|
Town of Holly Springs MINUTES The Holly Springs Town Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, April 17, 2001 in the Town Board meeting chambers, located in Town Hall, 128 S. Main St. Mayor Parrish L. Womble presided, calling the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. A quorum was established as the mayor and four board members were present as the meeting opened. Board Members Present:: Commissioners John Schifano, Chet VanFossen, Peter Atwell and Hank Dickson and Mayor Womble. Board Members Absent: Commissioner Tim Sack, excused absence Staff Members Present: Carl G. Dean, town manager; Ernest C. Pearson, town attorney; Joni Powell, town clerk (recording the minutes); Stephanie Sudano, director of engineering; Len Bradley, director of parks and recreation; Cecil Parker, chief of public safety; Gina Bobber, planning director; and Jennifer Carr, director of economic development. 2 and 3. The pledge of allegiance was recited, and the meeting opened with a moment of silent meditation. Mr. Pearson advised the Board that he felt it would be wise to formally excuse Commissioner Sack from attendance. The Board approved a motion to excuse Commissioner Tim Sack from the meeting with an excused absence. 4. Agenda Adjustment - The April 17, 2001 meeting agenda was adopted with changes, if any, as listed below. 5a. Public Hearing: Rezoning 01-REZ-03 - Ms. Bobber explained that the applicant is requesting a rezoning of the eastern portion of Omni Industrial Park Lot #5 from I-1 Light Industrial District to C-1 Commercial District. The proposed rezoning request is in conformance with the Town of Holly Springs Ten Year Comprehensive Growth Plan that has this area designated for Commercial purposes. The proposed zoning will allow for a continuous frontage of commercially zoned property along NC 55/N. Main Street and provide for a transition into the Industrial Park, she said. Ms. Bobber noted that a zoning change would not affect the site plan that already has been approved for the site. Ms. Bobber said that the Planning Board reviewed the petition and recommends approval. Staff also recommends approval, she said. With that explanation completed, Mayor Womble opened the public hearing, and the following comments were recorded: Cathy Sanita, Community Partners Charter High School - Ms. Sanita spoke in favor of the rezoning request and added that she appreciates the support the Town has shown the school in recent months. There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed. 5b. Public Hearing: Special Use Permit 01-SUP-03, Fox Haven Apartments - Ms. Bobber explained that the purpose of this public hearing is to accept sworn testimony that the subject application does or does not meet the six general conditions for a Special Use Permit and the seven specific conditions for multi-family dwellings and complexes in a Special Use District, according to Town Code. Ms. Bobber explained that staff and the Planning Board have reviewed the application and will recommend approval of the permit, with the attachment of several conditions. Ms. Bobber gave an overview of the application and site plan: Brisben Development is proposing to construct a 112-unit apartment complex on approximately 14 acres of land located on the north side of Holly Springs Road between the approved Middle Creek Subdivision and the proposed Rhamkatte Village Planned Unit Development. The property was recently rezoned to R-10 SUD: Single and Multi-Family Residential Special Use District, which requires apartments and other multi-family residential projects to gain approval of a Special Use Permit to insure that the proposed project will be compatible and desirable in the proposed location and district and does not have characteristics that may be detrimental to the adjoining properties or Holly Springs as a whole. Ms. Bobber explained that the requested action before the Town Board is for the Special Use Permit to grant approval of the "use" of the property as proposed, not the actual site plan. A detailed Site Plan/Zoning Permit would follow if the Special Use Permit is granted. She noted that this project has been removed from the standard review cycle and is being expedited since the applicant is applying for reduced interest bonds from the North Carolina Housing Finance Agency. The deadline for the financing application is April 27, 2001. Under the review cycle in which the company applied, the application would not have gained action by the Town Board until May 15, 2001, she said. Consequently, the plans presented are the applicant's second review plans, not the third as is typically presented to the Planning Board and Town Board; therefore, there are a large number of outstanding issues remaining as noted in the staff analysis and report to the Planning Board, Ms. Bobber pointed out. Following its review of the application, the Planning Board approved a motion (5-1) to grant the Special Use Permit with the following (8) conditions attached, Ms. Bobber reported:
| |||||||||||
|
From an engineering standpoint, Mrs. Sudano commented on the plan in the April 17, 2001 agenda notes: A hydraulic study may be required at construction drawing stage in order to verify adequate fire flows and determine the magnitude of improvements required. Sewer as shown on drawings reviewed by staff during the first and second reviews was indicated to connect to sewer lines in the proposed Middle Creek Subdivision. At the most recent submittal, the consultant confirmed that there would be difficulty serving the development in this manner, and the consultant is proposing a different alignment that will traverse off-site properties before connecting to downstream sewer at Middle Creek Subdivision. Mrs. Sudano said that a staff-recommended condition of approval is that this matter be resolved so that gravity sewer service may be provided and that all downstream easements necessary for the installation of the sewer to be installed. Upstream properties have been provided with sewer stub-outs. This project would be subject to both the Town's Middle Creek fees-in-lieu of assessment and a payment-in-lieu of downstream pump station upgrade, she said. In addition to thoroughfare widening, the project is providing a roadway with public access easement at the entrance, including stub-outs to adjacent properties (including proposed subdivided church property and the Ragan property) to reduce the number of separate driveways along Holly Springs Road. In addition, a roadway connection is provided to the adjacent public roadway stub-out approved in previous Middle Creek Subdivision Plans, she commented. Mr. Bradley provided the Board with Parks and Recreation comments on this plan in the April 17, 2001 agenda notes: At site plan / zoning permit review, credit for establishing the greenway trail would be recommended with the remainder of the requirements to be paid as a fee-in-lieu of land dedication. Commissioners asked for clarification on a few points, asking about the gravity sewer issue shown on the plans; the discrepancy in the number of units, and overall incompleteness of the application. Commissioner Atwell said he felt the application was incomplete because several of the conditions on the application were not completely answered, using the phrase "more information to be provided in 7 to 10 days." With the hearing topic explanation completed, Mayor Womble opened the public hearing to accept sworn testimony that the application does or does not meet the six general conditions and seven specific conditions as specified in the Town Code. The following witnesses, under oath administered by the Town Clerk prior to the meeting, provided testimony and evidence. Douglas Lyons, representing the applicant - Mr. Lyons said Brisbane Companies is experienced in owning and operating multi-family complexes. He said the planned Fox Haven Apartments would feature 2- and 3-bedroom apartments with washer and dryer connections, a swimming pool, tot lots and exercise room. He said the company intends to build a facility of the quality of Trellis Pointe. He submitted the company's application and associated site plan into the record as evidence that the plan would satisfy all SUP conditions. Rick Jones, 701 Holly Springs Road - Mr. Jones said he does not believe the application adequately proves that the project would satisfy all 13 conditions for a Special Use Permit. Mr. Jones explained that his family is committed to quality development in Holly Springs, as evidenced by the recently-approved and neighboring Rhamkatte Village PUD. He pointed out that staff and the Town's 10-Year Comprehensive Plan recommends medium- density residential uses for this area, and that a multi-family use on the site would be inappropriate as it would be high-density. He said the 10-Year Comp plan indicates that single-family and lower density townhome projects would be a more appropriate use of the property. Mr. Jones said he did not feel that the plan would meet General Condition No. 4 in that the number of police calls answered in the past year are evidence that some types of multi-family complexes put an added burden on the Department of Public Safety. As evidence, Mr. Jones pointed out that the Fox Haven Apartments plan is comparable to Maple Ridge Apartments in Holly Springs, both in building style and materials and in tax-credit status. In 2000, Mr. Jones said, the Holly Springs Department of Public Safety responded to 499 calls involving residents of Maple Ridge Apartments. He said the number of calls proves that the proposed type of multi-family complexes would place an added burden on the Town's public safety office, especially in light of how few calls (about 40) are on record for a higher-end apartment complex in Holly Springs during the same time period. A copy of Mr. Jones' outline for sworn testimony is incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages. Bill Shankle, 800 Tyrrell Road, Raleigh - Mr. Shankle explained that he is currently developing Middle Creek Subdivision, which is located on property adjacent to the subject site. Mr. Shankle said he believes that the application does not adequately address Condition No. 6. Mr. Shankle said it his belief that Fox Haven is not in keeping with what he was led to believe was designated by the Town as a medium-density, single-family detached residential area. He said his development meets the Tischler study standards, and if the Town were to approve a high-density project next door to his, it would adversely effect his ability to attract builders to develop Middle Creek as it should be. Mr. Shankle explained his points by recalling his own experiences as he was about to undertake the Middle Creek project. He said that, at that time, the impression he was given was that the Town intended that this property be developed as a traditional single-family detached neighborhood. He said another developer looked at this same property and was advised with the same information; therefore, he is certain it has been the Town's intention to protect this property from multi-family residential development. He said he felt the high-density use would be inappropriate and the intensity of the proposed use would have a significant adverse impact on adjoining properties and the neighborhood. Mr. Shankle added that he felt the application falls short of satisfying Condition No. 2 as access roads or entrance and exit drives are not properly located on the site plan to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety and convenience. He said a street planned for Middle Creek is required to stub into the subject property. At that point, he said, the street should continue as a public street and not transition immediately into a private parking lot, as shown. He said he is aware that the since 1995 the Town has been encouraging interconnectivity between developments. He said, ideally, his stubbed out street, should continue parallel to Holly Springs Road, traversing the subject property and continuing into the proposed Rhamkatte PUD. Mr. Shankle also testified that the site plan submitted does not indicate from where sewer service would be available in the near future. He said that would indicate that the application and site plan fail to satisfy Condition No. 4. A copy of Mr. Shankle's outline for sworn testimony is incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages. Conrad Cowan, 125 Starwood Lane - Mr. Cowan said he was attracted to Holly Springs by the quietness of a small town, and he has a concern about having a high-density residential complex located on Holly Springs Road across from two schools (Holly Ridge Elementary and Middle Schools). He said it has been his experience that high-density complexes have a much higher crime rate, and that environment would be in proximity to the schools. He said he did not feel the subject development would be in harmony with the surrounding neighborhood, thereby failing to satisfy Condition No. 5. Glenn Myrto, 408 W. Ballentine St. - Mr. Myrto said his issue with the proposal is one of safety with a high-density development proposed to be located so close to two schools. He said the Town already has one high-density development located across Holly Springs Road from Holly Springs Elementary School. He said he feels the project would pose an burden on the police with an increased call volume. Mr. Myrto added that he felt that the plan did not satisfy Condition No. 4 in that he believes the Town would provide Fox Haven with a sewer allocation all at one time, essentially tying up all 112 units in one allocation. He said he felt the Town should not allocate all its sewer capacity to residential uses when it may come at the cost of losing an industrial interest. Lynne-Hoyt-Meyers, 209 Crossway Lane - Ms. Meyers, speaking on behalf of several citizens in the audience, respectfully requested that the public hearing be continued so that she and her neighbors would have time to gather appropriate evidence on the case, especially as it pertains to Conditions Nos. 4 and 6. Ms. Meyers explained that she and her neighbors are concerned and opposed to the project, but did not know until the public hearing time that they would be required to provide sworn testimony and evidence. John Whetzel, 4700 Linksland Drive - Mr. Whetzel explained that he would be addressing Conditions Nos. 4 and 6 and the impact the project may have on adjacent properties. Mr. Whetzel explained that he searched the web to determine how Brisbane Company manages other projects. What he found on a Springdale, Ohio website was disturbing. Mr. Whetzel submitted to the Board information he gleaned from that site as evidence that Brisbane Company may not provide a quality project in Holly Springs. Mr. Whetzel produced a copy of a letter of complaint issued to Brisbane Company by the City of Springdale regarding a project there called Hunter's Glen. The complaint letter was issued 1998 and pertained to public safety concerns, including a increased police call volume at the complex. The letter states that the complex experienced 957 calls for 1998, a 100% increase after Brisbane took over its management. The letter warns Brisbane that, with 379 units, that level of criminal activity was dangerous for the residents of the aprtment complex and a drain on city's public safety resources. The City requested that Brisbane provide on-site security and screen applicants for criminal activity. Then, on March 21, 2001, the Springdale police detailed an initiative to deal with Hunter's Glen on the City's website, Mr. Whetzel said, providing a copy of the website text for the record. The website details an increased and dedicated patrol and a community policing program, specifically for the Hunter's Glen complex. As a potential neighbor of a Brisbane community, Mr. Whetzel said he was concerned. As a parent of children who will be attending school in the neighborhood, he said he was concerned. As a member and taxpayer of a community that may find itself having to provide increased public safety resources to another Brisbane Company project, he said he was concerned. Copies of Mr. Whetzel's exhibits are incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages. John Fox, 301 Crossway Lane - Mr. Fox explained that he recently moved to Holly Springs, hoping to find a peaceful retirement location. He said that, according to what he has read in publications, Holly Springs is possibly the fastest-growing town in North Carolina, and he does not feel it would be in the best interest of the Town for the Town to take a chance on a project that has so many questionable aspects contained in its application. At this time, the Town Board asked Chief Parker to address public safety questions. Chief Parker also testified under oath. Chief Parker advised the Board that he researched call data in 200 for Timber Springs, Maple Ridge and Trellis Pointe Apartment complexes. There were 106 calls related to Timber Springs; 499 interactions with Maple Ridge residents; and less than 40 at Trellis Pointe. Chief Parker explained that calls do not necessarily represent responses to the complexes themselves, since a number of the calls may deal with a person who simply has an address that is linked to the complexes. Chief Parker advised that the Town's two highest call volume areas are actually Linksland Drive and Cayman Ave; however, the biggest number of these "calls" are simply in response to traffic accidents or tickets at two of the Town's busiest intersections (Linksland at Holly Springs Road and Cayman Ave. at Hwy. 55) or calls for escorts for the Sonic restaurant. After Linksland and Cayman, Chief Parker said, the two most concentrated response areas are Maple Ridge and Timber Springs. From there, the numbers drop off dramatically and no other areas are close. "In other words," Chief Parker said, "there are no other comparable call volumes (to Maple Ridge and Timber Springs) in Holly Springs." Chief Parker said two of his officers live at Maple Ridge, and the management company has recently installed a full-time manager on site, who works very closely in cooperation with the Department of Public Safety. Commissioners asked about the nature of calls to Maple Ridge and Timber Springs. Chief Parker responded that the majority of calls involve minor drug offenses, domestic disturbances and traffic-related calls. He said there are very little urgent calls for service, but that this could be said about most of the Town. Commissioners asked if the subject development were approved, would it pose an added burden to the police department. Chief Parker said it would, as would be the case as any area of population is added to the Town's service area. Douglas Lyons - Mr. Lyons readdressed the Board in rebuttal to testimony regarding the Hunter's Glen project in Ohio. Mr. Lyons explained that when Brisbane Company acquired the property from another management company, Hunter's Glen was already saturated with Section 8 housing certificate holders. He said residents who violate rules at the complex are evicted and over time the Hunter's Glen neighborhood will improve. He said the company has been somewhat successful in its efforts and has even been awarded by the State of Ohio for its initiatives at Hunter's Glen. All written exhibits supplied by witnesses were received under sworn affidavit and copies are hereby incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages. Original exhibits and affidavits are part of the file for 01-SUP-03. Although residents had requested that the public hearing be continued, members of the Board expressed that they were inclined to make a decision later in the agenda and were not inclined to continue the hearing. There being no further sworn testimony or evidence, the public hearing was closed. At this time, Commissioner VanFossen advised that he is the architect on the subject property of the next agenda item. He asked to be excused from discussion and action. 6a. Rezoning Petition 01-REZ-03 - The Board approved a motion to approve Rezoning Petition 01-REZ-03, assigning a C-1 zoning designation to Lot 5b of Omni Industrial Park. By consensus, the Board readmitted Commissioner VanFossen into the business meeting. 6b. 01-SUP-03 - In accordance with Part 9, Chapter 4050.1 of the Holly Springs Town Code, the Town Board made the following findings of fact: (1) That all Specific Conditions have been or will be satisfied. There are seven specific conditions assigned to this use. How the application satisfies or does not satisfy these standards is noted in the Specific Conditions portion of these minutes below. No evidence or testimony was presented to prove that the application does not satisfy the seven specific conditions for multi-family dwellings and complexes. (2) That access roads or entrance and exit drives will be sufficient in size and properly located to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety and convenience; that traffic flow and speed will be controlled within the project; and there is adequate emergency access in case of fire or other emergency. The Board found that the application and associated site plan did not prove or provide evidence that the application meets the condition that traffic flow and speed will be controlled within the project. Commissioners Dickson and VanFossen pointed out that evidence was presented that a street in the Middle Creek Subdivision that stubs into the subject property is a public thoroughfare and will suddenly emerge into a private parking lot before picking up again as a public street into Rhamkatte Village PUD. Commissioner Dickson said it seems reasonable that adjoining property traffic would go through the parking lot of Fox Haven, creating a dangerous situation for pedestrians and other motorists. Commissioners agreed that this traffic hazard is evidenced by the site plan that shows the parking lot's connection to Middle Creek Road. Commissioner Schifano added that no evidence was presented to the Baord that traffic speeds within the project will be controlled. It will be an access for people to use as a public street, and there is no evidence that this will be controlled, he said. Other Board members agreed. (3) That service areas (off-street parking, loading, refuse areas, etc.) are located so as to be safe and convenient; that these areas do not block emergency access to buildings; and that these service areas are situated so as to minimize glare, odor, economic or other impacts on adjoining properties and the general neighborhood. The Board found that the application and associated site plan prove that the application meets this condition and would be in accordance with Town ordinances. No evidence or testimony was presented to disprove. (4) That utilities, schools, fire, police and other necessary public and private facilities and services will be adequate to handle the proposed use. Commissioner Atwell submitted that testimony disproves this condition. He pointed to testimony and evidence provided by Chief Parker, Mr. Shankle, Mr. Jones and Mr. Whetzel regarding police protection. Commissioner Schifano submitted that Mr. Shankle's testimony that the project would not be easily provided with sewer service also disproved the application's satisfaction of this condition. Mr. Schifano noted that the Town Engineer's review comments on the site plan review notes state that a sewer stub-out is not possible without an easement and no evidence was provided during the hearing that the easement has been secured. Commissioner VanFossen also noted that a comparable property in Holly Springs was used to testify regarding police call volumes. Commissioner VanFossen said he felt the comparison was a fair and accurate one. The Board found that the application and associated site plan did not prove that the application meets this condition. (5) That the location and arrangement of the use on the site, screening, buffering, landscaping and pedestrian ways harmonize with adjoining properties and the general area and minimize adverse impacts. The R-10 multi-family adjacency to 10,000 square foot lots, which both adjacent landowners testified to, was sufficient evidence for the Board to find that the application and associated site plan not prove that the application meets this condition. Commissioner Atwell said he did not feel the use would harmonize with adjoining properties and the Town's own 10-Year Comprehensive Plan advises against a high-density residential use at this location. (6) That the type, size and intensity of the proposed use, including such considerations as the hours of operation and numbers of people who are likely to utilize or be attracted to the use, will not have significant adverse impacts on adjoining properties or the neighborhood. The Board found that the application did not meet this condition. Evidence was provided that multi-family would have adverse impacts on the neighborhood and adjacent properties. In accordance with Part 9, Chapter 4050.3 of the Holly Springs Town Code, the Town Board made the following findings of fact regarding the seven specific conditions for multi-family dwellings and complexes in an R-10 Special Use District: (1) Density: maximum density shall be 10 units per acre developed on not less than 20,000 square foot tracts. The Board found that the application and associated site plan prove that the application meets this condition. No evidence or testimony was presented to disprove. (2) Building Separations and Height Restrictions: Where more than one building is to be located on the site, building separation shall be determined as follows The minimum horizontal distance between the vertical projections of any points on two adjacent buildings shall be determined according to the following table. The vertical projections for each building shall be drawn from that point on each building which is horizontally closest to the other building.
The Board found that the application and associated site plan proves that the application meets this condition. No evidence or testimony was presented to disprove. (3) Distance Related to Windows: The minimum distance between the centers of facing windows of different dwelling units shall be 20 feet. The Board found that the application and associated site plan proves that the application meets this condition. No evidence or testimony was presented to disprove. (4) Perimeter Setback: A yard of at least 30 feet shall be provided around the entire perimeter of the site, with the exception of driveways and shall include one row buffer (semi-opaque buffer) which shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the revisions of Section 9-4017. Parking spaces and accessory buildings shall not be permitted in the required setback area. The Board found that the application and associated site plan proves that the application meets this condition. No evidence or testimony was presented to disprove. (5) Accessory Buildings: Accessory Buildings and uses for multi-family dwellings shall not be placed in the 30 foot yard around the perimeter of the site. The Board found that the application and associated site plan proves that the application meet this condition. No evidence or testimony was presented to disprove. (6) Access for Emergency and Other Vehicles: Access for emergency vehicles to all parts of the complex and to each dwelling unit shall be provided. The Board found that the application and associated site plan proves that the application meets this condition. No evidence or testimony was presented to disprove. (7) Other Permitted On-Site Uses: The Holly Springs Board of Commissioners may approve the inclusion of leasing offices, coin-operated laundry facilities, swimming pool snack bars, and similar other services for residents of the complex only, and will not attract outside traffic to the site. The Board found that the application and associated site plan proves that the application meets this condition. No evidence or testimony was presented to disprove. 6c. Saddle Ridge Developer Agreement - Mrs. Sudano explained that the construction of a public 12-inch waterline along Sunset Lake Road is necessary for the development of the Saddle Ridge Subdivision. She said the developer is requesting reimbursement of costs associated with the offsite extension of these utilities up to the total amount of water acreage and capacity replacement fees due on the Saddle Ridge development project. If terms are approved by the Board, Mrs. Sudano said, the developer agreement would be prepared in the Town's standard format and is proposed to include reimbursement of up to $101,200 (equal to 44 lots @ $2,300 water acreage and capacity fees per lot) toward the cost of the waterline installation. Preliminary cost opinions on the waterline total approximately $220,000, she said, adding that the balance of costs would be funded solely by the developer. This waterline connection is particularly beneficial for the Town as it will create a second waterline connection for the existing Sunset Lake Village development on Sunset Lake Road (that currently has one cross-country 8-inch connection) and will complete a loop for Sunset Ridge and for the Fair Share area residents, she noted. Mrs. Sudano also noted that this section of waterline was included in a previous developer agreement with Spencer's Trace - a nearby project that has never been constructed. The Spencer's Trace project looks as if it will soon be changing ownership, and the Town has notified the developer that the terms of that agreement with respect to the waterline (and other issues) have not been fulfilled. Staff is working with the potential purchaser of this project to further address the other outstanding issues associated with the Spencer's Trace project. 6d. Assistant Town Manager - Mr. Dean explained that he would like to pursue recruitment of an assistant town manager, if the Board has no objections. He explained that actual filling of the position would be subject to that position's being funded in FY 2001-02. If the new position is funded in the new budget, Mr. Dean said, a qualified candidate could feasiblely be brought on board July 1 with the beginning of the new fiscal year if advertising were to begin now. 6e. Ordinance 01-09, Amend BFI Franchise Ordinance - Mr. Pearson explained that Mona O'Bryant, legal counsel for BFI, advised him last week that Ordinance 01-08, a franchise ordinance was returned by the State Department of Environment and Natural Resources for amendments. Mr. Pearson stressed that the amendments were minor and were not the result of the Town's efforts. Still, he said, BFI requires a new amended ordinance. Statutes appear to require first and second reading process. Ordinance is prepared and reviewed by the attorney. 7a. UDO Steering Committee -- Ms. Bobber explained that the Board was asked on April 3 to appoint a steering committee to work with planning and zoning staff and Baker & Daniels during the process of writing the Town's Unified Development Ordinance. The Board deferred action that evening so that commissioners could make contact with those in the development and home-building industry for interested potential committee members. She reminded the Board that names suggested leading up to and at the April 3 meeting were: Bill Shankle, D.R. Bryan, John Coley, Scott Dixon and Don Mizelle of Spaulding & Norris representing the development community; and Keith Greenwood and Jerry Smith of the homebuilding industry. Ms. Bobber stressed her recommendation that those appointed from these professional areas be those who would be most impacted by the resulting UDO, especially from a financial standpoint. In discussion, Commissioner Dickson said he talked to Bill Shankle, who has done both residential and commercial work in Holly Springs. Commissioner Dickson advised that Mr. Shankle had expressed an interest in serving on the UDO steering committee. Commissioner VanFossen suggested developer Harvey Montague. Commissioner Atwell said he still feels strongly that it would be important to have not only persons with a financial interest in projects, but to also consider those who have to deal with the resulting UDO on a daily basis. He suggested Don Mizelle, Tom Spaulding or any of those who work with Spaulding and Norris. 7b. Winding Creek PUD - Ms. Bobber explained that on April 3 action on this subject was deferred until April 17 at the request of the applicant. The applicant, she said, is still working on addressing a critical issue of direct Hwy. 55 access and requests that action be further deferred this evening. Ms. Bobber explained that the Winding Creek Planned Unit Development is a proposed 101-acre residential development for single-family homes and townhomes. The plans also indicate 41 acres, including the existing farm pond, to be set aside for open space and possible dedication to the Town. The PUD does not include any non-residential use areas, and the site is located just south of the Arbor Creek PUD, she said. A joint public hearing on this PUD proposal was held in February. Several residents of the adjacent Arbor Creek development addressed the Board. Of chief concern was the lack of a separate access to the Winding Creek property from Hwy. 55, especially for the movement of construction traffic during build-out. Ms. Bobber reported that the Planning Board reviewed the revised transportation plans and commitments and after a lengthy discussion and review voted to recommend that the Town Board deny the Winding Creek PUD Overlay District due to the developer's lack of commitment for direct access to NC 55. Ms. Bobber reported that Staff concurs with the Planning Board recommendation and would recommend that the application be denied unless an additional public permanent access point is provided and other specific conditions are met. At this time, Ms. Bobber asked the Board if further discussion was needed or if the Board desired to defer action as requested by the applicant. 8. Consent Agenda - All items on the Consent Agenda were approved following a motion by Commissioner Atwell, a second by Commissioner Dickson and a unanimous vote. The following actions were affected: 8a. Police Sergeant - A police officer position within the Public Safety Department was reclassified to that of police sergeant. 8b. Resolution 01-11 - Resolution 01-11 calling for the Governor and General Assembly to reinstate the inventory tax reimbursement to municipalities was adopted. A copy of Resolution 01-11 is incorporated into these minutes as an addendum page. 8c. Budget Amendment - A budget ordinance amendment in the amount of $23,200 was adopted to move funds within the Public Safety Department accounts to cover the costs related to the purchase of a service truck. A copy of the budget amendment is incorporated into these minutes as an addendum page. 8d. Minutes - Minutes of the Board's regular meetings held on Feb. 6, 2001 and April 3, 2001 and of the Board's continued meetings held on Feb. 22, March 6 and March 15, 2001 were approved. 9. 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. 10. Other Business: Commissioner Atwell welcomed Mr. Dean as town manager. 11. Manager's Reports: Mr. Dean said he had been on the job for a week and was impressed by and appreciative of staff. He reported that the Town began receiving Harnett County water as of today. 12. Closed Session None 13. Adjournment - There being no further business for the evening, the April 17, 2001 meeting of the Holly Springs Board of Commissioners was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. following a motion by Commissioner Atwell, a second by Commissioner Dickson, and a unanimous vote. Respectfully Submitted on Tuesday, May 1, 2001,
Joni Powell, CMC Town Clerk Addendum pages, as referenced in these minutes, follow and are a part of the official record of this meeting. |