Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2023_06_13_Council_Agenda_Packet_REVISED TOWN OF LEESBURG Town Hall, 25 West Market Street AGENDA Town Council Meeting June 13, 2023 7:00 PM Council Chamber 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. INVOCATION a. Council Member Nacy 3. SALUTE TO THE FLAG a. Mayor Burk 4. ROLL CALL 5. MINUTES a. Work Session Minutes of May 22, 2023 b. Regular Session Minutes of May 23, 2023 6. ADOPTING THE MEETING AGENDA (AMENDMENTS AND DELETIONS) 7. CERTIFICATES OF RECOGNITION 8. PROCLAMATIONS a. Juneteenth (Irvin Greene and Steve Williams) b. Master Gardeners 9. PRESENTATIONS 10. REGIONAL COMMISSION REPORTS 11. PETITIONERS 12. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA a. Special Event Fee Waiver for Loudoun Freedom Center Juneteenth March 2023 RESOLUTION Waiving Special Event Fees for Loudoun Freedom Center Juneteenth March 2023 REVISED 1 -2- b. Plaza Street Sidewalk Project – Design Task Order Contract Authorization RESOLUTION Authorize the Town Manager to Execute a Design Task Order Contract for the Plaza Street Sidewalk Project to Rinker Design Associates, PC (RDA) in the amount of $262,631.44 c. Supplemental Appropriation – Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation Project RESOLUTION Approve a Supplemental Appropriation in the amount of $120,000 for the Airport Runway Rehabilitation Project d. Automated Water Meter Reading System Upgrade and Annual Contract RESOLUTION Approving a Contract for the Upgrade of the Town’s Automated Water Meter Reading System and Annual Maintenance to Aclara Technologies in the amount of $314,345, Authorizing a Sole Source Procurement and Authorizing the Town Manager to Execute the Contract e. Extending Cable Franchise with Verizon Virginia LLC for a Period of Six Months RESOLUTION Extending Cable Franchise with Verizon Virginia LLC through December 27, 2023 f. Appointment to the Parks and Recreation Commission – Russ Shaw RESOLUTION Appointing Russ Shaw to the Parks and Recreation Commission g. Congregate Housing RESOLUTION Initiating Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to Define the Use, Create Use Standards, and Specify Zoning Districts for Congregate Housing h. Air Traffic Control Update and Control Tower Project Addition to the Capital Improvements Program RESOLUTION Amend the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program to add the Airport Control Tower Project and Appropriate $270,000 for Fiscal Year 2024 from the Unassigned Fund Balance i. 2024 Legislative Program RESOLUTION Adoption of the Town of Leesburg’s 2024 Virginia General Assembly Legislative Program 2 -3- 13. RESOLUTIONS / ORDINANCES / MOTIONS a. Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model RESOLUTION Approve an Engineering Services Task Order for the Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model in the amount of $382,122.90 to WSP USA Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc. b. Appointment to the Board of Architectural Review ORDINANCE Appointing _____________ to the Board of Architectural Review 14. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. TLZM-2021-0006, Hamblet Property Rezoning ORDINANCE Approving TLZM-2021-0006, Hamblet Property to Rezone 6.44 Acres from R-E, Residential Estate to R-8, Medium-Density Attached Residential 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 16. NEW BUSINESS 17. COUNCIL DISCLOSURES AND COMMENTS / ADDITIONS TO FUTURE MEETINGS a. Future Council Meetings and Agenda Topics 18. MAYOR DISCLOSURES AND COMMENTS / ADDITIONS TO FUTURE MEETINGS 19. TOWN MANAGER COMMENTS 20. CLOSED SESSION 21. ADJOURNMENT 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. 3 -4- 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. 4 Council Work Session May 22, 2023 1 | P a g e Council Chamber, 25 West Market Street, Leesburg, Virginia, 7:00 p.m. Mayor Kelly Burk presiding. Council Members Present: Ara Bagdasarian, Todd Cimino-Johnson, Zach Cummings, Kari Nacy, Vice Mayor Neil Steinberg, Patrick Wilt, and Mayor Kelly Burk. Council Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Town Attorney Christopher Spera, Deputy Town Manager Keith, Planning and Zoning Director James David, Economic Development Director Russell Seymour, Planning and Zoning Deputy Director Brian Boucher, Police Captain David Smith, Police Sergeant Edward Martin, Transportation Engineer Niraja Chandrapu, and Clerk of Council Eileen Boeing. Minutes prepared by Deputy Clerk of Council Corina Alvarez. AGENDA ITEMS a. Item for Discussion a. Town Code Section 32-143(c) – Parking of Certain Commercial Vehicles Within Residential Districts Mr. Spera gave a presentation on current parking restrictions in the Town’s residential zones, the three exceptions to the prohibition, the recent amendment regarding mobile homes and the request from a resident to allow parking of commercial vehicles in residential zones. Council and staff discussed the item. No further Council direction. b. Downtown Parking Strategies Messrs. Markel, David, Seymour, Boucher, and Ms. Chandrapu gave presentations on various downtown parking strategies for Council’s consideration. Council and staff discussed the strategies. Council provided straw poll direction as follows: Downtown Parking Strategy Straw Poll  On Street Pricing Adjustment Yes*  Modify Residential Parking Permit Program Yes  Town Leasing of Private Parking Lots Yes  Garage Space Monitoring Technology Yes  Trolley Shuttle Service No  Review Downtown Parking Ratios during Zoning Ordinance Rewrite Yes  Modify the 500 ft Rule for Downtown Businesses Yes  End the “Payment in Lieu of Parking” Program No**  End the “Payment in Lieu of Parking” Program Yes***  Initiate Creation of a Parking Authority Yes * with Town Hall Garage included in the assessment **as written ***to look at increases the per space cost of the parking-in-lieu program with discussion of potentially eliminating in the future 5 Item a. Council Work Session May 22, 2023 2 | P a g e b. Additions to Future Council Meetings Council Member Cummings requested that staff research potential areas for additional downtown parking structures. It was the consensus of Council to add this item to a future work session for discussion. Council Member Nacy asked about the LAWS request. Mr. David said it is already part of a future agenda item. c. Adjournment On a motion by Vice Mayor Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Cummings, the meeting was adjourned at 9:11 p.m. Clerk of Council 2023_tcwsmin0522 6 Item a. Page 1|May 22, 2023 May 22, 2023 – Leesburg Town Council Work Session (Note: This is a transcript prepared by a Town contractor based on the video of the meeting. It may not be entirely accurate. For greater accuracy, we encourage you to review the video of the meeting that is on the Town’s Web site – www.leesburgva.gov or refer to the approved Council meeting minutes. Council meeting videos are retained for three calendar years after a meeting per Library of Virginia Records Retention guidelines.) Mayor Kelly Burk: I'd like to open tonight's meeting of the May 22nd, 2023, Town Council Work Session. Our first item for discussion tonight is the Downtown Parking Strategies. Christopher Spera: Mayor Burk, they switched the order on you. Do the first item is the Town Code Section 32143-C. Mayor Burk: It is what? Christopher Spera: The consideration changes to- Mayor Burk: The commercial vehicle one? Christopher Spera: -commercial vehicle changes. Yes, Ma'am. Mayor Burk: All right. Okay. Christopher Spera: Which is why I was down here instead of at my usual place of residence. You'll recall that when we made the change to the parking section with respect to mobile homes, there was a person who came to that public hearing that urged us to consider additional changes with respect to commercial vehicles associated with mobile businesses. There was a request from, I believe it was Council Member Nacy that we add this to a work session for further discussion. That's what we're doing this evening. I went a little too far. This is operator error. As you recall from our discussion of the mobile home section, there's prohibitions in our Town Code prohibiting certain types of vehicles from parking in residential areas. They include commercial vehicles, trailers, vehicles over a certain weight, vehicles with three axles. There's three exceptions to that. If a commercial vehicle is engaged in providing services to a resident, a homeowner within the residential area, then they are allowed to be parked within the residential area while they're performing services. There's what I call the moving van exception, a commercial vehicle for up to 48 hours to load and unload furniture or equipment, and then there's a very specific one for utility generators during a loss of power. Those are the three exceptions. When we did the mobile homes amendment to this, we talked about why we would make that change for mobile homeowners. My thought process, and I believe the thought process that was accepted by the Council was that this is private property used for personal purposes, non-commercial, and allowing a 24-hour period to load or unload your mobile home was not an unreasonable imposition on your neighbors for the limited number of times during the course of the year when you might be using your mobile home. That was adopted back in April. At the same time, we got this proposal. What the resident asked for with respect to his mobile business vehicle, which was a trailer, as you recall, was that he wanted any mobile business to be able to park its vehicle, whether it be a trailer or mobile vehicle itself, say like a food truck, that they have an eight-hour free pass. Then if they're performing an event, then they can have 72 hours on either side of the event to park the vehicle or the trailer. That was what the ask was by the resident. My office looked at it. We spent substantial time talking with the Police Department about this. We already have an exception for when a commercial vehicle is actively engaged in performing services. That's already legal. That's already something that we allow. The biggest problem I think from the Police's perspective, and we share it, certainly and Captain Smith is here, if you have any 7 Item a. Page 2|May 22, 2023 questions of him, but enforceability is just so hard. How do you know if it's a mobile business owned by a resident that happens to live in the neighborhood, or it's somebody who just has a work truck that they took home with them? That they're not really a mobile business, but they like the convenience of having their work vehicle at home? Or it's just somebody that needs a place to park their vehicle that's more convenient than parking it someplace else. It's so difficult to enforce. That is the third bullet there that basically any commercial vehicle that's owned or operated by somebody who lives in that neighborhood arguably could be a mobile business. I don't know that really has any meaning in the context of parking. I suppose you could drill down to it over the course of time, but is something like this really worth a three-hour or four-hour investigation by our Police Department to try and figure out if this thing is legally parked or not? Separate, apart from the enforceability, there are other negative impacts which really, I think, are primary from my office why we don't support this proposed change. Obviously, commercial vehicles tend to be much larger than regular cars, so they take up a lot of space. The limited parking within the residential areas is one of the reasons why we have this restriction in place. I think this would be potentially an unfair use of the limited parking spaces that we have. The other safety concern, and this is something both my office and the Police Department shared, is these large vehicles do restrict visibility. That's one of the safety reduction by decreased visibility posed by these large vehicles in pedestrian, and potentially children is a cause of concern. Then also just more from a land use perspective, having commercial vehicles parked in a residential area changes the character of the neighborhood. For all those reasons, the Town Attorney's Office does not support the change. Separate apart from the enforceability problems, which I think are very fair for the Police Department to raise. That's our position on this. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have, and as I indicated, Captain Smith is here as well. Mayor Burk: Does Captain Smith wish to say anything in regard to this? David Smith: No, ma'am. [unintelligible] Mayor Burk: Would you mind coming up to the mic just so that people can hear you? David Smith: I would just echo the concerns of Mr. Spera. We've had significant discussion about this particular topic and these vehicles. Primary concern to me is the enforceability. Obviously, your position to set the Town ordinances for the t=Town, our job to necessarily enforce them. I would see a significant amount of time but have to go into the enforcement to do some research which could unintentionally result in ignorance of the-- Or officers ignoring what-- Putting the time into follow up on one of these type things. I think at the end of the day, there are definitely safety concerns, you start parking larger vehicles with pedestrians, people, and coming out from behind them, what do you want your neighborhoods to look like? Things of that nature was we opposed, we talked to RVs and things of that nature. I think it's a convenience thing as far our residents that own those things. It's for non-commercial purpose. I think this is a little bit different and limited, but my primary concern would be with the enforcement and the amount of time that would be needed to figure out, does this person live here? What's the purpose of this? When is this person's next event where they would need the 72 hours, or 48 hours, or 24 hours? Is this person supposed to have a schedule? Where am I supposed to go for this information? It looks like to me it'd be an enforcement problem, that is my primary concern, along with some of the same concerns that presented here for the Office of the Town Attorney. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Appreciate that. Does anyone have any questions at this point? Mr. Bagdasarian. Council Member Bagdasarian? 8 Item a. Page 3|May 22, 2023 Council Member Ara Bagdasarian: Yes, thank you. If there's an HOA that permits this, which regulations override the other, if they're permitted by an HOA, for example? Christopher Spera: Normally, I don't-- This is a complaint, Captain Smith, correct me if I'm wrong, but this is a complaint-driven process. Normally, if it's allowed by the HOA, we're not getting complaints. That would be the de facto prevailing rule, if it's allowed by the homeowners’ association, we are likely not going to get complaints, and this is, we enforce based upon complaints. The Police have other things to do rather than drive around town trying to figure out if they're going to take a commercial vehicle. De facto, the HOA rules would prevail. Council Member Bagdasarian: Okay, thank you. Mayor Burk: Council Member Wilt. Council Member Patrick Wilt: Yes. Thanks, Chris. I think when this came up at the meeting a few weeks back, I was thinking this was about the ability to park while they were granting services, but there's actually an exception that permits that currently. Christopher Spera: That's correct. Basically, if they're already engaged in parking, or providing services for a resident in the area, that it's allowed. Council Member Wilt: Okay. Christopher Spera: Then what this gentleman wanted to do, he was to park his trailer near or adjacent to his home to, which is the trailer commercial vehicle, so he could prepare it for events, he wasn't providing services, he basically wanted to just park it there to stage it before and after, and to me, that's really no different than a plumber or a carpenter who might be able to take his or her work vehicle with them, and for convenience, park it adjacent to their home because it's easier to get in and out, and that's really not consistent with residential parking and the character of residential neighborhoods. Council Member Bagdasarian: Okay, these two points on page five, mobile business parking up to eight hours in a residential area, and that's without providing services, that-- [crosstalk] Christopher Spera: That was part of what we asked for. That's correct. Council Member Bagdasarian: Then parking for six days around an event? Christopher Spera: Yes, those were the two asks. That's what was proposed by the resident. To me, what we've got in the code already is, while you're actively providing services, you've got a safe harbor, and the responding officer would not enforce if let's say it's a landscaping service, and you can see the people out there working, and there's the commercial vehicle, but they're providing services. There's no enforcement action necessary, or even this gentleman with his trailer, which is the specific gentleman with the axe throwing business, if there's an event at someone's residence while you're in the course of the event. I'm sure, Captain Smith's officers, if it's a couple of hours before and they're setting up or a couple of hours after and they're cleaning up, they're not going to enforce in that situation either, but what this gentleman wants is multiple days before or after. Council Member Bagdasarian: Is the topic he's getting at his own residence? Christopher Spera: Yes. Council Member Bagdasarian: Okay, so not at the event site- Christopher Spera: That's correct. 9 Item a. Page 4|May 22, 2023 Council Member Bagdasarian: -which our current ordinance takes care of? Christopher Spera: Yes, sir. Council Member Bagdasarian: He's looking for, he's running this operation from his residential home with this large commercial vehicle? Christopher Spera: That is how I understand his request. Yes, sir. Council Member Bagdasarian: Yes. All right. Thanks, Chris. Mayor Burk: Nacy? Council Member Kari Nacy: Thank you. Mayor Burk: Council Member Nacy? Council Member Nacy: With that instance where it is his private residence, he's got it parked, could he have it there for 48 hours to load/unload, would that fall under that bullet to load/unload it? Christopher Spera: We have interpreted that really more for construction where it might take a while to unload heavy construction supplies. Where bricks or something like that that might take a substantial period of time to unload or a moving van that might be loaded over the course of a couple of days. To me, I don't know that if he was just going to pull up by his house, and park, and load or unload for an hour or two, I doubt there'd be any enforcement action taken because by the time we responded, he'd be done. What he's looking for is a much larger window of time and I think that's- Council Member Nacy: To essentially park it. Mayor Burk: -too much of a burden to put on your neighbor, is my judgment. It starts to change the character of the neighborhood. Council Member Nacy: Thank you. I agree. I think what we have is sufficient. Mayor Burk: Council Member Cummings? Council Member Zach Cummings: Thank you. Just my question was similar to what Council Member Nacy brought up. I just have a concern with the exception for that 48 hours to load/unload furniture equipment, because I think as the resident who was here and asked for this, I could see him not understanding why that doesn't apply to him. My concern, and I understand that we need it, sometimes there has to be some exceptions to the rule, and you can't write something to work for everyone. Personally, I don't want to change the dynamic of our neighborhoods. That's why I don't support the overall ideas that he's looking for but I am concerned with, after this conversation, with that exception for the parking of commercial vehicles for up to 48 hours to load or unload furniture equipment. Because I think just -- it's vague enough to create potential issues for residents who are like this gentleman just looking to if it was trying to keep it within that 48-hour period. Mayor Burk: Mr. Cummings, the way that my office interprets that, and the advice that I would give the Police if they ask me the question is that as a homeowner engaged in my private activity as a homeowner, I might have furniture delivered, or I might have construction supplies delivered to my home to build an addition, or to swap out my furniture or whatever. So, I view that as somebody coming to provide service to the homeowner in the course of their private activities as property owners as opposed to commercial activity by the homeowner in a residential neighborhood. That's sort of the distinction for me from an enforcement perspective. 10 Item a. Page 5|May 22, 2023 If it takes two days to load up the moving van because of the amount of furniture and other materials in the home, okay, but that is not commercial activity by the resident. That's the resident exercising their private rights to move or to change out their furniture. To me, that's really the tipping point, is are we engaged in commercial activity by the homeowner in a residential neighborhood versus having a service come to them that might take a little bit longer time, like unloading construction materials or furniture. Council Member Cummings: Sure. I understand. I still think, ultimately, if it comes to the point where the Leesburg Police are called, and it has to come to you, this exception has already caused issue for one of our residents. That's my concern because it's not clear. I personally, hearing your argument for the 48 hours to load/unload furniture or equipment in those instances, I'm not sure I buy the difference between that and someone pulling up their ice cream truck, let's say, let's change their ice cream truck to load for the next day's ice cream venture, and it sits there 24 hours. Ultimately, this only affects a small number of neighborhoods because most HOAs in my experience don't allow commercial vehicles to park on the streets. That's just my concern. I understand what you're saying as far as reading of the law and your legal opinion. My concern is when it gets to that point, LPD has already had to deal with it. We have upset residents because of this potential exception that I think if I read that exception and have the Police at my door, I'm saying, "Well, I fit that exception." To have someone say, "No, you don't because it's not a furniture truck." I just think it creates too much uncertainty, and I think unfortunately, once we get to the point to have to have that conversation, we've probably upset a resident, and I don't want to put LPD in that position because that's not their job. That's not what they're there for. It creates friction between the town and our residents. That's my only comment. Christopher Spera: Certainly, if it's the will of Council to change that section, but that was a section that predates certainly me. That was not something that we amended, that was something that we inherited. We can certainly tighten that up if that's the will of the Council. To me, I feel pretty strongly that the interpretation isn't super hard because, if it's a private party not engaged in commerce, then I think it fits the exception. But if they're engaged in commerce, I think that it doesn't. That's just my interpretation, but to me that makes a pretty clear line of demarcation. Mayor Burk: Oh, you didn't have your mic on, so I didn't call on you. Vice Mayor Neil Steinberg: I'm sorry. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor Steinberg. Vice Mayor Steinberg: I apologize. Oh, thank you. That's who I am. Very good. Mr. Spera, out of curiosity, can the resident park the vehicle, including trailer, in the driveway if it will all fit there without any issues? Christopher Spera: Yes. Vice Mayor Steinberg: It just can't be on the street? Christopher Spera: Yes. This only relates to the Town's right of way. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Well, good. I see the 72-hour period before and after is unreasonable, and I can see where some people might even take advantage of the 48 hours, but I think that allowance for businesses servicing particular residents probably works pretty well. In an HOA, that's entirely up to them. I'm more than willing to allow for staff's interpretation, and not make any changes here. The whole reason we've created residential and commercial areas in the first place is to have this division. Even in heavily urban areas, commercial vehicles are typically not permitted to park long term in residential areas, so I'm satisfied that that we've got the right direction here. Thanks. Mayor Burk: The other day I was in a neighborhood, and there was a particular plumbing company. They had multiple vans, commercial, that identified the company and all that parked on the street in 11 Item a. Page 6|May 22, 2023 front of various homes, which caused me to question, did they have that many plumbers in those neighborhoods or was this just scattering out the vehicles? When I talked to people, they were scattering the vehicles, and made for a very difficult parking situation for that neighborhood, but they also made the same point that you made, which was it truly changed the character of that neighborhood. They were looking for some relief in regard to that themselves, and just that particular issue. Mobile businesses have been around, they're not new. Plumbers, our mobile businesses, electrical workers, and stuff like that, all those-- Christopher Spera: Food trucks have been around for decades. This is not really a new phenomenon, Mayor Burk, I agree with you. Mayor Burk: It's just different businesses now are involved in it. Let me make sure I understand this. If the neighborhood was holding an event and the trailer was there for the event, that's fine? Christopher Spera: That is already covered by the existing exemption. There is no-- [crosstalk] Mayor Burk: It's just a matter of parking it in front of your house for an extended period of time for the intent of loading or unloading it, perhaps that's not the best place to do it, and it doesn't have to-- [crosstalk] Christopher Spera: Right. Now you're engaged in commercial activity for yourself as opposed to for a customer. If your customer is in the residential neighborhood, you're covered by the exemption, but when you're just servicing it for yourself, you're engaging in commerce from your residents. I think that's a distinction. Mayor Burk: Anyone else have any questions? Do you need us to do anything on this tonight? Christopher Spera: If you tell me no changes are necessary, then I am done. Mayor Burk: Is there anyone that wants to make a change on this? Then I would say no changes are necessary. Thank you very much. Christopher Spera: Thank you. Mayor Burk: Alright. Now, the next item is the Downtown Parking Strategies. Keith Markel: Another short item for you this evening. Mayor Burk: Mr. Markel. Keith Markel: Yes, ma'am. All right. Well, thank you. I've got 10 minutes here. So, we're probably going to need a little bit more time than that to get to this. What we have for you this evening is a consolidated parking topic item based on your conversations that you had at the January Council planning retreat, as well as some other items that you've brought up in recent months. What we've done since a number of these items have some overlap into each other, we consolidated them all into one mega item, if you will, to talk through this evening. We've got the whole team here with us to share with you some slides, to answer questions as you have them and discuss some along the way. How we have it set up, you're prerogative, but we have it set up so the presentation will flow through different topic areas based on different themes that you all have brought up. At the end of that theme, we'll pose a straw poll question for you that you all can provide feedback on, and that will help guide staff as to future steps that you may want us to take if that's acceptable. Mayor Burk: Fine. 12 Item a. Page 7|May 22, 2023 Keith Markel: All right. Let's get into it. I'll just give you just a brief overview. I know this is a topic for those of you who have been on Council for a while. We've talked about some of these elements in the past, but just to give you an idea of our existing conditions, we have obviously a variety of different parking opportunities in the Downtown. We've got 336 surface lot spaces on public lots themselves. We have over 1,4K garage spaces between three structured parking facilities. We have on-street pay- to-park spaces. We have on-street free spaces. We have on-street loading and passenger drop off and pick up spaces that were designed over the past several years as we've seen trends in the way folks use the Downtown, many years ago before Uber was a thing, you didn't have this need for passenger drop off. Now we have golf carts, we have ride-sharing programs. We've created and evolved our Downtown parking strategies over the years as demand has shifted, and maybe it's time to look at some of these elements again. Just to give you an idea of just a breakdown of these spaces within the Downtown, you can see those highlighted yellow areas. Those are our public parking facilities that are owned either by the Town or the County. The County having the Pennington parking lot and garage. They manage that, but that is free and open to the public. To give you a little idea on parking demands, every year in September, we have been doing an annual parking count. We do an audit of the Town's public parking facilities, is on-street within the Town's parking garage, and then our surface lots as well as the County's surface and garage, Pennington facility. What you'll see here, and it varies obviously because different times of the day and the week, you'll see parking demand shift. On average, you'll see on our pay-to-park spaces, those former metered spaces now the ParkMobile spaces, we're seeing an occupancy rate in the month of September for 2022 of 47%. Within the Liberty Lot, our surface lot, we have a general average occupancy of 41%. These counts were taken mid-morning and mid-afternoon. Then the Pennington Lot seeing slightly higher use there at 48%. All of those below the 50% mark as far as utilization, again, on average. If you're there Friday evening, you'll see a much different situation where you might be pushing 100% occupancy. We also look at the Town parking garage. Lots of data is collected there, but just to give you a quick snapshot, if you look at times when the counts, and we do four counts during the day on weekdays, and three counts on the weekends, each day of the month for every day of the week. You'll see that within those counts, if we had to count that at any time exceeded 75% or greater occupancy in the garage, we counted that as what you'll see on this bar here. In 2017, you'll see we had 15 occurrences where garage capacity was at 75% or greater. In 2022, you'll see that number climbs up to just shy of 25 times where we've seen those counts exceed. You can see there's a trend. Obviously, COVID has messed with the statistics. We didn't even do counts in 2020 because it just wouldn't have meant anything with everything being closed. You'll see in 2021 to 2022 major increases in the Downtown. We all can see that anecdotally by the success of the Downtown businesses, we've seen parking demands. If you're here on a Friday night, you'll see lots of vehicles circling the parking garage looking for spaces. With that, I will turn it over now to James to talk to you a bit about the managing of the parking demands. There it is. James David: Thank you, Mr. Markel. Good evening, Madam Mayor, and Council. I've got two slides and they’re about managing parking demand. Just a little bit of context before we get to the discussion question. One popular approach to managing parking demand is through pricing strategies. Usually, this is in a Downtown environment. The basic premise is to adjust the cost of on- street parking to achieve a target occupancy rate. If you follow Dr. Shoup, he thinks that the occupancy rate of curbside parking should be 85%. What that means is on every block, you have one to two open on-street parking spaces at all times of the day. To achieve that occupancy rate, you vary the cost of on-street parking such that the Town can charge the lowest possible rate to still achieve that one to two vacant spaces per block. Now, the best pricing strategies can vary based on the time of day and the location, and perhaps that's something 13 Item a. Page 8|May 22, 2023 that could be enabled by the Town's new parking technology with the ParkMobile app in different areas of Downtown, and the thought behind that is that you have different levels of demand based on what time of day it is and where it is Downtown. Now, charging the right price for on-street parking could also have some other benefits, especially coupled with cheaper or free garage parking. The theory is that if the on-street parking is more expensive and creating turnover, then that basically creates incentive for long-term visitors and employees to seek out the cheaper parking in the structured parking garages, and then that lends itself to that theory of park once and walk, which helps with Downtown vitality, as well as better for the environment, getting people out of their cars and walking around Downtown. Now, some other benefits could be you free up on-street parking directly in front of the businesses. If there's a little bit more turnover, that means there'll be more spaces for those short-term patrons that are going right to a targeted business, and then, of course, there is some argument behind the cost of service being tied more to the motorist, and less obviously to the taxpayer of funding free parking on the streets or parking garages. Just a few thoughts there in terms of pricing strategies. That leads us to what is the Town doing right now. Well, we have the beginnings of a pricing strategy. For our pay-to-park spaces on street, they are a $1.50 per hour, and there's also a processing fee of ¢50, and then in our Town Hall garage, the first two hours are free, and then it's a dollar per hour thereafter. That's a good first step, but then the question that has been raised by at least one Council member is, “Do we need to adjust the on-street pricing, raise it above the $1.50 per hour to park on the street?” And if the majority of the Council says yes or maybe, then a little bit more direction would be helpful on what are we trying to achieve a target occupancy rate, are we open to dynamic pricing, et cetera. I think we'll pause and poll the Council. Mayor Burk: All right. Then you're asking for direction to develop a modified pricing strategy that would increase the $1.50 per hour fee to park on the street? Is there any questions on this, Mr. Wilt? Council Member Wilt: Yes. Just for clarification. The target objective would be to reach an occupancy rate of 85% so there's 15% availability at all times, each block? James David: Correct. Council Member Wilt: We currently have the $1.50 in place, and on slide four we say our on-street pay-to-park, we're at 47% occupancy. James David: Let me go back to slide four here. This is during the annual September counts, which is a certain time of day. Mr. Markel can give you the context on that. Keith Markel: That would be the mid-morning, mid-afternoon on the month of September. There are other times, so Friday afternoons at 3:00 PM you may see occupancy in the 80% to 90% range. On a Monday morning, you might be in the higher range, but on average, we're seeing 47%. Council Member Wilt: Just trying to speak apples to apples. We're talking about a target of 85%, so at the $1.50, and we're talking about increasing it so we can achieve that. What is the apples-to- apples metric comparable to the 85% that we're at right now? James David: Let me just clarify. The 85% is not based on measurement of where we are right now. It's actually just common practice. I don't know for certain where we are in terms of the $1.50 relative to occupancy rate at all times of the day. Council Member Wilt: Okay. I guess, I don't know, is there a need to modify the $1.50 at all because I'm not sure I'm understanding the data? 14 Item a. Page 9|May 22, 2023 James David: Yes, I think that as part of this, If we're directed to go forth and study it, we certainly need to bring back what is the $1.50 achieving at more times during the day, and some of the peak times during the day. Council Member Wilt: Would part of that be as I'm hearing some of the discussion depending on the day of the week, the time of the day, utilization changes. Is part of this to change the $1.50 by time of day, day of week also, or is the $1.50 fixed, and the intention would be to maintain a fixed rate? James David: Currently, it's a fixed rate. Keith Markel: Fixed rate. James David: Some of the other examples across the nation is that you do make it dynamic based on those demands, but we're not doing that right now as a Town. We could look into it as part of this. Council Member Wilt: Okay. I'd be interested in understanding the issue more thoroughly because the data doesn't communicate to me right now. James David: Understood. Council Member Wilt: All right. Thanks. Mayor Burk: Mr. Cummings? I mean, Council Member Cummings. Council Member Cummings: That's all right. I know the September numbers were taken in September 2022. What was the system for the on-the-street parking to pay? Keith Markel: [inaudible] meters and of the ParkMobile payment. Council Member Cummings: It probably isn't really truly reflective of the new system with the ParkMobile? Keith Markel: We haven't done a count yet where we've- Council Member Cummings: Sure. Keith Markel: -just been on the ParkMobile. Council Member Cummings: It's not September yet. Keith Markel: Right. Mayor Burk: You’re quick. Council Member Cummings: Look at that. I'm the smartest guy up here. No. Following what Council Member Wilt was trying to get at, I believe, if the goal is to increase usage, increasing the price to me at this point doesn't make sense without the data- James Davide: Sure. Council Member Cummings: -because we haven't tracked it. From my own personal anecdotal responses that I'm hearing from our business owners and residents, there's a concern for the ease of use of the ParkMobile parking. There's a lot of folks who visit the Town and shop, especially during the days and the mornings that don't have smartphones. If you don't have a smartphone, it makes it more difficult. 15 Item a. Page 10|May 22, 2023 I actually would have liked to see us either keep or install the dual system, what used to be at the lot down here on the Church and Market area where you could use your credit card to pay, and then get the little slip, or you could use your phone with the app. I think, for me, what's important is ensuring that when folks come to visit or our residents come Downtown, that they have a true ease of use for the system. I wish we could reevaluate the ParkMobile to see if it's really-- It may be the most efficient, best system for the Town to use, but is it the most efficient and best system for our residents and the visitors here at the Town of Leesburg? I actually had someone complain because they said that the meters were like a real nostalgic throwback, and it really made you feel like you’re -- which I laughed at. I'm like, I didn't know parking meters invoked that much emotion, but I guess it does. As far as the question of the $1.50 fee, I would not support raising that fee, especially without the data showing us that we're at that, where we are with this new ParkMobile. In fact, I'd actually ask us to consider looking at a more user-friendly system that looks at an ability for folks all over the spectrum of technology use and comfort to help ease their use of coming to visit Downtown. Mayor Burk: Council Member Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Yes. I brought [unintelligible] favorite book here for reference if you needed it, by the way. Excellent reading. Great by the bed stand if you need to fall asleep. Dr. Shoup does go into the science of parking, and he does advocate for market-based pricing and dynamic. I could see where the questions we’re looking at dynamic pricing based on the time of day, the volume. If you come down to Downtown Leesburg on a Friday night, you're not going to have 47% available parking. I think it is definitely worth looking at that. To Council Member Cummings' point, having, I don't know what the cost implications would be to have a dynamic system that takes credit cards and a little slip in conjunction with that. That's not what we're talking about here though. This was not in this report, and I don't know if we could add it to this, but also looking at the parking garage parking fees. I think that should also be market-based. If we're not charging parking, then the taxpayers, they might not drive vehicles or own vehicles are covering the cost for that. Just back of the envelope math here, so even if parking was three dollars an hour in the garage, which it's certainly not outrageous, at 75% occupancy and just for one hour a day over the course of the year, that would generate $1.21 million of revenue that can be reinvested in the Downtown for improvements. Maybe bearing power lines, funding the Main Street program. I think that keeping that the money that's generated from parking in the Downtown can be used to improve the Downtown, keep that revenue here, but also work on the value, because parking does have value, and certainly there can be free parking a little bit further out. But if you're going to park right in the heart of the Downtown, I think there's value there. I personally think that, and Dr. Shoup believes that we should be charging market-based rates for that, and we'll determine what is the right rate. Is it $1.50? Is it $3? Is it $5? We don't know that. This ties into the counter discussion. I would like to add that to this, either this straw poll or another item doing the parking garage pricing adjustment. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Council Member Cimino-Johnson? Council Member Todd Cimino-Johnson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. My question is, if we would vote yes on this, does that mean you would develop a pricing strategy, and then you come back to us? James David: Yes. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Not implement it? James David: Correct. I think it would behoove us to actually get the data to marry up apples to apples to look at occupancy rates at all times of the day now, and different days. 16 Item a. Page 11|May 22, 2023 Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Thank you. Mayor Burk: Council Member Nacy? Council Member Nacy: Thank you. I agree with what everyone's been saying with, let's go ahead and study it. Going into the city often for work, and they use ParkMobile in most places. I would be curious to know what the cost would be for one of the standalone where you get out of your car, you go, you use your credit card, and you take your slip back like Council Member Cummings was saying. Just maybe have some of those strategically placed for some of our residents who may not have access to a smartphone. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor Steinberg? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Thanks. The 50¢ service fee, who pays that? Keith Markel: The parker. Vice Mayor Steinberg: The parker pays that. Keith Markel: It goes directly to ParkMobile. The Town does not collect that. It's the third-party processing fee. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Can the end user choose less than an hour out of curiosity? Keith Markel: Yes. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Parking time? Keith Markel: Yes. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Anything they want. Okay. A theme I think that's going to be running through this conversation through the various parts of this thing now is that we either are coming to or need to come to the realization that parking is an expensive provision for the Town. In my view right now, currently, what we charge is too cheap. I agree with Councilman Bagdasarian. I'm not sure there's a halfway point here. We've made the leap of faith, so to speak, in the ParkMobile choice, which is obviously more efficient and less expensive in terms of its maintenance and everything. I recognize that it does create a certain difficulty for some people who are not technologically adept. Although I've seen people in the streets in DC looking at these kiosks that take credit cards in total confusion. In the end, I'm uncertain as to how much better a solution that is. It is a transitional period, like a lot of things, but I'm not sure going backward and investing more money is a good idea. I believe that the study for the rate is absolutely warranted, and I'm not uncertain that the rates don't need to go up in the end. Thanks. Mayor Burk: Originally, the setup came about because we charged for the garage, but we didn't charge for the parking on the street. The idea was to try to get people to move them to the garage, and have people parked temporarily in the street so you would charge them more than the garage. I'm not sure that that's happening. Although the garages most certainly are more full than they used to be. To see that the Pennington Lot is full at 48%, that was pretty surprising to me. It doesn't seem like it's utilized that much. That's good to hear that people are using it. I hope that has something to do with having the golf carts be able to bring them into Town and that sort of thing. The $1.50, the whole idea was to get people using the garage, get people off the street so people could just park there temporarily. So, I’m not sure if that is goodbye. The other thing, though, I would request, if this does go forward, we need feedback from the businesses that this will affect. That's really important to get some input from them as to what they would see would be the advocation for it or not, and what would be the impact to their business. If we 17 Item a. Page 12|May 22, 2023 change the question to direct staff to develop a modified pricing strategy that worked to increase the $1.50 per hour fee to park on the street and to look at the parking in the garage, the fees in the garage, that would be what we were all talking about. Council Member Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: To your point, this is a perfect opportunity for a Main Street program, right? For the business community to share their input. This may be a project or an initiative that the new organization provides some input on. I think that this is exactly what Main Street is for, for situations like this. Mayor Burk: That's true. Vice Mayor? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Mostly for the public's information, I'd like to remind everyone that in the parking garage, it is free for two hours. That is absolutely an incentive for people to move off the street spaces and into the parking garage. Mayor Burk: Then everybody's asked their questions. Then I'm going to ask, do we want to direct staff to develop a modified pricing strategy that would increase the $1.50 per hour fee to park on the street, along with looking at the parking garage's fees? Are four people that are interested in doing that? Do you need everybody's name? Eileen Boeing: [unintelligible] Mayor Burk: Okay, so there were six people. You didn’t raise your had? Okay, so six of us move forward. Thank you very much. James David: Thank you. Mayor Burk: The next one is the Residential Permit Parking. James David: I'm going to pass the baton to Niraja. Niraja Chandrapu: Good evening, Madam Mayor, and Council members. My name is Niraja Chandrapu and I'm here to discuss about the residential permit parking. There are certain streets in the Town that have been designated as the residential permit parking zones. The program is implemented where the residents are experiencing difficulty in finding on-street parking space because of non-residents frequently occupying on-street spaces. Currently, we have 17 residential permit parking zones out of which seven are in Downtown. This program particularly protects the street parking for residential properties from the daytime business users. For requesting a residential permit parking there is a process which requires a petition from the residents and after that the staff will conduct a parking survey. There will be a public hearing after the parking survey with the Town Manager and the last thing is the Town Manager's approval. This map shows the total 17 residential parking zones in the Town of Leesburg. Here is a graphic that focuses on the Downtown area. You could see seven residential parking zones in the area. The restrictions provide protection for the residential properties from the Downtown workers and visitors. However, this would increase demand for parking if the spaces are vacant. Town staff frequently monitors these zones and as such, I can share an example. Wirt Street between East Market and Cornwall, as well as the Cornwall between the Wirt and Liberty Street. The streets were not utilized enough for parking by the residents. As such, the Town Manager initiated a public hearing for a potential withdrawal of residential permit parking. In the public hearing, we heard the concerns from the residents as well as from the business owners. After careful consideration of many factors like public input, survey counts, before and after public hearing, and follow-up discussions with the residents and the business owners, the Town Manager decided to pilot a modified program. 18 Item a. Page 13|May 22, 2023 The modified program was implemented, as you can see on this graphic that is marked as black streets, which is Wirt Street between West Market Street and Cornwall, and Cornwall Street between Liberty and Wirt Street. The modified program allows two-hour free parking for non-permit holders and a continuous unlimited parking for the permit holder vehicles. This would increase the space utilization and convenience for the non-residential parkers. Six weeks ago, this program was implemented and since then there have been no complaints from either the residents or the business owners. Furthermore, we got a request from another resident located on Cornwall Street requesting a similar approach to be implemented on their street. Therefore, the staff recommends implementing the same approach for all and proposed residential permit parking zones in H1 District to provide fair and equitable solution for the residents as well as for the business owners. With that, we come to the Council question regarding the Modify Residential Permit Parking Program. Mayor Burk: All right, thank you. I appreciate that. Is there any questions on this one, this item? I have a couple questions. Wirt Street and whatever we do, the residential parking permit will still have to go through the process of they have to get so many signatures. Niraja Chandrapu: Yes 50% of the residents located on the street need to sign for a petition. Mayor Burk: Okay. My concern centers around the Wirt Street and Cornwall Street. Those two are very unique streets. I'm not sure that if you're looking at those to being the best example of a pilot program because everybody has a driveway where they are. Everybody has an opportunity to park, they don't have to park on the street unless they want to. I'm just not sure, I'm not opposed to looking at it but I'm just thinking Wirt Street and Cornwall Street may not be the best and only example. That's all. Niraja Chandrapu: Okay. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Anyone else? Well, then do we want to modify the current zoning to broader area zones that allow two-hour parking for non-permit holders and unlimited parking for permit holders within a specific zone? Is this model that has been successfully piloted on Wirt Street and Cornwall Street based on that? I would just caution that we look at other streets too. Niraja Chandrapu: Sure. Mayor Burk: Do we have four people that would be interested in asking staff to move forward on that one? Council Member Bagdasarian, Nacy, myself, and Vice Mayor. Oh, and Dr. Cimino-Johnson. That is a yes, move forward. Okay, thank you. Niraja Chandrapu: Thank you. Mayor Burk: The public party keen alternatives. Russell Seymour: Yes ma'am. Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of Council. Just continuing our discussion this evening, looking at possible alternatives for public parking. We've focused on where the public parking is. Now we're looking at, there are approximately 2K private parking or off- street parking areas that are in the Town of Leesburg. One of the things that we've noticed in talking with a lot of these property owners is that while these properties or the spaces are used predominantly during working hours, really after 5:00 PM they're underutilized. If there's an opportunity you may recall the Church Street Lot that we had leased for some time that we had used for some of our parking, doing something similar to that but looking at some of these areas that are not on the main streets, they're behind some of the buildings, so you don't see them necessarily. There are, like I said, approximately 2K spaces in the Town right now that may be an opportunity for us to look as a potential alternative. With that, I get to go to my yes or no maybe question a little sooner, and we'll answer any questions that you have. Mayor Burk: Thank you very much. Mr. Council Member Wilt? 19 Item a. Page 14|May 22, 2023 Council Member Wilt: Thanks, Russell. How many private parking spaces you say might be applicable? Russell Seymour: Well, we're looking at just right around 2K spaces privately-owned spaces that are in the Town of Leesburg. Now, obviously, 2K aren't going to be available but it's giving you an idea of how many spaces there are. Council Member Wilt: Are we focused across Leesburg or is this B1 or what’s the geography? Russell Seymour: I would say the extended Downtown area. Council Member Wilt: Okay. Russell Seymour: All walkable. Council Member Wilt: Would the target for the availability you said be after normal business hours after 5:00 PM on weekdays and such, is that the goal? Russell Seymour: I think we would look into it just across the board. The comment I mentioned about five seems to be the information that we get from them, but I would suggest that we look at it across the board. Council Member Wilt: Okay. There wouldn't necessarily be a distinction in signage or something for visitors. It would be public parking this way, not public parking during these hours, for example? Russell Seymour: It could be either way, and I think that's what staff is asking, is to at least take a look at that. Depending on the lot and depending on that particular lot's usage. Council Member Wilt: Okay. There would be signage if we did this kind of a lease? Russell Seymour: There would need to be, yes. Council Member Wilt: Okay. All right. Thanks, Russell. Mayor Burk: Council Member Cimino-Johnson? Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. I read this direct steps to engage with Downtown property owners. If we say yes to this, does that mean you go out immediately and do this? Because the way I look at this is it's not just one solution. All these are comprehensive- Russell Seymour: Exactly. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: -The whole thing, right? Okay. Russell Seymour: No. The way we looked at this was to go out and start the conversation. Take an inventory of what's there. We know most of the spaces, we know the property owners. Some of them have already talked to us just as these discussions have been becoming public. They've brought things up or questions to us. It's really going out talking to them, coming back with an idea of this is what's available and this is the information to even see if this is a valid opportunity. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Okay. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Council Member Nacy? Council Member Nacy: Thank you. How would the leasing work? A flat rate or would we share the parking cost, put ParkMobile in there and share it? What would be the-- Or would that be something you would be--? 20 Item a. Page 15|May 22, 2023 Russell Seymour: I would think that-- and I don't speak for our Attorney's Office. I think that would be something that we would want to look at, but we'd want to stay consistent. Whatever we did for one space or one lot, we'd want to continue to do it across. Council Member Nacy: Okay. Christopher Spera: Yes. There'd be multiple ways to do it. I agree with Russell though. Whatever it is that we choose to do, it would be consistent across the board. Seems to me the easiest thing to do would be to share the revenue, so that the revenue that the property owner gets is based upon the actual usage. That would be legal. You could do it that way. The other way to do it would be to do a flat fee to the property owner, and then if it's successful, the Town gets more. If it's less successful, the town gets less. Just off the top of my head, my thought would be to share the revenues, and that way it's a true partnership. Each party bears the same risk of overuse or underuse. Council Member Nacy: Okay. That's something you could come back and give us some potential example. Russell Seymour: Give you options. Absolutely. Mr. Markel just told me as well that when we did the Church Street Lot, that was a flat rate. We paid the flat rate and then the Town received the income coming back from the parking. Council Member Nacy: Okay. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Council Member Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Yes. I like the idea of the shared revenue, by the way. I'm sure if we did use like a ParkMobile, it would be start after five or something like that. If you don't need to pay for parking if you're there. Aside from Church Street, have we done any other partnerships like this up to date that you're aware of? Russell Seymour: Where we paid for the public? Not that I'm aware of. That was the primary lot that I've-- Since I've been here. I believe that's the only one I've known. Council Member Bagdasarian: Okay. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Oh, your lights went out. Who else? You turned yours on? Vice Mayor Steinberg: I did. Mayor Burk: Yes, Mr. Steinberg. Vice Mayor Steinberg. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Thank you very much. Okay. The idea of leasing is interesting, but as we go through a number of the components of this discussion, including pay in lieu, 500-foot rule, 1K-foot rule, and all these other questions. I think we have to keep in mind if a long-term goal is going to be less impervious surface, more pervious surface, and a better use of land in general, then I think the conversation about structured parking in the end is going to have to be considered. That kind of parking would also allow for shared parking by the way, by both property owners and users. I'm not even sure. Do we have a clue as to what areas might accommodate this particular concept? Russell Seymour: Yes, we do. We have a couple of spaces that we have talked about with some of the property owners. I do want to take a good inventory of all of it and put it together. None of them, that I'm aware of, are either right on King Street. Most of them are off the-- I won't say off the beaten path. They're all within walkable distance of the Downtown. They're in close proximity but most of them are behind the buildings, behind the primary lot. We can talk about the areas around Tuscarora, back in that area of the Crossings back there. There's some spaces back there. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Well, specifically as it pertains to the H1, B1, I think increasingly we need to consider land use and how we can best accommodate both parking and then accommodate the best 21 Item a. Page 16|May 22, 2023 use of the land. I recognize it's going to be in the end of a far more expensive endeavor, but it's probably something that we're not going to be able to avoid in the end. Thanks. Mayor Burk: Okay. Do we want to direct staff to engage with Downtown property owners of underutilized parking lots to see if there is an interest in leasing spaces to the Town for public use? Are there four people that would like to do that? All right. It’s everybody-- Okay. Thank you. Russell Seymour: No. Mayor Burk: You’re not done? Russell Seymour: You don't need to give me a sit down yet. Mayor Burk: I do have to say, Mr. Markel. Russell Seymour: Keith gave me a couple more slides I get to work on here. Mayor Burk: You may not hear me say this very often, but it actually is warm in here. You might want to-- Keith Markel: Oh, oh! Mayor Burk: Alright. Russell Seymour: We'll see it. Please let the record show that I did not wear a tie this evening just because-- We talked about directional signage, and we had looked at where we have directional signage. Currently the Council obviously has an approved signage plan that will be implemented. Signs will be installed later this summer. For that, the County Courts will be installing updated and additional wayfinding signs. In addition to that, Economic Development and Public Works are working together right now. We have applied, Economic Development has applied for an additional Department of Housing and Community Development grant that would give us some additional funding to add or to both look at a study for additional wayfinding signs with the intention of hopefully being able to add that. We've talked a lot about the signage right on the main areas and we hear all too often from businesses that that's great, but we're the next block over. Those are parts of the directional signage that we're talking about that would incorporate the additional parking. Mr. Bagdasarian, I believe that goes back to what you were saying too about advertising for those spaces. Those would be part of that. Also wanted to mention Pennington Lot, I believe the Mayor made a-- I'm sorry. Mayor Burk: You don't have a question for the directional signage? Russell Seymour: No, ma'am. There was no questions that we had. Keith Markel: You've already approved that in the budget -- Mayor Burk: Oh, is that right? Keith Markel: -- so that will go in later that summer. Mayor Burk: Ironically, what was it? Four years ago, we had a study to see how many signs we had and we ended up taking down signs because we had so many signs. Déjà vu. Go ahead. Sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt. Russell Seymour: Very good point. We talked about the Pennington Lot, and I believe Madam Mayor, you brought up a good point and that was the 47% usage. That surprised me too when I was looking at that number because one of the things we've heard repeatedly over and over again is that 22 Item a. Page 17|May 22, 2023 the Pennington Lot is not utilized. I think when you certainly look after hours when a lot of the business or a lot of the visitor activities going, I would say at that point the Pennington Lot is not utilized. There's more that we need to do. When I looked at, I took a survey of some of the local websites addressing when they talk about where the Downtown parking lots are. Pennington Lot was not on some of those sites. Some of the ones we looked at. Talking about Downtown visitors, educating them about and having them educate their customers next time, you come in. Really using them as a resource, whether through Main Street program, but using our businesses as a resource to come up and really not only tell us where people were parking, but also be able to have them highlight to their customers where the parking are. Obviously, social media advertising, updating our parking maps as well, and then looking at reestablishing some type of parking shuttle service. One of the things that we've heard from our business community a number of times is that, people will want to park right in front of the business here. The same people will drive to DC, park in a garage, and walk halfway across DC, wherever they want to go. They're used to that. They're not used to that here in Leesburg. Part of it's going to be a reeducation, but one of the things with the Pennington Lot and it really does tie into signage, you can't park where you don't know. If you don't know that the Pennington Lot's there, it's out of sight out of mind. Being able to identify that, put additional signage Downtown that direct people to the Pennington Lot, but then also provide those directions before somebody ever comes to Leesburg. I think there are going to be important parts of this. With that, I will turn it back over to Mr. Markel. Keith Markel: We'll move on to the next focus area, which is that technology enhancements. I know we've talked a little bit about this already, but to touch again on the ParkMobile feature, that app payment system that we first introduced back in 2016, and that was the combination of pay with coins and pay with ParkMobile at the street. We saw about a 50/50 split between users, how they were paying through those systems. As you know, in January of this year we transitioned to the all-app payment and pulled the meters out because the technology and the pay meters was out of date. It wasn't supported. The system presented some cyber security risks and to upgrade it would be a six- figure cost to go to a new coin collection system. It's just not where communities are headed. We've made the decision to go with the all-app payment. We did look at the walkup payment kiosk similar to that T2 system that you had in the Church Street Lot. When you look at those, there is the cost benefits analysis of it. It has points of failure in it. It has printers, it has screens, it has readers, it has to have a cellular connection, it has to have power. All of those issues make those a bit of a challenge and more maintenance. When we're looking at a small parking staff, we looked at what was our opportunity to keep up with those systems and we recommended going with the all-app payment system. The other advantage that Leesburg has is we're a fairly small footprint in the Downtown. You're within a few blocks of walking to free parking even if you don't want to pay on-street, on-street may be the most convenient if you're going to a certain store, but the garage, again, offers free two-hour parking. Nights and weekends it's free. Liberty Lot's free, Pennington Lot's free. Everything within about three blocks can get you to free parking if you don't want to pay with the app on the street. The app itself does allow not only for smartphone, but you can call from a traditional phone to make a payment as well on that. That's a little bit of background of how we got there. We also talked, in the past few years, about the garage space monitoring technology to provide an indication for those passing by the structured parking lot to see if there are spaces available. You've all seen this at One Loudoun, at Reston, Dulles, all has these features where it has sensors built into the garage, looking at those parking spaces and providing visual cues to the motorist as to whether or not there's a space available. Looking at this, they can be retrofitted into existing garages. The cost is about $550, give or take to install these per space. When you look at a garage the Town size, you'd be looking about $200K of an 23 Item a. Page 18|May 22, 2023 investment to put that in place. Something that you've funded in the budget, we have $150K currently allocated in the budget. Additional funds most likely would be necessary based on our preliminary discussions. This is something hopefully that we'll get into here in the next year or so as we start to have staff time to get into this in more detail. This question here really is simply just if you want us to continue on that path, you've allocated the funds. We assume that you still want us to continue with that, but since we haven't done it yet, we just want to make sure that's still the direction that you all feel. Mayor Burk: Council Member Nacy? Council Member Nacy: Yes. Mayor Burk: That was it? Council Member Nacy: Yes. It just made me think of I think it was the Valor Awards where we went to National Conference Center and they don't have this kind of technology. It was completely full and everyone got to the top of the garage and it was just bottlenecked for it. You couldn't turn back around. I know that that's happened a couple of times up here, especially during really, really busy, when the streets are closed, that sort of thing. I think this is well worth the investment to avoid accidents in the garage, cars getting hit, stuff like that. A little sign out front that says, "Sorry, this is full." That's worth its weight, I think right there. Mayor Burk: Council Member Cummings? Council Member Cummings: Yes. On the ParkMobile app, I just had a couple questions. The first is, this was done by staff and there was not a public hearing or a public process to the converting to an all-digital parking payment system, correct? Keith Markel: That's correct. Council Member Cummings: Okay. Then one question on the signage. Was the signage approved by the Board of Architectural Review or did it get an administrative--? Keith Markel: We consulted our Preservation Planner, and so the mock-ups that we had, we wanted to stick with something traditional. We used the Town's branding color, so that would stay consistent with the other wayfinding signs you'd see in Town. But as a public informational sign, it does not need to go through the full BAR approval process. It's treated as a street sign. Council Member Cummings: Okay. As far as the garage space monitoring technology, I just have a hard time spending $550 a parking spot for a garage that the first two hours is free. I'm not advocating eliminating the first two hours free, because I think it's a service to the residents and to our visitors to have that discount, if you will. It just puts me in a situation where I don't want to harm the budget. The money could go somewhere else to see a return on our investment. I remember I was with Kari at the Valor Awards, so I know we were both hunting for parking spots. I get that, having parked in the garage quite frequently, I haven't hit that same situation very often. There's, I think, enough spots, and if you get to the top, it's easy to navigate around. I just personally can't see spending $550 per space. I think it was $150K is the total budget for the parking garage at this point. I do just want to continue to highlight that I've heard from our small business owners as well as residents and visitors on the ParkMobile. My hope is that maybe there's an option to at least, if not install these multiple use payment systems to at least highlight the options of the garages and other places to where folks can pay with a different card rather than just on their phone. Mayor Burk: Council Member Wilt Council Member Wilt: No, actually, questions have answered. Thanks. 24 Item a. Page 19|May 22, 2023 Mayor Burk: Okay. Council Member Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Okay, great. Thank you, sir. Yes. I don't know how many hundreds of pictures I sent to the Town Manager here of different parking garages with the counters, but we're the Hometown of the 21st Century. I agree the fact that if it's free parking we're having that, I think it adds additional value. That's why I think looking at the pricing structure, the cost, the rates for the parking garage play into this, but the other aspects that this provides is real time data, like actually knowing outside of September that day or week that we actually do the count. It tells us when the highest frequencies are, what the rates are at any given time. It provides a lot of data. Now, I know that I did some research years ago about this, and there are different options. Obviously, if we have parking indicators per spot, that's substantially more expensive than a Parking Logix type approach where it counts cars in and out. It just tells you how many spots are on each level, which would fit within this budget. I think I saw the quote from that, I could share with you. I think this is a no- brainer as far as I'm concerned. It's beyond a no-brainer. Any parking garage should provide that information, especially in 2023, if not 2024. Yes, I think it's a no-brainer, so I appreciate it. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Yes, the lowest level in the garage, those are leased spaces. Are they leased 24 hours a day or it's a 9 to 5. Keith Markel: Monday to Friday, 8:00 to 5:00. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay. Whatever system we install would have to include the garage in its entirety? Okay. Real quick, back to the Pennington, you said the use rate was up to about 48%. Is it possible that number is being affected by the fact that our garage is under construction and some of that's spilling over to the Pennington? Keith Markel: It has. The Pennington number comes from the surface lot. It doesn't account for the garage. Vice Mayor Steinberg: I see. Keith Markel: You see the number is much lower because the garage gets very low utilization. That's just the lot. Just the surface lot. Vice Mayor Steinberg: The lot. Keith Markel: So, that's Monday, I guess it's every day of the week, mid-morning, and mid-afternoon. It gets a lot of Court traffic parking there. Those mid-morning, mid-afternoon numbers reflect business parking there for the Courthouse. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay. The garage is still primarily underutilized, I guess, is what you're saying? Keith Markel: Yes. The Pennington garage has very high vacancy. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Okay. All right, that's good to know. I think we should pursue the study on this idea, or actually we've already budgeted for it, so I guess we're going to go for it. I think that feedback is probably a good idea. People can-- Is this a system you can-- Again, you install an app and you can get feedback from the system, or do you have to actually see it visually? Keith Markel: I think there's ones out there that will feed an app. You can reserve parking spaces in advance in some fancier facilities where you'd be having a higher pay to park rate, where you could reserve a spot. We won't be looking at anything that elaborate, but going with a system that would collect that real-time data and then allow that, at least from the staff side to be able to log in and see what our usage look like. Then you could start looking at that pricing structure. Remember, you all 25 Item a. Page 20|May 22, 2023 provide free parking nights and weekends here and some of our trends now we're really shifted to our heaviest parking is nights and weekends. You come in here on a Friday evening at five o'clock, you're not making a nickel on any of the parking, but it's got its highest utilization rate of the year are these Friday nights. If you started pushing your charging to 8:00 PM, or 9:00 PM, you could be looking at a new revenue stream. Saturdays for a certain period of time, you could really be looking at new revenue stream. This would help you understand that. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Exactly and that's of course, part of larger conversation. Okay, thanks. Mayor Burk: I have a couple of questions before I go back to Mr. Bagdasarian. I have two cautions. One, we need to look at the Reston model because Reston changed their garage setup, and they decimated the town center. They're only now beginning to come back but it's been a very long process for them, they realized they made a huge mistake. They overcharged, raised the rates too much, and made it too complicated but we need to make sure that we're taking that into consideration when we are thinking about all of this. The directional signage, I know we've already approved it, but I still want to give you a warning to not overpopulate with signs. Seriously, we did have a study and they did take down a large number of signs. Now we're looking to put them up maybe we could combine things and stuff of that nature. The marketing for the Pennington Lot, that is a County lot. Keith Markel: It is. Mayor Burk: For us to spend a lot of effort and work on that, we better be careful because they could at any point change it and say, "Now this is a private, this is not. This is only for the Court uses," and that sort of thing. I don't think they're anywhere near that because nobody's using the garage at all. I think that's something we need to be aware of as we're doing whatever plans we're doing. The work with Visit Loudoun, I'd love to see us. I'd love to see Visit Loudoun doing more for the Town. If we can incorporate that, that would be well worth the effort. The parking, the garage spacing, monitoring technology, we already approved the $150. I would think that we would move forward with that. Council Member Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Yes, thank you, [unintelligible]. I'm a loser. Vice Mayor Steinberg, yes, most of the services have an app that can be integrated into the website so it can tell you even before you leave your house, how many spots are available at each level of garages. I think it's about providing better customer service and adding value. The right question and I think that could satisfy a lot of issues regarding the technology. The parking garage currently, so it accepts cash, and does it also accept credit cards? Keith Markel: And debit cards. Council Member Bagdasarian: Okay. I think it's an education campaign to make people aware, if you don't have an app, you don't have a smartphone, there are options for you in the garage as well. Keith Markel: That's on our website, that's on our rack card literature and that sort of thing. Mayor Bulk: And the other thing I wanted to make – The point I wanted to make was about the Pennington Lot, the shuttle service is provided by the County to the Courthouse. It's not around Town or anything like that. It's to the Courthouse. That's the intent of it. That being said, anybody else? Okay. Confirm that the Town Council is still interested in implementing a parking guidance system in the Town Hall garage that would visually alert drivers to open parking spaces. The Town has $150K budgeted for FY-2024, additional funds would likely be needed. Are there four people that would want to see that happen? Okay. That's six people going forward on that one. Keith Markel: All right. Thanks very much. Mayor Bulk: You’re still here? 26 Item a. Page 21|May 22, 2023 Keith Markel: Sorry. All right. Next focus, sorry, Public Transportation and Pedestrian Safety. The Mayor gave a great segue because here you can see an image of that shuttle bus. This is the small shuttle bus that the County is using now to move Courthouse employees and Courthouse customers around from the Pennington Lot to making that loop. It makes a stop in front of Shoes and makes a stop near the post office and then travels down back up Harrison Street. Gives you an idea of what public transportation in the Downtown could look like if we added in an additional shuttle once the Courthouse construction is completed. We understand is the County's intent, I believe, to end that shuttle service once the pathways and sidewalks are fully opened again. They may keep that longer; we just don't know. Obviously, we know that public transportation can do a few good things to help people move around the Downtown, around the greater Town. It reduces perhaps parking in the Downtown demand. The County currently operates the fixed route system in the Town as well as the County. We have three fixed routes within the Town, as well as the safety ride shuttle across the bypass. That's fully funded by the Town; the three other fixed routes are funded by the County, and we do buy some additional hours on one of those routes for the weekend. Here's just a map showing you how this works. We've had conversations for a number of years now with Loudoun County Transit. We believe there's a better way to lay these routes out, and I think they agree with that as well. They just haven't had this as their top priority because they've had a lot of other issues with Metro and the commuter bus systems and a lot of the things they're working with. They've helped us make some modifications when the new Walmart opened up out of Compass Creek to change that route to cover that, to make sure our residents were able to get access out to those spaces. We believe there's probably a more efficient way to run these routes, and that could also mean tying in a Downtown route or a shuttle that we could talk about here. The Downtown trolley, you’ll remember that. From '04 to '13 ran in the Downtown. Mayor Burk: Yes, it did. Keith Markel: It was funded significantly through a Federal grant program for rural communities. When our census numbers increased, passed a certain threshold, that funding dried up and the trolley went away. The question now is, is this something that you all would like to revisit? Having come back and having take a look at what a Downtown shuttle trolley could mean for Downtown businesses, employees, and ways to tie into those parking facilities that are underutilized. Again, we're talking about the Pennington garage here primarily. How could we integrate this with the fixed-route bus system so that you could use this trolley system to then tie in at a hub to take it out to Village at Leesburg or other points within the County? We've had preliminary just put out feelers to Virginia Regional Transit as well as to Loudoun County Transit. Still working with them on some preliminary concepts, but really the question for you all this evening is, is this something you would like us to continue to pursue and come back to you with some options and some costing on what a Downtown trolley would look like? Mayor Burk: Mr. Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Markel. Part of this, and I think this was in the memo, I think good is the cost of the park once and get around. We have visitors coming in. The last time we had the trolley, Downtown Leesburg closed at five o'clock for the most part. We didn't have a Village at Leesburg. I think we're in a very different place right now, and we obviously want to encourage people to park once and get around, visit some other areas of the Town. Part of the whole philosophy is to be distinctive from a standard bus service. This is really designed for tourists, for residents to get around and experience different aspects of the Town. I think it's absolutely worth looking at this again. Mayor Burk: Council Member Nacy? 27 Item a. Page 22|May 22, 2023 Council Member Nacy: I think Council Member Bagdasarian just made a good point that might have answered my question, but I'm just trying to recall the trolley from 2004 to 2013, and if I remember correctly, it was empty a lot. Mayor Burk: It was empty all the time. Council Member Nacy: It just drove in circles empty. Not sure about that one. Maybe taking into consideration that things have changed drastically in Downtown since then. I don't know if there's a way we can even study it before we commit it, but just not sure. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Thanks. My initial thought was it did drive around empty, but as we say, that was then, this is now. I think it would be at least useful to have some data to base a solid decision on. Honestly, I’m not convinced a trolley is a great idea. We do have a private business that's now running routes throughout the Town, at least on the weekends. What are their hours of operation, cartwheels, do we know? Keith Markel: I don't know. Mayor Burk: I'm sorry. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Cartwheels. Mayor Burk: It's all the time. Vice Mayor Steinberg: All the time. We do have a private concern that's offering that service. I wouldn't want to compete with them, but it would still be nice, I think, to have some data on which to base decisions. I guess we should look at it. That'd be about as far as I would go at this point. Thanks. Mayor Burk: Mr. Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Yes. Mr. Markel, are you envisioning this basically connecting the different destinations like Downtown Leesburg, the Outlet Mall, Village of Leesburg, Virginia Village, et cetera? Keith Markel: It could, and I think we've laid out a few different models. One is a real core Downtown, just parking to the core H1 district. We've had a second model. It's slightly larger that would take you down to Virginia Village in the future there, with that large development of residents who will be looking hopefully to come into the Town, maybe don't want to do the walk, or don't want to do the walk back. Maybe tying to some of these near, just slightly outer ring developments. Then the full model, which would take you out to the Village of Leesburg and go that far out with it. We also have the fixed routes that are also doing that similar design, so you don't want to have too many buses going in the same way. If we had a trolley that did that, we'd probably want to look at tweaking the fixed route so that we weren't doubling up on that capacity where it wasn't needed. I think it's really going to depend on the affordability, the costing, and the ridership demand, and bring those numbers back to you if you all want to pursue that and look at that. Mayor Burk: I'm concerned that the County provides these shuttle services, and if we start then providing the trolley, then they'll stop doing the shuttle service, then it'll be back on us again. I recently was at a VML meeting, and I asked this question of the mayors and the Board of Supervisors that were there. The majority of them were not happy if they had a trolley, were not particularly happy with the results. It didn't seem to attract what they anticipated it would, but many of them are getting grants from the rural policy, something, something and so they're using those grants to pay for it. Keith Markel: It doesn't cost them a lot to run it, so Orange and Front Royal and other side. Yes. 28 Item a. Page 23|May 22, 2023 Mayor Burk: I would be concerned that it is competing with the business. Would we as a government be competing with the golf cart business? All those things together would make me very reluctant to be willing, even interested in following up on this. But we’ll see what everybody else-- anybody else have -- Okay. We want to direct staff to develop detailed plans for a Downtown trolley shuttle to provide public transportation from parking facilities to Downtown destinations. That didn't make it. All right, nice try. The next one, pedestrian improvements. Keith Markel: We'll talk just a bit about that public transportation and the walkability. As you remember back in the 2015 study for the Downtown Parking Taskforce, one of the big elements that was pulled up by that group was really looking at pedestrian improvements, walkability, the convenience, the comfort, the safety levels, because a lot of that ties into the willingness for people to walk just a little bit further to public parking spaces. Here's just a few pictures. The Courthouse construction project has been great for walkability, but if you look at what Church Street is there, you wouldn't expect that to be the primary route to an 800- parking space parking facility. I know we're limited with the Downtown design that we have, and there's only so many things you can do, but anytime-- and it's not really a question here, but just a reminder, when our Capital Projects come up, anything that we can do to enhance the sidewalks, enhance the pedestrian experience, increase the lighting, all those things that really make it more walkable and more comfortable for people to use these spaces. You also see two other examples here. Liberty Street, so in front of the Thomas Birkby House, along their frontage with their new improvements, they've now provided a very nice public sidewalk that is handicapped accessible, and it's got a great ramp, and it's a ramp to nowhere because then it ties into no sidewalk on the other side that is the Town's Liberty Street parking lot. We know there are hopefully good things in the future for the Liberty Lot, whatever that may turn out to be, but we realize that there are pedestrian links and connections here that still need to be made. Then here's another example of Church Street where those improvements are happening for the Courthouse. Just because we have limited public right of way, you can see the obstacles that still present themselves in the sidewalk. If you're in a wheelchair, you're pushing a stroller, that's not the best sidewalk for you to be walking to the Pennington parking lot. All right. We'll go to the next focus area, which is the regulatory framework and I'll invite Brian up to take this one. Mayor Burk: We're not doing any voting on this one? We are not voting, straw voting? Brian Boucher: I'll have some things you can vote on, so we'll try to make up for it. Mayor Burk: Oh, good. Brian Boucher: What the topic is right now is the regulatory framework, and that's essentially our zoning rules for parking Downtown. Some of you may recall that back in 2018, the Town authorized a study of the Downtown parking. One of the conclusions of the study was if you look at Leesburg as a whole, the Downtown is, we'll call it semi-urban. Semi-urban, because we don't have the mass transit that some truly urban areas do, but the way the buildings are arranged, the walkability, the compact nature of the buildings, the layout, is semi-urban, the rest of the Town is suburban. It's typical suburban look. Our parking regulations Downtown at that time, pretty much were the same for uses, whether you were suburban or Downtown. By uses, I mean what you require for a multi-family unit of two bedrooms, what you require for retail office uses, they were the same. As a result of that study, there were some changes; several things changed. Our requirement for offices, we became a little more generous Downtown retail, a few other things, but that's really where it stopped. Most of our uses are the same. The parking requirements are the same Downtown as outside of it. Recently we had the hotels, which you all made an amendment to, again, try to do something a little bit different Downtown. We have these specific ratios for Downtown uses and then we have some other things Downtown. When I'm saying Downtown, they apply within what we call the H-1 Overlay District. It's really the 29 Item a. Page 24|May 22, 2023 Historic Downtown. It's made up of the B-1, the LRHD, which is where a lot of the housing is as you go on the north side of Town. It also includes the County properties, which are generally zoned GC. We have these other parking alternatives that apply. One is shared parking, and that's, again, if you've got a couple of uses because the priorities are at different times of the day you may be able to have an agreement in a mixed-use situation to reduce it. We also have offsite parking in the Downtown. Offsite parking has to be approved by the Planning Commission. It has to be within 1K feet of your property. The difficulty over time has been that property's really expensive. If somebody's got something, somewhere Downtown, they usually don't want to lease it for parking. Valet parking, we allow. Again, you have to have a private place to put the parking that you're going to do as your valet parking. An interesting thing is building additions. If you have a building Downtown, it's existing and you add on to it, you have to provide the parking for the square footage of that addition or even new building based on the use that's in it. We do have a mechanism where the land development official can actually reduce that for various reasons that are in the ordinance. These are some of the regulatory things that we have Downtown. I'll talk about the 500-foot rule in a minute. This really leads to this question. We've got a comprehensive rewrite of the Zoning Ordinance that you all have authorized, and it's going to be conducted in the coming year. The question here for you to guide us on is, do you want staff to examine or provide recommendations on possible modifications for Downtown onsite parking requirements for residential and non-residential uses as part of this comprehensive Zoning Ordinance rewrite? We'll get some help from the consultants on this. I said staff, I say the consultants too. That's really the question. Do you want us to re-examine the parking use regulations we have Downtown? Again, as I've told you, most of them still replicate the parking requirements we have in the suburban area. That's the question. Mayor Burk: Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings: Yes, I just had one quick question before we ask the question. On alternative parking, if there's an applicant that would want to use parking lifts in the Downtown area, do we count that as a spot on its own, the lift itself, or is it not counted into the number of spaces? Brian Boucher: Do you mean the area of the apparatus on the ground? That's a question I've never been-- Council Member Cummings: Is it one spot or is it two spots? Brian Boucher: If you've got two, we'll let you have two, if you've got a lift where you can put another one up there. Just so you all know, Church and Market is this building that may be built. You've seen them clear away some things down there for it. That was one of the options that they had, that they could use lifts in their parking garage to increase the parking total, so yes, we would count them as additional spaces. Council Member Cummings: Okay, thank you. Mayor Burk: Council Member Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Why yes, thank you. No, I think one of the things that people love about the H-1, the Historic District, is I've characterized it as historic urbanism. It was all built before automobiles so you have narrow streets, and the use of buildings are very different from the way they were structured in what you cannot do today. The question is -- the land in the H-1 is valuable -- the question is, are surface parking lots the best use of land in the H-1? Is that what we want more of? I would support this. Looking at our different options, how do we make the Downtown more people- centric, more pedestrian-centric but yet address the real issues of parking cars. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor, are you -- 30 Item a. Page 25|May 22, 2023 Vice Mayor Steinberg: Well, just to echo that and know that this conversation is going to involve virtually everything that's coming after it in the end. Yes, we need to rework the regulatory framework and yes, we need to consider all these other things that are part of it. Mayor Burk: How many times have we looked at parking ratios in the last 10 years? Brian Boucher: I was a young man then, had a full head of hair. Not a gray strand anywhere. Mayor Burk: This must be like the 5th time I've been involved in it, but anyway. Anyone else at this point? Okay, then, do we want to examine and provide recommendations on possible modifications for Downtown onsite parking requirement for residential and non-residential uses in the Downtown as part of the comprehensive Zoning Ordinance rewrite? Are there four people that want to do that? Okay, that's everybody. Yes, sixth time's the charm. Brian Boucher: I'm going to go to something a little more specific here in one of our Downtown regulations and everybody knows it or calls it the 500-foot rule and it's basically this. If you take an existing building Downtown and you're going to rehabilitate it for non-residential use, so you're going to put a non-residential use in there, if you're within 500 feet of what we call a municipal parking facility, that is the Town garage, it's Liberty Lot, it's also the Pennington Lot but we specifically exclude minor ordinance at the County Government Center lot. If you're within 500 feet of one of those for this non-residential use, you do not have to provide any parking. In other words, we assume that the parking is going to be taken care of by the public parking on the street. Recently, there was one Downtown developer who was asking about whether or not that 500-foot rule should be expanded. It's for a project that hasn't gone forward. The question remained, is this something that we should look at? It's, I think, important for you to know that when you go beyond that 500 feet, if you're anywhere in the H-1 overlay district, again, it's really the Downtown but you're not within 500 feet, you have to provide half of the parking that's normally required. That's the rule. It's a two-part rule. Five hundred feet, you're free of it for non-residential. Go farther than that, you provide half till you get to the outskirts of the H-1 overlay district. The question here is, is this something, again, worth looking at? One of the reasons these rules exist is exactly that. It's because back in the day when the Council was looking at Downtown, they didn't want to tear down existing structures or storage structures to provide surface parking. They also wanted to provide an incentive to more development Downtown to take over existing buildings and invest in them. That was the basic rationale for why these rules got created. The question is now is this something, as we're doing this rewrite, you might have already considered that in the last vote, really, that we'd be looking at this. We just wanted to specifically ask if this is something that you all think should be reconsidered as well, or at least re-examined when we're looking at the Zoning Ordinance rewrite. Mayor Burk: Council Member Cimino-Johnson? Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. The 500 feet, do you have a recommendation on what that would look like if we said yes, let's expand that? Brian Boucher: I think one of the things we would do is we need a little more information compiled because we don't want unintended results that hurt parking Downtown so that it's not convenient for visitors and people who live here. I think it's something we would be looking at to see how far could we go, what could we do to maybe change that rule. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Thank you. Mayor Burk: My concern, Brian, with this, is our parking situation is such that our parking garage has become very popular and is used a lot. Now will we end up having an impact that we don't intend that the parking garage now becomes an unattractive place because there's no parking spaces there because businesses are parking there during the day? Council Member Bagdasarian? 31 Item a. Page 26|May 22, 2023 Council Member Bagdasarian: Thank you, sir. I know this applies to businesses. What about existing residential and redevelopment for residential? Brian Boucher: Well, that's one thing that it could, and I'm glad you brought that up because generally, you have to provide residential parking Downtown. There is an exception within 500 feet of the Town garage. If you were, let's say, to build an apartment building, you could purchase by paying in lieu 10 spaces. You're not free. The 500 rule really doesn't say you don't have to provide any parking. What that particular 500 rule says is we'll let you buy 10 residential parking spaces. The rest you have to physically provide through either onsite or through one of the alternatives we talked about. That's generally the rule there. Council Member Bagdasarian: Are we currently leasing spaces in the garage to residents if someone says, hey, for $1K a month, we want to lease a reserved parking spot? Brian Boucher: Actually, I do not know the answer to that question. Perhaps Keith? Keith Markel: No, we have a permanent reserved space in the basement, so you could have your space with your number on it. We have an unreserved space, so you could have just a pass to come into the garage for a fixed monthly rate, and you park anywhere in the garage. That only works for Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM. At any other time, it would be a first-come-first-served space. Council Member Bagdasarian: A potential alternative in lieu of, because right now, I don't think we've ever utilized the in lieu of funds for actual parking. Is that correct to date? Keith Markel: Only for the Church Street Lot. We used it for the development of the Church Street Lot with the payment systems, striping and upkeep. Brian Boucher: And Liberty Lot too. I think once upon a time we use some of the funds there to restripe the Liberty Lot. Council Member Bagdasarian: I just don't know. I think it's worth looking at as an alternative because I think a lot of these things are starting to come together as more of a comprehensive approach. Is it possible, is it feasible to, in lieu of, you need to lease a parking spot in the garage, if we can support that? I don't know yet. Mayor Burk: Council Member Wilt? Council Member Wilt: Thank you. On this topic of the 500-feet rule, when I've inquired about it in the past, I was told that 500 feet was a number that was selected. It wasn't based on any capacity considerations or pedestrian behavior. It was randomly selected in some regards. Today in the B-1, do we know how many businesses are actually excluded by the use of this? If it was increased or removed, what the impact would be at all? Brian Boucher: I don't know the number in answer to your question, but I think it's one of the things we would try to figure out, look at. We've just never done that type of analysis up to this point. Council Member Wilt: Okay, because if it's [unintelligible] I can think on South King where my business is located, I think there are three businesses excluded. It's a de minimis number. If we found out [crosstalk] Brian Boucher: You're just beyond the 500 feet. It hits up a little above you. Council Member Wilt: Right, throughout the B-1, I'm going to guess it's actually de minimis in total. That would be good to understand. I'd be in support of understanding this more. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor? 32 Item a. Page 27|May 22, 2023 Vice Mayor Steinberg: I know I'm going to sound like a broken record. I wouldn't honestly invest a whole lot of time in modifying the 500-foot rule since I think it involves so many other factors, including the next thing that's coming up, which is payment in lieu. I would be in favor of abolishing that program altogether. We've got a sum total of $400K-plus in an account, which in today's dollars will buy us about eight spaces and the proverbial ramp to nowhere. I don't think it's served us well. I'm not sure the 500-foot rule is serving us that well anymore. We know the Town garage has got limited capability or it's a limited resource as is the Liberty Lot. We have seen that as we are losing areas, which has been substantial of late because we lost the Church Street Lot, we lost the lot to the County's expansion. We are off a number of surface spaces. Maybe that's just as well, because as I said before, I think we need to start considering something other than surface spaces and looking at this is infrastructure in the same way as we view water and sewer infrastructure and start considering serious pro rata arrangements or leasing arrangements because we keep applying our parking needs against the same limited resources that we've got. I believe we're going to get caught short if we don't start looking at a much longer-term plan. I'm not particularly in favor of modifying the rule at this point. Mayor Burk: We have two questions before us. The first one is to examine and provide recommendations on possible modifications for Downtown onsite parking requirements for residential and non-residential uses in the Downtown as part of the comprehensive Zoning Ordinance rewrite. Are there four people that want to do that? There are four people that want to do that. Parking ratios. Again, the sixth time, the magic time. Okay, we got the four votes. That's all we need. Then the next question is to initiate the expansion of the 500-feet distance requirement for existing Downtown buildings to utilize public parking facilities as an alternative for onsite parking. Are there four people that want to do that? All right, you got four people on that too. Brian Boucher: All right, you're not done with me yet. I have payment in lieu to discuss. Mayor Burk: You can just go to the end for that one. Brian Boucher: I will throw out a little of the propaganda stuff we put together, staff, and you take it as you will. Real quickly, this program has existed since the mid-'80s. It's only in the H-1 District, so it's only Downtown, nowhere else in Town. Current price of the space is $8K. We raise it every year under the Consumer Price Index, whatever that incremental cost is. Yes, as Council Member Steinberg has said, we've got over $400K in the fund right now and the funds have to be used for establishing parking Downtown. Two other things I want to mention is over time, 253 spaces have been purchased, at least that we can find records for. That adds up to, if you took what that would be in surface parking, it's about 1.7 acres of Downtown that could be surface parking. I just want to show you a few of the projects that had bought spaces that are Downtown. If you look at these, in most cases, it was a supplement. They couldn't provide all of the onsite parking because of space limitations, so they used this. If you look at 7 West Market Street, which is Paul Reimer's building, that all the parking they purchased for that particular one, the same for 116 East Market Street which you know is across from the County Government Center, they purchased all of their parking spaces and then built the building on the site because of site constraints. One other thing I want to say, what the question for you is, do you want to initiate removal of the option for developers to pay the Town as an alternative providing on-site parking that is currently included in the Zoning Ordinance? It is something that, again, it's the option of the developer. If they look at their site and think they don't have enough room or they want to develop the site, they can purchase these spaces now. If you take the option away completely, I will just say, then you will have to provide the parking on-site, or you will have to locate it somewhere through one of those other alternative methods, either off-site or through shared parking. If you just go back, I will just say if there was no option, I think it is fair to say that of these buildings, two of them would not have been constructed, and the other three would be smaller because more 33 Item a. Page 28|May 22, 2023 room would have been needed for on-site parking. Just something to consider in the history of this ordinance. Now, what we get for it money-wise, I think that's another question but that's really what we'd say, do you want to initiate the option to just remove it, or do you want to at least maintain it as an option? Mayor Burk: How much does it cost for a single parking space, generally? Brian Boucher: I did some research on that. There's actually groups that look at it Republic and you can say around here, about $80 a square foot, about $27K of space but that's not counting the land, that's not counting if you have to do specific architectural facades like we would have to Downtown. Keith was showing you the types of systems you can put in parking garages now to tell whether or not they're full. It doesn't include any of that. This is really the concrete of building the thing on a structured parking. That's assuming about 300 spaces in the parking garage. Mayor Burk: How many spaces have we put into parking in lieu? Brian Boucher: 253 have been purchased over time. Mayor Burk: How many spaces are in the garage? Brian Boucher: Roughly 362. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Council Member Cimino-Johnson? Council Member Cimino-Johnson: That was going to be my question. That's a little shocking to hear. I'm not very familiar with this. I'm a developer, I come in, I want to build a building Downtown, I don't have any room for parking. I get the option to choose? Brian Boucher: It's your option. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: The staff and Council have no say in this? Brian Boucher: Right, it's a private developer option but one thing you get when you pay this money, and the complaint, you hear about it from developers all the time, I think the Mayor has heard it more than she'd liked to recall, is they will say, "But you don't give me a dedicated parking space for it." Mayor Burk: I get nothing for it. Brian Boucher: That's it. You pay this fee, the parking is going to be public wherever that is. If you pay $1K, we don't go, okay, you get these spaces in the Town garage, because, again, the cost of actual parking is much more. But I think it's because we have a certain amount of public parking in the past that was created to, again, give that incentive to invest in Downtown, build new buildings without tearing down old buildings, without creating new surface parking lots. That was the intent. What we've done over time, just a little bit of history, the Council, the first 20 or so years of the program it was only $3K, and then it got raised to meet the Consumer Price Index increase from the time at least from 1986 and then so we had to every year, but it is a fraction of the cost of an actual parking space. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Could we raise it? Brian Boucher: I will say this and it's something, again, I felt one of you would mention that because in the Town Plan, there's actually one of the strategies that says to take a look at the payment in lieu and look at the actual costs of maintenance and constructing parking and consider updating the fee to more closely approximate or approximate the cost of actually providing the parking Downtown. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: You're saying it's upwards of $27K a space? Brian Boucher: I think that's reasonable. 34 Item a. Page 29|May 22, 2023 Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Okay, thank you. Mayor Burk: Mr. Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: I think a lot of this, at least in my mind, I think I'm more of a maybe because looking at the results of the regulatory framework and parking ratios I think would have an impact on the direction we take with this. Brian Boucher: It definitely could. Mayor Burk: Council Member Wilt? Council Member Wilt: I'm wondering what the overall philosophy or strategy is. In the Downtown area if it's considered an urban area, then do we want to try to provide community parking through these public means, or do we want to force parking to individual lots scattered around this urban area? I think that would inform what we do with this. What is the philosophy? Brian Boucher: I think that's one of the things you all get to decide, but it's really that in some Downtown areas you provide more public parking. The tradeoff, what the Town gets from that, the expense of that, is you get more investment in the Downtown and hopefully more tax revenues through a more heavily used urban area and hopefully one that's maintained better. Council Member Wilt: Because my thoughts are -- I would more go to structured parking. I don't know if the Town garage was structurally ever engineered for an additional level than it currently has. Brian Boucher: I think it was engineered so that it won't-- Keith is telling me no. It can't take an additional level. Council Member Wilt: Looking at how to create a structured parking opportunity at the Liberty Lot. How to do other things than isolated, small, individual parking responsibilities scattered in an urban area. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings? Council Member Cummings: If we were to remove the payment in lieu, what are the consequences? Brian Boucher: If you had an infill lot Downtown that was small and somebody wanted to put a building on, and I'll just use it because we have examples. If you look at 7 West Market, there once been a building there and it was empty for a long time. Paul Reimers built that building there. If he had to supply parking on it, his argument was I couldn't actually build the building because it's very small. The lot was very small. It was less than 4K square feet. You'd lose some of that infill type of development because they simply couldn't fit a space on it. For larger projects, the people who have invested in the payment in lieu have believed some of them, and you've seen some of them before, Mr. Kevin Ash, I'll mention that you know some of these are his buildings, will say that Downtown our parking regulations are a bit too stringent. They're paying for, again, suburban parking in a more Downtown area so the parking ratios themselves should be reduced. They'll pay the money because they believe there's enough parking Downtown so that their businesses will not be badly hurt by doing this. In the case of some of those, all of them from Mr. Ash, he has some of the parking on site. He does have parking on site. It's a matter of can you put all of it on-site or is it better to purchase some of it to have a better-- What developers get from this, obviously, is you get a more developable area on your property, which can be Downtown, very valuable. You also don't have to pay the full cost for providing a parking space which all of them know is a lot more than the 8K that they would pay in today. It benefits both ways, I guess. 35 Item a. Page 30|May 22, 2023 Council Member Cummings: What does staff recommend from a professional standpoint on payment in lieu? Brian Boucher: Geez. Council Member Cummings: Not to put you on the spot. Brian Boucher: I'll just say this. Having been here a long time and seeing it, I think there were problems with the payment in lieu. I think the fee is a little under what it should be for the value that it gives. But on the other hand, I think in an urban area like Downtown, I think it has its pluses, its advantages. Council Member Cummings: Just to reiterate, I heard you say the amount needs to be brought up to date but the use of payment in lieu in general it's still useful in this urban environment. Brian Boucher: I think so in Leesburg. The way Leesburg is still situated today, I think there are opportunities for people where they could use it that I think could complement the Town. Council Member Cummings: Thank you. Mayor Burk: Mr. Bagdasarian, have you spoken on this issue? Council Member Bagdasarian: I have. Mayor Burk: You have? Okay, I'll come back to you then. Council Member Nacy? Council Member Nacy: I just wanted to clarify [unintelligible]. Did you say the $8K was from 1986? Brian Boucher: No, actually until 2015, we charged $3K. It didn't increase between 1986 and 2015. Land went up a little bit in Leesburg in that period. The Council did increase it, but it's always been an issue for Councils how far do you go because the concern is if you raise it too high so let's say, approximate the full cost of parking, maybe they won't do those infill because they'll suddenly say, wow, I've got to pay a lot of parking. Council Member Nacy: Maybe. Brian Boucher: Maybe. Council Member Nacy: That's a big maybe. Brian Boucher: I'll just say, the fee has been a lot less than the required, so we've seen it happen in a number of places Downtown. Council Member Nacy: 2015 is the $8K. Everywhere [crosstalk] Brian Boucher: It was $6,2K and we've raised it to $8K, just simply by the Consumer Price Index annual increases. Council Member Nacy: You said, in your research, likely $27K per space is more -- Brian Boucher: That's again without some of the bells and whistles that you need like the land. It doesn't include those costs. It's actually in an urban environment constructing for space. One thing I'll tell you, oh, well, that sounds really high. When they build these things, they consider about 300 square feet per parking spot, or 9 by 18 is like 162, why? You need travel lanes. You need to get cars in and out and those take up a lot of space. Council Member Nacy: Interesting. All right, thank you. 36 Item a. Page 31|May 22, 2023 Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Thanks. A couple of points I want to be sure aren't lost. One, we're also serving a residential community as well as the business community. It's the residential community that sometimes suffers the greater inconvenience here, and they have fewer alternatives. I want to take care that we're not allowing the business community simply gobble up all the parking, and then leave our residents high and dry. I appreciate Mr. Boucher’s caution with the $27K figure. He keeps emphasizing that's not it. I think we really need to be thinking more of $35K to $40K per space when all is said and done. To the point about one applicant looking for changes in the ratios, we have other applicants who say they're more than willing to enter into very long-term leases per space to satisfy the success of their project should they occur. There are alternatives. In the end, if we take a good planning approach, and it offers success for everyone, including the residents and the general business welfare of the Town, especially the Downtown then I think it behooves us to do the responsible thing and look at real strategies. Mayor Burk: There's just one caution I want to bring forward is while we are not where we were 10 years ago even, we're still not truly urban. We're not in Arlington, we're not a Washington DC, we're not Chicago. We don't have transportation alternatives that the other locations have. We don't have the heights the other locations have. When we refer to urban that makes me turn my head a little because we're not really urban but we're not suburban anymore, either. We got to come up with something in between. We have to be careful, as Mr. Steinberg just referred to the fact that we can't squeeze out our residentials. That's something that we really need to consider further and I'm not sure if-- Well, I won't say that. Anyway. I'm just cautioning be careful with the term because we really aren't an urban paradise yet. Brian Boucher: I will reiterate. A study we did did call us semi-urban because we lacked the mass transit that would make us truly. Mayor Burk: Height and density. Brian Boucher: Yes, some of the other. Mayor Burk: Council Member Bagdasarian. Council Member Bagdasarian: That's why it's historic urbanism. It's capturing the essence of-- Yes, it is. I'm going to get a tattoo on that. I just want to make sure I have this clear. 7 West Market, if that was developed as an office space, would they need to provide parking based on their location? Brian Boucher: Yes, again. I'll tell you why. Because if it's an empty space and you build new, remember, the 500-foot rule says for existing buildings. If you build a new structure, we're going to tell you, you have to supply the parking required for the use that you're going to put in that structure. It's got to be on-site, or you could do offsite parking, but again, it's not very realistic I think historically in Leesburg because of value of land. Yes, build a new building, you have to supply the parking, and if there was no payment in lieu option that would have to be on-site or through one of these other alternatives. Council Member Bagdasarian: Are any of these buildings -- were they existing structures that were redeveloped? Brian Boucher: No, all of the buildings you see there except for the 203 Church Street they tore down a building to build that. Council Member Bagdasarian: Oh, yes, right. Brian Boucher: The building was already gone on 7 West. 116 Market Street there had been a building there, but it had been demolished I think due to a fire, and then there were some low 37 Item a. Page 32|May 22, 2023 commercial buildings. One-story commercial buildings existing where 116 Market Street is. 7 West Market Street again, there were some but what do we-- Keith Markel: They caught my typos here so [unintelligible] saw. Mislabeled these, bad cut-and- paste job. You'll see we have the wrong address for a few of these. Mayor Burk: 7 West Market is West Loudoun. Brian Boucher: Yes. That's actually on East Market. The one up on the left is on East Market Street coming down on the 203. Keith Markel: If you’re not thoroughly confused by my labels. Council Member Bagdasarian: Okay. Brian Boucher: I was looking at the buildings. I wasn't thinking too much of the labeling. Keith Markel: This was actually an [unintelligible] structure. Mayor Burk: That's it. Brian Boucher: Yes, and around it. In these cases, if they took down buildings, some cases, buildings were long gone, some they had been destroyed by fire, and then others were just small industrial-type buildings or commercial buildings that were removed. Council Member Bagdasarian: Okay. Alright, I’m good. Mayor Burk: Okay. Brian Boucher: Is she good? Mayor Burk: You never can be sure. Wait a minute. We better go fast before you think something. All right, then on this one, you're asking if we're interested in ending it and I have a few -- Brian Boucher: Right. They [unintelligible] to end it. Mayor Burk: Can we add something afterwards? Brian Boucher: You can. I think if it still exists, this is certainly something we could look at in the future. Mayor Burk: Okay, I have four people that want to initiate the removal of the option for the developer to pay for the Town as an alternative to providing on-site parking that is currently included in this our Zoning Ordinance. That would be just two of us. Okay. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Wait a minute. Mayor Burk: What? Council Member Cimino-Johnson: I am a maybe. Mayor Burk: You're a maybe. Oh, well, maybes don't count. I'm sorry. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: It’s an option though. Mayor Burk: Okay. They did give you an option. You got a maybe. 38 Item a. Page 33|May 22, 2023 Brian Boucher: What is that exactly? Is that a yes or no? Mayor Burk: No, it's a maybe. Brian Boucher: It's the halves that add up to one or it's a half of two? Mayor Burk: You got to get two maybes. Do we want to direct staff to look at increasing the cost of providing or for the parking in lieu? I'm not saying that right. Council Member Nacy: [unintelligible] Mayor Burk; Yes? Council Member Nacy: If we do that, could we still have the option to get rid of it? If we just decide it's not worth the money? Is that totally off the table? Brian Boucher: I'd say what we're asking for is direction from you all and obviously, you guys can always change your mind in the future based on other evidence or what you think at the time, but what we're asking now is that there's this idea of getting rid of it. Now it's been talked about, a lot of people have mentioned it. We just thought we'd bring it to you and see if you wanted to consider that as we're going forward, that's something you definitely want to do. Council Member Nacy: Okay. Mayor Burk: Did you want to finish it? Okay. Council Member Cimino-Johnson? Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Yes, just a follow-up question. When was the last time this was used? Brian Boucher: Oh, not that long ago, I'd have to look. We have a list. We get a lot of small, where they buy two or three. It's used, it's alive. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Okay. Thank you. Mayor Burk: I'm going to go with Vice Mayor for Mr. Bagdasarian. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Well, I'd like to see at least reworded to say that consider a substantial increasing the payment in lieu with the view in mind of eliminating it at some point down the road. Mayor Burk: Okay. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Maybe sooner rather than later. Mayor Burk: All right, keep that thought. Mr. Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: The reason why I'm a maybe is that if you look at this as a Gantt chart, right, I think that what the outcome of parking ratios and alternative parking, the regulatory framework, I think, at least from my perspective, will help inform this decision. Looking at this holistically. It's like one step and then moving on to this. Mayor Burk: Holistically, historically, you like the H's. Council Member Bagdasarian: I do. 39 Item a. Page 34|May 22, 2023 Mayor Burk: Okay, all right. We have said that we were not going to get rid of it, but we want to consider what Mr. Vice Mayor Steinberg said. Looking at increasing it substantially, okay. The majority on that one. All right. Brian Boucher: Okay, thank you. Now back to you. Keith Markel: All right. We're in the homestretch here. Mayor Burk: I'm just so excited at spending this much time on parking. Keith Markel: Aren't we all. Again, no question here. We're talking about the future planning and a number of you have alluded to these things. We've got a number of things in the future. How to be thinking about that philosophical question of is this the public responsibility to provide this parking? Is it still the private side to provide that? Something that won't be answered tonight but something you can be thinking about. We know there is an opportunity presenting itself for Liberty Street Lot. We know that we have an asset there that can be developed in a lot of different ways with parking opportunities built into that, and then we also have the changing transportation models that will be the continual changing force in the Downtown needs. One of the things that came out of Liberty Street discussion, and I know there's been conversations with you from the proposing parties there, was the creation of a public parking authority to replace what is really now a Town staff function where the Town manages and operates and takes care of the day-to-day issues with our public parking facilities. Just to give you just a quick overview of the public parking authorities and Chris Spera can answer in more detail, this does require State legislative action so it would be something you'd have to petition the Virginia Legislature to provide this authority for Leesburg. There are a few different reasons why localities go this route, and there are a few localities our size or smaller that already have parking authorities based on specific needs. One thing is that it takes the financing out of the General Fund issues, and they stand alone separately. They have separate borrowing power and the risk that's associated with financing for parking facilities does not impact the Town's debt limits or credit ratings. Secondly, liability issues. The liability is separated from the Town's general liability, so they have their own liability with parking authority if you had issues within your parking garage. The third one, and the reason why the proposing entity with the RFP for Liberty Street is interested in a parking authority is that the authority has the ability to lease its assets longer than 40 years. Forty years is the cap for local government, but parking authorities can lease longer. When you're looking at long-term land leases or parking space leases to make other elements of their proposal work, looking at something at larger than 40 years is their incentive for that. There are lots of pros and cons with parking authorities. Who has control, the funding, the apparatus of a parking authority that you'd have to manage and maintain. Those are all things to consider if you wanted to go deeper into that discussion. The question really is do you want us to initiate that discussion of going into a more detailed plan for a parking authority and coming back to you with what that structure of the cost and the overall framework would look like? Mayor Burk: Okay. Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings? Council Member Cummings: Yes. I just had one quick comment on one of the earlier slides here. There's land and I was just trying to look up the exact streets, but off of Harrison near Tuscarora Mill, that's a parking lot right now. I believe NVR Homes owns the land. I would love to see us look just like Mr. Seymour talked about earlier in the presentation about talking to private lots. I'd also like us to look at potential opportunities for public-private partnership to do structured parking. We obviously don't want to take up too much Downtown land for parking structures, but I think there are a few, especially land that is either somewhat in or in floodplain. You can use commercial parking 40 Item a. Page 35|May 22, 2023 is a use in a floodplain. I would like us to look at that as an option for whether it is an official public- private partnership, or we find a way creatively to maybe get a parking structure and lease it back from a person. That's something I would just like to throw out there. Mayor Burk: May I get clarification from you? Council Member Cummings: Sure. Mayor Burk: Are you talking about doing this through a parking authority? Council Member Cummings: I think we have to still probably have that conversation about whether we want to move forward because it sounds like a tedious process, at least, to have to go to Richmond and get approval to do that. Maybe this is something we had our conversation about a lobbyist or someone to work on our behalf. Maybe that's a reason to look at talking to someone because I do think a parking authority would be a worthwhile vehicle for the Town as we're studying. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Point of information, Madam Mayor. Point of information. Just to clarify, we do have to go to the State, but the fact is the State has already granted the parking authority method to seven jurisdictions and the feeling is it would be nothing more than an insertion that we could easily accomplish in the upcoming session if we wanted to include Leesburg. Plus, there is another entity, and perhaps Mr. Spera could enlighten us on that called The Recreational Facilities Authority and I don't know how they did-- Mayor Burk: We're straying away. We're talking parking. We're not going recreation right now. Vice Mayor Steinberg: They're both parking. Christopher Spera: Parking is fun. Mayor Burk: Are you really going to make him talk about recreational authority? Vice Mayor Steinberg: [unintelligible] Mayor Burk: Are you actually going to make him talk about it now? I was going to say something. Never mind. Christopher Spera: When you get as specific as that, you have to limit it to. I don't think unless the parking was used in conjunction with the operation of a recreational facility, you could construct parking through a recreational authority. Reverb. Mayor Burk: No, buts. Is there any other questions and concerning about the parking authority? Do we want to direct staff to develop a detailed plan for initiating the creation of a parking authority? Details would include authority structure, cost, and overall framework. Do we have four people that are interested? Everybody's interested. So, okay. Move that forward. Keith Markel: All right. Mayor Burk: Are we done? Keith Markel: That is the end of our list, so I thank you for your patience. Mayor Burk: Can't we talk more about it? Keith Markel: The night is yours. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Okay. Seriously -- in all seriousness, this is a very good way to do this. I appreciate you breaking it up like this. 41 Item a. Page 36|May 22, 2023 Keith Markel: Thank you. Mayor Burk: I think it was very efficient. Thank you. Future council meetings and agenda topics. Council Member Cimino-Johnson? Council Member Cimino-Johnson: I have nothing. Mayor Burk: I'm sorry. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: I have nothing. Mayor Burk: Nothing. Thank you. Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings: I just want to not to belabor the parking conversation-- Mayor Burk: But you're going to. Council Member Cummings: -but I will. I would like to see if we could either have a future Council work session or if staff feels they can pull together a memo for us at least to begin conversations on looking at potential spots and opportunities for an additional structured parking facility within the Downtown area. Mayor Burk: Are there four people that would like to have staff look at additional parking areas for a Town garage? Correct? Council Member Cummings: Yes. Mayor Burk: Okay, got four. More than four. Ms. Nacy? Council Member Nacy: I just had one quick thing which I wasn't sure if this needs to be added or if it's something that can be answered, but we got that email from LAWS about the text amendment. I just wasn't sure if that was something that we can have a discussion about or have a clarification about. James David: I could field that one. There already is an item coming to this Council to discuss and initiate adding congregate housing as a use to the Zoning Ordinance. That LAWS memo is in reference to this. Council Member Nacy: Perfect. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Mr. Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Nothing. Mayor Burk: Mr. Wilt? Vice Mayor? Vice Mayor Steinberg: I have nothing. Thank you. Mayor Burk: Did I get everybody? Did I miss anybody? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Just you. Mayor Burk: Okay. I have nothing. I want to talk more about parking. Adjournment. Do I have a motion? Vice Mayor Steinberg: So moved. 42 Item a. Page 37|May 22, 2023 Council Member Cummings: Second. Mayor Burk: All in favor? Council Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? Alright. Okay, you got the scissors? Russ Seymour: I got the scissors. 43 Item a. COUNCIL MEETING May 23, 2023 1 | P a g e Council Chamber, 25 West Market Street, 7:00 p.m. Mayor Kelly Burk presiding. Council Members Present: Ara Bagdasarian, Todd Cimino-Johnson, Zach Cummings, Kari Nacy, Vice Mayor Neil Steinberg, Patrick Wilt and Mayor Kelly Burk. Council Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Town Attorney Christopher Spera, Deputy Town Manager Keith Markel, Director of Finance and Administrative Services Clark Case, Director of Public Works and Capital Projects Renee LaFollette, Director of Economic Development Russell Seymour, Management and Budget Officer Cole Fazenbaker and Clerk of Council Eileen Boeing. AGENDA ITEMS 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. INVOCATION was given by Council Member Cummings. 3. SALUTE TO THE FLAG was led by Council Member Bagdasarian. 4. ROLL CALL a. All Council Members present. 5. MINUTES a. Work Session Minutes of May 8, 2023 MOTION 2023-105 On a motion by Vice Mayor Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Nacy, the May 8, 2023, Work Session minutes were moved for approval. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cimino-Johnson, Cummings, Nacy, Vice Mayor Steinberg, Wilt and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 b. Regular Session Minutes of May 9, 2023 MOTION 2023-106 On a motion by Vice Mayor Steinberg, seconded by Council Member Nacy, the May 9, 2023, Regular Session minutes were moved for approval. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cimino-Johnson, Cummings, Nacy, Vice Mayor Steinberg, Wilt and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 44 Item b. COUNCIL MEETING May 23, 2023 2 | P a g e 6. ADOPTING THE MEETING AGENDA MOTION 2023-107 On a motion by Council Member Nacy, seconded by Vice Mayor Steinberg, the meeting agenda was moved for approval. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cimino-Johnson, Cummings, Nacy, Vice Mayor Steinberg, Wilt and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 7. CERTIFICATES OF RECOGNITION a. None. 8. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATIONS a. Relay for Life Council Member Wilt read the proclamation for Relay for Life. b. Wayne’s Crossing Commemoration Council Member Cimino-Johnson read the proclamation for Wayne’s Crossing Commemoration. Mayor Burk presented the proclamation to Mr. Ken Bonner, President of the Sons of the American Resolution, Sergeant Major John Champe Chapter, who made a few remarks. c. National Gun Violence Awareness Day Council Member Cummings read the proclamation for National Gun Violence Awareness Day. Mayor Burk presented the proclamation to Moms Demand Action member Ms. Melanie Srivisal. d. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Pride Month Vice Mayor Steinberg read the proclamation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Pride Month. Mayor Burk presented it to Equality Loudoun Vice President Samantha Clarke, who made a few remarks. e. Loudoun County Resolves Council Member Bagdasarian read the proclamation for Loudoun County Resolves. f. Nancy L. Ryan 80th Birthday and 25th Senior Fitness Celebration Mayor Burk read the proclamation for Nancy L. Ryan’s 80th Birthday and 25th Senior Fitness Celebration and presented it to Ms. Ryan, who made a few remarks. 9. PRESENTATIONS a. None. 45 Item b. COUNCIL MEETING May 23, 2023 3 | P a g e 10. REGIONAL COMMISSION REPORTS Mayor Burk attended the Virginia Municipal League (VML) meeting in Richmond and noted the VML Conference would be held in Norfolk in October and additional details were forthcoming. 11. PETITIONERS The Petitioner's Section opened at 7:23 p.m. There were no petitioners wishing to address Council. The Petitioner's Section closed at 7:24 p.m. 12. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA MOTION 2023-108 On a motion by Council Member Cummings, seconded by Council Member Cimino-Johnson, the following consent agenda was proposed: a. Market Street and King Street Intersection Improvements Project – Construction Change Order RESOLUTION 2023-077 Authorizing the Town Manager to Execute Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $311,488 for Construction of the Market Street and King Street Intersection Improvements Project b. Town Liability Insurance Award RESOLUTION 2023-078 Award Town Liability Insurance to Virginia Association of Counties Group Self- Insurance Risk Pool The Consent Agenda was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cimino-Johnson, Cummings, Nacy, Vice Mayor Steinberg, Wilt and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 13. RESOLUTIONS /ORDINANCES / MOTIONS a. None. 14. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. None. 15. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. None. 46 Item b. COUNCIL MEETING May 23, 2023 4 | P a g e 16. NEW BUSINESS a. None. 17. COUNCIL DISCLOSURES AND COMMENTS / ADDITIONS TO FUTURE MEETINGS Council Member Bagdasarian disclosed he met with the residents of Potomac Station regarding the Hamblet project. Council Member Nacy disclosed she met with Potomac Station residents regarding the Hamblet property. Council Member Cimino Johnson disclosed he met with Mr. Andy Shuckra, Mr. Kim Hart, Mr. Erik DeLong and Town staff regarding the Oaklawn rezoning application. Council Member Wilt disclosed he met with Mr. Andy Shuckra, Mr. Kim Hart and Mr. Erik DeLong regarding the Oaklawn rezoning. Mayor Burk and Mr. Wilt confirmed with Town Attorney Spera that a disclosure was not required for the sub-committee meetings regarding the Liberty Lot Public Private Partnership proposal review as it is a sub-committee assignment by Council. 18. MAYOR DISCLOSURES AND COMMENTS / ADDITIONS TO FUTURE MEETINGS Mayor Burk disclosed she met with the residents of Potomac Station regarding the Hamblet development. Mayor Burk attended the VML Executive Committee meeting in Richmond and noted the VML Conference will be held in Norfolk this year. Mayor Burk held a “Meet the Mayor” event at SR Coffee across from the Airport and had several good conversations with patrons including hearing concerns about what’s going on at the Airport. Mayor Burk attended the Labor Tribute Dinner and said it was wonderful to see the workers represented by their unions. She thanked Virginia Diamond for the invitation and recognized the United Food Workers Union. Mayor Burk attended the Public Works and Utilities Open House and said it was a great event noting it gave residents and attendees a good perspective of Town operations and knowledgeable staff. She thanked everyone who participated in the event. Mayor Burk attended and spoke at the rededication ceremony of the Douglass School in Leesburg. She commented on the wonderful restoration project of returning the school to its 1941 appearance and the importance of black history in Leesburg. Mayor Burk invited everyone to attend her State of the Town address scheduled for 5:30 p.m. on June 7 in the Council Chamber at Town Hall. Mayor Burk noted she received a request from Mr. Adam Bell to share the details of a fundraising event hosted by Legacy Farms from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. the upcoming weekend and that tickets were $25. 19. TOWN MANAGER COMMENTS Mr. Dentler announced Chief of Police Thea Pirnat had been hired and will start with the Town on July 24, 2023. A swearing-in ceremony will take place prior to her arrival in mid-July. Mr. Dentler also noted the recruitment process is underway to replace Director of Finance and Administrative Services Clark Case who is retiring at the end of September. 47 Item b. COUNCIL MEETING May 23, 2023 5 | P a g e 20. CLOSED SESSION a. Annexation with respect to the Joint Land Management Area (JLMA) MOTION 2023-109 On a motion by Mayor Burk, seconded by Vice Mayor Steinberg, the following was proposed: I move pursuant to Va. Code Section § 2.2-3711(A)(8) and § 2.2-3711(A)(3) of the Code of Virginia that the Leesburg Town Council convene in a closed meeting for the purpose of consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members regarding specific legal matters related to the annexation in the JLMA where such consultation in open session would adversely affect the negotiating or litigating posture of the Town. The motion was approved by the following vote: Aye: Bagdasarian, Cimino-Johnson, Cummings, Nacy, Vice Mayor Steinberg, Wilt and Mayor Burk Nay: None Vote: 7-0 Council convened in a closed session at 7:33 p.m. Council convened in an open session at 7:58 p.m. MOTION 2023-110 On a motion by Mayor Burk, the following was proposed: In accordance with Section § 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia, I move that Council certify to the best of each member’s knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under Virginia Freedom of Information Act and such public business matters for the purpose identified in the motion by which the closed meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered in the meeting by Council. (ROLL CALL VOTE) Wilt – aye, Bagdasarian – aye, Nacy – aye, Vice Mayor Steinberg – aye, Cummings – aye, Cimino-Johnson – aye, Mayor Burk – aye. Vote 7-0 21. ADJOURNMENT On a motion by Council Member Cimino-Johnson, seconded by Council Member Bagdasarian, the meeting was adjourned at 7:58 p.m. __________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: _______________________ Clerk of Council 2023_tcmin0523 48 Item b. Page 1|May 23, 2023 May 23, 2023 – Leesburg Town Council Meeting (Note: This is a transcript prepared by a Town contractor based on the video of the meeting. It may not be entirely accurate. For greater accuracy, we encourage you to review the video of the meeting that is on the Town’s Web site – www.leesburgva.gov or refer to the approved Council meeting minutes. Council meeting videos are retained for three calendar years after a meeting per Library of Virginia Records Retention guidelines.) Mayor Kelly Burk: I would like to call to order tonight's Town Council meeting of May 23rd, 2023. If anyone in the room needs hearing assistance, please see the Clerk. Council Member Cummings will be giving the invocation tonight, followed by the salute to the flag by Council Member Bagdasarian. Council Member Cummings. Council Member Zach Cummings: Thank you. As we come upon National Gun Violence Awareness Day and Month, I just wanted to take a moment and just take a moment of silence for the victims and their families affected by gun violence. I just want to make a point that we can't just rely on moments of silence and prayers and thoughts. We have to have legislative action to end the epidemic of gun violence haunting our country. Tonight, we're going to take a moment of silence for the victims, their families, and friends, but tomorrow we're going to work on ending this epidemic. Thank you. [silence] Council Member Cummings: Thanks. Mayor Burk: All right. Would you join us in the pledge? All: I pledge allegiance to the flag [inaudible]. Mayor Burk: Let the record reflect that everyone, all members of Council are present at this point. No one will be participating electronically. We have two sets of minutes, the work session minutes of May 8th, 2023. Do I have a motion? Vice Mayor Neil Steinberg: So moved. Mayor Burk: Moved by Vice Mayor Steinberg. Council Member Kari Nacy: Second. Mayor Burk: Seconded by Council Member Nacy. All in favor? Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? That passes 7-0. Regular session minutes, May 9th, 2023, Vice Mayor Steinberg. Second? Council Member Nacy: Second. Mayor Burk: Oh, you two are fast tonight. All in favor? Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? All right. Do I have a motion to adopt the meeting agenda? Council Member Nacy: So moved. Mayor Burk: Council Member Nacy. Second? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Second. 49 Item b. Page 2|May 23, 2023 Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor Steinberg. Is there any amendments or deletions anyone wants to add? All right. All in favor indicate by saying, "Aye." Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? That passes 7-0. We have a couple of proclamations for tonight. The first one that we have tonight is for Relay of Life and Mr. Wilt, you're reading that one? Council Member Patrick Wilt: Yes. Proclamation for the American Cancer Society's Loudoun County Relay for Life. Whereas Relay for Life is the signature activity of the American Cancer Society and celebrates cancer survivors and caregivers, remembers loved ones lost to the disease, and empowers individuals and communities to fight back against cancer, and whereas money raised during Relay for Life supports the American Cancer Society's mission of saving lives, celebrating lives, and leading the fight for a world without cancer and whereas this year's Loudoun County Relay for Life will be held on June 3rd, 2023, at the Village of Leesburg. And whereas through the funds raised from the Relay for Life Movement, the American Cancer Society can invest in cancer research and provide free information and support for people facing the disease and whereas the American Cancer Society also educates people on how to reduce the risk of cancer or detect it early when it is easier to treat. Therefore, proclaimed that the Mayor and Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia hereby recognize Loudoun County Relay for Life volunteers, organizers, and participants, and encourage Leesburg residents to support the event. Proclaimed this 23rd day of May 2023. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Council Member Wilt. The second proclamation for tonight is Wayne's Crossing Commemoration. Council Member Cimino-Johnson. Council Member Todd Cimino-Johnson: Commemoration of Wayne's Crossing. Whereas General George Washington ordered Brigadier General Anthony Wayne and his brigade of Pennsylvania troops into Virginia in the spring of 1781 to reinforce Major General Marquis de Lafayette's army during the Virginia campaign of Revolutionary War. And whereas General Wayne crossed the Potomac River with his brigade of 700 troops on May 31st, 1781, at Nolan's Landing in the Loudoun County and marched through Leesburg on June 3rd, 1781. And whereas General Wayne's troops provided critical reinforcements for Lafayette's army in Virginia, which had been in retreat from the larger British army of General Charles Cornwallis before his arrival. Whereas General Wayne, leading the advanced forces of Lafayette's Army and augmented by 200 Virginia riflemen engaged Cornwallis at the Battle of Green Spring on July 6th, 1781, in the largest infantry engagement to occur in Virginia during the war, resulting in the withdrawal of Cornwallis and his army across the James River into Yorktown, where the war ended a few months later. Whereas Wayne's Crossing was significant Revolutionary War event in Loudoun County's history as commemorated by a historical marker at Lucketts Community Park, about three miles from where General Wayne's Army crossed the Potomac River, and therefore proclaimed that the Mayor and Town Council hereby recognize the Sons of the American Revolution and the Daughters of the American Revolution for commemorating June 3rd, 2023 as a William's Crossing Day in Leesburg, Virginia. Proclaimed this 23rd day of May 2023. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Council Member Cimino-Johnson. Our next one is National Gun Violence Awareness Day. Council Member Cummings. Council Member Cummings: Thank you. National Gun Violence Awareness Day. June 2nd, 2023. Whereas this year, the National Gun Violence Awareness Day will honor and remember gun violence victims and survivors on June 2nd. And whereas more than 120 Americans are killed daily by gun violence, along with more than 200 who are shot and wounded and an average of 17,000 gun-related homicides occur every year. And whereas Americans are 26 times more likely to die by gun homicide than residents in other high- income countries. And whereas the increase in gun violence and fatal shootings call for more efforts 50 Item b. Page 3|May 23, 2023 and resources to be directed toward gun violence prevention. And whereas by wearing orange on June 2nd, 2023, Americans will raise gun violence awareness and commemorate the lives of the lost. Whereas everyone must commit to reducing gun violence, pledge to do everything possible to keep firearms out of the wrong hands, and encourage responsible gun ownership for everyone's safety. Therefore proclaimed that the Mayor and Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia recognize the first Friday in June to be National Gun Violence Awareness Day. In support, we'll light the Town parking garage orange during June. Proclaimed this 23rd day of May 2023. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Council Member Cummings. The Loudoun County Resolves. Is this Mr. Badgasarian? Are you two still fighting over it? No, you're okay. [laughs] Council Member Cummings: You do the honors next time. Okay. Whereas in June 1774, Leesburg and Loudoun Freeholders met at the County Courthouse lawn to discuss the protection of people's rights and liberties in North America. Whereas at this meeting, Loudoun County residents discussed the best way to support their fellow Bostonians from the oppression and tyranny of the act of the British Parliament, and as whereas participants of the meeting drew upon the resolutions which were sent to the Continental Congress in Philadelphia as well as to London and whereas these resolutions resolve that Freeman should not be submitted to taxes other than those enacted by representatives of their own choosing. Whereas it is absolutely repugnant to the fundamental laws of justice to punish persons without a trial. Whereas enforcing the act of parliament by military power would lead to civil war in support of the suffering brethren of Boston and any oppressed part of North America. Therefore, proclaimed that the Mayor and Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia hereby has recognized the Sergeant Major John Champe Chapter of the Virginia Sons of the American Revolution for its efforts towards commemorating the 249 years in remembrance of this important event and count in this county's history, proclaimed this 23rd day of May 2023. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Badgasarian. Vice Mayor Steinberg is going to do the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Pride Month. Vice Mayor Steinberg: Thank you. Proclamation, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Pride Month. Whereas lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer LGBTQ Pride Month is celebrated each year in June. And whereas Pride Month honors the 1969 Stonewall Uprising, which is considered the catalyst of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer-identified, also known as the LGBTQ+ Rights Movement in the United States. And whereas every June, communities across the nation celebrate the contributions of LGBTQ+ people. And whereas Pride Month commemorates individuals who have fought to secure equality, who have experienced discrimination, and who have historically been disenfranchised of rights afforded to other Americans. And whereas the Town of Leesburg remains committed to protecting the rights of the LGBTQ+ community and invites everyone to respect, honor, and celebrate its diverse community, and to continue building a culture of inclusiveness and acceptance. Therefore, proclaimed this 23rd day of May 2023 that the Mayor and Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia hereby proclaim June 2023 is LGBTQ Pride Month and embrace LGBTQ+ people and recognize their contributions. Mayor Burk: Thank you, Vice Mayor. The final one is the proclamation for Nancy L. Ryan's 80th birthday and 25th Senior Fitness celebration. Whereas Ida Lee Park Recreation Center Senior Fitness instructor, Nancy L Ryan, is nearing her 25th year of instructions for the Leesburg Department of Parks and Recreation. Whereas Nancy L Ryan set the fitness example for all as she nears her 80th birthday on August 7th, 2023. Whereas she has been a certified fitness instructor for almost 40 years by the Athletic and Fitness Association of America, the American Council on Exercise, and the IDEA Health and Fitness Association. Whereas she's a personal fitness trainer and holds a master's degree in exercise science from George Washington University where she takes special pride in devotion and assisting senior citizens fitness class students of the Town of Leesburg and beyond with their recovery from illnesses and replacement challenges. Whereas she still finds time to be the family matriarch for her extended family, therefore proclaimed that the Mayor and the Town Council hereby present this proclamation to Nancy Ryan for 51 Item b. Page 4|May 23, 2023 her dedication to her students as a fitness professional and congratulate her for her example as a senior citizen on her 80th birthday. All right, I am going to be taking these down and ask people to come up and join me as I bring these proclamations forward. Okay. Thank you. All right. The first one is for the Proclamation of Life, the Relay for Life. Is Ron here? I didn't see him come in. Did you see Ron come in? We'll give that to him when he comes back. The proclamation for Wayne's Crossing and Ken Bonner is accepting this. Hello, how wonderful to see you again. Ken Bonner: You too, thank you so much. Mayor Burk: Sure, absolutely. Would you like to explain what this is all about and why it's so important? Ken Bonner: I would be delighted to, thank you. Mayor Burk: Sure. Let me take that up please. Ken Bonner: The proclamation was very well written as read but this is a very important historical event to the Town of Leesburg as well as Loudoun County and also to our nation. General Anthony Wayne, this is pretty loud, General Anthony Wayne began his march with his army and troops in Pennsylvania and they came down through Maryland and then crossed into Virginia, in nearby Nolan's Landing as was stated earlier. He camped just near the Town limits here at Leesburg on his way further south to meet up with General Lafayette and entered into the general engagement at Green Springs just ahead of the Yorktown Battle. For those of you who are familiar with the history, the engagement at Yorktown was a decisive victory for the American army joined with the French who had allied with the US, the [unintelligible] US and they defeated General Cornwallis at Yorktown effectively ending the Revolutionary War. We think it's important to recognize this historic event that happened here in Leesburg those many years ago. I thank you, Mayor, and the Town Council for recognizing this on an annual basis. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Would you explain your organization that you're with? Ken Bonner: Oh, sure. The Sons of the American Revolution, which was founded in 1889 and is under a Congressional charter as a historical education society. It's also a male lineage society which simply means that we descend from patriots of the American Revolution. Those who fought either in a military fashion or made other contributions to the common cause. You could have been a farmer and donated food. You could have made tax contributions, et cetera. Many are more familiar with our sister organization, the Daughters of the American Revolution. They're much better marketeers than the sons are as I'm sure everybody can probably imagine. I really appreciate the opportunity to see you. Just to add quickly, we're organized in chapters and by state, and so I am the President of the Sergeant Major John Champe Chapter here in Loudoun County. We rechartered our chapter about a year ago. The reason why it's named John Champe is because Sergeant Major Champe was born and raised in Aldie, not too far from here. The name of our chapter after the namesake is in his honor, and his historic contribution was that after the defection of Brigadier General Arnold, Benedict Arnold, that is, he was sent by General Washington and Light Horse Harry Lee to go after Benedict Arnold to try to apprehend him and bring him to justice. We felt it was worthy to honor a Loudoun County resident in this fashion. Thank you, Mayor. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Truly appreciate it. Our next proclamation, it is loud. [laughs] Our next proclamation is for National Gun Violence Awareness. Melanie, you're going to accept this on behalf of your organization. We got to get those pictures in. [laughs] Melanie Srivisal: [inaudible] Mayor Burk: Oh, no problem. I would like to present you with this proclamation, but I'd like you to explain to the public what organization you represent here and what your aims are. 52 Item b. Page 5|May 23, 2023 Melanie Srivisal: Thank you, Mayor. I'm Melanie. This is Melissa. We're from the Loudoun group of Moms Demand Action, but Wear Orange is actually bigger than Moms Demand or anything. It was created after a 14-year-old girl, Hadiya Pendleton was shot walking home from school in Chicago and her friends, like too many kids and adults in our country, were traumatized by her death and wanted to do something positive and take action. They created Wear Orange. We wear orange because hunters wear orange so they are not shot when they're out in the woods hunting. Just like we shouldn't have to do that in our streets and our towns, but maybe we do. [laughs] It's an educational program. We talk a lot about what kind of gun safety habits can make you more safe in your communities, working with local police departments like the Leesburg Police Department is wonderful. They have many programs and ways they can help you if you feel like you or a family member is at risk. We do promote any kind of program that's going to keep guns out of the hands of children, securing your guns in your home in a safe, locked and unloaded, and not leaving your guns in your car when you walk out of your car. Very simple things like that. We really appreciate the Town of Leesburg for supporting us in this. They've always been a great support and like I said, the Police Department has always been great too. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Melanie Srivisal: Thank you, Mayor. Mayor Burk: Great. Wonderful. That's really good to hear. Thank you for all you do. It really is important work and we really appreciate it. Thank you. [applause] Mayor Burk: Then we have a proclamation for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Pride Month. Cris was going to be here but Samantha's going to accept in her place. You all are welcome to come up. All of you. [laughs] All of you. Samantha Clarke: Thank you, Mayor. Mayor Burk: Yes, thank you. Thank you for standing in for Cris. We appreciate it. Samantha Clarke: Of course, of course. Mayor Burk: We are very proud to be able to give this to you today. Let me take that little sticker off though. I know that you have some things that you would like to, oh, she dropped your phone. Sorry. I know there are some things that you would like to share with us. Samantha Clarke: Of course, of course. Thank you, Mayor. As always, thank you Mayor Burk, and thank you to the Town Council for having Equality Loudoun here tonight to recognize June as Pride Month. It's very important, much like the proclamation says, that we recognize queer visibility, but also queer acceptance. A lot of times we do that in the month of June, but it's really important that we do that day in and day out in our lives not only here in Loudoun County, but across the United States and across the world. A lot of what we're seeing in the country today is the lack of acceptance and the harm that that causes members of the queer community. It's really, really important that we take opportunities like this to just stand up in front of our community, stand up with our neighbors, stand up with our elected officials, and just take the opportunity to thank you as a community for recognizing that we are members of your community, that we have value and that we have a lot to contribute. That's really what Equality Loudoun does here in Loudoun County, is we create a space where we can give voice to those who oftentimes feel voiceless. That we can show how much the queer community has to contribute in a community like Loudoun County. We're very, very grateful for opportunities like this to give our voice, and to share everything that we have to offer. 53 Item b. Page 6|May 23, 2023 The last thing that I'll say, I'll keep my comments brief, is that if you want to get to know a little bit more about Equality Loudoun, come join us at Pride. It's in two weeks on Sunday, June 4th. It's a huge festival. Lots of music, lots of family fun. We have over 120 vendors joining us from here in Loudoun County. Lots of allies coming out to celebrate what it is they do in our community and what it is they do with and for the queer community here in Loudoun County. Again, thank you, Mayor Burk. Mayor Burk: What was the date and what was the time and what was the location? Samantha Clarke: Oh, I'm sorry. I tend to talk fast. It is Sunday. Thank you so much. You're so good to me. It is Sunday, June 4th here in Loudoun County at Claude Moore Park, from 1:00 to 7:00, all day. Mayor Burk: [unintelligible] thank you. Samantha Clarke: Thank you so much. Mayor Burk: Thank you for being here today. Really appreciate it and thanks. Well, I'll see you on the 7th. Now, the last one is very special because this is for Nancy Ryan. Nancy, would you please come up? Nancy Ryan: Thank you, my own student. Mayor Burk: Absolutely. It is such a delight to see you. I've taken classes with Nancy and let me tell you she can keep you on your feet. [laughs] What a wonderful instructor. That's right. What a wonderful instructor and what a great experience. I was so diligent about it until COVID, and then I just never got back to it. I've got to get back to getting back into exercise class. It's so great to see so many people I remember from class and they were all a lot better than me, [laughs] but I do want to say congratulations. You are truly an inspiration- Nancy Ryan: Thanks. Mayor Burk: -to be still so active and out. I want to be you. [laughter] Mayor Burk: Would you like to say a few things to your adoring fans here? Nancy Ryan: Oh, my goodness. Well, thank you. Thank you. Thanks, everyone. When I came out here to Loudoun County 24 years ago to retire, I never got the opportunity because Kaj, who was running Ida Lee at that time hired me, and the rest is history. I would like to thank him, thank the Council for this nice honor, thank my family, my friends, and my wonderful students whom I've admitted many times, but sworn them to secrecy that I would gladly teach them without pay. I hope that will be stricken from the record. Thank you all so very much. It's an honor and a privilege and I love working for the Town of Leesburg. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Nancy Ryan: Thank you very much. Take care. Mayor Burk: On that note, we don't have any presentations. Does anybody have any regional commission reports? The only one I've got is that the VML met the other day in Richmond, and we did approve having the convention in Norfolk in October. You'll be getting information on that, and I hope all of you will take the opportunity to attend. The next section we have is our petitioners, and the petitioner section is one of the first orders of business to hear from the public. All members of the public are welcome to address the Council on any item, matter, or issue. Please identify yourself and if comfortable doing so, give your address for the taped record. Any public speaker will be requested to state their name and spell it for the purpose of closed captioning. In the interest of fairness, we also ask that you observe the three-minute time limit. 54 Item b. Page 7|May 23, 2023 The green light on the timer will turn yellow when you have one minute remaining. At that time we would appreciate your summing up and yielding the floor when the bell indicates your time is expired. [laughs] There's not going to be a soul left here and there's nobody who has signed up to speak. Is there anybody in the audience that would like to stay and say a few words? [laughter] Since there is nobody, at this point I will close the petitioners' section. We have the consent agenda. Excuse me, I'm looking. I'm losing my voice. We have two items on the consent agenda. The Market Street and King Street Intersection Improvement Project Construction Change Order, and the Town Liability Insurance Award. Do I have a motion to accept the consent agenda? Council Member Cummings: So moved. Mayor Burk: Moved by Council Member Cummings. Second? Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Second. Mayor Burk: Council Member Cimino-Johnson. Is there any item that anybody would like removed? Okay. All in favor of the consent agenda indicate by saying, Aye. Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? That passes 7-0. We have no resolutions, public hearing, unfinished business, Council disclosures, and comments. Would we like to start with Mr. Bagdasarian today? Council Member Ara Bagdasarian: Quite the honor. Thank you. Yes, only disclosure. I had a meeting with residents at Potomac Station about the Hamblet Project. I'll put the date in my paperwork here. That's it. Mayor Burk: Thank you. Council Member Nacy. Council Member Nacy: I have the same disclosure. I met on the 12th with some of the residents about the Hamlet property. Mayor Burk: Sorry. Council Member Cimino-Johnson. Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Disclosure, I met with Kim Hart, Andy Shuckra, Erik DeLong, James David, and Chris Murphy about the Oaklawn rezoning application. I have no additions to future meetings and no comments. Mayor Burk: Alright, Council Member Cummings. Council Member Cummings: Nothing this evening. Mayor Burk: Vice Mayor Steinberg. Vice Mayor Steinberg: No disclosures. Mayor Burk: Okay. Mr. Wilt. Council Member Wilt: Two disclosures. On May 17th, meeting on Oaklawn rezoning with Mr. Shuckra, Hart, and DeLong, and then Liberty Lot PPP meeting on May 11th with the working group of various Town staff and project group folks. Mayor Burk: May I ask a question of the attorney? Does Mr. Wilt have to disclose that meeting? 55 Item b. Page 8|May 23, 2023 Christopher Spera: If it was a subcommittee meeting, no. They don't need to disclose that if a meeting of the subcommittee, if it was a meeting separate from the subcommittee, then yes. Mayor Burk: So every time you meet, you don't have to disclose that. Council Member Wilt: That's actually what we discussed two weeks ago, that very question, the answer I got from Tina and others was yes, to disclose. If I prefer the simpler [unintelligible] [crosstalk]- - Christopher Spera: I apologize for that. I will speak with her, I guess I'm her boss. I'm going to say you don't have to do it because you were publicly designated as a member of the subcommittee and you were meeting as part of the subcommittee. We'll get that squared away. That is my legal opinion. Council Member Wilt: Excellent. That'll be much simpler for me. Mayor Burk: All right. On May 11th, I did attend the VML Executive Committee meeting in Richmond. Again, the conference will be held in Norfolk this year. May 17th, I did the Meet the Mayor at SR Coffee, which is a little coffee shop across from the Airport. It is a delightful place, I'm not a coffee drinker but everybody raved about the coffee and how great it was. It was very interesting to different people that came in. There were a number of people that were going to the Airport and then there were some people that were going to work somewhere else. I had some very interesting conversations and had some very interesting questions that I brought forward. Everybody's very interested in what's going on at the Airport and very concerned. On the 19th, I attended the Labor Tribute dinner. It was wonderful to see all of the workers that were there represented by their unions. As a former Teacher Association President, I'm always glad to see workers advocating for themselves. I want to thank Virginia Diamond for the invitation, and I want to shout out to the United Food Workers Union. On May 20th, I attended the Open House at the Leesburg Utility Department. While I can't tell you how interesting that was, it truly was. It was great to see all the different machineries and all the things that they do and how they do it, and the degree of staff's knowledge on the machines. There's five leaf- picking-up machines. It was just truly fascinating. It was very impressive. You saw the letter to the editor where the gentleman went to the Water Treatment Plant and really it showed to him what we're paying taxes for and how hard the Town staff works. I think that's something we need to repeat over and over again. Thanks to everybody that participated in that. I think it was a very good event and I'm glad that we do it every year. I had the opportunity to attend the rededication of the Douglass School and to speak and welcome everybody. This is an unbelievably new, wonderful facility, and no expense was spared to make sure that it went back to the 1941 look that it had back then. It was an inspiring event in total, but it really spoke to me about the need to realize that black history is our history, and we need to know all of that history. We here in Leesburg should be very proud that the Douglass High School Education and Community Campus is located here in Leesburg. I would invite all of you to join me on June 7th at 5:30 here in Town Hall for the State of the Town address. It won't be very long. Everybody knows I'm not one for long speeches, but it would be great if you could mark that on your calendar and come join us. I do have a disclosure. I did meet with the residents of Potomac Station in regard to the Hamblet development. Finally, I just want to say that on Legacy Farms this weekend is having a fundraiser. It's $25. It's 1:00 to 4:00, and Adam, what's his last name? Kaj Dentler: Bell. Mayor Burk: Bell. Adam Bell has called me three times, telling me that I have to remind all of you and invite you all. Adam, I did it. So I hope I see all of you there. Town Manager. 56 Item b. Page 9|May 23, 2023 Kaj Dentler: Just two announcements. As you know, we've got the new Police Chief that's been announced, Thea Pirnat. We'll start July 24th. We're working now to finalize the swearing-in ceremony, which would be mid- to late-July, just before she arrives. Details to come. Then while we're also working on that, we're working to hire Clark Case's replacement, his successor, as our Chief Financial Officer. Clark retires the end of September. We're in the middle of that process now. Interviews will start in June and hopefully get to mid-July, to late-July at the latest we will have made the decision. The game plan is for the new person to come on board with the last couple of weeks before Clark leaves to be able to have a transition. One senior position is finished, and we're working on the second one. Mayor Burk: Great. Thank you. If no one else has anything else to add, then we will go into a closed session. I will move pursuant to Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(8) and 2.2-3711(A)(3) of the Code of Virginia that the Leesburg Town Council convene in a closed meeting for the purpose of consultation with legal counsel in briefing by the staff members regarding specific legal matters related to the annexation of the JLMA where such consultation and open sessions would adversely affect the negotiations and litigation posture of the Town. Is there a second? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Second. Mayor Burk: All in favor indicate by saying, Aye. Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? We are in closed session when the mics are off. Council convened in a closed session at 7:33 p.m. Council convened in an open session at 7:58 p.m. Mayor Burk: So, are we on? In accordance with Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia, I move that Council certify to the best of each member’s knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirement under Virginia Freedom of Information Act and such public business matters for the purpose identified in the motion by which the closed meeting was convened were heard, discussed, and considered in the meeting by the Council. Mr. Wilt? Council Member Wilt: Aye. Mayor Burk: Mr. Bagdasarian? Council Member Bagdasarian: Aye. Mayor Burk: Ms. Nacy? Council Member Nacy: Aye. Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg? Vice Mayor Steinberg: Aye. Mayor Burk: Mr. Cummings? Council Member Cummings: Aye. Mayor Burk: Dr. Cimino-Johnson? Council Member Cimino-Johnson: Aye. Mayor Burk: And I’m an aye. Alright, we are out of closed session. Do I have a motion to adjourn? 57 Item b. Page 10|May 23, 2023 Council Member Cimino-Johnson: So moved. Mayor Burk: Moved by Dr. Cimino-Johnson. Second? By Mr. Bagdasarian. All in favor? Members: Aye. Mayor Burk: Opposed? Anybody else can stay here if they want. No. Alright, thank you. 58 Item b. PROCLAMATION Juneteenth WHEREAS, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863 declaring the slaves in Confederate territory free, and paving the way for the passing of the 13th Amendment which formally abolished slavery in the United States of America; and WHEREAS, news about the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation was delayed some two and a half years, to June 19, 1865, in reaching authorities and African Americans in the south and southwestern United States; and WHEREAS, June 19th has a special meaning for African Americans, and is called "JUNETEENTH" combining the words June and Nineteenth, and has been celebrated by the African American community for over 150 years; and WHEREAS, the year 2023 marks the 404th anniversary of the arrival to the Jamestown settlement of the first Africans where they were enslaved, marking the beginning of nearly 250 years of slavery in the British colonies and in the new nation which would become the United States; and WHEREAS, today, Juneteenth, celebrates African American freedom and achievements, while encouraging continuous self-development and respect for all cultures as it takes on a more national symbolic and even global perspective to ensure the events of 1865 are never forgotten; and WHEREAS, the Leesburg Town Council recognizes the following organizations:  The “BURG” Family Reunion Club and its President, Irvin Greene, for their efforts to encourage residents to become more aware of the significance of this celebration in African American history and for preserving the memories of Black descendants.  The National Juneteenth Observance Foundation and its President, Steve Williams, for their efforts towards the passage of Juneteenth Independence Day legislation and for the coordination and organization of the Juneteenth Flag Raising Event held on June 5, 2023. THEREFORE, PROCLAIMED, that the Mayor and Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia hereby declare that Monday, June 19th be observed as JUNETEENTH in the Town of Leesburg, Virginia. We urge all citizens to recognize the important remembrance of all the lives lost during a tragic period of slavery. PROCLAIMED this 13th day of June 2023. 2023/012022/07 ____________________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor ____________________________________ Neil Steinberg, Vice Mayor ____________________________________ Ara H. Bagdasarian ____________________________________ Todd Cimino-Johnson ____________________________________ Zach Cummings ____________________________________ Kari Nacy ____________________________________ Patrick Wilt 59 Item a. PROCLAMATION Master Gardeners WHEREAS, since 1992 the Virginia Cooperative Extension Loudoun (VCE Loudoun) Master Gardeners have educated the public on gardening methods through the Demonstration Garden at Ida Lee Park; and WHEREAS, VCE Loudoun Master Gardeners are dedicated and knowledgeable volunteers who look forward to answering any horticultural questions from the public; and WHEREAS, VCE Loudoun Master Gardeners have proven, through agricultural experimentation, that organic gardening is possible in Loudoun County; and WHEREAS, VCE Loudoun Master Gardeners have been recognized with the Community Improvement Award, the John W. Tolbert Award, and the Signatures of Loudoun Design Excellence Award for Public Landscapes; and WHEREAS, VCE Loudoun Master Gardeners donate between 1,000 to 2,000 pounds of fresh produce to Loudoun Hunger Relief annually; and THEREFORE, PROCLAIMED, that the Mayor and Council of the Town of Leesburg hereby recognize the VCE Loudoun Master Gardeners’ dedication and continued efforts and applauds the continued success of the Demonstration Garden at Ida Lee Park. PROCLAIMED this 13th day of June 2023. 2023/012022/07 ____________________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor ____________________________________ Neil Steinberg, Vice Mayor ____________________________________ Ara H. Bagdasarian ____________________________________ Todd Cimino-Johnson ____________________________________ Zach Cummings ____________________________________ Kari Nacy ____________________________________ Patrick Wilt 60 Item b. Council Meeting Date: June 13, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Subject: Special Event Fee Waiver for Loudoun Freedom Center Juneteenth March 2023 Staff Contact: Kate Trask, Deputy Director of Parks and Recreation Council Action Requested: Approval by Council is needed to waive the special event fees associated with the Juneteenth March 2023 on June 19, 2023. Staff Recommendation: Approval by Town Council to waive the special event fees up to $1,400. Commission Recommendation: Not applicable. Fiscal Impact: The special event fees for the Juneteenth March 2023 are for actual time worked by Town staff from the Police Department and the Department of Public Works. The estimated total special event cost is $1,395. The total costs are approximate and could increase or decrease depending on needs that arise on the day of the event. The staff costs for this event are not accounted for in the operating budgets of the associated departments providing staff for the event. Funding is required from the Town Council line item for an internal transfer of funds to cover staffing costs. Work Plan Impact: The Juneteenth March 2023 is being held on Monday, June 19, 2023. The workload of both the Police Department and the Department of Public Works will be affected. Staff will need to be identified to work outside normal work hours at overtime rates. Town Plan Impact: The Juneteenth March 2023 supports the Legacy Leesburg strategy 1.1.4 to plan, program, and design a public realm that exemplifies Leesburg’s unique character and quality of life. Executive Summary: The event organizers for the Juneteenth March 2023 have requested that the Town fees associated with the event be waived. See Attachment #2. This is the third year that the Loudoun Freedom Center has requested a fee waiver. The Town adopted a special event fee waiver policy in November 2021 which allows Town Council to waive fees or issue fee reductions for qualifying events. See Attachment #3. The funding for fee waivers or reductions is budgeted annually in Town Council’s operating budget. Upon submission of a Special Event Proposal application, an event organizer can request a special event fee waiver. A review by the staff on the Community Events Committee (CEC) is conducted and a recommendation is proposed. Based on the criteria for special event fee waivers, the Juneteenth March 2023 meets the requirements and is eligible for the fee waiver. Background: The Juneteenth March 2023 event is organized by the Loudoun Freedom Center and the Loudoun County NAACP. This will be the third year for this event. The previous Marches had associated event fees waived in the amount of up to $1,500 for both 2021 and 2022. 61 Item a. Special Event Fee Waiver for Loudoun Freedom Center Juneteenth March 2023 June 13, 2023 Page 2 Juneteenth is a nationally recognized holiday that commemorates the emancipation of enslaved African Americans in 1865. The Juneteenth March is held in downtown Leesburg; starting at the Loudoun County Courthouse complex and ending at the Orion Anderson Memorial along the W&OD Trail, where a celebration is held that includes guest speakers, food, and vendors. The event starts at 9:00am and ends by 1:00pm, rain or shine. The event is open to the public. Contract Start/End Date: Not applicable. Proposed Legislation: RESOLUTION Waiving Special Event Fees for Loudoun Freedom Center Juneteenth March 2023 Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed Resolution to waive the special event fees associated with the Freedom Center Juneteenth March 2023 in an approximate amount of $1,400. 2. I move to deny the proposed Resolution to waive the special event fees associated with the Freedom Center Juneteenth March 2023 in an approximate amount of $1,400. OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Draft resolution 2. Fee Waiver/Reduction Request Form for Juneteenth March 2023 3. Special Event Fee Waiver Policy – November 2021 2022/03 62 Item a. PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: ____________ A RESOLUTION : WAIVING SPECIAL EVENT FEES FOR LOUDOUN FREEDOM CENTER JUNETEENTH MARCH 2023 WHEREAS, the Loudoun Freedom Center has applied to hold the Juneteenth March 2023 in downtown Leesburg on June 19, 2023; and WHEREAS, the benefit event has associated special event fees in the approximate amount of $1,400; and WHEREAS, the Loudoun Freedom Center has requested that the Town Council waive the special event fees associated with the benefit event; and WHEREAS, the Loudoun Freedom Center meets the criteria of the Town’s Special Event Fee Waiver Policy; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that granting the requested fee waiver is appropriate and in the public interest; and WHEREAS, staff has advised that there are adequate funds available in the appropriate budget cost center to cover the waived fees. THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: 1. The special event fees in the approximate amount of $1,400 associated with the Juneteenth March 2023 event scheduled for June 19, 2023 are hereby waived. 2. Staff is directed to assess the actual costs incurred against the Town Council line item in the budget for the current fiscal year, and to take all such additional steps as may be necessary to properly document the waiver and recover such costs by an internal transfer of funds. 63 Item a. A RESOLUTION: WAIVING SPECIAL EVENT FEES FOR LOUDOUN FREEDOM CENTER JUNETEENTH MARCH 2023 -2- 2022/01 PASSED this 13th day of June, 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 64 Item a. TOWN OF LEESBURG PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT FEE WAIVER/REDUCTION REQUEST FORM Important: This form is to be completed by staff. Please complete this entire form and attach applicable backup (i.e. additional applicant information, facility request information, event information, etc.). APPLICANT INFORMATION Event Name: _________________________________________________________________________________ Event Organizer(s) Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Location of Event: ____________________________________________________________________________ Date(s) and Time: _____________________________________________________________________________ Is Organization a 501(c) (___)? YES ____ NO ____ Must attach proof of Organization’s designation. Number of anticipated attendees: #______________________________________________________________ Amount requested in waived/reduced fees: $ ______________________________________________________ Town costs: rental fee $ ______________________________ staffing cost $ _____________________________ Will in-kind support be greater or equal to the fee waiver/reduction provided? YES _____ NO _____ N/A_____ Is the event open to the public? YES ____ NO ____ Is a fee being charged to participants? YES ____ NO ____ If yes, attach fees/rates. Has a permit been previously issued for this event? YES ____ NO ____ If yes, year(s) _____________ Has a fee waiver/reduction been previously issued for this event? YES ____ NO ____ If yes, year(s) ______________________ Will event be annual or one-time? _____________________ Proposed event: Provide general explanation of event and justification for recommendation selected. Submit form with information, memo, and resolution. Town Council Meeting Date: _________________ Final Recommendation: Approved ______ Denied _______ Resolution # _________ Juneteenth Freedom March Pastor Michelle Thomas - Loudoun Freedom Center LC Courthouse, Leesburg Streets, Orion Anderson Memorial-NOVA Parks Monday, June 19, 2023 9:00am - 1:00pm 125-150 1,395.00 N/A $1,395.00 X X X X 2021 & 2022 X 2021 & 2022 Annual The Juneteenth March was started in 2021 and will be an annual event going forward. The March begins at the Loudoun County Courthouse starting on King Street, turning right onto E. Market Street, right on Church Street, left on South Street, and right on to Harrison Street to the Orion Anderson Memorial site. A small event with speakers will take place on the NOVA park side of the W & OD Trail until 1:00pm. June 13, 2023 X 3 65 Item a. TOWN OF LEESBURG EVENT FEE WAIVER POLICY For non-profit organizations PURPOSE AND INTRODUCTION The Town of Leesburg recognizes that special events are a key component toward providing a sense of community, establishing a sense of town pride, and attracting visitors. The purpose of this policy is to provide the process, criteria, and guidelines for event organizers seeking full or partial fee waivers of Town of Leesburg charges for their events that may be either one time or reoccurring. This policy has been established to ensure that special events requesting fee waivers or fee reductions meet the requirements described in this document. The Town reserves the right to supplement or discontinue the use of this policy. ELIGIBILITY & CRITERIA The following conditions and status must be met, and any needed documentation be provided, with the fee waiver request. Fee Waiver/Reduction Event Criteria: The event is being held by or to benefit a non-profit organization, whose 501© status is confirmed with an IRS letter. The event provides the community with a quality opportunity that brings value, service, or economic benefit to Leesburg. The event is open to the public. An event fee may be charged or a suggested donation collected. Events with restricted attendance by invitation only are not eligible. The event has submitted a Town of Leesburg Special Events Permit Application. The event has been reviewed and deemed acceptable by Community Events Committee. The event organizer and the event beneficiary are in good standing with the Town of Leesburg. To be in good standing may include: past event fees were paid; previous events were held according to Town codes and policies; Town taxes and licenses are current; there are no outstanding tickets. Events that DO NOT meet fee waiver requirements: Events produced by private individuals/businesses. Activities primarily of a fundraising or charitable nature for a private individual or group. Events that are not open to the public. Events that are political in nature or by individuals seeking political office or elected officials for the purpose of an election campaign. Events based outside Leesburg town limits and do not directly benefit residents. Events who have failed to fulfill their obligations during previous events or activities for which department fees were waived or reduced. Events that are prohibited by Town Code and/or do not require a Town Special Event permit. 66 Item a. Page | 2 EVENT FEE WAIVER POLICY APPROVED EVENT REQUIREMENTS If approved for a fee waiver the event organizer and/or the organization will comply with the following: Follow all Town laws and regulations in addition to any specific event parameters that are noted in the approved special event permit and the accompanying letter. Recognize the Town of Leesburg as a supporter of the event by either listing the Town or including the Town logo on marketing materials. Know and accept that the amount for a fee waiver will vary depending on each event’s needs. Attend an after event review meeting with the Town’s Community Events Committee representatives. Provide a financial report of the event within 90 days of being held. ANNUAL EVENTS An annual event is an event recurring each year at approximately the same date. Annual events have the same processes as listed above and are subject to re-evaluation each year. An annual event fee waiver would be possible after two years of an event being held successfully and meeting all criteria for an event fee waiver. An annual event could lose its waiver status if: The event organizer changes The event increases in size or logistical needs from the Town change The event becomes unsafe The intent of the event changes and no longer meets waiver criteria ______________________________________________________________________________ Approved Annual Events: As of November 2021, these are the current events receiving annual event fee waivers: All Night Grad Party: Heritage High School by HHS Parent Teacher Student Organization All Night Grad Party: Loudoun County High School by LCHS Parent Teacher Student Association All Night Grad Party: Tuscarora High School by THS Parent Teacher Student Organization America’s 9/11 Ride by America's 911 Foundation Incorporated Halloween Parade by Leesburg Kiwanis Club Leesburg Custom Car Show by Academies of Loudoun Loudoun County High School Graduation by Loudoun County Public Schools Martin Luther King Jr. March by MLK Committee The Haunting Tours by Loudoun Museum 67 Item a. Page | 3 EVENT FEE WAIVER POLICY REQUEST AND APPROVAL PROCESS The Town of Leesburg will use the guidelines and process noted below to submit a fee waiver/reduction request to Town Council for their approval/denial. Event organizer submits a Special Event Permit Application along with application fee to the Town’s Event Manager. The Town’s Event Manager reviews the application with input from the Community Events Committee and prepares an estimated cost for Town facility rentals and personnel services. Upon receiving the estimated costs, the event organizer may request in writing that an event fee waiver request form be submitted to Council. The Town’s Event Manager reviews the requirements to ensure that event meets eligibility criteria. If the event meets the eligibility criteria for a fee waiver: o Events Manager completes a fee waiver request form and submits it to the Director (or designee) for review. o Director (or designee) prepares Town Council memo & resolution with completed request form as an addendum. i.Memo includes staff’s recommendation for the fee wavier ii.Memo includes event fee waiver costs which will be separated as rental fees and staffing o Events manager notifies event organizer of Town Council meeting date. o Events manager notifies event organizer of Council’s decision. If approved by Town Council and event is held: o The Events Manager calculates actual event costs; and submits budget adjustment amounts to budget office for transfer to appropriate departments. ______________________________________________________________________________ EVENTS MANAGER DATE ______________________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR DATE 68 Item a. Council Meeting Date: June 13, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Subject: Plaza Street Sidewalk Project – Design Task Order Contract Authorization Staff Contact: Christine Roe, Senior Engineer, Public Works & Capital Projects Renée LaFollette, P.E., Director, Public Works & Capital Projects Council Action Requested: Authorize the Town Manager to execute a design task order contract to Rinker Design Associates, PC (RDA) in the amount of $262,631.44. The task order will be part of RDA’s Federal On-Call Civil Engineering Services contract with the Town of Leesburg effective May 22, 2023. Staff Recommendation: Authorize the Town Manager to execute a design task order contract to Rinker Design Associates, PC (RDA) in the amount of $262,631.44. Commission Recommendation: Not applicable. Fiscal Impact: No additional funding is necessary. Council approved a total budget for the project in the amount of $1,600,000 in the Fiscal Year 2024–2029 Capital Improvements Program (CIP). The task order includes services that fall under Design/Engineering and Land (Right of Way Services and Acquisition), as further shown in the table below: Approved CIP Budget Task Order Design/Engineering $250,000 $218,071.54 Land (Right of Way Services and Acquisition) $180,000 $44,559.90 Total $430,000 $262,631.44 Since this task order exceeds $200,000, the task order requires Town Council authorization per the Town’s Procurement Policy. Work Plan Impact: This project is part of the current work plan for Capital Projects. Town Plan Impact: Legacy Leesburg Town Plan (2022): Strategy 4.2.2 - Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure; Strategy 4.4.2 - Prioritize Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety and Comfort. Executive Summary: This proposed engineering task order is for design of improvements to approximately 1,000 feet of Plaza Street between the Leesburg Police Station and Edwards Ferry Road. The improvements include a new missing-link sidewalk on the west side of the street and upgrades to the existing east side sidewalk to meet current ADA standards. The proposed design narrows the roadway on Plaza Street, creating a multi-modal “road diet” corridor, and takes into consideration existing infrastructure and amenities, including mature trees, bike lanes, and bus 69 Item b. Plaza Street Sidewalk Project – Design Task Order Contract Authorization June 13, 2023 Page 2 stops. These improvements will increase pedestrian access and safety for residents of the Fields of Leesburg apartments and other residents in the surrounding area. In Spring 2023, Rinker Design Associates, PC (RDA) was selected for the Town’s On-Call Civil Engineering Services for Federally Funded Projects contract. Since the project is partially funded through a federal program through the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), this task order would be under that contract. Background: Plaza Street between East Market Street and Edwards Ferry Road is a wide two-lane collector street corridor that serves nearby commercial, residential, and public safety facilities. Bike lanes were added to the street in 2015. There is a continuous sidewalk on the east side of the street. However, on the west side of the street, there is no sidewalk for approximately 1,000 feet between the Leesburg Police Station and Edwards Ferry Road. The need to construct this missing link sidewalk has long been identified by the Town and endorsed by the Planning Commission. In addition to the missing link sidewalk on the west side of the street, there are several areas where the existing sidewalk on the east side needs to be upgraded to meet current ADA standards. The proposed project design minimizes impacts to the adjacent properties, infrastructure, and amenities, including mature street trees, using a “road diet” to narrow the Plaza Street roadway. The resulting project will provide a multi-modal corridor that serves pedestrians, bicyclists, motorized vehicles, and transit buses. During the past 15 years, outside funding for the project has been sought from several sources. In 2022, the Town received partial funding for the project through the federal Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), which is administered by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). Through this grant, VDOT will provide the Town up to $800,000 in reimbursement costs and support services on the project. In addition to this VDOT funding, Loudoun County is providing $111,050 in Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA) 30% funding. Under these agreements, the Town is responsible for providing all remaining funding to fully complete the project. Per the VDOT grant agreement, the Town is administering the project with oversight from VDOT. Contract Start/End Date: Estimated Contract Start: 06/26/2023 Estimated Contract End Date: 11/30/2026 Proposed Legislation: RESOLUTION Authorize the Town Manager to Execute a Design Task Order Contract for the Plaza Street Sidewalk Project to Rinker Design Associates, PC (RDA) in the amount of $262,631.44 Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed Resolution to authorize the Town Manager to execute a design task order contract for the Plaza Street Sidewalk project to Rinker Design Associates, PC (RDA) in the amount of $262,631.44. 70 Item b. Plaza Street Sidewalk Project – Design Task Order Contract Authorization June 13, 2023 Page 3 2. I move to deny the proposed Resolution to authorize the Town Manager to execute a design task order contract for the Plaza Street Sidewalk project to Rinker Design Associates, PC (RDA) in the amount of $262,631.44. OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution 2. Fiscal Year 2024 CIP Sheet 71 Item b. PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: ___________ A RESOLUTION : AUTHORIZE THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE A DESIGN TASK ORDER CONTRACT FOR THE PLAZA STREET SIDEWALK PROJECT TO RINKER DESIGN ASSOCIATES, PC (RDA) IN THE AMOUNT OF $262,631.44 WHEREAS, the Plaza Street Sidewalk project is an approved and fully funded capital improvements project; and WHEREAS, the proposed project will construct a new sidewalk on the west side of Plaza Street between the Leesburg Police Station and Edwards Ferry Road; and WHEREAS, the proposed project will include improvements to existing pedestrian facilities in the project area to fix ADA issues; and WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg has a continuing services contract for comprehensive engineering, architectural, surveying, and related services for federally funded projects with Rinker Design Associates, PC (RDA); and WHEREAS, the task order for design and engineering of the project has a total cost of $262,631.44; and WHEREAS, task orders for continuing services contracts in excess of $200,000 must be approved by Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works and Capital Projects recommends approval of the contract. THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: 72 Item b. A RESOLUTION: AUTHORIZE THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE A DESIGN TASK ORDER CONTRACT FOR THE PLAZA STREET SIDEWALK PROJECT TO RINKER DESIGN ASSOCIATES, PC (RDA) IN THE AMOUNT OF $262,631.44 -2- 2023/01 1. Authorize the Town Manager to execute a design task order contract for the Plaza Street Sidewalk project to Rinker Design Associates, PC (RDA) in the amount of $262,631.44. PASSED this 13th day of June 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 73 Item b. TITLE: Plaza Street Sidewalk (25303) STATUS: Ongoing LOCATION: Plaza Street Sidewalk (25303) PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Construction of approximately 1,000 linear feet of sidewalk along the west side of Plaza Street between the Police Headquarters and Edwards Ferry Road. This segment of sidewalk will complete a missing link and will improve pedestrian access and safety for residents of the Fields of Leesburg apartments and other residents in northeast Leesburg. OPERATING IMPACT: Minimal GOAL ADDRESSED: Legacy Leesburg Town Plan (2022): Strategy 4.2.2 - Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure; Strategy 4.4.2 - Prioritize Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety and Comfort PROJECTSTART ESTIMATEDCOMPLETION Spring 2022 Fall 2026 Significant Dates Funding Sources Sources Required Project Funding Approp. Through 06/30/23 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total for 6 Yr CIP Future Funds Required Line of Credit 603,960 10,000 190,950 363,010 30,000 10,000 ——593,960 — Proffers 68,000 ——68,000 ————68,000 — NVTA 30%111,050 36,000 37,810 37,240 ————75,050 — State- VDOT 816,990 144,000 151,240 521,750 ————672,990 — Total Sources $1,600,000 $190,000 $380,000 $990,000 $30,000 $10,000 $— $— $1,410,000 $— Planned Uses Uses Total Project Cost Approp. Through 06/30/23 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total for 6 Yr CIP Future Project Cost Project Management 110,000 10,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 10,000 ——100,000 — Design/ Engineering 250,000 120,000 130,000 —————130,000 — Land 180,000 60,000 120,000 —————120,000 — Utility Relocation 100,000 —100,000 —————100,000 — Construction 960,000 ——960,000 ————960,000 — Total Uses $1,600,000 $190,000 $380,000 $990,000 $30,000 $10,000 $— $— $1,410,000 $— Operating Impact Operating/Maintenance 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 N/A —————— Total Impact $—$—$—$—$—$— Capital Improvements Program Streets and Highways FY 2024 Adopted Budget - 210 -Town of Leesburg, VA 74 Item b. Council Meeting Date: June 13, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Subject: Supplemental Appropriation – Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation Project Staff Contact: Renée M. LaFollette, P.E., Director, Public Works & Capital Projects Scott Coffman, Airport Director Karin Franklin, P.E., Senior Engineer, Public Works & Capital Projects Council Action Requested: Approve a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $120,000 in Fiscal Year 2024 to fund preliminary engineering design work for the Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation project. Staff Recommendation: Approve a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $120,000 in Fiscal Year 2024 to fund preliminary engineering design work for the Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation project. Commission Recommendation: The Airport Commission recommends completion of the Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation project as part of the Town’s Capital Improvement Program. Fiscal Impact: The Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation project is an approved project in the Town’s Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program (CIP) with $28,000 funded through Fiscal Year 2024 for completion of an initial study and $1,100,000 funded in Fiscal Year 2025 for detailed engineering. The funding for Fiscal Years 2023 and 2024 is shown below: Activity Task Cost Preliminary Engineering (Pre Eng) $134,407 Independent Fee Estimate (IFE) $4,000 Contingency $9,593 Total $148,000 FY23 & FY24 Budget $28,000 Requested FY24 Supplemental Appropriation $120,000 FAA/DOAV Reimbursement (98% of Pre Eng) $141,120 Total Town Contribution after Grant Reimbursement (2% of Pre Eng plus IFE) $6,880 75 Item c. Supplemental Appropriation – Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation Project June 13, 2023 Page 2 A supplemental appropriation of $120,000 from the Unassigned Fund Balance is requested to complete preliminary engineering in Fiscal Year 2024. Information provided by this study will be utilized to update the Fiscal Year 2025-2030 CIP funding needs for this project. Based on conversations with the FAA it is anticipated that ninety eight percent of eligible amounts will be reimbursed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Virginia Department of Aviation (DOAV). The design grant will be requested in the summer of 2024 and reimbursement can occur after the grant agreement is executed in the fall of 2024. Work Plan Impact: This contract is part of the current work plan for the Department of Public Works and Capital Projects. Town Plan Impact: Strategy 4.3.4 of the Legacy Leesburg Town Plan states “Continue Planning for the Future of the Leesburg Airport” by following the Airport Master Plan. Maintaining the functionality of the Runway will ensure the safe takeoff and landing of aircraft and is critical to the future of the Leesburg Executive Airport. Executive Summary: The Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation project is an approved capital project in the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program (CIP). The Virginia Department of Aviation 2020 Pavement Management Update completed in 2022 identified the pavement condition as “Fair” and recommended immediate initiation of a rehabilitation project. Survey and geotechnical work originally planned as part of the detailed design work for Fiscal Year 2025 is proposed to be moved up to Fiscal Year 2024 to better understand the total scope and cost needed for detailed design and construction. Understanding the needs for the detailed design and construction, allows Town staff to revise the project budget for the Fiscal Year 2025 Capital Improvements Program, and include that information with the Town’s Federal Aviation Capital Improvement request to ensure funding for the project is aligned correctly between the Town and FAA budgets. A supplemental appropriation of $120,000 in Fiscal Year 2024 from Unassigned Fund Balance, in addition to the already budgeted $28,000 from Fiscal Years 2022 and 2023, will be sufficient to ensure completion of the preliminary engineering work. This project is programmed for both the FAA and DOAV grant funding through the Airport Improvement Program. The Town plans to apply for grants from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Virginia Department of Aviation (DOAV) this summer. Once awarded the grant will reimburse ninety eight percent of the cost of the grant eligible work. Background: The runway pavement condition is critical to the safe landing and takeoff for aircraft at the Leesburg Executive Airport. The most recent Pavement Management Update completed by the Virginia Department of Aviation in 2022 identified that the runway pavement is in fair condition and recommended initiation of a pavement rehabilitation project immediately to restore pavement condition. The survey and non-destructive geotechnical work to be included as part of preliminary engineering will help identify the condition of the runway paving and specifically identify the rehabilitation needed so that an updated scope and cost can be updated in the Town of Leesburg Fiscal Year 2025-2030 Capital Improvements Program. The FAA grant will cover ninety percent and the DOAV grant will cover eight percent of the grant eligible funds for the preliminary engineering design work on this project and can be reimbursed once the grant agreements are executed in the fall of 2024. 76 Item c. Supplemental Appropriation – Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation Project June 13, 2023 Page 3 The preliminary engineering for the Runway 17-35 Rehabilitation project will be completed through a Task Order by Talbert and Bright through the Town’s continuing services contract for capital projects at the Leesburg Executive Airport. This task order is less than $200,000 and will not require Town Council approval, therefore this contract will be authorized by the Town Manager once the supplemental appropriation of funds is approved by Town Council. Contract Start/End Date: Preliminary Engineering Design Contract Start: 07/05/23. Preliminary Engineering Design Contract End Date: 06/15/24 Proposed Legislation: RESOLUTION Approve a Supplemental Appropriation in the amount of $120,000 for the Airport Runway Rehabilitation Project Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed resolution to approve a supplemental appropriation of $120,000 to the Airport Runway Rehabilitation project for Fiscal Year 2024. 2. I move to deny the proposed resolution to approve a supplemental appropriation of $120,000 to the Airport Runway Rehabilitation project for Fiscal Year 2024. OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution 2. Fiscal Year 2024-2029 CIP Airport Runway Rehabilitation Project Page 2023/05 77 Item c. PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: ____________ A RESOLUTION : APPROVE A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $120,000 FOR THE AIRPORT RUNWAY REHABILITATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the Airport Runway Rehabilitation project is included in the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program with $28,000 funded through Fiscal Year 2024, and WHEREAS, it was suggested by the Federal Aviation Administration that the Town complete survey and non-destructive geotechnical work on the runway in Fiscal Year 2024 and Talbert & Bright has provided a task order proposal for preliminary engineering in the amount of $134,407 for the Airport Apron Paving project; and WHEREAS, completion of the study and preliminary engineering in Fiscal Year 2024 will result in a better understanding of the design and construction effort needed to rehabilitate the runway and provide updated costs for inclusion in the FY 2025-2030 Capital Improvements Program; and WHEREAS, there was $28,000 budgeted for design in Fiscal Years 2022 and 2023 and an additional $120,000 is needed in Fiscal Year 2024 to complete the preliminary engineering task order, which includes the originally budgeted study activities and will be provided from the Unassigned Fund Balance; and WHEREAS, the cost of the preliminary engineering task order will be included in the June 2024 application for grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration and the Virginia Department of Aviation and will be reimbursed once the grant agreement is executed in the fall of 2024; and 78 Item c. A RESOLUTION: APPROVE A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $120,000 FOR THE AIRPORT RUNWAY REHABILITATION PROJECT -2- 2023/01 WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg has a continuing services contract for professional airport planning, engineering, and architectural services for capital projects at the Leesburg Executive Airport with Talbert & Bright; and WHEREAS, the task order is less than $200,000 and can be authorized by the Town Manager. THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: 1. Approve a supplemental appropriation of $120,000 from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Capital Projects Fund for the Airport Runway Rehabilitation project for Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024. PASSED this 13th day of June 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 79 Item c.         !"# #$% $&'( #)*+  ,-$.- /0%-,$&   + 1  (+  +  (21#1 3 222  + 2 45 (  +     +   167 + 11+    21  1( 2+      * 2 ( 1   1 (   + 1  48 1# ++ 3( 9 1 1 2 + 1   2   #1     3+1(  1   (:#:  :# #1 3#4;1#( +  12  ;1   1(   ;1 < #=    2  ="<2  ( >+ 1(1  # (+1 2 1(#1+ ( +   ((4$,- &./, %? 4.$  00-0'#+'( #5 @8  #A44ABC  #2  ;   2 '( # < #=    2   D# E 1 @5  + 1  2   (; 1( + 112     FGHFIFJKHL0KLMN,-$O% -/ 0%$/,$&;P  QRSTUHVFHGWUXJMNWUXJMN WLKY-MZUFXMV,XW[MJLTUHVFHG \\XW\]^XWUG^_`ab_acb c_cd c_ce c_c` c_cf c_cg c_chWLKYIWX`iX%,TULUXMTUHVN-MZUFXMV' 2C 1 j: 6: 6: Q: 7: 77: 6: : AS:k8  B="< 6:6: k : SS: k l: k k 6:6:k;1 B; 66:QS: k : ll: k 6:jS: k k 66:QS:kWLKYWUXJMN  mncofe_o___ mnco___ mcbo___mnonneo___ mceo___mnnoedeo___ mn_o___ mc_o___mncofbgo___mp,YKHHMV!NMN!NMN WLKY,XW[MJL%WNL \\XW\]^XWUG^_`ab_acb c_cd c_ce c_c` c_cf c_cg c_chWLKYIWX`iX%,TULUXM,XW[MJL%WNL >+ D# 6: Q: k 67: 7: 7: 6: : l7:k=(#R)# #6:6S: 7: : 6:6: k k k k 6:6:kC ( +   66:7: k k k k 66:7: k k 66:7:kWLKY!NMN mncofe_o___ mnco___ mcbo___ mnonneo___ mceo___ mnnoedeo___ mn_o___ mc_o___ mncofbgo___mp$\MXKLFHGq\KJL$\MXKLFHGa/KFHLMHKHJM c_cd c_ce c_c` c_cf c_cg c_ch?R k k k k k kWLKYq\KJL mp mp mp mp mp mp FX\WXL %K\FLKYq\XWrMqMHLN,XWGXKq 5  2'( #:< B6B ;sA1 1t1# 80 Item c. Council Meeting Date: June 13, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Subject: Automated Water Meter Reading System Upgrade and Annual Contract Staff Contact: Amy Wyks, P.E., Director of Utilities Octavia Andrew, Chief Procurement Officer Council Action Requested: Approve a contract for the upgrade of the Town’s automated water meter reading system and annual maintenance to Aclara Technologies in the amount of $314,345.00, authorizing a sole source procurement, and authorizing the Town Manager to execute the contract. Staff Recommendation: Approval of a contract for the upgrade of the Town’s automated water meter reading system and annual maintenance to Aclara Technologies in the amount of $314,345.00, authorizing a sole source procurement, and authorizing the Town Manager to execute the contract. Aclara Technologies LLC was founded in 1972 with headquarters in St. Louis Missouri and operates worldwide. Aclara offers smart meters, communications networks, and operational data management systems for water, gas, and electric utilities. The Town has been a customer of Aclara since deployment of the original automated water meter reading system in 2002. Commission Recommendation: Not applicable. Fiscal Impact: No additional funding is necessary. Sufficient funding is appropriated in the adopted Fiscal Year 2023 budget. The initial implementation and first-year cost for the upgrade of the Automatic Meter Reading software system amounts to $97,987.91. The second year will cost approximately $49,863.12, with an annual increase of up to 5% thereafter for years 3 through 5. The total cost over five years is estimated to be $314,345. This upgrade supports the Town’s annual $25 million in water and sanitary sewer service billing that relies upon water meter reads utilizing the water meter system infrastructure. Work Plan Impact: Utilities staff will coordinate and oversee the project as part of normal business. Town Plan Impact: This project meets the goals and objectives of Strategy 2.4.2 of the Town Plan by proactively ensuring that water meter reading system continues to function efficiently with accurate and timely water meter reads for utility billing through an upgraded system with a cloud- hosted solution. Executive Summary: In 2002, the Town deployed an automated water meter reading system to efficiently and effectively obtain water meter readings for water and sanitary sewer utility billing. The Town’s current version of the automated water meter software solution of Aclara Star NCC is 81 Item d. Automated Water Meter Reading System Upgrade and Annual Contract June 13, 2023 Page 2 being retired by the manufacturer. An upgrade to a cloud-hosted solution is required to ensure the water meter reading system is functional while enhancing cybersecurity measures and improved system reporting features. The Code of Virginia, Section 2.2-4303(E) of the Virginia Public Procurement Act authorizes the Town Council to forego competitive sealed bidding or competitive negotiation if the Council determines, in writing, that only one source is practicably available to complete the services for which procurement is needed. If the Town Council determines that the upgrade of the automated water meter reading system and annual maintenance contract is a sole source, the Town Manager can procure and issue a purchase order to Aclara Technologies LLC. In this situation, the entire automated water meter reading system consists of proprietary parts from Aclara Technologies LLC that are not available from other companies who provide similar service. Aclara Technologies LLC. has provided a proposal to upgrade the current water meter reading system to AclaraOne. Town Council approval is required as the amount of the proposal exceeds $200,000 over a five-year period. See Attachment #2. Background: The Automatic Water Meter Reading System, was initially implemented as the Hexagram Star AMI system in 2002 and upgraded to Aclara Star NCC in 2008. The Star NCC system is at the end of life and the MTU units that transmit meter reads are no longer being manufactured. In order to continue utilizing the system which allows for electronic reads, the Town needs to upgrade to the AclaraOne cloud-based platform. The upgrade will protect the Town’s existing investment and allow continuity of service with accurate and timely water meter readings through a cloud-hosted solution. The proposed upgrade will enhance functionality, improve efficiency, and provide several cybersecurity enhancements. Aclara Technologies is the existing vendor, and this platform upgrade allows us to continue using the infrastructure we have in place for the over 16,500 water meters in the Town’s utility system. Aclara Technologies LLC.’s attached proposal is to upgrade the current water meter reading system to AclaraOne. See Attachment #2. The attached proposal is greater than $200,000 requiring Town Council approval since the amount exceeds the signature authority of the Town Manager. The award of this purchase order is subject to the Virginia Public Procurement Act. In order for the Town to award this purchase order to Aclara Technologies LLC., the Town Council must determine, in writing, that Aclara Technologies LLC. is a “sole source” under Code of Virginia, § 2.2-4303(E). A sole source determination may occur “if there is only one source practicably available for that which is to be procured”. The test for sole source is whether a particular product or service is “practicably” available, not whether it can be found anywhere. The current equipment manufacturer for the Town’s automated water meter reading system is Aclara Technologies LLC. Aclara Technologies LLC. proposal includes implementation costs for the upgrade to the AclaraOne cloud-based platform and annual contract maintenance services. As a result, Aclara Technologies LLC. is uniquely qualified to complete the upgrade of the Town’s automated water meter readings system. Contract Start/End Date: Contract Start: 07/01/2023 Contract End Date: 06/30/2024 82 Item d. Automated Water Meter Reading System Upgrade and Annual Contract June 13, 2023 Page 3 Proposed Legislation: RESOLUTION Approving a Contract for the Upgrade of the Town’s Automated Water Meter Reading System and Annual Maintenance to Aclara Technologies in the amount of $314,345, Authorizing a Sole Source Procurement and Authorizing the Town Manager to Execute the Contract Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed Resolution to approve a contract for the upgrade of the Town’s automated water meter reading system and annual maintenance to Aclara Technologies in the amount of $314,345, authorizing a sole source procurement and authorizing the Town Manager to execute the contract. 2. I move to deny the proposed Resolution to approve a contract for the upgrade of the Town’s automated water meter reading system and annual maintenance to Aclara Technologies in the amount of $314,345, authorizing a sole source procurement and authorizing the Town Manager to execute the contract. OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution 2. AclaraOne Quote 2023/05 83 Item d. PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: ____________ A RESOLUTION : APPROVING A CONTRACT FOR THE UPGRADE OF THE TOWN’S AUTOMATED WATER METER READING SYSTEM AND ANNUAL MAINTENANCE TO ACLARA TECHNOLOGIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $314,345, AUTHORIZING A SOLE SOURCE PROCUREMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg (“the Town”) owns and operates an automated water meter reading system for utility billing of water and sanitary sewer account; and WHEREAS, the existing system, implemented as the Hexagram AMI system in 2003 and upgraded to Star NCC in 2008, requires an upgrade from the outdated onsite server to a cloud-hosted solution; and WHEREAS, the upgrade will provide cybersecurity and operational improvements including reporting functionality; and WHEREAS, the estimated proposal for the upgrade project and five year annual software maintenance for the automated meter reading system is $314,345.00; and WHEREAS, Aclara Technologies LLC. Has been identified as a sole source vendor for the automated water meter reading equipment and software system; and WHEREAS, the contract is subject to the Virginia Public Procurement Act (“VPPA”); and WHEREAS, Code of Virginia, § 2.2-4303(E) of the VPPA allows for sole source procurement if there is only one source “practicably available”; and WHEREAS, adequate funds have been appropriated in FY2023 budget for implementation of the upgrade and year 1 services. Additional years of annual maintenance and contract are subject to future Council appropriation; and 84 Item d. A RESOLUTION: APPROVING A CONTRACT FOR THE UPGRADE OF THE TOWN’S AUTOMATED WATER METER READING SYSTEM AND ANNUAL MAINTENANCE TO ACLARA TECHNOLOGIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $314,345, AUTHORIZING A SOLE SOURCE PROCUREMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT -2- 2023/01 WHEREAS, the Director of Utilities, Chief Procurement Officer and Director of Information Technology recommends approval of the upgrade project and contract. THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: 1. The Town Manager is authorized to issue a contract to Aclara Technologies in a form approved by the Town Attorney in the amount of $314,345.00 for the upgrade of the Town’s automated water meter reading system and annual maintenance services. 2. The Town Council determines that only one source is practicably available for the procurement to upgrade of the Town’s automated water meter reading system and annual maintenance services and directs that this Resolution be posted on the public notice board in the Town offices for a period of ten (10) days. 3. The Town Manager is hereby authorized to procure the sole source purchase order for the upgrade of the Town’s automated water meter reading system and annual maintenance services to Aclara Technologies LLC. PASSED this 13th day of June 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 85 Item d. Aclara 77 West Port Plaza, Suite 500 St. Louis, MO 63146 US Phone: (800) 297-2728 Quotation Quote #:Q-19538-1 Created Date:7/7/2021 11:53 AM Expiration Date:4/30/2023 Bill To End Customer Lesley McClaughry Leesburg, Town of (VA) 25 W. Market St. Leesburg, VA 20176 US (703) 737-7075 (703) 737-7185 lmcclaughry@leesburgva.gov Leesburg, Town of (VA) Prepared By Phone EMAIL PAYMENT METHOD Eddie Brewer (859) 544-0308 ebrewer@hubbell.com Net 30 Implementation Fees (One-Time) Product Description Part No.Qty Net Unit Price Extended Price AclaraONE -Unified HE -SaaS Implementation SW-3010H 1.00 USD 33,000.00 USD 33,000.00 Year 1 Product Description Part No.Qty Price per Endpoint Extended Price AclaraONE -Unified HE -SaaS ASP SW-3010A 16,500 USD 2.21 USD 36,485.00 Sub-Total USD 69,485.00 Total USD 69,485.00 Notes Page 1 of 2 86 Item d. TERMS & CONDITIONS General Note:This Proposal/Quotation is based upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Aclara Standard Terms and Conditions of Sales forEquipment and certain services that are available on Aclara’s website at: http://www.aclara.com/terms-and-conditions/ 1.ADDITIONAL TERMS:Each Line Item will be shipped within the number of weeks staged after receipt of an acceptable order.  2.This quotation is based upon receipt and acceptance of an order by the earlier of the Expiration Date in the upper right or 60-days afterthe Proposal Date contained herein.  3.Seller shall deliver Equipment to Buyer FCA Seller’s Facility or warehouse (Incoterms 2010.) Seller will arrange freight on Buyer’sbehalf.  4.Buyer shall pay Seller’s standard Material Handling charges.  5.Sales tax will be charged unless the customer provides/has provided a valid Sales Tax Exemption or Reseller certificate.  6.Total Extended price shown excludes any applicable Sales Tax.  7.Software subject to 5% annual escalation starting year 2 8.AclaraONE configuration based on total system size as shown above. Final AclaraONE configuration will be determined by workingin conjunction with IT staff at the beginning of each contract year and pricing adjusted accordingly for that year. If optional software isselected, a Software License Agreement amendment will be required. 9.IF BUYER ACCEPTS THIS QUOTE AND WILL ISSUE ACLARA A SEPARATE PURCHASE ORDER BASED THEREON, DO NOT RETURN A SIGNED COPY OF THIS QUOTE.RETURNING BOTH A SIGNED QUOTE AND SEPARATE PURCHASE ORDER WILL RESULT IN THE BUYER BEING BILLED FORTWO ORDERS.  To place an order, please send a signed copy of your Purchase Order referencing this quotation to AclaraOrders@hubbell.com or simply reply to your sales rep via email with the fully executed PO attached. If there is no Purchase Order, enter N/A in PO Number, your signature, and your Ship To Street Address (P.O. Box not allowed) to acknowledge that this quote form will be used in lieu of PO. Signature: /Signature/ Effective Date: /Date/ ______/______/______ Name (Print): /Name/ Title: /Title/ PO Number *: /PO/ * Ship To: Street: City, State Zip: * If there is no purchase order, Ship To address must be entered. Aclara Confidential / Proprietary Information Seller’s above quote is expressly made conditional on the Buyer’s assent to all of the terms and conditions located at http://www.aclara.com/terms-and-conditions . By issuing a Purchase Order or Order to Seller based on this Quote, Buyer hereby represents and affirms that it has reviewed and assents to these terms and conditions. ADDITIONAL TERMS CONTAINED ON ANY PURCHASE ORDER ARE HEREBY REJECTED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AGREED TO IN WRITING BY ACLARA (SELLER) and BUYER. Page 2 of 2 87 Item d. Aclara 77 West Port Plaza, Suite 500 St. Louis, MO 63146 US Phone: (800) 297-2728 Quotation Quote #:Q-28140-1 Created Date:4/25/2023 12:18 PM Expiration Date:7/31/2023 Bill To End Customer Stephen Gates Leesburg, Town of (VA) 25 W. Market St. Leesburg, VA 20176 US 571-410-9889 (703) 737-7185 sgates@leesburgva.gov Leesburg, Town of (VA) Prepared By Phone EMAIL PAYMENT METHOD Eddie Brewer (859) 544-0308 ebrewer@hubbell.com Net 30 MTU Programmers Product Description Part No.Qty Net Unit Price Extended Price Wireless Field Programming Coil 109-6900 2 USD 808.50 USD 1,617.00 Implementation Fees (One-Time) Product Description Part No.Qty Net Unit Price Extended Price Mobile Programmer Setup/Integrations SW-1050H 1.00 USD 5,725.00 USD 5,725.00 Year 1 Product Description Part No.Qty Price per Endpoint Extended Price Mobile Programmer Annual Fee SW-1050A 15,437 USD 0.12 USD 1,852.44 Sub-Total USD 9,194.44 Total USD 9,194.44 Notes Page 1 of 2 88 Item d. TERMS & CONDITIONS General Note:This Proposal/Quotation is based upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Aclara Standard Terms and Conditions of Sales forEquipment and certain services that are available on Aclara’s website at: http://www.aclara.com/terms-and-conditions/ 1.ADDITIONAL TERMS:Each Line Item will be shipped within the number of weeks staged after receipt of an acceptable order.  2.This quotation is based upon receipt and acceptance of an order by the earlier of the Expiration Date in the upper right or 60-days afterthe Proposal Date contained herein.  3.Seller shall deliver Equipment to Buyer FCA Seller’s Facility or warehouse (Incoterms 2010.) Seller will arrange freight on Buyer’sbehalf.  4.Buyer shall pay Seller’s standard Material Handling charges.  5.Sales tax will be charged unless the customer provides/has provided a valid Sales Tax Exemption or Reseller certificate.  6.Total Extended price shown excludes any applicable Sales Tax.  7.Software subject to 5% annual escalation starting year 2 8.AclaraONE configuration based on total system size as shown above. Final AclaraONE configuration will be determined by workingin conjunction with IT staff at the beginning of each contract year and pricing adjusted accordingly for that year. If optional software isselected, a Software License Agreement amendment will be required. 9.IF BUYER ACCEPTS THIS QUOTE AND WILL ISSUE ACLARA A SEPARATE PURCHASE ORDER BASED THEREON, DO NOT RETURN A SIGNED COPY OF THIS QUOTE.RETURNING BOTH A SIGNED QUOTE AND SEPARATE PURCHASE ORDER WILL RESULT IN THE BUYER BEING BILLED FORTWO ORDERS.  To place an order, please send a signed copy of your Purchase Order referencing this quotation to AclaraOrders@hubbell.com or simply reply to your sales rep via email with the fully executed PO attached. If there is no Purchase Order, enter N/A in PO Number, your signature, and your Ship To Street Address (P.O. Box not allowed) to acknowledge that this quote form will be used in lieu of PO. Signature: /Signature/ Effective Date: /Date/ ______/______/______ Name (Print): /Name/ Title: /Title/ PO Number *: /PO/ * Ship To: Street: City, State Zip: * If there is no purchase order, Ship To address must be entered. Aclara Confidential / Proprietary Information Seller’s above quote is expressly made conditional on the Buyer’s assent to all of the terms and conditions located at http://www.aclara.com/terms-and-conditions . By issuing a Purchase Order or Order to Seller based on this Quote, Buyer hereby represents and affirms that it has reviewed and assents to these terms and conditions. ADDITIONAL TERMS CONTAINED ON ANY PURCHASE ORDER ARE HEREBY REJECTED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AGREED TO IN WRITING BY ACLARA (SELLER) and BUYER. Page 2 of 2 89 Item d. Aclara 77 West Port Plaza, Suite 500 St. Louis, MO 63146 US Phone: (800) 297-2728 Quotation Quote #:Q-28429-1 Created Date:5/18/2023 9:34 AM Expiration Date:7/31/2023 Bill To End Customer Lesley McClaughry Leesburg, Town of (VA) 25 W. Market St. Leesburg, VA 20176 US (703) 737-7075 (703) 737-7185 lmcclaughry@leesburgva.gov Leesburg, Town of (VA) Prepared By Phone EMAIL PAYMENT METHOD Eddie Brewer (859) 544-0308 ebrewer@hubbell.com Net 30 AclaraONE Setup/Integrations Product Description Part No.Qty Net Unit Price Extended Price Software Custom - Water Implementation SW-0030H 1 USD 8,600.00 USD 8,600.00 Sub-Total USD 8,600.00 Total USD 8,600.00 Notes Quote for a 10 day UAT period in relation to the AclaraONE project Page 1 of 2 90 Item d. TERMS & CONDITIONS General Note: This Proposal/Quotation is based upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Aclara Standard Terms and Conditions of Sales for Equipment and certain services that are available on Aclara’s website at: http://www.aclara.com/terms-and-conditions/ 1.ADDITIONAL TERMS: Each Line Item will be shipped within the number of weeks staged after receipt of an acceptable order. 2.This quotation is based upon receipt and acceptance of an order by the earlier of the Expiration Date in the upper right or 60-days after the Proposal Date contained herein. 3.Seller shall deliver Equipment to Buyer FCA Seller’s Facility or warehouse (Incoterms 2010.) Seller will arrange freight on Buyer’s behalf. 4.Buyer shall pay Seller’s standard Material Handling charges. 5.Sales tax will be charged unless the customer provides/has provided a valid Sales Tax Exemption or Reseller certificate. 6.Total Extended price shown excludes any applicable Sales Tax. 7.IF BUYER ACCEPTS THIS QUOTE AND WILL ISSUE ACLARA A SEPARATE PURCHASE ORDER BASED THEREON, DO NOT RETURN A SIGNED COPY OF THIS QUOTE . RETURNING BOTH A SIGNED QUOTE AND SEPARATE PURCHASE ORDER WILL RESULT IN THE BUYER BEING BILLED FOR TWO ORDERS. To place an order, please send a signed copy of your Purchase Order referencing this quotation to AclaraOrders@hubbell.com or simply reply to your sales rep via email with the fully executed PO attached. If there is no Purchase Order, enter N/A in PO Number, your signature, and your Ship To Street Address (P.O. Box not allowed) to acknowledge that this quote form will be used in lieu of PO. Signature: /Signature/ Effective Date: /Date/ ______/______/______ Name (Print): /Name/ Title: /Title/ PO Number *: /PO/ * Ship To: Street: City, State Zip: * If there is no purchase order, Ship To address must be entered. Aclara Confidential / Proprietary Information Seller’s above quote is expressly made conditional on the Buyer’s assent to all of the terms and conditions located at http://www.aclara.com/terms-and-conditions . By issuing a Purchase Order or Order to Seller based on this Quote, Buyer hereby represents and affirms that it has reviewed and assents to these terms and conditions. ADDITIONAL TERMS CONTAINED ON ANY PURCHASE ORDER ARE HEREBY REJECTED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AGREED TO IN WRITING BY ACLARA (SELLER) and BUYER. Page 2 of 2 91 Item d. Aclara 77 West Port Plaza, Suite 500 St. Louis, MO 63146 US Phone: (800) 297-2728 Quotation Quote #:Q-28139-1 Created Date:4/25/2023 11:54 AM Expiration Date:7/31/2023 Bill To End Customer Stephen Gates Leesburg, Town of (VA) 25 W. Market St. Leesburg, VA 20176 571-410-9889 (703) 737-7185 sgates@leesburgva.gov Leesburg, Town of (VA) Prepared By Phone EMAIL PAYMENT METHOD Eddie Brewer (859) 544-0308 ebrewer@hubbell.com Net 30 Other Product Description Part No.Qty Net Unit Price Extended Price DCU Power and Charging - Spare Parts_120/240 Volt, 50/60 Hz, 12/24 Volt Transformer Assembly 109-9975-120 1 USD 91.10 USD 91.10 DCU Power and Charging - Spare Parts_Line Protection/ Surge protector (120 VAC) 059-9975A 1 USD 375.38 USD 375.38 #8-32 KEPS NUT,EXT L/W,SS 069-2836 7 USD 0.20 USD 1.40 DCU Mounting Components - Ground Wire 070-9975P 2 USD 2.50 USD 5.00 DCU Mounting Components - 1/4-20 Hexnut 7/16 Flat, SS 069-3215LS 2 USD 0.07 USD 0.14 DCU Mounting Components - 1/4-SPL Ring L-Wash SS 069-3202A 2 USD 0.07 USD 0.14 DCU Mounting Components - 1/4 F/W SS 069-3201A 2 USD 0.03 USD 0.06 NS Labor - STAR NS-LBR-W-RF 1 USD 1,065.00 USD 1,065.00 FS Overhead NS-PH 1 USD 240.00 USD 240.00 Sub-Total USD 1,778.22 Total USD 1,778.22 Notes Revised quote to add in additional travel fees - the previous quote is void as it was sharing travel cost with another customer. That original plan was cancelled by customer as they didn't have enough time to do the prep work needed for AC Power. Page 1 of 2 92 Item d. 77 Westport Plaza Suite 500 St. Louis, MO 63146 www.Aclara.com December 9, 2022 Lesley McClaughry lmcclaughry@leesburgva.gov Town of Leesburg 25 West Market Street Leesburg, VA 20176 Subject: Leesburg VA January 2023 Renewal of Aclara Premier Maintenance Agreement Your Aclara Agreement for ongoing services will renew on January 1, 2023 for an additional twelve months through December 31, 2023 (“Renewal Period”). Per the agreement, the adjusted Annual Fee is as follows: Star Maintenance Annual 5% included $7,555 DCU Maintenance Annual 5% included $8,505 Total Due $16,060 This is not an invoice! If a PO or PO number is required on your invoice, please email it to AclaraOrdersContracts@hubbell.com within the next 10 days. If no PO or PO number is received, you will be invoiced for the new maintenance amount. All PO’s must be addressed to: Aclara Technologies, LLC. 77 West Port Plaza Suite 500 St Louis, MO 63146 For your consideration, these services are offered: Star System Monitoring $6,000 (Sign) _______________________Date__________ If you wish to sign up for this Supplemental Service please check the appropriate box, sign, date and return to me within the next 10 days. Except as noted above, the Aclara Maintenance Agreement and all of the terms, conditions and provisions thereof shall remain in full force and effect. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Dee Buettmann Kind regards, Terry Baker Terry Baker Client Relationship Specialist Dee Buettmann Client Relationship Specialist Phone: 314-895-7210 Email: dbuettmann@hubbell.com 93 Item d. TERMS & CONDITIONS General Note: This Proposal/Quotation is based upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Aclara Standard Terms and Conditions of Sales for Equipment and certain services that are available on Aclara’s website at: http://www.aclara.com/terms-and-conditions/ 1.ADDITIONAL TERMS: Each Line Item will be shipped within the number of weeks staged after receipt of an acceptable order. 2.This quotation is based upon receipt and acceptance of an order by the earlier of the Expiration Date in the upper right or 60-days after the Proposal Date contained herein. 3.Seller shall deliver Equipment to Buyer FCA Seller’s Facility or warehouse (Incoterms 2010.) Seller will arrange freight on Buyer’s behalf. 4.Buyer shall pay Seller’s standard Material Handling charges. 5.Sales tax will be charged unless the customer provides/has provided a valid Sales Tax Exemption or Reseller certificate. 6.Total Extended price shown excludes any applicable Sales Tax. 7.IF BUYER ACCEPTS THIS QUOTE AND WILL ISSUE ACLARA A SEPARATE PURCHASE ORDER BASED THEREON, DO NOT RETURN A SIGNED COPY OF THIS QUOTE . RETURNING BOTH A SIGNED QUOTE AND SEPARATE PURCHASE ORDER WILL RESULT IN THE BUYER BEING BILLED FOR TWO ORDERS. To place an order, please send a signed copy of your Purchase Order referencing this quotation to AclaraOrders@hubbell.com or simply reply to your sales rep via email with the fully executed PO attached. If there is no Purchase Order, enter N/A in PO Number, your signature, and your Ship To Street Address (P.O. Box not allowed) to acknowledge that this quote form will be used in lieu of PO. Signature: /Signature/ Effective Date: /Date/ ______/______/______ Name (Print): /Name/ Title: /Title/ PO Number *: /PO/ * Ship To: Street: City, State Zip: * If there is no purchase order, Ship To address must be entered. Aclara Confidential / Proprietary Information Seller’s above quote is expressly made conditional on the Buyer’s assent to all of the terms and conditions located at http://www.aclara.com/terms-and-conditions . By issuing a Purchase Order or Order to Seller based on this Quote, Buyer hereby represents and affirms that it has reviewed and assents to these terms and conditions. ADDITIONAL TERMS CONTAINED ON ANY PURCHASE ORDER ARE HEREBY REJECTED UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AGREED TO IN WRITING BY ACLARA (SELLER) and BUYER. Page 2 of 2 94 Item d. Council Meeting Date: June 13, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Subject: Extending Cable Franchise with Verizon Virginia LLC for a Period of Six Months Staff Contact: Christine M. Newton, Deputy Town Attorney Council Action Requested: Authorize an extension of the cable franchise between Verizon Virginia LLC and the Town for six months to allow time for the parties to continue necessary negotiations to renew the Franchise. Staff Recommendation: Approval to extend the franchise for a period of six months. The parties are actively negotiating the terms of renewal, and additional time is required to complete negotiations. Extension of the current franchise terms during the negotiation period is in the Town’s best interest. Commission Recommendation: Not applicable. Fiscal Impact: None. Work Plan Impact: The extension of the cable franchise will have no impact. Town Plan Impact: None. Executive Summary: Verizon Virginia LLC, formerly Verizon Virginia, Inc. (“Verizon”), currently holds a cable television franchise authorizing it to operate a cable television system in the Town. The original term of the franchise ran from June 28, 2006 to June 27, 2021. The renewal process must comply with federal law, and the Town Council has previously initiated the renewal process and extended the term of the franchise to June 27, 2023. An additional extension is necessary to allow time for the parties to complete negotiations. The proposed extension would not disadvantage the Town, and would keep current franchise terms and conditions applicable during the period of continuing negotiations. Background: Pursuant to Virginia Code § 15.2-2108.20 and Leesburg Town Code § 9-5(a), the Town Council is the franchising authority for the Town. 47 U.S.C. § 546 requires a franchising authority to commence a renewal proceeding upon receipt of a renewal notice, which Verizon provided on December 3, 2018. In accordance with these requirements, Council commenced a proceeding for the purpose of identifying future cable-related community needs and interests and reviewing the performance of Verizon under the franchise by Council Resolution 2019-049, adopted on March 26, 2019. With the assistance of outside telecommunications counsel, the Town Attorney’s Office is actively negotiating the terms for renewal of the franchise with Verizon, and additional time is necessary to complete those negotiations. 95 Item e. Extending Cable Franchise with Verizon Virginia LLC for a Period of Six Months June 13, 2023 Page 2 Contract Start/End Date: Original Franchise term June 28, 2006 to June 27, 2021; previous extension through June 27, 2023. Extension through December 27, 2023. Proposed Legislation: RESOLUTION Extending Cable Franchise with Verizon Virginia LLC through December 27, 2023 Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed Resolution. 2. I move to deny the proposed Resolution. OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Extension letter from Verizon Virginia LLC dated 5/31/23 2023/06 96 Item e. Clerk of Council Clerk of Council PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: ____________ A RESOLUTION : EXTENDING CABLE FRANCHISE WITH VERIZON VIRGINIA LLC THROUGH DECEMBER 27, 2023 WHEREAS, on June 27, 2006, the Leesburg Town Council, entered into a Cable Franchise Agreement with Verizon Virginia, Inc. (the “Franchise”); and WHEREAS, the Franchise is currently held by Verizon Virginia LLC; and WHEREAS, the original term of the Franchise ran until June 27, 2021; and WHEREAS, the term of the Franchise has previously been extended until June 27, 2022; and WHEREAS, the Town and Verizon have initiated a franchise renewal process in accordance with applicable law and are actively negotiating the terms of the renewal agreement; and WHEREAS, additional time is necessary to complete renewal negotiations; and WHEREAS, extending the term of the Franchise during the negotiation period is in the best interest of the Town. THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia that the term of the Franchise is hereby extended through December 27, 2023. PASSED this 13th day of June 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ 97 Item e. 395 Flatbush Avenue Ext Brooklyn, New York 11201 By Electronic Mail May 31, 2023 Mr. John O. Callahan Deputy Director of Information Technology Town of Leesburg 25 West Market Street Leesburg, Virginia 20178 Re: Resolution Extending the Term of the Verizon Virginia LLC Cable Franchise Agreement Dear Mr. Callahan: By this letter, Verizon Virginia LLC (“Verizon”) confirms its consent for a third extension of the term of the Cable Franchise Agreement (the “Cable Franchise”) by and between Verizon and the Town of Leesburg. This will be proposed by an ordinance to be proposed for Town Board approval on June 13, 2023 to extend further the current agreement through December 27, 2023, in order to provide additional time for negotiation of a renewal agreement. Except as expressly set forth in this letter, the parties to the Cable Franchise have agreed that the existing Cable Franchise, and all terms and conditions thereof, shall remain in full force and effect until the earlier of the expiration of the extended term or the execution of a cable franchise renewal agreement between Verizon and the Board. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Kwame K. Trotman Vice President Mid-Atlantic South cc: Matt Ames, Esq. Adrian Copiz Louise Anderson Paul Trane 98 Item e. Council Meeting Date: June 13, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Subject: Appointment to the Parks and Recreation Commission – Russ Shaw Staff Contact: Eileen M. Boeing, CMC, Clerk of Council Council Action Requested: Consideration of an appointment of Russ Shaw to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Staff Recommendation: Not applicable. Commission Recommendation: Not applicable. Fiscal Impact: Section 2-197 of the Town Code provides for annual compensation of $1,350 for the Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission and $1,200 for Parks and Recreation Commission members. Funds are available within the current Fiscal Year 2023 general fund budget. Work Plan Impact: None. Town Plan Impact: None. Executive Summary: One vacancy currently exists on the Parks & Recreation Commission with the resignation of James Corkrey. This appointment belongs to Council Member Patrick Wilt. Background: The terms of office for Commissioners correspond to the term of the council member who appointed them. The appointment of Russ Shaw is effective through December 2026. Membership on the Parks & Recreation Commission shall consist of seven members who shall be residents of the town or town business owners, but at least four members shall be residents of the town. Mr. Shaw is a town resident. Contract Start/End Date: Not applicable. Proposed Legislation: RESOLUTION Appointing Russ Shaw to the Parks and Recreation Commission Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed Resolution. 2. I move to deny the proposed Resolution. 99 Item f. Appointing Russ Shaw to the Parks and Recreation Commission June 13, 2023 Page 2 OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution 2. Statement of Interest – R. Shaw 2023/06 100 Item f. 2023/01 PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 2022- ADOPTED: ____________ A RESOLUTION : APPOINTING RUSS SHAW TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION WHEREAS, participation by public-spirited citizens on town boards, commissions and committees is vital to the success of town government and the democratic process; and WHEREAS, boards, commissions and committees serve an indispensable role in providing recommendations concerning town policy and programs; and WHEREAS, Council desires to appoint effective individuals to serve at its will and pleasure on these advisory boards; and WHEREAS, terms of Boards and Commissions members correspond to the term of the Council Member that nominated them, and WHEREAS, membership on the Parks and Recreation Commission shall consist of town residents or town business owners, but at least four must be residents of the town. Mr. Shaw is a town resident. THEREFORE, RESOLVED, that the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia hereby appoints Russ Shaw to the Parks and Recreation Commission to a term ending on December 31, 2026. PASSED this 13th day of June 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 101 Item f. Board or Commission of Interest First Name Last Name Board or Commission of Interest Description Parks and Recreation Russ Shaw I have been a Leesburg resident since 2001. I am very interested in supporting the town's efforts to maintain the greatest parks and recreational opportunities in the area. I am an active user of the town's parks and trail system. My contributions to the town's P&R efforts go back to 2006, when I served as a member of the Ad Hoc SE/SW Trail committee, which served to address the lack of trails in those quadrants of town. I also served on the PR Commission from 2008 to 2016. 102 Item f. Council Meeting Date: June 12, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION Subject: Congregate Housing Staff Contact: Shelby Miller, Planner, Planning & Zoning Michael Watkins, Zoning Administrator, Planning & Zoning James David, Director, Planning & Zoning Council Action Requested: Initiate a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to create a new use called “Congregate Housing” and allow the use in certain zoning districts by special exception. Staff Recommendation: Initiate a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to create a new use called “Congregate Housing” and allow the use in certain zoning districts by special exception. Staff’s preliminary research identified “Congregate Housing” as an appropriate land use term that includes a domestic violence shelter. A Congregate Housing use would need to be evaluated and potentially added to the Town’s Zoning Ordinance. To guide development of the proposed amendments, Council should provide any early direction on appropriate zoning districts, unit types, use standards, and process for a Congregate Housing use. Given the increasing need for these services in Leesburg, this initiation would consider where Congregate Housing is appropriate, what types of dwelling units are appropriate, and what use-specific standards are necessary to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. Commission Recommendation: Not applicable. Fiscal Impact: None. Work Plan Impact: Zoning text amendments are incorporated into the work plan of the Department of Planning and Zoning. The Department is currently processing eleven Zoning Ordinance text amendments, including the overall Zoning Ordinance Rewrite. Town Plan Impact: Legacy Leesburg Town Plan Strategy 1.1.6 calls for supporting regulatory documents to be regularly updated to reflect best practices, trends, and technologies. Strategy 3.2.2 promotes a diverse range of new housing options (based on income, age, household types and sizes, etc.). Strategy 3.3.5 focuses on new housing to address unmet needs in strategic locations. Executive Summary: The Council received interest from LAWS’ Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault Services to add a use category suitable for an emergency domestic violence shelter within the Town. See Attachment #2. This use is not specifically listed in the Zoning Ordinance, nor is a similar use listed, so it is currently prohibited in all zoning districts. 103 Item g. Congregate Housing June 12, 2023 Page 2 At their February 13, 2023 Work Session, Council requested a future work session discussion on this topic. The general goal for this text amendment would be to provide the option of Congregate Housing which could be complemented by special care, treatment, training, or similar purposes. Background: Congregate housing is generally defined as a facility providing a residence and daily supportive services for more than eight non-related persons which have common living spaces, kitchen, and separate sleeping quarters. Congregate housing is not specifically listed in the Zoning Ordinance as a permitted by-right use. The use is not considered multifamily because housing is provided for limited durations and is generally accompanied by support services. Support services can be in the form of resident advisors or dedicated programs with staff internal to the facility. In the Town Zoning Ordinance, group housing is typically limited to “Group Home.” Regulated by the Code of Virginia, a group home is defined as a residential facility limited to no more than eight persons which are mentally ill, intellectually disabled, or developmentally disabled persons. Group homes have one or more resident or nonresident staff persons and cannot be regulated more strictly than a single-family dwelling. Currently, State code requires localities to allow Group Homes in residential areas provided there is no substance abuse treatment. Another similar group-living arrangement is “Assisted Living.” This use is also limited and only serves the elderly. Staff conducted a limited survey of other Virginia jurisdictions and below is some information regarding inclusion of congregate housing. Loudoun County defines Congregate Housing Facility where:  The use is permitted dwellings other than a single-family dwelling,  Occupancy is more than four (4) unrelated persons residing under supervision,  Other support services such as special care, treatment, training or similar purposes may be included. Loudoun County permits the use in multiple zoning districts and requires approval by a special exception. The City of Roanoke treats the use similarly to Loudoun County and requires approval by a special exception. However, Roanoke permits this use by-right in its Planned Unit Developments. In Town of Blacksburg the use is called Home for Adults. In Blacksburg the use:  Is a single dwelling unit, organized within one (1) or more buildings,  Occupancy includes more than five (5) persons for purposes of providing special training, education, habilitation, rehabilitation, custodial care, or supervision., or providing a residence for elderly; provided that a licensed residential facility for eight (8) or fewer mentally ill, intellectually or developmentally disable persons, with one (1) or more resident counselors or other support staff, shall be considered a single- 104 Item g. Congregate Housing June 12, 2023 Page 3 Congregate family residence. This is a permitted use under most of their districts if there is no outside contention in which it will then be a conditional use. Contract Start/End Date: Not applicable. Proposed Legislation: RESOLUTION Initiating Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to Define the Use, Create Use Standards, and Specify Zoning Districts for Congregate Housing Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed Resolution to initiate amendments to the Zoning Ordinance related to allowing Congregate Housing facilities. 2. I move to deny the proposed Resolution to initiate amendments to the Zoning Ordinance related to allowing of Congregate Housing facilities 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Proposed Resolution Initiating Congregate Housing Zoning Ordinance Amendments 2. Letter from Debra Gilmore, CEO of LAWS’ Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault Services 2023/059999999999999999 105 Item g. PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: ____________ A RESOLUTION : INITIATING AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO DEFINE THE USE, CREATE USE STANDARDS, AND SPECIFY ZONING DISTRICTS FOR CONGREGATE HOUSING WHEREAS, the Town Plan promotes a diverse range of housing options to address unmet needs in strategic locations; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance does not list “congregate housing” as a use in the Town; and WHEREAS, the Town Council discussed this issue at its regular meeting on June 12, 2023, and recommended initiation of this text amendment; and WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice require the proposed amendments. THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: 1. Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are hereby initiated, and recommended to the Planning Commission to amend the Zoning Ordinance as necessary to define and create use standards for congregate housing, and to specify appropriate zoning districts, unit types, location and process for the use. 2. At a minimum, this Zoning Ordinance Amendment shall: a. Define the term Congregate Housing, and b. Identify appropriate zoning districts, and c. Create appropriate use standards to ensure compatibility of surrounding uses, and 106 Item g. A RESOLUTION: INITIATING AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO DEFINE THE USE, CREATE USE STANDARDS, AND SPECIFY ZONING DISTRICTS FOR CONGREGATE HOUSING -2- 2023/01 d. Consider the permissibility of the use as a special exception use. 3. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to consider amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, and to report its recommendation to the Town Council pursuant the Section 15.2-2204 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. PASSED this 13th day of June 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 107 Item g. 108 Item g. Council Meeting Date: June 12, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION Subject: Air Traffic Control Update and Control Tower Project Addition to the Capital Improvements Program Staff Contacts: Scott Coffman, Airport Director Keith Markel, Deputy Town Manager Renée M. LaFollette, P.E., Director, Public Works & Capital Projects Karin Franklin, P.E., Senior Engineer, Public Works & Capital Projects Betsy Arnett, Senior Management Analyst Council Action Requested: Adopt a resolution to amend the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program by adding the Airport Control Tower project and appropriating $270,000 from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Fiscal Year 2024 Airport Control Tower project budget. Staff Recommendation: Adopt a resolution to amend the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program by adding the Airport Control Tower project and appropriating $270,000 from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Fiscal Year 2024 Airport Control Tower project budget. Commission Recommendation: The Airport Commission’s priority list includes the provision of air traffic control through the Federal Contract Tower Program and recommends construction of the Airport Control Tower project as part of the Town’s Capital Improvements Program. Fiscal Impact: A supplemental appropriation of $270,000 for Fiscal Year 2024 from the Unassigned Fund Balance is needed to complete the first phase, a siting study for the project. The project is divided into four phases, including siting, environmental study, engineering design, and construction. The first two preliminary phases of siting and environmental study are expected to take up to three years to complete and cost up to $570,000. The outcome of the preliminary siting study will determine the tower location and thus a much more accurate estimate of the total project cost. The total project cost is currently estimated at $16 million based on other towers recently completed in the region. The preliminary phases are grant-eligible, however the Town will need to pay for this work up front and be reimbursed under future grants from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Virginia Department of Aviation (DOAV). FAA and DOAV grants cover 98% of project costs and require a 2% match from the Town. The 2% local match of the preliminary siting work is $5,000. Work Plan Impact: This project will be added to the current work plan for the Department of Public Works and Capital Projects and will become a priority project for the department which will require another project to be assigned as lower priority. 109 Item h. Air Traffic Control Update and Control Tower Project Addition to the Capital Improvements Program June 12, 2023 Page 2 Town Plan Impact: Strategy 4.3.4 of the Legacy Leesburg Town Plan states “Continue Planning for the Future of the Leesburg Airport” by following the Airport Master Plan. Maintaining air traffic control services through the construction of a permanent Airport Control Tower facility will ensure safe efficient aircraft operations and is critical to the future of the Leesburg Executive Airport.” Once the location of the Control Tower is identified through a Siting Study, the Airport Master Plan will be updated. Executive Summary: The Airport Control Tower project is a new project caused by the recent decision by the Federal Aviation Administration to cancel the Remote Tower Pilot Program. A mobile air traffic control tower will serve as a temporary solution until a permanent control tower facility can be constructed. To begin the process to site, design, and build a tower, the Airport Control Tower project needs to be added to the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program (CIP). A draft CIP page is attached for Town Council review. See Attachment #2. A supplemental appropriation of $270,000 to the Fiscal Year 2024 budget from the Unassigned Fund Balance is needed to start the siting study, which is the first step for the project. The cost for the siting study will be included in a later application for grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration and the Virginia Department of Aviation (requiring a 2% match from the Town) and will be reimbursed once the grant agreement is executed. The siting study will also provide context for an estimate of an overall project budget as the current ballpark total cost estimate is $16 million. The Town will seek to secure grant funding prior to starting construction, which would cover approximately 98% of the total cost. Background: In February 2023, the Federal Aviation Administration informed Town officials that the Remote Tower Pilot Program would be terminated on June 14, 2023, and that Leesburg Executive Airport would not have air traffic control (ATC) services after that date. The Town was accepted as a candidate in the FAA’s Federal Contract Tower (FCT) program in October 2020, but did not pursue development of a permanent tower at that time because the new remote tower facility was under construction with significant financial support from the FAA and the program appeared to be progressing toward certification. Moving forward, a permanent control tower facility will need to be built for the airport to continue to provide ATC services. Acceptance into the FCT program comes with a five-year deadline for construction of a tower. Leesburg’s original deadline was October 2025, which is an unrealistic timeframe for the development of a new tower. After a series of meetings with the Town, the FAA has agreed to the following:  Leesburg’s candidacy in the FCT program will be extended until October 1, 2028.  The FAA will allow a mobile tower unit to be placed on the airfield to provide ATC services from the time that the remote tower is shut down until Leesburg has constructed a permanent tower.  The FAA will pay for both the lease of the mobile tower and the cost of the controllers through the end of the current federal fiscal year (September 30, 2023). 110 Item h. Air Traffic Control Update and Control Tower Project Addition to the Capital Improvements Program June 12, 2023 Page 3  The FAA will pay for the controllers through the end of federal Fiscal Year 2028 (September 30, 2028).  Leesburg will be responsible for the lease of the mobile tower from October 1, 2023 until the permanent tower is completed. The Town Attorney is working with the FAA’s legal division on a memorandum of understanding (MOU) outlining the above points. The Airport Control Tower project needs to be added to the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) so that the initial steps of the permanent tower project can begin. A proposed CIP page has been drafted and attached for reference. See Attachment #2. The cost and timing are estimated based on limited information and potential construction locations. The CIP project page will be updated when more information is available. The project is estimated to take up to seven years, including the following phases: siting study, environmental assessment following the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, detailed design, and construction. Attachment #3 outlines each step in the project, including expected timeframes, costs, and potential funding sources. A graphic version of the expected timeline is included in Attachment #4. The siting study is the first phase and is estimated to require 12-18 months to complete. Completion of this study will require a task order with the on-call airport engineering firm, Talbert and Bright, in addition to compensation paid directly to the Federal Aviation Administration through a reimbursable agreement with a total estimated cost not to exceed $250,000. Contract Start/End Date: Contract Start: 09/15/23 Contract End Date: 9/16/24 Proposed Legislation: RESOLUTION Amend the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program to add the Airport Control Tower Project and Appropriate $270,000 for Fiscal Year 2024 from the Unassigned Fund Balance Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed Resolution to: (1) Amend the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program to add the Airport Control Tower Project. (2) Approve a supplemental appropriation of $270,000 for Fiscal Year 2024 from the Unassigned Fund Balance. OR 111 Item h. Air Traffic Control Update and Control Tower Project Addition to the Capital Improvements Program June 12, 2023 Page 4 2. I move to deny the proposed resolution to: (1) Amend the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program to add the Airport Control Tower Project. (2) Approve a supplemental appropriation of $270,000 for Fiscal Year 2024 from the Unassigned Fund Balance. OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Draft CIP Page 3. Airport Control Tower Project Timeline 4. Airport Control Tower Project Timeline Graphic 5. Airport Control Tower Project Funding Sources 2023/05 112 Item h. PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: ____________ A RESOLUTION : AMEND THE FISCAL YEAR 2024-2029 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM TO ADD THE AIRPORT CONTROL TOWER PROJECT AND APPROPRIATE $270,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 FROM THE UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE WHEREAS, the Leesburg Executive Airport Remote Tower will no longer be supported by the Federal Aviation Administration after June 14, 2023; and WHEREAS, a Control Tower is critical to the safety of the Leesburg Executive Airport and a permanent Airport Control Tower will be needed to replace the Airport Remote Tower; and WHEREAS, the first step to design and build a new Airport Control Tower will be to work with the Federal Aviation Administration to complete a Siting Study which is estimated to cost up to $250,000 which will identify the location of the Tower at the Airport in addition to $20,000 in project management costs; and WHEREAS, a new Airport Control Tower project needs to be added to the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program; and WHEREAS, a supplemental appropriation of $270,000 is needed in Fiscal Year 2024 to begin the Airport Tower Siting Study; and WHEREAS, the cost of the Siting Study task order will be included in a later application for grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration and the Virginia Department of Aviation and will be 98% reimbursed once the grant agreement is executed. THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: 113 Item h. A RESOLUTION: AMEND THE FISCAL YEAR 2024-2029 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM TO ADD THE AIRPORT CONTROL TOWER PROJECT AND APPROPRIATE $270,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 FROM THE UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE -2- 2023/01 1. Amend the Fiscal Year 2024-2029 Capital Improvements Program by adding Airport Control Tower project. 2. Approve a supplemental appropriation of $270,000 for the Airport Control Tower project from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Capital Projects Fund for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2023 and ending June 30, 2024. PASSED this 13th day of June 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 114 Item h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`_ `\`a `\`b `\`] `\`c `\`d `\`eTNMVKTU]fU *QRNRUOQRJSP+OWRHUOSg@h 9#i i i i i i i i i iAjFg@ k5 i k5 i i i i i k5i4  F?@> i i i i i i i i i i89 F8 i i i i i i i i i iTNMVTRULOP  l`c\m\\\ lnl`c\m\\\ ln ln ln ln ln l`c\m\\\ln*VMJJOSPOPPOP TNMV*UTXOLN TPN YYUTYZ[UTRI[\]^_\^`_ `\`a `\`b `\`] `\`c `\`d `\`eTNMVKTU]fU *QRNRUO*UTXOLN TPNA 0 o&1 5 i 5 i i i i i 5i?#&p'& &q5 i q5 i i i i i q5i # %   i i i i i i i i i iTNMVPOP  l`c\m\\\ lnl`c\m\\\ ln ln ln ln ln l`c\m\\\lnYOUMNHJIrYMLNYOUMNHJI^-MHJNOJMJLO `\`a `\`b `\`] `\`c `\`d `\`ep i i i i i iTNMVrYMLN ln ln ln ln ln ln HUYTUN MYHNMVrYUTsOrOJNP*UTIUMr  "#$% &5> F66F 8j9 9h%9& 115 Item h. Airport Control Tower Development Timeline Phase Timing Cost Funding Options Notes Siting Study 16-22 months Projection: 16 months Start: June 2023 End: September 2024 $150,000 - $250,000 1. BIL-FCT Competitive Grants 2. BIL-AIG Entitlement Funds  Using BIL-FCT grant funding will require the Town to front the money and apply for reimbursement in a later phase.  Will use existing contract with Talbert & Bright to speed up procurement process Environmental Study 7-25 months Projection: 13 months Start: October 2024 End: October 2025 $60,000 - $300,000 1. BIL-FCT Competitive Grants 2. BIL-AIG Entitlement Funds 3. Commonwealth Aviation Fund (CAF)  Proposed tower location will determine study complexity.  Anticipate applying for BIL-FCT grants in Fall 2024, with award in Spring 2025. Will include siting study costs in application.  Alternately, we could apply for a CAF grant, but application must be submitted before work begins. Also, requires a 20% match. 116 Item h. Phase Timing Cost Funding Options Notes Design & Bid 12-18 months, plus grant application time Projection: 23 months Start: November 2025 End: September 2027 $500,000 – $600,000 1. BIL-FCT Competitive Grants 2. BIL-ATP Competitive Grants 3. BIL-AIG Entitlement Funds 4. Commonwealth Aviation Fund (CAF)  Will begin the procurement process during the environmental study to save time (6 to 9 months).  Cannot apply for grant funding until environmental study is complete.  If environmental study is not complicated, hope to apply in the last BIL-FCT grant cycle in Fall 2025. Will include siting and environmental studies if not previously funded.  May be able to apply for BIL-ATP grant in late Summer 2025, if the environmental study is done in time.  Alternately, we could apply for a CAF grant, but application must be submitted before work begins. Also, requires a 20% match. Tower Construction 24 months, plus funding request time Projection: 33 months Start: February 2028 End: October 2030 $15 million 1. Airport Infrastructure Program (AIP) via Congressionally Directed Spending request  Cannot apply for grant funding until design and bid phase is complete. 117 Item h. Siting Study Environmental Study Design & Bid Construction Siting Study 16 months Begin June 2023, End September 2024 $150,000 - $250,000 Environmental Study 13 months Begin October 2024, End October 2025 $60,000 - $300,000 Design & Bid 18 months, plus grant application time Begin November 2025, End September 2027 $500,000 - $600,000 Construction 24 months, plus grant application time Begin February 2028, End September 2030 $15 million BIL-FCT Grant Cycle CDS Funding Request Cycle Q3Q2Q4Q3Q1Q2 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3 2030 Q4Q3 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 118 Item h. Airport Tower Funding Sources 1. Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) Grants  Five years (FY 22 through FY26)  Three more grant cycles (FY 24, FY 25, and FY 26)  All grants are reimbursements. Town must front the money. a. Airport Terminals Program (ATP) Grants  Competitive grant process.  $1 billion total available each year. Most grants go to commercial airports.  Expect application period to open in September with applications due by the end of October.  Grant awards announced in February.  Possible funding for first 3 phases (apply in September 2025) b. Federal Contract Tower (FCT) Grants  Competitive grant process.  $20 million total available each year.  Expect application period to open in November with applications due by the end of December.  Grants awards announced in March.  Possible funding for Phases 1 & 2 (apply in November 2024) and/or first 3 phases (apply in November 2025). c. Airport Improvement Grants (AIG) Program  Non-competitive grants.  JYO will receive between $760,000 and $850,000 each year.  FY 22 and FY 23 funds already committed to North End improvements, but FY 24, FY 25, and FY 26 funds could be used for the tower.  Funding requests can be submitted at any time and take 30-60 days for approval.  Using AIG funds for the tower will push the West Side Development project out, unless other funding is found for that project. 2. Airport Improvements Program (Congressionally Directed Spending)  As part of the annual congressional appropriations process, federal legislators can submit funding requests to the various appropriations subcommittees.  Requests are typically due to the legislators’ offices in late February/early March.  Grants are awarded when the Appropriations Bill passes – could be as late as December.  This source is our most realistic option for funding construction of the tower. 119 Item h. 3. Commonwealth Aviation Fund  Possible source for siting study, NEPA study, and design.  Applications accepted quarterly, and grants awarded in 30-60 days.  Cannot start work until grant is approved.  Requires 20% match. 120 Item h. Council Meeting Date: June 12, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION Subject: 2024 Legislative Program Staff Contact: Keith Markel, Deputy Town Manager Chris Spera, Town Attorney Kara Rodriquez, Public Information Officer Betsy Arnett, Senior Management Analyst Council Action Requested: Review and Adoption of the 2024 Virginia General Assembly Legislative Program for the Town of Leesburg. Staff Recommendation: Review and adoption of the 2024 Virginia General Assembly Legislative Program for the Town of Leesburg. Commission Recommendation: None. Fiscal Impact: No fiscal impact has been calculated at this time. Specific proposed legislation may have future positive or negative fiscal impacts on the Town. Work Plan Impact: The Legislative Program is incorporated in the work plan of the Town Manager’s Office and Town Attorney. Town Plan Impact: Not Applicable. Executive Summary: The Leesburg Town Council adopts an annual Virginia General Assembly Legislative Program that identifies key legislative requests and official positions on various legislative issues. As a starting point for the 2024 program discussion, Town staff developed a draft Legislative Program document that includes specific legislative requests along with position statements for issues important to the Town. See Attachment #2. This year, the draft program includes new suggested legislative priorities related to Air Traffic Control temporary trailer funding, clarity in marijuana regulations, and authority for Leesburg to establish a Parking Authority. All new items are underlined in the draft text. Upon adoption of the Legislative Program, staff will arrange meetings with members of the Leesburg & Loudoun County General Assembly delegation to discuss Town’s priorities. With the recent redistricting of House of Delegate and Senate districts, for the first time in many years the Town will be represented by all new Senators and Delegates in the 2024 Session. It will be critical for the Town to build relationships with whoever is elected to these offices. The legislators will not be known until after the November general election. 121 Item i. 2024 Legislative Program June 12, 2023 Page 2 Background: The 2024 Virginia General Assembly Session will convene on Wednesday, January 10, 2024. With the new redistricting plan going into effect for the 2024 Session, and with a significant number of first time General Assembly members in the upcoming session, VML staff is anticipating a year of limited activity and legislative progress. The 2024 session may not be the year to push for or expect progress on significant legislation. Legislative issues that were resolved in last year’s General Assembly Session were removed from the documents as have several items that are no longer significant issues. For a complete listing of previous items, please reference the 2023 Legislative Program. See Attachment #3. Contract Start/End Date: Not applicable. Proposed Legislation: RESOLUTION Adoption of the Town of Leesburg’s 2024 Virginia General Assembly Legislative Program Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed Resolution to adopt the Town of Leesburg’s 2024 Virginia General Assembly Legislative Program. 2. I move to deny the proposed Resolution to adopt the Town of Leesburg’s 2024 Virginia General Assembly Legislative Program. OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution 2. Draft 2024 Town Legislative Program 3. Adopted 2023 Town Legislative Program 4. VML 2023 Legislative Wrap-up 6 122 Item i. 2022/01 PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: ____________ A RESOLUTION : ADOPTION OF THE TOWN OF LEESBURG’S 2024 VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Virginia General Assembly will convene on January 11, 2024 for the 2024 Legislative Session; and WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg has specific legislative initiatives that it would like to see addressed during the General Assembly Session; and WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg has developed a 2024 Virginia General Assembly Legislative Program that includes specific legislative requests along with general position statements on areas of interest to the Town; and THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia that the proposed 2024 Virginia General Assembly Legislative Program is adopted and will be provided to the members of the Leesburg and Loudoun County General Assembly delegation. PASSED this 13th day of June 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 123 Item i. 2024 VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM TOWN OF LEESBURG, VIRGINIA Draft 1.0 124 Item i. 1 Table of Contents General Topics: ................................................................................. 2 Land Use ........................................................................................... 4 Environment ..................................................................................... 4 Public Safety ...................................................................................... 5 Utilities .............................................................................................. 6 Transportation .................................................................................. 6 Finance .............................................................................................. 7 Budget Funding Requests .................................................................. 8 125 Item i. 2 Town of Leesburg 2024 Legislative Program General Topics: Legislative Priorities: 1.1 Authority to Create a Leesburg Parking Authority: The Town Council requests Leesburg be added to the list of authorized localities within the Acts of Assembly that are enabled to create a Parking Authority. 1.2 Marijuana Regulations: The Town Council requests that the General Assembly take action to clarify state and local roles and responsibilities pertaining to marijuana rules and regulations. 1.3 Remote Meetings of Advisory Boards and Commissions: The Town Council requests amending Section 2.2-3708.2 of the Code of Virginia to allow advisory boards and commissions serving a locality, when not performing any adjudicatory function, to be permitted to conduct public meetings virtually, with no requirements for in-person attendance or quorum determination. All meetings would be required to provide real-time public access and methods for public participation. 1.4 Increase to the Allowable Limits of Remote Participation for Elected Officials: The Town Council requests amending Section 2.2-3708.2(b) of the Code of Virginia to allow members of legislative bodies, boards, and commissions, regardless of function, to participate through electronic communication means for reasons of unsafe travel conditions or personal health risks upon the approval of a majority of the members in physical attendance. 1.5 Memorandums of Agreement with the County: The Town Council requests an amendment to the Code of Virginia which mandates that counties that contain incorporated towns must provide services to town residents on equal parity with county residents without the necessity of a written agreement and that, for those services provided, county regulations and standards apply. 1.6 Plastic Bag Tax: The Town Council requests an amendment to Code of Virginia Section 58.1-1745 to authorize towns to implement a plastic bag tax, in the same way it authorizes cities and 126 Item i. 3 counties, or require counties to distribute collected revenue back to the towns within their jurisdiction using the formula already in place for distribution of sales tax. Position Statements: 1.7 More Authority for Large Towns: When crafting legislation that impacts localities, the General Assembly, when practicable, should grant large towns the same authorities that are granted to cities and counties. 1.8 Oppose Any Reduction of Local Taxing Authority: The Town Council opposes any reduction or narrowing of the taxing authority of local governments, including but not limited to business license tax, machinery & tools tax, sales tax, and meals tax. Further, the General Assembly should take no action to restrict the use of current local revenue sources. 1.9 Oppose Any Unfunded Mandates: The Town Council opposes any new state mandates that are not fully funded by the Commonwealth and opposes the shifting of fiscal responsibility from the state to localities for existing programs. 1.10 Support Revenue Sharing with State: The Town Council supports any state revenue sharing formula to assist local governments with public infrastructure needs, so long as the formula includes recognition of the needs in high growth localities. 1.11 Legal Notice Publication: The Town Council supports legislation that would give localities the authority to post legal notices on websites as a substitute for publishing legal notices in print newspapers. 1.12 Rights to Share Customer Account Information: The Town Council opposes any legislation that would restrict the sharing of customer contact information, exclusive of consumption data, between governmental bodies for the purpose of tax collection. 127 Item i. 4 Focus Areas: Land Use Position Statements: 2.1 Oppose any reduction of local land use authority: The Town Council opposes legislation that weakens local authority to plan and regulate land use, zoning and property maintenance. This authority should remain with local governing bodies. The Town Council generally supports the granting of additional land use, zoning, and property maintenance authority to localities, especially in areas experiencing high rates of sustained growth, and as a means to address the fiscal burdens experienced by localities in providing needed public services to local residents. The Town Council supports existing local authority to accept cash and in-kind proffers from developers to assist localities in financing the capital facilities and infrastructure needed to serve new development and opposes legislation to eliminate or restrict that authority. 2.2 Wireless Communication Facility Placement: The Town Council opposes any legislation that limits the Town’s authority to regulate the placement of wireless communication facilities in Town right-of-way and on Town- owned facilities and rental and permit fees related to such equipment. Environment Legislative Priorities: 3.1 Glass Recycling: The Town Council requests the state develop a program to incentivize localities and private recycling processors to provide glass recycling and to assist in expanding markets for recycled glass. 3.2 Prohibition on Disposable Plastic Bags: The Town Council requests legislation that would allow localities to prohibit the use of disposable plastic bags by retail establishments. Position Statements: 3.3 Tree Save Efforts: The Town Council supports efforts that would strengthen localities’ ability to require private new construction projects to save existing trees. 128 Item i. 5 3.4 Automobile Emissions Inspections: The Town Council supports the expansion of biennial motor vehicle emissions inspection requirements for localities with significant commuter traffic. 3.5 Dam Safety Funding and Regulations: The Town Council urges the federal government and the Commonwealth of Virginia to provide adequate funding for high hazard dam inspection, maintenance, and reconstruction. 3.6 Water Quality Funding: The Town Council urges the federal government and the Commonwealth of Virginia to provide adequate funding for state and federally mandated capital improvements for sewage treatment plants, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) requirements, MS-4 Permits, and other storm water systems. Public Safety Legislative Priorities: 4.1 Temporary Detention Order Expansion The Town Council requests an amendment to the Code of Virginia that would allow an extension to a 72-hour Temporary Detention Order. Under the current state code, community services cannot pursue a second Temporary Detention Order (TDO) when a bed is not found within the 72-hour period. Local magistrates are directed, pursuant to an old AG opinion, to not grant successive TDOs. The Town would like to see Va. Code §§ 37.2-808, -809, and -814 amended to allow for a second TDO assuming no change in the person’s circumstances while preserving an individual’s right to due process. Position Statements: 4.2 State Funding for Local Emergency Management Coordinators The Town Council supports the allocation of state funding to localities to ensure that Virginia communities are able to have Emergency Management Coordinator positions. 129 Item i. 6 Utilities Position Statements: 5.1 Chesapeake Bay TMDL and State Water Quality Management Planning Regulation: The Town Council urges the Commonwealth of Virginia to provide adequate funding for state and federally mandated capital improvements for TMDL, water quality and lead abatement (public and private water systems/services). 5.2 Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS): The Town Council urges the Commonwealth of Virginia to not set a maximum containment level (MCL) for Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) until sufficient study and research has been conducted and a uniform MCL has been established by the Environmental Protection Agency. 5.3 Lead and Copper Mitigation in Drinking Water: As a result of the Environmental Protection Agency’s recently revised Lead and Copper Rule, the Town Council urges the Commonwealth of Virginia to provide adequate funding including grants for any possible future lead surveys and abatement projects for water systems. If abatement work is required, the Town asks that the state adopt a realistic timeline for work to be completed. All private property lead abatement should be the responsibility of the property owner and not the water service provider. 5.4 Municipal Utility Force Majeure Exemption The Town Council urges the Commonwealth of Virginia to exempt municipal utility operations from state fines and penalties when water or wastewater plants experience significant treatment impacts that are outside of the control or authority of the municipality, so long as the locality is fully communicating with state regulatory agencies and working in good faith to rectify the situation. 5.5 Treatment Plant Expansion Funding: The Town Council supports the development of a state financing program that would share water and sewer plant expansion costs between the state and localities equally. Transportation Position Statements: 6.1 State Oversight of Locally Administered Projects: The Town Council supports state policy changes to reduce state oversight of locally administered transportation projects. Such oversight is duplicative, cumbersome, inefficient, and results in unnecessary delays and costs. Periodic state audits of locally 130 Item i. 7 administered projects would be more efficient and better policy than constant, day to day oversight. 6.2 VDOT Cost Estimates: The Town Council supports state policy changes to mandate further refinement of VDOT cost estimates for transportation projects in an effort to improve accuracy. In those circumstances when there are excess funds on a specific project, allow those funds to be reallocated to other transportation projects more efficiently. Finance Position Statements: 7.1 Line of Duty Act: The Commonwealth of Virginia should reassume the funding responsibility for the Line of Duty program instead of passing that financial obligation on to localities. 7.2 HB 599 Law Enforcement Assistance Funding: The General Assembly should follow the 599 Law Enforcement Assistance Funding formula that was established in the Code of Virginia Section 9.1-165 instead of the annual Appropriations Act passed by the General Assembly that distributes funds based on a standard, across-the-board percentage increase or decrease from the previous fiscal year’s allocations. 7.3 State Funding for School Resource Officers: The Town Council supports legislation that would provide state funding for school resource officers at all public elementary, middle, and high schools. 7.4 Bills of Financial Impact to the Town: The Town Council supports reinstatement of the requirement that bills resulting in a net expenditure and/or net decrease in revenue for local governments be filed on or before the first day the legislature convenes. 7.5 Business, Professional and Occupational License (BPOL) Taxes: The Town Council opposes any legislation that would eliminate the BPOL tax, unless current revenue from the BPOL tax is replaced with new local revenue that is distributed directly to each locality based on point of sale. Further, the Town Council requests that if the BPOL tax is eliminated, localities be granted the authority to issue an annual license to businesses physically located within the locality for a nominal fee to recover administrative costs necessary for the collection of requisite information for other business processes and state mandated reporting. 131 Item i. 8 7.6 Marijuana Sales Tax: Once authorized, the Town Council supports the Commonwealth of Virginia centrally collecting taxes on marijuana sales and distributing the tax on a monthly basis to each jurisdiction based where the local portion of the tax was assessed and collected. Budget Funding Requests 8.1 Air Traffic Control Tower Funding: The Town Council requests funding from the State Department of Aviation, or through other state sources, to support the Town in providing temporary mobile trailer air traffic control services while the permanent control tower is being constructed. Additional support for design and construction of the permanent tower through grants and other sources will also be needed. 8.2 State Maintenance Funds for Roadway Paving and Repair: The Town Council requests that the Virginia Department of Transportation continue to fund road maintenance through the two programs established to help localities with roadway maintenance, the Revenue Sharing maintenance program and the State of Good Repair program. Funding for both programs should only come from state sources, and not be commingled with federal funds. Currently, the state includes federal dollars in these programs, thus requiring all local projects receiving these funds to meet all federal regulations. This requires duplication of procurement and significant delays and increased costs for simple projects such as street paving. 132 Item i. 2023 VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM TOWN OF LEESBURG, VIRGINIA Adopted by the Leesburg Town Council on October 11, 2022 133 Item i. 1 Table of Contents General Topics: ................................................................................. 2 Land Use ........................................................................................... 4 Environment ..................................................................................... 4 Public Safety ...................................................................................... 5 Utilities .............................................................................................. 6 Transportation .................................................................................. 6 Finance .............................................................................................. 7 Budget Funding Requests .................................................................. 8 134 Item i. 2 Town of Leesburg 2023 Legislative Program General Topics: Legislative Priorities: 1.1 Remote Meetings of Advisory Boards and Commissions: The Town Council requests amending Section 2.2-3708.2 of the Code of Virginia to allow advisory boards and commissions serving a locality, when not performing any adjudicatory function, to be permitted to conduct public meetings virtually, with no requirements for in-person attendance or quorum determination. All meetings would be required to provide public access and methods for public participation. 1.2 Increase to the Allowable Limits of Remote Participation for Elected Officials: The Town Council requests amending Section 2.2-3708.2(b) of the Code of Virginia to allow members of legislative bodies, boards, and commissions, regardless of function, to participate through electronic communication means for reasons of unsafe travel conditions or personal health risks upon the approval of a majority of the members in physical attendance. 1.3 Memorandums of Agreement with the County: The Town Council requests an amendment to the Code of Virginia which mandates that counties that contain incorporated towns must provide services to town residents on equal parity with county residents without the necessity of a written agreement and that, for those services provided, county regulations and standards apply. 1.4 Dockless Mobility Devices (Scooters): The Town Council requests an amendment to Code of Virginia Section 46.2-1315 to authorize towns, cities, and counties to prohibit dockless mobility devices (scooters) within its corporate limits. Currently localities are only allowed to “regulate”, but not prohibit. 1.5 Plastic Bag Tax: The Town Council requests an amendment to Code of Virginia Section 58.1-1745 to authorize towns to implement a plastic bag tax, in the same way it authorizes cities and counties, or require counties to distribute collected revenue back to the towns within their jurisdiction using the formula already in place for distribution of sales tax. 135 Item i. 3 Position Statements: 1.6 More Authority for Large Towns: When crafting legislation that impacts localities, the General Assembly, when practicable, should grant large towns the same authorities that are granted to cities and counties. 1.7 Oppose Any Reduction of Local Taxing Authority: The Town Council opposes any reduction or narrowing of the taxing authority of local governments, including but not limited to business license tax, machinery & tools tax, sales tax, and meals tax. Further, the General Assembly should take no action to restrict the use of current local revenue sources. 1.8 Oppose Any Unfunded Mandates: The Town Council opposes any new state mandates that are not fully funded by the Commonwealth and opposes the shifting of fiscal responsibility from the state to localities for existing programs. 1.9 Support Revenue Sharing with State: The Town Council supports any state revenue sharing formula to assist local governments with public infrastructure needs, so long as the formula includes recognition of the needs in high growth localities. 1.10 Legal Notice Publication: The Town Council supports legislation that would give localities the authority to post legal notices on websites as a substitute for publishing legal notices in print newspapers. 1.11 Rights to Share Customer Account Information: The Town Council opposes any legislation that would restrict the sharing of customer contact information, exclusive of consumption data, between governmental bodies for the purpose of tax collection. 1.12 Access to Broadband: The Town Council supports state efforts to bring broadband access to all communities in Virginia. 136 Item i. 4 Focus Areas: Land Use Position Statements: 2.1 Oppose any reduction of local land use authority: The Town Council opposes legislation that weakens local authority to plan and regulate land use, zoning and property maintenance. This authority should remain with local governing bodies. The Town Council generally supports the granting of additional land use, zoning and property maintenance authority to localities, especially in areas experiencing high rates of sustained growth, and as a means to address the fiscal burdens experienced by localities in providing needed public services to local residents. The Town Council supports existing local authority to accept cash and in-kind proffers from developers to assist localities in financing the capital facilities and infrastructure needed to serve new development and opposes legislation to eliminate or restrict that authority. 2.2 Wireless Communication Facility Placement: The Town Council opposes any legislation that limits the Town’s authority to regulate the placement of wireless communication facilities in Town right-of-way and on Town- owned facilities and rental and permit fees related to such equipment. Environment Legislative Priorities: 3.1 Glass Recycling: The Town Council requests the state develop a program to incentivize localities and private recycling processors to provide glass recycling and to assist in expanding markets for recycled glass. 3.2 Prohibition on Disposable Plastic Bags: The Town Council requests legislation that would prohibit the use of disposable plastic bags by retail establishments. Position Statements: 3.3 Tree Save Efforts: The Town Council supports efforts that would strengthen localities’ ability to require private new construction projects to save existing trees. 137 Item i. 5 3.4 Automobile Emissions Inspections: The Town Council supports the expansion of biennial motor vehicle emissions inspection requirements for localities with significant Northern Virginia commuting populations. 3.5 Dam Safety Funding and Regulations: The Town Council urges the federal government and the Commonwealth of Virginia to provide adequate funding for high hazard dam inspection, maintenance, and reconstruction. 3.6 Water Quality Funding: The Town Council urges the federal government and the Commonwealth of Virginia to provide adequate funding for state and federally mandated capital improvements for sewage treatment plants, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) requirements, MS-4 Permits, and other storm water systems. Public Safety Legislative Priorities: 4.1 Temporary Detention Order Expansion The Town Council requests an amendment to the Code of Virginia that would allow an extension to a 72-hour Temporary Detention Order. Under the current state code, community services cannot pursue a second Temporary Detention Order (TDO) when a bed is not found within the 72-hour period. Local magistrates are directed, pursuant to an old AG opinion, to not grant successive TDOs. The Town would like to see Va. Code §§ 37.2-808, -809, and -814 amended to allow for a second TDO assuming no change in the person’s circumstances while preserving an individual’s right to due process. Position Statements: 4.2 State Funding for Local Emergency Management Coordinators The Town Council supports the allocation of state funding to localities to ensure that all Virginia communities have an Emergency Management Coordinator position. 138 Item i. 6 Utilities Position Statements: 5.1 Chesapeake Bay TMDL and State Water Quality Management Planning Regulation: The Town Council urges the Commonwealth of Virginia to provide adequate funding for state and federally mandated capital improvements for TMDL, water quality and lead abatement (public and private water systems/services). 5.2 Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS): The Town Council urges the Commonwealth of Virginia to not set a maximum containment level (MCL) for Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) until sufficient study and research has been conducted and a uniform MCL has been established by the Environmental Protection Agency. 5.3 Lead and Copper Mitigation in Drinking Water: As a result of the Environmental Protection Agency’s recently revised Lead and Copper Rule, the Town Council urges the Commonwealth of Virginia to provide adequate funding including grants for any possible future lead surveys and abatement projects for water systems. If abatement work is required, the Town asks that the state adopt a realistic timeline for work to be completed. All private property lead abatement should be the responsibility of the property owner and not the water service provider. 5.4 Municipal Utility Force Majeure Exemption Exempt municipal utility operations from state fines and penalties when water or wastewater plants experience significant treatment impacts that are outside of the control or authority of the municipality, so long as the locality is fully communicating with state regulatory agencies and working in good faith to rectify the situation. 5.5 Treatment Plant Expansion Funding: The Town Council supports the development of a state financing program that would share water and sewer plant expansion costs between the state and localities equally. Transportation Position Statements: 6.1 State Oversight of Locally Administered Projects: The Town Council supports state policy changes to reduce state oversight of locally administered transportation projects. Such oversight is duplicative, cumbersome, and inefficient, and results in unnecessary delays and costs. Periodic state audits of locally 139 Item i. 7 administered projects would be more efficient and better policy than constant, day to day oversight. 6.2 VDOT Cost Estimates: The Town Council supports state policy changes to mandate further refinement of VDOT cost estimates for transportation projects in an effort to improve accuracy. In those circumstances when there are excess funds on a specific project, allow those funds to be reallocated to other transportation projects more efficiently. Finance Position Statements: 7.1 Line of Duty Act: The Commonwealth of Virginia should reassume the funding responsibility for the Line of Duty program instead of passing that financial obligation on to localities. 7.2 HB 599 Law Enforcement Assistance Funding: The General Assembly should follow the 599 Law Enforcement Assistance Funding formula that was established in the Code of Virginia Section 9.1-165 instead of the annual Appropriations Act passed by the General Assembly that distributes funds based on a standard, across-the-board percentage increase or decrease from the previous fiscal year’s allocations. 7.3 State Funding for School Resource Officers: The Town Council supports legislation that would provide state funding for school resource officers at all public elementary, middle, and high schools. 7.4 Bills of Financial Impact to the Town: Reinstate the requirement that bills resulting in a net expenditure and/or net decrease in revenue for local governments be filed on or before the first day the legislature convenes. 7.5 Business, Professional and Occupational License (BPOL) Taxes: The Town Council opposes any legislation that would eliminate the BPOL tax, unless current revenue from the BPOL tax is replaced with new local revenue that is distributed directly to each locality based on point of sale. Further, the Town Council requests that if the BPOL tax is eliminated, localities be granted the authority to issue an annual license to businesses physically located within the locality for a nominal fee to recover administrative costs necessary for the collection of requisite information for other business processes and state mandated reporting. 140 Item i. 8 7.6 Marijuana Sales Tax: The Town Council supports the Commonwealth of Virginia centrally collecting taxes on marijuana sales and distributing the tax on a monthly basis to each jurisdiction based where the local portion of the tax was assessed and collected. Budget Funding Requests 8.1 State Maintenance Funds for Roadway Paving and Repair: The Town Council requests that the Virginia Department of Transportation continue to fund road maintenance through the two programs established to help localities with roadway maintenance, the Revenue Sharing maintenance program and the State of Good Repair program. Funding for both programs should only come from state sources, and not commingled with federal funds. Currently, the state includes federal dollars in these programs, thus requiring all local projects receiving these funds to meet all federal regulations. This requires duplication of procurement and significant delays and increased costs for simple projects such as street paving. 141 Item i. VML STAFF BRIEFING 2023 Regular Session Summary 142 Item i. DIR ECT OR OF FI SCA L P OL ICY JOE FLOR ES: JFLOR ES@VML.OR G Budget & Local Governments 143 Item i. It’s Overtime for Virginia’s Budget…again! For the second year in a row, the General Assembly failed to complete its work on the state budget by the agreed-upon conclusion of the 2023 Session. Their “skinny budget” provided additional funding to address the Basic Aid calculation error and three other provisions that were not in dispute. Unlike last year, the General Assembly does not need to pass a budget; it already has a budget that we’ve been operating under since July 1, 2022. But making no changes to the budget has consequences. It means: No additional tax relief No funding to stabilize the Commonwealth’s behavioral health system No resources to accelerate economic development, and No increases to address workforce needs 144 Item i. Proposed tax cuts divide the General Assembly The Governor’s budget proposed additional tax relief of $1.0 billion during the 2022-24 biennium. The House endorsed those tax cuts, while the Senate did not. Tax relief enacted last session, reduced annual general fund revenues by $1.3 billion. Proposed tax relief included in the House budget is projected to reduce ongoing general fund revenues by an additional $1.5 billion when annualized. 145 Item i. Fewer tax cuts = more revenue for Senate budget By not recommending additional tax relief, the Senate had more resources to allocate in their budget. The Senate budget includes $916 million more in general fund spending than the House. Major differences show up in the areas of: o K-12 education o Higher education o Health and human resources o Commerce and trade 146 Item i. What’s next on the budget? Very little has happened since the General Assembly adjourned on February 25, 2023. A subset of the General Assembly, fifteen conferees from the House and Senate, will need to reconvene with their staff to see if they can reach agreement on the budget. Similar to last year, the resources available to the budget conferees for high priority spending items will be dictated by the amount of tax cuts they agree to implement. 147 Item i. Proposed Property Tax Relief SJ231 (McPike) Constitutional amendment; property tax exemption for certain surviving spouses. Expands the current tax exemption for real property available to the surviving spouses of soldiers killed in action to the surviving spouses of soldiers who died in the line of duty. Because the bill proposes a constitutional amendment, it will need to pass the 2024 Session of the General Assembly and then be approved by the voters to become law. 148 Item i. Bills That Met Their Maker SB850 (Sutterlein) / HB1484 (McNamara) Sales Tax; exemption for food purchased for human consumption, essential personal hygiene products. The bill would have eliminated the 1% local option sales tax on food purchased for human consumption and essential personal hygiene products. HB1749 (Walker) Real property taxes; rate of increase procedure. The bill would have imposed additional administrative requirements on local governments to raise property tax revenues by more than 1%, compared to the prior year’s revenues. 149 Item i. POLICY COMMUNICATIONS COORDINATOR JOSETTE BULOVA: JBULOVA@VML.ORG K-12 Education 150 Item i. Passed HB1423 (Coyner) SB1404 (Barker) School Readiness Commission Renames the school readiness committee as the Commission on Early Childhood Care and Education As a commission, the group gets additional authority and powers Will include a local government representative; VML/VACo nominate (but Secretary decides) SB1124 (Stanley) School Building Maintenance and Construction in SOQ Requires the Department of Education to give the General Assembly recommendations regarding the inclusion of building maintenance and operational needs as part of the Standards of Quality (SOQ). Requires recommendations to include replacement values (incorporates aspects of SB1045 (McPike)/HB1694 (Simonds)) Requires stakeholder input (e.g., school superintendents, school boards) 151 Item i. Failed but may return SB1408 (McClellan) HB2316 (Bourne) Sales and Use Tax; Additional Tax Authorized for Counties & Cities to Support Public Schools. VML Legislative Priority Issue Would authorize every county or city to impose a local sales and use tax of up to one percent. Funds to be used solely for school construction and renovation needs Requires approval by referendum and ordinance before tax could be imposed Nine localities have this authority NOTE: Language is in the proposed Senate budget still in conference. Individual Local Authority Bills were submitted as follows: SB1287 (Deeds) – Albemarle County/City of Charlottesville HB1605 (Edmunds) - Prince Edward County HB2442 (Price) - City of Newport News 152 Item i. Failed but concepts may return, cont’d Education Savings/ Voucher Bills Six variations each creating an Education Savings Account Program Priority of the Administration State funds designated for school divisions would be given to parents who apply for the funds Money could be used for any nonpublic school item (e.g., tuition, textbooks for homeschooling, uniforms, etc.) Problematic because funds would be siphoned from already in-need public school divisions. Legislation: HB1371 (P. Scott) HB1508 (Davis) – Governor’s Version HB1396 (March) SB823 (Chase) SB1191 (Reeves) SB1290 (DeSteph) 153 Item i. VML DIRECTOR OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT JANET ARESON: JARESON@VML.ORG Health & Human Services 154 Item i. Behavioral Health HB2185 (Rasoul)/SB 1169 (Hanger) Community services boards/behavioral health authorities (CSBs/BHAs); performance contract provisions Updates/reorganizes provisions and requirements for performance contracts between the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services and CSBs/BHAs . Certain provisions are effective July 1, 2024. SB1465 (Hanger)Community services boards/behavioral health authorities; purpose; performance contracts Codifies purposes of behavioral health services provided by CSBs/BHAs Requires certain information in the performance contracts between the Department and CSBs/BHAs. SB 872 (Newman) Alternative transportation Requires magistrates to authorize alternative transportation for a person subject to an emergency custody order or temporary detention order if appropriate alternative transportation is available. Allows an employee or contractor of an alternative transportation services provider who has completed approved training in the proper and safe use of restraint to use restraints when necessary for safe transport of individual. 155 Item i. Opioids SB1414 (Pillion) Commonwealth Opioid Abatement and Remediation Fund Establishes this Fund for proceeds from settlements, judgments, verdicts, or court orders relating to consumer protection claims regarding the manufacture, marketing, distribution, or sale of opioids or that are intended to be used for opioid abatement or remediation, excluding funds designated for the Opioid Abatement Authority. The Appropriations Act will direct use of funds for prevention, treatment, reduction, abatement, and remediation. SB 1415 (Pillion) Opioid impact reduction o Allows any person to possess and administer naloxone or other opioid antagonist for overdose reversal in accordance with protocols developed by the Board of Pharmacy, Board of Medicine and the Department of Health. o Removes training requirements for use of naloxone. Directs the Departments of Health, Behavioral Health and Developmental Services, and Corrections to collaboratively develop a statewide naloxone distribution plan and allows for implementation of the plan within existing resources. o Directs VDH to develop a registry of nonprofit organizations that work to reduce the impact of opioids in Virginia. 156 Item i. Children’s Services Act (CSA) SB 1513 (Mason) Expansion of CSA state executive council membership Adds the Commissioner of the Department of Aging and Rehabilitative Services to the State Executive Council (SEC), the state body that oversees the Children’s Services Act (CSA), and to the State and Local Advisory Team (SLAT). 157 Item i. VML LEGISLATIVE CONSULTANT MARK FLYNN AND DIRECTOR OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT JANET ARESON: JARESON@VML.ORG Public Safety 158 Item i. Jails –oversight and opioids HB2438 (Campbell, E.H./SB797 (Favola) State Board of Local and Regional Jails; membership Adds to the State Board a former regional jail superintendent and a public mental health services agency employee with relevant training and experience working with individuals subject to the criminal justice system. HB1524 (Coyner)/SB820 (Favola) Opioid use reduction/jail-based substance use disorder fund and programs Creates a fund and directs the Department of Criminal Justice Services to develop guidelines in consultation with the Virginia Association of Regional Jails and Virginia Sheriffs’ Association; DCJS will administer the fund. Funds could be used for planning or operation of substance abuse disorder treatment and transition services for people incarcerated in local and regional jails (new services, not current ones). Provisions become effective July 1, 2024. 159 Item i. Public Safety – Courts HB2317 (Williams Graves)/SB789 (Spruill) Jury duty daily pay. o Increases the daily pay to jurors in trials from $30 to $50. State law requires that cities and counties pay jury duty costs for civil trials and trials involving misdemeanors under local ordinances. HB2037 (Sewell)Supplementing compensation of public defender. o Allows city and county governing bodies that elect to supplement the compensation of the state-funded public defender or his/her deputies to pay such funds to the Indigent Defense Commission or to the employees with notice to the Commission. o Requires the Commission to provide the funds directly to employees in combination with the compensation fixed by the executive director. 160 Item i. Public Safety SB1291 (Deeds) / HB1572 (Walker) False emergency communication to emergency personnel; penalties. Unlawful to report a false emergency communication; can collect expenses for unnecessary emergency response if you have an ordinance in place HB1765 (Carr) Fire; protection; fire company definition. Adds firefighter support group members to the definition SB1046 (McPike) Law-enforcement officer; definition includes fire marshal with police power. Specifies that fire marshals appointed with police powers are included in definition of law-enforcement officer in numerous applications in the Code of VA. Includes reenactment that applies to those amendments to the Code and directs DCJS to convene a workgroup to examine and make recommendations on inclusion of fire marshals with police powers in such definition of law- enforcement officer. Recommendations due to General Assembly by Nov. 1, 2023. 161 Item i. Public Safety, cont’d SB1455 (Norment) Civil disturbance; local curfew, penalty. Chief law-enforcement officer can enact a curfew up to 24 hours during a civil disturbance; longer requires governing body or judicial action SB905 (DeSteph) / HB1993 (Krizek) Fire Marshals; police powers, training requirements Provides that a local fire marshal or assistant shall not exercise any police powers until such person has satisfactorily completed a basic law-enforcement course for fire marshals with police powers and maintains satisfactory participation with in-service and advanced courses and programs. Current or prior certification as a law-enforcement officer may satisfy the police powers training requirements. SB1495 (Surovell) Local enforcement action; willful disregard for applicable law; damages. Compensatory damages may be awarded if there is willful disregard. 162 Item i. TRANSPORTATION & NATURAL RESOURCES POLICY MANAGER MITCHELL SMILEY: MSMILEY@VML.ORG Natural Resources 163 Item i. Waterworks/wastewater HB1940 (Runion) SB999 (Mason)Waterworks and wastewater works operators; license reciprocity. Provides Wastewater Works Operators and Onsite Sewage System Professionals licensed in other states with reciprocity for licensing in Virginia if specific conditions are met: •A valid license issued by another state •Licensed for at least three years •The State of original licensure required passing an examination that meets specified standards •Licensee is in good standing in other state(s) and no disqualifying experiences as set out in the bill Requires the Board for Waterworks and Wastewater Works Operators and Onsite Sewage System Professionals, upon application by an individual, to recognize other state licenses or certificates as fulfillment of qualifications for licensure if certain conditions are met. 164 Item i. Water Quality HB2189 (Rasoul)PFAS chemicals; testing requirements, publicly owned treatment works. Creates testing and notification standards for industrial operations that are customers of publicly-owned treatment works. Requires industrial customer to test and provide notice to publicly-owned treatment works if that customer believes that discharges could contain PFAS Requires industrial customers that: clean, repair, refurbish, or process items that contain PFAS to test waste streams for PFAS before and after their work and notify the publicly-owned treatment works within 3 days of receipt of the test results. SB1129 (Hanger) /HB1485 (Webert)Chesapeake Bay Watershed Implementation Plan; effective date. Allows agricultural sector an additional year to meet Chesapeake Bay nutrient reduction goals under the Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP III) for each year that the Commonwealth does not fully fund agricultural best management practices Includes specific targets for agricultural nutrient reductions to meet WIP III Goals. 165 Item i. TRANSPORTATION & NATURAL RESOURCES POLICY MANAGER MITCHELL SMILEY: MSMILEY@VML.ORG Transportation 166 Item i. Transit and Towing HB2338 (McQuinn) /SB1326 (McClellan) Transit Ridership Incentive Program Increases flexibility for transit systems seeking to use the Transit Ridership Incentive Program by increasing the amount of funding available under this program for capital improvements for passenger facilities like bus shelters and for systems transitioning to a zero emissions fleet and related capital costs. HB1649 (Wyatt); Private Towing Fuel Surcharge Approved o Authorizes private tow truck operators to levy a $20 fuel surcharge fee for vehicles towed without consent of the owner from private property. o Prohibits local governments from limiting or prohibiting this fuel surcharge fee. o Amended from a broader initiative to preempt any localities from setting fees for towing o Requires re-enactment by the 2024 General Assembly. 167 Item i. Transportation-Economic Development HB2302 (Adams, L.R.) / SB1106 (Newman) Transportation Partnership Opportunity Fund. Renames the Governor’s Opportunity Fund as the Transportation Partnership Opportunity Fund Broadens the type of loans or grants for economic development projects including transportation improvements Authorizes Governor to direct funds to be distributed by the Commonwealth Transportation Board for transportation projects to support major economic development initiatives or to enhance economic development opportunities. Allows use of funds for economic development with notice to the General Assembly for amounts greater than $5 million Requires approval of the Major Employment and Investment Project (MEI) Committee for amounts greater than $35 million: o Gives MEI a 14-day window to approve or reject a project o Funding is approved by default if MEI fails to act within 14 days o Prohibits grants from being used for exclusively economic development purposes. 168 Item i. School zones; school bus safety HB1723 (Simonds)Passing stopped school buses prohibited. o Clarifies current law that a stopped bus with at least one warning device activated is evidence that the bus was stopped to take on or discharge children or elderly or disabled persons. HB1995 (Krizek)SB868 (Cosgrove)Passing stopped school buses, rebuttable presumption. o Extends from 10 to 30 days the deadline for issuing a summons for an alleged violation of passing a stopped school bus with stop arm activated. HB2104 (Bourne) School crossing zones. o Authorizes any locality to place a school crossing sign in a school zone, increases the default boundary of a school zone from 600 to 750 feet. 169 Item i. Transportation safety HB1932 (Runion) SB982 (Marsden)Yielding or reducing speed for stationary vehicles; hazard lights, caution signs, or road flares. o Requires drivers, when safe and reasonable to do so, to make a lane change or reduce speed when passing stationary vehicles with activated hazard signal flashers, caution signs, or marked with properly lit flares or torches on certain highways; makes a violation of this requirement a traffic infraction. SB1069 (Saslaw) Drivers stopping for pedestrians; certain signs; stops. o Requires drivers stop for pedestrians instead of yielding as currently required o Authorizes localities to place signage alerting drivers to stop for pedestrians. 170 Item i. TRANSPORTATION & NATURAL RESOURCES POLICY MANAGER MITCHELL SMILEY: MSMILEY@VML.ORG Marijuana 171 Item i. HB2428 (Wilt)Marijuana advertising restrictions similar to those for alcohol products. Creates new restrictions for the advertisement of “marijuana, marijuana products, or any substance containing a synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol” other than those that may be legally sold. Limits circumstances for advertising; audiences for advertisements; and types of claims or messages that may be used in advertisements. HB2294 (Kilgore) /SB903 (Hanger) Hemp product regulation and oversight Redefines marijuana to include industrial hemp products on the schedules of the Drug Control Act/ Board of Pharmacy. Requires retailers to register with VDACS; pay an annual fee of $1,000; be subject to inspection and testing. Establishes standards for packaging and labeling of registered products; requires child-resistant packaging, list of ingredients, and a certificate of analysis of intoxicating ingredients. Prohibits certain shapes of products or certain packaging of products. Violations of regulations are subject to civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day. HB1598 (Robinson)/SB788 (Favola) Transition medical cannabis program to Cannabis Authority Shifts regulatory authority/oversight of the medical cannabis program from the Board of Pharmacy to the Cannabis Control Authority by Jan. 1, 2024. Marijuana 172 Item i. Failed bills; likely to return While bills addressing local authority for referendum, zoning authority failed, variations on these themes are likely to return. The bills that included these concepts this year were: HB1464 (Hodges) HB1750 (Webert) SB1133 (Ebbin) 173 Item i. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MICHELLE GOWDY: MGOWDY@VML.ORG Economic Development & Land Use 174 Item i. Economic Development HB1842 (Knight) Economic Development; Virginia Business Ready Sites Acquisition Fund and Program. Goal is to: Acquire sites for the purpose of creating & maintaining a portfolio of project ready sites Develop such sites to increase marketability for large scale projects Enter into development agreements with private employers Program to be managed by VEDP and Department of General Services Bill says 250 acres or more; Governor proposes 500 acres Allows the Commonwealth to show interest in purchasing a site by giving notice to the locality and giving the locality 14 days to purchase the site. 175 Item i. Economic Development/Land Use SB1308 (Deeds)/HB2332 (Campbell) Virginia Economic Development Partnership Authority; eligible site for site development grant. Reduces from 100 to 50 the minimum contiguous acreage for a non-brownfield site to satisfy the acreage requirement in some grants. SB1401 (Lewis)/HB1805 (Bloxom) Virginia Resources Authority; community development and housing projects. Allows the VRA to finance projects that include production and preservation of housing, including housing for persons and families of low and moderate income. HB2191 (Rasoul) Removal by locality of unattended or immobile vehicles. Allows for removal by a locality’s civil code enforcement division 176 Item i. Annexation/Land Use Extensions SB1185 (Lewis) / HB1676 (Hodges) Annexation; moratorium extension. Extends current moratorium to 2032. SB1205 (Lewis) / HB1665 (Marshall) Local land use approvals; extension of approvals to address the COVID-19 pandemic. Extends to July 1, 2025, the sunset date for local land use approvals that were valid and outstanding as of July 1, 2020. SB1390 (Lewis) / HB1944 (Hodges) Solar photovoltaic projects; extensions of land use approvals and sunset provision. Extends to July 1, 2026, the sunset date for various local land use approvals for solar photovoltaic projects that were valid and outstanding as of July 1, 2023. 177 Item i. Housing and Land Use HB2046 (Carr) / SB839 (Locke) Housing and Community Development, Department of; adds to powers and duties of Director. Incorporates reporting requirements of HB2494; adds to the Director’s duties the creation of a statewide affordable housing plan. HB2494 (Ware) Counties, cities, or towns; certain powers & duties, report. For localities over 3,500 pop., requires an annual report including: Adoption or amendments of any local policies or ordinances affecting housing Proffer policy changes Changes to subdivision or zoning ordinances, comprehensive plan revisions Changes to accessory dwelling units or fees 178 Item i. Housing and Land Use, cont’d HB1671 (Wyatt) Residential land development and construction; fee transparency, annual report. For localities over 3,500, requires an annual report to DHCD including the following: Total fee revenue collected by the locality for residential land use development and construction activities. SB1114 (Stanley) Housing and Community Development; powers and duties of Director. Optional for localities to participate in a Residential Sites and Structures locator database. 179 Item i. Land Use - Comprehensive Plans HB1634 (Bulova) / SB1187 (Lewis) Comprehensive Plan; strategies to address resilience. ENCOURAGES localities to consider resiliency during the comprehensive plan review process. HB1674 (Hodges) Comprehensive Plan; freight corridors. Requires localities, when developing a transportation plan as part of the locality's comprehensive plan, to include freight corridors when designating transportation facilities that support the planned development of the locality. 180 Item i. Short-term Rental Study HB2271 (Marshall) / SB1391 (Lewis) Short-term rental property; locality’s ability to restrict property managed by a Virginia realtor. Bill stated that short term rental properties that are managed by a realtor do not have to comply with the following ordinance provisions: Prohibition on short term rentals Limitations on occupancy that is less than what is allowed by code (zoning or bldg.) Limitation on the number of days or owner occupancy Installation of a remove monitoring device Inspections of the property unless there has been a complaint Required repairs that are greater than those in the building code Requirements for an owner to add additional parking 181 Item i. Affordable Housing Study HJR507 (Marshall) Affordable and workforce housing; Va. Housing Commission, et. al., to study local regulation. Revise Va. Code Chapter 22 of Title 15.2 to streamline and enhance predictability in local development review Alleviate effects of local policies or ordinances that contribute to increased housing costs and constrain supplies of affordable and workforce housing Identify state funding sources and other incentives to encourage the adoption of local policies that would expand the supply of affordable and workforce housing 182 Item i. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MICHELLE GOWDY: MGOWDY@VML.ORG Administration of Government 183 Item i. Administration - TikTok SB1459 (McDougle) Administration of state government; prohibited applications and websites. Prohibits any employee or agent of a public body OR any person or entity contracting with any such public body from: Downloading or using any application including TikTok or WeChat, etc., or accessing websites developed by those companies on any government-issued, owned, or leased equipment or other devices capable of connecting to any Commonwealth network Allows chief law enforcement officer of any locality/institution of higher education to make exceptions for purpose of participating in any law-enforcement-related matters. 184 Item i. Administration – Stop Work Orders & Appeals HB2312 (Head) / SB1263 (Hackworth) Uniform Statewide Building Code; stop work orders, appeals. Defines stop work orders Appeals process includes recovery of actual costs of litigation, including court costs, attorney fees, witness fees 185 Item i. Administration of Government SB1151 (Edwards) / HB2161 (Williams) Local government; standardization of public notice requirements for certain intended actions. Standardizes the frequency of advertisements in the newspaper and pares down several zoning notice requirements for newspapers Edwards bill was signed first; requires that a rezoning advertisement “shall include the street address or tax map number as well as the approximate acreage.” 186 Item i. Conflict of Interest Act SB1460 (McClellan) / HB2122 (Watts) State and Local Government Conflict of Interest Act; training for appointed school boards. Adds Appointed School Boards to the list of who is required to get training HB2281 (Shin) Virginia Conflict of Interest and Ethics Advisory Council; complaints; penalties. (defeated) This bill would have made the Council an investigatory body. 187 Item i. Freedom of Information Act HB2006 (Roem) Virginia Freedom of Information Act; public records charges, electronic payment method. Allows a locality to take electronic payment for FOIA requests HB2007 (Roem) Virginia Freedom of Information Act; posting of fee policy by a public body. If your population is above 250, you must post the following on your website: Written policy on how FOIA charges are assessed Note the current fee charges, if any, for accessing and searching for records. HB2498 (Kory) Virginia Freedom of Information Act; training for members of park authority boards. Adds members of park authority boards to those required to receive FOIA training HB1569 (Walker) Virginia Freedom of Information Act; disclosure of personnel records. Personnel records of Emergency Medical Service or Fire Protection providers or 911 employees shall be discretionary. 188 Item i. Labor & Employment SB906 (Saslaw) / HB1408 (Brewer) Workers’ compensation; presumption of compensability for certain cancers. Adds Bladder and Thyroid cancer to the list of cancers that are presumed to have been caused at work for first responders (includes time in service requirements) SB904 (DeSteph)/HB1775 (O’Quinn) Workers’ compensation; post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorder, or depressive disorder; law-enforcement officers and firefighters. These disorders are compensable if they meet the criteria listed in the bill SB1040 (McPike) Employer use of employee’s social security number; prohibited; civil penalty. Prohibits an employer from using a social security number or a piece of it as an employee’s identification number HB1410 (Marshall) / SB1038 (McPike) Workers’ compensation; Department of State Police Officers’ Retirement System; presumption for arson, bomb and hazardous materials investigators. Expands persons eligible for workers’ compensation presumptions 189 Item i. Procurement NOTE: VA Code Section 15.2-1804 was amended in 2022 to require localities to design certain large buildings so that they are energy efficient. The bill only applied to localities with populations of 100,000 or more BUT as of July 1,it applies to all!! 190 Item i. Procurement, cont’d HB1490 (Davis) Virginia Public Procurement Act; certain construction contract, performance and payment bonds. Allows a locality to pass an ordinance that will allow a contractor to furnish a performance and payment bond equal to the dollar amount in the current contract, not a contract of indefinite delivery or quantity. HB2500 (Wiley) / SB1313 (Bell) Virginia Public Procurement Act; private contracts, payment of subcontractors. Contractors are liable to their subcontractors even if they have not been paid HB1610 (Tata) Virginia Public Procurement Act; cooperative procurement, installation of playground equipment. Excludes the installation of playground equipment from the prohibition on using cooperative procurement to purchase construction. HB2450 (Campbell, J.L.) / SB1491 (Bell) Virginia Public Procurement Act; construction management; contract requirements. Construction management contracts involving infrastructure projects are not subject to the 10% limitation; infrastructure projects are not defined. 191 Item i. VML STAFF Selected studies 192 Item i. Finance Studies HB1896 (Byron) / SB1182 (Ruff) Bank franchise tax; electronic access to banks for real estate assessment records, etc. o Requires the Department of Taxation to convene a work group to develop potential alternative methods for filing and allocation of bank franchise revenue for consideration by the 2024 General Assembly. o VML will be part of the work group. o Beginning January 1, 2025, the bill requires localities that impose a bank franchise tax to provide electronic processes for banks to access real estate assessment records. HB2200 (Robinson) Anti-cancer drugs; analyzing current reimbursement, etc., for medical practices that administer. Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Resources to examine issues related to reimbursement and operational challenges for medical practices that administer these anti-cancer medications. As originally drafted, the bill would have exempted the cost of purchasing and administering these anti-cancer drugs from BPOL taxes in order to provide fiscal relief to these providers. 193 Item i. JLARC - Enhanced Benefits Studies HB1876 (Helmer) Firefighter’s Fertility Protection Act Hb1571 (Walker) / HB2327 (Cherry) / HB2328 (Cherry) / SB585 (Reeves), SB 1201 (Reeves)Virginia Retirement System; enhanced retirement benefits for 911 dispatchers HB1631 (Bulova) / SB1088 (Ebbin) Emergency Services Dispatcher’s access to workers compensation for PTSD 194 Item i. Transportation & Natural Resources Studies SB1365 (Lewis) Flow control; local authority Originally proposed exempting materials recovery facilities (MRFs) from local flow control ordinances in Hampton Roads and in Southern and Western Virginia. Would pre-empt local authority to regulate materials recovery facilities/local flow control ordinances Sent to the Waste Diversion and Recycling Task Force for further study SB979 (Marsden) Towing trespassing vehicles; limitations on fees. Pre-empt local authority to set towing fees at a rate other than the state maximum rate. Stricken by patron with request for further study by VDOT. SB1085 (Ebbin) Study; motor vehicle noise; report.VETOED Directs State Police to convene a work group to examine the issue of vehicle noise in the Commonwealth. 195 Item i. Construction Management Study SB954 (Petersen) / HB1957 (Leftwich) Virginia Public Procurement Act; construction management and design-build contracting; applicability. Requires two step process consisting of: (i) a preconstruction contract and (ii) competitive sealed bidding for construction services for certain projects totaling less than $125 million. The bill states that competitive sealed bidding is the preferred method of procurement for construction services in the Commonwealth. There is a definition of complex project and an exemption provision. 196 Item i. VML LEGISLATIVE CONSULTANT MARK FLYNN Looking Ahead to 2024 197 Item i. General Assembly: Looking Ahead to 2024 2024 will usher in a new and different General Assembly Long session, biennial budget year. Retirements, departures, or running for different office 12 Senate retirements; some members have contested primaries including Lucas and Spruill in same district. McClellan elected to Congress. 31 announced plans to leave the House; 13 of those are vying for a Senate seat Consequences? Senate Finance & Appropriations losing eight of 16 members House Appropriations losing five of 22 members Northern VA loss of members in leadership roles Power/leadership contests, especially in the Senate Rookie caucus? It happened before… Many new members will need an education about local governments. 198 Item i. Council Meeting Date: June 13, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Subject: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model Staff Contact: Niraja R. Chandrapu, P.E., P.T.O.E., Transportation Engineer, Public Works & Capital Projects Renée M. LaFollette, P.E., Director, Public Works & Capital Projects Council Action Requested: Adopt resolution approving an engineering services task order for the Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model to WSP USA Environmental and Infrastructure Inc. in the amount of $382,122.90 and authorize the Town Manager to execute the task order. Staff Recommendation: Adopt resolution approving an engineering services task order for the Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model to WSP USA Environmental and Infrastructure Inc. in the amount of $382,122.90 and authorize the Town Manager to execute the task order. The Town of Leesburg has a continuing services contract for comprehensive engineering, architectural, surveying, and related services for capital projects with WSP USA Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc. WSP is currently working on the Evergreen Mill Road Widening project with the town. They demonstrated an excellent knowledge of the traffic study process and already fully understand the requirements of the Town. Commission Recommendation: This item was discussed during the summer of 2022 at the Residential Traffic Commission meeting, and they are in favor of moving forward with the study. Fiscal Impact: No additional funding is required. The Fiscal Year 2023 operating budget has an approved budget of $375,000 for the Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model. However, the Downtown Traffic Study has an additional component, which involves assessing the impacts of the proposed redevelopment of Liberty Street Parking Lot on the surrounding roadway network. This component was not initially included in the approved budget. Additional funding from other sources is available to cover the costs associated with this component without requiring any additional budget allocation. Work Plan Impact: Traffic and other studies are part of the normal work activities within the Department of Public Works and Capital Projects. Town Plan Impact: The proposed traffic study ties into Legacy Leesburg Principle 4: Moving Around Town. This section of the new Town Plan talks about enhancing the resiliency of the transportation system by identifying issues within the Town’s network system of streets, finding effective solutions, providing alternative options to alleviate typical traffic congestion, and 199 Item a. Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model June 13, 2023 Page 2 developing and maintaining a transportation model for the Town (travel demand model), to name a few aspects. Executive Summary: The task order is to develop a new Travel Demand Model (TDM) tool to provide the Town of Leesburg additional functionality for plan and project evaluation, prepare a comprehensive evaluation of traffic operations and circulation patterns within the downtown, and assess the need for improvements to better accommodate both existing and future year traffic flow. Additionally, the task order will include a traffic operations study to analyze existing conditions and future conditions with a focus on the potential implementation of one-way streets as identified in previous capital projects studies and enhance pedestrian safety. Furthermore, the study will include an alternative, evaluating the impacts of redevelopment of the Liberty Street Parking Lot on the surrounding roadway network. The task order will identify existing traffic issues, issues that are anticipated at a future time based on traffic growth, and a work plan of potential in-house smaller projects and those that could be included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The areas are further delineated as follows:  Inside the Catoctin Circle loop: The scope of this would include; analyzing existing conditions (2023) by doing actual turning movement counts at approximately 27 intersections in both the am and pm peak hours, add inherent growth, add background traffic associated with approved development(s) in the study area, analyze future conditions (2030), and analyze the potential for one-way streets as identified in previous capital projects studies (Wirt Street SW, Royal Street SW, Liberty Street SW, North Street NE). Additionally, the study will identify safety deficiencies and identify short-term, low cost “maintenance type” improvements that fit within existing right-of-way. The improvements could include recommendations regarding lane use, turn bay length requirements, traffic signal modifications, signing/pavement marking improvements, sight distance improvements, pedestrian facilities, and safety. All potential pedestrian improvements will correspond to the Towns ADA Transition Plan and identify projects or areas in need of ADA compliance.  One-Way Pairs: The scope of this would be to fully analyze the pros/cons and traffic impacts associated with creating the one-way pairs from the east triangle of Market and Loudoun to the west triangle of Market and Loudoun. The analysis would be inclusive of business impacts, parking impacts, pedestrian impacts in addition to the traffic impacts.  Redevelopment of Liberty Street Parking Lot: The scope of this would be to assess the impacts of the redevelopment of the Liberty Street Parking Lot on the surrounding roadway network.  Travel Demand Model: The scope of this would be to develop a new Travel Demand Model tool that will be tied to the existing Loudoun County Travel Demand Model to provide the Town of Leesburg with additional functionality for planning and project evaluation. Background: The discussion of a downtown traffic study was initially brought forward in late 2020 when requests for individual streets to become one-way were brought forward. Those initial streets that were discussed include: North Street between North King Street and Church Street in association with the approval of the courts complex expansion, and as part of the Royal Street Improvements – Church Street to Wirt Street (CIP) the sections of Wirt Street between South Street and Loudoun Street, and Royal Street between King Street and Wirt Street were analyzed. The 200 Item a. Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model June 13, 2023 Page 3 section of Wirt Street between Loudoun Street and West Market Street has been studied due to the congestion associated with drop-off and pick-up times for the Great Beginnings Child Care at the United Methodist Church Due to the nature of the downtown street network and the volume of traffic that comes through Town, staff did not believe it would be good practice to change street functions from two-way streets to one-way streets without understanding what impacts would be caused within the roadway network or grid. The impacts from those potential streets being changed to one-way would also have a significant impact on detour routing for Town sponsored special events that would need to be taken into consideration during any level of study. During the discussion and markup sessions for the Fiscal Year 2023 budget, there were questions and confusion on what the study would do, what the deliverables would be, and what the study effort might cost. The council authorized $250,000 for a traffic study and $125,000 to update or develop a new travel demand model that was last modified over 10 years ago and is significantly out of date. The council also requested staff to come back to discuss how the $250,000 would be utilized for the traffic study before any work begins. During the budget discussions and afterwards, staff defined the following major components of the potential traffic study.  Inside the Catoctin Circle loop: This would include analyzing existing (2023) and future conditions (2030), analyze the potential for one-way streets as identified in prior discussions or in capital projects studies (Wirt Street SW & NW, Royal Street SW, Liberty Street SW., North Street NE.). Additionally, the study will identify safety deficiencies and identify short- term, low cost “maintenance type” improvements that fit within existing right-of-way. The improvements could include recommendations regarding lane use, storage requirements, traffic signal modifications, signing/pavement marking improvements, sight distance improvements, pedestrian facilities, and safety. All potential pedestrian improvements will correspond to the Towns ADA Transition Plan and identify projects or areas in need of ADA compliance.  Downtown One Way Pairs: The scope of this would be to fully analyze the pros/cons and traffic impacts associated with creating the one-way pairs from the east triangle of Market Street and Loudoun Street to the west triangle of Market Street and Loudoun Street.  Redevelopment of Liberty Street Parking Lot: The scope of this would be to assess the impacts of the redevelopment of the Liberty Street Parking Lot on the surrounding roadway network. Additionally, this task order includes developing a new Travel Demand Model (TDM) tool to provide the Town of Leesburg additional functionality for planning and project evaluation, prepare a comprehensive evaluation of traffic operations and circulation patterns within the downtown, and assess the need for improvements to better accommodate both existing and future year traffic flow. Contract Start/End Date: Contract Start: September 1, 2023 Contract End Date: September 1, 2024. 201 Item a. Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model June 13, 2023 Page 4 Proposed Legislation: RESOLUTION Approve an Engineering Services Task Order for the Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model in the amount of $382,122.90 to WSP USA Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc. Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed resolution to: Approve the engineering services task order for the Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model to WSP USA Environmental and Infrastructure Inc. in the amount of $382,122.90 and authorize the Town Manager to execute the task order. 2. I move to deny the proposed resolution to: Approve the engineering services task order for the Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model to WSP USA Environmental and Infrastructure Inc. in the amount of $382,122.90 and authorize the Town Manager to execute the task order. OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution 2. Map of area proposed for traffic study inside Catoctin Circle 3. Map of area proposed for the One-Way pairs study 4. Proposal – Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model 2023/06 202 Item a. PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ADOPTED: _______________ A RESOLUTION : APPROVE AN ENGINEERING SERVICES TASK ORDER FOR THE DOWNTOWN TRAFFIC STUDY AND TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL IN THE AMOUNT OF $382,122.90 TO WSP USA ENVIRONMENTAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE INC. WHEREAS, the Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model is included in the approved Fiscal Year 2023 budget; and WHEREAS, the Town of Leesburg has a continuing services contract for comprehensive engineering, architectural, surveying, and related services for capital projects with WSP USA Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the Town’s Procurement Policy, task orders more than $200,000 must be approved by Town Council; and WHEREAS, WSP USA Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc has provided a task order proposal in the amount of $382,122.90 for the Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Engineer and the Director of Public Works & Capital Projects have reviewed the proposal and agree with the scope of work and cost; and WHEREAS, the Council has previously approved $375,000 in the FY 2023 budget for this project and additional funding from other sources is available to cover the cost of $7,122.90, and thus no additional funding is needed. THEREFORE, RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: 203 Item a. A RESOLUTION: APPROVE AN ENGINEERING SERVICES TASK ORDER FOR THE DOWNTOWN TRAFFIC STUDY AND TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL IN THE AMOUNT OF $382,122.90 TO WSP USA ENVIRONMENTAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE INC. -2- 2023/01 1. The Town Manager is hereby authorized to execute a task order with WSP USA Environmental and Infrastructure, Inc. in the amount of $ 382,122.90 to provide engineering services for the Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model. PASSED this 13th day of June, 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 204 Item a. W MARKET ST S KING ST HAUPT SQ SE NORTH ST NE CORNWALL ST NW DRY MILL RD SW PLAZA ST NE MEMORIALDRNW CHERRYLNNE FAIRFAX ST SE FIELDSTONEDRNE LEESBURG BYPCHADFIELDWAYNE PROSPERITYAVESE NKINGST MARSHALL DRNE CATOCTINCIRNE KORNBLAUTERSE DAVIS AVE SW NORTH ST NE CATOCTINCIRSW E MARKET ST LOUDOUN ST SW CHURCH ST SE BATTLEFIELDPKWYNE TOLEESBURGBYPWB LEESBURG BYP CATOCTIN CIR SE LIBERTY ST SW STABLEVIEWTERNE HARRISONSTSE LOUDOUN ST SE EDWARDSFERRYRDNE PLAZASTSE E MARKET ST AMBROSIAPL NE CRESTWOODSTSW WILDMAN ST NE STONELEDGEPLNE WILKINSONDRNE CARLTONSTSW ROCKBRIDGEDRSE AYRLEE AVE NW TOWNBRANCHTERSW CLARKCTNE ROSEMEADEPLSW OAKCRESTMANORDRNE FOXBOROUGHDRSW FORT EVANS RD NE LIPIZZANDR SW BANKER DR SW DAVIS AVESE WINGATE PL SWRIVERFRAYSDRSW S KING ST PROSPECTDR SW CATTAIL LN NE MAYFAIR DR NEWIRT ST SW ROYAL ST SW WIRT ST NW NORTH ST NW WASHINGTON ST NE CURRANTTER NE FOXRIDGE DRSW FAIRVIEW ST NW RADFORDTERNE BELMONTDRSW CHAUCERPLNE APPLETREEDRNE WOODBERRYRDNE BRIDGETTEPLNE SOUTHVIEWPLNE NEWHALLPLSW COLLEENCTNE AYRSTNW CORNWALL ST NE MORVEN PARK RD NW ARIELDRNE STALLIONSQNE EDWARDS FERRY RDNE WILSON AVE NW WIRT ST SW WHITNEYPL NE DODDDR NW LAKEVIEWWAYNW BLUE RIDGE AVE NEHARRISONSTNE PHILLIPSDR NW SOUTH STSE SHENANDOAH ST SE ICELANDICPLSW OLD WATERFORD RD NW LEE AVE SW MONROESTSE LAKEVIEWWAYNW LOCUST KNOLL DRNW FOXTROTWAYNW AYR ST SW UNION ST NW NATHANPL NE EMARKETST WB NEWINGTON PLNE QUEEN ST NE PRINCE ST NE TUDORCTNE FORTEVANSRDSE REDBUD LN NE EMARKETST GIBSONSTNW ASHTONDRSW BIRCH ST NE CHATFIELD CT NE ROYAL ST SE EAST FIRST ST SE DIZEREGACT SW BELMONTPLSW WILLIAM ST NW SYCOLIN RD SE WARLANDERDRSW JAREDSQNE MARLOW STSW RUST DRNE OAKVIEWDRSE VALLEYVIEWAVESW DANIELS ST NW CRANBROOK DR NE ROSEBROOKCTNW CLUBHOUSEDRSW TOWMARKETSTEB PARKERCT SE MOSBY DR SW PERSHING AVE NW IDALEEDRNW HARRY BYRD HWY MEADOWS LN NE CATOCTINCIRNE CATOCTINCIRNE Map of Area Proposed for Traffic StudyInside Catoctin Circle ² Leesburg Town Boundary Catoctin Circle Area Development Project Type Commercial Institutional Mixed Use Current Development Project 1. Harrison Street Academy2. Courthouse Expansion3. Church and Market4. Church and South5. Virginia Village6. Meadow Glen 0 0.25 0.50.125 Miles 12 3 4 5 6 MAP AREA 205 Item a. S KING ST NORTH ST NE CORNWALL ST NW W MARKET ST DRY MILL RD SW MEMORIAL DR NW LOUDOUN ST SW MARSHALL DR NE CHURCH ST SE LIBERTY ST SW HARRISONSTSE LOUDOUN ST SE EDWARDS FERRY RD NE E MARKET ST SOUTH ST SE STATIONMASTER ST SE AYRSTNW TOWNBRANCHTERSW NEWHALLPLSW OAKCRESTMANORDR NEWILSON AVE NW WINGATE PL SW DEPOTCTSE TRACYCTNE SLACKLNNE CHURCH ST NE N KING ST WIRT ST SW ROYAL ST SW WIRT ST NW NORTH ST NW LIBERTY ST NW MEHERRINTERSW MONROE STSE AYRSTNW CORNWALL ST NE ARIELDRNE WHITNEYPLNE ANDOVER CT NE HARRISONSTNE BELMONT DR SW OLD WATERFORD RD NW LAFAYETTETERSW PARKER CT SE GEORGETOWNCTNE RAILTIE ALY SE AYR ST SW FOOTPLATEALYSE ROYAL ST SE UNION ST NW LASSITER WAY SW SOUTH ST SW AYR ST NW ROSEMEADE PL SW TIM ESMIRRORLNSE AYRLEE AVE NW TUDORCTNE ASHTON DR SW GIBSON ST NW MORVEN PARK RD NW ROCKSPRINGDRSW ROYAL ST SE OLDENGLISH CTSWBELMONTPLSW PROSPECTDRSW IDALEEDRNW WILLIAM ST NW VALLEYVIEWAVESW DANIELS ST NW DODD DR NW PROSPECT DR SW MOSBYDRSW Map of Area Proposed for One-Way Pair Study ² One-Way Pair Area 0 750 1,500375 Feet MAP AREA 206 Item a. Scope of Services Comprehensive Engineering, Architectural, Survey and Related Services Contract for Town of Leesburg Traffic Study Task: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model Submitted by: Submitted to: Town of Leesburg June 6, 2023 207 Item a. Comprehensive Engineering, Architectural, Survey and Related Services Contract Task: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model 2 TASK DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this task is to develop a new Travel Demand Model (TDM) tool to provide the Town of Leesburg (“Town”) additional functionality for plan and project evaluation, prepare a comprehensive evaluation of traffic operations and circulation patterns within the downtown Town, and assess the need for improvements to better accommodate both existing and future year traffic flow. WSP will be responsible for preparing the traffic study, and Kimley-Horn will prepare the TDM model. Traffic study area for this task is shown in Figure 1. Area shown within the orange boundary in Figure 1, will encompass the downtown area bordered by Market Street, Catoctin Circle, Oakcrest Manor Drive and King Street. The Town has approved a number of developments within this area, as identified numerically in Figure 1. Applicable data and information included in the developments’ Traffic Impact Analyses (TIAs) will be utilized in this study and supplemented with new data in this task order. Figure 1: Study Area Limits Task 1. Project Management This task includes administrative coordination with the Town and subconsultants for traffic data collection and demand modeling, regular bi-monthly coordination meetings, project administration, invoicing, and project coordination outside of the tasks outlined below. Deliverables The draft plan submittal for the listed sign locations will include the following: • Bi-monthly meeting notes (electronic PDF files), and • Monthly invoicing 208 Item a. Comprehensive Engineering, Architectural, Survey and Related Services Contract Task: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model 3 Task 2. Literature Review, Data Collection, and Desktop Review Literature Review The Town will provide WSP with applicable approved development Traffic Impact Analyses (TIAs) or any relevant approved traffic study or approved roadway improvements for consideration in this task order. WSP will consider the approved development TIAs traffic volumes, growth projections, and approved roadway geometric changes. The Town will also provide WSP with 2022 VDOT Average Daily Traffic (ADT) information, to include peak hour data at VDOT’s standard Leesburg jurisdiction reporting locations. The Town has provided the Downtown Leesburg Speed Study, by Wells and Associates, which provides some 2021 volume data. Data Collection 24-hr volume/classification count: 24-volume-classification counts to be conducted on a typical weekday Tuesday – Thursday while school is in session, and will be collected at up to five (5) locations to be determined after review of existing 2021 and 2022 data available. These counts will either verify or supplement the existing data to be provided by the Town. 24-hr volume-only count: In addition to the five classification counts (location TBD), WSP will collect 24- hour volume-only counts (typical weekday Tuesday – Thursday while school is in session) at the following two (2) locations to verify the 2021 data collected in the Downtown Leesburg Speed Study. WSP will compare the 2023 volume to the previous 2021 volume to determine an applicable volume factor to apply to the remaining 2021 counts in the Downtown Leesburg Speed Study. 1. Loudoun St just west of Liberty St 2. Market St between Church St and east Loudoun St/Market St merge Peak period intersection turning movement counts (TMCs): will occur while school is in session on a Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday for 2-hr AM weekday, and 2-hr PM weekday, with the exact 2-hour timeframes as determined by the prior Downtown Leesburg Speed Study traffic data. Existing peak period traffic volumes will be summarized in map format for the peak periods. Figure 2 and Table 1 identify the data collection locations. Figure 2: Data Collection Location Map 209 Item a. Comprehensive Engineering, Architectural, Survey and Related Services Contract Task: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model 4 Table 1: Intersection Turning Movement Count Locations No. First Street Second Street Control Type 1 W Market St Catoctin Cir SW/Fairview St NW Signalized 2 Catoctin Cir SW Dry Mill Road SW (Route 699) Signalized 3 Catoctin Cir SW King St Signalized 4 Catoctin Cir SE Harrison St SE Signalized 5 E Market St Catoctin Cir SE / Catoctin Cir NE Signalized 6 N King St North St NE Unsignalized 7 N King St Cornwall St Unsignalized 8 N King St Royal St Unsignalized 9 N King St Fairfax St SE Signalized 10 W Market St / E Market St N King St Signalized 11 E Market St /Edwards Ferry Rd NE Church St SE / Church St NE Unsignalized 12 W Market St / Loudoun St SW Morven Park Rd NW / Morven Park Rd SW Unsignalized 13 Loudoun St SW Dry Mill Rd SW / Ayr St SW Unsignalized 14 Loudon St SW Liberty St SW Unsignalized 15 Loudoun St SW Wirt St SW Unsignalized 16 Loudoun St SW / Loudoun St SE King St Signalized 17 Loudoun St SE Church St SE Unsignalized 18 Loudoun St SE E Market St Unsignalized 19 W Market St Ayr St SW / Ayr St NE Unsignalized 20 W Market St Memorial Dr NW Signalized 21 W Market St Liberty St Unsignalized 22 W Market St Wirt St NW / Wirt St SW Unsignalized 23 North St NE Church St NE Unsignalized 24 Royal St Wirt St SW Unsignalized 25 Royal St Church St SE Unsignalized 26 Cornwall St NE Church St NE Unsignalized 27 North St NE Slack Ln NE Unsignalized 28 S King St S St SW Unsignalized 29 Liberty St Royal St Unsignalized 30 Wirt St South St Unsignalized Travel Times and Queue Observations WSP will conduct field visits to review traffic conditions, collect arterial travel times and observe existing queues at major signalized intersections. Travel times will consist of three (3) runs in each direction for each corridor during the AM peak hour (approx. 7:00 – 8:00 am) and PM peak hour (approx. 5:00 – 6:00 pm). Travel times will be collected for the following corridors: 1. Market Street from Catoctin Circle SE to Catoctin Circle SW 2. Loudoun Street from Catoctin Circle SE to Catoctin Circle SW 3. King Street from south of Royal St and north of North St NE 210 Item a. Comprehensive Engineering, Architectural, Survey and Related Services Contract Task: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model 5 Queue length observations will be conducted at up to four (4) intersections within the downtown area, as listed in Table 2. Table 2: Weekday Queue Observation Locations Intersection No. First Street Second Street Control Type 10 W Market St / E Market St N King St Signalized 11 E Market St /Edwards Ferry Rd NE Church St SE / Church St NE Unsignalized 16 Loudoun St SW / Loudoun St SE King St Signalized 20 W Market St Memorial Dr NW Signalized Desktop Review of Existing Geometric Conditions WSP will perform a desktop review of the existing geometric conditions within the project area. This includes assessing existing parking to determine locations, restrictions or hours as well as identifying pedestrian/bicycle facilities, roadway widths and speed limits. Existing Conditions Safety Analysis WSP will review, analyze, and summarize the crash history data for the most recent five (5) years from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2022. WSP will utilize VDOT’s Crash Analysis Tool to identify crashes at existing signalized and up to five (5) unsignalized key intersections within the study area. Crash data will be summarized by year, severity, type, time of day, and location to identify crash trends and patterns crash heat maps will be developed. Results will be documented in the Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum. Field Review WSP will conduct a field visit to assess geometric conditions, driver behavior, and investigate potential safety concerns in areas where conflicts tend to occur, not only as crashes, but as near-misses or situations where erratic maneuvers are observed. Task 3. Existing Conditions Operational Analysis WSP will analyze, summarize, and balance the raw data from the traffic count program to produce the data needed for subsequent traffic operations analyses. This will include identification of weekday AM and PM peak hours and balancing of traffic volumes along the corridor that will be used to develop an AM and PM existing traffic models. The traffic operating conditions within the project area will be analyzed using Synchro 11 for the AM and PM peak hours. Signal timing provided by the Town will be incorporated into the Synchro network. Existing geometry, on-street parking areas, and existing speed limits will also be included in the existing model. The Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs) for this project will be reported and summarized in graphical and/or tabular format and will include 95th percentile queue length, control delay, volume to capacity (v/c) ratio, and travel time. WSP will prepare a technical memorandum documenting the analysis of existing conditions. The draft memorandum and Synchro models will be provided to Town for review and comment. The Synchro model and technical memorandum will then be revised and finalized based on feedback from the Town. 211 Item a. Comprehensive Engineering, Architectural, Survey and Related Services Contract Task: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model 6 Deliverables • Draft Existing Synchro models; • Final Existing Synchro models; • Draft Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum (electronic PDF files); and • Final Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum (electronic PDF files); and • Meeting notes (electronic PDF file). Task 4. Future No-Build Conditions Operational Analysis Upon approval of the existing Synchro model, WSP will develop the no-build Synchro Model for the future year 2030 for consistency with the Travel Demand Model interim year. The future no-build model will include the growth rates as determined by the Travel Demand Model (TDM) as part of Task 10. The TDM is assumed to include the growth from the background developments based on the TIAs provided by the Town. Task 10 provides details and the information regarding the development of the TDM model for the Town. Deliverables • No-Build Synchro models; • No-Build MOE summary at key intersections (electronic PDF files) Task 5. Alternatives Development Based on the Existing and No-Build operational analysis results, safety analysis, as well as field investigations, WSP will identify operational and safety deficiencies within the study area and develop an initial set of improvement alternatives. Short-term, low cost “maintenance type” improvements that fit within existing right-of-way will be identified and could include recommendations regarding lane use, storage requirements, traffic signal modifications, signing/pavement marking improvements, sight distance improvements, pedestrian facilities, safety. All potential pedestrian improvements will correspond to the Towns ADA Transition Plan and will consider identified projects or areas in need of ADA compliance. This study will also investigate the following one-way alternatives from a high-level planning comparative perspective in relation to each other in terms of safety, capacity, comparative planning-level cost, and overall impact to movements. Alternative recommendations will be summarized in a table or matrix format and provided in a memo to the Town for review. 1. Loudoun St EB and Market St WB from west merge past Morven Park Rd to east merge past Harrison St 2. North St EB between King St and Church St 3. Wirt St NB between Loudoun St and Market St 4. Wirt St NB between South St SW and Market St 5. Royal St EB between King St and Liberty St 6. Royal St WB between King St and Liberty St 7. Liberty St SB between Loudoun St and Parking lot WSP will conduct one (1) meeting with the Town to discuss the alternatives and select up to two (2) alternatives for more detailed study in the following tasks. 212 Item a. Comprehensive Engineering, Architectural, Survey and Related Services Contract Task: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model 7 Planning-Level Concept Drawings After the selection of the two (2) alternatives for further detailed study, WSP will prepare basic, planning-level conceptual layouts for the two (2) alternatives selected to show lane configurations. Conceptual layouts will be based on aerial photography of the study area. Planning-Level Cost Estimate After the selection of the two (2) alternatives for further detailed study, WSP will prepare planning-level cost estimates based on a generalized cost per block to include pavement marking, signage, signal modifications, or other necessary geometric modifications to the roadway based on the alternative. Deliverables • Alternatives documentation (electronic PDF files) • Meeting notes (electronic PDF files) • Conceptual Drawings of two preferred alternatives (electronic PDF files) • Cost Estimate of two preferred alternatives (electronic PDF files) Task 6. Future Conditions Build Operational and Safety Analysis Future Build Operational Analysis The future build traffic volumes will be determined as part of Task 10 for the one-way pair scenarios. WSP will revise the No-Build Synchro models based on geometry, signal phasing, and volume changes due to the selected two alternatives. WSP will develop four (4) Build Synchro models for year 2030 to analyze AM and PM peak periods based on the two (2) selected alternatives from the previous task. MOEs will be reported and summarized in graphical and/or tabular format consistent with previous tasks. Synchro Build models MOEs will be summarized and provided to the Town for review. A meeting will be conducted to review Synchro models and findings. Synchro models will be revised based on feedback from the Town. Future Build Safety Analysis WSP will identify Crash Modification Factors (CMFs) for key intersections for build improvements and provide a general discussion about safety benefits, notably in terms of conflict points and CMFs. Deliverables • Four (4) Build Synchro models; (electronic files); and • Build MOE summary at key intersections (electronic PDF files) • CMFs • Meeting notes (electronic PDF files). Task 7. Redevelopment of Liberty St Parking Lot Liberty Lot Operational Analysis The parking lot on the south end of Liberty St is anticipated to be redeveloped. The Town is exploring redevelopment opportunities to include a public garage, an 80-unit apartment building (55 and over senior living community), a 75-room hotel, and a 600-seat auditorium (performing arts/theatre space) at the current location of the parking lot. The redevelopment traffic volumes will be determined for one development scenario using the Trip Generation Manual methodology and data available from the Town 213 Item a. Comprehensive Engineering, Architectural, Survey and Related Services Contract Task: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model 8 on the anticipated development of the Liberty Parking Lot. WSP will revise the two Build Synchro models completed in Task 6 to add the trips generated by redevelopment to the surrounding intersections. WSP will develop four (4) Build Synchro models for year 2030 to analyze AM and PM peak periods based on the two (2) selected alternatives from Task 6. WSP will analyze MOEs for up to eight (8) intersections for each Synchro Model on Wirt Street, Royal Street, Liberty Street and South Street. MOEs will be reported and summarized in graphical and/or tabular format consistent with previous tasks. Synchro models MOEs will be summarized and provided to the Town for review. Synchro models will be revised based on feedback from the Town. Deliverables • Four (4) Liberty Lot Synchro models; (electronic files); and • MOE summary at key intersections (electronic PDF files) Task 8. Traffic Study Technical Report WSP will prepare a draft technical report summarizing the methodology and results of all previous tasks. WSP will submit an electronic copy of the draft report in addition to supporting files and documentation (Synchro files, data, etc.) to the Town for review and comment. WSP will attend one (1) public meeting with the Town as defined in Task 8. After the public meeting, WSP will revise the draft report in response to the comments provided by the Town, including documentation of public feedback and incorporation of items as determined by Town staff, then submit the final electronic version of the technical report to the Town. Deliverables • Eight (8) Synchro models (Existing AM & PM, No-Build AM & PM, two Build alternatives AM & PM) (Electronic submittal) • Draft Technical Report (Electronic submittal) Task 9. Meetings Public Meetings After submission of the Draft Technical Report, WSP will assist in a public information meeting. The Town will conduct the presentation and respond to resident questions while WSP will be present as Technical Expert to answer technical questions as needed. WSP will prepare presentation materials such as maps, drawings, and relevant technical documents. Input received by the community at the meeting will be reviewed with the Town, summarized, and incorporated into the Final Technical Report. Town Council meetings Similar to the public information meeting, WSP will assist the Town with Council meeting in preparing the meeting material and to answer technical questions as needed. Input received by the Council members at the meeting will be reviewed with the Town, summarized, and incorporated into the Final Technical Report. This task includes up to 80 hours reserved to make minor adjustments to the preferred alternatives prior to final submission. Deliverables 214 Item a. Comprehensive Engineering, Architectural, Survey and Related Services Contract Task: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model 9 • Meeting presentation materials (electronic copies) • Final Technical Report (to incorporate summary of citizen and Town Council comments) (Electronic submittal) Task 10. Travel Demand Model (TDM) The scope of services and cost proposal for the development of the Town’s Travel Demand Model tool are described in more detail as an Attachment to this scope. Note that this service will be completed by Kimley-Horn. ITEMS TO BE PROVIDED BY THE TOWN OF LEESBURG: The WSP Team assumes that the Town of Leesburg will provide the following: • Available inventory of existing data (traffic counts, signal timing, Traffic Impact Analyses (TIAs), additional approved traffic studies or approved roadway modifications) • 2021 Speed Limit Study • Growth rates based on the approved TDM model • Map of locations identifying the authorized lower speed limit of 20mph • Notes regarding Town staff and Town Council’s preferences for location of one-way pairs • Identified projects or areas of need for ADA improvements within the project limits EXCLUSIONS/ASSUMPTIONS: The WSP team makes the following exclusions/assumptions: • Does not include SimTraffic modeling or calibration • WSP will not present or conduct public or Council meetings. • Signal warrant analysis • No more than two (2) Build alternatives will be modeled in Synchro (for a total of four Build models for AM and PM peaks). • No more than one (1) revision is expected for each scenario: o Existing; o No-Build; and o Build alternatives 1 and 2 • Kimley-Horn will include all background developments in the TDM referenced in the TIAs provided by Town. OPTIONAL/ADDITIONAL SERVICES: • Based on the results of the initial analysis and Town Staff and Council guidance, traffic model simulation/calibration with SimTraffic may be added as an optional service under a supplemental work order. 215 Item a. Comprehensive Engineering, Architectural, Survey and Related Services Contract Task: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model 10 SCHEDULE: The WSP Team estimates that this task order will be complete in approximately 12 months. FEE SUMMARY: WSP shall bill the Town of Leesburg in accordance with the Billable Rate Schedules, based upon the time during which the actual work is performed. The estimated fee for this work is detailed in the attached Fee Proposal. 216 Item a. kimley-horn.com 11400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400, Reston, VA 20191 703 674 1300 April 28, 2023 Ravindra Raut, P.E. WSP USA, Inc 13530 Dulles Technology Drive Dulles Executive Plaza 1, Suite 300 Herndon, VA 20171 Re: Letter Agreement for Professional Services for the Town of Leesburg Travel Demand Model Dear Ravindra Raut: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (“Kimley-Horn” or “Consultant”) is pleased to submit this Letter Agreement (the “Agreement”) to WSP (“Client”) for providing Traffic Model Development and Support Services for the Town of Leesburg. Project Understanding This scope of services is for the development of a new Travel Demand Model tool to provide the Town of Leesburg (“Town”) additional functionality for plan and project evaluation. Note that this scope is based on a conversation between the Town, WSP, and Kimley-Horn conducted on April 21, 2023. Note that the use of the Loudoun County Travel Demand Model for the purposes described in this document are contingent on coordination between the Town of Leesburg and Loudoun County for the explicit permission to use and modify the Loudoun County Travel Demand Model. Background Kimley-Horn recommends that a subarea model developed for Leesburg be tied to the Loudoun County Travel Demand Model (LC Model). The LC Model was last updated in 2022 to a 2019 base year providing a strong and recent base for subarea model development. By utilizing the effort that Loudoun County has completed and continue to invest in maintaining, the LC Model allows Leesburg to focus resources on developing a custom product for the Town. The LC model is a county focused model of the entire MWCOG region and includes 1922 internal zones across the 14-jurisdiction model area, 696 of which are in Loudoun County. The 2006 Leesburg Model geography is shown in Figure 1 and the extent of the Loudoun County Model network is shown in Figure 2. The proposed model will utilize the current LC Model but traffic analysis zones (TAZs) and roadway network links in Leesburg will be enhanced to provide additional level of detail for current and future analyses. The updated TAZs will be based on any planning zones already developed by the Town (if available) and the updated transportation network description will be constructed to adequately mesh with the more detailed zone system. The following scope describes the tasks required to develop the model. 217 Item a. Page 2 kimley-horn.com 11400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400, Reston, VA 20191 703 674 1300 Figure 1: 2006 Leesburg Travel Demand Model Figure 2: 2022 Loudoun County Travel Demand Model Scope of Services Kimley-Horn will provide the services specifically set forth below. Task 1: Project Management and Coordination Meetings Kimley-Horn will provide management services to complete the documented scope of services contained herein, including conducting quality control/assurance, and providing timely invoicing and reporting of the project’s progress to the Town. We anticipate the need to have regular coordination throughout the project. This scope assumes one, one-hour project kickoff meeting and up to nine 30- minute, bi-weekly meetings with the Town. Deliverables:  Kickoff meeting notes in electronic email format  Monthly progress reports and invoices (up to 4) Task 2: Review and Define Traffic Analysis Zones Kimley-Horn will work with Town staff in conducting a review of the Loudoun County Model TAZ structure within and adjacent to the Town. The zones from the LC model will be modified to align with the planning zone definitions of the Town in order to more accurately load volume to the network. The zones will be examined to evaluate that the land uses reflect the anticipated future land use forecasts. Kimley-Horn will work with the appropriate Town Departments in developing the new subarea transportation model zones as appropriate and will review draft TAZ changes with Town staff. 218 Item a. Page 3 kimley-horn.com 11400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400, Reston, VA 20191 703 674 1300 Kimley-Horn will refine the TAZ structure based on the review results as described above. Kimley-Horn will disaggregate TAZs with insufficient granularity to the appropriate size to more accurately load the highway network. Kimley-Horn will review and modify centroid connectors based on the new TAZ structure and the local road configuration in specific TAZs. Kimley-Horn will use the revised traffic analysis zones for both the existing and future year models. Deliverables:  Shape file versions of the updated TAZ system.  Documentation of how the Town of Leesburg subarea zone corresponds to the Loudoun County Model zones. Task 3: Update Highway Network The highway network will be updated to include all roads of interest such that they support the required analysis of growth and traffic in the Town. The roads will be added as appropriate for the zone size developed concurrently in Task 2. These two tasks will require iteration to ensure that the zones and network are coordinated. Roadways with a functional classification of collector and above (i.e. Minor Arterial and Principal Arterial) within the study area will be included in the model network. Select local roadways important in the study area for connectivity will also be included in the roadway network, as necessary. Kimley- Horn will populate the link level attributes based on aerial photos, along with information from Town staff. Deliverables:  Shape file versions of the highway network.  Documentation of how the updated network corresponds to the LC Model network. Task 4: Develop Base Model Kimley-Horn will develop the base year subarea travel demand model for Leesburg to reflect the 2019 roadway network and land use. Kimley-Horn will review the accuracy of the Loudoun County Model socio-economic data and will update the demographic and employment data at the new TAZ level for Leesburg. Based on the updated network and TAZ attributes, Kimley-Horn will review and validate area traffic counts, model parameters, and subarea model performance. Kimley-Horn will use the same validation criteria used by the regional model to validate the sub-area model assignment results. Kimley-Horn will discuss the results of this validation with the Town staff in a project meeting. 219 Item a. Page 4 kimley-horn.com 11400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400, Reston, VA 20191 703 674 1300 Deliverables:  Kimley-Horn will prepare a technical memorandum documenting development of the base year travel demand model. Kimley-Horn will submit the technical memorandum to the Client for one round of review and comment. Task 5: Future Year 2045 Model Development Kimley-Horn will use the Leesburg Base Year Subarea Model developed in Task 4 and land use information provided by the Town to develop a Future Year 2045 Leesburg Subarea travel demand model. Kimley-Horn will model the Existing plus Committed (E+C) transportation network based on the current Legacy Leesburg Town Plan and Loudoun County Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP), and any committed projects by private developers identified by the Town. Kimley-Horn will utilize information from the existing LC model and work with the Town to establish information for approved developments, pending developments, and currently undeveloped parcels within the study area. Based on this information, Kimley-Horn will develop TAZ level attributes as input to the trip generation and distribution models. Kimley-Horn will obtain committed and planned roadway project information from the Town. The Town will provide future committed and planned roadway projects not shown in the Legacy Leesburg Town Plan. Kimley-Horn will review the roadway projects and resolve any inconsistencies. Kimley-Horn will review the model results for reasonableness between the LC Model and Town models based on the refinements. Deliverables:  Kimley-Horn will prepare a technical memorandum documenting the future year land use scenario assumptions and data forecasts, E+C network, and results of the model run. Kimley- Horn will submit the technical memorandum to the Client for one round of review and comment. Task 6: Intermediate Model Years 2030 and 2040 Development The most current LC Model includes input for the base year 2019, interim years of 2030 and 2040, and horizon year 2045. Kimley-Horn will develop interim years 2030 and 2040 models land use and roadway network inputs for the subarea process and will review with Town staff. Kimley-Horn will review the model results for reasonableness between the LC Model and Town models based on the refinements. Deliverables:  Summary technical memorandum of the intermediate year network assumptions and regional land use, and results of the model runs. Kimley-Horn will submit the technical memorandum to the Client for one round of review and comment. 220 Item a. Page 5 kimley-horn.com 11400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400, Reston, VA 20191 703 674 1300 Task 7: Model Documentation The model development will be recorded in technical documentation through the development of each task (Task 2 though Task 6). These memos will be compiled to document the methodology, process, inputs development, calibration, and users guide for model application. Note that this documentation will refer to components of the Loudoun County model development documentation and reference additions or modifications resulting from the model described in this scope. Deliverables:  Model Development Report and User’s Guide for model application. Kimley-Horn will submit the Development Report and User’s Guide to the Client for one round of review and comment.  All input and output model files. Task 8: Model Assistance, Training, & Maintenance This task is envisioned as an additional undefined task order to fit the needs of the Town to be determined through model development and after delivery. While Kimley-Horn will develop the model, the model and all components will be the Towns property to run internally or use Kimley-Horn or another consultant to apply the model. This task could include providing modeling support to the Town including training and minor assistance or it could be a task to complete specific analysis requested by the Town. This task will be billed on an hourly basis. For the purposes of this scope Kimley-Horn labor is assumed to be up to 60 hours of Kimley-Horn staff time. Deliverables:  As coordinated between Kimley-Horn and the Client Task 9: Townwide Traffic Study Assistance This task is envisioned for Kimley-Horn to support the Client for the Townwide Traffic Study effort. This task could include assisting in the development of ideas, reviewing traffic forecasting assumptions, public engagement support, or other items as needed. This task will be billed on an hourly basis. For the purposes of this scope Kimley-Horn labor is assumed to be up to 80 hours of Kimley-Horn staff time. Deliverables:  As coordinated between Kimley-Horn and the Client 221 Item a. Page 6 kimley-horn.com 11400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400, Reston, VA 20191 703 674 1300 Optional Services An optional service requested by the Town is noted below:  Task 10: Future Model Update. As an additional task, Kimley-Horn could support updates to model inputs in the future as a result of new Town zoning ordinances, development applications, or changes in the Loudoun County Travel Demand Model or MWCOG Travel Demand Model. Scope and fee for this task could be developed at a future point time as requested by the Town. Additional Services Any services not specifically provided for in the above scope will be billed as additional services and performed at our then current hourly rates. Additional services we can provide include, but are not limited to, the following:  Additional support of Town-wide Traffic Study, support and participation in public meetings, and additional Travel Demand Model scenario runs Information Provided By Client We shall be entitled to rely on the completeness and accuracy of all information provided by the Client or the Client’s consultants or representatives. The Client shall provide all information requested by Kimley-Horn during the project, including but not limited to the following:  Agreement for the explicit use of the more recent version of the Loudoun County Travel Demand Model from Loudoun County, Virginia.  The provision of the complete file package including Cube model, supporting files, and documentation of the Loudoun County Travel Demand Model  Street traffic data for use in model validation This space intentionally left blank. 222 Item a. Page 7 kimley-horn.com 11400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400, Reston, VA 20191 703 674 1300 Schedule We will provide our services as expeditiously as practicable with the goal of meeting the following schedule: The schedule for Tasks 8 and 9 will depend on the requested support and activities defined at a later point in time between Kimley-Horn, the Client, and the Town of Leesburg. It is assumed the support period in Task 8 will last one year (12 months) following the notice to proceed. Fee and Expenses Kimley-Horn will perform the services in Tasks 1-7 for the total lump sum fee of $120,100. Individual task amounts are informational only. Kimley-Horn will perform the Services in Task 8 and 9 on a labor fee plus expense basis with a budget of $33,800. Labor fee will be billed on an hourly basis according to our then-current rates. See Attachment A for the fee estimate with labor hours. Kimley-Horn will provide monthly invoices as a percent complete for the lump tasks and hourly services for Tasks 8 and 9. Payment will be due within 25 days of your receipt of the invoice and should include the invoice number and Kimley-Horn project number. Closure In addition to the matters set forth herein, our Agreement shall include and be subject to, and only to, the attached Standard Provisions, which are incorporated by reference. As used in the Standard Provisions, "Kimley-Horn" shall refer to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., and "Client" shall refer to WSP. 223 Item a. Page 8 kimley-horn.com 11400 Commerce Park Drive, Suite 400, Reston, VA 20191 703 674 1300 Kimley-Horn, in an effort to expedite invoices and reduce paper waste, submits invoices via email in a PDF. We can also provide a paper copy via regular mail if requested. Please include the invoice number and Kimley-Horn project number with all payments. Please provide the following information: ____ Please email all invoices to ___________________________ ____ Please copy _______________________________________ To proceed with the services, please have an authorized person sign this Agreement below and return to us. We will commence services only after we have received a fully-executed agreement. Fees and times stated in this Agreement are valid for sixty (60) days after the date of this letter. To ensure proper set up of your projects so that we can get started, please complete and return with the signed copy of this Agreement the attached Request for Information. Failure to supply this information could result in delay in starting work on this project. We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Geoff Giffin, P.E., PTOE Vice President WSP USA, Inc. SIGNED: PRINTED NAME: _______________________ TITLE:_________________________________ DATE: _______________________________ Client’s Federal Tax ID: _______________________ Client’s Business License No.: __________________ Client’s Street Address: _______________________ _______________________ Attachment – Standard Provisions 224 Item a. Principle in  Charge Program Manager Project Manager Engineer/ Planner  II Engineer/ Planner  I  Hourly Rates 332.65$              319.90$                          240.46$                       191.07$                       158.98$                        Task 1: Project Management and Coordination 5 10 20 20 55 12,851$                    12,900$                     Task 2: Review and Define TAZ 2 16 40 80 138 24,849$                    24,800$                     Task 3: Update Highway Network 2 16 20 60 98 17,848$                    17,800$                     Task 4: Develop Base Model 4 45 60 109 23,564$                    23,600$                     Task 5: Future Model Year 2045 Development 1 2 40 20 20 83 17,592$                    17,600$                     Task 6: Interim Model Years 2030 and 2040 Development 1 2 8 12 36 59 10,912$                    10,900$                     Task 7: Model Documentation 2 4 16 10 30 62 12,472$                    12,500$                     Task 8: Model Assistance, Training, & Maintenance 2 6 14 20 18 60 12,634$                    12,600$                     Task 9: Townwide Traffic Study Assistance 5 30 30 10 5 80 21,180$                    21,200$                     Total Hours and Labor Costs 16 62 205 192 269 744 153,903$                 153,900$                  Travel ‐$                           ‐$                           Total Cost 153,903$              153,900$               Tasks 1‐7 (Lump Sum) 120,100$                  Tasks 8‐9 (Hourly) 33,800$                    Total 153,900$                  Other Direct Costs Task Kimley Horn Hours Professional Services for the Town of Leesburg Travel Demand Model Fee Estimate Attachment A Rounded SubtotalsSubtotal 225 Item a. Rev 12/2022 1 KIMLEY‐HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.  STANDARD PROVISIONS    1) Kimley-Horn's Scope of Services and Additional Services. Kimley-Horn will perform only the services specifically described in this Agreement. If requested by the Client and agreed to by Kimley-Horn, Kimley-Horn will perform Additional Services, which shall be governed by these provisions. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, the Client shall pay Kimley-Horn for any Additional Services an amount based upon Kimley-Horn’s then- current hourly rates plus an amount to cover certain direct expenses including telecommunications, in-house reproduction, postage, supplies, project related computer time, and local mileage. Other direct expenses will be billed at 1.15 times cost. 2) Client's Responsibilities. In addition to other responsibilities herein or imposed by law, the Client shall: a. Designate in writing a person to act as its representative, such person having complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, and make or interpret the Client's decisions. b. Provide all information and criteria as to the Client's requirements, objectives, and expectations for the project and all standards of development, design, or construction. c. Provide Kimley-Horn all available studies, plans, or other documents pertaining to the project, such as surveys, engineering data, environmental information, etc., all of which Kimley-Horn may rely upon. d. Arrange for access to the site and other property as required for Kimley-Horn to provide its services. e. Review all documents or reports presented by Kimley-Horn and communicate decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as not to delay Kimley-Horn. f. Furnish approvals and permits from governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the project and approvals and consents from other parties as may be necessary. g. Obtain any independent accounting, legal, insurance, cost estimating, and feasibility services required by Client. h. Give prompt written notice to Kimley-Horn whenever the Client becomes aware of any development that affects Kimley-Horn's services or any defect or noncompliance in any aspect of the project. 3) Period of Services. Unless otherwise stated herein, Kimley-Horn will begin work after receipt of a properly executed copy of this Agreement. This Agreement assumes conditions permitting continuous and orderly progress through completion of the services. Times for performance shall be extended as necessary for delays or suspensions due to circumstances that Kimley-Horn does not control. If such delay or suspension extends for more than six months, Kimley-Horn’s compensation shall be renegotiated. 4) Method of Payment. Client shall pay Kimley-Horn as follows: a. Invoices will be submitted periodically for services performed and expenses incurred. Payment of each invoice will be due within 25 days of receipt. The Client shall also pay any applicable sales tax. All retainers will be held by Kimley-Horn and applied against the final invoice. Interest will be added to accounts not paid within 25 days at the maximum rate allowed by law. If the Client fails to make any payment due under this or any other agreement within 30 days after Kimley-Horn's transmittal of its invoice, Kimley-Horn may, after giving notice to the Client, suspend services and withhold deliverables until all amounts due are paid. b. If the Client relies on payment or proceeds from a third party to pay Kimley-Horn and Client does not pay Kimley- Horn’s invoice within 60 days of receipt, Kimley-Horn may communicate directly with such third party to secure payment. c. If the Client objects to an invoice, it must advise Kimley-Horn in writing giving its reasons within 14 days of receipt of the invoice or the Client’s objections will be waived, and the invoice shall conclusively be deemed due and owing. If the Client objects to only a portion of the invoice, payment for all other portions remains due. d. If Kimley-Horn initiates legal proceedings to collect payment, it may recover, in addition to all amounts due, its reasonable attorneys' fees, reasonable experts' fees, and other expenses related to the proceedings. Such expenses shall include the cost, at Kimley-Horn's normal hourly billing rates, of the time devoted to such proceedings by its employees. e. The Client agrees that the payment to Kimley-Horn is not subject to any contingency or condition. Kimley-Horn may negotiate payment of any check tendered by the Client, even if the words “in full satisfaction” or words intended to have similar effect appear on the check without such negotiation being an accord and satisfaction of any disputed debt and without prejudicing any right of Kimley-Horn to collect additional amounts from the Client. 5) Use of Documents. All documents and data prepared by Kimley-Horn are related exclusively to the services described in this Agreement and may be used only if the Client has satisfied all of its obligations under this Agreement. They are not intended or represented to be suitable for use or reuse by the Client or others on extensions of this project or on any other project. Any modifications by the Client to any of Kimley-Horn’s documents, or any reuse of the documents without written authorization by Kimley-Horn will be at the Client's sole risk and without liability to Kimley-Horn, and the Client shall indemnify, defend and hold Kimley-Horn harmless from all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, resulting therefrom. Kimley-Horn’s electronic files and source code remain the property of Kimley-Horn and shall be provided to the 226 Item a. Rev 12/2022 2 Client only if expressly provided for in this Agreement. Any electronic files not containing an electronic seal are provided only for the convenience of the Client and use of them is at the Client’s sole risk. In the case of any defects in the electronic files or any discrepancies between them and the hardcopy of the documents prepared by Kimley-Horn, the hardcopy shall govern. 6) Intellectual Property. Kimley-Horn may use or develop its proprietary software, patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and other intellectual property owned by Kimley-Horn or its affiliates (“Intellectual Property”) in the performance of this Agreement. Unless explicitly agreed to in writing by both parties to the contrary, Kimley-Horn maintains all interest in and ownership of its Intellectual Property and conveys no interest, ownership, license to use, or any other rights in the Intellectual Property to Client. Any enhancements of Intellectual Property made during the performance of this Agreement are solely owned by Kimley-Horn and its affiliates. If Kimley-Horn’s services include providing Client with access to or a license for Kimley-Horn’s (or its affiliates’) proprietary software or technology, Client agrees to the terms of the Software License Agreement set forth at https://www.kimley- horn.com/khts-software-license-agreement (“the License Agreement”) which terms are incorporated herein by reference. 7) Opinions of Cost. Because Kimley-Horn does not control the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, methods of determining prices, or competitive bidding or market conditions, any opinions rendered as to costs, including but not limited to the costs of construction and materials, are made solely based on its judgment as a professional familiar with the industry. Kimley-Horn cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual costs will not vary from its opinions of cost. If the Client wishes greater assurance as to the amount of any cost, it shall employ an independent cost estimator. Kimley-Horn's services required to bring costs within any limitation established by the Client will be paid for as Additional Services. 8) Termination. The obligation to provide further services under this Agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven days' written notice in the event of substantial failure by the other party to perform in accordance with the terms hereof, or upon thirty days’ written notice for the convenience of the terminating party. Kimley-Horn shall be paid for all services rendered and expenses incurred to the effective date of termination, and other reasonable expenses incurred by Kimley-Horn as a result of such termination. 9) Standard of Care. The standard of care applicable to Kimley-Horn’s services will be the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by consultants performing the same or similar services in the same locality at the time the services are provided. No warranty, express or implied, is made or intended by Kimley-Horn's performance of services, and it is agreed that Kimley-Horn is not a fiduciary with respect to the Client. 10) LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. In recognition of the relative risks and benefits of the Project to the Client and Kimley- Horn, the risks are allocated such that, to the fullest extent allowed by law, and notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement or the existence of applicable insurance coverage, that the total liability, in the aggregate, of Kimley-Horn and Kimley-Horn's officers, directors, employees, agents, and subconsultants to the Client or to anyone claiming by, through or under the Client, for any and all claims, losses, costs or damages whatsoever arising out of or in any way related to the services under this Agreement from any causes, including but not limited to, the negligence, professional errors or omissions, strict liability or breach of contract or any warranty, express or implied, of Kimley-Horn or Kimley-Horn's officers, directors, employees, agents, and subconsultants, shall not exceed twice the total compensation received by Kimley-Horn under this Agreement or $50,000, whichever is greater. Higher limits of liability may be negotiated for additional fee. This Section is intended solely to limit the remedies available to the Client or those claiming by or through the Client, and nothing in this Section shall require the Client to indemnify Kimley-Horn. 11) Mutual Waiver of Consequential Damages. In no event shall either party be liable to the other for any consequential, incidental, punitive, or indirect damages including but not limited to loss of income or loss of profits. 12) Construction Costs. Under no circumstances shall Kimley-Horn be liable for extra costs or other consequences due to unknown conditions or related to the failure of contractors to perform work in accordance with the plans and specifications. Kimley-Horn shall have no liability whatsoever for any costs arising out of the Client’s decision to obtain bids or proceed with construction before Kimley-Horn has issued final, fully approved plans and specifications. The Client acknowledges that all preliminary plans are subject to substantial revision until plans are fully approved and all permits obtained. 13) Certifications. All requests for Kimley-Horn to execute certificates, lender consents, or other third-party reliance letters must be submitted to Kimley-Horn at least 14 days prior to the requested date of execution. Kimley-Horn shall not be required to execute certificates, consents, or third-party reliance letters that are inaccurate, that relate 227 Item a. Rev 12/2022 3 to facts of which Kimley-Horn does not have actual knowledge, or that would cause Kimley-Horn to violate applicable rules of professional responsibility. 14) Dispute Resolution. All claims arising out of this Agreement or its breach shall be submitted first to mediation in accordance with the American Arbitration Association as a condition precedent to litigation. Any mediation or civil action by Client must be commenced within one year of the accrual of the cause of action asserted but in no event later than allowed by applicable statutes. 15) Hazardous Substances and Conditions. Kimley-Horn shall not be a custodian, transporter, handler, arranger, contractor, or remediator with respect to hazardous substances and conditions. Kimley-Horn's services will be limited to analysis, recommendations, and reporting, including, when agreed to, plans and specifications for isolation, removal, or remediation. Kimley-Horn will notify the Client of unanticipated hazardous substances or conditions of which Kimley-Horn actually becomes aware. Kimley-Horn may stop affected portions of its services until the hazardous substance or condition is eliminated. 16) Construction Phase Services. a. If Kimley-Horn prepares construction documents and Kimley-Horn is not retained to make periodic site visits, the Client assumes all responsibility for interpretation of the documents and for construction observation, and the Client waives any claims against Kimley-Horn in any way connected thereto. b. Kimley-Horn shall have no responsibility for any contractor's means, methods, techniques, equipment choice and usage, sequence, schedule, safety programs, or safety practices, nor shall Kimley-Horn have any authority or responsibility to stop or direct the work of any contractor. Kimley-Horn's visits will be for the purpose of endeavoring to provide the Client a greater degree of confidence that the completed work of its contractors will generally conform to the construction documents prepared by Kimley-Horn. Kimley-Horn neither guarantees the performance of contractors, nor assumes responsibility for any contractor’s failure to perform its work in accordance with the contract documents. c. Kimley-Horn is not responsible for any duties assigned to it in the construction contract that are not expressly provided for in this Agreement. The Client agrees that each contract with any contractor shall state that the contractor shall be solely responsible for job site safety and its means and methods; that the contractor shall indemnify the Client and Kimley-Horn for all claims and liability arising out of job site accidents; and that the Client and Kimley-Horn shall be made additional insureds under the contractor’s general liability insurance policy. 17) No Third-Party Beneficiaries; Assignment and Subcontracting. This Agreement gives no rights or benefits to anyone other than the Client and Kimley-Horn, and all duties and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement will be for the sole benefit of the Client and Kimley-Horn. The Client shall not assign or transfer any rights under or interest in this Agreement, or any claim arising out of the performance of services by Kimley-Horn, without the written consent of Kimley-Horn. Kimley-Horn reserves the right to augment its staff with subconsultants as it deems appropriate due to project logistics, schedules, or market conditions. If Kimley-Horn exercises this right, Kimley-Horn will maintain the agreed-upon billing rates for services identified in the contract, regardless of whether the services are provided by in-house employees, contract employees, or independent subconsultants. 18) Confidentiality. The Client consents to the use and dissemination by Kimley-Horn of photographs of the project and to the use by Kimley-Horn of facts, data and information obtained by Kimley-Horn in the performance of its services. If, however, any facts, data or information are specifically identified in writing by the Client as confidential, Kimley-Horn shall use reasonable care to maintain the confidentiality of that material. 19) Miscellaneous Provisions. This Agreement is to be governed by the law of the State where the Project is located. This Agreement contains the entire and fully integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations, representations, agreements, or understandings, whether written or oral. Except as provided in Section 1, this Agreement can be supplemented or amended only by a written document executed by both parties. Any conflicting or additional terms on any purchase order issued by the Client shall be void and are hereby expressly rejected by Kimley-Horn. If Client requires Kimley-Horn to register with or use an online vendor portal for payment or any other purpose, any terms included in the registration or use of the online vendor portal that are inconsistent or in addition to these terms shall be void and shall have no effect on Kimley- Horn or this Agreement. Any provision in this Agreement that is unenforceable shall be ineffective to the extent of such unenforceability without invalidating the remaining provisions. The non-enforcement of any provision by either party shall not constitute a waiver of that provision nor shall it affect the enforceability of that provision or of the remainder of this Agreement. 228 Item a. ESTIMATE WDC:VA BILL TO :WSP 13530 Dulles Technology Drive , Dulles Executive Plaza 1, Suite 300 Herndon,VA 20171 (703) 742-5980 CLIENT PROJECT # :ESTIMATE DATE : 6/5/2023 ORDER DATE : 5/23/2023 ORDER No PROJECT NAME PAYMENT TERMS ORDER BY 162314 Leesburg Revised Estimate 5-23-2023 PWP Ravi Raut QTY DESCRIPTION RATE TOTAL 52 Standard-Turn Count $215.00 $11,180.00 26 Location(s) for time period(s): 7:00 AM -- 9:00 AM-(Midweek) - 2 Hrs. -Fairview St NW/Catoctin Cir SW -- Market St, Leesburg, VA -Catoctin Cir SW -- Dry Mill Rd (Rt 699) , Leesburg, VA -Harrison St SE -- Catoctin Cir SE, Leesburg, VA -N King St -- North St NE, Leesburg, VA -N King St -- Cornwall St, Leesburg, VA -King St SE -- Royal St SW/Royal St SE, Leesburg, VA -King St -- Fairfax St SE, Leesburg, VA -N King St -- W Market St/E Market St, Leesburg, VA -Ayr St SW/Dry Mill Rd SW -- Loudoun St, Leesburg, VA -Liberty St SW -- Loudoun St SW, Leesburg, VA -Wirt St SW -- Loudoun St SW, Leesburg, VA -King St -- Loudoun St SW/Loudoun St SE, Leesburg, VA -Church St SE -- Loudoun St SE, Leesburg, VA -E Market St -- Loudoun St SE, Leesburg, VA -Ayr St SW/Ayr St NW --W Market St, Leesburg, VA -Memorial Dr NW -- W Market St, Leesburg, VA -Liberty St -- W Market St, Leesburg, VA -Wirt St NW/Wirt St SW -- W Market St, Leesburg, VA -Church St NE -- North St NE, Leesburg, VA -Wirt St SW -- Royal St, Leesburg, VA -Church St SE -- Royal St, Leesburg, VA -Church St NE -- Cornwall St NE, Leesburg, VA -Slack Ln NE -- North St NE, Leesburg, VA -S King St -- S St SW/Stationmaster St, Leesburg, VA -Liberty St -- Royal St, Leesburg, VA -Wirt St -- S St SW, Leesburg, VA 26 Location(s) for time period(s): 4:00 PM -- 6:00 PM-(Midweek) - 2 Hrs. Generated on 06/05/2023 03:36 AM Page 1 of 3 229 Item a. -Fairview St NW/Catoctin Cir SW -- Market St, Leesburg, VA -Catoctin Cir SW -- Dry Mill Rd (Rt 699) , Leesburg, VA -Harrison St SE -- Catoctin Cir SE, Leesburg, VA -N King St -- North St NE, Leesburg, VA -N King St -- Cornwall St, Leesburg, VA -King St SE -- Royal St SW/Royal St SE, Leesburg, VA -King St -- Fairfax St SE, Leesburg, VA -N King St -- W Market St/E Market St, Leesburg, VA -Ayr St SW/Dry Mill Rd SW -- Loudoun St, Leesburg, VA -Liberty St SW -- Loudoun St SW, Leesburg, VA -Wirt St SW -- Loudoun St SW, Leesburg, VA -King St -- Loudoun St SW/Loudoun St SE, Leesburg, VA -Church St SE -- Loudoun St SE, Leesburg, VA -E Market St -- Loudoun St SE, Leesburg, VA -Ayr St SW/Ayr St NW --W Market St, Leesburg, VA -Memorial Dr NW -- W Market St, Leesburg, VA -Liberty St -- W Market St, Leesburg, VA -Wirt St NW/Wirt St SW -- W Market St, Leesburg, VA -Church St NE -- North St NE, Leesburg, VA -Wirt St SW -- Royal St, Leesburg, VA -Church St SE -- Royal St, Leesburg, VA -Church St NE -- Cornwall St NE, Leesburg, VA -Slack Ln NE -- North St NE, Leesburg, VA -S King St -- S St SW/Stationmaster St, Leesburg, VA -Liberty St -- Royal St, Leesburg, VA -Wirt St -- S St SW, Leesburg, VA 8 High Volume-Turn Count $290.00 $2,320.00 4 Location(s) for time period(s): 7:00 AM -- 9:00 AM-(Midweek) - 2 Hrs. -King St -- Catoctin Cir SW, Leesburg, VA -Catoctin Cir NE/Catoctin Cir SE -- Market St, Leesburg, VA -Church St -- Market St/Edwards Ferry Rd NE/E Market St, Leesburg, VA -Morven Park Rd NW/Morven Park Rd SW -- Market St/Loudoun St, Leesburg, VA 4 Location(s) for time period(s): 4:00 PM -- 6:00 PM-(Midweek) - 2 Hrs. -King St -- Catoctin Cir SW, Leesburg, VA -Catoctin Cir NE/Catoctin Cir SE -- Market St, Leesburg, VA -Church St -- Market St/Edwards Ferry Rd NE/E Market St, Leesburg, VA -Morven Park Rd NW/Morven Park Rd SW -- Market St/Loudoun St, Leesburg, VA 4 Video- VC Binned - 1-3 Lanes Per Direction-Class, Volume $960.00 $3,840.00 4 Location(s) for time period(s): 1 Days (Class, Volume) -TBD Location 1, Leesburg, VA -TBD Location 2, Leesburg, VA -TBD Location 3, Loudoun, VA -TBD Location 4, Leesburg, VA QTY DESCRIPTION RATE TOTAL Generated on 06/05/2023 03:36 AM Page 2 of 3 230 Item a. Quality Counts, LLC 15615 SW 74th Ave #100 Tigard, OR 97224 (877) 580-2212 qualitycounts.net 1 Video VC Binned - 4-6 Lanes Per Direction-Class, Volume $1,440.00 $1,440.00 1 Location(s) for time period(s): 1 Days (Class, Volume) -TBD Location 5, Leesburg, VA 2 Bi-Directional 1-3 Lanes-Volume $220.00 $440.00 2 Location(s) for time period(s): 1 Days (Volume) -Loudoun St West of Liberty St, Leesburg, VA -Market St btwn Harrison St and east Loudoun St/Market St merge , Leesburg, VA 1 Standard tube setup fee $200.00 $200.00 TOTAL $19,420.00 QTY DESCRIPTION RATE TOTAL Balances unpaid by end of Payment term (listed above) will be charged 1.5% interest per month Generated on 06/05/2023 03:36 AM Page 3 of 3 231 Item a. WSP Fee Town of Leesburg Traffic Study Task Manager Sr Engineer - Traffic Engineer - Traffic Jr. Engineer I- Traffic CADD Technician Admin. Asssistant Task No. Task Description $263.14 $209.70 $169.29 $106.48 $135.87 $109.58 1 Project Management Bi-Monthly Meetings (Preparation and Meeting Minutes)12 12 Project Coordination and Invoicing 12 12 12 2 Literature Review, Data Collection, and Desktop Review Literature Review 2 8 16 Data Collection coordination & summarization 2 8 8 Travel times and queues 2 2 4 16 Desktop review of existing geometric conditions 1 4 4 8 Existing conditions safety analysis 2 8 16 32 Field Review 2 8 8 3 Existing Conditions Operational Analysis Existing Synchro Model Volume balancing 4 8 Develop Existing Synchro Model (AM&PM)2 8 40 8 QAQC 4 4 Summarize MOEs - results figures/tables 4 8 Draft Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum 2 16 30 Conduct Meeting with Town and Draft Meeting Notes 2 2 2 Update Existing Model Based on Town Feedback 4 8 Final Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum 4 8 30 4 Future No-Build Conditions Operational Analysis 2 12 20 8 Develop Future No-Build Volumes (AM&PM)4 8 Develop Future No-Build Synchro Model (AM&PM)2 8 12 Summarize MOEs - results figures/tables 4 8 46 5 Alternatives Development Develop Short-Term/low cost improvements 4 8 6 High level analysis of 7 one-way alternatives 8 20 20 Conduct Meeting with Town and Draft Meeting Notes 3 3 3 Two Planning-level concept drawings 2 8 20 4 6 Future Build Conditions Operational & Safety Analysis Develop Future Build Volumes (2 alts, AM&PM)1 8 12 Develop Future Build Synchro Models (2 alts, AM&PM)4 32 40 80 Summarize MOEs - results figures/tables 8 12 197 Summarize CMFs for Key Intersections 1 8 16 Conduct Meeting with Town and Draft Meeting Notes 3 3 3 Update Build Models Based on Town Feedback 2 12 20 20 7 Redevelopment of Liberty St Parking Lot Develop Future Build Volumes-Liberty Lot redevelopment (2 alts, AM&PM)1 4 8 Develop Future Build Synchro Models with Liberty Lot (2 alts, AM&PM)2 12 14 20 Summarize MOEs with Liberty Lot - results figures/tables 1 4 6 72 8 Traffic Study Technical Report Draft technical report 8 24 48 Final technical report 4 16 24 9 Meetings Public Meeting (Materials prep, mtg, summary)8 20 8 4 12 Town Council Meeting (Materials prep, mtg, summary)8 8 8 4 Revisions Based on Town or community input 4 8 20 10 10 Travel Demand Model Coordination 4 8 4 Labor hours subtotal 117 350 398 304 20 16 1205 Labor cost subtotal 30,787.38$ 73,395.00$ 67,377.42$ 32,369.92$ 2,717.40$ 1,753.28$ 208,400.40$ Optional Labor hours subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Optional Labor cost subtotal -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Direct Costs Item Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Traffic Data Collection 1 lump sum 19,420 19,420.00$ Travel Demand Model 1 lump sum 153,900 153,900.00$ Mileage (mi)500 mile 0.655$ 327.50$ Plan Sheets 250 sf 0.10$ 25.00$ Color Copies 200 each 0.25$ 50.00$ Direct Cost Subtotal 173,722.50$ 173,722.50$ TOTAL 382,122.90$ Detailed Scope - WSP OPTIONAL SERVICES 232 Item a. Council Meeting Date: June 13, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Subject: Appointment to the Board of Architectural Review Staff Contact: Eileen M. Boeing, CMC, Clerk of Council Council Action Requested: Consideration of an appointment to the Board of Architectural Review. Staff Recommendation: Not applicable. Commission Recommendation: Not applicable. Fiscal Impact: Section 2-197 of the Town Code provides for annual compensation of $3,750 for the Chair of the Board of Architectural Review and $3,600 for Board of Architectural members. Funds are currently available within the current Fiscal Year 2023 general fund budget. Work Plan Impact: None. Town Plan Impact: None. Executive Summary: One vacancy currently exists on the Board of Architectural Review. This appointment belongs to Council Member Zach Cummings; however, more than 60 days have elapsed since the vacancy occurred. Therefore, nominations may be submitted by any member of Council in accordance with Section 2-194(7) of the Town Code. One nomination was received by the agenda packet release date from Council Member Zach Cummings to appoint Rick Brown to the Board of Architectural Review. Mr. Brown’s statement of interest is attached (Attachment 2). Background: One vacancy currently exists on the Board of Architectural Review. This appointment belongs to Council Member Zach Cummings; however, more than 60 days have elapsed since the vacancy occurred. Therefore, nominations may be submitted by any member of Council in accordance with Section 2-194(7) of the Town Code. One nominee, Rick Brown, was received by Council Member Cummings by the agenda packet release date. This appointment is through December 2024. Membership on the Board of Architectural Review shall consist of nine members including seven voting members and two non-voting members. One non-voting member shall be a Town Council member appointed by the Town Council and one non-voting member shall be a Planning Commission member appointed by the Planning Commission. Members shall demonstrate a qualified interest in historic preservation, and a majority of Board of Architectural Review members shall have professional training or equivalent experience in history, architectural history, archaeology, or planning. At least one member of the Board of Architectural Review shall be an 233 Item b. Appointment to the Board of Architectural Review June 13, 2023 Page 2 architect. All persons appointed to the Board of Architectural Review shall be bona fide residents of the Town of Leesburg and shall have a demonstrated interest in and knowledge of the history of the community. Mr. Brown is a Town resident and has historic preservation experience. Contract Start/End Date: Not applicable. Proposed Legislation: ORDINANCE Appointing _____________ to the Board of Architectural Review Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed Ordinance. 2. I move to deny the proposed Ordinance. OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Draft Ordinance 2. Statement of Interest – R. Brown 2023/06 234 Item b. PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 ORDINANCE NO. 2023- ADOPTED: ____________ AN ORDINANCE : APPOINTING ______________________ TO THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW WHEREAS, participation by public-spirited citizens on town boards, commissions and committees is vital to the success of town government and the democratic process; and WHEREAS, boards, commissions and committees serve an indispensable role in providing recommendations concerning town policy and programs; and WHEREAS, Council desires to appoint effective individuals to serve on these advisory boards; and WHEREAS, terms of Boards and Commissions members correspond to the term of the council member who holds the vacancy, and WHEREAS, this appointment belongs to Council Member Zach Cummings; however more than 60-days have elapsed since the vacancy occurred and any member of Council may nominate a replacement; and WHEREAS, membership on the Board of Architectural Review shall meet the criteria listed in the Zoning Ordinance and Town Code and shall consist of town residents or town business owners, with the exception that one member of the Board may, at the discretion of the Town Council, be appointed to the Board as a non-resident property owner provided that said member owns at least a parcel of land in the H-1 Old and Historic Overlay District; and WHEREAS, one nomination was received by the agenda packet release date from Council Member Zach Cummings to appoint Rick Brown to the Board of Architectural Review; and 235 Item b. AN ORDINANCE: APPOINTING ____________________ TO THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW -2- 2023/01 WHEREAS, Mr. Brown’s qualifications and residency were reviewed for compliance with applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance and Town Code; and WHEREAS, Town Code Section 7A-2 requires members of the Board of Architectural Review be appointed by Ordinance. THEREFORE, ORDAINED, that the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia hereby appoints ____________________ to the Board of Architectural Review to a term ending December 31, 2024. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. PASSED this 13th day of June 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 236 Item b. Board or Commission of Interest First Name Last Name Board or Commission of Interest Description Board of Architectural Review Richard Brown I am passionate about the visual history of the United States in general. This is reflected in how I have restored my own property at 213 S. King Street utilizing as much original material as possible and adhering to the BAR guidelines and process. The town has a rich architectural heritage that needs to be showcased, preserved and augmented when new construction is occurring. 237 Item b. Council Meeting Date: June 13, 2023 TOWN OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Subject: TLZM-2021-0006, Hamblet Property Rezoning Staff Contact: Scott E. Parker, AICP, Senior Planning Project Manager James David, Director, Department of Planning and Zoning Council Action Requested: Approve the Rezoning request from Residential Estate (R-E) to Medium Density Attached Residential (R-8) to allow 25 townhouse units for the Hamblet property located at the end of Box Lake Place NE, and identified with Loudoun County PIN 149382764 and 149383136. Staff Recommendation: Approve the rezoning for the Hamblet project with draft proffers and a concept plan. Staff finds the proposal meets Zoning Ordinance approval criteria and fits within the Town Plan’s Eastern Gateway Small Area Plan designation for the property as “appropriate for single family detached or attached development that is compatible with the character of the adjoining residential neighborhood.” Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on April 20, 2023, for the application. Four members of the public expressed concerns about the proposal and many more stood in opposition to the application when asked to do so by one of the speakers. The Planning Commission also received multiple emails from concerned citizens about the proposal and a petition against the proposal. The majority of public speakers and concerned citizens reside in the neighborhoods adjacent to the subject property. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the Rezoning by a vote of 4-2-1 following the public hearing. Within the motion for denial, the Planning Commission stated that the rezoning application does not meet the Approval Criteria of TLZO Section 3.3.15 and the proposal will not serve the public necessity, general welfare, and good planning practice based on the findings as follows: 1. Based on the Legacy Leesburg Town Plan, the proposal is not beneficial to current town residents and future generations. 2. Based on the Legacy Leesburg Town Plan, the proposal does not support the general welfare of the existing community. The Planning Commission discussed numerous topics associated with the application as part of their evaluation in addition to the items presented in the motion. These topics included the impact of the development on the existing Potomac Station neighborhood, the character of the townhouses compared to the adjacent single family detached homes, ingress and egress from Bow Lake Place, Route 7 noise impacts and mitigations, townhouse resident and guest parking, and the additional vehicle trips on the adjacent neighborhood streets. There was also discussion about the current 238 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006, Hamblet Property Rezoning June 13, 2023 Page 2 condition of Harper Park Middle School traffic using the Potomac Station neighborhood for ingress and egress, and how the rezoning proposal may impact existing traffic. Fiscal Impact: A fiscal impact analysis dated January 31, 2022 using the Town’s in-house fiscal model was conducted by staff regarding the subject application. It is estimated that the proposal is fiscally positive for the Town and projected to generate $10,539 in tax revenue annually. Work Plan Impact: Managing legislative applications is part of the core function of the Department of Planning and Zoning. Town Plan Impact: The proposed application is for a 25-unit townhouse development which Staff believes is consistent with the Legacy Leesburg Town Plan land use, community design, and transportation goals for the area. A detailed Town Plan analysis is available in the April 20, 2023 Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report, beginning on page 10, at the link below: https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/Browse.aspx?id=619025&repo=r-165d21d4 The Town Plan shows this property is within the general designation of “Residential Neighborhood” and states that: “…Residential neighborhoods include one housing type—single family detached— on different lot sizes that vary enough to provide a range of home choices in the same neighborhood…” Since the application is proposing townhouse units, this presents an apparent conflict. However, this property is specifically cited within the Eastern Gateway District Small Area Plan (EGDSAP) special planning district, which supersedes the Town Plan. The EGDSAP states: “The vacant property at the end of Bow Lake Place is appropriate for single family detached or attached development that is compatible with the character of the adjoining residential neighborhood.” The EGDSAP also states under Objective 1.b (EGDSAP page 12-24): “Ensure protection of Heritage resources in the Eastern Gateway Area including Carradoc Hall and the Stone House at Harper Park.” Since the EGDSAP is a specific policy document that is part of the Town Plan, the application demonstrates Town Plan compliance given the relatively low number of single family attached units for the parcel size, the property’s inclusion within the Gateway District (Overlay) for architectural control, and the proposed and proffered protection of the Stone House feature located on the site. Executive Summary: The Applicant (Carr Homes, LLC) seeks rezoning approval for a residential townhouse project on the Hamblet property, located at the end of Bow Lake Place. Although Bow Lake Place is within a single-family detached home section of the Potomac Station planned community, this proposed development would be independent from the Potomac Station Home Owners Association. The subject parcel is 6.44 acres, zoned Residential Estate (R-E), and is located within the Gateway District (Overlay). An existing ingress/egress point at the end of Bow Lake Place (at the end of a cul-de-sac) is the legal existing access to this property, and the entrance will be modified to provide the sole means of ingress/egress for this proposed development. The 239 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006, Hamblet Property Rezoning June 13, 2023 Page 3 Applicant is requesting a rezoning to Medium-Density Attached Residential (R-8) to permit 25 townhouse units on the property at a density of approximately 3.89 dwelling units per acre. Part of this application includes the rehabilitation and re-use of the “Stone House” (alternately known as the “Harper House”), located on a separate 0.44-acre parcel, as an outdoor amenity and gathering area. The Stone House is a contributing resource but is not listed on any historic register. The building was moved to this site from its original location in the 1990s to allow for the construction of the River Creek Parkway / Route 7 interchange. The inside of the house is not proposed for use. Background: The Hamblet property is currently vacant except for an entrance built at the terminus of Bow Lake Place, and the Stone House is located at the southeast corner of the site. The property’s only legal public road access is on Bow Lake Place. There is no access to Route 7 though the site has frontage on that limited access highway. The property is not subject to any previous rezoning approvals. Density and Layout: The requested density of 3.89 dwelling units per acre is comparable to the surrounding Potomac Station planned development. The proposed townhomes are arranged in five “sticks” of units. Two four-unit sticks would face Route 7 and front on the stormwater facility for the project which will be significantly landscaped. Two sticks of five townhomes would face single- family residential units of Potomac Station, and a stick of seven units would front on the accompanying open space in the middle of the development but have the rear of the units face toward Harper Park Middle School. All units would have two-car, rear-loaded garages. No buffer modifications are requested. 240 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006, Hamblet Property Rezoning June 13, 2023 Page 4 Design: The site is in the Gateway District (Overlay) (TLZO Sec. 7.12) which establishes standards that ensure quality site and building design compatible with Leesburg's historic, architectural, and tourist resources along the town's primary arterial routes into the H-1, Overlay, Old and Historic District. The Board of Architectural Review (BAR) will have final approval authority for construction design of all units on the site through the issuance of Certificates of Appropriateness (COAs). The BAR reviewed this application as a referral to provide feedback on conceptual items, such as scale, height, massing and building placement. The BAR’s referral indicated they were generally comfortable with the application. More detail regarding the BAR’s conceptual review may be found in the April 20, 2023, Planning Commission Staff Report. Stone House: The application includes the rehabilitation and exterior re-use of “the Stone House” as an outdoor amenity and gathering area. The Eastern Gateway District Small Area Plan (EGDSAP) states that this resource should be protected. The resource is in a state of disrepair, and the applicant is proposing to repair the structure, and make it weather tight. The interior is not proposed for renovation for a variety of architectural, structural and accessibility reasons, but the grounds surrounding the house are proposed to be an amenity gathering area with paths and a gazebo that can be used by the greater Potomac Station community in addition to the proposed development. Transportation: A Transportation Analysis demonstrates the 25 townhomes would create no more than 12 vehicle trips per hour over the three-hour a.m. peak and the three-hour p.m. peak periods. A total of 149 trips per day is estimated by the study, falling well below a threshold to be considered a burden to the local residential street network. The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed development will not overburden the local roads adjacent to this development. Staff acknowledges, however, that although from a technical perspective the additional trips generated from the proposal will not over burden the local streets, the traffic generated will potentially add to traffic on Bonnie Ridge Drive that is associated with Harper Park Middle School drop off/pick up. The addition of these trips, combined with the traffic associated with Harper Park has been a significant concern for residents in the vicinity. Parking: Residential parking is required for townhouses at a rate of 2.5 spaces per unit which requires 63 spaces (2.5 x 25 dwelling units). This includes the ordinance requirement that for townhomes with a two-car garage, the garage shall count as one space and the driveway shall count as another. A total of 89 spaces are provided, which includes garage (25 spaces), driveway (50 spaces), and common spaces (14). The Applicant has included Proffer #6.C (page 3) to ensure “no garage shall be converted to any purpose other than for the storage of operable vehicles.” This proffer is part of the Covenants and Restrictions section of the proffers, thus making the HOA the responsible entity for enforcement. No parking is proposed for the Stone House amenity. It was determined that if public parking were provided, the Stone House amenity area may become a destination for the general public outside of the greater community in the vicinity. Therefore, the amenity feature is intended as a walkable destination for the local community. 241 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006, Hamblet Property Rezoning June 13, 2023 Page 5 ADUs: No Affordable Dwelling Units (ADUs) are being provided in the Hamblet Property rezoning. The threshold for providing ADUs per the requirements of TLZO Sec. 3.17.7.A.2 is a development proposal of at least 25 units. However, the number of units allowed by-right on a property under its current zoning is subtracted from this criterion. For the purpose of determining ADU requirements the Hamblet application is calculated at 23 units since 2 units are currently allowed by-right. Therefore, the applicant is not required to provide ADUs. Schools: According to Loudoun County Public School’s projections, the proposed development would generate five (5) elementary age school children, three (3) middle school age children, and four (4) high school age children, for a total generation of 12 students. Proffer Cash Contributions: The Applicant has submitted proposed proffers per established proffer guidelines. A summary of the cash proffers is provided as follows: Table 2. Summary of Proffered Cash Contributions Type of Contribution Amount Total 1 Off-Site Transportation Contribution (Proffer #11) Consistent with previous application contributions $66,779 2 Fire & Rescue (Proffer #13) $100 x 25 units $2,500 3 School Capital Facilities Contribution (Proffer 12) $18,285 x 25 units $457,125 Total Proffered Cash Contributions $526,404 The proffers also cover issues such as substantial conformance with the Concept Plan, establishment of an HOA, design and provision of amenities. Contract Start/End Date: Not applicable. Proposed Legislation: ORDINANCE Approving TLZM-2021-0006 Hamblet Property to Rezone 6.44 Acres from R-E, Residential Estate to R-8, Medium-Density Attached Residential Draft Motions: 1. I move to approve the proposed Ordinance, approving rezoning application TLZM-2021-0006 including the Concept Plan revised through March 31, 2023, and the proffers dated May 4, 2023, based on finding that the rezoning is compatible with neighboring properties, consistent with the Legacy Leesburg Town Plan and Eastern Gateway District Small Area Plan land use and community design goals, consistent with the Town of Leesburg Zoning Ordinance, and consistent with the protection of the health, safety, welfare, and convenience of the community. 242 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006, Hamblet Property Rezoning June 13, 2023 Page 6 2. I move to deny the proposed Ordinance based on finding that the proposed use is not consistent with the Legacy Leesburg Town Plan nor the regulations of the Town of Leesburg Zoning Ordinance, based on the following findings_________________________ . OR 3. I move an alternate motion. Attachments: 1. Draft Ordinance 2. Applicant Statement of Justification 3. Applicant Concept Plan, dated March 31, 2023 4. Applicant Draft proffers, dated May 4, 2023 2023/05 243 Item a. PRESENTED: June 13, 2023 ORDINANCE NO. 2023- ADOPTED: ____________ AN ORDINANCE : APPROVING TLZM-2021-0006 HAMBLET PROPERTY TO REZONE 6.44 ACRES FROM R-E, RESIDENTIAL ESTATE TO R-8, MEDIUM-DENSITY ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL WHEREAS, the rezoning application TLZM-2021-0006, Hamblet Property, has been filed by Carrhomes, LLC to rezone approximately 6.44 acres from R-E, Residential Estate to R-8, Medium-Density Attached Residential, subject to a Concept Plan and Proffers; and WHEREAS, the property subject to this rezoning is identified as Loudoun County Parcel Identification Numbers (PIN) 149-38-2764 and 149-38-3136; and WHEREAS, the development of the property includes up to 25 single-family attached units; and WHEREAS, the proposed application is consistent with the Legacy Leesburg Town Plan and Eastern Gateway District Small Area Plan land use, community design, and transportation goals for the area, and WHEREAS, on April 20, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing on the application; and WHEREAS, on April 20, 2023, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the subject rezoning request based on their finding that the proposed rezoning does not meet the Approval Criteria of TLZO Section 3.3.15; and WHEREAS, Town Staff recommends approval of this rezoning application pursuant to proffer commitments by the applicant; and WHEREAS, on June13, 2023, the Town Council held a duly authorized public hearing on this application; and 244 Item a. AN ORDINANCE: APPROVING TLZM-2021-0006 HAMBLET PROPERTY TO REZONE 6.66 ACRES FROM R-E, RESIDENTIAL ESTATE TO R- 8, MEDIUM-DENSITY ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL -2- WHEREAS, Town Council has determined that the Approval Criteria of Zoning Ordinance Section 3.3.15 have been satisfied; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has concluded that the approval of the application would be in the public interest and in accordance with sound zoning and planning principles. THEREFORE, ORDAINED, by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia as follows: SECTION I. Rezoning application TLZM-2021-0006, Hamblet Property, as identified above, is hereby approved; and SECTION II. Development of the property is subject to the Proffer Statement dated May 4, 2023; and SECTION III. Development of the property shall be in substantial conformance with the Concept Plan prepared by Christopher Consultants, last revised March 31, 2023; and SECTION IV. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. PASSED this 13th day of June 2023. ______________________________ Kelly Burk, Mayor Town of Leesburg ATTEST: ______________________________ Clerk of Council 245 Item a. STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION TLZM-2021-0006 Hamblet Property Loudoun County PIN 149-38-2764 & 149-38-3136 November 10, 2021 December 8, 2021 September 22, 2022 February 17, 2023 I. Introduction Carrhomes, LLC (the “Applicant”) is requesting a rezoning of Loudoun County PIN 149-38-2764 & 149-38-3136 (the “Property”) to provide for an accessible and high quality infill residential neighborhood that complements the existing neighborhood character. As set forth in more detail below, by providing for high quality design and architecture, increasing the range of living and affordability, and creating a sense of place, the Applicant’s proposed rezoning will meet the intent and goals of Legacy Leesburg and the Eastern Gateway District Small Area Plan (“EGSAP”). II. Property Background The Property consists of approximately 6.44 acres located north of Harry Byrd Highway (State Route 7) west of Bow Lake Place. The Property is undeveloped with the exception of the Stone House building which moved to its current location in the 1990’s to accommodate the construction of the River Creek Parkway interchange. Following the move, the less than half-acre parcel and Stone House were originally gifted to the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors before reverting to the current Property owners in 2007 after concerns regarding cost of restoration and maintenance made meeting the conditions in the deed of gift unattainable in the timeframe allowed. The Virginia Department of Historic Resources (VDHR) refers to the Stone House as a known heritage resource (VDHR ID# 253-5006), however, despite private interest in the Stone House, the building is not currently listed as eligible for any historic register, and no public entity has come forward to express interest in assuming responsibility either financially or programmatically. As such, no facilities are presently provided for the benefit, use or enjoyment of the public at large or nearby residents. No historic features are located on the Property; the Applicant’s archeology study yielded no discoveries associated with the Stone House, and recommended no additional studies with the exception of a Phase 2 Architectural Evaluation of the Stone House. The Applicant is committed to preserving the Stone House in place, and has conducted a Phase 2 Architectural Evaluation, prepared by Thunderbird Archaeology, which confirms that this building is not recommended as eligible for listing in any historic register and no additional investigations are recommended. 246 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006 Statement of Justification Page 2 of 8 The Property is bordered to the south by Harry Byrd Highway; to the north by Harper Park Middle School; to the west by the existing Clarion Hotel and Conference Center; and to the east by single-family detached homes in the Potomac Station community. The Property is currently zoned to the R-E Single-Family Residential Estate District (the “R-E District”) pursuant to § 5.1 et seq. of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Leesburg (the “Zoning Ordinance”). The Property is designated as an “Area to Enhance” under the Legacy Leesburg Town Plan For Leesburg, VA (“Legacy Leesburg”). Legacy Leesburg specifically calls out Areas to Enhance as primarily traditional suburban neighborhoods, and notes that there may be opportunities for carefully planned and designed infill development. Integrated into Legacy Leesburg is the EGSAP. The EGSAP provides guidance on certain architecture and design goals for new development including residential. The EGSAP specifically notes within the Northeast Quadrant Policies, Guidance, and Goals that the Property per “Land Use Policy Point 3” is “appropriate for single family detached or attached development that is compatible with the character of the adjoining residential neighborhood.” III. Proposed Neighborhood and Amenities As depicted on the Rezoning Concept Plan (the “Concept Plan”) prepared by Christopher Consultants, Ltd., the Applicant proposes a new residential community comprised of 25 single-family attached (townhouse) dwellings along with various amenities including the incorporation of the Stone House. The proposed community necessitates rezoning the Property to the R-8 Medium-Density Attached Residential District (the “R-8 District”) pursuant to § 5.7 et seq. of the Zoning Ordinance. At a proposed density of 3.89 units per acre the proposed development is noticeably lower in density than the closest existing townhome area within the Potomac Station neighborhood, which when accounting for both nearby HOA open space and townhome lots is approximately 6.52 units per acre in comparison. The Applicant has specifically chosen to stay under four units per acre in order to achieve an actual and perceived density that is most closely comparable to the density levels achieved within the single-family detached home areas of Potomac Station. The Applicants proposal to provide single-family attached dwellings is directly in line with Policy Point 3, which specifically calls for single-family attached development in this area that is compatible with the character of the adjoining residential neighborhood. The adjoining residential neighborhood, Potomac Station, includes both single-family detached and attached dwelling units, as well as multi-family rental apartments, two school sites, a hotel, and various commercial strip and pad retail. The average residential density, excluding the multi-family units is approximately 3.23 units per acre, within half a unit per acre of the proposed density. When including the multi-family rental units, the residential density if approximately 4.12 units per acre, almost a quarter of a unit per acre more dense than the proposed project’s density of 3.89 units per acre. The proposed townhouses will be located along an interior looped road network extending from Bow Lake Place, on the northeastern half of the property. Careful consideration was made to ensure the proposed townhouses were placed away from Route 7 and maximized setback distances. The proposed townhouses will be designed with rear loaded garages and driveways. They will also be sited so that front facades are positioned towards Route 7 and towards existing single family detached residential units in the existing Potomac Station community. 247 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006 Statement of Justification Page 3 of 8 Building elevations are included with this application. The EGSAP sets forth certain design criteria for the Property and surrounding area, as well as a design review process. The Applicant’s architectural design intent is to follow the design review process and standards listed in the EGSAP criteria for all proposed townhouses. All signage and architectural lighting on the Property will comply with Article 15 of the Zoning Ordinance. IV. Transportation Vehicular and pedestrian access to and from the site will be provided via access from Bow Lake Place. All streets on the Property will be privately owned and maintained, but placed under a public access easement. The proposed neighborhood meets the Zoning Ordinance’s minimum parking requirement. A traffic analysis prepared by Gorove/Slade Associates, Inc. included with the previous submission has been revised and provides a detailed examination of the traffic associated with the proposed development and a comparison with the trips that would be generated by the Property under a by-right scenario. As noted, the trip generation during a typical weekday under a by-right scenario would be approximately 28 trips per day. The proposed project would generate approximately 141 trips per day, with approximately 8 trips (2 inbound; 6 outbound) during the a.m. peak hour and approximately 12 trips (8 inbound; 4 outbound) during the p.m. peak hour. Accordingly, the proposed community would generate 5 additional trips during the a.m. peak hour, 9 additional trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 113 additional trips per weekday in comparison to a by right scenario. The traffic analysis indicates that the traffic conditions following completion of the proposed community would be adequately accommodated through the existing road network. All intersections in the study area continue to operate at acceptable levels of service, including the site entrance, per the Town’s Design and Construction Standards Manual. Overall, given the minimal number of trips generated by the proposed development, the development will not have a significant impact on the surrounding transportation network. V. Landscaping & Environmental Considerations The Applicant is committed to being a good steward of the environment through the incorporation of quality building design, environmental protections, attractive landscaping, and minimally impactful lighting design. The Applicant has provided thoughtful attention to the project’s landscaping, environmental management, and stormwater controls. As depicted within the Concept Plan, the Applicant is proposing new vegetation throughout, and will be providing particularly substantial areas of new vegetation in buffers along Route 7 and the hotel property west of the Property. The Applicant has also included a commitment to energy conservation through using ENERGY STAR Version 3® or Home Energy Rating System (“HERS”) qualifications for design and construction to be verified prior to occupancy of each residential unit. 248 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006 Statement of Justification Page 4 of 8 The Applicant will meet all stormwater regulations pursuant to the latest edition of the Town’s Subdivision and Land Development Regulations, and other such applicable Town and state regulations. The Applicant is proposing stormwater detention and water quality/quantity facilities, which will be appropriately sized and located to meet detention and outfall requirements and reduce peak flow from the Property over existing conditions. Best Management Practices (“BMPs”) will also be provided and the Applicant’s proposal will meet water quality and quantity requirements. A generalized lighting plan is included with this submission. The Applicant is also committed to the preservation of the Stone House. This commitment and proposed present day intervention are key to prevent further deterioration of the Stone House structure. As noted in the Phase 1 Cultural Resources Investigation completed by Wetland Studies and Solutions, Inc. (D/B/A Thunderbird Archeology), originally recorded as DHR #253-5006, the stone building was constructed in 1822 and functioned as an ordinary. Historically known as Jenkins Ordinary, the structure was moved to its current location on the Property from an area now part of the River Creek Parkway interchange approximately 900 feet to the east. From aerial imagery, the building shows up on the Property as early as 1998, though it was likely moved some time in 1997. In keeping with Objective 1 of the Historic Resources policy of the EGSAP, the Applicant proposes to stabilize and preserve the exterior of the Stone House as the main feature of a proposed community park on that part of the Property. In an attempt to pay homage to the Stone House’s history as a tavern, a patio with pergola facing an oval shaped lawn will allow residents of the proposed and existing community to gather together. Winding paths and interpretive signage, along with proposed hardscape and landscaped features will create a dynamic visual and inspire a sense of a newly reinvigorated historic site. VI. Fiscal Benefits The Property currently contributes minimal tax revenue to the Town. As a part of the initial submission process for this application, the Applicant has requested and granted a waiver of the Fiscal Impact Analysis requirement for rezoning applications. As a condition of the waiver the Town of Leesburg has requested financial information per the Town’s Fiscal Impact Mode Checklist, which the Applicant has provided as part of its initial submission. In addition to the data provided and in support of this request the Applicant notes that previous residential applications have submitted analysis supporting a net positive fiscal impact to the Town of Leesburg from new residential development, and that this analysis has been accepted by the Town. The Applicant notes that the proposed rezoning is not converting the Property from commercial to residential, but rather allowing for greater density on the Property. Off-site transportation costs under R-8 zoning are assumed to be offset from proffer payments as are net impacts towards capital facilities. A commitment to cash contributions for both offsite transportation and capital facilities have been provided in the Proffer Statement. The development on site will dramatically increase the assessed value of the currently mostly vacant and under-utilized parcel. Development under R-8 zoning will also result in additional personal property 249 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006 Statement of Justification Page 5 of 8 taxes, meals tax, and other tax revenue to the Town in comparison to the existing or by-right conditions. The proposed application will complement the character of the Town and provide residential property tax revenue to the Town, realizing the highest and best use for the Property. VII. Compliance with § 3.3.15 Approval Criteria Section 3.3.15 of the Zoning Ordinance contains general standards the Planning Commission and Town Council are to evaluate when considering a rezoning request. Each use limitation is listed in bold below, followed by the Applicant’s response in italics: A. Consistency with the Town Plan, including but not limited to the Land Use Compatibility Policies. The Town Plan designates the Property as appropriate for Low Density Residential under the policies of the EGSAP which recommends densities up to four units per acre and building types to be either single-family detached, or single-family attached. The plan for the proposed community adheres to the EGSAP design criteria, and will result in a neighborhood design that conforms to the Town Plan’s vision for the Property. The proposed community is in line with the density of the surround community, and was designed to align with EGSAP design criteria such as the orientation of units. The use of brick, brick veneer and stone on the front facades of units, the inclusion of four-sided architectural elevations and the commitment to not use vinyl or aluminum siding aligns the architectural design of the proposed community with Objectives 1.a and 3 for Architectural Design under the EGSAP. The Property is currently undeveloped with the exception of the Stone House building which was moved to its current location in the 1990’s to accommodate the construction of the River Creek Parkway interchange. Following the move, the less than half acre parcel and Stone House were originally gifted to the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors before reverting to the current Property owners in 2007 after concerns regarding cost of restoration and maintenance made meeting the conditions in the deed of gift unattainable in the timeframe allowed. Despite private interest in the Stone House, the building is not currently listed as eligible for any historic register, and no public entity has come forward to express interest in assuming responsibility either financially or programmatically. As such, no facilities are presently provided for the benefit, use or enjoyment of the public at large or nearby residents. No historic features are located on the Property; the Applicant has conducted a Phase 2 Architectural Evaluation, prepared by Thunderbird Archaeology, which confirms that this building is not recommended as eligible for listing in any historic register and no additional investigations are recommended. Given the current lack of outside private efforts or any known public efforts to preserve or enhance the Stone House, the Applicant’s proposed preservation and programmatic enhancements represent a unique and potentially irreplaceable opportunity to achieve Objective 1.b for Heritage Resources under the EGSAP. 250 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006 Statement of Justification Page 6 of 8 B. Consistency with any binding agreements with Loudoun County, as amended, or any regional planning issues, as applicable. Aside from Town Council Resolution 2015-105 related to Loudoun County Public Schools to which the Applicant will adhere to, the Applicant is not aware of any binding agreements with Loudoun County or regional planning issues as they pertain to the proposed application. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied. C. Mitigation of traffic impacts, including adequate accommodation of anticipated motor vehicle traffic volumes and emergency vehicle access. The traffic impact analysis demonstrates that the conversion of the Property from existing uses to the proposed uses does not require any additional improvements. While no additional improvements are necessary as a result of development, the Applicant has committed via its Proffer Statement to make a one-time offsite transportation contribution to the Town in the amount of $2,671.00 per unit, for a total combined contribution of $66,779.00. Given the noted lack of improvements necessitated by the proposed development and the monetary contributions being made, this criterion is satisfied. D. Compatibility with surrounding neighborhood and uses. The Applicant is proposing a single family community that is laid out specifically for compatibility with existing and surrounding uses. Appropriate setbacks and buffers have been provided along with substantial landscaping to further ensure compatibility and transitions. The Applicant is not seeking any zoning modifications to any of the required buffers. The Applicant has also included colorized architectural elevations to further highlight the proposed design and its compatible nature with surrounding existing development. The Applicant is providing a public access easement over the pedestrian pathways providing access to and the area around the Stone House. The amenity area being provided will act as a natural neighborhood park area for the future residents of the proposed community and the existing residents of the adjacent community. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied. E. Provision of adequate public facilities. The Applicant is providing pedestrian and vehicular connections to the existing road network will contribute funds to the overall transportation network as well as public access to a reinvigorated park area around the Stone House. The Property will be served by Town public central water supply and public central sanitary sewer systems. In accordance with Town Council Resolution 2015-105, the Applicant is paying the full school fees per unit. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied. VIII. Compliance with § 7.12.6 Design Criteria 251 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006 Statement of Justification Page 7 of 8 In order to approve an application filed under Sec. 7.12 Gateway District (Overlay), the Preservation Planner or the Board of Architectural Review shall find that it meets all of the standards and criteria stated below and as further defined in the EGSAP Design Guidelines. The standards and criteria are listed in bold below, followed by the Applicant’s response in italics: A. Whether or not the proposed external architectural features, represented by the general design and arrangement, texture, color, line, mass, dimension, material, and lighting reflect appropriate design for the Town of Leesburg. The proposed building elevations provided with this submission capture the general design and arrangement as called for by the design criteria of the EGSAP. Particular attention was given to the placement of front facades, and ensuring that all proposed units would be designed with rear entrance garages. B. Whether or not the proposed structure, building, or improvement is compatible with appropriate structures in the vicinity of the proposed structure. Structures in the immediate vicinity are mostly suburban style detached homes and are compatible with the single family attached residential units proposed. Substantial screening and buffering have been provided between the proposed community and the commercial property to the west. The screening and buffering provided along with the residential units themselves provide an appropriate and improvement over existing conditions for the transition from adjacent commercial and institutional uses to the single family detached homes that exist within the adjacent area of the Potomac Station community today. C. Whether or not proposed freestanding buildings or partially freestanding buildings use the same or architecturally harmonious materials, color, texture, and treatment for all exterior walls. As shown on the building elevations provided in the Concept Plan, the Applicant proposes to use the same architecturally harmonious materials, color, texture, and treatment for all exterior walls. The materials shown are superior, high-quality architectural materials that will serve to preserve and enhance the overall design and character of the surrounding community. D. Whether or not the combination of architectural elements proposed for a structure, building, or improvement, in terms of design, line, mass, dimension, color, material, texture, lighting, landscaping, roof line, and height conform to accepted architectural principles for permanent buildings reflecting the character of the Town of Leesburg, as contrasted with engineering standards designed to satisfy safety requirements only. The proposed single family attached residential units are designed to exceed an engineering standard reflective of satisfying safety requirements only. The proposed 252 Item a. TLZM-2021-0006 Statement of Justification Page 8 of 8 community will comply with the EGSAP design criteria, as well as ensure compatibility with existing residential units in the vicinity of the project. E. Whether or not the proposed structure, building, or improvement, in terms of design, material, texture, color, lighting, dimension, line, mass roof line and height, is intended to serve primarily as an advertisement or commercial display, exhibits exterior characteristics likely to deteriorate rapidly, would be of temporary or shortterm architectural or aesthetic acceptability, or would otherwise constitute a reasonable foreseeable detriment to the appearance and stability of the Town's historic arterial corridors. The proposed development is not an advertisement or commercial display and does not pose a reasonably foreseeable detriment to the appearance and stability of the Town’s historic arterial corridors. IX. Conclusion The proposed dwelling units will help meet the increasing demand for housing in the Town and the region at large. The proposed neighborhood fulfills the vision of a high-quality design through four-sided architecture utilizing high-quality materials and provides a unique amenity in the Stone House that provides for a neighborhood park area while preserving a structure identified as a Heritage Resource under the EGSAP. The proposed road and pedestrian network will provide connections as recommended in Legacy Leesburg and the EGSAP. The proposed community is designed with the surrounding community in mind by orienting the front facades of units utilizing high-quality materials towards existing units, providing substantial landscaping throughout as well as ordinance required buffers. The proposed community will provide future residents with a vibrantly unique neighborhood and sense of place as called for in the EGSAP. The Applicant’s rezoning request is appropriate in light of the Town’s designation of this area as appropriate for single family residential uses within Legacy Leesburg and the EGSAP. For all the foregoing reasons, the Applicant respectfully requests positive consideration of the application from Town staff, the Planning Commission and the Town Council. 253 Item a. SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III COVER SHEET 1 26 SITE TABULATION PIN #:149-38-2764 & 149-38-3136 Existing Zoning:R-E Zoning Overlay:Gateway District Noise Abatement Corridor Overlay District Proposed Zoning:R-8 Proposed Use:SFA Residential HAMBLET PROPERTY REZONING CONCEPT PLAN TLZM-2021-0006 NOTES 1. Topographic information shown is per aerial survey by McKenzie Snyder, INC. dated 11-19-2020, supplemented with field shot data by christopher consultants. C.I. = 2’. 2. Boundary information shown based on a Boundary Survey by christopher consultants dated 12-10-2020. 3. There are no known environmental features located on this site. 4. ineering 5. Approval of this plan does not express or imply any waiver or modification of the requirements set forth in the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations, the Zoning Ordinance, or the Design and Construction Standards Manual. 6. At the time of Final Site Plan/Construction Drawings, the weir wall outlet protection must be designed using the appropriate FHA HEC 14 guidelines. 7. The Applicant acknowledges that DCSM modifications will be required at time of Final Site Plan/Construction Drawings (such as but not limited to, DCSM Section 5-342.4 as currently shown on the CDP), and further acknowledges that the approval of this Rezoning Application does not imply that any DCSM modification is being approved, nor does it guarantee that any will be approved by the Director of Plan Review at the time of Final Site Plan/Construction Drawings. In addition, the Applicant also acknowledges that if a DCSM Modification required to maintain the current site layout as shown on the CDP cannot be approved at the time of Final Site Plan/Construction Drawings, a revision to the Rezoning Application may be required. 8. At time of Final Subdivision Drawing Plans, the applicant shall meet all Town and State SWM standards. If the pond size or location is required to be adjusted, the applicant acknowledges the pond may not be within substantial conformance with the Concept Plan and may require a Concept Plan amendment before the Final Plans can be approved. 9. At time of Final Subdivision Drawing Plans, the applicant shall meet all Town and county standards as well as all building code regulations related to site grading. If the final grading of the site differs from what is shown on the Concept Plan such that it impacts the site layout, the applicant acknowledges the project may no longer be within substantial conformance to the Concept Plan, and may require a Concept Plan amendment before the Final Construction Drawings can be approved. 10. Any modifications required to Bow Lake Place to accommodate safe access into and out of this property to accommodate all vehicles (such as, but not limited to emergency vehicles, delivery vehicles, school buses, trash trucks, snow plows as well as vehicles driven by the residents, their guests and the general public) shall be made by the developer within the Final Construction Drawing plans associated with this project in accordance with all Town and VDOT road standards. SCALE: 1" = 500' VICINITY MAP OF VIR G I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NA D 8 3 CROSSTRAIL BLVD E. MARKET ST - RTE 7 RUSSELL BRANCH PKWY TOWN OF LEESBURG CORPORATE LIMITS LOUDOUN COUNTY RIVER CREEK PKWY - RTE 773 POTOMAC STATION DR BOW LAKE PL BONNIE RIDGE DR SITE CL CG-6 N.T.S. RESIDENTIAL COMMON PARKING COURT TYPICAL SECTION CG-6R (FLUSH CURB AT DRIVEWAYS) 12.5' TRAVEL LANE 12.5' TRAVEL LANE FCFC20' MIN 25' GARAGE LOT LINE No.DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION DCSM MODIFICATIONS DCSM 5-342.4 Modification requested to permit combined principal and emergency spillway. (See sheets 5 and 16) AREA TABULATION Total Site and Proposed R-8 Zoned Area = 280,547 SF or 6.4405 Ac. OWNERS: William Randall Hamblet Susan Swink Hamblet Susan Harper Hamblet Samuel H. Rogers III 2413 Pine Hill Circle Staunton, VA 24401 CIVIL ENGINEER: christopher consultants 50 Catoctin Circle NE Suite 200 Leesburg, VA 20176 APPLICANT: Carrhomes, LLC 4460 Brookfield Corporate Drive Suite P Chantilly, VA 20151 APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE: Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley & Walsh, P.C. 1 East market Street Suite 300 Leesburg, Virginia 20176 TRAFFIC ENGINEER: GOROVE / SLADE 3914 Centreville Road Suite 330 Chantilly, VA 20151 1 12-10-2021 ADDRESS INITIAL ACCEPTANCE REVIEW COMMENTS 2 09-22-2022 ADDRESS 1ST SUBMISSION COMMENTS 2% Sheet List Table Sheet Number Sheet Title 1 COVER SHEET 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 REZONING PLAT 4 CONCEPT PLAN 5 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN 5A CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN 6 CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN 7 CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN TABULATIONS 8 STONE HOUSE CONCEPTUAL PLAN 9 CONCEPTUAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS AND SIGNAGE PLAN 10 CONCEPTUAL FIRE APPARATUS VEHICLE TURN ANALYSIS 11 CONCEPTUAL FIRE HYDRANT COVERAGE PLAN 12 CONCEPTUAL LIGHTING PLAN 13 CONCEPTUAL SWM PLAN - QUALITY 14 CONCEPTUAL SWM PLAN - QUALITY 15 CONCEPTUAL SWM PLAN - QUANTITY 16 CONCEPTUAL SWM PLAN - QUANTITY 17 CONCEPTUAL SWM MAINTENANCE VEHICLE TURN ANALYSIS 18 FRONT BUILDING ELEVATIONS 19 REAR BUILDING ELEVATIONS 20 SIDE BUILDING ELEVATIONS 21 TYPICAL TOWNHOUSE DETAIL 22 OPEN SPACE TABULATION 23 SOILS MAP 24 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 25 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN TABULATIONS 3 02-09-2023 ADDRESS 2ND SUBMISSION COMMENTS P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 0 0 0 C O V E R S H E E T . d w g , 2 / 9 / 2 0 2 3 1 1 : 0 0 : 2 7 A M , r o n a l d k i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d 4 ADDRESS 3rd SUBMISSION COMMENTS Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 03-31-2023 254 Item a. VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 27 0 270 27 0 270 270 280280 28 0 270 270 270 280 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 280 280 280 280 280 28 0 280 280 280 280 280 29 0 29 0 29 0 280 28 0 280 280 28 0 EX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX . A S P H A L T PA R K I N G L O T EX. HOTEL 27 8 276274274 276 278278 278 276 274 276 278 280 28 2 284 286 286 28 2 284 284 28 2 284 282 280 278 278 276 276 276 278 278 282 284 284 286 286 284 288 288 286 286 28 6 28 8 284 282 284 286 27 8 276 276 278 278 280 282 284 286 288 28 4 284 28 2 282 27 4 27 4 276 278 278 27 6 274 272 27 2 274 27 6 278 274 276 278 280 27 6 27 4 272 266 264 262 266 268 268 26 8 27 2 27 4 276 27 8 272 27 4 276 278278 272 268 266 28 2 28 4 282 284 286 28 6 286 28 6288 288 288 28 8 292 294 296 294 292 288 286 28 6 288 286 286 28 6 284 284 28 6 286 284 286 286 286 284 28 2 28 6 272 27 2 27 4 27 6 27 8 278 28 2 28 4 28 6 274 278 27 6 274 274 276 27 8 278 284 28 2 28 0 . 9 281 . 0 28 1 . 4 280 . 9 281 . 2 273 . 4 272 . 4 273 . 1 274 . 9 27 9 . 0 28 1 . 4 281 . 0 280 . 7 275 . 5 27 5 . 5 275 . 4 27 5 . 6 27 7 . 9 27 7 . 3 27 7 . 3 277 . 3 27 6 . 2 27 6 . 3 27 9 . 2 28 2 . 6 28 3 . 1 28 5 . 1 28 4 . 7 284 . 5 283 . 3 282 . 7 28 0 . 9 279 . 1 28 6 . 0 285 . 2 283 . 3 28 1 . 5 279 . 5 27 8 . 3 277 . 3 274 . 8 27 2 . 9 28 1 . 5 280 . 5 278 . 3 277 . 1 275 . 1 273 . 6 274 . 3 276 . 5 27 7 . 3 277 . 2 279 . 2 28 1 . 1 28 0 . 8 28 1 . 2 28 0 . 9 280 . 4 279 . 6 27 9 . 1 27 8 . 4 278 . 6 27 7 . 8 277 . 1 276 . 8 276 . 4 276 . 7 277 . 3 277 . 4 276 . 8 27 7 . 5 27 3 . 0 272 . 7 273 . 0 273 . 7 279 . 8 278 . 3 28 3 . 1 282 . 7 283 . 1 28 2 . 7 280 . 5 27 8 . 4 278 . 7 279 . 6 279 . 1 27 8 . 5 278 . 6 278 . 8 27 8 . 9 283 . 3 28 3 . 4 283 . 9 28 5 . 1 285 . 4 283 . 7 28 4 . 8 282 . 9 289 . 7 28 5 . 4 288 . 9 284 . 7 284 . 8 280 . 9 28 3 . 0 28 5 . 7 28 5 . 6 28 5 . 2 28 5 . 5 28 4 . 9 285 . 6 28 4 . 8 285 . 3 287 . 6 28 6 . 6 287 . 7 287 . 1 28 7 . 7 286 . 8 28 7 . 6 287 . 4 28 7 . 2 286 . 3 28 7 . 1 28 5 . 0 285 . 2 287 . 2 28 8 . 4 EX . A S P H A L T DR I V E IN V = 2 7 1 . 1 7 IN V = 2 7 2 . 8 6 INV = 2 7 9 . 1 9 IN V = 2 8 1 . 7 6 IN V = 2 8 2 . 6 4 VZ N C C C C C C C C C C C C SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN DO M C C C C C C C C C VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN 276 . 3 27 8 . 9 277 . 7 TO P = 2 7 6 . 3 3 IN V O U T = 2 6 6 . 9 3 TOP=271.60 INV IN=267.45 INV OUT=267.41 TO P = 2 7 2 . 6 1 IN V O U T = 2 6 7 . 7 1 TO P = 2 7 7 . 7 8 IN V O U T = 2 7 2 . 3 8 TO P = 2 8 2 . 7 6 INV O U T = 2 7 6 . 6 ± TO P = 2 7 7 . 9 7 IN V O U T = 2 6 9 . 8 7 TO P = 2 8 0 . 4 0 IN V O U T = 2 7 4 . 4 0 INV = 2 6 8 . 9 3 IN V = 2 6 7 . 1 5 IN V = 2 6 3 . 5 3 IN V = 2 6 5 . 1 5 IN V = 2 5 9 . 0 9 24" P V C 24" PVC 24 " P V C STR. S1 TOP=283.77 INV IN=260.60' (24" PVC #) INV OUT=260.50' (24" PVC #S2) ST R . S 2 TO P = 2 8 2 . 0 1 INV I N = 2 6 0 . 0 0 ' ( 2 4 " P V C # S 1 ) INV O U T = 2 5 9 . 9 1 ' ( 2 4 " P V C # ) 48 5 . 3 5 ' - 2 4 " P V C @ 0 . 1 0 % 54.36' - 24" PVC @ 0.37% 45. 5 3 ' - 2 4 " P V C @ 5 9 3 . 7 9 % IN V = 2 6 3 . 4 4 SIDEWALK SID E W A L K 15" RCP 24" RCP15" RCP 24" RCP 15" R C P 15" RCP 15 " R C P 15" R C P EX . 8 " S A N EX . 6 " W / M 15 " R C P C L I I I 15 " R C P C L I I I 15" RCP CL III SADDLEBACK PLACE NE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW HA R R Y B Y R D H I G H W A Y - R T E 7 EX . V A R I A B L E W I D T H R O W PIN: 149-38-3136 PARCEL 26-1 18,263 S.F. 0.4193 AC. 1200 LOT 1199 LOT 1198 LOT 1197 LOT 1196 LOT 1195 LOT 1194 LOT 1193 PIN: 149-38-2764 PARCEL 26 262,284 S.F. 6.0212 AC. N 7 , 0 8 2 , 5 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 5 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 3 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 EX. DRAINAGE ESMT D.B. 1432, PG. 341 N36°39'41"E 577.41' S5 7 ° 2 9 ' 1 6 " E 4 6 3 . 1 2 ' S33°21'01"W 406.68' S33°21'01"W 176.88' R=4347.39'L=396.59' N5 2 ° 5 1 ' 5 5 " W 1 0 0 . 2 2 ' S33°21'01"W 187.99' S33°21'01"W 176.88' R=4347.39'L=100.10' Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open Space PARCEL 9B3 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Carradoc Group LLC Zone: B-3 Use: Hotel / Easting Establishment EX. BLDG EX. BLDG Owner: Fahel, Elias E. & Safa M. Zone: PRC Use: Open SFD POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B PARCEL 9B2 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open Space EX. SOUNDWALL Harper Park Middle School EX . V A R I A B L E W I D T H R O W BO W L A K E P L A C E Owner: Loudoun County School Board Zone: PRC Use: Harper Park Middle School CL CL Stone House SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 25 10050500 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 50' HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III EXISTING CONDITIONS 2 P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 3 0 0 E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S . d w g , 1 1 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 1 3 : 2 5 : 4 1 P M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d 255 Item a. VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 BOW LAKE PLACE NE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW LOT 1201PARCEL 9B3 PARCEL 9B2 HA R R Y B Y R D H I G H W A Y - R T E 7 EX. DRAINAGE ESMT D.B. 1432, PG. 341 EX . V A R I A B L E W I D T H R O W PIN: 149-38-2764 PARCEL 26 PIN: 149-38-2764 PARCEL 26-1 N 7 0 8 2 7 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 5 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 7 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 1 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 1 0 0 E 1 1 7 5 9 9 0 0 S33°21'01"W 406.68'S33°21'01"W 176.88' R=4347.39'L=100.10' R=4347.39'L=396.59'' N36°39'41"E 577.41' S5 7 ° 2 9 ' 1 6 " E 4 6 3 . 1 2 ' POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B N/F LOUDOUN COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD N/F CARRADOC GROUP LLC EX. BUILDING SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: MA R K DA T E DE S C R I P T I O N 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 15 6030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30' HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - X X X X TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 07-26-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III REZONE PLAT 3 NOTES 1. This plat is in accordance with Town of Leesburg Zoning Ordinance section 3.3.6.H (submittal requirements for Rezoning) and is based on a boundary survey by christopher consultants dated 12-10-2020. 2. Minor Subdivision Plat recorded in DB 1443 PG 935. 3. Easement Vacations recorded in Instrument #20210518-0057287 AREA TABULATION Total Site and Proposed R-8 Zoned Area = 280,547 SF or 6.4405 Ac. P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 4 0 0 R E Z O N E P L A T . d w g , 8 / 2 5 / 2 0 2 1 9 : 1 9 : 0 9 A M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d 08-25-2021 09-01-2021 REZONING PLAT TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 256 Item a. VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 100' BUILDING SETBACK (10.4.5.E.1) 1 765432 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 4 3 4 3 BO W L A K E P L A C E EX . V A R I A B L E W I D T H R O W SADDLEBACK PLACE NE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW HARRY BYRD HIGHWAY - RTE 7 EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW N 7 , 0 8 2 , 5 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 3 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 EX. DRAINAGE ESMT D.B. 1432, PG. 341 50'50' Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open SpaceLOT 1201 PARCEL 9B3 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Carradoc Group LLC Zone: B-3 Use: Hotel / Easting Establishment Owner: Loudoun County School Board Zone: PRC Use: Harper Park Middle School Owner: Fahel, Elias E. & Safa M. Zone: PRC Use: Open SFD POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B PARCEL 9B2 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open Space Stone House (1) Harper Park Middle School EX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. HOTEL 10' Side Yard 10 ' S i d e Y a r d 10' Side Yard 10' Side Yard 10' Side Yard 10' Side Yard 10' Side Yard 10 ' S i d e Y a r d 10 ' S i d e Y a r d 10 ' S i d e Y a r d EX. SIDEWALK EX. SIDEWALK SWM (SEE SHEET 5)2,088 S.F. 2,088 S.F. 2,088 S.F. 2,088 S.F. 2,088 S.F. 2,088 S.F. 2,088 S.F. 2,184 S.F. 2,184 S.F. 2,184 S.F. 2,184 S.F. 2,184 S.F. 2,088 S.F. 2,088 S.F. 3,045 S.F. 3,045 S.F. 3,045 S.F. 3,185 S.F. 3,185 S.F. 3,185 S.F. 2,184 S.F. 20' Rear Yard 20' Front Yard/Setback (Garage Entrance) 3,137 S.F. 3,045 S.F. 3,020 S.F. 3,041 S.F. 87' (TYP) 87' (TYP) 92 ' (TY P ) Noise Abatement Corridor Overlay District 300' CL CL 36' 26' 42' 62' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 72' 25' 62' 15' Front Yard/Setback (Principal Building) 15' Front Yard/Setback (Principal Building) 20' Front Yard/Setback (Garage Entrance) 15' Front Yard/Setback (Principal Building) 20' Front Yard/Setback (Garage Entrance) 15' Front Yard/Setback (Principal Building) 20' Front Yard/Setback (Garage Entrance) 15' Front Yard/Setback (Principal Building) 20' Rear Yard 20' Rear Yard 20' Rear Yard 20' Rear Yard 261' (SEE SHEET 8 FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS) SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPT PLAN 42510050500 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 50' NOTES (1) Stone House is identified in the Town Plan as a Heritage Resource to be protected (See Sheet 8). AREA TABULATION Total Site and Proposed R-8 Zoned Area = 280,547 SF or 6.4405 Ac. P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 4 0 1 C O N C E P T P L A N . d w g , 9 / 2 2 / 2 0 2 2 8 : 0 7 : 4 6 A M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 257 Item a. 1 765432 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 100' BUILDING SETBACK (10.4.5.E.1) STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY AREA SIDEWALK 16 17 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 SIDEWALK 4 3 4 EX . 1 0 ' T E M P . C O N S T R . E S M T D. B . 1 4 4 3 , P G . 9 3 5 EX . 1 0 ' T E M P . C O N S T R . E S M T D. B . 1 4 4 3 , P G . 9 3 5 EX . 3 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S E S M T D. B . 1 4 4 3 , P G . 9 3 5 STM DRN ESMT SAN SEW ESMT W/L ESMT 205 110 105 210 125 215 100 C S D S E S A EX.S F S G S 305 2 0 115 300 B S 107 108 216 WATERLINE 15' STM DRN ESMT N 7 0 8 2 7 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 5 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 7 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 1 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 1 0 0 E 1 1 7 5 9 9 0 0 F.H. F.H. F.H. 3 EX. 30' SAN SEW ESMT EX. 30' SAN SEW ESMT EX. 10' W/L ESMT EX. 8" W/M EX . 1 0 ' W / L E S M T EX . 8 " W / M STM DRN ESMT STM DRN ESMT EX. DRAINAGE ESMT D.B. 1432, PG. 341 NOISE ABATEMENT CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT W/L ESMT SWM / BMP PRIVATELY MAINTAINED ESMT LOD LOD C&G C & G C & G C & G C&G C&G COMBINED PRINCIPAL - EMERGENCY SPILLWAY (WEIR WALL) VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 MAINTENANCE ACCESS DRIVE PROVIDE REMOVABLE BOLLARDS OR BOLLARDS AND CHAIN PROVIDE REMOVABLE BOLLARDS OR BOLLARDS AND CHAIN RESIDENTIAL COMMON PARKING COURT (PRIVATE) 9'x18' PARKING SPACE (TYP)DECK (TYP) R=50' R=50' R=50' R=50' CG-12 EX. 8" SAN SEW FF = 286.00 FOY.=288.3 FF = 285.67 FOY.=288.0 FF = 285.00 FOY.=287.3 FF = 284.33 FOY.286.6 FF = 284.33 FOY.=286.6 FF = 286.00 FOY.=288.3 FF = 286.00 FOY.=288.3 FF = 286.00 FOY.=288.3 FF = 286.00 FOY.=288.3 FF = 285.33 FOY.=287.6 FF = 285.33 FOY.=287.6 FF = 285.33 FOY.=287.6 FF = 284.67 FOY.=287.0 FF = 284.67 FOY.=287.0 FF = 285.33 FOY.=287.6 FF = 285.33 FOY.=287.6 FF = 285.33 FOY.=287.6 FF = 285.00 FOY.=287.3 27 6 28 0 280 27 6 27 8 FF = 285.00 FOY.=287.3 FF = 285.00 FOY.=287.3 FF = 285.00 FOY.=287.3 FF = 285.00 FOY.=287.3 FF = 286.00 FOY.=288.3 FF = 286.00 FOY.=288.3 FF = 286.00 FOY.=288.3 86.4 85.75R 86.4 85.76R 87.0 86.37R 87.0 86.37R 87.0 86.3 7R 83.1 82.2 82.2 82.2 82.2 81.8 80.4 INV = 277.94 81.580.1 86.7 86.07R 82.2 82.5 82.5 82.5 83.7 86.7 4R84.4 85.3 84.0 86.7 86.7 86.7 86.0 83.283.2 83.2 82.6 83.2 285.5 284.8284.0284.0 284.0 282.00 283.29 282 282 282 28 4 284 284 83.9 TC 84.1 TC 84.4 TC 83.1 82.2 TC 84.0 84.0 84.7 84.7 84.7 84.7 84.0 83.5 83.8 FL 83.9 83.15 83.3 85.083.5 82.7 LIP 83.2 LIP 83.7 LIP 84.2 LIP 84.15 LIP 83.2 84.3 84.3 84.3 84.3 84.3 84.3 83.55 LIP 83.3 LIP 83.2 LIP 83.5 LIP 83.7 LIP 84.5 81.0 82.95 TC 82.8 TC 83.2 TC 83.0 TC 83.7 TC84.1 TC 83.4 TC83.6 TC 83.8 TC 84.7 TC 84.4 TC 83.9 TC 83.7 TC 83.4 84.1 82.982.4 82.4 TC 82.9 83.2 83.7 82.9 TC 82.1 276 278 28 0 284 28 4 284.0 284 280 284.0 284 TC 83.6 83.0 TC 81.4 86.0 84.7 83.7 83.7 85.0 84.3 82.7 LIP 82.9 LIP 83.2 LIP 83.4 LIP 284.0 280 278 86.0 86.6 87.4 86.0 85.0 84.3 85.3 84.5 84.5 81.5 87.7 86.3 87.7 87.7 87.7 86.3 85.3 84.0 85.1 84.36 85.3 85.3 85.3 85.3 84.6 LIP 84.6 LIP 84.2 LIP 84.0 LIP 84.5 TC 85.0 TC 85.3 TC 84.9 TC 85.5 TC 83.9 TC 83.6 TC 83.4 TC 83.5 TC 83.2 TC 84.5 TC 85.1 TC 84.6 TC 83.7 TC 84.3 TC 84.6 TC 85.3 84.8 86.9 86.4 87.6 83.6 84.2 87.683.7 84.2 87.7 87.7 87.0 87.0 87.0 85.2 84.7 84.7 84.8 85.4 84.7 84.1 84.0 84.0 84.5 6R 5R 4R 4R 6R 6R 6R284 28 4 86.0 84.7 84.7 84.7 84.7 85.3 85.3 85.3 85.3 84.45 LIP 84.45 LIP 84.2 LIP 84.0 LIP 83.7 LIP 83.4 LIP 83.1 LIP 83.5 TC 84.3 TC 81.3 280.00 280.00 84.6 LIP 85.8 85.6 84.085.0 28 0 284 284 82.3 81.8 83.0 84.50 6R 276.00 276.00 284.0 INV (ORIFICE) =274.00 274.0 276.0 278.0 274.0 278.0278.0 INV=27 .82 INV=275.82 83.4 83.9 83.5 82.9 82.9 82.9 82.9 85.7 85.3 83.2 83.7 82.7 85.4 TC 84.2 TC 82.4 84.75 80.4 81.4 82.0 80.4 81.4 80.4 81.4 80.4 81.4 80.4 81.4 81.7 81.9 81.9 80.4 81.8 82.4 81.9 80.4 83.0 83.6 80.7 83.0 83.6 80.4 83.2 85.0 81.0 81.0 80.3 80.3680.4 80.4 80.4 82.0 81.5 80.4 80.4 80.4 80.4 80.4 80.4 80.4 80.4 INV = 279.05 282 282 282 282 282 86.0 86.0 84.3 83.0 4R 3R 86.3 86.3 86.3 87.0 87.0 87.0 87.0 7R 7R 9R 86.3 86.3 86.3 10R 82.5 81.4 83.7 10R 8R 7R 7R 86.185.5 86.0 85.5 85.0 84.7 28 4 282 282 28 4 28 2 284.0 282.0 28 2 28 6 28 6 28 6 28 4 28 6 28 0 280 79.8 80.0 284 84 28 4 83.8 83.9 83.7 TC 83.17 TC 83.3 TC 83.7 83.983.6 84.6 84.2 83.8 84 81.8 27 4 27 2 27 0 278 274 26 8 27 0 27 2 27 4 27 4 27 8 27 6 27 6 27 6 72.5 26 8 26 8 27 0 27 0 270 268 272 276 276 5:1 5:1 5:1 5:1 27 2 27 4 LOD LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LOD LO D LODLODLOD LO D LO D LO D LODLOD LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD BMP PRIVATELY MAINTAINED ESMT MANUFACTURED TREATMENT DEVICE (FILTERING) STM DRN ESMT 30" ST M SAN SEW ESMT SAN SEW ESMT SAN SEW ESMT 8" W/M W/L ESMT LOD DRY SWALE 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 280 280 280 280 280 28 0 28 0 28 0 EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX . A S P H A L T PA R K I N G L O T 27 8 276274274 27 6 278 278 278 276 274 276 27 8 28 0 28 2 28 4 28 6 286 28 2 284 284 28 2 28 4 282 280 278 278 276 276 276 27 8 278 28 2 284 28 4 286 284 288 286 286 28 6 28 4 282 284 286 27 8 276 276 278 278 280 282 284 286 288 28 4 28 4 28 2 28 2 278 27 4 27 2 27 2 27 4 27 6 27 8 27 4 276 278 280 28 2 28 4 282 284 28 6 28 6 286 286 286 286 28 6 28 4 28 2 28 6 27 4 27 8 27 6 27 4 27 4 27 6 27 8 27 8 28 4 28 2 EX . A S P H A L T DR I V E INV=271.17 INV=272.86 IN V = 2 7 9 . 1 9 IN V = 2 8 1 . 7 6 IN V = 2 8 2 . 6 4 VZNVZN C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN DO M DOM DOM VZN C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN TOP=271.60 INV IN=267.45 INV OUT=267.41 TO P = 2 7 7 . 7 8 INV O U T = 2 7 2 . 3 8 TO P = 2 8 2 . 7 6 IN V O U T = 2 7 6 . 6 ± TO P = 2 7 7 . 9 7 IN V O U T = 2 6 9 . 8 7 TO P = 2 8 0 . 4 0 IN V O U T = 2 7 4 . 4 0 SIDEWALK SI D E W A L K 15" RCP 24" RCP 15" RCP 15" R C P 15 " R C P 15" R C P 273.10 273.89 279.46 281.58 281.92281.24 281.32 273.07 279.61 10YR WSEL = 280.23 OL R OL R 5' WIDE CONCRETE SPLASH BLOCK. RIPRAP (SEE SHEET 8 FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH EXISTING STONE HOUSE) 7413 7415 7414 7416 7417 7430 7431 7433 7432 7434 7445 7435 74447437 7446 74387429 7479 74677466 7465 7464 7461 7463 7221 7222 7219 7220 7218 7215 7456 7408 7407 7409 7410 7406 7405 7402 7457 7489 7490 7203 7204 7201 HARRY BYRD HIGHWAY - RTE 7 EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW AQ U A T I C B E N C H AQ U A T I C B E N C H GABION BASKETS FOREBAY NOTES: INDICATES LIGHT POLE (MUST BE LOCATED OUTSIDE Town EASEMENTS AND SHALL NOT CONFLICT WITH LANDSCAPING; SUBJECT TO FINAL ENGINEERING. SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN 5156030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30'BOW LAKE PLACE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW 1.AT THE TIME OF FINAL SITE PLAN/CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS, THE WEIR WALL OUTLET PROTECTION MUST BE DESIGNED USING THE APPROPRIATE FHA HEC 14 GUIDELINES. 2.THE APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGES THAT DCSM MODIFICATIONS WILL BE REQUIRED AT TIME OF FINAL SITE PLAN/CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS (SUCH AS BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DCSM SECTION 5-342.4 AS CURRENTLY SHOWN ON THE CDP), AND FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE APPROVAL OF THIS REZONING APPLICATION DOES NOT IMPLY THAT ANY DCSM MODIFICATION IS BEING APPROVED, NOR DOES IT GUARANTEE THAT ANY WILL BE APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLAN REVIEW AT THE TIME OF FINAL SITE PLAN/CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IF A DCSM MODIFICATION REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN THE CURRENT SITE LAYOUT AS SHOWN ON THE CDP CANNOT BE APPROVED AT THE TIME OF FINAL SITE PLAN/CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS, A REVISION TO THE REZONING APPLICATION MAY BE REQUIRED. 3.AT TIME OF FINAL SUBDIVISION DRAWING PLANS, THE APPLICANT SHALL MEET ALL TOWN AND STATE SWM STANDARDS. IF THE POND SIZE OR LOCATION IS REQUIRED TO BE ADJUSTED, THE APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGES THE POND MAY NOT BE WITHIN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN AND MAY REQUIRE A CONCEPT PLAN AMENDMENT BEFORE THE FINAL PLANS CAN BE APPROVED. P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 4 0 2 C O N C E P T U A L G R A D I N G A N D U T I L I T I E S P L A N . d w g , 3 / 1 6 / 2 0 2 3 5 : 0 4 : 2 7 P M , D W G T o P D F - F L A T . p c 3 4. Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 1 yr. WSE = 275.09 10 yr. WSE = 276.08 100 yr. WSE = 276.77 258 Item a. LOD LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LODLODLOD LODLODLODLODLODLODLO D LO D LO D LO D LOD LO D LODLODLOD LO D LO D LO D LODLOD LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD 1 765432 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 100' BUILDING SETBACK (10.4.5.E.1) STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY AREA SIDEWALK 16 17 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 SIDEWALK HARRY BYRD HIGHWAY - RTE 7 EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW STM DRN ESMT SAN SEW ESMT W/L ESMT EX. 30' SAN SEW ESMT EX. 30' SAN SEW ESMT EX. 10' W/L ESMT EX. 8" W/M EX . 1 0 ' W / L E S M T EX . 8 " W / M STM DRN ESMT STM DRN ESMT NOISE ABATEMENT CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT W/L ESMT LOD LOD C & G COMBINED PRINCIPAL - EMERGENCY SPILLWAY (WEIR WALL) VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 MAINTENANCE ACCESS DRIVE RESIDENTIAL COMMON PARKING COURT (PRIVATE) MANUFACTURED TREATMENT DEVICE (FILTERING) 8" W/M8" W/M 8" W / M 8" W / M 8" S A N 8" W / M 8" W / M SAN SEW ESMT SAN SEW ESMT SAN SEW ESMT 8" W/M 8" W / M 8" W/M W/L ESMT LOD 5' WIDE CONCRETE SPLASH BLOCK. RIPRAP N 7 0 8 2 7 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 5 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 7 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 1 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 1 0 0 E 1 1 7 5 9 9 0 0 110 300 210 107 115 105 305 108 205 125 216 215 100 200 21" STM. 21" STM. 30" ST M . 15" STM. 18 " S T M . 18" S T M . 15 " S T M . 21" STM. 15 " S T M . 24" STM. 15" STM. 15" STM. F S G S A EX.S B S E SD S C S 8" S A N . S E W . 8" SAN. SEW.8" SAN. SEW. 8" S A N . S E W . 8" S A N . S E W . 8" S A N . S E W . DI-1 TOP = 280.38 INV 15" OUT = 277.94 DI-1 TOP = 280.00 INV 15" IN = 277.16 INV. 15" OUT = 277.06 MH TOP = 283.00 INV 15" IN = 276.73 INV 15" OUT = 276.63 205 DI-3C TOP = 281.40 INV 15" IN = 276.20 INV. 15" OUT = 276.10 INV = 275.82 INV = 275.82 TOP = 282.70 INV. 24" IN = 276.82 INV. 30" OUT = 276.07 MH TOP = 282.90 INV. 21" IN = 277.11 INV. 15" IN = 277.58 INV. 24" OUT = 276.83 DI-1 TOP = 283.10 INV. 21" IN = 277.81 INV. 15" IN = 278.11 INV. 21" OUT = 277.61 INV. 21" = 279.05 DI-3C TOP = 282.80 INV. 21" IN = 278.50 INV. 21" OUT = 278.40 DI-1 TOP = 283.00 INV. 15" IN = 278.80 INV. 15" OUT = 278.70 DI-1 TOP = 282.70 INV. 15" OUT = 279.42 SAN MH TOP = 284.36 INV. OUT = 277.40 SAN MH TOP = 284.75 INV. OUT = 277.91 SAN MH TOP = 283.30 INV. IN = 276.00 INV. OUT = 275.90 SAN MH TOP = 282.90 INV. IN (E) = 274.94 INV. IN (F) = 274.94 INV. OUT = 274.84 SAN MH TOP = 282.10 INV. IN = 274.50 INV. OUT = 274.40 SAN MH TOP = 283.40 INV. IN = 273.73 INV. OUT = 273.63 INV. IN = 273.35 INV. OUT = 273.25 UTILITY CROSSING INV. STM = 279.09 BOT STM PIPE = 278.86 TOP SAN PIPE = 276.81 INV. SAN = 276.11 2.05' CLR. UTILITY CROSSING INV. STM = 277.32 BOT STM PIPE = 277.14 TOP SAN PIPE = 275.87 INV. SAN = 275.17 1.27' CLR. DI-3B TOP = 282.40 INV. 15" OUT = 277.70 UTILITY CROSSING INV. STM = 276.86 BOT STM PIPE = 276.67 TOP SAN PIPE = 274.58 INV. SAN = 273.88 2.09' CLR. 15 6030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30' BOW LAKE PLACE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 #### S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN 5A 1" = 30 P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 4 0 6 C O N C E P T U A L U T I L I T Y P L A N . d w g , 3 / 1 5 / 2 0 2 3 5 : 1 0 : 4 9 P M , D W G T o P D F - F L A T . p c 3 Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 259 Item a. 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 0 280 280 280 280 280 28 0 28 0 28 0 27 8 276274274 27 6 278 278 278 276 274 276 27 8 28 0 28 2 28 4 28 6 286 28 2 284 284 28 2 28 4 282 280 278 278 276 276 276 27 8 278 28 2 284 28 4 286 284 288 286 286 28 6 28 4 282 284 286 27 8 276 276 278 278 280 282 284 286 288 28 4 28 4 28 2 28 2 278 27 4 27 2 27 2 27 4 27 6 27 8 27 4 276 278 280 28 2 28 4 282 28 4 28 6 28 6 286 286 286 286 28 6 28 4 28 2 28 6 27 4 27 8 27 6 27 4 27 4 27 6 27 8 27 8 28 4 28 2 INV=271.17 INV=272.86 IN V = 2 7 9 . 1 9 IN V = 2 8 1 . 7 6 IN V = 2 8 2 . 6 4 VZNVZN C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN DO M DOM DOM VZN C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN TOP=271.60 INV IN=267.45 INV OUT=267.41 TO P = 2 7 7 . 7 8 INV O U T = 2 7 2 . 3 8 TO P = 2 8 2 . 7 6 IN V O U T = 2 7 6 . 6 ± TO P = 2 7 7 . 9 7 IN V O U T = 2 6 9 . 8 7 TO P = 2 8 0 . 4 0 IN V O U T = 2 7 4 . 4 0 15" RCP 15 " R C P 15" R C P 273.10 273.89 279.46 281.58 281.92281.24 281.32 273.07 279.61 AQUATIC BENCH FOREBAY MICROPOOL GABION BASKETS 285.5 284.8284.0284.0 284.0 282.00 283.29 280.00 280.00 276.00 276.00 284.0 274.0 276.0 278.0 274.0 278.0278.0 VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 10 0 ' B U I L D I N G S E T B A C K ( 1 0 . 4 . 5 . E . 1 ) 1 765432 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 BOW LAKE PLACE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW 16 17 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 4 4 3 3 HA R R Y B Y R D H I G H W A Y - R T E 7 EX . V A R I A B L E W I D T H R O W EX. DRAINAGE ESMT D.B. 1432, PG. 341 Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open Space LOT 1201PARCEL 9B3 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Carradoc Group LLC Zone: B-3 Use: Hotel / Easting Establishment Owner: Loudoun County School Board Zone: PRC Use: Harper Park Middle School Owner: Fahel, Elias E. & Safa M. Zone: PRC Use: Open SFD PARCEL 9B2 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B N 7 0 8 2 2 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 5 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 3 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 6 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 6 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 6 0 0 SEE SHEET 8 FOR CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING DETAIL AROUND STONE HOUSE EXISTING TREE SAVE AREAS VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 50' BUFFER YARD W/S3 SCREEN 10 0 ' B U I L D I N G S E T B A C K ( 1 0 . 4 . 5 . E . 1 ) 25' BUFFER YARD W/S2 SCREEN 10' BUFFER YARD W/S1 SCREEN 75' BUFFER YARD Z.O. 12.8.2.G.2.C SEE SHEET 8 FOR CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING DETAIL AROUND STONE HOUSE EXISTING TREE SAVE AREAS 287 SF 980 SF 200 SF 154 SF 200 SF421 SF 205 110 105 210 125 215 100 C S D S E S A EX.S F S G S 305 200 115 300 B S 107 108 216 # 832 DENOTES INTERIOR PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE AREA LARGE CANOPY TREE (40' SPREAD) MEDIMUM CANOPY TREE (25' SPREAD) UNDERSTORY TREE (20' SPREAD) LARGE EVERGREEN TREE (20' SPREAD) SMALL EVERGREEN TREE (8' SPREAD) SHRUBS (4' SPREAD) LEGEND: DENOTES LIGHT POLE SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 15 6030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30' HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN 6 Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 260 Item a. SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN TABULATIONS 7 P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ L 1 0 1 C O N C E P T U A L L A N D S C A P E P L A N T A B U L A T I O N S . d w g , 1 / 2 6 / 2 0 2 3 1 : 3 6 : 2 3 P M , r o n a l d k i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 261 Item a. SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 02-08-2023 CM ZY CM STONE HOUSE CONCEPTUAL PLAN 8 8 3216160 VIR G I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 1/16" = 1' GRAPHIC SCALE Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 262 Item a. VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 1 765432 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 BO W L A K E P L A C E EX . V A R I A B L E W I D T H R O W SADDLEBACK PLACE NE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW HARRY BYRD HIGHWAY - RTE 7 EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW N 7 , 0 8 2 , 5 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 3 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open SpaceLOT 1201 PARCEL 9B3 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Carradoc Group LLC Zone: B-3 Use: Hotel / Easting Establishment Owner: Loudoun County School Board Zone: PRC Use: Harper Park Middle School Owner: Fahel, Elias E. & Safa M. Zone: PRC Use: Open SFD POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B PARCEL 9B2 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open Space Harper Park Middle School SWM (SEE SHEET 5) EX . S T O N E BU I L D I N G EX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. HOTEL 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 4 3 4 3 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 25 10050500 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 50' HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS AND SIGNAGE PLAN 9 FIRE LANE SIGNS ARE TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOUDOUN COUNTY FSM AND TO BE SHOWN AT TIME OF FINAL SITE PLAN. LEGEND FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 9 0 0 C O N C E P T U A L F I R E A P P A R A T U S A N D S I G N A G E P L A N . d w g , 9 / 2 2 / 2 0 2 2 8 : 3 5 : 3 2 A M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d 263 Item a. 1 765432 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 BOW LAKE PLACE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW HARRY BYRD HIGHWAY - RTE 7 EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open Space LOT 1201PARCEL 9B3 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Carradoc Group LLC Zone: B-3 Use: Hotel / Easting Establishment Owner: Loudoun County School Board Zone: PRC Use: Harper Park Middle School Owner: Fahel, Elias E. & Safa M. Zone: PRC Use: Open SFD PARCEL 9B2 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Stone House SWM (SEE SHEET 5) EX . S T O N E BU I L D I N G EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING 25' 4 3 3 4 SU-40 - S i n g l e U n i t T r u c k N 7 0 8 2 7 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 5 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 7 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 1 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 1 0 0 E 1 1 7 5 9 9 0 0 EDGE OF TIRE (TYP) EDGE OF BODY (TYP) 39.5 4 23 4 25 SU-40 - Single Unit Truck Overall Length 39.500ft Overall Width 8.000ft Overall Body Height 13.500ft Min Body Ground Clearance 1.367ft Track Width 8.000ft Lock-to-lock time 5.00s Max Steering Angle (Virtual)31.80° SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 15 6030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30' HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL FIRE APPARATUS VEHICLE TURN ANALYSIS 10 P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 9 1 0 C O N C E P T U A L F I R E A P P A R A T U S V E H I C L E T U R N A N A L Y S I S . d w g , 9 / 2 2 / 2 0 2 2 8 : 3 6 : 3 9 A M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d 264 Item a. VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 1 765432 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 BOW LAKE PLACE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW 16 17 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open Space LOT 1201PARCEL 9B3 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Carradoc Group LLC Zone: B-3 Use: Hotel / Easting Establishment Owner: Loudoun County School Board Zone: PRC Use: Harper Park Middle School Owner: Fahel, Elias E. & Safa M. Zone: PRC Use: Open SFD PARCEL 9B2 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B HARRY BYRD HIGHWAY - RTE 7 EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW Stone House 300 FT 300 FT 300 FT 300 FT300 FT 300 FT 300 FT 300 FT 300 FT 300 FT 300 FT 300 FT HYDRANT # 1 HYDRANT # 2 HYDRANT # 3 N 7 0 8 2 7 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 5 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 7 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 1 0 0 E 1 1 7 6 0 2 0 0 N 7 0 8 2 1 0 0 E 1 1 7 5 9 9 0 0 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 15 6030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30' HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL FIRE HYDRANT COVERAGE PLAN 11 P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 4 1 0 C O N C E P T U A L F I R E H Y D R A N T C O V E R A G E P L A N . d w g , 9 / 2 2 / 2 0 2 2 8 : 3 8 : 2 4 A M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d 265 Item a. SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL LIGHTING PLAN 12 Faron Lee President 703.777.6200 OVERALL HIEGHT OF POLE AND HEAD IS 14'-3.5" VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 2 15 6030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30'SA & SB FIXTURES Proposed Fixtures to be Full Cut-Off per TLZO 12.11.3.A LIGHT POLE DETAIL 14' - 3.5" Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. (15' maximum permitted) Path, and path post lights deleted (see sheet 8) Photometric lighting plan to be updated accordingly at time of Final Construction Drawings Locations of Light poles subject to adjustments at time of Final Engineering 266 Item a. 270 280 28 0 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 290 29 0 280 28 0 280 280 EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX . A S P H A L T PA R K I N G L O T EX. HOTEL 278 276274274 27 6 278278 278 276 274 276 278 280 282 284 286 286 282 284 284 28 2 284 282 280 278 278 276 276 276 278 278 282 284 284 286 286 284 288 288 286 286 28 6 288 284 282 284 286 278 276 276 278 278 280 282 284 286 288 284 284 282 282 274 274 276 278 278 276 274 27 2 272 274 276 278 274 276 278 280 282 284 282 284 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 28 4 282 286 274 278 276 274 274 276 278 278 284 282 EX . A S P H A L T DR I V E C C C C C C C C C C SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN DO M C C C C C C C C VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN SID E W A L K 15" RCP 24" RCP 273.10 273.89 279.46 281.58 281.92281.24 281.32 273.07 279.61 285.5 284.8284.0284.0 284.0 282.00 283.29 280.00 280.00 276.00 276.00 284.0 274.0 276.0 278.0 274.0 278.0278.0 TOTAL ONSITE FORESTED = 4.26 AC. MANAGED TURF = 2.18 AC. VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 6 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 6 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 SOUTH OUTFALL (EXISTING CULVERT) WEST OUTFALL (SWALE) 28 0 28 0 28 0 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 290 290 280 28 0 280 280 278 276274274 276 278278 278 276 274 276 278 280 282 284 286 286 282 284 284 282 284 282 280 278 278 276 276 276 278 278 282 284 284 286 286 284 288 288 286 286 286 28 8 284 282 284 286 278 276 276 278 278 280 282 284 286 288 284 28 4 28 2 282 274 274 276 278 274 27 6 278 282 284 28 6 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 28 4 282 286 274 278 276 274 274 276 278 278 284 282 C C C C C C C C C C SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN DO M C C C C C C C C VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN 273.10 273.89 279.46 281.58 281.92281.24 281.32 273.07 279.61 205 110 105 210 125 215 100 305 200 115 300 107 108 216 285.5 284.8284.0284.0 284.0 282.00 283.29 280.00 280.00 276.00 276.00 284.0 274.0 276.0 278.0 274.0 278.0278.0 VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 6 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 6 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 SOUTH OUTFALL (EXISTING CULVERT) WEST OUTFALL (SWALE) DA TO MANUFACTURED TREATMENT DEVICE = 2.19 AC TOTAL ONSITE TO TREATMENT IMPERVIOUS = 2.15 AC. MANAGED TURF = 2.38 AC. DA ONLY TO LEVEL 1 WET POND = 2.34 AC TOTAL DA TO POND = 4.53 AC HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL SWM PLAN - QUALITY 13 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 30 12060600 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 60' WATER QUALITY NARRATIVE EXISTING CONDITIONS LAND COVER MAP 30 12060600 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 60' PROPOSED CONDITIONS LAND COVER MAP ·TECHNICAL CRITERIA: PART II B ·VRRM NEW DEVELOPMENT 2013 DRAFT BMP STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS SPREADSHEET UTILIZED. ·THIS PLAN ATTEMPTS TO REMOVE AS MUCH OF THE REQUIRED PHOSPHOROUS LOAD AS POSSIBLE THROUGH THE USE OF ONSITE BMP PRACTICES. ALL RUNOFF FROM PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREAS IS DIRECTED TO ONSITE BMP PRACTICES. HOWEVER, DUE TO THE TOPOGRAPHIC LIMITATIONS OF THE SITE, A PORTION OF THE NUTRIENT CREDITS WILL NEED TO BE PURCHASED TO OFFSET THE REQUIRED POST DEVELOPMENT PHOSPHOROUS LOAD REDUCTION. TOTAL REQUIRED POST DEVELOPMENT PHOSPHOROUS LOAD REDUCTION IS LESS THAN 10 POUNDS, NUTRIENT CREDITS MAY BE PURCHASED (PER VIRGINIA STATE CODE 9VAC25-870-69.B.3). ·TREATMENT WILL BE PROVIDED BY A LEVEL 1 WET POND THAT WILL RECEIVE FLOWS FROM THE SITE AND AN ADDITIONAL OFFSITE AREA . TREATMENT WILL ALSO BE PROVIDED BY A PROPOSED MANUFACTURED TREATMENT DEVICE. AT THE TIME OF FINAL ENGINEERING, THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS AND OTHER OPTIONS MAY BE EVALUATED BEFORE A FINAL DETERMINATION IS MADE BY THE APPLICANT AS TO THE MEANS OF COMPLIANCE. OTHER POTENTIAL PRACTICES OF PHOSPHORUS LOAD REDUCTION MUST BE LISTED IN THE DEQ BMP CLEARINGHOUSE AND MEET VRRM REQUIREMENTS. ·OFFSITE RUNOFF FROM THE NORTH AND EAST OF THE SITE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE SIZING OF THE LEVEL 1 WET POND. NO CREDIT IS BEING TAKEN FOR OFFSITE AREA. EX. SHALLOW DITCH ALONE NORTH PROPERTY LINE DRAINS TO WEST OUTFALL Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. LEVEL 1 WET POND DESIGN To be accordance with the BMP Clearinghouse design specification 14 for Wet Ponds including the following: -Min. Tv volume provided below permanent pool -Single cell design (with forebay) -L:W ratio or flow path = 2:1 min. - shortest flow path/overall length = 0.5 min. -standard Aquatic Benches -5:1 side slopes above permanent pool Additionally, due to the small size of the contributing drainage shed: -Pond design to provide average pond depth in accordance with Water Balance Testing Equation 14.1 and - provide pond aeration At time of Final Engineering, should a Level 1 Wet Pond be determined to not be technically feasible, other water quality measures may be considered by the Town. 267 Item a. HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G L O U D O U N C O U N T Y , VI R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL SWM PLAN - QUALITY 14 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 (1) NUTRIENT CREDITS WILL BE PURCHASED TO MEET THE REMAINING LOAD REDUCTION REQUIREMENT. (1) In addition to the MTD shown on sheet 5A (Structure #105), applicant will provide an MTD at the location of Storm inlet #205 or provide other treatment measure(s) that achieves an equivalent approximate phosphorus removal. 268 Item a. NAD 8 3 VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 6 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 6 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 28 0 280 280 280 28 0 280 280 280 280 28 0 28 0 280 280 280 280 290 290 29 0 280 280 280 280 280 EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX . A S P H A L T PA R K I N G L O T EX. HOTEL 278 276274274 27 6 278278 278 276 274 276 278 280 282 284 286 286 282 284 284 28 2 284 282 280 278 278 276 276 276 278 278 282 284 284 286 286 284 288 288 286 286 286 288 284 282 284 286 278 276 276 278 278 280 282 284 286 288 284 284 282 28 2 274 274 276 27 8 282 284 286 286 286288 288 288 292 294 296 294 292 288 286 286 288 286 286 28 6 284 284 286 286 286 286 28 6 28 4 282 286 272 272 274 276 27 8 278 282 284 28 6 274 27 8 276 274 274 276 278 278 284 282 EX . A S P H A L T DR I V E C C C C C C C C C C SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN DO M C C C C C C C C VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN SIDEWALK SID E W A L K 15" RCP 24" RCP 15 " R C P C L I I I 15 " R C P C L I I I 273.10 273.89 279.46 281.58 281.92281.24 281.32 273.07 279.61 WEST OUTFALL (EX. SWALE) EX. SHALLOW DITCH ALONG NORTH PROPERTY LINE DRAINS TO WEST OUTFALLONSITE TO WEST OUTFALL DA B1= 2.98 AC. ONSITE TO SOUTH OUTFALL DA A1 = 3.46 AC. OFFSITE TO SOUTH OUTFALL (THROUGH SITE) DA F1= 0.44 AC. OFFSITE TO WEST OUTFALL (THROUGH SITE) DA F4= 2.35 AC. OFFSITE TO SOUTH OUTFALL DA F2= 0.77 AC. SOUTH OUTFALL (EXISTING CULVERT) OFFSITE TO SOUTH OUTFALL DA F3 = 0.66 AC. N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 6 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 6 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 205 110 105 210 125 215 100 305 200 115 300 107 108 216 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 6 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 6 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 290 290 290 280 28 0 280 280 280 EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX . 2 S T O R Y DW E L L I N G EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX . A S P H A L T PA R K I N G L O T EX. HOTEL 278 276274274 276 278278 278 276 274 276 278 280 282 284 286 286 282 284 284 282 28 4 282 280 278 278 276 276 276 278 278 282 284 284 286 286 284 288 288 286 286 286 288 284 282 284 286 278 276 276 278 278 280 282 284 286 288 284 28 4 28 2 282 27 4 274 276 278 27 4 276 278 28 2 284 28 6 286 286 286288 28 8 288 28 8 292 294 296 294 292 288 286 286 288 286 286 286 28 4 284 286 286 286 28 4 282 286 272 272 27 4 276 278 278 282 284 286 274 278 276 274 274 276 278 278 284 282 EX . A S P H A L T DR I V E C C C C C C C C C C SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG SIG VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN DO M C C C C C C C C VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN VZN SIDEWALK SID E W A L K 15" RCP 24" RCP 15 " R C P C L I I I 15 " R C P C L I I I 273.10 273.89 279.46 281.58 281.92281.24 281.32 273.07 279.61 SOUTH OUTFALL (EXISTING CULVERT) ONSITE TO POND DA A1= 4.53 AC. TOTAL DA TO LEVEL 1 WET POND DAs A1 & F4 = 6.88 AC. OFFSITE TO SOUTH OUTFALL DA F2 = 0.77 AC. OFFSITE TO SOUTH OUTFALL DA F3 = 0.66 AC. ONSITE TO WEST OUTFALL DA B1= 0.69 AC. ONSITE TO SOUTH OUTFALL DA A2= 1.22 AC. OFFSITE TO SOUTH OUTFALL (BY-PASS) DA F1 = 0.44 AC. WEST OUTFALL (EX. SWALE) OFFSITE TO SOUTH OUTFALL DA F4 = 2.35 AC. HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL SWM PLAN - QUANTITY 15 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 WATER QUANTITY NARRATIVE EXISTING DRAINAGE DIVIDES MAP 30 12060600 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 60'PROPOSED DRAINAGE DIVIDES MAP ·TECHNICAL CRITERIA: 9VAC25-870-66 (VIRGINIA CODE FOR STORMWATER QUANTITY) ·CHANNEL PROTECTION CRITERIA FOR MANMADE STORMWATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS AND NATURAL STORMWATER CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS USED AT EACH OUTFALL. (9VAC25-870-66.B). ·FLOOD PROTECTION CRITERIA FOR CONCENTRATED DISCHARGE USED AT EACH OUTFALL. (9VAC25-870-66.C) ·TWO EXISTING OUTFALLS TO BE UTILIZED UNDER PROPOSED CONDITIONS; ··SOUTH OUTFALL: ENERGY BALANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE 1-YR STORM EVENT (9VAC25-870-66.B.3.a) ARE SATISFIED FOR THE SOUTH OUTFALL VIA DETENTION. THE SOUTH DRAINAGE AREA DISCHARGES INTO A MAN-MADE STORM SYSTEM THAT CROSSES UNDER ROUTE 7 BEFORE DISCHARGING INTO A STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY BEFORE ULTIMATELY DISCHARGING INTO A NATURAL FLOODPLAIN. ··WEST OUTFALL: ENERGY BALANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE 1-YR STORM EVENT (9VAC25-870-66.B.3.a) AS THE CONTRIBUTING AREA WILL BE REDUCED BY APPROXIMATELY 4.19 ACRES WITH NO INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS AREA. THE WEST DRAINAGE AREA DISCHARGES INTO A MAN-MADE CHANNEL THAT DISCHARGES INTO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY BEFORE DISCHARGING INTO A NATURAL FLOODPLAIN. 30 12060600 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 60' OFFSITE RUNOFF FROM THE NORTH AND EAST OF THE SITE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE SIZING OF THE LEVEL ONE WET POND. NO CREDIT IS BEING TAKEN FOR OFFSITE AREA. Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 269 Item a. HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL SWM PLAN - QUANTITY 16 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 POST DEVELOPMENT 1-YEAR AND 10-YEAR OUTFALL HYDROGRAPHS FOR THE LEVEL 1 WET POND 100-YR WSEL* ELEV. = 276.77' 10-YR WSEL ELEV. = 276.08'1-YR WSEL ELEV. = 275.09' * 100-YR WSEL CALCULATED WITH BMP ORIFICE AND AREA OF 10-YR WEIR BLOCKED AS THE POST DEVELOPED 1-YEAR AND 10-YEAR FLOWS FROM THE POND ARE LESS THAN THE CALCULATED ALLOWABLE FLOWS, THE PROPOSED LEVEL 1 WET POND SATISFIES THE APPLICABLE STORMWATER QUANTITY CRITERIA. PERMANENT POOL WSEL ELEV. = 274.00' Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 270 Item a. VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 1 32 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 BOW LAKE PLACE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW HARRY BYRD HIGHWAY - RTE 7 EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW SWM (SEE SHEET 5) EX . S T O N E BU I L D I N G EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING SU-30 - S i n g l e U n i t T r u c k SU-30 - S i n g l e U n i t T r u c k EDGE OF BODY (TYP) EDGE OF TIRE (TYP) N 7 , 0 8 2 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 3 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 3 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 3 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 4 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 1 32 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 BOW LAKE PLACE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW HARRY BYRD HIGHWAY - RTE 7 EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW SWM (SEE SHEET 5) EX . S T O N E BU I L D I N G EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING SU-30 - S i n g l e U n i t T r u c k EDGE OF BODY (TYP) EDGE OF TIRE (TYP) N 7 , 0 8 2 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 3 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 3 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 3 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 1 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 4 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 15 6030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30' HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III CONCEPTUAL SWM MAINTENANCE VEHICLE TURN ANALYSIS 17 15 6030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30' P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 9 1 1 C O N C E P T U A L S W M V E H I C L E T U R N A N A L Y S I S . d w g , 9 / 2 2 / 2 0 2 2 8 : 5 8 : 3 9 A M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 271 Item a. HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III FRONT BUILDING ELEVATIONS 18 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 2 0 0 B U I L D I N G E L E V A T I O N S . d w g , 2 / 9 / 2 0 2 3 8 : 0 9 : 0 0 A M , r o n a l d k i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d Final building facades design subject to change pending final engineering and subject to BAR approval of COA BAY WINDOW 272 Item a. HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III REAR BUILDING ELEVATIONS 19 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 2 0 0 B U I L D I N G E L E V A T I O N S . d w g , 9 / 1 3 / 2 0 2 2 5 : 0 1 : 4 0 P M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d Final building facades design subject to change pending final engineering and subject to BAR approval of COA 273 Item a. HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III SIDE BUILDING ELEVATIONS 20 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 2 0 0 B U I L D I N G E L E V A T I O N S . d w g , 9 / 1 3 / 2 0 2 2 5 : 0 2 : 1 9 P M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d Final building facades design subject to change pending final engineering and subject to BAR approval of COA 274 Item a. 4 25' 18' DRIVEWAY WIDTH15' FRONT YARD / SETBACK (PRINCIPAL BUILDING) 20' FRONT YARD / SETBACK (GARAGE ENTRANCE) 2' (TYP) 24' (TYP) 5'X18' CANTILEVERED DECK (TYP) TOWNHOUSE END UNIT LOT AREA = 3,045 SF TOWNHOUSE INTERIOR UNIT LOT AREA = 2,088 SFTOWNHOUSE END UNIT LOT AREA = 3,045 SF TOWNHOUSE INTERIOR UNIT LOT AREA = 2,088 SF 44' (TYP) 87 ' 35'24'24'35' 87 ' 5' SIDEWALK 5' S I D E W A L K OPEN SPACE RESIDENTIAL COMMON PARKING COURT (PRIVATE) 4' LEAD WALK (TYP)20' REAR YARD / SETBACK SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III TYPICAL TOWNHOUSE DETAIL 21 5 2010100 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 10' TYPICAL TOWNHOUSE DETAIL TYPICAL HVAC UNIT DETAIL N.T.S. 10' SIDE YARD / SETBACK 10' SIDE YARD / SETBACK P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 4 0 3 T Y P I C A L T O W N H O U S E D E T A I L . d w g , 7 / 7 / 2 0 2 2 4 : 4 2 : 2 8 P M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 275 Item a. VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 1 765432 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 BO W L A K E P L A C E EX . V A R I A B L E W I D T H R O W SADDLEBACK PLACE NE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW HARRY BYRD HIGHWAY - RTE 7 EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW N 7 , 0 8 2 , 5 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 3 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open SpaceLOT 1201 PARCEL 9B3 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Carradoc Group LLC Zone: B-3 Use: Hotel / Easting Establishment Owner: Loudoun County School Board Zone: PRC Use: Harper Park Middle School Owner: Fahel, Elias E. & Safa M. Zone: PRC Use: Open SFD POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B PARCEL 9B2 POTOMAC STATION SECTION 9B Owner: Potomac Station Community Association Inc. Zone: PRC Use: Open Space Harper Park Middle School EX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLINGEX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. 2 STORY DWELLING EX. HOTEL EX. SIDEWALK EX. SIDEWALK SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III OPEN SPACE TABULATION 222510050500 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 50' OPEN SPACE TABULATION (1) TOTAL SITE - 6.44 Ac. OPEN SPACE - 4.24 Ac. (65.8%) (1) SUBJECT TO FINAL ENGINEERING LEGEND OPEN SPACE P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 4 0 4 O P E N S P A C E T A B U L A T I O N . d w g , 9 / 2 2 / 2 0 2 2 8 : 5 9 : 3 1 A M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 276 Item a. VIRG I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NAD 8 3 1 765432 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 BO W L A K E P L A C E EX . V A R I A B L E W I D T H R O W SADDLEBACK PLACE NE EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW HARRY BYRD HIGHWAY - RTE 7 EX. VARIABLE WIDTH ROW N 7 , 0 8 2 , 5 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 0 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 3 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 N 7 , 0 8 2 , 0 0 0 E 1 1 , 7 6 0 , 5 0 0 67B 68B 69A 66A 67C 66A 68B "SUMMARY OF SOIL CHARACTERISTICS AND USE POTENTIAL" MAPPING UNIT NUMBER NAME, SLOPE, AND HYDROLOGIC GROUP SOIL CHARACTERISTICS MAPPING UNIT POTENTIAL GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CENTRAL WATER AND SEWER SUBCLASSES FOR SELECTED USES CONVENTIONAL SEPTIC TANK DRAINFIELDS AGRICULTUR AL FORESTRY, AND HORTICULTU RAL 66A Waxpool silt loam, (0-3%) ponding (D) Hydric soil very deep somewhat poorly to poorly drained gray and brown clayey soils with seasonal perched water tables on nearly level upland flats; developed from diabase IV PW - very poor potential; high shrink-sweel clays and prolonged perched water table depth to hard bedrock is generally greater than 6' IV - very poor potential; high water table, shrink swell clays IV - grassland agriculture 4W 67B Haymarket and Jackland soils, (3-8%) (D) complex of very deep moderately well drained yellowish-brown to olive brown (Jackland) and well drained strong brown (Haymarket) soils with perched water tables on convex ridgetops and side slopes over diabase and some basalt IV P - very poor potential; high shrink-sweel clays and preseasonal perched water table depth to hard bedrock is generally greater than 5' IV - very poor potential; high water table, shrink swell clays II - secondary cropland 5E, 5W 68B Haymarket and Jackland soils, very stony (3-8%) (D) complex of very deep stony moderately well drained yellowish- brown to olive-brown (Jackland) and strong brown (Haymarket) claypan soils with perched water tables on convex uplands; developed in diabase IV P - very poor potential; wetness and high shrink- swell clays depth to hard bedrock is generally greater than 5' IV - very poor potential; high water table, shrink swell clays V - forestry and wildlife 5S, 5S 69A Elbert silty clay loam, (0-3%) ponding (D) Hydric soil very deep poorly drained soil in drainageways; developed from diabase and basalt IV P - very poor potential; Wetness and high shrink- swell clays depth to hard bedrock is generally greater than 6' IV - very poor potential; high water tables and shrink swell clays IV - grassland agriculture 5W The subject development site contains Class III and Class IV Soils, per the latest County Soils Map and as identified by The Interpretive Guide To Soils Maps, Loudoun County, Virginia. Loudoun County recommends no construction of structures with subgrade levels within natural drainage swales or within soils or spots specifically identified as wet per the latest County soils map as identified by the Interpretive Guide to Soils Map, Loudoun County, Virginia. SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 11-02-2021 S.J.W.III R.E.K. S.J.W.III SOILS MAP 232510050500 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 50'P:\ L D \ P r o j e c t s \ 2 0 0 6 7 H a m b l e t P r o p e r t y \ C a d \ R e z o n e \ D W G \ S h e e t S e t \ C 4 0 5 S O I L S M A P . d w g , 9 / 2 2 / 2 0 2 2 9 : 0 0 : 5 6 A M , R o n a l d K i n g , 1 : 1 , c h r i s t o p h e r c o n s u l t a n t s , l t d 277 Item a. 280 280 280 280 280 28 0 280 280 28 0 280 28 0 290 290 290280 280 280 280 280 278 276 27 4 27 4 276 278 278 27 8 276 27 4 286 282 28 4 28 4 282 284 28 228 0 27 8 278 276 27 6 27 6 278 278 282 284 284 286 286 28 4 288 28 8 28 6 286 286 288 284 282 28 4 28 6 278 27 6 276 278 278 28 0 28 2 284 28 6 28 8 284 284 282282 288 292 294 296 294 292 288 286 286 288 284 282 274 278 274 278 276 274 274 276 278 278 284 282 IN V = 2 7 1 . 1 7 IN V = 2 7 2 . 8 6 INV=279.19 INV=281.76 INV=282.64 VZN VZN C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C CSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIGSIG VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N DOM DO M DO M VZ N C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N VZ N TOP=277.78 INV OUT=272.38 15" RCP 15" R C P 27 3 . 1 0 27 3 . 8 9 27 9 . 4 6 28 1 . 5 8 28 1 . 9 2 28 1 . 2 4 28 1 . 3 2 27 3 . 0 7 27 9 . 6 1 VIR G I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NA D 8 3 BO W L A K E PL A C E EX . V A R I A B L E WI D T H R O W X 7485 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 17 15 16 18 1920 2122 23 2425 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40414243 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 5354 555657 58 5960 61 6263 6465 6667 68 72 69 70 71 73 74 75 77 76 78 798081828384 85 8687 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 9697 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 7478 7476 7205 7206 7207 7208 72097210 7212 72117480 7481 7482 7483 7484 74867487 7488 7489 7490 7201 7202 7203 7204 7408 7407 74097410 7406 7405 7411 7412 7403 7404 7402 7401 74777479 7475 7467 7466 7465 74687469 7464 7473 7474 7471 74727470 7227 7228 7462 7461 7463 7226 72237224 7217 7460 722172227219 7216 7225 72207218 7453 7455 7454 7215 7459 7413 7415 7414 7416 7417 7430 7418 7431 7433 7432 7434 7445 7435 7444 7437 74467443 7438 7447 7429 7419 7420 7428 7427 7421 1 7422 74237426 7424 7425 7439 7442 7440 74487450 7452 7458 7449 7436 7441 7451 7457 7456 25' OFF-SET FROM LIMITS 15' OFF-SET FROM LIMITS X XX X XX X X X X XX X XXX X X XX X X X LIMITS OF DEVELOPMENT (LOD) 15' OFF-SET FROM LIMITS 25' OFF-SET FROM LIMITS LIMITS OF DEVELOPMENT (LOD) TREE PROTECTION FENCING ROOT PRUNING TREE PROTECTION FENCING ROOT PRUNING TREE PROTECTION FENCING ROOT PRUNING PROPERTY LINE LIMITS OF DEVELOPMENT (LOD) TREE PROTECTION FENCING ROOT PRUNING TREE PROTECTION FENCING ROOT PRUNING LOD LOD LOD LOD LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LOD LOD LO D LO D LODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLODLOD LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LOD LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LOD LOD LEGEND: : LIMITS OF DEVELOPMENT (LOD) : 15' OFFSET FROM LOD : 25' OFFSET FROM LIMITS : ROOT PRUNING : TREE PROTECTION FENCING : PROPERTY BOUNDARY TREE NUMBER : TREE TO PRESERVE : TREE TO REMOVEXX TREE NUMBER TREE NUMBER : APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TREES, 1-6" DBH : TREELINE SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 15 6030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30' HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 08-25-2022 CL CL JM TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 24 NOTE: A LETTER OF PERMISSION IS REQUIRED TO REMOVE ANY OFFSITE OR SHARED TREES. Dimensions and designs shown hereon are approximate and subject to change pending final engineering. 278 Item a. 290 284 286 286 288 284 282 28 4 28 6 28 4 28 6 28 8 288 286 28 6 283.1 282.7 283.9 285.1 285.4 284.8282.9 289.7 285.4 288.9 284.8 285.2 24 " P V C ST R . S 1 TO P = 2 8 3 . 7 7 INV I N = 2 6 0 . 6 0 ' ( 2 4 " P V C # ) INV O U T = 2 6 0 . 5 0 ' ( 2 4 " P V C # S 2 ) 54 . 3 6 ' - 2 4 " P V C @ 0 . 3 7 % LOD LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LO D LOD LOD 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 17 15 16 18 1920 2122 23 2425 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40414243 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 5354 555657 58 5960 61 6263 6465 6667 68 72 69 70 71 73 74 75 77 76 78 798081828384 85 8687 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 9697 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 7478 7476 7205 7206 7207 7402 7401 74777479 7475 7467 7466 7465 74687469 7464 7473 7474 7471 74727470 7227 7228 7462 7461 7463 7226 72237224 7217 7460 722172227219 7216 7225 72207218 7453 7455 7454 7215 7459 7413 7415 7414 7416 7417 7430 7418 7431 7433 7432 7434 7445 7435 7444 7437 74467443 7438 7447 7429 7419 7420 7428 7427 7421 1 7422 74237426 7424 7425 7439 7442 7440 74487450 7452 7458 7449 7436 7441 7451 7457 7456 25' OFF-SET FROM LIMITS 15' OFF-SET FROM LIMITS X X LIMITS OF DEVELOPMENT (LOD) VIR G I N I A S T A T E G R I D N O R T H NA D 8 3 SHEET No. SHEET TITLE: PROJECT No.: DRAWING No.: DATE: DESIGN: DRAWN: CHECKED: 1 2 3 4 5 6 B A C D en g i n e e r i n g Ÿ su r v e y i n g Ÿ la n d p l a n n i n g ch r i s t o p h e r co n s u l t a n t s 50 c a t o c t i n c i r c l e n e su i t e 2 0 0 lee s b u r g , v a 2 0 1 7 6 p 7 0 3 . 7 7 7 . 2 7 5 5 HA M B L E T P R O P E R T Y RE Z O N I N G C O N C E P T P L A N TL Z M - 2 0 2 1 - 0 0 0 6 TO W N O F L E E S B U R G LO U D O U N C O U N T Y , V I R G I N I A 20067.002.00 110531 08-25-2022 CL CL JM TREE PRESERVATION PLAN TABULATIONS 25 #819 #817 #821 #823 #830 #832 #828 EXISTING OFF-SITE VEGETATION ON PARCEL 9B2 SUMMARY OF OFF-SITE EXISTING VEGETATION THE OFFSITE PRC OPEN SPACE (LABELED AS SECTION 9B PARCEL 9B2) IS ABOUT 0.37 ACRES (16,200 FEET2) IN SIZE AND 80' WIDE. IT IS POPULATED BY APPROXIMATELY 187 TREES OVER ONE (1) INCH DBH. THE TREE SPECIES INCLUDE MANY EASTERN RED CEDAR, AMERICAN ELM, WHITE ASH, HACKBERRY, SHINGLE OAK, MOCKERNUT HICKORY, BLACK WALNUT, AND DEAD TREES, AS WELL AS A FEW WHITE OAK, POST OAK, PAW PAW, BLACKHAW, PIGNUT HICKORY, ARBORVITAE, TREE-OF-HEAVEN, BLACK OAK, AND SUGAR MAPLE. THE NORTHERN THIRD OF THIS PROPERTY IS ALSO DENSELY POPULATED BY SHRUBBY UNDERGROWTH, MOSTLY CONSISTING OF BUSH HONEYSUCKLE, CHINESE PRIVET, WINGED EUONYMUS, AND SMALL PAW PAW AND BLACKHAW. THE EASTERN RED CEDARS THAT GROW AROUND THE EDGES OF THIS ENTIRE PROPERTY ARE DENSE, AND MANY ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY FEATURE THICK FOLIAGE. THE OFFSITE VEGETATED AREA SIGNIFICANTLY ENHANCES THE REQUIRED S1 ONSITE SCREEN. 15 6030300 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30' ISA CERTIFIED ARBORIST APPROVAL: Date Approved:Allison Hay ISA Certified Arborist, MA-6600A 4035 Ridge Top Road, Suite 601 Fairfax, VA 22030 703.293.4934 allison.m.hay@imegcorp.com 01-16-2023 Date of Field Work: 08-17-2022NOTE: A LETTER OF PERMISSION IS REQUIRED TO REMOVE ANY OFFSITE OR SHARED TREES. 279 Item a. PROFFER STATEMENT HAMBLET PROPERTY TLZ|M202t-0006 November l0r202l Revised December 13, 2021 Revised September 26, 2022 Revised February 17, 2023 Revised April 5,2023 Revised l;Û/Iay 4,2023 \ililliam Randalt Hamblet, Susan Swink Hamblet, Susan Harper Hamblet, and Samuel H. Rogers III, record owners of the properfy designated by Loudoun County Parcel Identification Numbers (PINs) 149-38-2764 and 149-38-3136 collectively referenced herein as the "Property" consi sting of a total of approxim ately 6 .438 acres, (the above-referenced record owners shall hereafter be referred to as the "Owner"), on behalf of themselves and their successors in interest, hereby voluntarily proffer, pursuant to Section 15.2-2303 of the Code of Virginia and Section 3.3.16 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Leesburg (the "Zoning Ordinance"), that in the event the Properfy is rezoned by the Town Council of teesburg, Virginia (the "Town") from R-E, Single family Residential Estate District to the R-8, Medium-Density Attached Residential ("R-8") District (pursuant to Section 5.7 of the Zoning Ordinance), the development of the Property shall be in substantial conformance with the proffered conditions ("Proffers") as set forth below and the Concept Development Plan identified in Proffer 1 below (collectively referenced herein as the "Application"). All exhibits referred to in these Proffers are attached and incorporated into these Proffers. LAND USE & DEVELOPMENT SCOPE Rezoning Concept Plan. The Property shall be developed in substantial conformance with Sheets 1,3,4,6,7,8, 12, 13, 14, 15,T6, 17,18, 19,20,2I,22and24of the26-sheet rezoning concept plan, prepared by Christopher Consultants, Ltd., dated November 02, 2021 andrevised through March 3I,2023 (the "Rezoning ConceptPlan") which is attached to these Proffers as Exhibit A. Development Scope. Up to twenty-five single-family attached ("Townhouses") dwelling units may be developed in a single phase on the Property consistent with R-8 district regulations, except as modified inTLZM202l-0006. Development shall be in substantial conformance with the Rezoning Concept Plan as noted in Proffer 1. Minor Modifrcations. Pursuant to $ 3.3.20 of the Zoning Ordinance, minor modifications to the Rezoning Concept Plan may be permitted as determined by the Land Development Official. I 2 J 280 Item a. TLZM202r-0006 Page 2 of 11 4 5 Water & Sewer. The Property will be developed using Town central water supply and central sanitary sewer systems, with such facilities extended and provided to the Property at no cost to the Town, and in accordance with Town standards. The Owner shall acquire any offsite easements, if needed, to extend public water and/or sanitary sewer lines to this site and shall convey them to the Town at no cost to the Town. Creation of a Homeowners Association. The Owner shall establish a Homeowners Association ("HOA"), to which residential owners will be subject. During the subdivision plan review process, the HOA documents shall be submitted to the Town for review and approval as to form and consistency with the Proffers and the Leesburg Town Code and Zoning Ordinance. No provision of the HOA that addresses any matter that is proffered or is otherwise required by this rezoning approval shall be amended without prior approval by the Town. Timing of HOA. The HOA shall be established at the time of recordation of the first subdivision plat prior to the sale of any lot to a third parfy who is not an affrliate of the Owner. Duties. The Owner, the HOA or its members shall have, among its duties, snow removal, trash removal (if not provided by the Town) and the maintenance of all private facilities on the Property including private roads and private access easements, private storm drainage, private common areas, and green spaces. The HOA shall also be responsible for the maintenance of all facilities as described herewithin and below on the Property within the Public Access Easement. Private Streets and Stormwater Management Facilities. The HOA documents shall include a statement that the private streets cannot be accepted as public roads by the Town and the responsibility for their maintenance will be delegated to the HOA. The HOA documents also shall include a statement that the stormwater management facilities on the Property are private and the responsibility for their maintenance will be delegated to the HOA. D Stone Harper House Initial Repairs. The Owner shall make necessary improvements and/or repairs to the exterior of the Stone Harper House such as, but not limited to, wind and waterproofing of the Stone Harper House, stone repairs, replacement of any rotting and/or rotted wood trim, door and window and/or shutter repairs, painting oftrim (new and existing), roofrepairs and porch guard rail repairs as necessary. The Owner shall provide to the Town in writing prior to the issuance of the first occupancy pennit on the Property, the determination by a licensed engineer that the Stone Harper House is structurally sound. Nothing in this proffer shall exempt the Stone Harper House from applicable reviews and approvals as required by the Zoning Ordinance including but not limited to, if applicable, review and approval by the Board of Architectural Review. Retention and Maintenance of Stone Harper House. The HOA shall establish financial reserves and commit to the annual maintenance of the Stone Harper A. B C E. 281 Item a. TLZM202t-0006 Page 3 of 11 House, including, but not limited to, maintaining the structure as wind and waterproof, stone repairs, replacing rotting and/or rotted wood trim, painting trim, roof repairs and porch guard rail repairs as necessary. The HOA shall also maintain an insurance policy on the Stone Harper House. However, in the event that the Stone Harper House is completely destroyed, or more than fifty percent of the structure is damaged in a manner reasonably considered beyond repair as determined by a licensed engineer, the HOA shall not be required to repair or replace the Stone Harper House to its original condition, so long as such destruction andlor damage is deemed to not have been a direct result of actions or inaction by the HOA, as determined by the Zoning Administrator after consultation with appropriate authorities. In the event that such destruction and/or damage occurs, the HOA shall be allowed to, in consultation with the Town, stabilize the site as necessary (to include removal of debris and grading) and may replace in consultation with the Town, but shall not be required to replace, the Stone Harper House with a structure of similar scale, heighq and square footage (the "Replacement Structure"). In the event the HOA opts to replace the Stone Harper House, nothing in this proffer shall exempt the Replacement Structure from review and approval by the Town nor exempt said Replacement Structure from substantial conformance with these Proffers and the approved Rezoning Concept Plan. Nothing in this proffer shall exempt the Stone Harper House from applicable reviews and approvals as required by the Zoning Ordinance including but not limited to, if applicable, review and approval by the Board of Architectural Review. General Responsibilities. In addition to the responsibilities related to the Stone Harper House as noted above, theHOA shall maintain all other common areas, open space areas and active recreation areas. Public Access Easement. The area immediately surrounding the Stone Harper House, including any and all pedestrian paths, sidewalks, andlor trails necessary for accessing the Stone Harper House on the Property shall be open and available for public use and shall be located within a public access easement to be approved to form by the Town Attorney and dedicated to the Town at not public cost. The dedication of the public access easement shall not include any language that relieves the HOA of its maintenance obligations for facilities within the area of the public access easement. Covenants. Conditions and Restrictions. Concurrently with recordation of the first record plat for the Property, the Owner shall record a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions that shall be applicable to all property and uses on the Property (the "Declaration"). The Declaration shall include covenants that address all proffered design elements set forth in these Proffers and the Rezoning Concept Plan. In addition, the Declaration shall include, but is not limited to, the following restrictions: A. Garbage Cans. Garbage Cans, Recycling Cans, or any other storage of refuse and recycling ("R&R Storage"), shall not be permitted outside of units except when said R&R Storage is to be placed at curbs for days of trash collection. Sufficient space F G 6 282 Item a. TWM202I-0006 Page 4 of 11 shall be provided for each units R&R Storage in the garage area of each dwelling unit constructed on the Property. Architecture. Architectural guidelines shall govern any exterior alterations of dwelling units, fencing, and decks. All exterior modifications, regardless of HOA guidelines, will be subject to review and approval in accordance with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Section 7.12 Gateway District (Overlay). C.Garages. No garage shall be converted to any purpose other than for the storage of operable vehicles, except where a dwelling unit is used as a display or model home. Said display or model home shall be exempt from this garage conversion restriction until such time as the dwelling unit is sold to a residential user and no longer functions as a display or model home. Architectural Design. Building elevations for the Townhouses shall be in substantial conformance to the Architectural Elevations depicted on Sheets 18, 19, and 2A of the Rezoning Concept Plan with allowances for modification by the Board of Architectural Review during the Certificate of Appropriateness Process in accordance with Zoning Ordinance Section 7.12 Gateway District (Overlay). Following initial approval by the Board of Architectural Review, any exterior modifìcations, regardless of HOA guidelines andlor approval shall be subject to review and approval in accordance with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Section 7.12 Gateway District (Overlay). ENVIRONMENTAL Open Space. Open space and buffer yards, as well as amenities including but not limited to a Pergola and Patio, Oval-shaped law, Pathways, Picnic Table, Fencing and Interpretive Sign as shown on Sheet 8 of the Rezoning Concept Plan (the "Stone Harper House Amenities") shall be conveyed by the Owner to the HOA referenced in Proffer 5, and the HOA shall be responsible for maintaining the amenities and landscaping within these spaces in substantial conformance with the Rezoning Concept Plan. The Stone Harper House Amenities shall be installed by the Owner and available for use prior to the issuance of the 23d Occupancy Permit for a residential unit. Energ]¡ Conservation. Al1 Townhouse dwelling units on the Property shall be designed and constructed as ENERGY STAR Version 3@ or Home Energy Rating System ("HERS") qualified homes with a maximum rating of 90. V/ith the submission of a zoning permit for each building, the Owner shall provide certification that the construction documents have been reviewed by a qualified Home Energy Rater, and that the building meets ENERGY STAR Version 3@ or I{ERS standards with a maximum rating of 90. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, a "wet" ENERGY STAR Version 3@ or I{ERS label must be verified at each dwelling unit's electrical panel and a copy of the Home Energy Rating report shall be provided by the Home Energy Rater. The Home Energy Rating report shall include the unit address, builder's name, Rater's name and date of verifïcation. B 7 I 9 10. Noise Impact Mitigation Measures. The Owner shall install windows and sliding glass 283 Item a. TLZM202I-0006 Page 5 of 1l 11 12 13 14. doors, where identifïed and as shown at fïnal design, that provide a Sound Transmission Class Rating ('STC Rating") of 29 for all sides of the residential unit located on lot 1 as identified on the Rezoning Concept Plan. The Owner shall install windows and sliding glass doors, where identified and as shown at final design, that provide a STC Rating of 29 for the front and sides of residential units located on lots 18, 19, 2A,2I,22,23,24, and25 as identified on the Rezoning Concept Plan. The Owner shall install a front door which provides a STC Rating of 25 for the residential unit located on lots 1, 18, 79, 20,21, 22, 23,24, and25 as identified on the Rezoning Concept Plan. The Owner shall install a solid wall that extends at least six (6) feet above the deck elevation on the left end of the elevated deck (the "Deck Wall") for the residential unit located on lot I as identified on the Rezoning Concept Plan. TRANSPORTATION Offsite Transportation Contribution. The Owner shall, prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit, make a one-time offsite transportation contribution to the Town in the amount of $2,671.00 per unit, for a tot¿l combined contribution of $66,779.00. Said contribution shall be used at the discretion of the Town to offset any transportation impacts of the proposed development in the general vicinity of the Property. MISCELLANEOUS School Capital Facilities Contribution. In accordance with Town Council Resolution 2Al5- 105, the Owner shall provide, upon issuance of each occupancy permit for a dwelling unit, a one-time cash contribution in the amount of $18,285.00 for each Townhouse dwelling unit, which shall be used for capital projects for public schools serving the Town of Leesburg or other capital improvement projects in the Town of Leesburg. Fire and Rescue Contribution. The Owner shall, prior to the approval of the occupancy permit for each residential dwelling unit on the Property, make a one-time cash contribution to the Town in the amount of $100.00 per residential dwelling unit for distribution to the fire and rescue companies providing primary service to the Property. This contribution shall be divided equally between those fire and rescue companies that primarily serve the Property, Waivers and Modifications. Approval of this Application does not express or imply any waiver or modification of the requirements set forth in the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations, the Zoning Ordinance, or the DCSM, except as expressly set forth herein or as approved with the Zoning Ordinance Modifications, and all fînal plats, concept plans, and construction plans shall remain subject to these applicable Town regulations. Escalation Clause. All monetary contribution proffers shall escalate on a yearly basis beginning one year from the date of approval of the first site plan or the first record plat for the Property and shall change effective each January I thereafter, based on the Consumer Price Index for the \ü/ashìngton Metropolìtan Statistical Area. 15 284 Item a. TLZM202t-00A6 Page 6 of 1l T6 t7 Construction. Should construction and/or installation of any of the improvements described herein be determined by the Zoning Administrator (including, but not limited to, healthcare pandemic, construction schedules, availability of financing, weather delays, duration of approval process, market conditions, inability to secure necessary easements, licenses, healthcare emergencies, or perrnission from other private or public entities for utility relocations and traffic improvements, etc.), to have been delayed due to circumstances beyond the Owner's control, later dates for compliance may be permitted as determined appropriate by the Zoning Administrator and, if necessary, subject to a proffer bond to compel completion of the overdue commitment. Successors and Assigns. These proffers will bind and inure to the benefit of the Owner and its successors and assigns. Each reference to "Owner" in these Proffers will include within its meaning and will be binding upon the Owner's successor(s)-in-interest and/or developer(s) of the site. The undersigned hereby warrants that all Owners with any legal interest in the Property have signed this Proffer statement, that no signature from any additional party is necessary for these Proffers to be binding and enforceable in accordance with their terms, that the undersigned has full authority to bind the Property to these conditions, and that the Proffers are entered into voluntarily. I STGNATURES ON FOLLOWTNG PAGE ] 285 Item a. TLZM202l-0006 Page 7 of 11 WILLIAM RANDALL HAMBLET Owner/Title Owner of Loudoun County PINs 149- 38-2764 and I 8-3 136 By Name: rJ/illiam Randall Hamblet STATE/COMMONWEALTH OF Vir't;n;ct CITY/COUNTY OF ê to-wit: - "LjThe foregoing instrument was acknowledged before ffiê, this lg' day of l\2023, by WILLIAM RANDALL HAMBLET Notary Public My Commission Expires My Notary Registration Number l) - 7t-?"¡7 7 q?'7,1S I WIXAMJAtvtES p€trlE I¡OTARY PUB|.IC REG. #?82705.|* *-,î,?s"i&iÅH 8[#m]r..,,,* 286 Item a. TLZM202t-0006 Page I of Ll SUSAN SWINK HAMBLET Owner/Title Owner of Loudoun County PINs 149- 38-27 64 and 149-38-3 136 By Susan Swink Hamblet STATE/COMMONWEALTHOF Vlf 4,'a¡ À CITY/COUNTY OF *^u on to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before úe, this J3^ Ou, of 2A23, by SUSAN S\ÄÆNK IIAMBLET. * Notary Public l)_7t _ 3"7sMy Commission Expires: My Notary Regi stration Number: 7ga 715 | WTLIAM JAMES PEALE NOTAFY PUBLIC REG. f7827Ssl COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIArl coMMrssroN üplREs DEGEMAËn 31,2Gl 287 Item a. TLZM202t-0006 Page 9 of 11 SUSAN HARPER HAMBLET Owner/Title Owner of Loudoun County PINs 149- 38-27 64 and I 49-38 -3136 By Name: Susan Hamblet STATE/COMMONWEALTH OF yi^Tì rtì ¿,r CITY/COUNTY OF lz¡rnÅ¿:tr.-l^, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before ño, this tqlfi- day of My Commission Expires:o3 8(2ø2.}r My Notary Registration Number:3l 2023, by SUSAN HARPER HAMBLET. Notary Public ¡lllr, R A,ililt| L 2oc\ 288 Item a. TLZM202t-0006 Page l0 of 11 STATE/C CITY/COUNTY OF My Notary Registration My Commission Expires:ô\o 2023, by SAMUEL H. ROGERS otary Public 4 Number: ,15t2 a35 SAMUEL H. ROGERS ITI Owner/Title Owner of Loudoun County PINs 149- 38-2764 and I 8-31 By Name: Samuel H.u OF \nn{ to-wit: this a5 day of 289 Item a. TLZM202t-0006 Page Ll, of 11, Exhibit A Concent Plan 290 Item a. COUNCIL ACTIONS CALENDAR Tentative/Subject to Change MeetingDate MeetingType Name SubmittedBy 06/12/2023 Town Council Work Session CLOSED SESSION: Annexation with respect to the Joint Land Management Area (JLMA)Boeing, Eileen DISCUSSION: 2024 Legislative Program (P)Markel, Keith DISCUSSION: Air Traffic Control Update and Control Tower Project Addition to the Capital Improvement Plan (P)Coffman, Scott DISCUSSION: Airport Noise Complaints from Evergreen Meadows subdivision Coffman, Scott DISCUSSION: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow Congregate Housing (P)Cicalese, Karen INFORMATION MEMO: Economic Development Plan – Project Update to Council Turney, Elaine INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine 06/13/2023 Town Council Meeting CONSENT: Appointment to the Parks & Recreation Commission (Council Member Wilt) (NP)Boeing, Eileen CONSENT: Contract Award to Upgrade Meter Reading System (NP)Wyks, Amy CONSENT: Extending Cable Franchise with Verizon Virginia LLC for a Period of Six Months Smith, Carmen CONSENT: Plaza Street Sidewalk Project - Design Task Order Contract Authorization (B)Southerland, Danielle CONSENT: Special Event Fee Waiver for Juneteenth Freedom March (NP)Trask, Kate CONSENT: Supplemental Appropriation for the Airport Runway Pavement Rehabilitation Project (NP)Southerland, Danielle ORDINANCE: Appointment to the Board of Architectural Review (Council) (NP) (Tentative)Boeing, Eileen PROCLAMATION: Juneteenth Smith, Ann PROCLAMATION: Master Gardeners Smith, Ann PUBLIC HEARING: TLZM-2021-0006 Hamblet Rezoning (P)Cicalese, Karen RESOLUTION: 2024 Legislative Program (P)Markel, Keith RESOLUTION: Amending the Capital Improvement Program for Air Traffic Control Tower (P)Coffman, Scott RESOLUTION: Downtown Traffic Study and Travel Demand Model - Award of Contract (P)Southerland, Danielle RESOLUTION: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow Congregate Housing (P)Watkins, Michael 06/26/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Outdoor Performance Venue (P)Eagle, Tabitha DISCUSSION: Proclamation Process Boeing, Eileen DISCUSSION: Traffic signal at Battlefield Parkway and Fieldstone Drive NE (P)Southerland, Danielle INFORMATION MEMO: Monthly Board and Commission Report - Activity and Attendance Smith, Ann INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine 6/7/202312:26 PM 291 Item a. COUNCIL ACTIONS CALENDAR Tentative/Subject to Change MeetingDate MeetingType Name SubmittedBy 06/27/2023 Town Council Meeting CONSENT: Appointment to the Tree Commission (Vice Mayor Steinberg) (NP) - Tentative (June 10)Boeing, Eileen CONSENT: Contract Award for UV Disinfection at Water Treatment Plant (NP)Wyks, Amy CONSENT: Contract Award Sanitary Sewer Pump Station Upgrades (NP)Wyks, Amy PRESENTATION: 2021/2022 Tree Commission Annual Report Atkins, Noble PUBLIC HEARING: Amending Town Code Chapter 20 - Transient Occupancy Tax Smith, Carmen PUBLIC HEARING: Ordinance Amendment for Continuing Care Facility Cicalese, Karen PUBLIC HEARING: TLZM-2022-0006 Village at Leesburg - Village Market Boulevard Cicalese, Karen RESOLUTION: Appointment to the Diversity Commission (Council) - Tentative (NP)Boeing, Eileen 07/10/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Evaluate the Development of a Business Incubator/Entrepreneurial Program (P)Turney, Elaine DISCUSSION: Follow Up on Affordable Housing Incentives Plan (P)Cicalese, Karen DISCUSSION: Legislative Aides for Council Members Berrios, Sandra DISCUSSION: Liberty Lot PPP Update (P)Markel, Keith INFORMATION MEMO: Town Council Benefits Didawick, Josh 07/11/2023 Town Council Meeting CONSENT: Water Treatment Plant Roof-Top HVAC Unit Replacement (NP)Wyks, Amy PRESENTATION: Independence Day Parade Patriot Cup Winners – TBD Boeing, Eileen 07/24/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Community Composting Program Moran, Deb 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 CONSENT: Contract Award Sanitary Sewer Manhole Lining (NP)Wyks, Amy RESOLUTION: Adoption of the Town's Legislative Agenda (P)Belote, Tara 08/07/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Outdoor Volleyball Courts Eagle, Tabitha DISCUSSION: Liberty Lot PPP Update (P)Markel, Keith DISCUSSION: Main Street – Quarterly Update Turney, Elaine DISCUSSION: Membership Requirements for Boards and Commissions Smith, Carmen DISCUSSION: Traffic Intersection Route 7 Exit Ramp at Clubhouse Drive (P)LaFollette, Renee 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: Quarterly Progress Report on Council Retreat Workplan Items Dentler, Kaj 6/7/202312:26 PM 292 Item a. COUNCIL ACTIONS CALENDAR Tentative/Subject to Change MeetingDate MeetingType Name SubmittedBy 08/07/2023 Town Council Work Session INFORMATION MEMO: Visit Loudoun Monthly Report Turney, Elaine 08/08/2023 Town Council Meeting CONSENT: Airport Apron Paving Construction Contract Award (NP)Southerland, Danielle 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 PUBLIC HEARING: Zoning Ordinance Re-Write Commercial Inn Definition Watkins, Michael RESOLUTION: Memorandum of Agreement for Air Traffic Control Services at Leesburg Executive Airport Coffman, Scott 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: Noise Ordinance Amendments Smith, Carmen DISCUSSION: Summer JAMS Program (formerly Acoustics on the Green) (P)Eagle, Tabitha DISCUSSION: Traffic signal at Battlefield Parkway and Fieldstone Drive NE (P)Southerland, Danielle 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 6/7/202312:26 PM 293 Item a. COUNCIL ACTIONS CALENDAR Tentative/Subject to Change MeetingDate MeetingType Name SubmittedBy 10/02/2023 Town Council Work Session DISCUSSION: Liberty Lot Access from South Street (NP)Southerland, Danielle DISCUSSION: Liberty Street Parking Lot - Consideration of Remediation Study with Associated Costs (P)Belote, Tara DISCUSSION: Sustainability Progress Report (P)Cicalese, Karen 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: Quarterly Progress Report on Council Retreat Workplan Items Dentler, Kaj 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 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 RESOLUTION: Renewal of Private Property Mural Program (P)Kosin, Leah 6/7/202312:26 PM 294 Item a.