by WSP. Recovered waste materials will be described, photographed, and screened with a multi-gas meter(s) that can measure volatile organic compounds (VOCs), lower explosive limit (LEL), hydrogen sulfide and methane. Gas measurements will also be recorded at depth using plastic tubing that can be connected
to the multi meter and lowered into the excavations. WSP will collect soil samples from each drilled shaft based on visual observations and screening results. WSP will collect up to three (3) discrete soil samples from each shaft for a total of 24 soil samples. Discrete sample collection will be collected from different
soil layers and will be biased toward soil with evidence of staining, odors and/or VOC detections. Additionally, WSP will combine soil from all eight borings to generate a single composite sample that is considered representative of the full investigation area. Soil samples will be collected in laboratory-supplied sample containers and shipped via overnight courier to a contract laboratory for analysis of the following:
• Target Analyte List (TAL) VOCs using EPA Method 8260
• TAL Semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) using Method 8270
• RCRA 8 Metals using EPA Method 6010
• PCBs using Method 8082
• Pesticides using EPA Method 8081, and
• Herbicides using EPA Method 8141
11
Item a.
Town of Leesburg Liberty Lot Landfill Investigation & Characterization – Proposal
March 8, 2023
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc.
Page 4
For this task we have included a small contingency for analyzing additional discrete samples, if warranted, in the event that contaminant impacts are encountered. After collecting soil sampling is complete, the drilled shafts will be backfilled with #57 crushed
stone to approximately 4-inches below the surface. The stone will be compacted with the excavator bucket in the upper 4 feet. After all the shafts have been backfilled with stone, H&H will place hot mix asphalt patch over each location to match the parking lot grade.
The recovered soil and waste materials will be stockpiled in a corner of the parking lot, at a location that has been pre-approved the Town. Soil and waste materials will be placed on plastic sheeting and surrounded by a fabric-wrapped stone berm to prevent soil from running off the stockpile area. WSP will collect two (2) composite samples of soil from the stockpile to be laboratory analyzed for those constituents required for
landfill acceptance, including the analyte list above and other waste characteristic analyses. Our proposal pricing assumes that samples will be laboratory analyzed on a 10-day turnaround time. Following collection of the composite samples, the stockpile with covered with plastic, weighted down, and secured to ensure that precipitation does not come in contact with the materials.
4. Soil Borings and Well Installations WSP will subcontract with Tidewater, Inc. to advance five (5) soil borings and install four (4) monitoring wells with a GeoProbe direct-push rig equipped with auger capability.
The five soil boring locations will be selected based on the findings of the GPR and EM survey. The soil borings will be advanced to depths of 30 to 35 feet below grade which will allow the collection of soil samples beneath the landfill materials. WSP will collect up to two (2) soil samples per boring for laboratory analysis based on visual observations and soil screening.
WSP will select four of the boring locations to install 2-inch diameter, flush-mounted monitoring wells. Following well development, the monitoring wells will be gauged, and groundwater samples will be collected. The well elevations will be surveyed to a common datum so that groundwater elevation and flow direction can be determined.
Soil cuttings and purged groundwater from the borings/wells will be added to the stockpile (see Task 3). Samples will be collected in laboratory-supplied sample containers and shipped via overnight courier to a contract laboratory for analysis of the following:
• TAL VOCs using EPA Method 8260
• TAL SVOCs using Method 8270
• RCRA 8 Metals using EPA Method 6010
• PCBs using Method 8082
• Pesticides using EPA Method 8081, and
• Herbicides using EPA Method 8141
12
Item a.
Town of Leesburg Liberty Lot Landfill Investigation & Characterization – Proposal
March 8, 2023
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc.
Page 5
Our proposal pricing assumes that samples will be laboratory analyzed on a 10-day turnaround time. The monitoring wells are anticipated to be in place for at least thirty (30) to 45 days. WSP will discuss the results of the groundwater sampling with the
Town to evaluate if additional monitoring of the wells is beneficial. If not, WSP will remobilize Tidewater to properly abandon the wells. This proposal includes an estimated cost to abandon the monitoring wells within 2 months of installation. 5. Transportation and Disposal of Stockpile Materials
Following receipt of sample analytical results, WSP will provide waste descriptions and analytical results of the stockpile materials to various disposal facilities to evaluate the feasibility of waste acceptance and associated costs for disposal. WSP will communicate with Loudoun County Landfill, Clean Earth of Maryland and King George,
Virginia landfill. WSP will present the Town with options and associated costs for transportation and disposal of the stockpile materials. Once a destination has been selected, WSP will prepare the disposal facility application and waste profiles on behalf of the Town. For this proposal, WSP has included estimated costs for transportation and disposal of 32 tons of material (approximately 20 cubic yards) at the Loudoun
County landfill. WSP will provide oversight and direction of H&H in loading the stockpile materials for transportation to the selected disposal facility. 6. Reporting and Project Management
Following receipt and review of laboratory analytical data, WSP will tabulate the sample results and prepare a technical report for the Town summarizing the field activities and documenting the investigation results. Our report will include conclusions and recommendations for next steps. Following review of the draft report by the Town, WSP will incorporate any comments and issue a final report.
7. Cost Estimating and Consultation In Task 6, WSP will provide cost estimating and additional post-investigation consultation to the Town. The focus of this task will be to provide a rough cost estimate
for next steps to support the Town in decision-making related to site development. The cost estimate will incorporate remediation, as warranted, and possible excavation and disposal of waste materials, depending on the results of consultation with the Town. The cost estimates can be used by the Town for budgeting purposes.
13
Item a.
Town of Leesburg Liberty Lot Landfill Investigation & Characterization – Proposal
March 8, 2023
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc.
Page 6
ASSUMPTIONS
Our scope of services and estimated cost to complete this project is based on the
following assumptions and those presented in the text above. 1. The areas to be investigated are on parcels owned by the Town of Leesburg and no work, nor access, will take place on adjoining properties. 2. The Town will not require permits for any of the proposed activities.
3. Field work will be performed during regular business hours on weekdays. 4. The Town will make necessary arrangements such that vehicles will not be parked in the lot during the field work. 5. A water source, such as a garden hose spigot, is available onsite. If a fire hydrant is used, WSP assumes there will be no fees charged for use of the
hydrant. 6. Backfilling of the shafts will be conducted with the excavator and will not include compaction testing. 7. Drilling, backfilling, and site restoration will be performed over the period of four days. Drilled shafts will not remain open overnight; they will be backfilled on the
same day as drilling. 8. Shallow excavations (<4 feet deep) will not require shoring or benching to reach target depths. Excavation dewatering is not included. 9. Investigation derived waste (soil cuttings and purge water) from the well installations will be incorporated into the onsite stockpile for offsite disposal.
10. Transportation and disposal costs (Task 5) are approximate and will be contingent upon actual weight and characteristics of the waste materials. Costs will be increased if Loudoun County Landfill does not accept the materials. 11. Drilled shafts and drilling activities will each be performed under one mobilization. 12. Data validation will not be performed for analytical reports.
ESTIMATE OF FEES The Scope of Work described herein will be performed on a time-and-materials basis within a not-to-exceed budget of one hundred thirty thousand and nine hundred sixty-
one dollars ($130,961.00). A breakdown of the proposed fees by task is provided as Attachment A. This budget will not be exceeded without further written authorization from the Town of Leesburg. WSP is prepared to start on this project within five days upon authorization from the Town of Leesburg. The Rate Schedule submitted by WSP as part of Contract No. 100330-FY20-45 “Comprehensive Civil Engineering Services,”
as may be updated, shall apply to this Task Order.
14
Item a.
Town of Leesburg Liberty Lot Landfill Investigation & Characterization – Proposal
March 8, 2023
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc.
Page 7
Agreed and acknowledged:
TOWN OF LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WSP ENVIRONMENT & INFRASTRUCTURE INC.
By: By:
Name:
Title:
Date:
Name: John Mittauer____
Title Sr.Project Manager/VP_______
Date: ___________
Attachment A: Estimated Fee Breakdown
15
Item a.
Town of Leesburg Liberty Lot Landfill Investigation & Characterization – Proposal
Attachment A: Estimated Fee Breakdown
Revised
03/08/2023
ODC
Exp & travel Geophysical Drilled Shafts Drilling / Wells Laboratory Waste T&D
Task 01 Project Kickoff & Coordination 3,051.39$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,051.39$
Task 02 GPR and GeoPhysical Survey 3,323.92$ 75.00$ 3,300.00$ -$ -$ 3,300.00$ 6,698.92$
Task 03 Drilled Shaft and Sampling 10,387.58$ 1,100.00$ -$ 25,663.00$ 20,196.00$ 45,859.00$ 57,346.58$
Task 04 Soil Borings & Well Installations 6,426.84$ 825.00$ -$ 16,255.80$ 8,717.50$ 24,973.30$ 32,225.14$
Task 05 Stockpile Transportation & Disposal 3,814.08$ 275.00$ 4,043.60$ 4,043.60$ 8,132.68$
Task 06 Reporting and Project Management 13,054.16$ -$ -$ 13,054.16$
Task 07 Cost Estimation and Consultation 10,452.56$ -$ -$ 10,452.56$
50,510.53$ 2,275.00$ 3,300.00$ 25,663.00$ 16,255.80$ 28,913.50$ 4,043.60$ 78,175.90$ 130,961.43$
Notes:
* See page 2 for a breakdown of labor hours by task with assigned rates
** A 10% markup has been applied to all subcontrators
Subcontractors **TotalTotal Subs
Town of Leesburg Liberty Street Lot
Landfill Investigation &
Characterization
Attachment
A:
Total by cost type
Phase Task Labor Cost *
16
Item a.
Town of Leesburg Liberty Lot Landfill Investigation & Characterization – Proposal
Labor Breakdown:
Pro
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
181.38$ Pro
j
e
c
t
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
115.72$ Env
.
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
s
t
104.43$ CAD
D
T
e
c
h
.
76.34$ Cler
i
c
a
l
74.38$
Task 01
Procure subs & project kickoff 725.52$ 462.88$ 104.43$ -$ 148.76$
HASP Preparation 181.38$ 231.44$ 1,044.30$ 152.68$ -$
-$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total 906.90$ 694.32$ 1,148.73$ 152.68$ 148.76$ 3,051.39$
Task 02 GPR and GeoPhysical Survey
GPR / Geophysical Survey - Field 362.76$ 1,157.20$ -$ -$ -$
Geophysical report review & submittal 725.52$ 925.76$ -$ 152.68$ -$
Total 1,088.28$ 2,082.96$ -$ 152.68$ -$ 3,323.92$
Task 03 Drilled Shaft and Sampling
Field work Oversight 1,451.04$ 3,703.04$ 4,177.20$ -$ -$
Soil sampling & sample prep -$ 12.00$ 1,044.30$ -$ -$
-$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total 1,451.04$ 3,715.04$ 5,221.50$ -$ -$ 10,387.58$
Task 04 Soil Borings & Well Installations
Field work Oversight + well Development 725.52$ 2,777.28$ 1,670.88$ -$ -$
Groundwater sampling & sample prep -$ -$ 1,253.16$ -$ -$
-$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total 725.52$ 2,777.28$ 2,924.04$ -$ -$ 6,426.84$
Task 05 Stockpile Transportation & Disposal
Disposal Evaluation & Waste Application 1,813.80$ 1,851.52$ -$ -$ 148.76$
Oversight of waste Loading
Total 1,813.80$ 1,851.52$ -$ -$ 148.76$ 3,814.08$ Task 06 Reporting and Project Management
Reporting 1,451.04$ 2,082.96$ 2,506.32$ 763.40$ 446.28$
Project Management 5,804.16$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Total 7,255.20$ 2,082.96$ 2,506.32$ 763.40$ 446.28$ 13,054.16$
Task 07
Consultation and Meetings 2,902.08$ 925.76$ -$ -$ -$
Cost Estimating 2,176.56$ 2,777.28$ 1,670.88$ -$ -$
Total 28 5,078.64$ 32 3,703.04$ 16 1,670.88$ 0 -$ 0 -$ 10,452.56$
101 18,319.38$ 150 16,907.12$ 139 13,471.47$ 14 1,068.76$ 10 743.80$ 50,510.53$
Liberty Lot - Landfill Investigation &
Characterization
Tot
a
l
6 18 0 2 0
4 8 2 Tota
l
2 10 0
5 6 11 2 2
10 2 012
Tota
l
16 8
Tot
a
l
40 18 10 6
2
16
0
24
24
Cost Estimation and Consultation
Total by Staff Member
6
32
12 24
Level Of Effort
4 4 1 2
Project Kickoff & Coordination
4
32
4
8
24
24
12
50
16
28 0
00
8 18 10
10 16
40 0
10 0
Labor Breakdown for All Tasks
Tota
l
Tot
a
l
8 32
Tot
a
l
4 10
10 20 10 0 2
17
Item a.
18
Item a.
19
Item a.
20
Item a.
21
Item a.
22
Item a.
23
Item a.
24
Item a.
25
Item a.
26
Item a.
27
Item a.
28
Item a.
29
Item a.
30
Item a.
31
Item a.
32
Item a.
33
Item a.
34
Item a.
35
Item a.
36
Item a.
37
Item a.
38
Item a.
Council Meeting Date: Month 28, 2023
TOWN OF LEESBURG
TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Subject: Liberty Street Parking Lot – Redevelopment Proposal
Staff Contact: Keith Markel, Deputy Town Manager
Council Action Requested: Provide direction on the Public Private Partnership redevelopment
proposal received for the Liberty Street Parking Lot.
Staff Recommendation: Staff does not support the May 31, 2022 proposal in its current form. As
a result, staff recommends adoption of a resolution to formally reject the proposal from the
partnership of Good Works LP, Waukeshaw Development Inc., Bowman Consulting, James G.
Davis Construction, and DBI Architects Inc.
The staff recommendation is based primarily on the proposal’s heavy reliance on public funding
which is not financially feasible for the Town at this time without a significant new revenue source.
The proposing partnership estimates the cost of site remediation and construction, exclusive of the
affordable housing component, at $31,000,000. Town staff have not performed an independent cost
estimation at this point. A detail staff analysis of other issues such as traffic and economic impacts
would also need to be conducted.
Commission Recommendation: There is no Commission recommendation specifically related to
the received proposal.
Prior to receiving the May 31, 2022 proposal, the Economic Development Commission (EDC)
expressed general support for exploring opportunities for redevelopment of the Liberty Street
Parking lot at their May 5, 2021 meeting. The EDC also recommended the Town move forward in
determining the best and highest use of the property.
Fiscal Impact: As initially proposed, the May 31, 2022 Public Private Partnership proposal requires
significant local government funding for site preparation and construction. This includes an
estimated $3,000,000 in landfill tipping fees from County of Loudoun and up to $28,000,000 in site
development and construction costs from the Town of Leesburg. In order to reduce the need for
Town funding, grants and private donations could be considered.
Town
Funding
Assumed Interest
Rate
Annual Debt Service
for 20 Years
Impact on Real Estate
Tax Rate
$31 Million 4% $2.25 million 2.05 cents
$15 Million 4% $1.12 million 1.08 cents
39
Item b.
Liberty Street Parking Lot – Redevelopment Proposal
March 27, 2023
Page 2
Funding this project would also require a substantial reprioritizing of capital projects due to the
Town’s 15 percent debt ceiling borrowing limit, or additional revenue streams would need to be
found. Funding this project without major structural changes to the Capital Improvements Program
(CIP), such as postponing major projects would likely jeopardize the Town’s AAA bond rating.
Projects including the police station expansion, the Town shop expansion, and the potential
construction of an air traffic control tower at the airport would all likely need to be delayed.
Other fiscal impacts may include increased Town staffing to manage and maintain the project once
completed as well as operational costs neither of which have not been evaluated at this time.
Funding in the amount of $164,000 is needed to conduct a detailed site environmental analysis to
develop more accurate site remediation cost estimates. Additional funding may also be needed to
develop an independent professional cost pro-forma for the operations of a performing arts center
and restaurant which are part of the proposal.
Work Plan Impact: Development, review, and ongoing efforts related to the Public Private
Partnership proposal solicitation has required support from the Department of Economic
Development, Town Attorney’s Office, Department of Planning and Zoning, Department of Plan
Review, Department of Finance and Administrative Services, Public Works and Capital Projects,
and the Town Manager’s Office.
If the Town Council elects to move forward with this proposal, a significant amount of staff
resources will be required to advance the project. If actually developed, the initial proposal calls for
the Town to own and manage the operations of the performing arts facility, the parking garage,
conference space, and restaurant.
Town Plan Impact: The Legacy Leesburg Town Plan, in Strategy 1.3.4 states, “The Town will
actively work to identify opportunities to create new civic and cultural spaces in the Town.
Examples of appropriate spaces include public gathering spaces, museums, and a performing arts
center. Such facilities can be a key component of a Public Private Partnership.”
The Plan also talks extensively on the need for affordable housing. Strategy 3.3.1 Provide
Affordability for All states the following, “Affordable housing is a major concern for the Town of
Leesburg and focused efforts to increase the availability of affordable housing must be a part of
Leesburg’s future.
Executive Summary: At their November 9, 2021 meeting, Town Council approved Resolution
2021-174 directing staff to proceed with issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a public-private
partnership related to the potential redevelopment of the Liberty Street Parking Lot site. See
Attachment #2.
The 2.03-acre site currently serves as a free, 120 space parking lot for the public and Town fleet
vehicles. The site also includes an independent, eleven space metered public parking lot adjacent to
Royal Street as well as two support facility buildings and a small storage yard for Public Works.
The site is the location of a former Town dump.
40
Item b.
Liberty Street Parking Lot – Redevelopment Proposal
March 27, 2023
Page 3
The Town issued a solicitation for public private partnership proposals in May of 2022. See
Attachment #3. At the conclusion of the RFP process, the Town received one response from a
group of partnering firms that include Good Works LP, Waukeshaw Development Inc., Bowman
Consulting, James G. Davis Construction, and DBI Architects Inc. See attachment 4. The proposal
includes the creation of approximately 65 senior affordable housing apartments, a performing arts
center, restaurant, public open space, and a 175-space parking garage.
Town staff from a variety of disciplines independently reviewed the submitted proposal, met
internally to discuss key elements, and then held an extensive meeting with the proposing firms to
discuss the project. At the Town Council work session of August 8, 2022, Council discussed the
proposal with staff and the proposing partnership. Council agreed to continue the evaluation of the
proposal.
Since that time, the proposing partnership has met several times with Town staff and individual
Council members to review various aspects of the plan, including options for fundraising, the
creation of a parking authority to manage the structured parking, and a parks authority to manage
the performing arts center. There was consensus that the Town must first understand what level of
effort and expense will be required to remediate the current dump site that lies below the existing
parking lot. This must be addressed before any development can take place on the property.
Since the discussion with Council in August, the developer has unofficially proposed a few modest
changes to the total number of affordable dwelling units and has increased the recommended
amount of parking to better accommodate the needs of the Town along with providing spaces for a
potential hotel development on an adjacent parcel. There has been talk of development of a hotel
on the adjacent property, however that would be privately owned and is not part of the PPP
proposal. The hotel may be interested in purchasing parking spaces from future structured parking
on the Liberty Lot site.
Proposal Highlights:
The affordable senior housing component is proposed to be located on the western half of the parcel
adjacent to the Chesterfield Place Townhomes. The affordable dwelling units would be offered to
seniors at least 62 years of age.
The land and the building containing the residential use would be privately owned and operated.
The four-story structure would be constructed using private investment and local and state housing
grants. The developer would purchase the land from the Town at a cost of $2,000,000. The proposal
indicates that these funds could then be used towards the cost of site remediation.
The performing arts center and restaurant are the two commercial features of the project. The proposal
calls for a 450-seat performing arts space, designed to allow flexibility to serve not only seated
performances, but also conferences and open meeting space. The restaurant component would
occupy an additional 4,000 square feet of building space. The Town would be responsible for the
funding of the construction and for the ongoing operation of these facilities.
41
Item b.
Liberty Street Parking Lot – Redevelopment Proposal
March 27, 2023
Page 4
Parking for all the uses on the site would be provided in a structured parking garage beneath the
buildings on the site. The proposal calls for the development of 175 parking spaces of which 51
would be dedicated to the residential use.
Public green spaces for passive recreation and community use are included in the proposal with the
construction of a pedestrian bridge to cross Town Branch to link the W&OD trail with the site. This
proposal has not been approved by NOVAParks at this time.
Compatibility with the Town’s Request for Proposal (RFP):
The Request for Proposal stated that “The Town envisions selling the parcel in fee to a developer
or developers, who would redevelop the parcel for commercial uses. The redevelopment should
be consistent with the Town’s vision as identified in the proposed Legacy Leesburg Town Plan
and should include public shared parking. The Town would strongly prefer that the public shared
parking be funded from the proceeds of the Town’s property although it will consider alternative
proposals….The Town will also consider donation of the land in exchange for public parking
spaces, and building/storage space for the Public Works Department”.
The current Liberty Street Parking Lot is a heavily utilized free public parking lot. As part of the
RPF process, the Town stressed the importance of maintaining public parking. This proposal has
uses that are estimated to require 238 spaces (residential units, performing arts center, restaurant),
yet the proposal only calls for the creation of 175 spaces.
The senior affordable housing component of the proposal was not a central focus of the RFP.
However, the RFP suggested that residential uses could be located on upper floors of first floor
commercial development. The proposing team shared that the multi-story residential use would
serve as a buffer between the existing neighborhood to the west of this site, and the commercial uses
on the eastern portion of the site.
In the development of the RFP, the Town envisioned a private developer to purchase the Town
property or receive a donation of the property as the Town’s contribution towards the project, and
then to develop the site independent of the Town. This proposal requires the Town to complete the
dump remediation along with the construction of the performing arts center, restaurant, public
spaces, bridge crossing, and a substantial portion of the parking garage. Additionally, the Town
would be responsible for the management of the performing arts center and identifying a user for
the restaurant space. The level of expense borne by the Town in this proposal was not suggested in
the RFP or factored into any financing discussions during the Capital Improvement Plan
development.
Background: The Liberty Street Public Parking Lot, located at 204 Liberty Street, consists of 2.03
acres and is zoned B1 - Community (Downtown) Business District. The B1 designation was
established in recognition of this area serving as the center of Leesburg’s employment, tourism, and
specialty commercial activity. Currently, the asphalt site contains approximately 120 parking
spaces, and buildings totaling approximately 3,200 square feet that supports the Department of
Public Works.
42
Item b.
Liberty Street Parking Lot – Redevelopment Proposal
March 27, 2023
Page 5
During their November 9, 2021 meeting, Town Council approved Resolution 2021-174, directing
staff to proceed with issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a public-private partnership
related to the development of the site. RFP No. PPP-001 was issued in April 2022 requesting
proposals for the redevelopment of the 2.03-acre parcel in a manner consistent with expanding
economic and tourism opportunities in Downtown Leesburg.
By the set closing date, the Town received one response to the RFP. The response was from a group
of partnering firms that included Good Works LP, Waukeshaw Development Inc., Bowman
Consulting, James G. Davis Construction, and DBI Architects Inc. The proposal includes dividing
the parcel in half with the development of a senior affordable housing facility on the western portion
and a performing arts center and restaurant on the eastern portion.
Proposed Legislation:
RESOLUTION
Rejection of the Development Proposal Dated May 31, 2022 for Redevelopment of the Liberty
Street Parking Lot
Draft Motions:
1. I move to approve the proposed Resolution to reject the proposal from the partnership of Good
Works LP; Waukeshaw Development Inc.; Bowman Consulting; James G. Davis Construction
and DBI Architects Inc. for the redevelopment of the Liberty Street Parking Lot.
2. I move to deny the proposed Resolution to reject the proposal from the partnership of Good
Works LP; Waukeshaw Development Inc.; Bowman Consulting; James G. Davis Construction
and DBI Architects Inc. for the redevelopment of the Liberty Street Parking Lot.
OR
3. I move an alternate motion.
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution
2. Resolution 2021-174 (Direction to Develop an RFP)
3. Liberty Lot RFP
4. Proposal from Partnership for Redevelopment of Liberty Lot
2023/01
43
Item b.
PRESENTED: March 28, 2023
RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: _____________
A RESOLUTION : REJECTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL DATED
MAY 31, 2022 FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE LIBERTY
STREET PARKING LOT
WHEREAS, the Town owns approximately 2.03 acres of land located at 204 Liberty
Street that serves as a public parking lot and Public Works facility; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council determined that the site has the potential to be
redeveloped to enhance the economic and cultural vitality of the downtown by providing
elements such as improved public parking along with commercial and entertainment amenities;
and
WHEREAS, the Town’s adopted Comprehensive Plan “Legacy Leesburg” identifies
this location as Opportunity Area #6 and “encourages residential, hospitality, and mixed use
infill development to further activate downtown”; and
WHEREAS, the Town issued a Request for Proposals for the redevelopment of the site
in April of 2022; and
WHEREAS, one proposal was received on May 31, 2022 from the partnership of Good
Works LP; Waukeshaw Development Inc.; Bowman Consulting; James G. Davis Construction
and DBI Architects Inc. for the redevopment of the Liberty Street Parking Lot.; and
WHEREAS, the proposal calls for the private construction of a multiple unit senior
affordable housing structure along with the public financing and construction of a parking
garage, performing arts center, restaurant, and public park space; and
44
Item b.
A RESOLUTION: REJECTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL DATED MAY
31, 2022 FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE LIBERTY STREET
PARKING LOT
-2-
2023/01
WHEREAS, the proposal places a significant portion of the construction and
operational responsibility of the project on the Town of Leesburg, and not on the proposing
entity as called for in the Town issued Request for Proposal; and
WHEREAS, after thoughtful consideration, it has been determined that the project, as
it is currently proposed, places significant financial liability on the Town of Leesburg and is not
an affordable project within the Town’s Capital Improvement Plan.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as
follows:
The Town rejects the proposal dated May 31, 2022 summitted by the partnership of
Good Works LP; Waukeshaw Development Inc.; Bowman Consulting; James G.
Davis Construction and DBI Architects Inc. for the redevopment of the Liberty Street
Parking Lot.
PASSED this 28th day of March 2023.
______________________________
Kelly Burk, Mayor
Town of Leesburg
ATTEST:
______________________________
Clerk of Council
45
Item b.
The Town of
Leesburg,
Virginia
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-174
PRESENTED: November 9. 2021
ADOPTED: November 9, 2021
A RESOLUTION: DIRECTING STAFF TO PROCEED WITH A REQUEST FOR
PROPOSAL FOR A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP
RELATED TO THE POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT OF THE
LIBERTY STREET MUNICIPAL PARKING LOT
WHEREAS, the Town owns a 2.03 acre parcel of land located at 204 Liberty Street
currently in use as a parking lot (the "Liberty Lot"); and
WHEREAS, the Town has received a number of informal inquiries about the Liberty
Street Municipal Parking Lot being redeveloped, either individually or in connection with
adjacent parcels; and
WHEREAS, Town staff conducted a public informational meeting on October 7, 2021,
as well as soliciting ideas and feedback regarding the future of the Liberty Lot through an on-
line portal; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the Town issue an RFP for a public -private
partnership for the redevelopment of the Liberty Lot in a manner consistent with expanding
economic and tourism opportunities in Downtown Leesburg.
THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as
follows:
1. Staff is directed to develop and issue a Request for Proposal for the redevelopment
of the Liberty Lot pursuant to Va. Code Section 56-575.1, et seq. and the Town of
Leesburg PPP Guidelines.
2. The Town Manager and the Town Attorney are hereby authorized to take all steps
necessary to effectuate the foregoing.
PASSED this 9t' day of November, 2021.
ATTEST:
Clerk of Council
Town of Leesburg
46
Item b.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE LEESBURG
LIBERTY PARKING LOT
RFP No. PPP 22-001
I. OVERVIEW
The Town of Leesburg, Virginia (“Town”), in this Request for Proposal (“RFP”), hereby
solicits submission of proposals for the redevelopment of 2.03 acres of land in historic
downtown Leesburg in a manner consistent with expanding economic and tourism opportunities
in Downtown Leesburg. The Town envisions a development of excellent design and quality
providing the historic town core with additional vitality while respecting and reflecting the
heritage of the downtown. Proposals may be to develop the parcel alone, or to include the parcel
in an assemblage of land to be developed. The parcel benefits from close proximity to South
King Street, Loudoun Street, Georgetown Park, and the highly traveled and widely enjoyed
Washington & Old Dominion Regional Trail.
The parcel is zoned as B-1, Community (Downtown) Business District. It is established
in recognition of the mixed-use core area as the center of Leesburg’s employment, tourism,
restaurants, breweries, and specialty commercial activity. The small to medium size, pedestrian-
oriented retail uses that attract shoppers and tourists from throughout the region are considered
primary uses. Residential uses, typically above the ground floor of retail uses, are also
considered primary uses within the B-1 District. Some office, financial, and personal service uses
are allowed as secondary uses in the B-1 District. The district is generally appropriate for
application in the core area, designated in the Town Plan for “Downtown” development. It is
intended that this area remain a viable mixed-use core, and that the goals of the H-1 Overlay
District be promoted and enhanced throughout the B-1 District.
The Town envisions selling the parcel in fee to a developer or developers, who would
redevelop the parcel for commercial uses. The redevelopment should be consistent with the
Town's vision as identified in the proposed Legacy Leesburg Town Plan, and should include
public shared parking. The Town would strongly prefer that the public shared parking be funded
from the proceeds of the Town's property although it will consider alternative proposals. The
Town is willing to consider a long-term lease of the parcel and financing, but the simpler
approach of sale of the parcels in fee is preferred . The Town will also consider donation of the
land in exchange for public parking spaces, and building/storage space for the Public Works
Department.
This RFP is being issued pursuant to Virginia's Public-Private Education Facilities and
Infrastructure Act of 2002, Va. Code §56-575.1, et seq. ("PPEA"), and other law. The PPEA
allows public entities in Virginia to enter into public-private partnerships in order to develop a
47
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 2 of 22
wide range of facilities under the “qualifying projects” definition in the PPEA. The Town
adopted revised PPEA implementing guidelines on December 11, 2018 (the "Guidelines").
Procurements under the PPEA are not subject to the Virginia Public Procurement Act ("VPPA"),
except as the PPEA and Guidelines indicate, and PPEA procurements may be conducted using
procedures consistent with those used for competitive negotiation of nonprofessional services
under the VPPA. The Town has determined to use such competitive negotiation procedures in
this PPEA procurement. The Town's goal in this procurement is to enter into an agreement under
the PPEA and other law with the proposer who is fully qualified and best suited to provide the
Town the best project.
To follow is a general description of the proposal process (Part II), a description of the
property and the project (Part III), the evaluation factors to be used to evaluate proposals (Part
IV), terms and conditions of this RFP and of any resulting agreement (Parts V and VI),
instructions on proposal submission (Part VII), a list of references (Part VIII), and a list of
appendices, which include forms that proposers must complete and submit with their proposals.
A projected timeline for this procurement is in Appendix E to this RFP.
II. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL, EVALUATION,
AND SELECTION PROCESS
The Town contemplates that this procurement will be a two-step process:
Step 1: Initial Conceptual Phase. Proposers will submit initial proposals, the contents of
which are described in Part VII(B) of this RFP. In general terms, initial proposals for this
procurement should be concerned primarily with the proposer's capabilities and qualifications for
a project of this nature, proposed development plans and strategies to implement the project, and
demonstration of a thorough understanding of the Town's needs, requirements, and vision as they
relate to this project. Proposers should carefully follow all the instructions in this RFP and
respond only in a format that corresponds to that outlined in Part VII(B) of this RFP.
A Town committee will evaluate proposals in accordance with the applicable evaluation
factors in Part IV of this RFP. The evaluation committee may ask proposers, individually or
collectively, for clarifications or further information, may check references and other
information, may meet individually with one or more of the proposers, at its discretion, and may
request oral presentations from one or more proposers. Alternately, the Town may base its
evaluations on the proposals as submitted. The public portion of the proposals will be posted on
the Town of Leesburg website, which will allow citizens to provide comments. The Town
Council, after considering the recommendations of the evaluation committee and public
comment, may select a limited number (likely two, and not more than three) of proposers who
are fully qualified, capable, and best suited in the Town’s discretion to submit a detailed proposal
that best meets the Town's needs. Selected proposers will be invited to submit detailed proposals
by a specified deadline. However, the Town may, in its discretion, following Step 1, determine
that only one proposer is qualified or that one proposer is clearly more highly qualified than the
others and proceed directly to negotiate with that proposer.
48
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 3 of 22
Step 2: Detailed Phase. Selected proposers will be invited to submit detailed-phase
proposals. These detailed proposals will be reviewed by the Town’s evaluation committee, which
may request additional information or clarifications if and as deemed necessary. The detailed
proposal review will likely include an interview with the proposers' key team members and
principals by the evaluation committee. The Town will require the proposers to make a
presentation of their proposal to the public and will accept public comment on the proposals and
presentations. After considering recommendations by the evaluation committee and public
comment, the Town Council may, in its discretion, choose to enter into negotiations with one,
two or more than two proposers. However, the Town Council may, in its discretion, determine
that only one proposer is fully qualified or that one proposer is clearly more highly qualified and
proceed directly to negotiate with that proposer. Based upon negotiations, the Town Council will
then decide if proceeding with an agreement serves the public interest, and may enter into such
an agreement. The Town Council will hold a public hearing on proposals at least thirty days
prior to entry into any agreement with a proposer.
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE PROJECT
The Town is providing the following for information purposes only and does not warrant
its accuracy or completeness:
A. Location and Physical Description
1. The land is generally described as located between Wirt Street SW to the east, the
southern end of Liberty Street SW to the west and north of the property known as
the W&OD Regional Trail (the owner of which is the Northern Virginia Parks
Authority (NOVA)), and south of Royal Street SW.
2. The land is more specially described as Parcel ID no. 231374615000. The
recorded address for the property is 204 Liberty Street SW.
B. Site Background
1. History of Site. The site sits within a core block of Leesburg’s traditional
downtown. Between 1920 and 1970, this lot was the site of the former Leesburg
Town Dump. The 2003 DEQ report for the Liberty Lot is available for review.
Today the site is currently being utilized as a parking area for both the general
public and Town/County vehicles. The site also includes a satellite operation for
Public Works.
2. Historic Preservation. Beginning with the creation of the Old and Historic District
in 1963, the Town of Leesburg has been committed to the identification,
documentation, and preservation of historic resources throughout the town for
more than 50 years. The Board of Architectural Review (“BAR”) and design
review program for the H-1 and Gateway Overlay Districts and proffered H-2
49
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 4 of 22
Overlay Districts are the primary activity of the Historic Preservation Section of
the Planning & Zoning Department.
In the Old and Historic District, any new construction, alterations of existing
construction, or demolition of existing construction require review and approval
by the BAR. The seven-member board reviews, among other things, the
architectural form, massing, scale, materials, fenestration, colors and other
exterior features of proposed buildings to determine the appropriateness of
proposed development in accordance with the adopted Old and Historic District
Design Guidelines.
The BAR will review those structures and associated site improvements proposed
for the Liberty Lot. Their determination of appropriateness will be based upon the
Town’s Old and Historic District Design Guidelines. Formal application to the
BAR should coincide with the final stages of site plan review. Applicants are
encouraged to submit drawings, descriptions, materials and similar information to
the Preservation Planner (which may include the opportunity for a pre-application
meeting with the BAR) prior to formal application submittal.
3. Comprehensive Planning Activities. For more than 250 years, Leesburg residents
and elected officials have overseen the development of their community. From a
rural hamlet to the seat of one of the fastest growing counties in the country,
Leesburg has seen many changes. Through these many years of growth and
prosperity, Leesburg has managed to provide a strong quality of life and maintain
its identity as a historic Town poised for the future. The current Town Plan was
formally adopted by the Leesburg Town Council in 2012
(https://www.leesburgva.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/12822/63748483402
8770000). In 2019, the Town launched a new project, Legacy Leesburg. A
comprehensive review of the Town Plan that has continued into 2022.
4. Environmental Assessments. An environmental assessment of the site was
prepared in 2003 by the Virginia State Department of Environmental Quality.
The report is available by request and can be sent electronically for the
convenience of proposers.
5. Maps/Plats. See Appendices C and D.
6. Zoning. Section 6.3 as well as the H-1 Overlay District of the Town of Leesburg
Zoning Ordinance (2003 as amended) control the development of the property.
7. Geotechnical. N/A
C. Project Requirements
50
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 5 of 22
The Town expects the project to be mainly commercial uses on street level, but
can include residential uses above. Cultural opportunities and hospitality uses
may be considered which are not currently provided in downtown Leesburg.
Ideally, storefronts will be small to medium size, pedestrian-oriented that attract
shoppers and tourists from throughout the region. Although the Town does not
require the project to provide workforce or affordable housing within the
development, any such proposal will to do so will be considered more favorably.
The inclusion of public art opportunities will also be considered favorably.
a. Height. The building height limitation for the site is currently 40 feet.
b. Access. All proposals must include a description for addressing
required parking for any project. Pedestrian access is required through
the site in both the east/west and north/south directions. Shared use
areas (pedestrian and vehicular) should be of alternative paving
materials such as brick or decorative paver. Bollards and paving
markings should provide appropriate cues to pedestrians, cyclists and
vehicles where awareness is necessary. Furthermore, shared use areas
must have pedestrian zones per ADA guidelines
2. Architectural Standards & Architectural and Material Quality Expected. The
architectural standards are described and illustrated within the Old and Historic
District Design Guidelines. The use of masonry, such as brick, stone, or stucco, is
one of the most appropriate materials for new buildings. Structures shall not have
stairwells open to the exterior. The architecture of the proposal should reflect the
architectural character of the Old and Historic District and should complement
and enhance the architecture of Liberty Street in accordance with the adopted Old
and Historic District Design Guidelines. The scale of larger structures should be
broken into smaller units to reflect the scale of the downtown’s older commercial
structures. Vertical and horizontal articulation is necessary on all sides of any
proposed building. Changes in plane should be significant enough to create a
sense of depth and shadow. Buildings should follow classical architectural
principles with a tri-partite design (meaning that they have a defined base, middle
and top)
Ground floor ceiling heights are preferred to be approximately 17-20 feet.
The exterior elevations of the building, including materials and other site features
such as fences, walls, and hardscaping, shall be subject to review and approval by
the BAR.
The designated open spaces shall incorporate soft and hard surfaces and shall be
designed by a registered landscape architect based upon the guidance provided
within both sets of proffers and in concert with the architectural character of the
51
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 6 of 22
Historic District as established in the Old and Historic District Design Guidelines.
Hardscaping is treated as a structure which is the purview of the BAR.
3. Sustainability. The Town is committed to a sustainable development and requires
that this project be developed to in a manner consistent with LEED certification
under the appropriate LEED rating system or equivalent certification. All
Chesapeake Bay stormwater requirements are the responsibility of the proposer.
In addition to other possible stormwater quality and quantity measures, planting
areas along the streetscapes may incorporate stormwater facilities provided they
are of high aesthetic quality and the responsibility of the adjacent development to
maintain. Appropriate agreements regarding responsibility and enforcement will
be required during the site plan process.
4. Zoning. This lot is subject to Town of Leesburg Zoning Ordinance (2003 as
amended). The process, following final selection, will consist of legislative
approvals, if necessary and standard site plan procedures and processing, as well
as BAR review and determination. Generally, site plan approval can be
accomplished within 9 – 12 months and BAR review and approval can be
completed in approximately 3-4 months dependent upon the responsiveness of the
applicant and the applicant’s consultants.
5. Board of Architectural Review. No construction or demolition can commence
prior to application to, and review and determination of appropriateness by the
BAR. The seven-member board reviews the exterior elevations of any new
building for consistency with the Old and Historic District Design Guidelines
including (but not limited to) the architectural massing, form, scale, materials,
fenestration, colors and other exterior features of proposed buildings to determine
the appropriateness of proposed development.
The BAR will review those structures proposed for the property as well as
demolition of any existing structures. Their determination of appropriateness will
be based upon the Old and Historic District Design Guidelines.
6. Parking Requirements.
a. Parking Spaces. The Town will require a fee interest in a number of
parking spaces, the total of which will depend on the total amount of
development square footage. It is required that the proposer will pay for
all required nonresidential parking, which will remain open to the public
and not assigned to a specific business.
b. Public-Shared Parking Program. Some component of the parking
must not be assigned and available to all patrons and residents in
downtown Leesburg.
52
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 7 of 22
7. Water Systems. Town of Leesburg.
8. Sanitary Sewer Systems. Town of Leesburg.
9. Electrical Power and Underground Gas. Dominion Virginia Power and
Washington Gas.
10. Telecommunications. Verizon and Comcast.
11. Streetscape Improvements Along Public Rights-of-Way. The required streetscape
along public rights-of-way is set forth in the Town’s streetscape guidelines. All
plantings shall be done by the proposer with the placement, species, variety, and
size being per the Town’s adopted streetscape guidelines, the approved proffers
and with the approval of the Zoning Administrator.
12. Internal Streetscapes. Internal streets or drives (excluding parking areas within
parking lots or parking structures) shall provide pedestrian sidewalks or in the
case of shared use space pedestrian safe areas meeting ADA guidelines. All
pedestrian areas and shared use spaces shall be designed with high quality and
durable decorative surface treatments. Sidewalks or shared use spaces shall be
provided between all parking areas and structures and adjacent buildings and
public rights-of-way. Any hardscaping, including walkways, within the OHD
requires review and approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness by the
Preservation Planner or BAR.
IV. FACTORS TO BE USED IN EVALUATING PROPOSALS
The Town plans to evaluate the proposals using Section 8 of the Guidelines and the
following criteria:
A. The proposal falls under the “qualifying projects” definition in the PPEA.
B. The suitability and quality of the redevelopment proposed and how it complements
the established historic character of the Town and meets the needs of the community.
C. The strength and definiteness of agreements and guarantees that all development and
construction promised will in fact occur and in a timely manner, including without
limitation, the proposer’s having leases, contracts, or letters of intent in place with
reputable and desirable tenants or purchasers of the developed property.
D. The benefit to the Town of the transaction considering all the factors in Section 7.1 of
the Guidelines.
53
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 8 of 22
E. The capabilities and prior experience of the proposer and its team with similar
projects.
F. The proposer's understanding of the Town's needs, requirements and vision as they
relate to this project and its accommodation of them in its proposal.
G. The -long-term economic, cultural, and tourism viability, sustainability and
contribution of the project to the Town's quality of life.
H. The feasibility of the strategies for the implementation of the proposed project.
I. An assessment of the proposal for LEED certification under the appropriate LEED
rating system or equivalent certification, and at what level of certification.
V. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
The following terms and conditions apply to this Request for Proposals, and by
submitting its proposal, the proposer agrees to them without exception:
A. Neither this Request for Proposals nor the Town's consideration of any proposal shall
create any contractual obligation, expressed or implied, by the Town to any proposer,
or any other obligation by the Town to any proposer. The Town makes no promise,
expressed or implied, regarding whether it will enter into an agreement with any
proposer or regarding the manner in which it will consider proposals. The Town will
only be bound by the terms of any agreement into which it enters should it choose to
enter into any such agreement.
B. The Town will not be responsible for any expenses incurred by a proposer in
preparing and submitting a proposal or in engaging in oral presentations, discussions,
or negotiations with the Town.
C. Proposers who submit a proposal in response to this RFP may be required to make an
oral presentation or oral presentations of their proposal in the Town of Leesburg,
Virginia, at their own expense. The Town may request the presence of proposers'
representatives from their teams at these presentations. The Town will schedule the
time and location for these presentations. By submitting its proposal, the proposer
agrees to make these representatives reasonably available in the Town.
D. The Town reserves the right to waive any informalities with respect to any proposal
submitted in response to this RFP.
54
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 9 of 22
E. The Town reserves the right to accept or reject any and all proposals received by
reason of this request, in whole or in part, and to negotiate separately in any manner
necessary to serve the best interests of the Town.
F. Generally, proposal documents submitted to public bodies, such as ones submitted to
the Town by private entities in response to this RFP, are subject to the Virginia
Freedom of Information Act ("VFOIA"). Such documents are releasable if requested,
except to the extent that they relate to (i) confidential proprietary information
submitted to the responsible public entity under a promise of confidentiality or (ii)
memoranda, working papers or other records related to proposals if making public
such records would adversely affect the financial interest of the public or private
entity or the bargaining position of either party. In order for proposers to exclude
confidential proprietary information from public release, proposers must make a
written request to the Town that (i) invokes such exclusion upon submission of the
data or other materials for which protection from disclosure is sought, (ii) identifies
with specificity the data or other materials for which protection is sought, and (iii)
states the reasons why protection is necessary. The proposer must also clearly mark
each page of information for which protection is sought with the legend-
"Confidential – Not Releasable under VFOIA."
G. The Town reserves the right to reject any and all proposals without explanation.
H. The provisions of Va. Code § 2.2-4310 are applicable to this RFP and any
procurement done pursuant to it by virtue of the PPEA and the Guidelines. The Town
will not discriminate against a proposer because of race, religion, color, sex, national
origin, age, disability, or any other basis prohibited by state law relating to
discrimination in employment.
I. Proposers shall comply with, and be bound by, the Town's Guidelines.
VI. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF RESULTING AGREEMENT
The Agreement entered into with the successful proposer (the "developer" for purposes of
the agreement) shall provide for those items specified in the PPEA and in the Guidelines, as well
as such additional terms and conditions as deemed prudent by the Town.
If the proposer is a limited liability company, a corporation, a limited partnership, or
another entity that affords limited liability to any members, partners, etc., and is relying upon
financial statements or performance of members, affiliates, limited partners or others to show its
responsibility, past performance, or qualifications, the proposer will be expected to have such
members, etc., provide guarantees or to provide other adequate assurances of performance of all
obligations under the agreement.
VII. INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS ON PROPOSAL SUBMISSION
55
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 10 of 22
A. General (Applicable to both Initial and Detailed Proposals).
1. Submittal of Proposals.
In order to be considered:
a. Proposals must be signed in ink by an authorized representative of
the proposer, with an original, two hard-copies, and one electronic
copy provided to the Town at the location designated in this RFP.
b. Proposals must be complete when submitted, including without
limitation, a completed cover sheet (Appendix A) and a completed
list of references (Appendix B).
c. Submit initial proposals to the Town Manager. Proposals must be
received no later than May 31, 2022. Requests for extensions of this
date will not be granted except by written amendment to the RFP
applicable to all prospective proposers. Submission dates/times for
detailed proposal(s) and draft agreement(s) from selected proposers
advanced to detailed proposal evaluation and the negotiation of an
agreement will be established at a later time by the Town. However,
Appendix E provides an expected timeline for these activities.
d. Proposals are to be submitted in a sealed envelope with the words
"PPEA Proposal Enclosed" on the face of the envelope. The lower
left corner of the face of the envelope shall indicate the RFP
number, the time and date of the RFP opening, the title of the
proposal, and the proposer's name.
e. Proposals or any amendments to proposals received by the Town
after the closing date will not be considered. Actual receipt by the
Town and not the mailing or sending date shall control.
2. Brevity, clarity, and responsiveness in proposals are encouraged. The inclusion of
extraneous information not pertinent to the basic purpose of the RFP is
discouraged.
3. In the event a potential proposer would like to physically tour the site prior to the
proposal deadline, they may request a site tour through Economic Development
Director Russell Seymour, whose contact information is set forth in the
subsequent paragraph.
56
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 11 of 22
4. Proposers are encouraged to carefully examine the RFP for discrepancies, errors,
omissions or ambiguities. Any questions concerning the requirements of the RFP
should be submitted by e-mail by May 9, 2022 and directed to:
Russell Seymour, Economic Development Director
Town of Leesburg
25 W Market St, Leesburg, VA 20176
rseymour@leesburgva.gov
(703) 771-6530.
5. The Town will attempt to review the written questions and requests for
clarification. To the extent the Town decides to respond to such questions and
requests for clarification, any and all responses and any supplemental instructions
will be in the form of written addenda to this RFP which, if issued, will be posted
on www.leesburgva.gov. All addenda shall become part of the RFP.
6. NO CONTACT POLICY: No proposers shall initiate or otherwise have contact
related to the solicitation with any Town representative or employee, other than
Russell Seymour, Economic Development Director or Kaj Dentler, Town
Manager. Any contact initiated by a proposer with any Town representative, other
than the Economic Development Director or the Town Manager, concerning this
solicitation is prohibited and may cause the disqualification of the proposer from
this procurement process. No attempt shall be made by any proposer to contact
members of the evaluation committee, any Town representative or employee,
other than the Economic Development Director or the Town Manager.
7. No person or firm that is suspended or debarred from participation in Town
procurement, conducting business or submitting proposals on contracts by any
other local government, any agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia
(“Commonwealth”) or the federal government, or any other governmental entity,
shall be eligible to submit a Proposal pursuant to this RFP. If a proposer
experiences a material change in its debarment status after a proposal is submitted
and prior to the award of an agreement for the project, the proposer shall notify
the Town of the change in writing at the time the change occurs or as soon
thereafter as is reasonably practicable.
8. Any proposer organized or authorized to transact business in Virginia pursuant to
Title 13.1 or Title 50 of the Code of Virginia shall include in its proposal the
identification number issued to it by the Virginia State Corporation Commission.
Any proposer that is not required to have authorization to transact business in the
Commonwealth as a foreign business entity under Title 13.1 or Title 50 or as
otherwise required by law shall include in its proposal a statement describing why
the bidder or offeror is not required to be so authorized.
57
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 12 of 22
9. The provisions contained in Article 6, Chapter 43 (Ethics in Public Contracting)
of the Virginia Public Procurement Act as set forth in the Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended, shall be applicable to this RFP and agreement entered into by
the Town.
By submitting a proposal, all proposers certify that their bids are made without
collusion or fraud and they have not offered or received any kickbacks or
inducements from any other proposer, supplier, manufacturer or subcontractor in
connection with their proposal, and that they have not conferred on any public
employee having official responsibility for this RFP any payment, loan,
subscription, advance, deposit of money, services or anything of more than
nominal value, present or promised, unless consideration of substantially equal or
greater value was exchanged.
B. Instructions for Initial Proposals.
1. A proposer’s initial (conceptual-phase) proposal shall contain the following
information:
a. Completed copy of Appendix A to this RFP;
b. Short executive summary;
c. Table of contents; and
d. Part A. Background and Firm/Team Qualifications: Provide background and
general qualifications for the firm and team members describing capability
and credentials for the project. Cite specific information about the firm, the
firm's reputation, knowledge and working experience in the regional market,
similar types of endeavors, and successes. Demonstrate organizational
strength and capacity. Demonstrate experience with funding mechanisms
utilized by Virginia public entities, developers, and development partnerships.
Provide the following information about background, capabilities,
qualifications and experience.1
i. The structure of the proposer. Identify the legal structure of the proposer,
the proposer's organizational structure for the project, and the proposer's
management approach. Identify the senior principal who will execute the
agreement on behalf of the proposer.
ii. The proposer's qualifications and the qualifications of key personnel
proposed to be involved in the project.
a) Describe the experience of the entities making the proposal, the key
principals and project managers involved in the proposed project
including experience with projects of comparable size and complexity,
1 If the private entity that would be signing any Agreement would be a corporation, limited liability company,
limited partnership, or an entity formed especially for the project, and if the proposer is relying at all on the past
experience, name, or financial statements of any other person or entity to show the private entities’ capabilities and
responsibility, state what guaranty of performance will be provided by such other persons or entities.
58
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 13 of 22
including prior experience bringing similar projects to completion on
budget and in compliance with design, land use, service and other
standards. Include experience with public-private developments.
b) Describe past safety performance and current safety capabilities.
c) Describe the past technical performance history on recent projects of
comparable size and complexity, including disclosure of any legal
claims relating to such projects. Describe the length of time in
business, business experience, public sector experience, and other
engagements. Include the identity of any firms that will provide
design, construction and completion guarantees and warranties, and a
description of such guarantees and warranties.
iii. Provide the names, prior experience, addresses, telephone numbers and e-
mail addresses of persons within the firm or who will be directly involved
in the project or who may be contacted for further information.
iv. Provide the current or most recent financial statements of the firm (audited
financial statements to the extent available), and if the firm is a joint
venture, limited liability company, partnership or entity formed
specifically for this project, provide financial statements (audited if
available) for the firm’s principal venturers, members, partners, or
stockholders that show that the firm or its constituents have appropriate
financial resources and operating histories for the project.
v. Identify any persons known to the proposer who would be obligated to
disqualify themselves from participation in any transaction arising from or
in connection to the project pursuant to The Virginia State and Local
Government Conflict of Interest Act, Chapter 31 (Va. Code § 2.2-3100, et
seq.).
vi. Identify the proposed plan for obtaining sufficient numbers of qualified
workers in all trades or crafts required for the project.
vii. For each firm or major subcontractor that will perform construction and/or
design activities, provide an accurately completed Commonwealth of
Virginia Department of General Services (DGS) Form 30-168.
viii. If known, a list of proposed subcontractors?
e. Part B. Proposed Redevelopment and Project Characteristics: Outline
proposer's proposed redevelopment and strategies for implementing the
project. The redevelopment proposed should be consistent with the Town's
vision. The proposal must utilize strategies that reflect an understanding of the
project background, challenges, and parameters as described in Part III of this
RFP. The outline of proposed development characteristics should include:
i. A description of the project, including the conceptual design. Describe the
proposed project in sufficient detail so that type and intent of the project,
the location, and the communities that may be affected are clearly
identified.
59
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 14 of 22
ii. Description of any work to be performed by the town or any other public
entity.
iii. A list of all federal, state and local permits and approvals required for the
project and a schedule for obtaining such permits and approvals.
iv. Description of any anticipated adverse social, economic, environmental
and transportation impacts of the project measured against the Town’s,
County’s or other affected jurisdiction’s comprehensive land use plan and
applicable ordinances and design standards. Specify the strategies or
actions to mitigate known impacts of the project. Indicate if an
environmental and archaeological assessment has been completed.
v. Description of the projected positive social, economic, environmental and
transportation impacts of the project measured against the town’s,
County’s or other affected jurisdiction’s comprehensive land use plan and
applicable ordinances and design standards.
vi. The proposed schedule for the work on the project, including sufficient
time for the town’s review and the estimated time for completion.
vii. Contingency plans for addressing public needs in the event that all or
some of the project is not completed according to projected schedule.
viii. The allocation of risk and liability, and assurances for timely completion
of the project.
ix. The assumptions related to ownership, legal liability, law enforcement and
operation of the project and the existence of any restrictions on the town’s
use of the project.
x. Information relative to phased openings of the proposed project.
xi. Description of any architectural, building, engineering, or other applicable
standards that the proposed project will meet.
f. Part C. Unique Capabilities: Describe any unique capabilities, experience,
tools, or perspective that the proposer has related to the project. This section
may expand on items presented in any of the previous sections or introduce
new information related to the candidate firm or team
g. Part D. Project Financing: Provide a preliminary estimate and estimating
methodology of the cost of the work by phase, segment (e.g., design,
construction, and operation), or both, that includes:
i. A plan for the development, financing and operation of the project
showing the anticipated schedule on which funds will be required.
Describe the anticipated costs of and proposed sources and uses for such
funds, including any anticipated debt service costs. The operational plan
should include appropriate staffing levels and associated costs based upon
the town’s adopted operational standards. Include any supporting due
diligence studies, analyses, or reports.
ii. A list and discussion of assumptions underlying all major elements of the
plan. Assumptions should include all fees associated with financing given
the recommended financing approach, including but not limited to,
60
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 15 of 22
underwriter’s discount, placement agent, legal, rating agency, consultants,
feasibility study and other related fees. A complete discussion or interest
rate assumptions should be included given current market conditions. Any
ongoing operational fees should also be disclosed, as well as any
assumptions with regard to increases in such fees and escalator provision
to be required in the Agreement.
iii. Description of the risk factors and methods for dealing with these factors.
Describe methods and remedies associated with any financial default.
iv. List any local, state or federal resources that the proposer contemplates
requesting for the project along with an anticipated schedule of resource
requirements. Describe the total commitment, if any, expected from
governmental sources and the timing of any anticipated commitment, both
one-time and on- going.
v. Description of the underlying support and commitment required by the
town under your recommended plan of finance. Include your expectation
with regard to the town providing its general obligation or moral
obligation backing.
vi. List any dedicated revenue, source or proposed debt or equity investment
on behalf of the private entity submitting the proposal.
vii. Analysis of the public value of the project and the project’s impact on the
tax base of the Town as follows: (a) identification of the property taxes,
sales taxes, amount of fees and contributions and other local public
income within the Town’s current defined tax and fee schedule, (b)
identification of the value of public facilities to be derived from the
project, and (c) identification of any other quantifiable economic benefits
to the Town to be derived from the project.
h. Part E. Project Benefit and Compatibility: Identify community benefits,
including the economic impact the project will have on the local community
in terms of amount of tax revenue to be generated for the town or other
affected jurisdiction, the number jobs generated for area residents and level of
pay and fringe benefits of such jobs, and the number and value of subcontracts
generated for area subcontractors. Also include:
i. Any anticipated public support, as well as any anticipated government
support (including that in any affected jurisdiction), for the project.
ii. Explanation of the strategy and plans, including the anticipated timeline
that will be carried out to involve and inform the general public, business
community, and governmental agencies in areas affected by the project.
iii. any anticipated significant benefits to the community, including
anticipated benefits to the economic, social, environmental, transportation,
Legacy Leesburg, etc., and whether the project is critical to attracting or
maintaining competitive industries and businesses to the town or other
affected jurisdiction.
61
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 16 of 22
iv. Description of the project’s compatibility with Legacy Leesburg
(including related environmental, land use and facility standards
ordinances, where applicable), infrastructure development plans,
transportation plans, the capital improvements plan and capital budget, or
other government spending plan.
Note: The projection of future imputed tax revenues to mitigate current capital
outlay and/or future debt service outlay by the Town will be assessed
commensurate with the risks associated with the actual realization of such
benefits and may be discounted or modified by the Town in order to permit
comparison of like factors among alternative proposals. The evaluation of
proposals will include the consideration of overall cost and purchase price offered
to the Town and a realistic assessment of net benefits to be derived from the
project related to expanding the economic and tourism opportunities for
Downtown Leesburg. In general, proposals that demonstrate the least net
cost/most net profit with the greatest benefit, will receive more favorable
consideration.
2. Proposals should be tabbed and organized along the categories of information
indicated in Part VII B.1 of this RFP to allow easy review.
C. Instructions for Detailed Proposals. The Town will issue instructions for detailed-
phase proposals at a later time to those proposers invited to submit such proposals.
The Town currently expects that it will issue its invitations and instructions on or
about July 1, 2022. The Town may require an earnest money deposit to the Town
from proposers proceeding to detailed proposals, which would be refunded to
unsuccessful proposers and applied to the consideration to be paid by the successful
proposer.
VIII. LIST OF APPENDICES TO RFP
A. Appendix A – Proposal Submission Cover Sheet Form
B. Appendix B – References Format
C. Appendix C – Property Location Map
D. Appendix D – Surveys
E. Appendix E – Projected Timeline for Procurement
F. Appendix F – Town of Leesburg Public/Private Partnership Guidelines
62
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 17 of 22
Appendix A
Leesburg Liberty Parking Lot Redevelopment Project
Solicitation (Request for Proposals) No. RFP PPP 22-001
Proposer’s Name: _________________________________________
_________________________________________
Address: Telephone No.: _________________________
__________________________________ Email: _________________________________
__________________________________ VA SCC Business Registration #: ___________
If the proposer does not have a Virginia SCC Business Registration number, explain why the
proposer is not required to be so authorized under Title 13.1 or Title 50 of the Code of Virginia:
______________________________________________________________________________
Proposer's or Proposer's Contractor's Virginia Class A General Contractor's License Number (if
applicable): ____________________________________________
Proposer's or Proposer's Architect's and Engineer's Virginia Registration Numbers (if
applicable): ____________________________________________
I hereby swear and affirm I have authority to submit this proposal on behalf of the
proposer whose name appears above, that I am a principal of the proposer, that the proposer
hereby agrees to all of the terms and conditions in the Town's solicitation for this procurement
and in the Town's December 11, 2018 PPEA Guidelines, that neither the proposer nor any
member of its team or their principals is currently suspended or debarred from public contracting
by any federal, state or local government entity, that I have taken reasonable steps to ascertain
the accuracy of all the information contained in this proposal and this certification, and that the
information in this proposal and certification is accurate to the best of my knowledge or
information and belief.
_____________________________________
Signature
_____________________________________
Printed Name
_____________________________________
Title (Principal of Proposer)
63
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 18 of 22
Commonwealth of Virginia
County/City of ___________
On _________, 2022, ___________________________, (same name as above) appeared before
me, and after satisfying me of his/her identity and after being placed under oath, swore to the
truthfulness of the above statement.
Notary Public: ____________________________
My commission expires: ____________________
The proposer acknowledges receipt of the following addenda:
Addendum No. ____ Dated ___________
Addendum No. ____ Dated ___________
Addendum No. ____ Dated ___________
Addendum No. ____ Dated ___________
64
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 19 of 22
APPENDIX B
References
Name Organization Address Telephone Number E-mail
65
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 20 of 22
Appendix C
Map of Parcel
Leesburg Liberty Parking Lot Redevelopment Project
66
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 21 of 22
Appendix D
Plat of Parcel
Leesburg Liberty Parking Lot Redevelopment Project
67
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia Page 22 of 22
Appendix E
Leesburg Liberty Parking Lot Redevelopment Project
Proposed RFP Time Line
April 4, 2022 – Issuance of RFP
May 31, 2022 – Responses Due
June-July 2022 – Staff Review and Analysis of Responses
August 8, 2022 – Presentation of Staff Analysis to Town Council
September 13, 2022 – Decision on Merits (May be selection of a prevailing submission,
request for more detailed submission(s) or decision not to move forward)
68
Item b.
Town of Leesburg, Virginia
Guidelines for
Implementation of the
Public-Private Education Facilities and
Infrastructure Act of 2002, as amended
December 11, 2018
Appendix F
69
Item b.
-i-
Table of Contents
1. Guideline’s Applicability ........................................................................................1
2. Overview .................................................................................................................1
3. Eligible Projects ......................................................................................................2
4. General Provisions ..................................................................................................3
4.1 Proposal Submission ...................................................................................3
4.2 Affected Jurisdictions .................................................................................3
4.3 Proposal Review Fees .................................................................................4
4.4 Virginia Freedom of Information Act .........................................................5
4.5 Use of Public Funds ....................................................................................7
4.6 Applicability of Other Laws .......................................................................8
5. Solicited Bids/Proposals .........................................................................................8
6. Unsolicited Proposals ............................................................................................10
6.1 Decision to Accept and Consider Unsolicited Proposal; Notice ...............10
6.2 Competing Proposals ................................................................................12
6.3 Availability of Proposals for Public Inspection ........................................12
6.4 Initial Review at the Conceptual Stage .....................................................12
6.5 Receipt of Public Comments/Hearings .....................................................13
7. Proposal Preparation and Submission ...................................................................13
7.1 Proposal Content and Format for Submissions at the Conceptual
Stage ..........................................................................................................13
7.2 Proposal Content and Format for Submissions at the Detailed
Stage ..........................................................................................................18
8. Proposal Evaluation And Selection Criteria .........................................................20
8.1 Manner of Evaluation and Use of Outside Professionals .........................20
70
Item b.
-ii-
8.2 Evaluation Criteria ....................................................................................20
8.3 Qualifications and Experience ..................................................................20
8.4 Project Characteristics ...............................................................................21
8.5 Project Financing ......................................................................................22
8.6 Project Benefit and Compatibility ............................................................22
9. Agreement .............................................................................................................23
10. Adoption of Certain Portions of the Virginia Public Procurement Act
and Use of Competitive Negotiation and Competitive Sealed Bidding
Procedures. ............................................................................................................25
11. Terms and Conditions on Proposal Submission ...................................................26
12. Disputes, Claims, and Other Matters Arising Under or Relating to any
Agreement .............................................................................................................27
13. Protests of PPEA Procurements ............................................................................29
14. Timelines for Selecting Proposals and Negotiating Agreements and
Accelerated Timelines for Priority Qualifying Facilities ......................................30
15. Proposers’ Agreement to Terms and Conditions of This Policy ..........................30
71
Item b.
1. Guideline’s Applicability
1.1 The Town of Leesburg, Virginia, (“town”) has adopted these guidelines
to implement the Public-Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure
Act of 2002, Va. Code §§ 56-575.1, et seq., as amended (“PPEA”).
These Guidelines apply to all procurements under the PPEA conducted
after the date of their adoption where the town is the “responsible
public entity” within the meaning of Virginia Code §56-575.1.
1.2 The town manager and all employees of the town shall follow the PPEA
and these guidelines in any PPEA procurement in which they are involved.
1.3 Any reference in these guidelines to actions to be taken by the “town”,
unless the reference is specifically to the “town council”, includes actions
by the town manager. The town manager may delegate his or her duties
under these guidelines to members of town staff.
1.4 Any reference in these guidelines to “Agreement” means an agreement
entered into between the town and a private entity pursuant to the PPEA
and these guidelines.
2. Overview
2.1 The PPEA grants “responsible public entities” the authority to enter into
public-private partnerships with private entities for the development of
certain “qualifying projects” if the public entity determines, under criteria
established by the PPEA, that such a project serves the public purpose.
PPEA proposals are also subject to review by any “affected local
jurisdiction” in which the “qualifying project” will be located.
2.2 Proposals for qualifying projects may either be solicited or unsolicited.
PPEA procurements typically will be conducted as a two-phase process,
first involving submission and evaluation of conceptual-phase proposals
resulting in selection of certain proposers to submit detailed-phase
proposals, and then submission and evaluation of detailed-phase
proposals. If the purposes and requirements of the PPEA are met and the
town council so elects, in its discretion, it will then select a detailed-phase
proposal or proposals and enter into an “Agreement” for the project.
2.3 Individually-negotiated Agreements between private entities and the town,
along with the PPEA and these guidelines, ultimately will define the
respective rights and obligations of the parties for PPEA projects
involving the town.
2.4 Although these guidelines provide guidance for application of the PPEA,
the version of the PPEA that is in effect at the time the Agreement is
executed is controlling in the event of any conflict.
72
Item b.
-2
3. Eligible Projects
3.1 A PPEA procurement may only be for a “qualifying project”. The PPEA
contains a broad definition of “qualifying project” that includes for
example;
3.1.1 An education facility, including, but not limited to, a school building
(including any stadium or other facility primarily used for school events),
any functionally-related and subordinate facility and land to a school
building, and any depreciable property provided for use in a school facility
that is operated as part of the public school system or as an institution of
higher education;
3.1.2 A building or facility that meets a public purpose and is developed or
operated by or for any public entity;
3.1.3 Improvements, together with equipment, necessary to enhance public
safety and security of buildings to be principally used by a public entity;
3.1.4 Utility and telecommunications and other communications infrastructure;
3.1.5 A recreational facility;
3.1.6 Technology infrastructure, including, but not limited to,
telecommunications, automated data processing, word processing and
management information systems, and related information, equipment,
goods and services;
3.1.7 Any services designed to increase the productivity or efficiency of the
responsible public entity through the use of technology or other means.
3.1.8 Any technology, equipment, or infrastructure designed to deploy wireless
broadband services to schools, businesses, or residential areas;
3.1.9 Any improvements necessary or desirable to any unimproved locally- or
state-owned real estate; or
3.1.10 Any solid waste management facility as defined in Virginia Code § 10.1-
1400 that produces electric energy derived from solid waste.
3.2 The examples set forth herein are merely provided here for convenience.
The definition of “qualifying project” in the PPEA as of the time in which
the procurement is concluded by execution of an Agreement is controlling,
and the version of the PPEA then in effect should be consulted to
determine what is a “qualifying project.”
73
Item b.
-3
4. General Provisions
4.1 Proposal Submission
4.1.1 A proposal for a PPEA “qualifying project” may be either solicited by the
town or submitted by a private entity on an unsolicited basis. In either
case, the proposal shall be clearly identified as a “PPEA Proposal”. To be
considered, one original and nine (9) copies of any unsolicited
proposal must be submitted, along with the applicable fee, to Town
Manager, Town of Leesburg, 25 West Market St, Leesburg, Virginia
20176. Solicited proposals shall be submitted in accordance with the
instructions in the applicable solicitation.
4.1.2 Proposers will be required to follow a two-part proposal submission
process consisting of a conceptual phase and a detailed phase, as
described herein. For unsolicited proposals, the conceptual phase of the
proposal shall contain the information specified by paragraph 7.1 of
these guidelines, and the detailed phase of the proposal shall contain the
information specified at paragraph 7.2 of these guidelines. For solicited
proposals, the solicitation and subsequent instructions by the town
manager will prescribe the information that proposals shall contain.
4.1.3 Proposals should be prepared simply and economically. Solicited
proposals should contain all information requested by the solicitation
or subsequent instructions by the town manager. Unsolicited proposals
should contain information specified by these guidelines and also
should include a comprehensive scope of work and, if applicable, a
financial plan for the project, containing enough detail to allow an
analysis by the town manager of the feasibility of the proposed project.
Any facility, building, infrastructure, or improvement included in a
proposal shall be identified specifically or conceptually. The town
manager may request, in writing, clarification of any submission.
4.1.4 Representations, information and data supplied in, or in connection
with, proposals play a critical role in the competitive evaluation process
and in the ultimate selection of a proposal by the town. Accordingly, as
part of any proposal, the proposer shall certify that all representations,
information and data provided in support of, or in connection with,
its proposal are true and correct. Such certification shall be made by
authorized individuals who are principals of the proposer and who
have knowledge of the information provided in the proposal. In the
event that material changes occur with respect to any representations,
information or data provided for a proposal, the proposer shall
immediately notify the town manager of the same.
74
Item b.
-4
4.2 Affected Jurisdictions
Under the PPEA, an “affected jurisdiction” is any county, city or town in
which all or a portion of a qualifying project is located. Any private entity
submitting a conceptual or detailed proposal to the town must provide any
affected jurisdiction with a copy of the private entity’s proposal by
certified mail, express delivery or hand delivery. In the case of solicited
proposals, such copy should be submitted to any affected jurisdiction to
ensure its receipt at the time proposals are due to be submitted to the town.
In the case of unsolicited proposals, such copy should be submitted to any
affected jurisdiction to ensure its receipt within 5 business days after
receiving notice from the town that the town has decided to accept the
proposal pursuant to Section 6.1.1 hereof. Any affected jurisdiction shall
have 60 days from the receipt of the proposal to submit written comments
to the town and to indicate whether the proposed qualifying project is
compatible with the jurisdiction’s (i) comprehensive plan, (ii)
infrastructure development plans, and (iii) capital improvements budget or
other government spending plan. The town shall give consideration to
comments received in writing within the 60-day period, and no negative
inference shall be drawn from the absence of comment by an affected
jurisdiction. The town may begin or continue its evaluation of any such
proposal during the 60-day period for affected jurisdictions to submit
comments.
4.3 Proposal Review Fees
4.3.1 The town manager will require payment of a review fee by a private entity
submitting an unsolicited proposal to the town and by any private entities
submitting competing proposals in response to the unsolicited proposal.
Also, if the solicitation so indicates, the town manager may require
payment of a review fee by any private entities submitting solicited
proposals. Review fees are to cover the costs of processing, reviewing,
and evaluating proposals, including the cost to compare a proposal to any
competing proposals. Such costs include, but are not limited to, town staff
time, the cost of any materials or supplies expended, the cost of meals and
travel related to the review process, and the cost of any outside advisors or
consultants, including but not limited to attorneys, design consultants,
construction consultants, and financial advisors used by town in its sole
discretion, to assist in processing, reviewing, or evaluating the proposal.
Such fees generally will be in the amount necessary to completely cover
all of the town’s and town’s costs. All fees and additional fees shall be
submitted in the form of a cashier’s check payable to the Town of
Leesburg, Virginia.
4.3.2 Such fees should be imposed as follows:
4.3.2.1 Initial fee. Unless waived or otherwise directed by the town
manager, payment of an initial fee must accompany the
submission of the proposal to the town in order for the town to
75
Item b.
-5
proceed with its review. The initial fee shall be one and one-
quarter percent (1.25%) of the reasonably anticipated total cost of
the proposed qualifying project, but shall be no less than $2,000
nor more than $25,000, regardless of the anticipated total cost;
provided, however, that the town manager, in his or her
discretion, may specify a different initial fee amount in a Receipt
of Unsolicited PPEA Proposal and Solicitation of Competing
Proposals prepared under paragraph 6.1.2 of this policy or no fee
or a different fee in a solicitation issued under paragraph 5 of this
policy.
4.3.2.2 Additional fees. Additional fees shall be paid by proposers
throughout the processing, review, and evaluation of the
proposals, if and as the town manager requires, based upon costs
in excess of initial review fees assessed that the town manager
reasonably anticipates incurring. The town manager may impose
additional fees on proposers selected for detailed-phase
consideration as a condition of consideration of their detailed-
phase proposals. The town manager will notify the proposers
concerned of the amount of such additional fees. Proposers must
promptly pay such additional fees before the town will continue
to process, review, and evaluate the proposer’s proposal. Unless
otherwise specified by the town manager, additional fees for
detailed-phase review will be one and one-quarter percent
(1.25%) of the total cost of the proposed qualifying project, but
will be no less than $5,000 nor more than $50,000. The town
manager, in his or her discretion, may waive additional fees or
require lower additional fees.
4.3.2.3 Reimbursement of excess fees paid. If the total fees paid by
proposers for a phase of a PPEA procurement exceed the total
costs incurred in processing, reviewing, and evaluating proposals
for that phase, then the town shall reimburse the proposers the
difference on a reasonable, pro rata basis. Otherwise, the town
may retain all fees paid
4.4 Virginia Freedom of Information Act
4.4.1 Generally, proposal documents submitted by private entities to the town
are subject to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (“VFOIA”). In
accordance with VFOIA, such documents are releasable if requested,
except to the extent that they contain (i) trade secrets of the private entity
as defined in the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (§ 59.1-336, et seq.);
(ii) financial records of the private entity, including balance sheets and
financial statements, that are not generally available to the public through
regulatory disclosure or otherwise; or (iii) other information submitted by
the private entity, where, if the records were made public prior to the
76
Item b.
-6
execution of an Agreement, the financial interest or bargaining position of
the town or private entity would be adversely affected. Once an
Agreement has been entered into, and the process of bargaining of all
phases or aspects of the Agreement is complete, the town shall make the
procurement records available upon request, in accordance with Virginia
Code §§ 2.2-4342 and § 56.575.17.D-F.
4.4.2 In order for the records specified in clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of 4.4.1 to be
excluded from release pursuant to the Virginia Freedom of Information
Act, the private entity shall make a written request to the town that (a)
invokes such exclusion upon submission of the data or other materials for
which protection from disclosure is sought; (b) identifies with specificity
the data or other materials for which protection is sought; and (c) states the
reasons why protection is necessary. In addition, the proposer must
clearly mark each page of its proposal that it contends is not subject to
disclosure under the VFOIA with the legend “Confidential – Not
Releasable under VFOIA.” The town may only protect information
excluded from release by Va. Code § 2.2-3705.6.11 and will not protect
any portion of a proposal from disclosure if the entire proposal has been
designated confidential by the proposer without reasonably differentiating
between the proprietary and non-proprietary information contained
therein.
4.4.3 The town manager shall determine whether a private entity’s request to
exclude documents from disclosure pursuant to 4.4.2 is necessary to
protect the trade secrets or financial records of the private entity. To
protect other records submitted by the private entity from disclosure, the
town manager shall determine whether public disclosure prior to the
execution of an Agreement would adversely affect the financial interest or
bargaining position of the town or private entity. The town manager shall
make a written determination of the nature and scope of the protection to
be afforded under these guidelines and the PPEA. Once a written
determination is made by the town manager, the records afforded
protection under 4.4.1 through 4.4.3 shall continue to be protected from
disclosure when in the possession of the town and any affected jurisdiction
to which such records are provided by the town.
4.4.4 Nothing in this 4.4 shall be construed to authorize the withholding of
(a) procurement records as required to be made available by Va. Code
§56-575.17; (b) information concerning the terms and conditions of any
Agreement, service contract, lease, partnership, or any agreement of any
kind entered into by the town and the private entity; (c) information
concerning the terms and conditions of any financing arrangement that
involves the use of any public funds; or (d) information concerning the
performance of any private entity developing or operating a qualifying
project.
77
Item b.
-7
4.4.5 Once an Agreement has been entered into, the town shall make the
procurement records available upon request, in accordance with Virginia
Code § 56-575.17. However, the following, if properly designated by the
private entity under this Section 4.4 as “Confidential-Not Releasable under
VFOIA” are not considered procurement records: (i) trade secrets of the
private entity as defined in the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, Va. Code §§
59.1-336, et. seq.; and (ii) financial records, including balance sheets or
financial statements of the private entity that are not generally available to
the public through regulatory disclosure or otherwise. Further, costs
estimates relating to a proposed procurement transaction prepared by or
for the town shall not be made available for public inspection.
4.4.6 Any inspection of procurement records under these guidelines will be
subject to reasonable restrictions to ensure the security and integrity of the
records.
4.4.7 Except as reasonably necessary for the town, staff and consultants to
review proposals, the town promises to maintain the confidentiality of
confidential proprietary information that is provided to it by a private
entity pursuant to a proposal for procurement under these guidelines if the
private entity follows all the steps required by paragraph 4.4. of these
guidelines to designate the information as confidential proprietary
information excluded from disclosure under VFOIA, and if the
information is, in fact, information that is properly exempt from release
under VFOIA. The town manager shall take appropriate action to protect
the confidentiality of such information from any disclosure beyond
whatever disclosure is reasonably necessary for the town, affected
jurisdictions, staff, and outside consultants having a need to know the
information to carry out the procurement. Despite the town’s sincere
intent to honor this promise of confidentiality, nothing contained herein
shall constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity, a consent to suit, or a
contractual undertaking, and it is a condition of submitting proposals that
no cause of action, in contract or otherwise, shall arise against the town for
any failure to maintain confidentiality of information.
4.4.8 Any information in a proposal that becomes incorporated into an
Agreement with the proposer submitting it, such as by becoming an
exhibit, shall become a public record releasable under VFOIA upon
execution of the Agreement.
4.5 Use of Public Funds
Virginia constitutional and statutory requirements as they apply to
appropriation and expenditure of public funds apply to any Agreement
entered into under the PPEA. Accordingly, the processes and procedural
requirements associated with the expenditure or obligation of public funds
should be incorporated into planning for any PPEA project, and any PPEA
78
Item b.
-8
procurement should comply with town fiscal policies. Virginia
constitutional and statutory restrictions that apply to the town regarding
expenditures of public funds shall be deemed to be incorporated into any
Agreement into which the town enters pursuant to the PPEA and to
condition the town’s obligations thereunder.
4.6 Applicability of Other Laws
Nothing in the PPEA shall affect the duty of the town or any of its
employees, or agents to comply with all other applicable law; provided,
however, that the applicability of the Virginia Public Procurement Act (the
“VPPA”) is as set forth in paragraph 10 of these guidelines.
5. Solicited Bids/Proposals
5.1 The town manager may invite bids or proposals from private entities to
acquire, design, construct, improve, renovate, expand, equip, maintain or
operate qualifying projects. The town manager may use a two-part
process consisting of an initial conceptual phase and a detailed phase. The
town manager will set forth in the solicitation the format and supporting
information that is required to be submitted, consistent with the provisions
of the PPEA and these guidelines. Notwithstanding any provision in these
guidelines to the contrary, the town manager may vary the requirements
for proposal format and content from those in Section 7.
5.2 Prior to inviting any bids or proposals, the town shall determine pursuant
to paragraph 10 of these guidelines whether to use procedures consistent
with competitive sealed bidding or competitive negotiation of other than
professional services, and if using competitive negotiation, indicate the
justification, consistent with the PPEA and paragraph 10 of these
guidelines, for proceeding in that manner, and the evaluation criteria to be
used to evaluate proposals.
5.3 The solicitation will specify, but not necessarily be limited to, information
and documents that must accompany each proposal and the factors that
will be used in evaluating the submitted proposals. The solicitation will
be posted on the town’s website or posted on the Commonwealth
electronic procurement website. The solicitation will also contain or
incorporate by reference other applicable terms and conditions, including
any unique capabilities or qualifications that will be required of the private
entities submitting proposals. Pre-proposal conferences may be held as
deemed appropriate by the town manager.
5.4 Initial (conceptual) proposals received in response to a solicitation by the
town shall be posted by the town within 10 days after their acceptance by
posting them or of a summary of them and the location where copies of
the proposals are available for public inspection on the town’s website or
79
Item b.
-9
on the Virginia Department of General Service’s web-based electronic
procurement site, commonly known as eVa, or both. The town may also
publish in a newspaper of general circulation where the qualifying project
will be performed a summary of the proposals and the location where
copies of the proposals are available for public inspection. The town may,
in its discretion, post proposals by other means as well.
5.5 Subject to exclusions from disclosure in 4.4., at least one copy of each of
the proposals shall be made available for public inspection. Unless
otherwise agreed by the town and the private entity submitting a proposal,
portions of the proposal properly designated pursuant to 4.4 and
containing trade secrets, financial records, or other records excluded from
disclosure by Va. Code § 2.2-3705.6.11 and these guidelines shall not be
made available for public inspection.
5.6 The town will receive comments from the public on any proposals.
Comments should be in writing and directed to the town manager’s
designee. Comments will be accepted after the proposals have been
received, and a public comment period of at least 30 days will be allowed
before entry into any Agreement. The town shall hold a public hearing or
hearings on proposals at least 30 days prior to entering into an Agreement.
5.7 Only proposals complying with the requirements of the PPEA that contain
sufficient information for a meaningful evaluation and that are provided in
an appropriate format will be considered by the town for further review at
the conceptual stage.
5.8 After reviewing conceptual proposals, the town may determine:
5.8.1 Not to proceed further with any proposal,
5.8.2 To proceed to the detailed phase of review with multiple proposals,
or
5.8.3 To proceed to the detailed phase with a single proposal if a finding
is made that the proposer submitting it is the only fully qualified
proposer or is clearly more highly qualified than the other
proposers.
5.9 Receipt of Public Comments/Hearings
The town will receive comments from the public on any proposals.
Comments should be in writing and directed to the town manager.
Comments will be accepted after the proposals have been received and a
public comment period of at least 30 days will be allowed before entry
into any Agreement. The town shall hold a public hearing or hearings
on proposals at least 30 days prior to entering into an Agreement.
80
Item b.
-10
6. Unsolicited Proposals
The PPEA permits the town to receive and evaluate unsolicited proposals from
private entities to acquire, design, construct, improve, renovate, expand, equip,
maintain, or operate a qualifying project.
The town may publicize its needs and may encourage or notify interested parties to
submit proposals subject to the terms and conditions of the PPEA. When such
proposals are received without issuance of a solicitation, the proposal shall be
treated as an unsolicited proposal. Proposals received as a result of the town
receiving an unsolicited proposal and then publishing a Notice of Receipt of
Unsolicited Proposal will also be treated as unsolicited proposals.
To ensure that the town receives the best value for any qualifying project, the
town will seek and encourage competing unsolicited proposals.
6.1 Decision to Accept and Consider Unsolicited Proposal; Notice
6.1.1 Upon receipt of any unsolicited proposal or group of proposals and
payment of any required fee by the proposer or proposers, the town will
determine whether to accept the unsolicited proposal for publication of
notice and conceptual-phase consideration. If the town determines not to
accept the proposal and not to proceed to publication of notice and
conceptual-phase consideration, the town will return the proposal, together
with all fees and accompanying documentation, to the proposer.
6.1.2 If the town chooses to accept an unsolicited proposal for conceptual-phase
consideration, the town shall:
6.1.2.1 Determine pursuant to paragraph 10 of these guidelines whether to
use procedures consistent with competitive sealed bidding or
competitive negotiation of other than professional services, and if
using competitive negotiation, indicate the justification,
consistent with the PPEA and paragraph 10 of these guidelines,
for proceeding in that manner, and the evaluation criteria to be
used to evaluate the unsolicited proposal and competing
unsolicited proposals;
6.1.2.2 Determine what if any conditions that the town will authorize the
town manager to place upon the proposer and any competing
proposers beyond those contained in these guidelines for going
forward with the unsolicited proposal and for receiving competing
unsolicited proposals;
6.1.2.3 Have the town manager (i) prepare a short document entitled
“Notice of Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal” for purposes of
publication, and (ii) prepare a lengthier document entitled
81
Item b.
-11
“Receipt of Unsolicited PPEA Proposal and Solicitation of
Competing Proposals” that will not be published but will be
available upon request.
a. The Notice of the Receipt of Unsolicited Proposal shall
state that the town (i) has received and accepted an
unsolicited proposal under the PPEA, (ii) intends to
evaluate the proposal, (iii) may negotiate an Agreement
with the proposer based on the proposal, and (iv) will
accept for simultaneous consideration any competing
proposals that comply with these guidelines and the
PPEA. The notice shall include a summary of the
proposal and state the location where the proposal is
available for public inspection. The notice shall indicate
that conditions have been imposed upon proposers for
proceeding to the initial conceptual phase and inform
them how to obtain the Receipt of Unsolicited PPEA
Proposal and Solicitation of Competing Proposals
containing the conditions and evaluation criteria for the
procurement.
b. Within 10 days of acceptance of the unsolicited proposal,
the town manager shall post the Notice of Receipt of
Unsolicited Proposal on the town’s web site or on the
Virginia Department of General Service’s web-based
electronic procurement site, commonly known as eVa, or
both, for a period of not less than 45 days. The town
manager may also publish the same notice at least once in
one or more newspapers or periodicals of general
circulation in the County of Loudoun, Virginia, to
notify the public and any persons that may be interested
in submitting competing unsolicited proposals, with the
first such publication to occur at least 45 days before
competing proposals are due. Competing proposals may
be submitted to the town manager during the period
specified in the notice following the publication required
above.
c. The Receipt of Unsolicited PPEA Proposal and
Solicitation of Competing Proposals shall contain the
following information and shall be provided to
prospective competing proposers and members of the
public on request:
(i) The instructions, terms and conditions applicable
to the procurement;
82
Item b.
-12
(ii) A summary of the project proposed in the
unsolicited proposal that is more detailed than the
summary in the Notice of Receipt of unsolicited
proposals.
(iii) The evaluation criteria to be used for the
procurement (which should be approved by the
town);
(iv) Instructions for obtaining any portions of the
unsolicited proposal that are releasable; and
(v) Such other instructions and information as the
town manager deems reasonable and desirable.
d. Copies of unsolicited proposals are available to the
public, upon request, pursuant to the Virginia Freedom of
Information Act (“VFOIA”), except as exempted from
release under the PPEA and VFOIA.
6.2 Competing Proposals
Competing proposals shall be posted by the town within 10 days after their
receipt by posting on the town’s website or on the Virginia Department of
General Services central electronic website of a summary of the proposals
and the location where copies of the proposals are available for public
inspection. The town may also publish in a newspaper of general
circulation where the qualifying project will be performed a summary of
the proposals and the location where copies of the proposals are available
for public inspection. In addition, the town may, in its discretion, post
proposals by other means deemed appropriate by the town.
6.3 Availability of Proposals for Public Inspection
Subject to exclusions from disclosure in 4.4., at least one copy of each of
the proposals shall be made available for public inspection. Unless
otherwise agreed by the town and the private entity submitting a proposal,
portions of the proposal properly designated pursuant to 4.4 and
containing trade secrets, financial records, or other records excluded from
disclosure by Va. Code 2.2-3705.6.11 shall not be made available for
public inspection.
6.4 Initial Review at the Conceptual Stage
6.4.1 Only proposals complying with the requirements of the PPEA that contain
sufficient information for a meaningful evaluation and that are provided in
an appropriate format will be considered by the town for further review at
83
Item b.
-13
the conceptual stage. Content and format requirements for proposals at
the conceptual stage are found at Section 7.1.
6.4.2 After reviewing the original proposal and any competing unsolicited
proposals submitted during the notice period, the town may determine:
6.4.2.1 Not to proceed further with any proposal,
6.4.2.2 To proceed to the detailed phase of review with the original
proposal,
6.4.2.3 To proceed to the detailed phase with a competing proposal, or
6.4.2.4 To proceed to the detailed phase with multiple proposals.
However, the town may not proceed to the detailed phase with only one proposal unless it
has determined in writing that only one proposer is qualified or that the only proposer to
be considered is clearly more highly qualified than any other proposer.
6.5 Receipt of Public Comments/Hearings
The town will receive comments from the public on any proposals, both
unsolicited and competing. Comments should be in writing and directed
to the town manager. Comments will be accepted after the proposals have
been received and a public comment period of at least 30 days will be
allowed before entry into any Agreement. The town shall hold a public
hearing or hearings on proposals at least 30 days prior to entering into an
Agreement.
7. Proposal Preparation and Submission
7.1 Proposal Content and Format for Submissions at the Conceptual Stage
The town manager may generally require that proposals at the conceptual
stage contain information in the following areas: (1) qualifications and
experience, (2) project characteristics, (3) project financing, but only if
public financing is unavailable or potentially less advantageous, (4)
project benefit and compatibility, and (5) any additional information as the
town manager may reasonably request. Conceptual-phase proposals
should include an executive summary of the proposal at the beginning of
the proposal. An unsolicited proposal shall include an executive summary
not designated as “Confidential-Not Releasable under VFOIA” that
describes the proposed qualifying project sufficiently so that potential
competitors can reasonably formulate meaningful competing proposals
from a review of the summary and publicly-available information. Unless
otherwise indicated in the solicitation or Receipt of Unsolicited PPEA
Proposal and Solicitation of Competing Proposals, as applicable,
conceptual-phase proposals should contain the information indicated
84
Item b.
-14
below in the format indicated below unless otherwise indicated by the
town manager:
7.1.1 Qualifications and Experience
7.1.1.1 Identify the legal structure of the private entity making the
proposal. Identify the organizational structure for the project, the
management approach, and how each participant in the structure
fits into the overall team. If the private entity that would be
signing any Agreement would be a corporation, limited liability
company, limited partnership, or an entity formed especially for
the project, and if the proposer is relying at all on the past
experience, name, or financial statements of any other person or
entity to show the private entities’ capabilities and responsibility,
state what guaranty of performance will be provided by such
other persons or entities.
7.1.1.2 Describe the experience of the entities making the proposal, the
key principals and project managers involved in the proposed
project including experience with projects of comparable size and
complexity, including prior experience bringing similar projects
to completion on budget and in compliance with design, land use,
service and other standards. Describe past safety performance
and current safety capabilities. Describe the past technical
performance history on recent projects of comparable size and
complexity, including disclosure of any legal claims relating to
such projects. Describe the length of time in business, business
experience, public sector experience, and other engagements.
Include the identity of any firms that will provide design,
construction and completion guarantees and warranties, and a
description of such guarantees and warranties.
7.1.1.3 For each firm or major subcontractor that will be utilized in the
project, provide a statement listing the firm’s prior projects and
clients for the past 3 years and contact information for same
(name, address, telephone number, e-mail address). If a firm has
worked on more than ten (10) projects during this period, it may
limit its prior project list to ten (10), but shall first include all
projects similar in scope and size to the proposed project and,
second, it shall include as many of its most recent projects as
possible. Each firm or major subcontractor shall be required to
submit all performance evaluation reports or other documents,
which are in its possession evaluating the firm’s performance
during the preceding three years in terms of cost, quality,
schedule maintenance, claims, change orders, lawsuits, safety and
other matters relevant to the successful project development,
operation, and completion.
85
Item b.
-15
7.1.1.4 Provide the names, prior experience, addresses, telephone
numbers and e-mail addresses of persons within the firm or who
will be directly involved in the project or who may be contacted
for further information.
7.1.1.5 Provide the current or most recent financial statements of the firm
(audited financial statements to the extent available), and if the
firm is a joint venture, limited liability company, partnership or
entity formed specifically for this project, provide financial
statements (audited if available) for the firm’s principal
venturers, members, partners, or stockholders that show that the
firm or its constituents have appropriate financial resources and
operating histories for the project.
7.1.1.6 Identify any persons known to the proposer who would be
obligated to disqualify themselves from participation in any
transaction arising from or in connection to the project pursuant
to The Virginia State and Local Government Conflict of Interest
Act, Chapter 31 (Va. Code § 2.2-3100, et seq.).
7.1.1.7 Identify the proposed plan for obtaining sufficient numbers of
qualified workers in all trades or crafts required for the project.
7.1.1.8 For each firm or major subcontractor that will perform
construction and/or design activities, provide an accurately
completed Commonwealth of Virginia Department of General
Services (DGS) Form 30-168.
7.1.2 Project Characteristics
7.1.2.1 Provide a description of the project, including the conceptual
design. Describe the proposed project in sufficient detail so that
type and intent of the project, the location, and the communities
that may be affected are clearly identified.
7.1.2.2 Identify and fully describe any work to be performed by the town
or any other public entity.
7.1.2.3 Include a list of all federal, state and local permits and approvals
required for the project and a schedule for obtaining such permits
and approvals.
7.1.2.4 Identify any anticipated adverse social, economic, environmental
and transportation impacts of the project measured against the
Town’s, County’s or other affected jurisdiction’s comprehensive
land use plan and applicable ordinances and design standards.
Specify the strategies or actions to mitigate known impacts of the
86
Item b.
-16
project. Indicate if an environmental and archaeological
assessment has been completed.
7.1.2.5 Identify the projected positive social, economic, environmental
and transportation impacts of the project measured against the
town’s, County’s or other affected jurisdiction’s comprehensive
land use plan and applicable ordinances and design standards.
7.1.2.6 Identify the proposed schedule for the work on the project,
including sufficient time for the town’s review and the estimated
time for completion.
7.1.2.7 Identify contingency plans for addressing public needs in the
event that all or some of the project is not completed according to
projected schedule.
7.1.2.8 Propose allocation of risk and liability, and assurances for timely
completion of the project.
7.1.2.9 State assumptions related to ownership, legal liability, law
enforcement and operation of the project and the existence of any
restrictions on the town’s use of the project.
7.1.2.10 Provide information relative to phased openings of the proposed
project.
7.1.2.11 Describe any architectural, building, engineering, or other
applicable standards that the proposed project will meet.
7.1.3 Project Financing
7.1.3.1 Provide a preliminary estimate and estimating methodology of
the cost of the work by phase, segment (e.g., design, construction,
and operation), or both.
7.1.3.2 Submit a plan for the development, financing and operation of
the project showing the anticipated schedule on which funds will
be required. Describe the anticipated costs of and proposed
sources and uses for such funds, including any anticipated debt
service costs. The operational plan should include appropriate
staffing levels and associated costs based upon the town’s
adopted operational standards. Include any supporting due
diligence studies, analyses, or reports.
7.1.3.3 Include a list and discussion of assumptions underlying all major
elements of the plan. Assumptions should include all fees
associated with financing given the recommended financing
approach, including but not limited to, underwriter’s discount,
87
Item b.
-17
placement agent, legal, rating agency, consultants, feasibility
study and other related fees. A complete discussion or interest
rate assumptions should be included given current market
conditions. Any ongoing operational fees should also be
disclosed, as well as any assumptions with regard to increases in
such fees and escalator provision to be required in the
Agreement.
7.1.3.4 Identify the risk factors and methods for dealing with these
factors. Describe methods and remedies associated with any
financial default.
7.1.3.5 Identify any local, state or federal resources that the proposer
contemplates requesting for the project along with an anticipated
schedule of resource requirements. Describe the total
commitment, if any, expected from governmental sources and the
timing of any anticipated commitment, both one-time and on-
going.
7.1.3.6 Clearly describe the underlying support and commitment
required by the town under your recommended plan of finance.
Include your expectation with regard to the town providing its
general obligation or moral obligation backing.
7.1.3.7 Identify any dedicated revenue, source or proposed debt or equity
investment on behalf of the private entity submitting the
proposal.
7.1.4 Project Benefit and Compatibility
7.1.4.1 Identify community benefits, including the economic impact the
project will have on the local community in terms of amount of
tax revenue to be generated for the town or other affected
jurisdiction, the number jobs generated for area residents and
level of pay and fringe benefits of such jobs, and the number and
value of subcontracts generated for area subcontractors.
7.1.4.2 Identify any anticipated public support, as well as any anticipated
government support (including that in any affected jurisdiction),
for the project.
7.1.4.3 Explain the strategy and plans, including the anticipated timeline
that will be carried out to involve and inform the general public,
business community, and governmental agencies in areas affected
by the project.
7.1.4.4 Describe any anticipated significant benefits to the community,
including anticipated benefits to the economic, social,
88
Item b.
-18
environmental, transportation, Comprehensive Plan, etc., and
whether the project is critical to attracting or maintaining
competitive industries and businesses to the town or other
affected jurisdiction.
7.1.4.5 Describe the project’s compatibility with the comprehensive plan
applicable to the town (including related environmental, land use
and facility standards ordinances, where applicable),
infrastructure development plans, transportation plans, the capital
improvements plan and capital budget or other government
spending plan.
7.1.5 Any additional information as the town manager may reasonably request
7.2 Proposal Content and Format for Submissions at the Detailed Stage
If the town decides to proceed to the detailed phase of review with one or
more proposals, the following information, along with an executive
summary of the proposal at its beginning, should be provided by the
private entity unless waived by the town manager:
7.2.1 A topographical map (1:2,000 or other appropriate scale) depicting the
location of the proposed project.
7.2.2 Conceptual site plan indicating proposed location and configuration of the
project on the proposed site;
7.2.3 Conceptual (single line) plans and elevations depicting the general scope,
appearance and configuration of the proposed project;
7.2.4 Detailed description of the proposed participation, use and financial
involvement of the town. Include the proposed terms and conditions for
the project,
7.2.5 A list of public utility facilities, if any, that will be crossed by the
qualifying project and a statement of the plans of the proposer to
accommodate such crossings.
7.2.6 Information relating to the current plans for development of facilities that
are similar to the qualifying project being proposed by the private entity in
any affected jurisdiction;
7.2.7 A statement and strategy setting out the plans for securing all necessary
property and/or easements. The statement must include the names and
addresses, if known, of the current owners of the subject property as well
as a list of any property the proposer intends to request the town or
affected jurisdiction to condemn.
89
Item b.
-19
7.2.8 A detailed listing of all firms, along with their relevant experience and
abilities, that will provide specific design, construction and completion
guarantees and warranties, and a brief description of such guarantees and
warranties along with a record of any prior defaults for performance.
7.2.9 A total life-cycle cost, including maintenance, specifying methodology
and assumptions of the project or projects including major building
systems (e.g., electrical, mechanical, etc.), and the proposed project start
date. Include anticipated commitment of all parties; equity, debt, and
other financing mechanisms; and a schedule of project revenues and
project costs. The life-cycle cost analysis should include, but not be
limited to, a detailed analysis of the projected return, rate of return, or
both, expected useful life of facility and estimated annual operating
expenses using town adopted service levels and standards.
7.2.10 A detailed discussion of assumptions about user fees or rates, lease
payments and other service payments, and the methodology and
circumstances for changes, and usage of the projects over the useful life of
the projects.
7.2.11 Identification of any known government support or general public support
for the project or financing thereof. Government or public support should
be demonstrated through resolution of official bodies, minutes of
meetings, letters, or other official communications.
7.2.12 Demonstration of consistency with appropriate town and/or affected
jurisdiction comprehensive plans (including related environmental, land
use and facility standards ordinances, where applicable), applicable zoning
ordinances or regulations, infrastructure development plans, transportation
plans, the capital improvement plan and capital budget, or indication of
the steps required for acceptance into such plans, ordinances, or
regulations.
7.2.13 Explanation of how the proposed project would impact the town’s or
affected jurisdictions’ development plans.
7.2.14 Description of an ongoing performance evaluation system or database to
track key performance criteria, including but not limited to, schedule, cash
management, quality, worker safety, change orders, and legal compliance.
7.2.15 Identification of any known conflicts of interest or other factors that may
impact the town’s consideration of the proposal, including the
identification of any persons known to the proposer who would be
obligated to disqualify themselves from participation in any transaction
arising from or in connection to the project pursuant to The Virginia State
and Local Government Conflict of Interest Act, Chapter 31 (Va. Code
§ 2.2-3100, et seq.).
90
Item b.
-20
7.2.16 Acknowledgement of conformance with Sections 2.2–4367 through 2.2-
4377 of the Code of Virginia, the Ethics in Public Contracting Act.
7.2.17 Additional material and information as the town manager may reasonably
request.
8. Proposal Evaluation and Selection Criteria
8.1 Manner of Evaluation and Use of Outside Professionals
Unless the town council directs a different manner of evaluation in
writing, evaluations of proposals shall be by such persons or group or
committee of persons as the town manager may designate, subject to such
review as the town council may direct. Evaluations of proposals shall
include, without limitation, analysis of the proposals’ specifics,
advantages, disadvantages, long-term costs, and short-term costs, using the
evaluation criteria specified for the procurement. The town shall engage
the services of qualified professionals not employed by the town, which
may include an architect, professional engineer, certified public
accountant, or other consultant, to provide an independent analysis as part
of the evaluation. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, if the town
determines that such analysis of proposals will be performed by town
staff, the town need not engage such an outside professional.
8.2 Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation criteria for proposals and their relative importance should be
specified in the solicitation, or Receipt of Unsolicited PPEA Proposal and
Solicitation of Competing Proposals, as applicable, for the procurement
concerned. Evaluation criteria may include the following factors, among
others: (1) price; (2) the proposed cost of the qualifying facility; (3) the
general reputation, industry experience and capability of the private entity;
(4) the proposed design of the qualifying project; (5) the eligibility of the
facility for accelerated selection, review, and documentation timelines
under these guidelines; (6) local citizen and government comments; and
(7) benefits to the public. If the evaluation criteria are not specified in the
solicitation or Receipt of Unsolicited PPEA Proposal and Solicitation of
Competing Proposals, then the criteria in the preceding sentence along
with following items, and the specified information required under 7.1 and
7.2 above, should be considered in the evaluation and selection of such
PPEA proposals:
8.3 Qualifications and Experience
Factors to be considered in either phase of the town’s review to determine
whether the proposer possesses the requisite qualifications and experience
include, the following:
91
Item b.
-21
8.3.1 Experience, training, and preparation with similar projects;
8.3.2 Demonstration of ability to perform work;
8.3.3 Demonstrated record of successful past performance, including timeliness
of project delivery, compliance with plans and specifications, quality of
workmanship, cost-control, lack of excessive claims, change orders, and
litigation, and project safety;
8.3.4 Demonstrated conformance with applicable laws, codes, standards,
regulations, and agreements on past projects;
8.3.5 Leadership structure;
8.3.6 Project manager’s experience;
8.3.7 Management approach;
8.3.8 Project staffing plans, the skill levels of the proposed workforce, and the
proposed safety plans for the project;
8.3.9 Financial condition;
8.3.10 Project ownership; and
8.3.11 Efforts to facilitate participation of small businesses and businesses owned
by women and minorities in the project.
8.3.12 Willingness to assume full responsibility for design and intent of project
design, including but not limited to, willingness to use design-build
method of project delivery.
8.4 Project Characteristics
Factors to be considered in determining the project characteristics include,
along with the specified information required under 7.1 and 7.2 above, the
following:
8.4.1 Project definition;
8.4.2 Proposed project schedule;
8.4.3 Operation of the project;
8.4.4 Technology; technical feasibility;
8.4.5 Conformity to State, County, town, or affected jurisdiction laws,
regulations, and standards;
92
Item b.
-22
8.4.6 Environmental impacts;
8.4.7 Condemnation impacts;
8.4.8 State and local permits; and
8.4.9 Maintenance of the project.
8.5 Project Financing
The town reserves the right to select its own finance team, source and
financing vehicle in the event any project is financed through the issuance
of obligations that are deemed to be tax-supported debt, or if financing
such project may impact debt rating or financial position. The decision as
to whether to use the financing plan contained in any proposal (whether
solicited or unsolicited) is at the town’s sole discretion.
Factors to be considered in determining whether the proposed project
financing allows access to the necessary capital, at the lowest practical
cost include, along with the specified information required under 7.1 and
7.2 above, the following:
8.5.1 Cost and cost benefit to the town;
8.5.2 Financing and the impact on the debt or debt burden of the town;
8.5.3 Financial plan including overall feasibility and reliability of plan; default
implications; operator’s past performance with similar plans and similar
projects; degree to which operator has conducted due diligence
investigation and analysis of proposed financial plan and results of any
such inquiries or studies.
8.5.4 Estimated cost; including financing source, operating costs, etc., and
8.5.5 Life-cycle cost analysis.
8.6 Project Benefit and Compatibility
Factors to be considered in determining the proposed project’s
compatibility with the town’s, affected jurisdiction’s or regional
comprehensive or development plans include, along with the specified
information required under 7.1 and 7.2 above, the following:
8.6.1 Community benefits; including the economic impact the project will have
on the town in terms of amount of tax revenue to be generated for the
town, the number jobs generated for area residents and level of pay and
fringe benefits of such jobs, and the number and value of subcontracts
generated for area subcontractors.
93
Item b.
-23
8.6.2 Community support or opposition, or both;
8.6.3 Public involvement strategy;
8.6.4 Compatibility with existing and planned facilities;
8.6.5 Compatibility with town, County, regional, and state economic
development efforts; and
8.6.6 Compatibility with the town’s, County’s and affected jurisdiction’s land
use, environmental and transportation plans.
9. Agreement
9.1 Prior to acquiring, designing, constructing, improving, renovating,
expanding, equipping, maintaining, or operating the qualifying project, the
selected proposer shall enter into an Agreement with the town. The town
will only enter into an Agreement if the town council determines that
the qualifying project to be done pursuant to the agreement serves the
public purpose of the PPEA under the criteria of Va. Code § 56-
575.4C. Each Agreement shall define the rights and obligations of the
town and the selected proposer(s) with regard to the project.
9.2 The terms of the Agreement shall be tailored to address the specifics of the
project and shall include, if applicable, but not be limited to:
9.2.1 The delivery of maintenance, performance and payment bonds or letters of
credit in connection with any acquisition, design, construction,
improvement, renovation, expansion, equipping, maintenance, or
operation of the qualifying project, including, without limitation, bonds or
letters of credit that comply with Virginia Code § 2.2-4337 for
components of the qualifying project that include construction;
9.2.2 The review and approval of plans and specifications for the qualifying
project by the town;
9.2.3 The rights of the town to inspect the qualifying project to ensure
compliance with the Agreement;
9.2.4 The maintenance of a policy or policies of liability insurance or self-
insurance reasonably sufficient to insure coverage of the project and the
tort liability to the public and employees and to enable the continued
operation of the qualifying project;
9.2.5 The monitoring of the practices of the private entity by the town to ensure
proper maintenance, safety, use and management of the qualifying project;
94
Item b.
-24
9.2.6 The terms under which the private entity will reimburse the town for
services provided;
9.2.7 The policy and procedures that will govern the rights and responsibilities
of the town and the private entity in the event that the Agreement is
terminated or there is a material default by the private entity, including
without limitation, the conditions governing assumption of the duties and
responsibilities of the private entity by the town and the transfer or
purchase of property or other interests of the private entity by the town;
9.2.8 The terms under which the private entity will file appropriate financial
statements on a periodic basis.
9.2.9 The mechanism by which user fees, lease payments, or service payments,
if any, may be established from time to time upon agreement of the
parties. Any payments or fees shall be the same for persons using the
facility under like conditions and that will not materially discourage use of
the qualifying project;
9.2.9.1 A copy of any service contract shall be filed with the town.
9.2.9.2 A schedule of the current user fees or lease payments shall be
made available by the private entity to any member of the public
upon request.
9.2.9.3 Classifications according to reasonable categories for assessment
of user fees may be made.
9.2.10 The terms and conditions under which the town will contribute financial
resources, if any, for the qualifying project;
9.2.11 If the private entity is a limited purpose or “shell” entity, such as a limited
liability company, limited partnership, or corporation, that lacks its own
substantial resources and operating history and that will depend on its
members, partners, shareholders or others for resources to perform, then
guarantees of performance by such entity’s principal members, etc., or
other similar arrangements that adequately assure performance.
9.2.12 The procedures at paragraph 12 of these guidelines; and
9.2.13 Other requirements of the PPEA or provisions that the town determines
serve the public purpose of the PPEA.
9.3 After the town has negotiated an Agreement with a private entity and
decided to make award to the private entity, but prior to entry into such
Agreement, the town shall:
95
Item b.
-25
9.3.1 Post a summary of the Agreement and the location where a copy of the
Agreement is available for public inspection. Posting shall be in the same
manner as the posting of initial (conceptual) proposals specified by 5.4. A
copy of the Agreement shall be made available for public inspection.
9.4 Any Agreement, and any amendments thereto shall first be approved by
the town council and then executed in writing by persons having the
authority to do so. Entry into any Agreement shall, as a condition
precedent to its effectiveness, be approved by the town council.
9.5 Parties submitting proposals understand that representations, information
and data supplied in support of, or in connection with proposals play a
critical role in the competitive evaluation process and in the ultimate
selection of a proposal by the town. Accordingly, as part of the
agreement, the proposing private entity shall certify that all
representations, information and data provided in support of, or in
connection with, a proposal are true and correct. Such certification shall
be made by an authorized individual who is a principal of the private
entity and who has knowledge of the information provided in the proposal.
In the event that material changes occur with respect to any
representations, information or data provided for a proposal, the proposing
private entity shall immediately notify the town of same. Any violation of
this section shall give the town the right to terminate the Agreement,
withhold payment or other consideration due, and seek any other remedy
available at law or in equity.
9.6 As required by Va. Code § 56-575.9.F. and 56-575.18, when the town
enters into an Agreement pursuant to the PPEA, a copy should be filed
with the Auditor of Public Accounts electronically within 30 days
thereafter. A record reflecting this filing should be kept in the
procurement file.
10. Adoption of Certain Portions of the Virginia Public Procurement
Act and Use of Competitive Negotiation and Competitive Sealed
Bidding Procedures.
10.1 The provisions of the Virginia Public Procurement Act, Va. Code § 2.2-
4300, et seq., shall not apply to procurements by the town under the PPEA
except as follows:
10.1.1 The definitions of and procedures for “competitive sealed bidding” and
“competitive negotiation” of other than professional services in Va. Code
§§ 2.2-4301, 2.2-4302.1 and 2.2-4302.2 are hereby adopted.
10.1.2 The provisions of Va. Code §2.2-4310 shall apply to all PPEA
procurements.
96
Item b.
-26
10.1.3 The provisions from the Ethics in Public Contracting Act, Va. Code § 2.2-
4367 through 2.2-4377, shall apply to all PPEA procurements.
10.1.4 The provisions of Va. Code §2.2-4343 are adopted as additional authority
for parts of this policy.
10.2 Before accepting any unsolicited proposal or before issuing any
solicitation for proposals, the town will determine whether it will proceed
to evaluate proposals using either:
10.2.1 “Competitive sealed bidding”, as defined in Va. Code § 2.2-4301 and
described in Va. Code § 2.2-4302.1; or
10.2.2 “Competitive negotiation” of other than professional services as defined in
Va. Code § 2.2-4301 and described in Va. Code § 2.2-4302.2.
10.3 The town may proceed using competitive negotiation procedures
described in 10.2.2 above only if it first makes a written determination that
doing so is likely to be advantageous to the town and the public based
upon either (i) the probable scope, complexity or urgency of need, or (ii)
the risk sharing, added value, increase in funding or economic benefit
from the project would otherwise not be available.
11. Terms and Conditions on Proposal Submission
11.1 The following terms and conditions apply to submission of any proposals
to the town pursuant to the PPEA, whether unsolicited, competing
unsolicited, or solicited, and by submitting any proposal to the town, the
private entity submitting the proposal agrees to them:
11.1.1 Neither these guidelines, nor any request or solicitation, nor the town’s
receipt or consideration of any proposal shall create any contract, express
or implied, any contractual obligation by the town to any proposer, or any
other obligation by the town to any proposer. The town makes no
promise, express or implied, regarding whether it will enter into an
Agreement with any proposer or regarding the manner in which it will
consider proposals. The town will only be bound by the terms of any
Agreement(s) into which it enters should it choose to enter into any such
Agreement(s).
11.1.2 The town will not be responsible for any expenses whatsoever incurred by
a proposer, including without limitation, in preparing and submitting a
proposal in any form, or in engaging in presentations, discussions, or
negotiations in any manner.
11.1.3 Proposers may be required to make an oral presentation or oral
presentations of their proposal in Leesburg, Virginia, at their own
expense. The town manager may request the presence of proposers’
representatives
97
Item b.
-27
from their development, financial, architectural, engineering and
construction teams at these presentations. The town manager will
schedule the time and location for these presentations. By submitting its
proposal, the proposer agrees to make these representatives reasonably
available in Leesburg, Virginia.
11.1.4 The town reserves the right of the town manager to waive any
informalities with respect to any proposal submitted.
11.1.5 The town reserves the right to accept or reject any and all proposals
received, in whole or in part, without explanation, and to negotiate
separately in any manner necessary to serve the best interests of the town.
Any procurement under these guidelines may result in multiple awards to
multiple proposers.
11.2 The provisions of this paragraph 11 of these guidelines shall apply
automatically to all PPEA procurements by the town.
11.3 The town will not discriminate against a proposer because of race,
religion, color, sex, national origin, age, disability, or any other basis
prohibited by state law relating to discrimination in employment.
12. Disputes, Claims, and Other Matters Arising Under or Relating to
any Agreement
12.1 The following provisions apply to any disputes, claims or other matters
(collectively “Claim” or “Claims”) arising under or relating to any
Agreement entered into pursuant to the PPEA by the town, on the one
hand (“Owner”), and any private entity (“Contractor”), on the other hand.
Claims between the parties arising under or relating to an Agreement shall
only be resolved as follows:
12.1.1 The Contractor shall give Owner written notice of any Claim for any
additional compensation, damages, or delay within ten (10) days of the
beginning of the occurrence of the event leading to the Claim being made
and shall submit the actual Claim and any supporting data within thirty
(30) days after the occurrence giving rise to the Claim ends. The written
notice shall be a document addressed to the Owner that clearly states
Contractor’s intention to make a Claim and the occurrence involved and
shall be transmitted in a manner to ensure prompt receipt by Owner. The
Claim must be certified under oath as true and correct by a principal of
Contractor. The “occurrence” means the condition encountered in the
field giving rise to the Claim and not a later dispute about payment for that
condition. Claims of time impacts will be resolved as they occur, and no
claims of cumulative impacts or deferral of claimed impacts will be
allowed. Complete satisfaction of subparagraph 12.1 of these guidelines is
an absolute prerequisite for Contractor to pursue a Claim arising under or
98
Item b.
-28
relating to an agreement. Failure by Contractor to satisfy this paragraph
12.1 shall constitute a waiver by Contractor of the Claim for which such
failure occurs. A Claim by Owner is not subject to the requirements of this
12.1.1.
12.1.2 The parties shall first endeavor to resolve any Claims between them
through direct negotiations, and if such direct negotiations fail, by non-
binding mediation conducted pursuant to the Rules of the American
Arbitration Association, with the site of the mediation being
Leesburg, Virginia. Should the Claim remain unresolved for the shorter of
(i) following negotiation and mediation, or (ii) more than 90 days after
mediation is requested by a party, either party may proceed in accordance
with 12.1.3 below. However, nothing in this paragraph 12.1.2 excuses
Contractor from compliance with all the provisions of 12.1.1.
12.1.3 If the procedures of 12.1.2 have been followed, but, more than 90 days
have passed since a party has invoked mediation, and the Claim remains
unresolved, then either party may institute an action in the Circuit Court of
the County of Loudoun, Virginia, or if the subject or amount in
controversy is within its jurisdiction, the General District Court of the
County of Loudoun, Virginia, and may thereafter pursue all available
appeals in Virginia state courts, to the extent they have jurisdiction.
12.1.4 Nothing in paragraphs 12.1.2 and 12.1.3 shall prevent a party from
seeking temporary injunctive or other temporary equitable relief in the
Circuit Court of the County of Loudoun if circumstances so warrant.
12.1.5 In the event of any Claim arising, Contractor shall continue its
performance diligently during its pendency as if no Claim had arisen.
During the pendency of any Claim, Contractor shall be entitled to receive
payments for non-disputed items, subject to any right of set-off by Owner.
12.1.6 Paragraph 12 of these guidelines and the provisions of the applicable
Agreement supersede any right at common law by Contractor for a claim
of material breach or for rescission of any Agreement.
12.1.7 Paragraph 12 of these guidelines shall be deemed automatically
incorporated by reference into any Agreement entered into by the town
pursuant to the PPEA.
12.1.8 For purposes of this Paragraph 12, “Owner” means the town, and
“Contractor” means the private entity or entities entering into the
Agreement, as well as Contractor’s successors, assigns, or others claiming
through Contractor.
12.2 The town manager may further supplement this Paragraph 12 of these
guidelines with the terms and conditions of any Agreements.
99
Item b.
-29
13. Protests of PPEA Procurements
The following are the exclusive procedures for contesting or challenging
(protesting) (a) the terms or conditions of any solicitation of proposals by the
town pursuant to the PPEA, (b) non-selection of a PPEA proposal for
further consideration, and (c) the selection of any PPEA proposal for entry into
an Agreement or the entry into an Agreement under the PPEA:
13.1 Any protest to any term or condition of a solicitation must be made in
writing and delivered to the town manager so it is received by the town
manager before proposals are due under the solicitation. Otherwise, any
such protest shall be deemed to be waived.
13.2 A protest of a town decision not to select a PPEA proposal for further
consideration may only be made by the entity who submitted the proposal
at issue. A protest of a town decision to select a PPEA proposal for entry
into an Agreement or to enter into an Agreement may only be made by an
entity who submitted a proposal for the procurement at issue and who was
reasonably likely to have its proposal accepted but for the town’s decision.
Protests shall only be granted if (1) the protester has complied fully with
this paragraph 13 and there has been a clear violation of law, this policy,
or mandatory terms of the solicitation that clearly prejudiced the protestor
in a material way, or (2) a statute requires voiding of the decision.
13.3 Any entity desiring to protest a town decision not to select a PPEA
proposal for further consideration, to select a PPEA proposal for entry into
an Agreement, or to enter into an agreement shall submit the protest in
writing and deliver it so that it is received by the town manager not later
than 5 business days after announcement of the decision. Otherwise any
such protest shall be deemed to be waived.
13.4 The town manager shall issue a written decision on a protest within 10
days of its receipt by the town manager.
13.5 If the protest is denied, the protester may only appeal the denial or
otherwise contest or challenge the procurement by then filing suit in the
Circuit Court for the County of Loudoun and serving the town with
such suit within 10 days of such denial. Otherwise, the protester’s
right to appeal the denial or to otherwise contest or challenge the
procurement shall be deemed to be waived.
13.6 The exclusive relief allowed if a protest is granted is to void the decision
being protested. Under no circumstances will any monetary relief or
directed award of an Agreement be allowed.
13.7 Strictly following these procedures shall be a mandatory prerequisite for
any challenge of any nature to a decision by the town relating to terms and
100
Item b.
-30
conditions of a PPEA solicitation, non-selection of a PPEA proposal
for further consideration, selection of a PPEA proposal, or entry into an
agreement. A failure to follow all these procedures strictly shall constitute
a waiver of any right to challenge judicially a town decision (a) as to terms
or conditions in a PPEA solicitation, (b) not to select a PPEA proposal for
further consideration, (c) to select a PPEA proposal, or (d) to enter into an
Agreement.
14. Timelines for Selecting Proposals and Negotiating Agreements
and Accelerated Timelines for Priority Qualifying Facilities
14.1 Normal expected timelines for selecting proposals and negotiating an
Agreement are set out at Appendices A and B hereto. Appendix A sets
out the normal expected timeline for a PPEA procurement solicited by the
town. Appendix B sets out the normal expected timeline for a PPEA
procurement initiated by an unsolicited proposal.
14.2 For projects deemed a priority by the town, the portion of timelines related
to selection, review, and documentation may be accelerated.
14.3 The town should generally adhere to these timelines in PPEA
procurements, but the town may deviate from them when it is in its
interests to do so.
15. Proposers’ Agreement to Terms and Conditions of This Policy
The town manager shall require as a condition of accepting any proposal for
consideration that its proposer agree to be bound by all the terms and conditions
of these guidelines. Proposers shall submit with any proposal the certification
that is set out in Appendix C hereto.
101
Item b.
APPENDIX A
Projected Procurement Timeline for
town PPEA Procurement Solicited By
Request for Proposals (“RFP”)
Activity
Number
Date Activity Guidelines Reference
1 D Initiate procurement
under PPEA.
Decide whether to
use competitive
negotiation and
issue RFP.
5.1 & 5.2
2 D+45 Receive Conceptual-
Phase
Proposals
3 D+50 Determine whether
proposers’ requests
to exclude
information from
disclosure are
necessary
4.4.3
4 D+55 Post Conceptual-
Phase Proposals.
Receive public
comments
5 D+105 Evaluate
Conceptual-Phase
Proposals and
decide whether to
proceed. If
proceeding under
PPEA, select
proposers to invite
to submit, and invite
submission of
Detailed-Phase
Proposals
6 D+135 Receive Detailed-
Phase Proposals
7 D+140 Determine whether
proposers’ requests
to exclude
information from
disclosure are
necessary
4.4.3
8 D+180 Evaluate Detailed-
Phase Proposals,
conduct interviews,
and select
proposers for
negotiation of
102
Item b.
2
Activity
Number
Date Activity Guidelines Reference
Agreement
9 D+225 Negotiate
Agreement. Select
awardee
10 D+245 Post Agreement for
public
11 D+280 Obtain approvals by
Town Council
Note: Considerable planning before Step 1 is required to determine the town’s needs
for a project and to state them in an RFP.
103
Item b.
APPENDIX B
Projected Procurement Timeline for town PPEA
Procurement Initiated By Unsolicited Proposal
Activity
Number
Date Activity Guidelines Reference
1 D Receipt of
Unsolicited
Proposal
6.1.1
2 D+45 Decide whether to
accept Unsolicited
Proposal, whether
to use competitive
negotiation, what
conditions to
impose, and
whether the
proposer’s request
to exclude
information from
disclosure is
necessary
6.1.2.1 6.1.2.1 and
6.1.2.2 4.4.3
3 D+55 Prepare Notice of
Unsolicited
Proposal, Receipt of
Unsolicited
Proposal, and Post
and Publish
6.1.2.3
4 D+115 Receive Competing
Conceptual-Phase
Proposals
6.2
5 D+120 Determine whether
proposers’ requests
to exclude
information from
disclosure are
necessary
4.4.3
6 D+125 Post Competing
Conceptual-Phase
Proposals.
Receive public
comments on
unsolicited and
competing
Conceptual-Phase
Proposals.
7 D+175 Evaluate
Conceptual-Phase
Proposals, decide
whether to proceed.
If proceeding, select
proposers to invite
to submit, and invite
6.2.2
104
Item b.
Activity
Number
Date Activity Guidelines Reference
submission of
Detailed-Phase
Proposals
8 D+205 Receive Detailed-
Phase Proposals
9 D+220 Determine whether
proposers’ requests
to exclude
information from
disclosure are
necessary
4.4.3
10 D+250 Evaluate Detailed-
Phase Proposals,
conduct interviews,
and select
proposers for
negotiation of
Agreement
11 D+295 Negotiate
Agreement, select
awardee
12 D+315 Post Agreement for
public
13 D+350 Obtain approval
from town council
105
Item b.
APPENDIX C
Proposer’s Certification
Proposer’s Name:
Proposer’s Address Proposer’s:
Telephone No.:
Facsimile No.:
E-mail Address:
Proposer’s or Proposer’s Contractor’s Virginia Class A General Contractor’s License Number (if
applicable):
Proposer’s or Proposer’s Architect’s and Engineer’s Virginia Registration Numbers
(if applicable):
After first being placed under oath, I hereby certify that I have authority to submit this proposal
on behalf of the proposer whose name appears above, that I am a principal of the proposer, that
the proposer hereby agrees to all of the terms and conditions in the Town of Leesburg Guidelines
for Implementation of the Public-Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002, as
amended, that neither the proposer nor any member of its team or their principals is currently
suspended or debarred from public contracting by any federal, state or local government entity,
that I have taken reasonable steps to ascertain the accuracy of all the information contained in
this proposal and this certification, and that the information in this proposal and certification is
accurate to the best of my knowledge or information and belief.
Signature
Printed/Typed Name
Title (Principal of Proposer)
106
Item b.
Commonwealth of Virginia :
: to wit
County/City of :
On , 20 , , (same name as above) appeared before me,
and after satisfying me of his/her identity and after being placed under oath, swore to the
truthfulness of the above statement.
Notary
Public My commission expires:
(If applicable) the proposer acknowledges receipt of the following agenda:
Addendum No.:
Addendum No.:
Addendum No.:
Addendum No.:
Dated:
Dated:
Dated:
Dated:
2 107
Item b.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FORLEESBURG LIBERTY PARKING LOTLEESBURG LIBERTY PARKING LOT
RFP NO. PPP 22-001RFP NO. PPP 22-001
05.3105.31.2022
108
Item b.
109
Item b.
“The Town will actively work to identify opportunities to create new
civic and cultural spaces in the Town. Examples of appropriate spaces
include public gathering spaces, museums, and a performing arts
center [PAC]. Such facilities can be a key component of a Public Private
Partnership.”
Legacy Leesburg
Town Plan for Leesburg, VA
Adopted March 22, 2022
For an online version of this proposal, please scan the QR code.
110
Item b.
111
Item b.
1. A APPENDICES A & B
“Affordable housing is a major concern for the Town of Leesburg and
focused efforts to increase the availability of affordable housing must be
a part of Leesburg’s future.”
Legacy Leesburg
Town Plan for Leesburg, VA
Adopted March 22, 2022
112
Item b.
113
Item b.
PG 7
114
Item b.
PG 8
115
Item b.
PG 9
116
Item b.
117
Item b.
PG 11
0677373-3
118
Item b.
PG 12
Philip Vannoorbeek Town of Blackstone, Virginia
434-294-0519100 W. Elm StreetBlackstone, VA 23824
Bill Greenleaf Virginia Community Capital
804-939-61657814 Carousel Lane, Suite 100Richmond, VA 23294
bgreenleaf@vccva.org
Blackstone Lofts, Nottoway House
The Westie (Madison Heights)
Blackstone Lofts
1.
2.
3. Leon Towarnicki City Manager 276-656-5180 ltowarnicki@ci.martinsville.va.usP.O. Box 111255 West Church St. Martinsville, VA 24112The Henry Hotel (Martinsville)Chief Tassel (Martinsville)
philipv@townofblackstoneva.com
119
Item b.
PG 13
Philip Vannoorbeek Town of Blackstone, Virginia
434-294-0519100 W. Elm StreetBlackstone, VA 23824
Bill Greenleaf Virginia Community Capital
804-939-61657814 Carousel Lane, Suite 100Richmond, VA 23294
bgreenleaf@vccva.org
Blackstone Lofts, Nottoway House
The Westie (Madison Heights)
Blackstone Lofts
1.
2.
3. Leon Towarnicki City Manager 276-656-5180 ltowarnicki@ci.martinsville.va.usP.O. Box 111255 West Church St. Martinsville, VA 24112The Henry Hotel (Martinsville)Chief Tassel (Martinsville)
philipv@townofblackstoneva.com
120
Item b.
121
Item b.
PG 15
122
Item b.
PG 16
123
Item b.
PG 17
APPENDIX B
References
Name Organization Address Telephone Number Email Kevin Lewis, COO Department of Support Services
Loudoun County Public Schools
2100 Education Court, Ste. 210 Ashburn, VA 20148
571-252-1355 Kevin.Lewis@lcps.org
Mark Peterson Deputy General Manager of Administration
Loudoun Water 44865 Loudoun Water Way Ashburn, VA 20146
571-291-7700 m.peterson@loudounwaterorg
Brian Nolan Director of Planning & Development
NOVA Parks 5400 Ox Road Fairfax Station, VA 22039
703-352-5900 bnolan@nvrpa.org
124
Item b.
125
Item b.
PG 19
126
Item b.
PG 20
127
Item b.
PG 21
128
Item b.
129
Item b.
PG 23
130
Item b.
PG 24
131
Item b.
PG 25
132
Item b.
133
Item b.
1. B EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
“... identifying areas like the Old & Historic Downtown and the Arts and
Cultural District, for which the Plan focuses on reinforcing character
with tactical investment and public investments.”
Legacy Leesburg
Town Plan for Leesburg, VA
Adopted March 22, 2022
134
Item b.
PG 28
135
Item b.
PG 29
Aimed at achieving the best and highest uses of the 2.03-acre Liberty Lot parcel, adjacent to both the
heart of Old & Historic Downtown Leesburg, as well as the Arts & Culture District, this proposed project
brings together several high-priority objectives of Legacy Leesburg as adopted into the most recent
Town Plan for Leesburg, on March 22, 2022. In a singular landmark destination, this project would:
• Deliver to the Town a long sought-after Performing Arts Center [PAC];
• Address a growing need for senior affordable housing;
• Provide the Town with additional parking spaces, in an enclosed, multi-level parking structure.
Working together for more than a year to develop a plan that improves and brings new value to the
under-utilized parcel that is Liberty Lot, a group of engaged local entities, as well as a number of
interested private citizens have envisioned an approach that would create a dramatic yet pragmatic
addition to the Town that addresses cultural, societal, and economic needs identified in Legacy Leesburg,
The proposer recognizes that the RFP clearly states that “The Town envisions selling the parcel
fee simple to a developer or developers.” However, the RFP also states that the Town “will consider
alternative proposals.” In support of this broader approach, the RFP includes the “Guidelines for
Implementation of the Public-Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2022, as Amended”
(PPEA). In our view, the highest and best use of the Liberty Street lot can most effectively be achieved
by a Public/Private Partnership
where a portion of the lot is sold
fee simple, and the balance of the
lot is retained in Town ownership
for multiple public uses and
benefits.
The project, as presented by this
proposal, envisions dividing the
site roughly in half. The western-
most half would be sold to be
developed into an approximately
65-unit senior affordable housing
apartment building. The senior
affordable housing component
of the project will be anchored
by Good Works LP. A Virginia-
registered, Limited Partnership,
Good Works was formed to build,
own, and operate affordable
housing in Northern Virginia.
Headquartered in Loudoun County, Good Works is adept in navigating the funding, planning, approvals
and management of details related to building affordable housing in the greater Virginia community, all
136
Item b.
PG 30
in strict adherence to Virginia housing
regulations. The Good Works team
has more than 17 years of experience
managing and working with Federal
Low-Income Housing Tax Credits,
HUD bonds and VHDA low-interest
loans together with Federal, state
and local grants to finance attractive,
certified “green” apartments with
rents well-below market rates.
The remaining portion of the site
would remain in the Town’s hands,
as a Public-Private Education
Facility. Waukeshaw Development,
a Petersburg, VA-based real estate
development firm that has completed
a variety of new build and reuse
projects in small communities
throughout Virginia and North
Carolina will handle development of the Performing Arts/Convention Center, restaurant, Georgetown
Park enhancements, and the balance of the public parking, occupying the eastern half of the existing
Liberty Street lot. Waukeshaw leads revitalization and rehabilitation efforts throughout Virginia and
works to advance unique projects around the state in numerous historic communities. Current adaptive
reuse and historic tax credit developments, in varying project stages, comprise more than 500,000
square feet and reflect a value of more than $90 Million. As is the norm in many jurisdictions, it is
proposed that this half of the project should continue to be owned by the Town of Leesburg. Thus, on this
side of the project, Waukeshaw will work with the Town to write a contract to deliver the PAC, restaurant,
and parking for a set contract price. This is very similar to a design-build contract, with which the Town
is already very familiar.
Civil engineering for the project will be provided by Bowman Consulting LTD [Bowman], a nationally
known and respected engineering firm, with a significant history in Leesburg and Loudoun County.
Bowman will provide the expertise and guidance to clear the dump on which Liberty Lot sits, to address
the known and hidden environmental issues required before any activities that disturb the soil at the site
can begin.
Design of the Performing Arts/Conference Center and Parking Structure effort will be led by DBI
Architects Inc. [DBI], an architectural and interior design firm located in Reston, VA. DBI has a rich
50-year history in the region, including significant work with both the Town of Leesburg and Loudoun
County. Since its inception in 1973, DBI has provided full-service architecture and interior design services
across the region and the United States, as well as internationally. DBI brings a wealth of knowledge
137
Item b.
PG 31
from a considerable amount of work creating spaces like those outlined above. Their work as designer
and project architect on the Constitution Center in Washington, DC provided a 400-seat Auditorium,
an 8,000 SF fitness center, full-service cafeteria, and a Secure Conferencing Center, as well as 370,000
sf of adjoining office space for the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities and others. Work
for the Securities and Exchange Commission, also in Washington, DC, provided a visitors center, a
500-seat auditorium, testimony and hearing rooms, training rooms, a closed commission hearing room,
and a library. Closer to home, DBI was retained by Reston Bible Church to provide Master Planning,
Architectural Design, Interior Design and Furniture layout services for a new church facility on a 23-acre
site in Eastern Loudoun County. The interior spaces include a 900-seat sanctuary, 4,500 sf Meet and
Greet, classrooms for nursery to fifth grade, adult education, and office space.
DAVIS Construction [DAVIS] will provide construction services for the project. A well-known entity
in the Washington Metropolitan area and beyond, DAVIS understands that significant research and
experience is required for specialty construction projects like theaters, requiring a great deal of planning,
quality control, and experience. DAVIS’s portfolio includes The Woolly Mammoth Theatre Company, the
Ford’s Theatre Center for Education and Leadership, the Fillmore Silver Spring, and many others.
The subject building, as conceived, will have many uses that fall into five categories. First, existing public
parking will be expanded by approximately 50 spaces, resulting in 175 parking spaces to be used in
whatever way the Town believes best serves the community. Second, the 450 seat PAC and its large
reception area/lobby/art gallery is anticipated to have regular productions, evenings and weekends.
Third, as the PAC’s theater component can be converted into a flat floored conference facility, it is
anticipated that various corporate and other large meetings will occur there on a regular basis (and,
as needed, for various public meetings and hearings with anticipated audiences in excess of Council
Chamber capacity). Fourth, the building is anticipated to include a meeting and education center
that can be used by various organizations for meetings and educational programs. Lastly, the 4,000 sf
restaurant, anticipated to be leased
to a private operator by the Town, and
the outdoor park amenities, will not
only complement and support the PAC
activities but will also draw regular
independent users.
This project, once operational,
will serve as an economic boon
to Leesburg, bringing entirely
new revenue streams to storefront
businesses and restaurants, as
visitors and tourists will patronize
those establishments as part of their
cultural arts experience. Along with
this increase in street-level activity will
138
Item b.
PG 32
also come an attendant uptick in foot
traffic across the Old & Historical and
Arts & Culture districts, as patrons visit
new areas of town, wait for their dinner
reservation or the start of the show
they have come to see. An uptick in foot
traffic would be a significant net gain
for Leesburg, as visitors from beyond
Town limits will begin to discover their
new “favorite little store,” or “the best
coffee shop in Loudoun County.” These
new customer relationships will result
in return visits to the Town, completely
independent of the performing arts
center, and will serve, overall, to broaden the base of Leesburg’s day-to-day commerce. These results will
be measurable, as a benefit to the Town’s business community, from the outset.
The Town itself will also benefit directly from these new sources of revenue, in the form of a broader
stream of consumer taxes, from the patrons of the Town’s business community. Moreover, this revenue
will come at no cost and significant gain
to local businesses, as they will simply be
passing through the same percentage of
what will increased receipts.
The Town will also see a bump in revenue
in property taxes that would accrue
due to the addition of senior affordable
housing. All in all, Town commitment to
and investment in a project that brings
affordable senior housing and a performing
arts center will constitute a long-term
investment in Leesburg that will pay off in
innumerable ways.
Liberty Lot represents the best opportunity
to achieve many of the goals laid out in
Legacy Leesburg and the adopted Town
plan. The project, as proposed, will yield
predictable outcomes for the Town, with
predictable baseline revenue streams,
while providing the potential for positive
impact far and above those predictions.
139
Item b.
PG 33
HA
R
R
I
S
O
N
S
T
CR
E
S
T
W
O
O
D
S
T
CARLTON ST
PR
O
S
P
E
C
T
D
R
BE
L
M
O
N
T
D
R
PROSPECTDR
BELMONTPL
ROSEME
A
D
E
P
L
LA
F
A
Y
E
T
T
E
P
L
BELMONTDR
VALLEYVIEWAV
DR
Y
M
I
L
L
R
D
WILSON AV
NE
W
H
A
L
L
P
L
ASHTON DR
WINGATE PL
ROCKSPRINGDR
WILLIAM STMOSBY DR
Washington&Old DominionTrail
380
S K
I
N
G
S
T
GIBSON ST UNION ST
SOUTH S
T
E MARK
E
T
S
T
MONRO
E
S
T
MA
D
I
S
O
N
C
T
OLD WATERFORD RD
WI
L
D
M
A
N
S
T
OLDENGLISH CT
HA
R
R
I
S
O
N
S
T
SL
A
C
K
L
A
DEP
O
T
C
T
ANDOVER CT
RI
V
A
N
N
A
T
E
MARSHALL DR
OCCOQU
A
N
T
E
BARBARA CT
BROWNSMEADO W CT
CHESTERFIELDPL
PAR
K
E
R
C
T
OAKCREST MANOR DR
TO
W
N
B
R
A
N
C
H
T
E
EDWARD
S
F
E
R
R
Y
R
D
M
A
X
I
M
I
L
L
I
A
N
C
T
ROYAL S
T
E MA
R
K
E
T
S
T
CORNW
A
L
L
S
T
N K
I
N
G
S
T
ARIELDR
DRYMILLRD
E MA
R
K
E
T
S
T
CH
U
R
C
H
S
T
HA
R
R
I
S
O
N
S
T
CH
U
R
C
H
S
T
ME
M
O
R
I
A
L
D
R
W MARK
E
T
S
T
S K
I
N
G
S
T
LIB
E
R
T
Y
S
T
AY
R
S
T
SOU
T
H
S
T
HA
R
R
I
S
O
N
S
T
MORVEN PARK RD
NORTH
S
T
CORNW
A
L
L
S
T
WI
R
T
S
T
AY
R
S
T
LOUDO
U
N
S
T
ME
H
E
R
R
I
N
T
E
SOUTH
S
T
W MARK
E
T
S
T
ROYAL
S
T
3
6
9
8
88
64 8
1
9753
4 68
6
2
975
3
8
953
9 7 3
3
3 7
9
2
5
8
6
4
2
9
7
5
3
1
86
21359
1975314215379
2
4
5
7 1 9
2
3 8
7 75
58 1 46
4
2 8
75
69
796
24 26
10
10 16 20
16
18
11
10
1412
1517
2725
2119
1715
11
30
26
24 20
18
16
12
32
27
19
15
11
20
14
2119
11
28
15 19 23
10 16 18
20
20
16
14
10
10
23
12
10
11
12
14
2422
2018
1614
12
12
10
17
181614
11 21171511
1814
11 291315
19 18 10171520131811191615
13
25
16182220242628 18 24
17 13
112110 2220
12 30 18161429101317111516
19 1921
12
1014
181820
111418 1317151920
206
109
101
301
204
230
229
242
218
218
305
303
329
211
211
209205
224
238
240
242
105
201
221
199 212
201
413
119117115263261
111257
109
108106104
206
125123
121
117115
109107
103101
125123
121
117115118
116114
110108
104
251249247243241235233231
227
223221
213
220209207218
214203201210208
109
202
219
224
224
224
224
108
105
110
104
102100
204
107
110
106
102
107
106
204
126125
123
121
119
115
114
112
112111
109
127
128
131
106
104
102202208212216220224
203
215
109
101
107
109
108110112
220
212214
216218
207
219
301
402
216
214212210208
206
219
215
217213211209207205
114
112
108
106
115
107
108
105
101
214
212
208
217215
213
211
209
432
431 430
429 428
426
427 424
422420423
418 416
417 414415412
404 215410
408 403411401406
407 404 317321402325 316329
403 335339343401
308
229
306305
227
307
225223219
230302217
228
213211
226224
207203201
214208210206 223219221217
215
215
222
213
108213 218 220205212214201219210203
210
212209208 223207206221205219217215
106 211202209207 217205203201212204203216210209107104209201105 217207101212205109210203
206112111 211101201205 216214120116
208
101 226115204103105107202110120109201101102106114112108110116211110213108202106110107
108 210 109212
214216241243
220218224
226 116228230232107234101 117111 122109236 215244102211207246119250104252225121106227104123124229110223112108127215110202129106314231
213
104 116102217118219206316221312233106318212310235208237308239102243241306101245304105106302107107110320334305322203201332109324102
326 209330328 201204101211246206 204208215203210105
107
306
208109210205
320324
233 216 211235330
102218212 208234404338 219406212221 224223226214225420215217227216219229218223220225222233231229227224301102235237430
4
7
1
18
23
14
222
265
113259255
102
119
105
119
112
106
102
245
229
225
215
211
216205212
206
107
102
106
202
124
122
120
118
113
110
108107
129
130
132133134 105
103
101214218222
105103 111
204206
319323327331337341
221215209
208
213
109
209
204206208
222
108 125
114
221
Historic Features
National Historic Register District
Buildings
Parcels
Historic District
December, 2018
The act establishing the Town of
Leesburg, Virginia in 1758 stated
60 Acres. Former Town Attorney George Martin found it was actually
67.5 Acres.
Leesburg was incorporated in 1813.
The Old and Historic District was created in 1963 and
followed the incorporated
Town boundary indicatedon Gray's New Map of
Leesburg of 1878.
Leesburg Town
Boundary in 1758
KIN
G
AK
A
N
ATH
E
N
A
THE
M
I
S
GREENWAY
CONNERY
MEADE
COU
B
E
R
T
I
N
LAC
O
N
I
A
N
GOLDSWORTH
WING
T
I
P
ALLMAN
SHADETREE
HAMPSHIRE
KIN
G
WHITNEY
CATOCTIN
KIN
G
OAKCREST MANOR
STALLIONCOLLEEN
ELK
R
I
D
G
E
THIS
T
L
E
BRIDGETTE
ST
A
B
L
E
V
I
E
W
BATTLEFIELD
GREENMONT
BRIDLECREST
COLTSRIDGE
WI
L
D
M
A
N
HEDGESTONE
BATTLEFIELD
05001,000250 Feet
For more information on
Leesburg's Old and Historic District,
"EXPLORING LEESBURG:
guide to history and architecture,"
is available at Leesburg Town Hall
and the Loudoun Museum.
Leesburg's
Old and Historic
District
Leesburg's Old and Historic District1 Carlheim
Vicinity Map
2 Greenway Farm
Building Address Number123
Marshall House
Thomas Balch Library
Loudoun County Court House
Market Station12
WWW.LEESBURGVA.GOV\BAR
LE
E
DRY
M
I
L
L
CATOCTIN
BEL
M
O
N
T
3
3 Rogers Farm
140
Item b.
141
Item b.
1. C TABLE OF CONTENTS
“Public Art provides great value to a community and is directly
connected to the Town Character and Authenticity. Public art will help
Leesburg provide a high-quality brand and sense of place. In addition,
public art can inspire, define, and strengthen the economy. Research
shows that arts travelers are the perfect tourists, staying longer and
spending on meals, retail and lodging throughout the Town. Investment
in public art can bring back two to three times in value.”
Legacy Leesburg
Town Plan for Leesburg, VA
Adopted March 22, 2022
142
Item b.
PG 36
TABLE OF CONTENTS TAB PAGE
Appendices A & B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.A . . . . . .7
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.B . . . . . .29
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.C . . . . . .21
Background & Firm/Team Qualifications . . . . . . . . . . . .PART A . . . .39
The structure of the proposer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41
Qualifications - experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42
Past safety performance and
current safety capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43
Past technical performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44
Contact information for key peopl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44
Current Financial Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Enclosure
Disqualification notification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45
Plan for hiring workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45
Virginia DGS Form 30-68 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45
Proposed subcontractors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45
Proposed Project Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .PART B . . . .47 Project Description and Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49
Work performed by Town or others . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51
List of all permits and approvals required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51
Anticipated adverse impacts and remediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52
Anticipated positive impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53
Proposed schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54
Contingency plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55
Allocation of risk and liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55
Assumptions related to Town use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55
Phased openings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56
Design & Construction Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56
Unique Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .PART C . . . .61
143
Item b.
PG 37
Project Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .PART D . . . .65
Development Financing and Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
Fee or Finance Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
Risks and plans to deal with them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
Local, State and Federal resources to be sought . . . . . . . . . . . .69
Town support sought . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69
Private sources sought . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69
Analysis of public value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69
Project Benefit and Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .PART E . . . .73
Development Financing and Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
Fee or Finance Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
Risks and plans to deal with them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
Local, State and Federal resources to be sought . . . . . . . . . . . .69
Town support sought . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69
Private sources sought . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69
Analysis of public value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69
TABLE OF CONTENTS TAB PAGE
144
Item b.
145
Item b.
PART A BACKGROUND & FIRM/TEAM QUALIFICATIONS
• The structure of the proposer
• Qualifications - experience
• Past safety performance and
current safety capabilities
• Past technical performance
• Contact information for key people
• Current Financial Statements
• Disqualification notification
• Plan for hiring workers
• Virginia DGS Form 30-68
• Proposed subcontractors
146
Item b.
PG 40
š €
‚ƒ „
… † ‡ˆ
†‡ ˆ‰ Š
‰
‰
Š‹Š
147
Item b.
PG 41
A.i. Structure of Proposer
Three different uses are incorporated in this proposal for the Liberty Street lot: a Performing Arts/
Convention Center (including a restaurant); age-restricted (senior) affordable housing; and public
parking. Because of regulatory and financing reasons, all of these uses cannot proceed under a
single contract. For that reason, as shown on the Organization Chart attached, we are submitting two
proposals, carefully coordinated to be in parallel. One proposal is for the senior affordable housing,
with a portion of the public parking. The other proposal is for the Performing Arts/Conference Center,
restaurant, and the balance of the public parking. In what follows, we refer to the two proposing
organizations as “Co-Developers.”
Co-Developer for Senior Affordable Housing: Good Works, LP
Good Works is a Virginia Limited Partnership (LP). Its General Partner is Hart, McMurphy & Parks,
which is wholly owned by G. Kimball Hart. As Owner, Mr. Hart will be the senior principal who will
manage this contract and execute the agreement on behalf of this proposer. Please see the a resume and
qualifications of Good Works at the end of this proposal.
The Senior Affordable Housing portion of
this project, including both resident parking
and a portion of public parking, will occupy
approximately half of the Liberty Street lot. In
order to meet state and Federal rules for projects
funded with tax credits and to meet Loudoun
County policy for projects receiving County loan
funds, it is required that the lot be owned fee
simple by the affordable project developer. In
this case that is Good Works.
Good Works has already selected the team that will work on this project: Architect to be DBI; Civil
Engineer to be Bowman; and General Contractor to be DAVIS Construction. Good Works will execute
standard professional contracts with each of these firms. And, per Virginia Housing rules, a set of books
will be kept solely for this affordable “side” of the project. However, as is clear on the Organization Chart,
these same sub-contractors will also be selected to work on the PAC side of the project and these
contracts will be carefully coordinated so that the project can be built all at the same time.
Co-Developer for the Performing Arts/Convention Center: Waukeshaw Development
Waukeshaw Development is a Petersburg, VA-based real estate development firm specializing in
adaptive reuse and historic preservation projects. They have completed a variety of new build and reuse
projects in small communities throughout Virginia and North Carolina. Dave McCormack will be the
senior principal who will manage this contract and execute the agreement on behalf of this proposer.
The resume and qualifications of Waukeshaw Development are provided at the end of this proposal. The
Performing Arts/Convention Center, restaurant, and the balance of the public parking will occupy the
other half of the existing Liberty Street lot. Because it is the norm in other jurisdictions, and because this
is a situation very similar to Ida Lee Park, we are proposing that this half of the project should remain
owned by the Town of Leesburg. Thus, on this side of the project, Waukeshaw will work with the Town to
148
Item b.
PG 42
write a contract to deliver the PAC, restaurant, and parking for a set contract price. This is very similar to
a design-build contract, with which the Town is already very familiar.
As can be seen on the Organization Chart.
Waukeshaw has already chosen to work with:
DBI as Architects; Bowman Consulting as Civil
Engineer; and DAVIS Construction as General
Contractor. As stated above, although under
separate contract, using the same subcontractors
with coordinated contracts makes it possible to
design and construct this project on a small, urban
site in the most economically efficient way.
Note, also, on the Organization Chart that
the Waukeshaw team will be augmented by
subcontracting with Ms. Daphne Maxwell Reid, who will provide a wealth of information as to the design and
future operation of the PAC. Ms. Reid has had a long and distinguished career as an actress, film producer,
and performing arts educator. Please see her biography at the back of this proposal.
Advisory Group
An advisory group has also been formed to offer guidance in our pursuit of this RFP, including concerned
private citizens with substantial relevant experience and personal interest in the project. Peter Burnett,
Principal of Burnett & Williams, P.C. located in Leesburg, Virginia, has been practicing law in Leesburg
since 1978 and has been committed to charitable activities in the Town, and in Loudoun County, for
many years. He is a founding director of the Loudoun Abused Women’s Shelter, a founding director
and Chairman of Loudoun Cares, Co-Chairman of the Downtown Improvement Association, founder
and Chairman of the Loudoun Law Foundation, and founding Chairman of the Virginia Diversity
Foundation, the parent organization of the Ampersand Pantry Project. Whether salvaging a historic
Leesburg structure, building a home for a valued member of the community, or planning for the future of
downtown Leesburg, Peter is tirelessly devoted to the common good.
Kareem McCullough is a product of Loudoun County Public Schools where he began his study of guitar.
He continued his studies at Radford University, earning at Bachelor of Music in Music Education, and
then at Marshall University, where he earned his Master of Arts in Music Performance, Classical Guitar.
Since 2016, Kareem has been the Director of Guitar and Orchestra programs for the Loudoun County
Public Schools, sharing his love of music with students throughout Loudoun County. In 2020, he joined
the Leesburg Commission on Public Art and advocates for, and advises, on matters of art in the Town of
Leesburg.
A.ii.a. Qualifications
At over 750 affordable units built and occupied to date, Mr. Hart has led the creation of more affordable
housing in Loudoun County than any other affordable housing developer. Early years, at the Windy Hill
Foundation, focused on smaller, infill projects, including duplexes, quadplexes, and low-rise multifamily
designs. More recently, at Good Works, projects are larger 96-125 unit multifamily projects, often on
podiums, to preserve costly land in Eastern Loudoun. Completing these projects included the successful
149
Item b.
PG 43
approval of 9 rezoning applications. Good Works is the only affordable housing developer headquartered
in Loudoun County. Please see the list of successfully completed projects at the end of this proposal.
Waukeshaw Development Inc. has become a leader in the adaptive reuse and historic preservation
development industry through nearly 20 years of development experience. Led by company President,
Dave McCormack, the company began with the revitalization of a 6-block section of Old Towne
Petersburg and then expanded to small, untapped markets across Virginia. Waukeshaw uses creative
tools such as public-private partnerships, Historic Tax Credits, and grants to achieve development goals.
Waukeshaw has a portfolio of over 700 residential multifamily units, owns and operates three breweries/
restaurants, as well as a golf club, coffee shop, AirBnBs, and campground. The company has two more
breweries/restaurants, several multifamily projects, and a boutique hotel under development. The
company has not only completed its own development projects, but has co-developed multiple projects
and consulted with communities across the Commonwealth on their redevelopment goals. In total, the
company has invested over $150 million in projects totaling 1.2 million square feet.
A.ii.b. Past safety performance and current safety capabilities
Construction contractor, DAVIS Construction is proud of their sterling safety record and won’t do
anything to tarnish it. DAVIS is consistently ranked above the rest for excellence in safety performance.
DAVIS lives by the adage that no job is too important to take shortcuts on safety. In DAVIS's view, it is
important to look at safety in terms of more than just jobsite safety, but as personal safety. Keeping every
individual safe and secure is vitally important to the company — and to the success of the project. DAVIS
trains their employees in general safety as well as jobsite-specific safety, and strives to continuously
communicate the importance of keeping safety top-of-mind.
Safety is more than a habit. It’s a mindset each of
the team members will employ on every project,
achieving industry recognition for excellence in
safety performance. DAVIS holds their partners and
subcontractors to equally demanding standards.
Getting everyone home safely at the end of the
day is DAVIS's highest priority, holding everyone
accountable on every project for the wellbeing of
both staff and subcontractors. Through continuing
education, jobsite inspections and weekly reviews,
DAVIS provides the training necessary to ensure compliance across the board. The commitment to safety
begins and ends with established on-site practices. An experienced safety manager is appointed to each
project, who is involved from day one in planning and hazard analysis. Through the project’s lifecycle, this
expert works with the entire team as a key resource, providing oversight and conducting weekly safety
inspections. At the daily level, the DAVIS superintendent takes primary responsibility for jobsite safety.
With a minimum of 30 hours of OSHA certification, this jobsite supervisor is trained to recognize potential
safety hazards. They address concerns and identify solutions in weekly Toolbox Meetings, engaging the
entire team in safety compliance. Certified First Aid/CPR staff are always on-site and available for all work
activities to respond to incidents and emergencies. As part of internal corporate learning initiatives, field
teams are updated on the latest trends and issues in safety management, providing in-house education
throughout the year.150
Item b.
PG 44
A.ii.c. Past Technical Performance
As shown table of “Affordable Housing Experience,” provided with the company resume at the end of
this proposal, between 2014 and 2020, Mr. Hart completed four projects which could be considered
comparable in size and complexity to the affordable senior project proposed here: Shreveport Ridge
Apartments (98 units); Heronview Apartments (96 units); Stone Springs apartments (128 units); and
Ashburn Chase Apartments (96 units). All of these projects were completed on time and within budget.
There were no legal claims filed in regard to any of these projects.
Hart, McMurphy & Parks, the General Partner of Good Works has been in business in Virginia for
over 40 years. Mr. Hart has had roughly 25 years of experience working with the non-profit Windy Hill
Foundation--13 years as the volunteer President and 12 years as the Executive Director. Good Works, a
for-profit affordable housing developer, has been in operation for five years.
Waukeshaw Development, Inc. was selected as the co-developer of the Performing Arts/Convention
Center because they have extensive experience in real estate development in small communities across
Virginia since 2004. With more than $150M of adaptive reuse and new construction projects now
complete, Waukeshaw Development has successfully developed properties in markets across Virginia
such as Petersburg, Hopewell, Bedford, Amherst, Vinton, and Blackstone, and has established itself as a
pioneering development company in diverse markets.
DAVIS Construction has been selected as the General Contractor for this project, in part, because it has
significant experience in the construction of PACs. For the senior affordable housing project, per the
rules of Virginia Housing, DAVIS Construction will provide a Letter of Credit to insure timely completion
of the project. As to the PAC side of the project, DAVIS Construction will provide standard Performance
Bonds to insure completion of the project. These guarantees are in addition to the stellar performance
record of the company and their substantial balance sheet, which speak for themselves.
A.iii. Contact information for Key People
G. Kimball Hart
Good Works LC
kim@goodworksva.com(540) 687-5866
102 W. Washington St.
Middleburg, VA 20117
www.goodworksva.com
Dave McCormackWaukeshaw Development, Inc.
dave@waukeshaw.com
245 E Bank Street
Petersburg, VA 23803
www.waukeshaw.com
Mark Baker
Bowman Consulting
mbaker@bowman.com
(703) 669-5340
101 South Street SELeesburg, VA 20175
www.bowman.com
Al Storm
DBI Architects, Inc.
astorm@dbia.com(703) 787-0882
1984 Isaac Newton Square West
Suite 400
Reston, VA 20190
www.dbia.com
Jim Davis
DAVIS Construction
jdavis@davisconstruction.com
(301) 881-2990
12530 Parklawn DriveRockville, MD 20852
www.davisconstruction.com
Daphne Maxwell Reid
msdaphne@mac.com
www.daphnemaxwellreid.com
Peter Burnett
Attorney, Burnett & Williams
peterb@burnettwilliams.com (703) 777-1650
105 Loudoun Street SE
Leesburg, VA 20175
www.burnettwilliams.com
Kareem McCulloughkareem.mccullough89@gmail.com
7 North Street NE, Apt. 2
Leesburg, VA 20176
151
Item b.
PG 45
A.iv. Current Financial Statement
Please see additional enclosure, marked "Financial Statements - Confidential."
A.v. Disqualification Notice
The proposer knows of no persons who would be obligated to disqualify themselves from participation
in any transaction arising from or in connection to the project pursuant to The Virginia State and Local
Government Conflict of Interest Act, Chapter 31 (Va. Code § 2.2-3100, et seq.).
A.vi. Plan for hiring workers
DAVIS takes pride in developing strong and lasting relationships with subcontractors and suppliers
within the community. Through their diverse experience, DAVIS has grown an extensive database
of subcontractors aligned by specialty markets. DAVIS's database contains thousands of potential
partners that are screened and prequalified to ensure that the appropriate team matches with the size
and complexity of the project. DAVIS's Risk Management Group manages the DAVIS subcontractor
prequalification process. Using only prequalified subcontractors and vendors significantly reduces
the financial, operational, and reputational risks associated with subcontractor operations. The
prequalification process is intended to be a comprehensive evaluation of the subcontractor. It covers
financials, safety record, operational capacity, experience with similar work, bonding capacity, depth of
their insurance program, legal history, and DAVIS history.
A.vii. Virginia DGS Form 30-68
Note, we have not included the Virginia DGS Form 30-68. This appears to be a requirement after the
project is bid and is ready to be released.
A.viii. Proposed Subcontractors
DBI Architects, Inc.
1984 Isaac Newton Square West
Suite 400
Reston, VA 20190
Bowman Consulting Ltd.
101 South Street SE
Leesburg, VA
DAVIS Construction
12530 Parklawn Drive
Rockville, MD 20852
152
Item b.
153
Item b.
PART B PROPOSED PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
• Project Description and Concept
• Work performed by Town or others
• List of all permits and approvals required
• Anticipated adverse impacts
and remediation
• Anticipated positive impacts
• Proposed schedule
• Contingency plans
• Allocation of risk and liability
• Assumptions related to Town use
• Phased openings
• Design & Construction Standards
154
Item b.
155
Item b.
PG 49
B.i. Project Description and Concept
Aimed at achieving the best and highest uses of the
2.03-acre Liberty Lot parcel, adjacent to both the
heart of Old & Historic Downtown Leesburg, as well
as the Arts & Culture District, this proposed project
brings together several high-priority objectives of
Legacy Leesburg and the most recent Town Plan for
Leesburg. In a singular landmark destination, this
project will:
• Deliver to the Town a Performing Arts Center;
• Address a need for senior affordable
housing;
• Provide the Town with an increased number
of flexible structured parking spaces.
The envisioned approach would create a dramatic
yet pragmatic addition to the Town that addresses
cultural, societal, and economic needs identified in
Legacy Leesburg, as adopted into the Town Plan on
March 22, 2022.
A senior affordable housing component of the
project, providing 60 to 80 age-restricted units at
below market rate, will occupy approximately half
of the site. The remaining half of the site will be
comprised of a performing arts center/conference
center. The affordable housing and performing
arts center will be conjoined by, and will share, an
enclosed multi-level parking garage. 51 parking
spaces will be available to the affordable housing
project, and another 175 parking spaces to be
used in whatever way the Town believes best
serves the community, resulting in a net gain of 50 public
parking spaces over the existing Liberty Lot.
Additionally, a pedestrian bridge over Town Branch
and enhancements to the bank is proposed. This
bridge will increase the walkability of the Town, even
as it increases residents’ access to green space.
Notably, this new entry into Leesburg’s Old & Historic
and Art & Culture will be of great benefit to the
Town’s business community, bringing in new customers and
visitors.
156
Item b.
PG 50
Initial Project Budget
Dump Removal and Land Purchase
Use of Funds
Excavation & Trucking $ 2,000,000
Landfill Tipping Fees $ 3,000,000
$ 5,000,000
Source of Funds
Sale of 1 Acre to Good Works $ 2,000,000
Loudoun County Fee Waiver $ 3,000,000
$ 5,000,000
Senior Affordable Housing (65 Units + 51 Parking Spaces)
Use of Funds
Land Purchase $ 2,000,000
Construction - Residences + Parking $ 15,300,000
Financing, Fees, Soft Costs $ 6,700,000
$ 24,000,000
Source of Funds
Low-Income Housing Tax Credits $ 7,300,000
Tax-Exempt Bond $ 6,200,000
Loudoun County Housing Trust Fund $ 4,300,000
Other Loans and Grants $ 6,200,000
$ 24,000,000
Performing Arts/Conference Center (Including 175 Parking Spaces)
Use of Funds
Land Purchase RETAINED BY TOWN
Construction - Facilities + Parking $ 19,500,000
Financing, Fees, Soft Costs $ 8,500,000
$ 28,000,000
Source of Funds
Grants and Capital Donations TBD
Town of Leesburg Bonds $ 28,000,000
$ 28,000,000
Note:
Formula for Land Budget Value:
Leesburg Assessed Land Value (minus Waste and Earth Removal )
(plus 2.0 Million Site Purchase Dollars from Good Works) equals the new Town site value.
157
Item b.
PG 51
B.ii. Work performed by Town or others
Once the Town has determined to proceed with the PPEA for this project, it will need to address the two
special exceptions that will be necessary for the project to meet current zoning requirements: structured
parking and the construction of more than 5 residential units in the B-1 zone.
In addition, to obtain the benefit of tipping fee waivers at the county land fill from Loudoun County,
removal of the old dump material will have to be undertaken by the Town prior to selling half of the lot for
private affordable housing units. Prior to the removal process, the Town will need to sufficiently evaluate
the content to be moved to determine acceptability under county landfill permits as well as to determine
destinations for materials that the county landfill cannot accept. It is estimated that the initial cost of
such comprehensive testing will be between $50,000 and $100,000.
Also, prior to the dump removal process, the Town will need to advise the public of the parking lot
closure, and it also will need to make alternative arrangements for any Town activities it now performs on
the site.
B.iii. List of all permits and approvals required
Federal Permits
• Wetlands Delineation
• Hazardous Waste Disposal Permit
• FEMA (if required)
State Permits
• Hazardous Waste Disposal Permit
Local Permits and Approvals (Town of Leesburg)
• Special Exceptions
o Structured Parking
o More than 5 units in B-1 Zone
• Board of Architectural Review
o Demolition Permit
o Certificate of Appropriateness
• Floodplain Study/Floodplain Alteration (if required)
• Site Plan, Subdivision & Easement Plat Approval
• Address Plat
158
Item b.
PG 52
• Water and Sewer Easement
• Nutrient Credit Purchase (if applicable)
• VSMP
• SWPPP
• Grading Permit
• Zoning Permit
• Building Permit
• As-builts
Senior Affordable Housing Funding Approvals
• Low-Income Housing Tax Credit approvals
• Tax Exempt Bond approval
Construction Permits
• CLOMR, if required (Conditional Letter of Map Revision)
• Zoning Approval
• Utility Connections
• Grading Permit
• Building Permits
• SWPPP
• Occupancy Permits
• LOMR, if CLOMR required (Letter of Map Revision)
A proposed schedule for the timing of applying for and securing these permits and approvals will be
prepared in Phase Two of this application process, once it is known more precisely when the Town might
give approval for proceeding with this project.
B.iv. Anticipated adverse impacts and remediation
The Leesburg Performing Arts Center will present many opportunities for the Town. The venue will
offer a place for gathering and celebration of the arts. The facilities will meet a longtime desire of
the community as noted within the Town Plan – Legacy Leesburg. The facilities will reinforce the
establishment of the Arts & Cultural District for the Town. The venue will attract patrons with stature and
means to support other restaurants, hotels, events, and places to visit within the Downtown. This facility
offers the opportunity to add another jewel into the crown of Leesburg as the best place to live, work,
play, and entertain arts & culture.
Individuals may express concern that the sound of concerts and other events held in the performing arts
center might create objectionable noise for neighbors. Because performers of every sort expect zero
noise from the outside interfering with their work, every theater is designed to fully insulate against the
transmission of noise, in or out.
Some have expressed concern that this project will aggravate the traffic flow on Liberty Street,
particularly at its intersection with King Street. Without the benefit of traffic studies, which will come
later, we anticipate that the project will actually reduce traffic congestion on Liberty Street. Unlike today
when all users of the 120 space Liberty Lot enter at the end of Liberty Street, in our proposal only senior
159
Item b.
PG 53
housing residents will access their approximately 50 parking spaces from Liberty Street. All others will
enter the public parking lot from Wirt St., mid-block, which can be accessed from both Market and Royal
Streets to the north and King St. via South St. from the south.
The Leesburg Performing Arts Center will be located one and two blocks off already established “Lees-
burg Fixed Routes” within the Loudoun County Transit system which can be adjusted to off hours for
the performing arts venue. These bus routes may be considered for extension if future traffic studies for
the site warrant such conditions. The Project will comply with local transportation requirements within
the Town through submission of a traffic scoping request and meeting with Town Transportation staff to
determine existing conditions of roads and future scenarios for traffic with the proposed project.
Also, some regard the addition of businesses along South Street as an adverse impact. Because such
improvements are contemplated by Legacy Leesburg, we regard them as positive impacts.
And, though some regard more users of the W&OD trail as a negative, we view a possible pedestrian
bridge to it at the bottom of South Street bringing more people into town as a positive.
Some have expressed concern that disruption of the dump material could be a dangerous process.
Performed in accordance with state and federal environmental guidelines, the dump can be safely
removed. As the dump was not created or closed in accordance with modern environmental standards,
and the 2003 brownfield study suspected leakage into Town Branch, removal of the dump is a very
strong environmental positive.
The project intends to remove existing materials that have been stored within the landfill area for de-
cades and reclaim the site/area and replace the surface parking lot with a more valuable asset within the
Town.
• Proper removal of the landfill materials will mitigate/remove all the materials outlined under
previous DEQ studies
• We propose the town conduct another more detailed study to further assess and quantify
materials within the landfill for removal and deposit at the County’s Landfill.
• The proposed facilities will comply with Federal, State, and local ordinances and regulations for
flood control, building code, etc.
• These facilities will not emit odors, fumes, or substances toxic or detrimental to the surrounding
area.
• The site will improve (over the existing conditions) stormwater, and water quality through
compliance with State and local regulations.
B.v. Anticipated positive impacts
As has been described above, the positive impacts of this project are numerous, diverse, and
economically significant. Each of the four major project elements contributes to the quality of life in
Leesburg.
Removal of the antiquated and non-conforming dump, in addition to being beneficial to the project
design, is simply responsible and prudent stewardship given its ongoing potential for negative
environmental impact and its less than appealing or useful frontage on Wirt Street.
160
Item b.
PG 54
Tasks 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028
Town of Leesburg
PPEA - Phase I
PPEA - Phase II
PPEA - Contract
Special Exception*
Dump Removal
Content Analysis
Removal Permits
Removal
Affordable Senior Housing
Pre-Development
Loudoun Affordable Multi-Family Housing Loan Program
Application
Approval
Virginia Housing Bond Application
Finance Closing
Construction
Opening and Lease-Up
Performing Arts/Convention Center
Pre-Development
Fundraising/Finance
Construction
Opening
Public Parking
Construction on Affordable Lot (51)
Construction on Performing Arts/Convention Center Lot (175)
*Diligence on the part of the Town has the potential to accelerate the process by up to one year. Estimated Project Milestone
Public parking availability in downtown Leesburg has not kept up with the Town’s population growth.
Adding approximately 65 - 75 more spaces at the subject location with a much more convenient central
access point on Wirt Street will benefit downtown visitors and businesses day and night.
Senior affordable housing is in short supply in Leesburg and beyond. The subject site is particularly
appropriate for seniors as they contribute to local businesses with part time work, tend to walk rather
than drive, and when they do drive, it is generally not during the peak hours.
Clearly the most impactful element of this project, from economic, social, and cultural perspectives, is
the creation of a performing arts center that can easily convert to a business conference center and
includes a restaurant, visual arts lobby/gallery, and a community meeting and educational center. While
the numerous functions of the facility would be desirable in virtually any location, they are particularly
beneficial at the subject site, as it becomes a powerful connection between the historic district and the
anticipated re-development of Virginia Village with its 640 residential units within easy walking distance.
Virtually every community in the US that has had the good sense to invest in a performing arts center
sings the praises of their economic, social, and cultural benefits. There is no reason Leesburg should be
any different.
B.vi. Proposed schedule
161
Item b.
PG 55
B.vii. Contingency plans
We are proposing three highest and best uses for the Liberty Street lot. However, this is a very small
lot. These three uses can be accomplished only if all three are constructed simultaneously on the site.
Therefore, there is no contingency plan for proceeding with any one or two parts of the project, should
one part be delayed. The contingency plan is to wait until all three parts are ready to go before starting
construction.
On this project, the biggest unknown is the specific content characteristics of the current, capped dump.
Until testing is complete, it is impossible to know the true cost and time to safely remove this dump. In
this case, our contingency plan is to wait until the site is safe and “clean” before we start construction.
The Senior Housing part of this project will require significant state and Federal funding. These funds
are applied for and awarded on set schedules. Again, these funding schedules will be taken into account
when preparing the overall integrated project schedule. Should a funding delay occur, the project will be
delayed, as necessary, to facilitate a combined start on all three parts of the project.
B. viii Allocations of Risk and Liability
As with any construction project, the Town, as land owner for the PAC, and Good Works, as the fee sim-
ple owner of the Senior Affordable lot, will be covered during construction by adequate insurance poli-
cies carried by the General Contractor. (The excellent safety record of DAVIS Construction is addressed
in Section A.ii.b.)
The risk of not completing the project on schedule will be mitigated by contracting with one of the
largest and best-performing General Contractors in the greater Washington area. That will be mitigated
further by using both Performance Bonds and Letters of Credit to insure timely completion. Pending acts
of God or forces of nature, this project will be completed in a timely manner.
B.ix. Assumptions related to Town use
As conceived in our proposal, the Town will retain ownership of approximately half of the subject lot
and the other half will be sold for affordable senior housing. It is anticipated that much like Ida Lee Park
and other Town owned facilities, the Performing Arts/Conference Center [PAC] and related structured
parking facility will be managed by the Town directly or through contracted management. The build-
ing, as conceived, will have many uses that fall into five categories. First, existing public parking will be
expanded by approximately 50 spaces, resulting in 175 parking spaces to be used in whatever way the
Town believes best serves the community. Second, the 450 seat PAC and its large reception area/lobby/
art gallery is anticipated to have regular productions evenings and weekends. Third, as the PAC’s theater
component can be converted into a flat floored conference facility, literally with the push of a few but-
tons, it is anticipated that various corporate and other large meetings will occur there on a regular basis
(and, as needed, for various public meetings and hearings with anticipated audiences in excess of Coun-
cil Chamber capacity). Fourth, the building is anticipated to include a meeting and education center that
can be used by various organizations for meetings and educational programs. Lastly, the 4,000 sf restau-
rant, anticipated to be leased to a private operator by the Town, and the outdoor park amenities, will not
162
Item b.
PG 56
only complement and support the PAC activities but will also draw regular independent users.
Converting landfill and surface parking (potentially damaging materials adjacent to a floodplain area)
with limited opportunities to revenue, to a more viable means of potential revenue and spin off tax base
for neighboring/community business and facilities.
In summary, our vision is a building that will be a vibrant center of publicly beneficial activities from park-
ing to dining to performances to educational events, all in support of the community at large for genera-
tions to come.
B. x. Phased Opening
As the “foundation” of this project, construction of lower level parking will begin first. Once parking is
complete, the Senior Affordable Housing and the Performing Arts/Convention Center will be built in
parallel. However, because this is a small site, safety regulations will not allow the public to enter any
part of the site while another part is still under construction. Therefore, the project will be fully complete
before it is open to the public.
Once open to the public, the Senior Housing Project will lease up over one or two months. (Because
demand is so extreme in Leesburg for Senior Affordable Housing, the property will be virtually full—
through pre-leasing—before the property completes construction.)
The Performing Arts Center is likely to have several “soft” openings as various groups “test” the facility
and learn to operate its many special features. This process can proceed as slowly or as quickly as the
artistic community is able to respond.
B.xi. Design & Construction Standards
The proposer is committed to providing a design for both components of the project that is contextual
with the fabric of Leesburg's existing architecture. DBI Architects, the subcontractor selected to provide
this service, has a long and storied history of working within the vocabulary of a district's established
standards. Projects in Leesburg that DBI has created or that are still in progress include studies for
Courthouse Square and the Loudoun Times-Mirror building.
Bowman consistently delivers technical depth and industry leading talent that, when combined, produce
innovative and solution-driven results. Bowman's clients benefit from a balance of deep national resourc-
es often associated with large firms, and the flexibility
and quick response associated with smaller boutique
firms, to effectively navigate through intricate approval
processes.
DAVIS Construction is renowned for their commitment
to excellence. Driven by our their core values of Trust,
Excellence in Service, Integrity, and Building Relation-
ships, DAVIS takes a holistic, all-encompassing look
at every aspect of every project to ensure a seamless,
fully integrated experience.
163
Item b.
PG 57
164
Item b.
165
Item b.
PART C UNIQUE CAPABILITIES
“This profile of an affluent market suggests that a performing arts
center and top-quality events venue would both flourish.
Louise Stevens
ArtsMarket, Inc.
166
Item b.
167
Item b.
PG 61
C. Unique Capabilities
The proposers and their team of contractors and consultants bring an unparalleled level of unique capa-
bility to this project. At over 750 affordable units built and occupied to date, G. Kimball Hart, with Good
Works and other organizations, has led the creation of more affordable housing in Loudoun County than
any other affordable housing developer. Early years, at the Windy Hill Foundation, focused on smaller,
infill projects, including duplexes, quadplexes, and low-rise multifamily designs. More recently, at Good
Works, projects are larger 96-125 unit multifamily projects, often on podiums, to preserve costly land in
Eastern Loudoun. Completing these projects included the successful approval of 9 rezoning applications.
Good Works is the only affordable housing developer headquartered in Loudoun County.
Waukeshaw Development Inc. is a leader in the adaptive reuse and historic preservation development
industry, with nearly 20 years of development experience. The company began with the revitalization
of a 6-block section of Old Towne Petersburg and then expanded to small, untapped markets across
Virginia. Waukeshaw uses creative tools such as public-private partnerships, Historic Tax Credits, and
grants to achieve development goals. Now Waukeshaw has a portfolio of over 700 residential multifamily
units, owns and operates three breweries/restaurants, as well as a golf club, coffee shop, AirBnBs, and
campground.
DBI Architects, Inc brings to the project a fifty-year history of architecture and interior design Since
its inception in 1973, DBI
has provided full-service
architecture and interior
design services to clients who
share our belief that beautiful
environments foster meaningful
human interaction and
successful business outcomes.
DBI has not only witnessed,
but has been a pioneer of, the
evolution of design. As a result,
the firm have extensive and
authentic knowledge of, and
experience with, designing
state-of-the-art buildings and
interiors. The firm has designed
theatre and auditorium
spaces for the Securities
and Exchange Commission,
Constitution Center, the
Church of the Redeemer,
the Intelligence Community
Campus – Bethesda [ICC-B],
and many others. Further, DBI's
long history with the Loudoun
168
Item b.
PG 62
Design Cabinet, and other pro bono pursuits with the Town of Leesburg and Loudoun County give the
firm an unique view of the Town's needs and expectations.
Bowman has a long history of success in Leesburg and Loudoun County, and will provide the
expertise and guidance to clear the dump on which Liberty Lot sits, to address the known and hidden
environmental issues required before any activities that disturb the soil at the site can begin.
DAVIS Construction is among the region's premier general contractors. As one of the largest contractors
in all of Northern Virginia, their financial strength, buying power, and access to the highest quality
sub-contractors gives them unprecedented strength to complete this project on-time, and on-budget.
Furthermore, they have significant previous experience building performing arts centers.
Finally, our team is extremely fortunate to have secured the participation of Daphne Maxwell Reid. Over
the course of a full career working in the Performing Arts, Ms. Reid has augmented these strengths with
a commitment to Performing Arts Education. Her experience in the realities of what works will provide
unparalleled guidance to the programming and design of the Performing Arts Center.
We believe this exceptional team is unique in its ability to design and deliver this project.
169
Item b.
170
Item b.
171
Item b.
PART D PROJECT FINANCING
• Development Financing and Operations
• Fee or Finance Assumptions
• Risks and plans to deal with them
• Local, State and Federal resources
to be sought
• Town support sought
• Private sources sought
• Analysis of public value
172
Item b.
173
Item b.
PG 67
D.i. Development Financing and Operations
As is typical in PPEAs, the financing of this project will be complex. For the Senior Affordable Housing, a
detailed financial proforma will be prepared for and approved by Virginia Housing to ensure future suc-
cess of the project, on every level, before state and Federal funds will be committed. All “Sources and
Uses” of funds will be carefully detailed. This financial data is in the public domain and will be available
for the Town to review. Typical Sources of Funds will include: Low-Income Housing Tax Credits; Tax Ex-
empt Bonds; State and Federal low-interest loans; and third party loans and grants from local, state, and
national sources. Loudoun County has already stated that they will be open to an application for funds,
to support the project, from the Loudoun County Housing Trust Fund. All the funds will mentioned above
be raised entirely by Good Works with no obligation from the Town. Once the rental units are occupied,
monthly rents from residents will cover all operating costs, with the exception that County or State rental
vouchers may support units designated for the disabled.
The Town will have its own set of financing options for the Performing Arts/Convention Center includ-
ing, for capital construction: Capital Improvement Funds; general obligation bonds; and potential grants
to support economic development projects and the performing arts. Costs for removing the dump can
be supported with both state and Federal funds for environmental cleanup. It is also anticipated that the
County will be open to considering reducing or waiving tipping fees at the County landfill, once an analy-
sis of the dump contents has been completed.
As to ongoing operational costs for the Performing Arts Center, it is assumed that Convention uses of
the space and the restaurant will be self-supporting through fees for use and sale of meals whether
restaurant-style or catered for functions. Support for the Performing Arts Center, itself, is expected to
come from two principal sources: the Town’s General Fund and from a private endowment that will be
promoted to private individuals and corporations, once the Town is fully committed to the project.
D.ii. Fee or Finance Assumptions
This section requests a very detailed analysis of all financing assumptions. However, at this “Initial Pro-
posal” phase of our RFP response, it is premature to have prepared the detailed proformas necessary
to answer these detailed questions. We must have feedback from the Town on such basic assumptions
as the number of Senior Affordable units they will support, the number of seats in the Performing Arts
Center, and the number of public parking spaces desired. Once these basic programming discussions
have been held, and initial targets agreed to, detailed financial analyses will be prepared as part of the
“Detailed Proposal” phase of our RFP response.
D.iii. Risks and plans to deal with them
Every project of any significance carries risks. Preparatory due diligence requires identification and
analysis of likelihood, avoidance strategies, and remediation approaches.
For this project, risks fall into four primary categories: environmental, construction cost, financing, and
operations. As virtually every aspect of the subject property has been undertaken by hundreds if not
174
Item b.
PG 68
thousands of communities across the country, the magnitude of those risks and elements of remediation
can be evaluated with confidence by subject matter experts.
First, the environmental risks of removing closed dump sites are well known to the private entities that
do the work and the government entities that regulate and supervise it. The process begins with com-
prehensive testing of the dump content, a reliable and relatively inexpensive process that can and should
be completed as early as possible in the life of the project. Given the knowledge of what was typically
deposited in the dump during its 50 year life and the findings of the 2003 brownfields study, there is ev-
ery reason to be cautiously optimistic that further and more comprehensive testing will result in a some-
what routine, safe, and economically viable plan for its removal.
Second, the risk of construction cost surprises is largely ameliorated by the extensive experience of both
Good Works and DAVIS Construction Co. in projects similar to this one. Further security comes from
having a contract price for the precise work to be completed backed by the usual bonding and other
economic capacity requirements of a project of this size and scope.
Third, financing is considerably more reliable in this project than most private developments of this
scope as about half of the project cost is within the exclusive control of the Town and the senior housing
component is financed under regulations that are created and enforced by Virginia Housing, a State of
Virginia agency.
Fourth, as hundreds and hundreds of communities have built performing arts centers in recent decades,
the parameters of income and expense predictions are well understood. There is no reason to believe
that there is anything about the Town of Leesburg or the PAC that is contemplated that would suggest
this project is any kind of outlier.
One additional, minor risk is worth mentioning here. Consistent with Legacy Leesburg, the project
includes a bridge across Town Branch at the bottom of Wirt Street. This design element encourages pe-
destrian and bicycle access to downtown and provides a lovely outdoor gathering spot for the public at
any time of day or night. Whether the Northern Virginia Park Authority would approve this contemplated
enhancement of Georgetown Park Is not known, and, for this proposer, not predictable.
175
Item b.
PG 69
D.iv. Local, State and Federal resources to be sought
Many of the proposed sources of funding for this project are shown in the “Initial Project Budget” at-
tached. Below, we have broken these possible sources down by the intended use:
Funding for Existing Dump Removal
• State and Federal funds for environmental remediation; and
• Local Loudoun County support by reduction or waving of landfill tipping fees.
Senior Affordable Housing
• Federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credits;
• Virginia Housing Tax-Exempt Bonds;.
• National Housing Trust Fund;
• Virginia Housing Trust Fund; and
• Loudoun County Housing Trust Fund.
Performing Arts/Convention Center (PAC)
• NEPA Qualified Federal Grants
• State Performing Arts funding; and
• Local Individual and corporate donations.
Further work in specifying each of these funding sources, including the general magnitude of loans or
grants made, as well as funding schedules will be undertaken in Phase II of this proposal.
D.v. Town support sought
The success of the project requires an enthusiastic, cooperative partnership between the public and
private sector. The Town must embrace and endorse the many benefits of both affordable senior hous-
ing and a high quality performing arts center that will attract attendees from Leesburg, Loudoun County,
and beyond. The town must also support the many reasons for removing the old town dump and essen-
tially replacing it with about 50% more parking than currently exists on the site. Lastly, the Town must
invest in the construction and ongoing operations of the facility with confidence that Leesburg, like the
many other communities that have invested in PACs, will reap the many rewards such facilities bring to
the communities that build them.
176
Item b.
PG 70
D.vi. Private sources sought
There are two basic categories of potential private support for the performing arts center component
of the project: contributions to construction and contributions to the ongoing operation of the theater.
Private funding for both should be explored and sought, but not as a necessity for moving forward. As
the project advances and public consciousness increases, a professional fund raising initiative can be
undertaken. The opportunity for naming rights and other sponsorships will likely generate significant
interest from individuals and businesses capable of providing significant private funding. Profession-
als advise that large donations will not be made prior to the Town making a firm commitment to move
forward with the project.
Most communities establish a 501c3 for the purpose of seeking private funding of ongoing operations
and various specific programs. This, too, should be achieved with the help of experienced fund raising
professionals.
D.vii. Analysis of public value
For decades, residents of Leesburg and beyond have touted the value of a Performing Arts Center as
having great value to our community. While such opinions, oft repeated, certainly provide ample evi-
dence of public support, they are of little help in determining the economic impact of such a facility and
provide no statistical basis for responsible decision makers to weigh benefits against cost.
To address this issue, we followed the lead of the Town and hired Arts Market owner and expert Louise
Stevens, as the town did in 2009, to evaluate our proposal, albeit for a facility that is considerably smaller
than those anticipated by her report for the Town.
Ms. Stevens says it best: “This profile of an affluent market suggests that a performing arts center and
top-quality events venue would both flourish. Typically, participation in arts and entertainment increases
in frequency as income increases: households earning over $75,000 dominate most audiences. Educa-
tion is the most important variable for many types of performing arts events, with audiences dominated
by those with college and graduate school degrees.”
Ms. Stevens provides extensive economic analysis and projections of both on-site revenue and commu-
nity economic benefit in her comprehensive report. Such conclusions are best considered as refined at
such time as an exact size and type of venue has been determined. We anticipate addressing this analy-
sis in Phase II of this RFP process.
177
Item b.
178
Item b.
179
Item b.
PART E PROJECT BENEFIT AND COMPATIBILITY
• Anticipated public and government support
• Plans for public information on project
• Significant benefits to community
• Compatibility with Legacy Leesburg
180
Item b.
181
Item b.
PG 75
E.i. Anticipated public and government support
There are numerous forms of anticipated public and government support for this project. At the core
of any effort to achieve advantageous loans, grants, and private donations is a firm commitment by the
Town to proceed with the conceived project. With that commitment in place numerous possibilities be-
come available. In no particular order, a partial list includes the tipping fee waiver from the County, the
procurement of a NEPA qualifying grant in excess of $5,000,000 with the assistance of Loudoun County,
other performing arts grants from private foundations, naming rights from both private businesses and
individuals, significant individual donations, etc.
Given the lack of a dedicated performing arts facility in Leesburg since 1957 (when the Opera House was
razed), it is not unrealistic to expect broad community enthusiasm and support for a new Performing
Arts/Conference Center facility, particularly within the Leesburg Historic District, at a walkable location
with ample on-site parking.
E.ii. Plans for public information on project
Beginning at the approval of the project, the proposer will reach out to involve the general public, busi-
ness community, and governmental agencies about this important project and inform them of potential
impacts, detailing how the negative will be mitigated, and the positive maximized. Neighborhoods to
the west, particularly the Chesterfield Place neighborhood, as well as those residences on Royal Street,
will want to know how the development of the Liberty Parking Lot will affect them, with regards to traffic
and noise. Ingress/egress plans will be shared, assuring nearby residents that access to the site through
the existing Liberty Street entrance will not increase (and may decrease), as that entry to the site will
be limited to only senior housing residents, accessing their 51 allotted parking spaces. Further, it will be
communicated that all others entering, for the Performing Arts Center, or to access those public parking
spaces allotted to the Town, will do so from Wirt St., accessed from both Market and Royal Streets to the
north and King St. via South St. from the south.
It will also be communicated that performing arts centers, by their very nature, are highly sound-insu-
lated, and that those entering the PAC will generally do so from the parking garage, having little, if any,
noise impact on the surrounding community.
And, it will be communicated to the nearby residential neighborhoods that their new neighbors, in the
Senior Affordable Housing component of the development are of a demographic that, generally speak-
ing, tends to favor quiet. Moreover, rules will be in place, prohibiting disturbing levels of noise.
It is a goal of the proposer to engage the business community from the outset of the project. A perform-
ing arts center/conference center will benefit every storefront, every restaurant, and every gas station
and convenience store in Leesburg, and beyond, in nearby areas of Loudoun County. Serving as a gate-
way between Leesburg’s Arts & Cultural District and the Old & Historic District, the PAC will transform
the Liberty Street Lot from a veritable asphalt desert in the evenings to a vibrant cultural oasis. Visitors
and attendees will create a brand new revenue stream for Leesburg businesses, as well as businesses in
the surrounding county.
182
Item b.
PG 76
The proposer will engage the Town and County governments, as well, communicating the benefits of the
project in a way that will provide leadership with a firm grounding to promote local business and tour-
ism, as well as to tout positive gains in housing.
As the project moves through stages toward completion, an extensive strategy will be deployed to pro-
mote the Performing Arts Center to national booking agencies, to begin to bring top-tier entertainment
to Leesburg. As the Center’s calendar begins to fill, the strategy will pivot to promoting the calendar of
events to the public, through website, outreach to various news media, and targeted outreach to other
media outlets, tailored to specific acts.
E.iii. Significant benefits to community
Throughout the research and design of this project, highest and best use has been the guiding principle
of every decision. We define “highest” as having the most positive impact on the most citizens while
defining “best” as being within the physical capacity of the site and the economic realities of both public
and private funding.
Fortunately, each of the four principal components of this project have been repeated in hundreds, if not
thousands, of communities across the country in recent decades. Even more comforting is the availabil-
ity of outcomes for the vast majority of those undertakings. Theaters have proven to be huge assets to
the communities that invested in them. Affordable housing is approved, financed, and constructed under
strict regulatory requirements. Structured parking in the southwest quadrant of the Historic District will
be a huge benefit to Leesburg. Dump removals of various sizes are almost routine, and they are closely
regulated by both state and federal regulations, to assure public safety.
We need look no further than the projects of Good Works here in Loudoun County to appreciate their
quality and community value. National theater consultant, Louise Stevens, who is intimately familiar with
Leesburg, provides convincing expert opinions that suggest we will have the same panoply of benefits
from the Performing Arts/Conference Center that most other communities with similar facilities have
experienced. There is little doubt on anyone’s part that downtown Leesburg would benefit from more
parking. In addition, proactively meeting modern standards of environmental responsibility is simply
good governance, particularly when it can be achieved at a steeply discounted cost by virtue of tipping
fee waivers from the County.
The benefits of the propose Performing Arts Center to the Town of Leesburg and beyond are many. It
is prudent and expected that the town should first evaluate the long-term economics of this undertak-
ing, which are remarkably strong and supported by the similar experiences of many other communities.
While certainly important, for many, the economic feasibility as a positive factor will pale in comparison
to the many social and cultural benefits such a facility would provide, extending from the cultural ex-
periences of our children, young and old, to the joy of senior citizens frequenting events in the Historic
District. Local businesses will notice an increase in customers. Hotels and motels will see a significant
increase in heads in beds. Perhaps most significant will be the talk of Leesburg being a new and great
place to visit now that they have concerts and entertainment events of all kinds. All of the positives
about such a facility, much like Ida Lee Park, multiply on each other and reflect the many wonderful fea-
183
Item b.
PG 77
tures of a very special and exceptional community.
It is easy to imagine that the Town’s commitment to this project, even before it’s construction, could
stimulate substantial investment in the vacant property along South Street and beyond, thereby further
enhancing and animating the Georgetown Park area. Over time, thousands upon thousands of people
will discover the magic of downtown Leesburg occasioned by attendance at a theater performance or
conference event on the envisioned site. Restaurants and other merchants will experience increased
revenues and the Town will collect additional taxes as a result. Many seniors will enjoy retirement in a
downtown location that would otherwise be economically out of reach. Traffic will be less pressured
along Liberty Street at morning and evening rush hours. Legacy Leesburg’s goal of public gathering
spots will be enhanced, and a once neglected area of downtown will become a showplace of social and
cultural engagement. This investment is worth the political leadership such important projects require.
E.iv. Compatibility with Legacy Leesburg
By now, through the liberal use of quotations from Legacy Leesburg throughout this document, it should
be very obvious that this proposal addresses many of the key elements of that visionary document: per-
forming arts, public art, tourism support, affordable housing, and more public parking. This proposal is
fully in sync with, and fully supports the intent of Legacy Leesburg.
184
Item b.
185
Item b.
Council Meeting Date: March 27, 2023
TOWN OF LEESBURG
TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Subject: Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 - Final Mark-up Session
Staff Contact: Kaj Dentler, Town Manager
Clark Case, Director of Finance and Administrative Services
Lisa Haley, Deputy Director of Finance and Administrative Services
Cole Fazenbaker, Management and Budget Officer
Council Action Requested: Final Budget Work Session and Mark-up Session for the Proposed
Fiscal Year 2024 Budget.
Staff Recommendation: Finalize decisions for the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024 Budget.
Commission Recommendation: Not applicable.
Fiscal Impact: The Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 includes $77,915,385 for the General
Fund and $29,504,222 for the Utilities Fund Operations. The proposed General Fund Budget for
Fiscal Year 2023 is based upon a real estate tax rate of 17.74 cents which is no change from the
current real estate tax rate. The Utilities Fund is in the final year of the previously adopted rates
approved following the five-year rate study.
Work Plan Impact: The Town Manager’s Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 outlines the work
plan beginning July 1, 2023.
Town Plan Impact: None.
Executive Summary: Below are the results of the previous mark-up session from the March 13, 2023
Budget Work Session.
186
Item c.
Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 - Final Mark-up Session
March 27, 2023
Page 2
Background: The Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 was presented to Town Council on
February 13, 2023. The presentation and the proposed budget may be found using this link to the
Town’s website https://www.leesburgva.gov/departments/finance/budget
Remaining Proposed Budget Schedule:
Monday, March 27 Budget Work Session (3 of 3): Final Mark-up Session
Tuesday, March 28 Public Hearing/Adoption: Setting Tax Year 2023 Real
Taxable Property Rate and Certain Personal Property
Adoption of Fiscal Year 2024 Budget and Fiscal Years 2024-
2029 Capital Improvements Program
Attachment: None.
2023/01
187
Item c.
COUNCIL ACTIONS CALENDAR
Tentative/Subject to Change
MeetingDate MeetingType Name SubmittedBy
03/27/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Final Mark-Up of FY 2024 Budget (P)Schellhase, Holland
DISCUSSION: Liberty Lot Street Parking Lot - Action on Public/Private Partnership Proposal (P)Belote, Tara
DISCUSSION: Liberty Street Parking Lot - Remediation Study Contract Award (P)Belote, Tara
INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance (NP)Smith, Ann
03/28/2023 Town Council Meeting CONSENT: Appointment to the Board of Architectural Review (Council Member Cummings) (NP) Tentative Boeing, Eileen
CONSENT: Appointment to the Diversity Commission (Council Member Bagdasarian) - (NP)Boeing, Eileen
CONSENT: Appropriation of Grant Funds for Thomas Balch Library (NP)Smith, Ann
CONSENT: Civil Engineering for Federally Funded Projects Continuing Services Contract Award (NP)Southerland, Danielle
CONSENT: Lawson Rd Pedestrian Crossing of Tuscarora Creek – Commitment to Funding and Signatory Authority (B)Lamas, Marcela
MOTION: International Dark Sky Proclamation (EAC)Alvarez, Corina
MOTION: National Public Safety Telecommunications Week April 9-15, 2023 Grigsby, Vanessa
ORDINANCE: FY 2024 Budget Adoption (NP)Fazenbaker, Cole
PRESENTATION: 2022 Board of Architectural Review Annual Report (P)Parry, Debi
PRESENTATION: EAC Annual Report (P)Klusek, Richard
PROCLAMATION: Keep Leesburg Beautiful Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Child Abuse Prevention Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Fair Housing Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: Sexual Assault Awareness Month Smith, Ann
PUBLIC HEARING: 2023 Tax Rate and Fees Ordinance (P)Fazenbaker, Cole
RESOLUTION: Award of Contract for Vendor Verification to Carahsoft Technology Corporation and PaymentWorks Schellhase, Holland
RESOLUTION: FY 2024-2029 CIP Adoption (NP)Fazenbaker, Cole
RESOLUTION: Liberty Lot Street Parking Lot - PPP (Placeholder)Boeing, Eileen
RESOLUTION: Liberty Street Parking Lot - Remediation Study Contract Award Boeing, Eileen
RESOLUTION: Public Parking Signage (P)Boeing, Eileen
3/22/202311:46 AM
188
Item a.
COUNCIL ACTIONS CALENDAR
Tentative/Subject to Change
MeetingDate MeetingType Name SubmittedBy
04/10/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Air Traffic Control Services at Leesburg Executive Airport (P)Boeing, Eileen
DISCUSSION: Main Street Program Update (P)Turney, Elaine
DISCUSSION: Affordable/Workforce Housing Plan (P)Cicalese, Karen
DISCUSSION: Legacy Leesburg Annual Report (P)Cicalese, Karen
INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine
04/11/2023 Town Council Meeting CONSENT: Ida Lee Park Recreation Center - PoolPak No. 3 Replacement (NP)Southerland, Danielle
PROCLAMATION: Arbor Day Atkins, Noble
PROCLAMATION: Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: Dark Sky (EAC)Alvarez, Corina
PROCLAMATION: In Recognition of Medical Laboratory Professionals Week Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Public Safety Telecommunications Week Grigsby, Vanessa
PUBLIC HEARING: TLSE-2023-0001 Urgent Care Facility Minor Special Exception (P)Cicalese, Karen
PUBLIC HEARING: Update Parking Requirements Related to Motor Homes (P)Smith, Carmen
RESOLUTION: Military Banner Program (P)Eagle, Tabitha
RESOLUTION: Appointment to the Diversity Commission (Council) - Tentative (NP)Boeing, Eileen
RESOLUTION: Initiating Resolution for Home 2 Suites Signage (P)Cicalese, Karen
04/24/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Define the Downtown Footprint for Marketing Purposes (P)Turney, Elaine
DISCUSSION: Explore the Hiring of Legislative Liaison/Consultant (P)Belote, Tara
DISCUSSION: Legislative Wrap-up Belote, Tara
DISCUSSION: Main Street – Quarterly Update Turney, Elaine
DISCUSSION: Maximum Number of Rooms for an Inn (P)Cicalese, Karen
DISCUSSION: Re-evaluate Private Property Mural Guidelines Kosin, Leah
INFORMATION MEMO: Annual Continuing Disclosures Starkey, Diane
INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance Smith, Ann
3/22/202311:46 AM
189
Item a.
COUNCIL ACTIONS CALENDAR
Tentative/Subject to Change
MeetingDate MeetingType Name SubmittedBy
04/25/2023 Town Council Meeting PROCLAMATION: Independent Bookstore Day Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: International Firefighters’ Day Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: Mental Health Awareness Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Day of Prayer Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Military Appreciation Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: Stroke Awareness Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: World Ovarian Cancer Day Smith, Ann
PUBLIC HEARING: TLOA-2022-0010 Batch Zoning Text Amendments (P)Cicalese, Karen
RESOLUTION: Initiating Resolution to Amend Amplified Noise Ordinance (P)Smith, Carmen
RESOLUTION: Maximum Number of Rooms for an Inn (Placeholder)Cicalese, Karen
05/08/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Reevaluation of Donation Boxes (P)Watkins, Michael
DISCUSSION: Review the Charter of Each Board and Commission (P)Belote, Tara
DISCUSSION: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow Congregate Housing (P)Cicalese, Karen
INFORMATION MEMO - Quarterly Budget Update Fazenbaker, Cole
INFORMATION MEMO - Quarterly Parking Update Fazenbaker, Cole
INFORMATION MEMO: Status Report on Effectiveness of Clutter Ordinance Watkins, Michael
INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine
05/09/2023 Town Council Meeting CONSENT: Airport North Apron Paving - Hangars C & D Construction Contract Award (NP)Southerland, Danielle
CONSENT: Supplemental Appropriation for Preliminary Engineering of the Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation Project (NP)Southerland, Danielle
ORDINANCE: Initiate Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow Congregate Housing (Placeholder)Cicalese, Karen
PROCLAMATION: Kids to Parks Day Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Police Week Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Public Works Week Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Skilled Nursing Care Week Smith, Ann
3/22/202311:46 AM
190
Item a.
COUNCIL ACTIONS CALENDAR
Tentative/Subject to Change
MeetingDate MeetingType Name SubmittedBy
05/22/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Alternative Parking Provisions Study (P)Cicalese, Karen
DISCUSSION: Conduct a Feasibility Study to Include Trolley Service for Downtown Workers and Visitors (P)Belote, Tara
DISCUSSION: Develop a Downtown Parking Master Plan (P)Belote, Tara
DISCUSSION: Payment in Lieu (P)Cicalese, Karen
DISCUSSION: Provide Report on Establishing Parking Authority (P)Smith, Carmen
DISCUSSION: Residential Permit Parking in Historic District (P)Southerland, Danielle
INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance Smith, Ann
05/23/2023 Town Council Meeting PROCLAMATION: 249th Commemoration of the Loudoun County Resolves Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: American Cancer Society’s Loudoun County Relay for Life Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: LGBTQ Pride Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Gun Violence Awareness Day Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: Wayne’s Crossing Day Smith, Ann
RESOLUTION: Initiating Resolution for Alternative Parking Provisions (P) PLACEHOLDER Cicalese, Karen
RESOLUTION: Traffic Study Areas - Award of Contract (P)Southerland, Danielle
06/12/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Economic Development Plan – Project Update to Council (P)Turney, Elaine
DISCUSSION: Outdoor Performance Venue (P)Eagle, Tabitha
INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine
06/13/2023 Town Council Meeting PROCLAMATION: Juneteenth Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: Master Gardeners Smith, Ann
06/26/2023 Town Council Work Session INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance Smith, Ann
06/27/2023 Town Council Meeting CONSENT: Airport Apron Paving Construction Contract Award (NP)Southerland, Danielle
PRESENTATION: 2021/2022 Tree Commission Annual Report Atkins, Noble
07/10/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Evaluate the Development of a Business Incubator/Entrepreneurial Program (P)Turney, Elaine
INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine
07/11/2023 Town Council Meeting PRESENTATION: Independence Day Parade Patriot Cup Winners – TBD Boeing, Eileen
07/24/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Recycling Program (P)Southerland, Danielle
DISCUSSION: Solar Panels on Public Buildings (P)Southerland, Danielle
INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance Smith, Ann
INFORMATION MEMO: EV Pilot Program (P)Southerland, Danielle
INFORMATION MEMO: Green Infrastructure (P)Southerland, Danielle
07/25/2023 Town Council Meeting RESOLUTION: Adoption of the Town's Legislative Agenda (P)Belote, Tara
3/22/202311:46 AM
191
Item a.
COUNCIL ACTIONS CALENDAR
Tentative/Subject to Change
MeetingDate MeetingType Name SubmittedBy
08/07/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Main Street – Quarterly Update Turney, Elaine
INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance Smith, Ann
INFORMATION MEMO: Thomas Balch Library Advisory Commission Annual Report Smith, Ann
INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine
08/08/2023 Town Council Meeting PROCLAMATION: Childhood Cancer Awareness Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: Hunger Action Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: International Overdose Awareness Day Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Payroll Week Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: World Suicide Prevention Day Smith, Ann
09/11/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Town Manager Staff Report on Organizational Succession Planning (P)Belote, Tara
INFORMATION MEMO: Quarterly Budget Update Schellhase, Holland
INFORMATION MEMO: Quarterly Parking Update Schellhase, Holland
INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine
09/12/2023 Town Council Meeting PRESENTATION: Commission on Public Art Annual Report Kosin, Leah
PROCLAMATION: Constitution Week Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Hispanic Heritage Month Smith, Ann
09/25/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Summer JAMS Program (formerly Acoustics on the Green) (P)Eagle, Tabitha
INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance Smith, Ann
09/26/2023 Town Council Meeting PROCLAMATION: Domestic Violence Awareness Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: Dysautonomia Awareness Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Arts and Humanities Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Bullying Prevention Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: Polish American Heritage Month Smith, Ann
RESOLUTION: Revision of Crescent District Master Plan (P)Cicalese, Karen
3/22/202311:46 AM
192
Item a.
COUNCIL ACTIONS CALENDAR
Tentative/Subject to Change
MeetingDate MeetingType Name SubmittedBy
10/02/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Liberty Street Parking Lot - Consideration of Remediation Study with Associated Costs (P)Belote, Tara
10/03/2023 Town Council Meeting RESOLUTION: Business Assistance Team (P)Cicalese, Karen
RESOLUTION: Liberty Street Parking Lot - Remediation Study Contract Award Belote, Tara
10/23/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Economic Development Plan – Adoption of Plan (P)Turney, Elaine
INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance Smith, Ann
INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine
10/24/2023 Town Council Meeting PROCLAMATION: Diabetes Awareness Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: Lung Cancer Awareness Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National American Indian Heritage Month Smith, Ann
PROCLAMATION: National Veterans and Military Families Month Smith, Ann
RESOLUTION: Adoption of Economic Development Strategic Plan (P)Turney, Elaine
11/13/2023 Town Council Work Session INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine
PLACEHOLDER: P&R Annual Report/Info Memo Eagle, Tabitha
11/14/2023 Town Council Meeting PROCLAMATION: Small Business Saturday Smith, Ann
11/27/2023 Town Council Work Session INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance Smith, Ann
11/28/2023 Town Council Meeting CONSENT: Test Item for Training (2)Boeing, Eileen
12/11/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Main Street – Quarterly Update Turney, Elaine
INFORMATION MEMO: 2023 Economic Development Commission Annual Report Turney, Elaine
INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance Smith, Ann
INFORMATION MEMO: 2023 Diversity Commission Annual Report Rodriguez, Kara
INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine
12/12/2023 Town Council Meeting CONSENT: Consent Test Item (1)Boeing, Eileen
RESOLUTION: Training Test Item Boeing, Eileen
3/22/202311:46 AM
193
Item a.
Council Meeting Date: March 27, 2023
TOWN OF LEESBURG
TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
Subject: Monthly Board and Commission Report – Activity and Attendance
Staff Contact: Eileen M. Boeing, CMC, Clerk of Council
Council Action Requested: None. Information only.
Staff Recommendation: None. Information only.
Commission Recommendation: Not applicable.
Fiscal Impact: None.
Work Plan Impact: None.
Town Plan Impact: None.
Executive Summary: Town Code requires a monthly report to Council listing key events/actions
from each meeting. Members will automatically be removed from their Board or Commission if
they miss more than three consecutive meetings or four meetings in a 12-month period. Attendance
reports are provided for Council’s awareness. A listing of all Board and Commission vacancies is
also included for Council’s reference.
Background: Town Code Section 2-195(h) requires Board and Commission chairs or their designee
to provide key events/actions from each meeting in summary format to Council monthly.
Additionally, Town Code Section 2-195(b) requires if any member is absent from three consecutive
meetings or is absent from any four meetings within any calendar year 12-month period, then the
member shall automatically be removed from the position and the town council shall fill the
vacancy in the manner set forth in Town Code Section 2-194. The foregoing shall not apply to the
Planning Commission or the Board of Zoning Appeals, where appointment and removal are
governed by applicable state law. A year-to-date monthly attendance report for calendar year 2023
and a calendar year 2022 attendance report are attached.
Current Board and Commission Vacancies:
Board of Architectural Review (Council Member Cummings)
Diversity Commission (Council Member Bagdasarian)
Diversity Commission (Council)
Attachments:
1. Monthly Board and Commission Report
2. Attendance Report – February 2023
3. Attendance Report – Calendar Year 2022
2023/01 194
Item a.
BOARDS & COMMISSIONS ACTIVITY REPORT
February 2023
Airport Commission
• Airport Commission assigned members to its Operations and Land Use Development
subcommittees.
• The Commission discussed apron construction phasing and operational impacts. The south apron
repaving project will have temporary, but significant impact on aircraft tie-down and transient
parking spaces. This project is anticipated to be under construction early spring 2024.
Board of Architectural Review
February 6, 2023, BAR Site Visit
• The BAR conducted a site visit at 102 South King Street in reference to proposed alterations to
the historic structure related to case TLHP-2022-0169.
February 6, 2023, BAR Work Session
• Discussion of Continued Cases in the H-1 Overlay Old & Historic District
o TLHP-2022-0132, 19 East Market Street: Directory Sign Installation
The applicant failed to attend the meeting and discussion was continued to the March
6, 2023, work session to provide the applicant with an opportunity to present their
revised proposal.
o TLHP-2022-0158, 208 South King Street: Alterations to Existing Structure & New
Addition
This application was approved.
o TLHP-2022-0169, 102 South King Street: Alterations to Existing Structure & New
Addition
This application was approved.
February 22, 2023, BAR Business Meeting
• This meeting was cancelled as there were no new COA applications filed for the meeting.
Board of Zoning Appeals
The Board of Zoning Appeals did not meet in February.
Diversity Commission
• There were not sufficient members present to proceed with the meeting. Two members of the
public were also present to observe the meeting, including a representative from Equality Loudoun.
• There was a brief discussion about the upcoming boards/commissions networking event in March.
No other business was discussed.
195
Item a.
2 | P a g e
Economic Development Commission
• EDC was provided with an update from staff regarding the Town’s Main Street Program.
o This included an update regarding the Town’s Steering Committee, which is meeting twice
a month. The Committee is made up of both business owners and residents located in the
Main Street district.
o A consultant has been hired to assist in the development of the Town’s overall
initiative. This includes preparing all the necessary work for the creation of a 501c3.
• The EDC was provided an update on the development of the Town’s Economic Development Plan.
o BetterCity, a consulting firm, has been hired to develop the plan.
o The firm has begun gathering information and will be meeting with local representatives
beginning March 1.
o The intention is to present the plan to Council in October.
• Staff provided an update regarding the Town’s HUBZone program.
o On July 1, 2023, the current HUBZone will be reduced, falling back to its original area. The
Zone was initially expanded in 2018, but with the new Census number, will be reduced.
o Staff has been working with those businesses located in this area to assist in the transition.
o Any business working on a current government contract will still have 3 years to complete.
• Initial planning has begun for the 2023 Small Business Awards. This year the event will be held at
ION.
Environmental Advisory Commission
• Continued discussion of recycling and opportunities for public education
• Potential tree planting initiative using tree bank funds
• Preparation for Flower and Garden Show planning
• Preparation for Keep Leesburg Beautiful
• Preparation of EAC Annual Report
• Planning for 2022 Tolbert Award
• Planning for Rain Barrel Workshops
• Discussion of Plastic Bag Recycling Tax Results
• Participation in Earth Day Events for additional outreach opportunities
Parks & Recreation Commission
New Business
• Banner Program: The Commission endorsed the following recommendation 7-0 relating to a
Veterans Banner Program at Freedom Park. “The Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission
endorses a partnership with the Town and VFW for the placement of pole banners at Freedom
Park to honor local veterans.”
• Networking Event: The Commission was briefed on the upcoming Boards and Commissions
networking event to be held March 30th at Ida Lee.
• Departmental Information: The Commission was based on various departmental information
including staffing vacancies, revenue, and FY23 Budget progress.
Old Business
• CIP Project Update: An update of the Veteran’s Park and Izaak Walton Park pond restoration
projects was provided to the Commission.
196
Item a.
3 | P a g e
• Park Plaques: The Commission members provided status updates on the information that has
been gathered to date for the plaque project.
• Outdoor Performance Venue: The Commission was briefed on Council’s desire for them to
evaluate and identify a possible location for an outdoor performance stage in other areas of
Town besides Ida Lee Park. There was initial discussion regarding potential locations with more
detailed analysis to take place during the March Commission meeting.
Planning Commission
FY 2024 – 2029 Capital Improvement Program Public Hearing: The Planning Commission voted to
send a recommendation of approval, by a vote of 7-0, with the following recommendations:
• Add funding for land, planning, design, and construction of transit infrastructure and
structured parking to serve the Crescent District, Eastern Gateway District, and B-1
Downtown Commercial District.
• Add funding for land, planning, design, and construction of a pedestrian bridge over
Route 7 in the Eastern Gateway District as indicated in the Town Plan.
• Prioritize an opportunity area in the Town Plan and add funding for a study to evaluate
infrastructure projects within the Town purview – including capital and operating costs,
order of magnitude, and possible public private partnerships – that move the vision for
that opportunity area forward.
• Evaluate alternative solutions to reduce parking demand that are less costly and more
environmentally friendly than construction of structured parking.
• Prioritize the Police Mobile Command Center project and move it into the Active Projects
list and complete as early as possible.
• Reevaluate the need for a signal as opposed to a pedestrian lighted crossing at Battlefield
Parkway and Fieldstone Drive.
TLOA-2022-0009 Hotel Parking Standards in the B-1 Zoning District Work Session
The Planning Commission voted to send a recommendation of approval by a vote of 4-3
BAR Liaison
Ron Campbell was appointed as the Planning Commission liaison to the BAR.
Bylaws Amendments
The Commission held discussion on whether to amend their Bylaws to institute time limits on
Commission member commentary and staff presentations, however, the majority of Commission
members did not support the proposed amendment.
Public Art Commission
New Business:
• Donna Torraca presented a proposed mural for Douglass School in Leesburg. COPA unanimously
approved supporting the project.
• Jeanette Ward was unanimously elected as chair. Kirsten Ponticelli will act as secretary.
• An open house will be held on Friday, March 3 for the new Town Hall art exhibit beginning at 5 p.m.
Rebecca Takemoto will be in attendance to represent COPA.
197
Item a.
4 | P a g e
Old Business:
• The tentative start date for the Public Works mural is March 11.
• A Call to Artists, for this year’s Paint the Plow project, will be issued next week. This will allow more
time for the schools to be involved. June 15 will be the deadline for submissions.
• Art in Your Yard project will take place in April. The idea is to have Town residents display artwork
in their yards during the weekend of Flower & Garden. More details to come.
Residential Traffic Committee
• Mr. Bruce Dewar inquired about the progress of the traffic calming measures that are to be
implemented by Hospital on their entrance on Memorial Drive. In response Sargent Ryan stated
that Hospital plans to implement the traffic calming measures and read the list of measures from
an email sent by Dorri O'Brien's. Many residents located along Memorial Drive showed up and
expressed that they are not in favor of striping the pavement (cross-hatching). The commissioner
Sandy Grossman mentioned that no further actions/improvements will be taken on Memorial Drive
until the effectiveness of the improvements taken so far are measured.
• Ms. Sarah from the Foxridge Community expressed that their HOA is in agreement with establishing
a no parking zone at the crosswalk on Foxridge Road. The resident enquired about the status on
actionable items for better visibility of crosswalk on Deerpath Avenue. Commissioner Sandy
Grossman responded that it would take another 3 to 4 weeks to formulate ideas on actionable
items for improving the visibility of pedestrians and crosswalk for approaching vehicles. The
resident was asked to reach out to HOA on trimming of branches on Deerpath Avenue approaching
the crosswalk. She requested the Police Department to monitor the crosswalk during school
dismissal hours and in the evening.
• Sargent Ryan shared SMART Trailer results collected on South Kings Street at Governors Dr SW and
on 25 Catoctin Cir SE (WB directions only) at Post Office with the members of the commission.
Additionally, Sargent Ryan provided the group with crash summary data for year 2022.
• The commission has decided to vote on Chair and Vice Chair positions in the next RTC meeting.
• The commission members reviewed the recommendation “The Residential Traffic Commission
(RTC) discussed reducing the speed limit on core downtown Leesburg streets at their December 5,
2022 and January 9, 2023 meetings. At the February 6, 2023 meeting, the RTC recommended
reducing the speed limit from 25 MPH to 20 MPH in the core downtown area and to implement
speed transition zones on streets surrounding the area”. On motion by Commissioner Norman,
seconded by Commissioner Raymond, the Commission approved the recommendation (7-0).
• Ms. Christine Roe, a senior engineer with Department of Public Works and Capital Projects, shared
Plaza Street sidewalk draft concept plan with RTC. The commission is good with the design and had
no comments.
• The commission discussed about the speeding on Hope Parkway, streetlights located only on one
side of the roadway, visibility of crosswalks at Burnell Place SE and Park Gate Drive SE. Currently,
the driver feedback sign collects the speeding data in only one direction and the commission asked
the staff to turn the driver feedback sign to collect the data in other direction of Hope Parkway.
• The commission discussed on how to allocate the available budget and asked Sargent Ryan to get
quotes on ATS trailer to be discussed at the next meeting.
198
Item a.
5 | P a g e
Technology/Communications Commission
• Election of John Binkley as chair and Richard Jackson as vice chair
• Discussion of annual report
• Overview of the Information Technology Help Desk presentation.
Thomas Balch Library Commission
The Thomas Balch Library Commission did not have a quorum for the February meeting.
Tree Commission
• It was noted that some trees have already begun leafing out much earlier than usual. This can be
dangerous in case we get a late winter storm.
• Mr. Marshall will take new high-quality pictures of town trees for the Tree Tour App.
• Tree canopy data was finally received from LCPS, but not actionable. However, data from 2005 and
2015 is available. Therefore, Commission recommended shifting the 10-year canopy study from
the years of 2010-2020, to the years of 2005-2015 due to the available data sets. Commission also
recommended the next 10-year study to be created from the data of 2015 to 2025.
• Water Oaks, Chestnut Oaks and River Birch trees were selected to give away at the Flower and
Garden Show.
• Mr. Hower and Mr. Groothuis were unanimously voted in again as Chair and Vice Chair
respectively.
• Handling future FOIA requests with urgency was discussed.
• Discussions were made about how the Town is providing leadership by offering innovative tree
preservation measures to the consulting design engineers submitting plans to the Town so that
they can start providing plans that act to save more individual trees during construction and
thereby save the Town’s tree canopy.
• A new landscape pest was discovered in Florida from a shipment of flowers imported from South
America.
• A new Op Ed newspaper article shows empirical data that humans live healthier, longer lives when
they live in neighborhoods containing more trees.
199
Item a.
Date: 3/8/2023
Page 1 of 2
Town of Leesburg Legend:WS
Boards & Commissions Attendance Present Not on / No Longer on Commission
Calendar Year 2023 E = Present via Electronic Participation E E P = No Quorum but Member was present P
Absent Recused from Meeting
COUNCIL SPONSOR No Meeting R = Rescheduled R
(HIDE before PDF)
Airport Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Arrington, Lindsay Burk
Duenkel, Daniel Cummings
Forsythe, Hugh Wilt
Lekli, Malvina Cimino-Johnson
Marrero, Jose Steinberg
Silvey, JC Bagdasarian
Toth, Tom Nacy
Thomas Balch Library Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Baracat-Donovan, Candy Cimino-Johnson
Billigmeier, Scott Bagdasarian
Coyer, Paul Nacy
Hershman, James Steinberg P
Mattina, Adrian Cummings
Scheib, Elizabeth Wilt P
Woolard, Russ Burk P
Commission on Public Art Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Fallon, Leah Nacy
MacMichael, Huyen Bagdasarian P
Ponticelli, Kirsten Cimino-Johnson P
Takemoto, Rebecca Cummings
Ward, Jeanette Burk P
Wilt
Morbeto, Deborah Steinberg
Diversity Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Amato, Allison Cimino-Johnson
Carter, Devon Cummings
Gonzalez, Enrique Nacy P
Kopp, Christine Bagdasarian E
Martinez-Harris, Jasmin Steinberg P
Segura, Edgard Burk P
Wilt
Economic Development Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Cusack, Robert Steinberg
Edwards, Marantha Bagdasarian
Guzman, Mirna Cimino-Johnson
McCray, Linda Burk
Miller, Jason Nacy
Pindell, Monica Cummings
Tallent, Tony Wilt
Environmental Advisory Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Bolthouse, Julie Cummings
Brafford, Kohler Bagdasarian
Faugust, Leigh Anne Nacy
Glick, Deanna Cimino-Johnson
Mason, Ami Burk
Sheaffer, Paul Steinberg
Wilt
Parks & Recreation Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Burke, Laurie Steinberg
Carroll, Natalie Nacy
Cimino-Johnson, Anthony Cimino-Johnson
Corkrey, James Wilt
McCray, Brody Bagdasarian
Shabanowitz, Kirsten Cummings
Sturgeon, Ginger Burk
200
Item a.
Date: 3/8/2023
Page 2 of 2
Residential Traffic Committee Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Bowers, David Steinberg
Delpesche, Ray Nacy
Grossman, Sandy Burk
Jones, Raymond Bagdasarian
Norman, Mark Cummings
Simonetta, Melissa Cimino-Johnson
Wilt
Patel, Deepan
Phillips, Jeff Fox
Technology and Communications Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Binkley, John Burk
Fulcer, Rob Cimino-Johnson
Grandjean, Chris Steinberg
Jackson, Richard Nacy
Johnson, Katherine Cummings
Nadler, Aaron Bagdasarian
Wilt
Hill, Peter
Taylor, Ben
Tree Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Garnreiter, Joseph Cummings
Groothuis, John Wilt
Hower, Earl Nacy
Marshall, Philip Bagdasarian
Schneider, Frank Cimino-Johnson
Stokes, Tom Steinberg
Welch, Elizabeth Burk
Board of Architectural Review Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Aikman, Helen Nacy
Fuoto, Judd Cimino-Johnson
Nichols, Robert Cummings
O'Neil, Tom Steinberg
Pastor, Julie Burk
Reeve, Keith Wilt
Scheuerman, Donald Bagdasarian
BAR Work Sessions / Scheduled as needed Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Aikman, Helen Nacy
Fuoto, Judd Cimino-Johnson
Nichols, Robert Cummings
O'Neil, Tom Steinberg
Pastor, Julie Burk
Reeve, Keith Wilt
Scheuerman, Donald Bagdasarian E
Minchew, Teresa
Planning Commission Jan Jan Feb Feb Mar Mar Apr Apr May May Jun Jun Jul Jul Aug Aug Sep Sep Oct Oct Nov Nov Dec Dec
Barnes, Ad Burk
Campbell, Ron Wilt
Canton, Jennifer Nacy
Hoovler, Earl C. Bagdasarian
McAfee, Brian L. Cummings
Robinson, Gigi Steinberg
Tuck, Cris Candice Cimino-Johnson
Reeve, Keith
Board of Zoning Appeals Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Gutierrez, Gregory Circuit Court
Marshall, Thomas C. Circuit Court
Moffett, Susan Circuit Court
Semmes, Martha Mason Circuit Court
Vanderloo, Peter L. Circuit Court
201
Item a.
Date: 1/4/2023
Page 1 of 2Town of Leesburg Legend:WS
Boards & Commissions Attendance Present Not on / No Longer on Commission
Calendar Year 2022 E = Present via Electronic Participation E E P = No Quorum but Member was present P
Absent Recused from Meeting
No Meeting R = Rescheduled R
Airport Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Arrington, Lindsay
Boykin, Dennis
Duenkel, Daniel
Forsythe, Hugh
Toth, Tom E
de Haan, Raymond
Silvey, JC
Miller, Sybille
Thomas Balch Library Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Woolard, Russ E E
Hershman, James P
Mattina, Adrian E
Kinne, Mandy
Scheib, Elizabeth
Coyer, Paul
Billigmeier, Scott
Pellicano, Mary E
Schonberger, Martha
Commission on Public Art Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Ward, Jeanette
Fallon, Leah
Morbeto, Deborah
MacMichael, Huyen
Ponticelli, Kirsten
Takemoto, Rebecca
Manson, Amy
Wilson, Jan
Garofalo, James
McCullough, Kareem
Beijan, Minu
Diversity Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Carter, Devon P P P P
Gonzalez, Enrique P P P
Kopp, Christine P P E
Segura, Edgard P
Martinez‐Harris, Jasmin P E P E
Randolph, Mary P
Maddox, Vanessa P
Poisson, Jean‐Joseph E E
Kunzelman, Dana E
McCray, Linda
Economic Development Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Youkers, Brittany E E
Byrd, Eric
Edwards, Marantha E
Neel, Britta
Miller, Jason
McCray, Linda
Cusack, Robert
Choi, James
Harper, Mary
Allred, Curtis
Environmental Advisory Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Bolthouse, Julie
Brafford, Kohler E
Faugust, Leigh Anne
Jones, Martha
Mason, Ami
Replogle, Bill
Sheaffer, Paul
Parks & Recreation Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Cimino‐Johnson, Todd
Fulcer, Rob
McCray, Brody
Shabanowitz, Kirsten E
Burke, Laurie
Hart, Rachel
Carroll, Natalie
Drupa, David
202
Item a.
Date: 1/4/2023
Page 2 of 2Residential Traffic Committee Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Grossman, Sandy
Caney, Brian C.
Jones, Raymond
Phillips, Jeff P
Patel, Deepan P
Norman, Mark P
Delpesche, Ray
Sproul, Robert J.
Vella, Michael
Technology and Communications Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Hill, Peter E E
Binkley, John E
Nadler, Aaron E
Johnson, Katherine E E
Jackson, Richard
Taylor, Ben
Grandjean, Chris E
Ahmed, Daoud E
Curtis, John (Jack)
Tree Commission Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Welch, Elizabeth
Groothuis, John
Marshall, Philip P
Stokes, Tom
Hatfield, Pat
Hower, Earl P
Garnreiter, Joseph
Board of Architectural Review Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Aikman, Helen
Minchew, Teresa
O'Neil, Tom E
Pastor, Julie
Scheuerman, Donald E
Nichols, Robert
Nicholson, Erin E E
Reimers, Paul
BAR Work Sessions / Scheduled as needed Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Aikman, Helen
Minchew, Teresa E
O'Neil, Tom
Pastor, Julie
Scheuerman, Donald
Nichols, Robert
Nicholson, Erin
Reimers, Paul E
Planning Commission Jan Jan Feb Feb Mar Mar Apr Apr May May Jun Jun Jul Jul Aug Aug Sep Sep Oct Oct Nov Nov Dec Dec
Barnes, Ad
Hoovler, Earl C.E
McAfee, Brian L.
Reeve, Keith
Robinson, Gigi
Canton, Jennifer
Barney, Al E E
Clemente, Nicholas E E E
Board of Zoning Appeals Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Gutierrez, Gregory
Moffett, Susan
Semmes, Martha Mason
Vanderloo, Peter L.
Carter, Joseph
203
Item a.