Town of Holly Springs

Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting

Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2000

MINUTES

The Holly Springs Town Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2000 in the Town Board meeting chambers, located in Town Hall, 128 S. Main St. Mayor Gerald W. Holleman presided, calling the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. A quorum was established as the mayor and all five board members were present as the meeting opened.

Board Members Present: Commissioners Tim Sack, John Schifano, Parrish Womble, Peter Atwell and Hank Dickson and Mayor Holleman.

Board Members Absent: None.

Staff Members Present: Richard B. Self, town manager; Ernest C. Pearson, town attorney; Joni Powell, town clerk (recording the minutes); Stephanie Sudano, director of engineering; Cecil Parker, chief of public safety; and Gina Bobber, planning director.

2 and 3. The pledge of allegiance was recited, and the meeting opened with a moment of silent meditation.

4. Agenda Adjustment – The Oct. 17, 2000 meeting agenda was adopted with changes, if any, as listed below.

Motion Made By: Atwell

Motion Seconded By: Sack

Vote: Unanimous.

Items Added to Agenda: Under Consent Agenda, Item No. 7 to adopt Resolution 00-R-30 in support of the Wake County Jail Facilities bond referendum.

Consent Agenda Items Moved to New Business: Item 7b., Resolution 00-R-28 in support of the Wake County Schools bond referendum, was moved to New Business.

Other Changes: None.

5. Commercial Corridor Growth Committee – Mr. John Wood, chairman of the CCGC, addressed the Board, providing members with a progress report for the committee. Mr. Wood advised the Town Board that the committee would be forthcoming with a full report.

Mr. Wood expressed the Committee’s desire for more succinct direction from the Town Board of Commissioners as to the role of the Committee. He also commended staff for its participation and support of the Committee’s efforts, and he said comments received from some of the members by Commissioners were misplaced.

Mr. Wood told the Board that he had received a few comments back from Commissioners following a request for specific direction in May. He said his committee still lacks a clear charge as to what the CCGC is supposed to be doing for the Town. In example of the confusion, Mr. Wood asked, “Do we identify places for additional zoning districts... or are we supposed to recommend and/or write the ordinances?”

At committee meetings, the CCGC has taken an education from staff as to how the development and plan review process works, Mr. Wood said.

While the CCGC intends to provide a full report to the Board in November or December, he summed up a consensus point of the Committee: that the Town needs more than one commercial zoning designation, i.e., C-1, C-2, and possibly some overlay districts.

Mr. Wood explained that the CCGC’s first study area has been Hwy. 55 North. He noted that the pending progress report will break that area down into three districts: Holly Springs Road north to Sonic; from Sonic north to Household Building Systems; and Household Building Systems north to Sunset Lake Road.

Currently, the CCGC is leaning toward categorizing the first area closest to downtown as a mildly intense commercial and office area for offices and medium size retail stores. As the districts move northward, buffers would change and requirements would ease incrementally as development radiates out from the downtown area. In the end, the most intense highway commercial areas would be farthest away from downtown.

Mr. Wood added that the Committee envisions that the same three elements could be plugged into each commercial corridor similarly.

Mr. Wood noted that the Town has necessary regulations in place to promote quality commercial development. He said the Town must also be wary of being too restrictive in its guidelines that it thwarts potential investment in the Town.

He asked the Board for direction as to how much detail does the Board want the CCGC to go into. He also requested that any correspondence regarding the CCGC be directed to him. Mr. Wood also noted that the Board’s recent discussions of entrances to the Town as being less-intense in commercial nature may be at odds with the direction in which the CCGC was currently going in terms of “radiating” from the center of Town out with more and more intense commercial uses.

In closing, he asked the Board if the CCGC was heading in the right direction with its ideology; what is the next corridor the Board would like examined; and what did the Board see as the future of the CCGC... a temporary committee or a long-standing advisory board?

In response, Commissioners offered the following comments:

Commissioner Sack – Mr. Sack said he found the concept of a graduated series of commercial zones along corridors interesting. He added that he did not envision the CCGC as an ordinance-writing body, but does envision the CCGC as a group of citizens who would assist in categorizing and outlining what the community desires to see in terms of commercial development in Holly Springs. He said he would support applying the graduated series of Commercial zones to future corridors.

Commissioner Schifano – Mr. Schifano admitted that the Town Board did not specifically nail down exactly what the CCGC was supposed to do in the beginning. He said he did not blame individual members for having confusion. He added that he did not see the CCGC as a body that would go into great or specific detail as to its recommendations, but to offer a fresh insight as to what kind of development does the public want to see and where. In example, he asked the CCGC to answer questions like, “Where do we want to see big-box development? If not downtown, then where?” Mr. Schifano added that he does not envision the CCGC as a long-standing committee, but he is open to discussion.

Commissioner Womble – Mr. Womble said he likes the idea of establishing graduated and multiple Commercial zones along the corridors. He said he also was supportive of overlay districts.

Commissioner Atwell – Mr. Atwell suggested that the CCGC be a flexible group that would focus on providing general insights into how the Town should develop commercially but could also be called upon to look at specific development plans that come in to the Town and offer comments. Mr. Wood responded that the CCGC would be willing to do so, but would offer comments only in very general terms.

Commissioner Dickson -- Mr. Dickson said he did not feel that the CCGC should worry about writing ordinances, but that he saw the group as a “think tank” for the Board in regard to Commercial development in Holly Springs.

Mayor Holleman -- Mayor Holleman suggested that the CCGC be provided professional support in the form of artists, who could provide renderings of key areas studied by the CCGC. Mayor Holleman said he also feels the Town could benefit from the CCGC as time goes on and development begins to occur. For this reason, he said he feels the committee should have a longer life.

No other action taken.

6a. Annexation Ordinance A00-06 --

Action: The Board approved a motion to adopt Annexation Ordinance A00-06, effective Oct. 17, 2000, to annex the property of the Finisterra development.

Motion By: Womble

Second By: Schifano

Vote: Unanimous

A copy of Annexation Ordinance A00-06 is incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages.

6b. Rezoning Petition 00-REZ-10 –

Action: The Board approved a motion to grant Rezoning Petition 00-REZ-10 as requested by the petitioner for the Finisterra development.

Motion By: Sack

Second By: Womble

Vote: Unanimous

6c. PUD Application 00-PUD-03 – Ms. Bobber explained that the original master plan for the proposed Finisterra development has been revised slightly, the result of meetings with staff and developers. She said the amended master plan provides for a variety of single- and multi-family uses as well as commercial and office areas. She stressed that the conceptual master plan would be referenced as Finisterra is developed, but that subdivision preliminary plat procedures would be followed with final and reviews and approvals as each phase is developed. Streets, lots and land uses would all be according to the master plan that is the subject of the evening.

Ms. Bobber explained that the Finisterra PUD is a proposed 775-acre mixed-use development to be located on the west side of Holly Springs -- specifically north of New Hill Road, south of Woods Creek Road, west of Old Holly Springs-Apex Road/BFI landfill and east of White Oak Creek.

She noted that Staff has been working with the developer of this project since May, which has resulted in a wide variety of changes since the original submission. In addition, the size of the project was reduced by nearly 200 acres after the PUD had been submitted for staff review, adding to additional changes and review time to the proposed master plan.

The Master Plan presented for approval consists of a maximum of 2,226 residential dwelling units. The expected units are as follows: 588-1,365 single-family; and 541-739 multi-family (townhomes, apartments, condominiums). The plan allows for single-family lots from 4,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet in area. The specific lot sizes for each area would be determined during the preliminary plat review.

The plan also provides a 9.23-acre mixed-use (office/retail) site along the southern edge of the development. A minimum of 77.6 acres of open space is required to be provided for this project. Including the 27-hold golf course, Finisterra is providing 349.7 acres of open space (312.9 within the golf course).

A system of private and public greenways would be provided throughout the development as well a series of public parks and private neighborhood parks containing tot lots and/or picnic areas.

The Master Plan also provides for architectural standards that would be required of all non-residential uses, including the Finisterra Club House, to ensure that the appearance of the development is compatible and provides for a consistent architectural theme, she said.

Mrs. Sudano addressed the Board with notes from the Engineering Department. She explained that water service to this site would be provided by the developer via off-site extensions down New Hill Road with a secondary tie to Old Holly Springs-Apex Road. Additional upgrades and/or ties would be provided by the developer as necessary to meet Town standards for fire protection after the developer models the water system.

In addition, the necessary internal infrastructure to serve the development (both the golf course and the residences in the development) with reclaimed water for irrigation also would be provided by the developer. The Town is presently seeking grants and/or other funding in order to install the off-site infrastructure to deliver reclaimed water to the project, she said.

Sanitary sewer service would be provided via the construction of an on-site pump station, gravity sewer, and off-site force main that will tie directly to the Town's wastewater treatment plant. This will prevent stressing existing downstream gravity sewer systems which are already at capacity. The pumping station and other facilities will be constructed by the developer and will be designed to serve the entire tract and other upstream properties.

Addressing transportation, Mrs. Sudano said that external access to the project would include: Multiple roadway access points to connect with New Hill Road; and a roadway connection to Old Holly Springs-Apex Road prior to development of the rear phase (as indicated on the plan).

She pointed out that the original project included additional acreage to the north, and an additional roadway connection to Woods Creek Road. Since that time, however, the developer has removed the tract of property, including this connection from the PUD. Mrs. Sudano said Staff is evaluating the possibility of a Town-initiated right-of-way acquisition process for the right-of-way for this connection, which may result in the construction of this additional transportation connection to the project.

Pedestrian connections, via sidewalk, are proposed at each of these roadway connections. Future evaluation of a possible roadway connection to the west has been discussed with the developer.

As for internal connectivity, Mrs. Sudano pointed out that the major street layout is shown on the plans, and provides for internal connection of all parts of the development. More detail will be provided as each "POD" develops. Sidewalk is provided in accordance with Town standards.

Full thoroughfare improvements are proposed along the frontage of New Hill Road at this time. The developer has had some discussions with Staff about the possibility of entering into a developer agreement which may re-allocate funds to change the scope of improvements made along this section of roadway (i.e., instead of installing one-half of a paved, curb-and-guttered roadway, pave both sides of the unpaved portion of the roadway plus extend the limits of the improvements). Any such agreement would be subject to Town Board approval at a later date, Mrs. Sudano said.

In addition, a traffic study has been finalized that will be used to determine the exact scope of additional improvements which will be needed for other sections of roadway and nearby intersections. Details on the required improvements to external existing roadways will be presented in the developer agreement when it is presented to the Town Board.

Mrs. Sudano also brief the Board on environmental considerations of the proposed PUD. She said the developer of this site indicated early on that the site complies with most aspects of the state's Neuse River Basin Buffer Rules. Although this site is not in the Neuse River Basin (it is in the Cape Fear basin), and it is not required to meet those regulations, this particular feature of the project complies with the environmental goals and policies stated in the Town's Comprehensive Land Use Plan.

Provision of these buffers, she pointed out, also positions the Town to defend the project in a regulatory environment that is particularly sensitive to secondary and cumulative impacts of large developments. The developer also has committed to use reclaimed water for irrigation of the golf course and residential properties. An Environmental Protection Plan was prepared and presented to the Town. The plan provides details on how the developer proposes to construct a golf course community that “both respects the integrity of the existing landscape and is sensitive to the land’s environmental features”. The developer plans to accomplish this task through the use of buffers, storm water management, run-off prevention, special clearing and grubbing methods, pollution control, and by the use of native plants and grasses. Staff has reviewed the plan and is satisfied with the conditions as set forth in the recommendations section the Staff Review and Recommendations, she said.

Mrs. Sudano added that a developers agreement would be forthcoming to the Board and that the agreement would outline certain obligations of the developer with respect to water, sewer, re-use, and transportation improvements and “fee offsets” which may be provided by the Town in accordance with Town policy.

Ms. Bobber then summarized the activities related to the Finisterra PUD. She said a public hearing on this project was held Aug. 15 before both the Town Board and the Planning Board. The project was scheduled to be presented to the Planning Board on Aug. 22; however the Planning Board did not have a quorum that evening, and did not, therefore, review the project at that meeting, but continued it to Sept. 12.

Since consideration of the project was continued to Sept. 12, the applicant requested and was given the opportunity to submit revised plans in response to Staff’s outstanding recommendations outlined in the “Staff Recommendations” document. Staff reviewed the revised plan, and then prepared a “Staff Recommendation Addendum” which includes the staff’s original recommendations (as referenced above). In addition, the “Staff Recommendation Addendum” reflects Staff’s new recommendations on the revised plan and the Planning Boards recommendations on the revised plan (from the Sept. 12 meeting).

Ms. Bobber admitted that there might be confusion, but she summed up the Planning Board and Staff’s recommendation that approval be granted for the Finisterra PUD Application 00-PUD-03 dated last revision 8-31-00 with the following conditions as recommended in the Staff Recommendation Addendum:

1. Should the Town accept the 17.12-acre tract in the northeast corner of the development for land dedication, the asphalt path will be required to be constructed from the street through the dedication area and a street stub will be provided to all access the dedicated area by the Town.

2. Town accepts the 2.02-acre parcel in the southwest corner of the development.

3. Town accepts the pond site located to the east of the 2.02-acre parcel in the southwest corner, provided that an asphalt greenway connection between the two sites is constructed by the developer.

4. If the greenway trail loop is to include sidewalks, the specifications for these sidewalks may be amended (at staff’s recommendation) to provide for 7-foot concrete sidewalks when they are to be a part of the greenway system.

5. All open space and recreational amenities shall be dedicated and completed before certificates of occupancy may be issued for more than 50% of the dwelling units in the PUD.

6. A developer agreement will include details for the timing of the recreation areas, payment of fees, land dedication, trail construction and any other items that may arise.

7. Prior to recordation of any lots in the PUD, homeowners association documents and deed restrictions in full are to be presented to staff for review, then recorded. These covenants are to include the creation of a homeowners association for the maintenance of all privately owned common areas and recreational facilities, including, but not limited to, streets, parking areas, easements and the like, maintenance of street trees, preservation buffers, “private” walking trails and any other individual items as determined by staff at Preliminary Plat Review and Approval for each section. And,

8. Prior to construction drawing approval, the following items must be

satisfied:

i. Staff will need to review the reduced PUD document to insure that it is consistent with the larger version of the PUD plan that we have been reviewing.

ii. Field survey coordinated with flood studies of flood-prone areas will be required before construction drawing approval

iii. Fire flow calculations will be required and may warrant additional offsite water extensions to serve the project

iv. Water “re-use” plan to be finalized at construction drawing review and specifically detailed in developer agreements

v. Staff has met with the developer’s engineer about the tentative terms of a developer agreement which will outline certain obligations of the developer with respect to water, sewer, re-use, and transportation improvements and “fee offsets” which may be provided by the Town in accordance with Town policy. Once cost estimates and design and preliminary infrastructure sizing calculations for the improvements that will be considered in the agreement are received by staff, a developer agreement will be prepared and forwarded to the Town Board for review and approval. Refer to recommended approval conditions relative to this agreement.

vi. Additional improvements may be necessary pending review of the revised Transportation Impact Analysis.

vii. Alignment and design of the street extension to Old Holly Springs-Apex Road should be considered at this time. The angle of the intersection as proposed is not acceptable. Verify that the Traffic Impact Analysis takes into consideration both the intersection and the intersection’s lane configuration.

viii. A separate sheet showing the water re-use system for both the golf course and residential lawn irrigation is to be included. This system is a requirement of this PUD. The infrastructure is to be constructed immediately even if the system is not yet on-line so that the system will be fully functionable upon completion of the system to the site.

ix. The Town may use condemnation to accommodate an entrance for this PUD to Woods Creek Road. The Town will likely require construction of this roadway if the condemnation takes place. The Town also reserves the right to require either/both this connection or the connection to Old Holly-Springs-Apex Road.

x. Response to the Wake Soil and Water Conservation letter will be addressed at construction drawing review.

9. The following comments are provided on the Environmental Protection Plan for the project:

! The statement on page 1 that “the designs, construction techniques, and programs incorporated into this plan are performance based” allows allows for the developer, engineer and Town staff to have the most effective environmental protection measures possible. A “performance” based system will be required.

! An important benefit of large trees is the cover for the stream that keeps the water temperature low with is important in water quality. Therefore, it is important to limit the length of stream along which trees are to be cut down.

! On page 2, Stream Buffers & Storm water section, you refer to the USGS map for identifying intermittent and perennial streams. The Neuse buffer rules also regulates intermittent and perennial streams shown on the County soil maps in addition to the USGS quad map – please provide the additional information to identify any other streams that show up on the County soil map Also, evaluate the possibility of conserving the area that must be disturbed at points where roadways and fairways cross streams as permanently unused/undisturbed areas after construction is completed. This will prevent further impacts to the streams.

! A long-term maintenance plan is an important component in the success of the entire environmental protection plan – especially for the proposed filter systems. Most of the methods proposed will require some maintenance, which should be addressed in the covenants for the project.

! The Town is currently working on a basic Environmental Education Kit that will be the developer’s responsibility to reproduce and to hand out to all homeowners with buffers, wetlands, drainage easements, and/or other environmentally sensitive areas on or near their lots. The Town staff recommends that the developer of this project provide this packet of information - which will generally include: appropriate uses of fertilizer and pesticides to maintain a healthy lawn and landscape information, definitions and descriptions of types of buffers and care and restrictions in those buffers, some supplementary material addressing some of the special measures that you are proposing in this development, and information on reuse – to every homeowner adjacent to environmentally-sensitive areas in the development. Because this project has some environmental features specific to the project, the developer will need to work with staff to supplement our basic Education Kit with more site-specific information

Action: The Board approved a motion to approve PUD Application 00-PUD-03 for the proposed Finisterra development, contingent upon the satisfaction of staff review comments and conditions as enumerated in the Staff Review and Recommendation and Recommendation Addendum.

Motion By: Sack

Second By: Womble

Vote: Unanimous

6d. Noise Ordinance – Commissioner Womble made a motion to adopt Ordinance 00-21, a noise ordinance, but commissioners said they wanted to discuss the draft before taking action. The motion, therefore, died for lack of a second.

In discussion, it was decided that the following changes would be made in the text of the draft:

# To replace each instance of the word “unnecessary” with the words “unreasonably, loud, annoying or frightening.”

# To change Section 8-6003(5) to read “The Town Department of Public Safety” in place of “The Town Board.”

Action: The Board approved a renewed motion to approve Ordinance 00-21, as amended.

Motion By: Sack

Second By: Schifano

Vote: Unanimious

A copy of Ordinance 00-21 as amended is incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages.

6e. Resolution 00-R-28 and Resolution 00-R-30 – Resolution 00-R-28, a resolution supporting the upcoming Wake County School Bonds referendum, was read.

Action: The Board approved a motion to adopt Resolution 00-R-28 supporting the Wake County School Bond referendum.

Motion By: Dickson

Second By: Atwell

Vote: Unanimous.

A copy of Resolution 00-R-28 is incorporated into these minutes as an addendum page.

At this time, Resolution 00-R-30, a resolution supporting the upcoming Wake County Jail Facilities referendum, was read.

Action: The Board approved a motion to adopt Resolution 00-R-30 in support of the Wake County Jail Facilities Bond referendum.

Motion By: Womble

Second By: Schifano

Vote: Unaniomus

A copy of Resolution 00-R-30 is incorporated into these minutes as an addendum page.

7. Consent Agenda – All remaining items on the Consent Agenda were approved following a motion by Commissioner Womble, a second by Commissioner Atwell and a unanimous vote. The following actions were affected:

7a. Annexation A00-04 – Annexation Ordinance A00-04 annexing the Fair Share Annexation Area was adopted, effective Oct. 17, 2001.

A copy of Annexation Ordinance A00-04 is incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages.

7b. Resolution 00-R-28 – Action taken earlier in agenda.

7c. Resolution 00-R-29 – Resolution 00-R-29 urging Holly Springs residents to participate in a safe and courteous Halloween, was adopted.

A copy of Resolution 00-R-29 is incorporated into these minutes as an addendum page.

7d. Budget Amendments – Budget ordinance amendments to align funds in the FY 1999-2000 budget year ending June 30, 2000 were adopted.

An amendment in the amount of $150,000 was made to accept and assign COPS grant funds was adopted. An amendment in the amount of $49,391 to accept and assign funds received from the developer for infrastructure costs of Cross Pointe Village not covered by CDBG funds was adopted.

Copies of the budget amendments are incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages.

7e. Budget Amendment – A FY 2000-2001 budget ordinance amendment in the amount of $2,500 to accept and assign funds received from Time Warner Cable for reimbursement of funds expended for the transfer resolution project was adopted.

A copy of the budget amendment is incorporated into these minutes as an addendum page.

7f. Grant Project Ordinance – A FY 1999-2000 grant project ordinance amendment for a Utility Fund Transfer of $40,000 and Rural Center Grant of $200,000 for the Fair Share utility line extension project was adopted.

A copy of the budget amendment is incorporated into these minutes as an addendum page.

8. Public Comment – At this time, the Board opened the floor to those in the public who wished to address the Board on any variety of topics not listed on the agenda. The following comments were offered: None

9. Other Business:

9a. Attendance Records -- Commissioner Dickson requested that attendance records of the Planning Board and Board of Adjustment be provided to the Board of Commissioners.

10. Manager’s Reports – Mr. Self reported NCLM conference.

11. Continuation – There being no further business for the evening, the Oct. 17, 2000 meeting of the Holly Springs Board of Commissioners was continued to reconvene at 7 p.m. Wednesday, Oct. 25 following a motion at 9:12 p.m. following a motion by Commissioner Schifano, a second by Commissioner Sack, and a unanimous vote.

Respectfully Submitted on Tuesday, Nov. 21, 2000,

______________________________

Joni Powell, CMC

Town Clerk

Addendum pages, as referenced in these minutes, follow and are a part of the official record of this meeting.