Town of Holly Springs

Board of Commissioners Regular Meeting

Tuesday, February 4, 2003

MINUTES

The Holly Springs Town Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, February 4, 2003 in the cafeteria of the W. E. Hunt Community Center, located at 301 Stinson Ave. Mayor Dick Sears presided, calling the meeting to order at 7:11 p.m. A quorum was established as the mayor and all five board members were present as the meeting opened.

Board Members Present: Commissioners Steve Tedder, Chet VanFossen, John Schifano Peter Atwell, and Hank Dickson and Mayor Sears.

Board Members Absent: None.

Others Present: A quorum of the Planning Board was established for the purpose of a joint public hearing. Planning Board members in attendance were: Jeff Bateman, Dave Mackie, Joseph Fanjoy, Jonathan Gibbons and Glenn Myrto.

Staff Members Present: Carl Dean, town manager; Chuck Simmons, assistant town manager; Ernest C. Pearson, town attorney; Joni Powell, town clerk (recording the minutes); Linda Harper, deputy town clerk; Gina Bobber, director of planning and zoning; Len Bradley, parks and recreation director; Drew Holland, finance director; Kendra Thompson, senior engineer; Stephanie L. Sudano, director of engineering; Derek Baker, engineering technician; and Alysia Bailey, town planner.

2 and 3. The pledge of allegiance was recited, and the meeting opened with an invocation by Rev. Hal Adkins, pastor of the Holly Springs Moravian Church.

4. Agenda Adjustment ‑ The February 4, 2003 meeting agenda was adopted with changes, as listed below.

Motion By: Dickson

Second By: Atwell

Vote: Unanimous.

Items Added to the Agenda: Discussion and possible action on a request from United Church of Christ regarding its development plan was added to the agenda as the first order of business.

Agenda Items Removed: None.

Other Changes: Item 8d, Trotters Village consideration, was moved up on the agenda to the second order of business.

8e. United Church of Christ – Mrs. Sudano explained to the Board when the site plan was submitted, it was noted that the drainage issue on the site would have to be addressed according to modeling to be completed. She summarized that the decision before the Board is whether the Church site can be constructed as it is or whether a detention pond will be required.

The drainage study indicates the site would retain a .014 foot of water. Because of this minimal amount of effect, Mrs. Sudano said, staff recommends that the Town Board grant the Church of Christ request to construct the site as it with no detention pond.

In discussion, Mrs. Sudano explained that the Church of Christ site sits at the head of three sub-basins of the Windward Pointe drainage basin. If retention were required, two or three retention areas on site would most likely be recommended. One of the retention areas would be underground retention under the parking lot, she said.

Mrs. Sudano said that although detention pond construction is not necessary, it would be wise to take steps to slow down the discharge of stormwater in order to minimize any impacts.

Commissioner VanFossen said he felt the Church should work with staff to come up with ideas on the site for retention.

Mayor Sears and Commissioner Tedder agreed. Commissioner Tedder added he would like staff to report back to the Board with the drainage study results translated into gallons and with exactly what is going to be done on the site when a plan is devised.

Action: The Board approved a motion to concur with the town staff recommendation to approve the United Church of Christ request to proceed with construction without the requirement to install a detention pond.

Motion By: Tedder

Second By: VanFossen

Vote: Unanimous

8d. Trotter Village PUD 02-PUD-01 - Ms. Bobber explained that Trotter Village Planned Unit Development is a proposed development that would be located on the north side of Avent Ferry Road adjacent to the Trotter Bluffs subdivision and within the Town’s extraterritorial jurisdiction. The property is currently zoned R‑20 and is designated for Moderate Density Residential in the Town’s Ten‑Year Comprehensive Growth Plan, Ms. Bobber said.

The proposed plan is in conformance with the Land Use Plan, which states that mixed use developments are appropriate for such areas of moderate density.

Ms. Bobber reported that the proposed PUD would consist of a variety of residential housing types ranging from 18,000 square foot single‑family home sites to patio homes and townhomes. The plan also calls for an area for “neighborhood village” style retail/office development.

Ms. Bobber said that the proposed project was brought before the Planning Board and Town Board at a joint public hearing on December 3, 2002. After the public hearing was closed, the Town Board requested that the property owner and project planner hold a community meeting with the adjacent property owners to allow for an opportunity for them to meet and discuss concerns and options for plan modifications.

Plans were submitted to staff for the January Planning Board meeting on Monday, January 13, 2003. On Wednesday, January 15, the community meeting was held. As a result of this meeting, the property owner agreed to several changes to the plans: added buffering through an increase in berm height and additional fence material as well as adding an amenity site for a neighborhood pool that will be opened up for membership to the adjacent neighborhoods; and a detention/retention pond.

Ms. Bobber said the revised plans were submitted to staff on January 27, 2003.

The Planning Board met on January 29th and after a lengthy discussion among the Planning Board, adjacent property owners and the land planner, the Planning Board voted 6-2 to recommend that the Town Board deny the proposed Trotter Village PUD as amended.

Ms. Bobber said staff recommends approval of the proposal as amended and with conditions, including a condition that the developer commit that the road connection to the existing Trotter Bluffs subdivision would be closed until construction of Trotter Village is complete.

Mr. Boots Elam, project designer, addressed the Board and presented a further revised master plan proposal. He said since the public hearing and the community meeting, designers deleted some lots to add a stormawater detention pond. He noted the other changes as outlined by Ms. Bobber and added that a street stub had been moved to accommodate adjacent property owner Jeff Sugg. He said the plan calls for an increased berm height with a fence on top of the berm and opaque landscaping in front of fence, which would effectively screen the development from neighbors. He also noted that a swimming pool had been added as an amenity.

Mr. Elam said he feels like the 81,000 square feet of non-residential noted on the plan may be misleading. He pointed out that the area is not planned for straight retail. He said the revised land use sheet shows a differential between retail and office (half and half) space. Because the plan is for a PUD, Mr. Elam said, he has the flexibility of requesting a reduction in required parking spaces, so 62 spaces have been removed from the proposal to make room for more green area.

Neighboring resident Dr. Paul Franzon was given permission to take the floor with a Power Point presentation illustrating concerns of neighbors, including the potential effect of the PUD on the value of their homes; the proposed density; drainage concerns and their concern of the impact the commercial activity will have.

Planning Board member Glenn Myrto reported to the Town Board that the Planning Board had seen most of the changes noted by Mr. Elam. He said the Planning Board had concurred that the fence and berm, although they address neighbor concerns, would not be desirable because they would serve to isolate the subdivision. He said the Planning Board also discussed that the 10-Year Comprehensive Plan does not seem to show commercial development this far down on Avent Ferry Road.

Mr. Elam responded. He said he felt the plan was a good one and that the question becomes, if not Trotter Village, then what. He said he feels the proposed PUD offers a better system of serving the future neighborhood than a straight R-10 or R-15 neighborhood. He stressed that the type of commercial development that is envisioned is “destination neighborhood commercial,” for those who live in the area.

Commissioner Atwell asked questions about potential traffic on Trotter Bluffs Drive. He asked if the designer had given any thought to moving the traffic circle on the plan up so that it is not tangent to Trotter Bluffs Drive.

Mr. Elam said that was a possibility. He added that he was open to either blocking Trotter Bluffs Drive entirely or just to construction traffic, at the Board’s pleasure.

Commissioner Schifano said he would vote against the plan because there is so much town home and patio cluster homes featured. He said he would like to see a larger number of single-family homes.

Commissioner Tedder said the proposal fits the 10-Year Comprehensive Plan and he believes a future plan brought to the Board by any other developer would be only more dense. He said the designer has worked the plan to accommodate public hearing and neighborhood meeting comments. He said the plan features amenities, open space, a variety of housing and a mix of uses, which the Town encourages. He said he did not feel that it is realistic to believe that areas in Holly Springs are going to develop in two-acre-plus lots, so he would be inclined to give a nod to the proposal and would not be in favor of deferring action.

Commissioner VanFossen said he almost likes the plan. He said he agrees with Commissioner Tedder, but would like to see some tweaking of the plan. He said he thinks the plan could be modified and get his support. He suggested losing some of the planned units and rearranging the smaller and larger lot phases and increase the open space around the detention pond. He also said he felt a condition of approval should be that the developer be required to provide full disclosure that the Town owns property behind the subdivision and that it is the site of the town’s wastewater treatment plant.

Commissioner Atwell said he agrees with Commissioner Schifano in that the plan should feature more single-family homes and less of the town homes. Additionally, he said, he would like to see the traffic pattern shifted away from Trotter Bluffs Drive. He said he was also concerned about the isolated G section on the plan. He said he would be in favor of sending the plan back for more modifications.

Commissioner Dickson said he likes the A section on the plan, but would like to see more like it in the rest of the plan. The result, he said, would be less density and fewer lots of the patio and townhomes.

Action: The Board approved a motion to defer action on the Trotter Village PUD and to refer the plan to the Technical Review Committee for possible modifications to address suggestions enumerated by the Town Board during discussion.

Motion By: Schifano

Second By: Atwell

Vote: The motion carried, 4-1. Commissioners Dickson, Atwell, VanFossen and Schifano voted for. Commissioner Tedder voted against.

At this time, the Board resumed with the regular order of the agenda.

5a. Public Hearing: Annexation Petition A03-01, N. F. Ransdell Heirs - Ms. Bobber explained to the Board that the Town had received a petition for voluntary annexation of land containing 12.27 acres located east of NC 55 Bypass and west of Oakhall PUD. The petition meets all the statutory requirements for annexation, Ms. Bobber reported.

She added that the applicant has requested that the public hearing be held as scheduled, but that action on the annexation be deferred to the February 18, 2003 Board meeting when action is anticipated on a development plan for the property.

With that explanation completed, Mayor Sears opened the public hearing to accept input. The following comments were recorded: None.

There being no comments, the public hearing was closed.

Action: The Board approved a motion to defer action on Annexation Ordinance A03-01 until the February 18, 2003 Town Board meeting.

Motion By: Schifano

Second By: VanFossen

Vote: Unanimous

5b. Joint Public Hearing: Sunset Oaks PUD, 02-PUD-02 - Ms. Bobber explained to the Board that Sunset Oaks Planned Unit Development is a proposed 328-acre mixed‑use development consisting of single‑family, multi‑family, and commercial/office uses. It is located on the north and south side of Optimist Farm Road at the intersection with Pierce Olive Road. The land was recently annexed into the Town Limits and is zoned R‑20 (Residential).

Ms. Bobber said the density for the proposed PUD is 4.9 units per developable acre (with the total number of residential units capped at 1,150). The proposed single‑family lot sizes range from 3,500 square feet to 9,000 square feet with densities ranging from 10 to16 units per acre. There is no specification regarding the expected square footage of non‑residential uses within the development, she said. The plans also provide for a neighborhood amenity site with a pool and tennis facilities.

Ms. Bobber said that the planning department has received many phone calls from adjacent property owners regarding concerns about this development. As a result, the preliminary plans for consideration have been posted on the department web page as of January 23, so that all interested residents and adjacent property owners have the ability to review the revised plans for public hearing.

Ms. Bobber said that a valid protest petition has been filed in this case, which triggers a special voting requirement when action is taken next month. Receipt of a protest petition from qualified land owners requires a three‑fourths vote (4‑1) to approve the PUD plan rather than a simple majority. (i.e. a 3‑2 vote in favor would still fail).

With that explanation completed, Mayor Sears opened the public hearing to accept input. The following comments were recorded:

Carol Honeycutt, 129 Talicud Trail B Ms. Honeycutt asked the Town Board to explain the process that the plan would go through before approval. She said she knows development is inevitable, but the proposed density of this plan is her key concern. She said she would prefer the density be reasonable and more of a blend with what is already in the area.

Ms. Honeycutt said the current roads in the area do not meet minimum DOT standards and would not handle the added traffic. Within a mile, there are four schools, and the road has not been upgraded, she said, adding that the number of homes to be built would add traffic to already inadequate roads.

Mark Badders, 109 Talicud Trail B Mr. Badders said his major concern is traffic. He said the density of the proposed PUD should be reduced because the roads feeding into the site are not designed for that much traffic.

Steven Honeycutt, 129 Talicud Trail B Mr. Honeycutt said the PUD would result in an extreme change in volume of traffic that would be dumped onto Optimist Farm and Pierce-Olive Roads (6,900 daily trips in his estimation at build-out), which are roads that already are overloaded. He said, additionally, he is concerned about the additional construction and service vehicles that the project would generate.

Mr. Honeycutt said Optimist Farm Road already is congested with car and school bus traffic going to the nearby schools. Construction and delivery vehicles during construction of Sunset Oakes would contribute to the destruction of the roads unless the roads are upgraded. Also, they would pose a traffic hazard.

Mr. Honeycutt said widening of the roads and traffic lights would do little to minimize the danger of the Talicud intersection, which is on a blind hill.

He said he would like assurances that the site would not be used as a demolition landfill in the areas that are marked “open space” on the plan. He said the owners of two vacant lots on Talicud Trail are in agreement with him.

He pointed out that the density figures proposed by the project are incredible, especially when compared to the neighboring development on Talicud Trail with only 12 lots in total. He said the difference amounts to a 95:1 ratio.

David Baker, 4116 James Mill Ct. B Mr. Baker said he is mostly concerned about traffic using Pierce-Olive Road. The proposed PUD would increase the danger of the intersection of Pierce-Olive Road and Holly Springs Road. He said he would hate to see the rural character of his neighborhood disappear. He said he would ask that the new development remain consistent with the surrounding pattern.

William D. Smith, 4200 Optimist Farm Road B Mr. Smith said he concurred with previous speakers for all the reasons stated on the record.

James Ellis, 4101 James Mill Ct. – Mr. Ellis said he concurred with previous speakers for all the reasons stated on the record.

Chris Ellis, 4101 James Mill Ct. – Mrs. Ellis said she concurred with previous speakers for all the reasons stated on the record.

Betsy Olive, 712 N. Church Street, Zebulon B Ms. Olive, who is an adjacent land owner, said she is opposed to the master plan as presented mainly because the project is too dense for the area and features inadequate buffering between adjacent properties. She said she would like to see the plan changed to reflect more single-family lots, adding townhomes on the plan equate to 26% of the project, not including those in the mixed use area.

The nearest existing multi-family development, she said, is on West Lake Road. She said she felt the buffer with adjoining property should be at least 100 feet, and she encouraged the development group to meet with residents and property owners who would be neighbors.

Beth Jackson, 108 Talicud Trail B Ms. Jackson showed the Boards a video she had made of daily traffic flow on Optimist Farm Road at the Talicud intersection. The video illustrated the hazard of the blind curves. The video also featured the Pierce-Olive Road at its intersection that shows that a hill is dangerous because it limits sight distance. She said she hopes the town and Mr. Bryan will consider their best interests in processing this plan.

She said she also is concerned about the potential for noise pollution, stormwater runoff and other environmental impacts of the development. She asked the Board to consider the density and the effect that so many houses would have on Middle Creek and Rocky Creek and wildlife.

Jill Telkamp, 125 Talicud Trail B Ms. Telkamp said she is afraid local schools are not adequately sized or equipped to handle an influx of new residents. She has concerns with traffic’s being further aggravated by the development, and she asked that the plan be changed to be less dense.

Marcia Babb, 116 Talicud Trail B Ms. Babb said the plan should be reduced in density. She cited the potential impact of the proposed density on the local schools and the roads. She said she felt the mixed-use portion of the plan was incongruous with the area and would set a new precedent and increase traffic even more. In closing, she said the PUD should be reduced in proposed density.

Karen Rehm, 117 Talicud Trail -- Ms. Rehm said she concurred with previous speakers for all the reasons stated on the record, particularly the traffic concerns.

Robert Babb, 116 Talicud Trail -- Mr. Babb said he concurred with previous speakers for all the reasons stated on the record and would defer his speaking time to Joan Bridges.

Joan Bridges, on behalf of her sister, Kim Booth – Ms. Bridges said her sister moved to Talicud Trail to escape the traffic, noise and congestion of the urban areas. She said her sister had expressed to her that she would like to see the land develop more closely in harmony with the surrounding neighborhoods. She also said that the roads are substandard and dangerous.

Robert Babb, 116 Talicud Trail B Mr. Babb addressed the Board, saying that the proposed Sunset Oaks PUD is a broader community concern. He said the traffic and density of the proposal is troublesome. He said he realizes growth is inevitable, but hopes growth in this area would be more consistent with the existing residential development. The project would effect the residents there forever. In the end, he hopes that when the development is built out, that the town would have a continuing sense of pride in what was accomplished.

Douglas Wilhelm, 3224 Summer Oaks Drive B Mr. Wilhelm was not present.

William McKoy, 4628 Optimist Farm Road B Mr. McKoy said he concurred with previous speakers for all the reasons stated on the record.

Gloria Boone, 4801 Abercroft Place B Ms. Boone said she concurs with other speakers, but would really encourage board members to check out the issues with infrastructure.

Rich Tallevi, 8412 Pierce Olive Road B Mr. Tallevi said he concurred with previous speakers for all the reasons stated on the record, particularly with traffic concerns.

Mike Goins, 4104 James Mill Ct. B Mr. Goins had left but asked other speakers to state for the record that he concurs with previous speakers for all the reasons stated on the record, particularly with traffic concerns.

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

Action: The Board approved a motion to forward Sunset Oaks PUD Application 02-PUD-02 to the Planning Board for review and recommendation.

Motion By: Tedder

Second By: Dickson

Vote: Unanimous

6. Consent Agenda ‑ The one item on the Consent Agenda was approved following a motion by Commissioner Dickson, a second by Commissioner Atwell and a unanimous vote. The following action was affected:

Budget Amendment $2,970 - The board adopted a budget amendment to the FY 2002‑03 budget in the amount of $2,970 to receive grant funds from Progress Energy for Holly Springs Fire Department weekend on-call duty at Shearon Harris Nuclear Plant. A copy of the budget amendment is incorporated into these minutes as an addendum page.

7. Rezoning Petition 02-REZ-13 – Ms. Bailey explained that the subject property does not currently have a Holly Springs zoning designation following recent annexation. She explained that action on the requested zoning designation of R-10 was tabled by the Town Board until additional information on an R-15 classification and traffic and drainage concerns in the area of the property could be reviewed.

Members of the Board received R-15 zoning classification information in their agenda packets, and the engineering department addressed the questions of traffic and drainage.

Ms. Bailey reported that staff and the Planning Board recommend approval of the R-10 zoning request.

Commissioner Schifano suggested that an R-15 zoning designation on this property would be a good experiment in diversifying the Town’s housing stock. He said if it proves to be too burdensome for the developer, then the Board could revisit the question, but he would like to

see what could come of it.

Action: The Board approved a motion to set the zoning of the Hood property at R-15, rather than R-10 as requested by the petitioner.

Motion By: Schifano

Second By: Atwell

Vote: Unanimous

8a. Womble Park Lighting and Fencing - Mr. Bradley explained to the Board that this request is for approval of funding for adding lights and fencing to one ball field at Womble Park to allow for use this spring. Mr. Bradley said that currently the Town’s baseball fields are limited to use by players aged 12 years old and younger due to infield size limitations.

Therefore, he said, the Town has been unable to provide an adequate facility for children of older ages. Both unfinished fields at Womble Park have larger infields and will provide the necessary base paths needed for older ages, he said.

Mr. Bradley said he had requested price quotes from vendors for fencing, lights and a scoreboard that would minimally develop one field for an older aged program. To accomplish these improvements, he said, the project would require approximately $85,000, and he recommended that the Town Board appropriate these funds from the Parks and Recreation Development Reserve fund.

Action: The Board approved a motion to approve funding to add lights and fencing to one ball field at Womble Park at a cost not to exceed $85,000 and to adopt the associated budget amendment.

Motion By: Tedder

Second By: Dickson

Vote: The motion carried, 4-1. Commissioners Dickson, Atwell, VanFossen and Tedder voted for. Commissioner Schifano voted against.

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

8b. Estes Lane Surveying - Mrs. Thompson explained to the Board that the approved 2002 Transportation Capital Improvement Plan for the Town of Holly Springs includes the two-lane paving of Estes Lane within the next two years. Estes Lane is currently a dirt road, and property owners along Estes Lane have requested that the road be paved.

Mrs. Thompson said the first step in that process is to move forward with surveying. Once surveys are completed, the road design would be prepared in-house, she added.

Commissioner Dickson said he felt Estes Lane does not need paving at this time since future development in the area may result in the paving. He added that the street is not a route used by anyone else than the few residents who live on Estes Lane, so he would not be in favor of the project.

Other commissioners said they felt no streets in Town should remain unpaved, especially if the Town has the funds to make the improvements.

Action: The Board approved a motion to approve to enter a professional services agreement with Mauldin-Watkins Surveying in the amount of $3,933 for the surveying of Estes Lane.

Motion By: VanFossen

Second By: Atwell

Vote: The motion carried, 4-1. Commissioners Atwell, VanFossen, Schifano and Tedder voted for. Commissioner Dickson voted against.

8c. Bass Lake Retreat Center Construction Bid - Mr. Bradley said that the Town received four (4) bids on Friday, January 31, 2003 for the construction of the Bass Lake Retreat Center. Mr. Bradley said the bids ranged from a low of $770,000 to a high of $1.1 million.

R.P. Construction was lowest bidder at $770,000 and is willing to discuss value engineering to bring the cost down, Mr. Bradley said.

Action: The Board approved a motion to authorize staff to negotiate with low bidder R.P. Construction in an effort to reduce the cost of constructing the Bass Lake Retreat Center.

Motion By: VanFossen

Second By: Dickson

Vote: Unanimous.

9. Public Comment – At this time, an opportunity was provided for members of the audience who had registered to speak to address the Board on any variety of topics not listed on the night’s agenda. The following citizens were heard:

Robert Blake, 321 Sycamore Creek Drive – Mr. Blake voiced concerns about Braxton Village North, a development plan that has not yet been brought before the Board. He said he is concerned about traffic on Sycamore Creek Drive and the impact the proposed development may have.

10. Other Business: Mr. Pearson reported that the Town has filed a petition for review to the North Carolina Supreme Court in the landfill matter; and he reported that the State and County have responded by filing papers opposing the Town’s request.

Mr. Pearson also reported that Thompson Contracting has filed a claim against the Town in the amount of $86,000, claiming damages from delays in the construction of the Bass Lake dam. Mr. Pearson said the Town may have a counterclaim. The Town Attorney recommends that the Town retain outside counsel who is more experienced in construction contract law. He recommended that the Town retain Ben Thompson, who would handle the case with oversight from himself.

The consensus of the Town Board was to concur with the Town Attorney’s recommendation.

Commissioner Schifano reported that the Wake County Growth Task Force and the Wake County Planning Office wishes to give the Town Board a presentation on growth issues.

11. Manager’s Reports – Mr. Dean reported that the Town, after six long years, has received permission from the State to expand the wastewater treatment plant by one million gallons, if needed. He also commented on how impressed he was with those who spoke during the night’s public hearings.

12. Closed Session - The Board approved a motion to enter Closed Session, pursuant to G.S. 143-318.11(a)(3), to discuss with the Town Attorney matters relating to the Kolesar vs Holly Springs case.

Motion By: Atwell

Second By: Dickson

Vote: Unanimous

General Account of Holly Springs Town Board Closed Session, Feb. 4, 2003

In Closed Session, the Town Attorney reported on the progress of negotiations with the property owner’s attorney. After discussion of a surprisingly high property appraisal, the Board directed the Town Attorney to discuss a negotiated settlement amount.

– End General Account

Action: The Board approved a motion to reenter Open Session.

Motion By: Atwell

Second By: Dickson

Vote: Unanimous

13. Adjournment – There being no further business for the evening, the February 4, 2003 meeting of the Holly Springs Board of Commissioners was adjourned at 10:36 p.m. following a motion by Commissioner Atwell, a second by Commissioner Dickson and a unanimous vote.

Respectfully Submitted on Tuesday, March 4, 2003.

Joni Powell, CMC

Town Clerk

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