9/18/01 Meeting Minutes, Town of Holly Springs

Town of Holly Springs

Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting

Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2001

MINUTES

The Holly Springs Town Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, September 18, 2001 in the Town Board meeting chambers, located in Town Hall, 128 S. Main Street. Mayor Parrish L. Womble presided, calling the meeting to order at 7:39 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, Chet VanFossen, Peter Atwell and Hank Dickson and Mayor Womble.

Board Members Absent: None.

Staff Members Present: Carl G. Dean, town manager; Ernest C. Pearson, town attorney; Joni Powell, town clerk (recording the minutes); Linda R. Harper, deputy town clerk; Gina Bobber, planning and zoning director; Larry Boykin, assistant finance director; Stephanie Sudano, director of engineering; Derek Baker, engineering technician; and Len Bradley, director of parks and recreation.

2 and 3. The pledge of allegiance was recited, and the meeting opened with a prayer by Mayor Womble. Mayor Womble prayed particularly for the families and loved ones of those lost in the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack that destroyed the World Trade Center complex in New York City and severely damaged the Pentagon in Washington D.C. when suicide highjackers flew commercial airliners into both WTC towers and the Pentagon in an orchestrated terrorist attack. Mayor Womble prayed, too, for those who lost loved ones on a highjacked airliner that also was to be used by the terrorists that same day as a suicide crash into another target, but was apparently thwarted by passengers aboard who may have been able to overtake the highjackers. The plane crashed into an empty field in Pennsylvania. There were no survivors. In all, more than 6,000 people were killed in the four related crashes.

4. Agenda Adjustment – The Sept. 18, 2001 meeting agenda was adopted with changes, if any, as listed below.

Motion Made By: Sack

Motion Seconded By: Schifano

Vote: Unanimous.

Items Added to Agenda: None.

Consent Agenda Items Removed: None.

Other Changes: None.

5a. Joint Public Hearing: Planned Unit Development, 01-PUD-01 - Ms. Bobber explained that tonight’s hearing (and the hearing for 01-PUD-02 following) is a joint public hearing of the Planning Board and the Town Board of Commissioners to accept public comment on the proposed plans. She added that there is no extended discussion or action on the plans scheduled at this meeting as the Town Board is to forward the request to the Planning Board for review and recommendation.

Ms. Bobber advised the Board that the Town has received a application filed by Covenant Developers, LLC. She said the proposed Holly Glen East PUD contains 59.22 acres and is located to the northeast of Holly Meadow Drive and would modify the approved Holly Glen Master Plan by eliminating Phase 6 and replacing that phase with the zoning standards proposed in the PUD document.

She said the proposed PUD would allow for 182 single-family homes on individual lots with a minimum lot size of 7,250 square feet in area. She said the PUD’s design and land use is compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods since the overall average lot size in Holly Glen is just under the R-10 Single and Multi-Family Residential District minimum of 10,000 square feet.

Ms. Bobber added that the master plan and concept is in compliance with the Holly Springs Ten-Year Comprehensive Growth Plan and that the PUD proposal exceeds the minimum required open space for a PUD.

With that explanation completed, Mayor Womble opened the public hearing. The following comments were recorded:

David Carlton, 228 Hickory Glen Lane – Mr. Carlton asked that the Town Board deny approval to any additional PUDs because he feels they contribute to drainage problems and additional development would further aggravate the problems in Holly Glen. He asked that the Board halt all current and future development until all problems are addressed in the existing phases of Holly Glen in relation to traffic, speeding, drainage and erosion.

Charlie Bower, 101 Highland Springs Court – Mr. Bower echoed Mr. Carlton’s comments about drainage problems and said he is concerned that future development would further aggravate the problem.

Barry Lanning, 204 Highland Springs Lane – Mr. Lanning said he has had numerous drainage problems with water rising in several yards. He said he has lost much landscaping due to drainage. He asked that, if the plan is approved, that sidewalk and a berm be installed before any construction in the next phase. He said he feels problems in the existing portion of the subdivision should be addressed before a new phase is approved.

Terry Sein, 204 Wild Holly Lane – Mr. Sein said the PUD document indicates that drainage from the planned PUD would flow into the existing subdivision, and residents are concerned. He said he also felt that a change in the master plan would not be fair to those who purchased property after being showed the initial approved master plan for Holly Glen.

Shawn Park, 209 Spring Leaf Court – Mr. Park said he is familiar with construction and said he has had problems with standing water in his yard and feels that the drainage ditch should be widened or deepened. He said he feels the current drainage was improperly engineered and that no more development should occur until these problems are solved.

Steve Johnson, Managing Partner of Covenant Developers – Mr. Johnson said the original master plan called for 162 homes. He said the new PUD plan features about 180 homes, and he feels there is more open space featured in the new plan. He said his engineers have determined that there would be no drainage effect on the existing development. He explained that the reason the developers have proposed changes to the plan is to provide a neo-traditional section to Holly Glen.

Mr. Johnson said there is a difference of opinion of how Covenant Developers is dealing with drainage issues in Holly Glen. He said the development company is not opposed to providing sidewalk, which will be required by the Town, or a berm as suggested by one of the residents.

Mr. Johnson pointed out that Covenant Developers did inherit some problems. And, he added, the company is trying to address those issues or convince the previous developer to address them. He said some problems have been identified and rectified.

Danny Blackburn, Blackburn Consulting Engineering – Mr. Blackburn addressed the drainage issue. He said of the 59 acres in the PUD, 38 acres actually drain toward the CP&L property in the other direction; approximately seven acres drain north of the Phase 8 property; and 5 ½ acres drain into an area between Phase 7 and Phase 8. Of the total PUD acreage, the drainage area of 9 acres is of concern.

Of that, Mr. Blackburn said, almost all runoff would flow into the drainage way between Phase 1 and 2, a natural drainage way. The original developer left some greenway there for that purpose. He said a flood study was conducted there to see the impact the nine acres would have. Mr. Blackburn said there is some flooding problems in that area, particularly along Spring Leaf Court. The living space of the homes is not danger, but the whole backyard is flooded during a 100-year rain.

Mr. Blackburn said that with development of the nine acres with no detention, there would be an increase in the flooding on those lots of about an inch in a 100-year storm.

He said the state would dictate what could be done to increase the capacity of the natural drainage way, if anything at all would be allowed.

Discussion of drainage problems in subdivision ensued.

Commissioner Sack summarized that the proposed PUD street configuration and connectivity is the same as the previously approved Holly Glen subdivision phase. The difference is that the number of units proposed is increased. He said drainage in the existing development would not be impacted significantly by the addition of the PUD, so it remains a separate issue, but one that should be addressed.

Commissioner Schifano and Atwell agreed that drainage is an issue throughout town.

Commissioner VanFossen said he felt the PUD application should go ahead through the process by being forwarded to the Planning Board.

Todd Freeman, 225 Highland Springs Lane – Mr. Freeman stressed that drainage is a major issue, but that there are others. He said Holly Glen experiences problems with people walking in the street and speeding traffic. He said the addition of the next phase would aggravate the problems. He said approval of the PUD would mean more people and more cars.

Beth Olovano, Weathervane Ct. – Ms. Olovano said she believes there has been a lack of communication between the developers and the homeowners, and she agrees that there are other problems in Holly Glen that should be addressed before the Town grants approval for a new phase.

Lisa Martin, Planning Board Member -- Mrs. Martin asked the Town Attorney what the Planning Board could do in regard to citizen expectations that the PUD application be denied based on problems homeowners have with the developer in the existing phases.

The Town Attorney explained that the Planning Board does not have the authority to address those types of issues, but must review the PUD application from the standpoint of whether or not it is in keeping with the Town Code and 10-Year Comprehensive Plan.

Mrs. Martin asked if the Planning Board could recommend policies to the Town Board regarding drainage issues all throughout town. Mr. Pearson said yes.

Terry Sein – Mr. Sein addressed the Board again. He said on the drawings, there is land set aside for open space. He said private and public parks are designated, but no parking. He said he assumes the town will own and maintain the public park. On the private parks, the way they are situated, Mr. Sein said, there will be limited access. If it the open space needs to be there, he said he would rather it be part of the property of a homeowner. He asked that the Town take into consideration that open space is going to be more like private space.

Commissioner Schifano asked if the Town was looking into the drainage complaints in Holly Glen and other areas of town.

Mrs. Sudano said that the Town is looking at drainage concerns from a individual as well as a townwide perspective and would reporting to the Board at the second meeting in October with a list of recommendations.

There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.

5b. Joint Public Hearing: Planned Unit Development, 01-PUD-02 – Ms. Bobber advised the Board that the Town has received a Planned Unit Development application filed by Spaulding and Norris, PA. The proposed Autumn Park PUD contains 57.75 acres and is located on the south side of Avent Ferry Road between Piney-Grove Wilbon Road and Cass Holt Road.

She said the PUD would allow for 228 single-family homes on individual lots with a minimum lot size of 4,000 square feet in area and 73 townhome units for a total of 283 units. She said the plans exceed the minimum required open space for a PUD and the master plan is in general compliance with the Holly Springs Ten-Year Comprehensive Growth Plan’s Land Use Plan map; however, there is some staff-level concern regarding the compliance with the intent and policies of the Comprehensive Growth Plan, Ms. Bobber added. She said those concerns are that the property skirts an agricultural preservation area.

Ms. Bobber noted that a voluntary annexation petition and a rezoning petition apply to this same piece of property.

With that explanation completed, Mayor Womble opened the public hearing. The following comments were recorded

John Brown, 740 Loch Highlands Drive – Mr. Brown said he is in favor of the PUD zoning for the development, but has some concerns about the master plan. He pointed out a street stub on sheet C-10 that stubs to his property at a location that would leave a triangle of his property useless. He asked that the street stub be moved to right at the property line or that it be moved to the south toward the middle of his property, which makes better sense.

Also on page 10, Mr. Brown said, the pedestrian circulation plan (greenway) is whon adjacent to the northern portion of some of his property and it is being stubbed adjacent to my property. He pointed out that he has two very large beautiful ponds right there and that no matter how many signs or fences he puts up, kids will find there way there. He asked that the greenway be eliminated or moved and that the Town not put him in the position of having to watchguard those ponds.

Mr. Brown noted names of all residents on Cleon Court in the Braden Park mobile home community. He said he and these residents note that a pump station is illustrated less than 40 feet away from the common property. He said his engineer believes the pump station could be moved. He feels pump station is being placed in this location so it would be a burden on adjacent property owners and not on properties within the PUD. Mr. Brown said his engineer believes the pump station could be placed well within the PUD and still adequately serve the development. He pointed out that this move may cost the developer more because it would be in Phase 2, which will not be ready to develop for a while. Still, Mr. Brown said he feels it should be moved to impact the future residents of Autumn Park and not the adjacent property owners. Mr. Brown even offered to pay for engineering services to have the pump station relocated. He urged the Board to consider not only residents but land owners, too.

He pointed out that moving the pump station would prevent future problems with residents because it would be pre-existing.

Wallace Ponder, 1225 Happy Hunting Hills Drive – Mr. Ponder said he had no objection to the PUD in general, but he has a problem with its design. Mr. Ponder pointed out that the density is twice that of Holly Glen. He said the Autumn Park proposal was very similar to one addressed at a recent UDO workshop as the kind of development Holly Springs doesn’t need nor want in Holly Springs. He said it was too dense, poorly planned and very unattractive in his opinion.

Don Mizelle, 972 Trinity Road – Mr. Mizelle, representing Spaulding & Norris, the civil engineers on the project, addressed the Board. He said he appreciates the concerns and comments of those who gave input. He said his company will try to work with them to resolve those issues that were brought up.

Mr. Mizelle said that, whatever goes on the property, the nature of the property demands some special attention. He said a 50-foot buffer will be required along the Avent Ferry Road frontage, but there is very little vegetation on the site at this time. He said the developer is going to have to put in a tremendous amount of opaque buffer. He said the landscaping will create a wooded corridor and that will provide a canvass for an attractive entrance and set the scene for how the property would be treated.

Dorothy Ponder, 1225 Happy Hunting Hills Drive – Mrs. Ponder said she is concerned about daily traffic on Avent Ferry Road and the added load of traffic that would be generated by the development of another subdivision.

There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.

5c. Public Hearing: 01-REZ-07 – Ms. Bobber explained that the Town had received a petition for rezoning from Don Mizelle of Spaulding and Norris, PA on behalf of the heirs of the subject property, who are requesting that 57.75 acres be rezoned from R-20 to R-10.

The majority of the subject parcel is located within the Town’s Extraterritorial Jurisdiction. A “pan-handle” portion is not in the Town’s ETJ, but a voluntary annexation petition has been received to annex the entire parcel into the Town’s corporate limits, she said.

Ms. Bobber said the requested zoning designation is consistent with the Town of Holly Springs 10-Year Comprehensive Growth Plan which has this area designated for medium density residential to allow for residential development at a density of 2-5 units per acre. The R-10 district is consistent with this density range, she noted.

Ms. Bobber said the surrounding properties to the north and east are located within the Town’s ETJ and are zoned R-20 and R-10. The properties to the south and west are currently under Wake County’s planning jurisdiction.

With that explanation completed, Mayor Womble opened the public hearing. There were no comments for or against the petition, and the hearing was closed.

6a. Sunset Ridge Pump Station – This topic emerged during the Aug. 21, 2001 meeting’s Public Comment portion of the agenda. Residents of Sunset Ridge were distressed because an existing pump station was being upgraded. The upgrade, the residents said, would result in a much larger station that would be more unsightly and intrusive. They also asked that the Town consider shifting the location of the pump station.

Mrs. Sudano reported, and the residents agreed, that she has been meeting with them regarding the possibilities. A list of changes, including relocating the pump station to another site, was submitted to the contractor installing the pump station, but the pricetag for the changes totaled more than $300,000. Residents were dismayed that the original plan for the upgrade at the current location was going to have to apply. Mrs. Sudano explained that she was still attempting to make changes that would both satisfy the residents and come within the budgetary restraints of the Town.

Since the Aug. 21 and Sept. 4 meetings, engineering staff has continued to meet in the office with engineers on the pump station project and on site with residents. During those meetings, several alternatives and requests were suggested. Mrs. Sudano outlined a number of possibilities for the Board’s consideration. Mrs. Sudano relayed to the Board several means of addressing the residents’ concerns of odor, sound, visibility and size of the station footprint:

Alternative #1: Construct pump station as designed with no additional improvements – at no additional cost.

Alternative #2: Construct pump station with improvement options totaling between $50,000 and $80,000 – landscaping, $25,000; wood fence, $5,000; and odor control, between $20,000 and $50,000.

Alternative #3: Construct pump station with improvement options, totaling between $80,000 and $110,000 – landscaping, $25,000; wood fence, $5,000 in a smaller area; odor control, $20,000 to $50,000; and generator with reduction in noise to 75 db, $30,000.

Alternative #4: Construct pump station with improvement options totaling between $120,000 and $150,000 – landscaping, $25,000; wood fence, $5,000; odor control, $20,000 to $50,000; and a generator with noise level reduction to 55 db, $70,000.

Alternative #5: Construct pump station with improvement options totaling between $170,000 and $200,000 – landscaping, $25,000; wood fence, $5,000; odor control, $20,000 to $50,000; generator with noise reduction to 55 db, $70,000; and architectural building surrounding the generator, $50,000. This option would expand the fencing area to accommodate the generator building.

Mrs. Sudano said these alternatives are based on the conclusion that the pump station would remain where it is.

Mr. Tom Mix, speaking for the seven residents who are making this request of the Town, addressed the Board. Mr. Mix said residents ask that the Town delay any decision or further activity at the site for an additional 90 days to see if original requests of moving the pump station to another location can be revisited and cost estimates recalculated. He said residents did not feel that all options have been explored.

If the Town Board does not delay the process for 90 days, Mr. Mix said, residents would request that the Town eliminate the crane from the site, move the gate, provide room at the site for future possible housing of the generator and then all the items listed in Alternative 5, or at the very least, Alternative 4.

Mrs. Sudano noted that the Board is asked for a decision on whether or not to use a crane truck or the on-site crane. Purchase of a crane truck, though not recommended, is estimated at $50,000.

Mrs. Sudano noted that there are other issues to consider such as: The consultant's memo echoes some of the concerns of staff with respect to decisions that need to be made on other pump stations being constructed both in this project, and in other projects. It is very possible that the same requests will be made for retrofitting the other pump stations similarly. In addition, staff will be requesting that the Board consider making changes to the Town's current design guidelines and policies on pumping stations to meet some of these criteria.

There was much discussion as the Board explored the options and heard from some of the residents of the area who have concerns.

The Town Attorney advised that if the Town works out a deal with residents, the residents should release or indemnify the Town for damages.

Mr. Dean summarized for the Board that when the staff knows what the Board is willing to do, staff can proceed with the project. He pointed out the penalty of delays in the contract, and he stressed that the Board needs to tell staff what it wants to do in this situation.

Commissioner Atwell said he wants to minimize the impact of this and future pump stations in the following ways – visual impact, provide landscaping and a wood fence; sound impact – limit the generator to the 60-decibel range; and raise the standard of Town utility stations a little bit higher so that they harmonize with residential development.

Commissioner Sack said there has been a redundancy established in the electrical system in that area now and maybe the generator would no longer be needed. He said he was not too concerned about the impact of the generator because the testing lasts for only a half hour a week and could be scheduled so that it there is minimal impact on the neighborhood.

He said he was concerned that the Town would be spending a lot of money for a quieter generator that may never come on for any length of time. Odor control, he said was a bigger issue, however.

Commissioners believed that landscaping would actually cost less than estimated. They also agreed that odor control was something that should be standard on all pump stations and should not be included in the cost of what these residents are requesting.

Commissioner Sack finally summarized that the residents wanted all they could get that the Town was willing to provide. He suggested that the Town Board provide what it could within a $100,000 ceiling.

Commissioner Schifano agreed, but said he felt the price should be lower.

Motion: The Board approved a motion that the Town follow a revised plan for the Sunset Ridge pump station, providing upgrades and change orders in an amount not to exceed $90,000 (in addition to odor control, which should also be provided but not included in the $90,000 ceiling), and specifically that the plan will incorporate a wood fence enclosure around a smaller area; use a generator with a sound level of no more than 55 decibels; and provide opaque landscaping suitable to residents but not to exceed $15,000.

Motion By: Atwell

Second By: Schifano

Amended: Commissioner Atwell amended his motion to include an inverse condemnation clause as recommended by the Town Attorney.

Amendment Second By: Schifano

Vote: unanimous

6b. Fair Share Utility Services to Unoccupied Lots and Bible Way -- Mrs. Sudano said residents in the Fair Share area have made a request that the Town provide water and sewer services to unoccupied lots in that area. Connection fees to occupied lots will be waived, but the request is for the same consideration for unoccupied lots.

The cost to the Town for these services would include approximately $800 to $1,200 per lot in construction costs, and between $5,000 and $8,000 per lot in unpaid development fees (and more considering the loss of future revenue when the properties are developed to their full potential), Mrs. Sudano said.

Mrs. Mary Beamon addressed the Board with the formal request. She said the residents feel that this was a verbal commitment made by the Town when the project was first initiated years ago. Mrs. Beamon said later in the project, the Town advised that unoccupied lots would not be serviced for free. She asked for clarification of the Town’s intentions.

Commissioner Atwell said he did not recall any discussions about servicing unoccupied lots because the thrust of the project was always providing municipal services to aid those who had bad wells. Commissioner Sack agreed.

Commissioners agreed that the purpose of the project was driven by a health issue and that the Board would not be in favor of providing free water and sewer connections to vacant lots that may never be built upon. Additionally, the Board agreed that the availability of the services in the area was a general benefit to the owners of vacant lots.

Action #1: The Board approved a motion that the Town would not provide utility extensions of water or sewer service to unoccupied, vacant lots in the Fair Share project area.

Motion By: Dickson

Second By: Atwell

Vote: Unanimous

Mrs. Sudano reported that the residents of the Bible Way areas (which are adjacent to the Fair Share area) have requested that the Town not proceed with a project to install water and sewer and roadway improvements along this private roadway. The installation of water and sewer to properties along Bible Way was initially requested by the Fair Share residents to be included in the Fair Share project. In fact, the Bible Way area was graphically included in all of the original Fair Share service area maps that were used in initial planning for the Fair Share Project, Mrs. Sudano said.

In the Town Board’s agenda packets, Mrs. Sudano had explained the history of this project. She wrote that the Town originally did not have the funds to include the Bible Way utility extensions in the original Fair Share project. During design and even the construction period of the Fair Share project, repeated requests for this area to be included in the Fair Share project were made to Town staff and elected officials at Town Board meetings and at Fair Share meetings. The Town did not have the funds at the time to include the utility extensions along Bible Way in the Fair Share project.

Mrs. Sudano said last year, the development of a nearby (and downstream) development provided an opportunity for the Town to make these improvements via a developer agreement when property adjacent to the Bible Way area developed. The Town Board approved a developer agreement which provided for these improvements, contingent upon Town securing the necessary rights of ways and easements.

Mrs. Sudano stated the right-of-way and easement acquisition for these improvements was initiated recently when a letter was sent out to all property owners along Bible Way. This is when several of the property owners along Bible Way responded that they no longer (or in some cases, never) wanted utilities in the area.

There are 10 property owners impacted by the project. According to the Town’s acquisition agent on the project, the owner of the largest tract is in support of the project. Five property owners have not yet responded to the letters, and four of the property owners have responded that they are not in agreement with the improvements.

Mrs. Sudano said last year the Town Board approved a developer’s agreement for improvements along Bible Way, the Town also extended a 12” waterline further down Optimist Farm Road (in the Fair Share Project) to create a waterline loop by connecting to the future waterline to be installed in Bible Way.

Mrs. Sudano said it is staff’s recommendation that water and roadway improvements along Bible Way are necessary as planned to provide critical transportation and waterline connections to the future Town residents of Wescott Subdivision. However, it is apparent that condemnation of right of way would likely be necessary to obtain the necessary right-of-way. Also, Mrs. Sudano stated that staff has been advised by the Town Attorney that the Town would have the authority for condemnation of this project.

William Jones, Bible Way – Mr. Jones maintains that his property was lumped into to the Fair Share area and he never wanted it to be. He said Bible Way is a private drive and he wants to keep it that way. He said he did not want increased traffic in front of his home, which has a good well.

Commissioner VanFossen asked if it would be possible to lay water and sewer lines along Bible Way without paving or improving the road surface. This option would get water and sewer to Optimist Farm Road for the Town and the services would be available to property owners should they ever decide in the future that they desired to connect to Town services.

Mr. Jones said he would entertain the idea and pass it by his relatives. He asked if the installation of sewer lines would effect his well, which is situated very near the proposed easement. He said he also did not want his water well contaminated by a potential sewer line break.

The Town Manager suggested that the sewer line may not be necessary along Bible Way, and the Board agreed that installation of the water line alone was a good compromise that would serve the Town but satisfy Bible Way residents not in favor of the project.

Action #2: The Board approved a motion to proceed with attempting to obtain easements for the extension of water lines along Bible Way, but not for transportation improvements or sewer lines, which will be eliminated from the project.

Motion By: Sack

Second By: Atwell

Vote: Unanimous

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

7a. Planned Unit Development application 01-PUD-01 -- PUD application 01-PUD-01 was forwarded to the Planning Board for Sept. 25 review and recommendation.

7b. Planned Unit Development application 01-PUD-02 -- PUD application 01-PUD-02 was forwarded to the Planning Board for Sept. 25 review and recommendation.

7c. Budget Amendment -- A budget ordinance amendment to the FY 2001-02 budget in the amount of $9,033 to transfer funds from Street Reserves to Holly Springs Road Widening Project to cover costs associated with realignment services was adopted.

The budget amendment is incorporated into these minutes as addendum page(s).

7d. Budget Amendment -- A budget ordinance amendment to the FY 2001-02 budget in the amount of $98,500 to transfer funds from Project Fund to General Fund for costs associated with improvements to Public Works facility was adopted.

The budget amendment is incorporated into these minutes as addendum page(s).

7e. Budget Amendment -- A budget amendment to the FY 2001-02 budget in the amount of $11,850 to transfer funds from Fund Balance to cover local funding of cost required by CDBG in the original Grant Ordinance for the scattered site project was adopted.

The budget amendment is incorporated into these minutes as addendum page(s).

7f. Developer Agreement -- The Board entered into a developer’s agreement for Windcrest Planned Unit Development regarding water and sewer capacity.

The text of this developer agreement is incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages.

7g. Minutes – Minutes of the Board’s regular meeting held on Aug. 21, 2001 were approved.

8a. Professional Services Contract design and cost for Avent Ferry Road Alignment –

Mrs. Sudano said the proposal before the Board from CH Engineering is for performing the work on a project which will improve the existing intersection of Avent Ferry Road with NC 55 by relocating it to the south. The Town has made a request to North Carolina Department of Transportation for years for some assistance with the intersection, Mrs. Sudano said, adding that, with some preliminary engineering work completed, the Town can approach North Carolina Department of Transportation for assistance perhaps on a cost sharing basis for this needed improvement. The cost for these services is estimated to be $2,828.70 and will come from the Town’s existing account 32-432-12.

Action: The Board approved a motion to enter a professional services contract with CH Engineering for preliminary design and cost estimates for the realignment of Avent Ferry Road.

Motion By: Sack

Second By: Schifano

Vote: Unanimous

A copy of the text of the professional services agreement is incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages.

8b. Meeting Efficiency – Mr. Dean said he has had some concerns involving the length of the meetings in relationship to how long it should take to conduct and accomplish the Board’s business. He made several suggestions for staff and the Board including:

1. Changing the meeting start time to 7 p.m.

2. Adjusting the agenda packet distribution schedule so that Commissioners receive their packets on Wednesdays rather than Fridays.

3. Improving public notice information so residents know more about the hearing topics in advance and know how best to address the Board for a given hearing.

4. Establishing procedures for the public to follow and the board to uphold for public hearings and comment.

5. Providing the board with quick reference cover sheets with topic highlights and action requested

6. Limiting staff meeting presentations to topic highlights/summary so as not to repeat materials already stated in detailed notes.

7. Moving the Consent Agenda up on the agenda.

Mr. Dean asked for the Board’s endorsement of one, some or all of these suggestions for implementation.

In discussion, the Board agreed that the suggestions had merit.

Action: The Board approved a motion to endorse the suggestions of the Town Manager and the seven ideas be put into action.

Motion By: VanFossen

Second By: Sack

Vote: Unanimous

8c. Development Tracking System – Mr. Baker said the Town is exploring the implementation of a Development Tracking System to be used by several departments involved in the various processes of development in Holly Springs. He said the program would be used to keep up with and track plans as they progress from submittal to certificates of occupancy.

Phase 1 of the Development Tracking System would include interviews with the departments involved in the development process (Planning, Engineering, Inspections, Economic Development and the Town Manager). A final report would be prepared that would summarize the interviews and describe the results and how best to translate that into an interactive database, he said.

He noted that the project is included in this year’s operating budget.

Action: The Board approved a motion to enter into a professional services agreement for Phase 1 of the Development Tracking System project at a cost of $10,000.

Motion By: Schifano

Second By: Atwell

Vote: Unanimous

A copy of the text of the professional services agreement is incorporated into these minutes as addendum pages.

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 Schifano asked for the Town Manager to follow up with a request for quarterly reports from Wake County Solid Waste Management on the County staff’s efforts to examine alternative waste disposal technologies.

The Town Attorney reported on the status of two zoning violation cases and one condemnation case.

The Town Attorney reported that he has been contacted about two legal cases that they may pit him against the Town of Cary and he asked the Board’s position on his taking those cases. The Board agreed that there were no problems with it.

Commissioner Sack reported to the Board that he and Jennifer met with Phil Stout with Wake County regarding the library property. He reported to the Board that Wake County would need a two-acre site for a district library and a four-acre site for a larger one (but not the regional size, which would be larger). Commissioner Sack said that he was advised that there may be funds available for two district libraries in Wake County and that he was encouraged with what is available in and for Holly Springs, which has offered a portion of its 7-acre park property on Ballentine Street to Wake County for a library site

11. Manager’s Reports – None.

12. Closed Session – None