SUMMARY MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING

OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2000 AT 7:30 P.M.

 

Mayor Rosemary Waldorf called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

 

Council members present were Flicka Bateman, Joyce Brown, Pat Evans, Kevin Foy, Lee Pavão, Bill Strom, Jim Ward, and Edith Wiggins.

 

Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Senior Development Coordinator J.P. Culpepper, Planner Kay Pearlstein, Assistant to the Manager Bill Stockard, Engineering Director George Small, and Acting Clerk Toni Pendergraph.

 

Mayor Waldorf announced that there would be a memorial service at the United Church of Chapel Hill on November 21st at 2:00 p.m., for Claudia Paine, a member of the Planning Department staff, who died over the weekend in a car accident.  Mayor Waldorf noted that Ms. Paine was a loyal and valued employee who would be greatly missed.

 

Item 1 – Public Forum on Proposed Weaver Dairy Road

Improvement Alternatives

 

Engineering Director George Small noted that included in the packets distributed to the Council for the discussion this evening were comments made by people who attended the public forum on the Weaver Dairy Road Alternatives.  He said there also was a paper discussing the issue that had been distributed to the neighborhoods in the area, which, although official looking, had not been distributed by the Town.  Mr. Small said one letter had pointed out that the maps in the memorandum did not match the descriptions on the front sheet, and he explained that the difference between Alternative 1 and 1A was simply in the bike lane, and Alternative 1A was supported by the Council.  He apologized for the confusion, and said the State had repeated the analysis with a striped bike lane in the second set of drawings.

 

Mr. Small described the background of the proposal.  He said that in April 1999 the Council had requested four alternatives:

 

(1)   a five-lane cross-section,

(2)   a four-lane divided section,

(3)   a four-lane cross-section with a median, and

(4)   a three-lane cross-section.

 

Mr. Small reported on a Citizens’ Information Workshop held on November 14th for citizens and the Council to review the drawings and receive information about the proposed improvement alternatives and to discuss this information with Town and State staff.

 

Mr. Small pointed out that Table 1 in the memorandum described the alternatives in general terms.  He said at this evening’s meeting it was expected that there would be citizen comments and questions, as well as the same from the Council.  He said on pages 4 and 11 of the memorandum were descriptions and tables of the developments contributing to the traffic on Weaver Dairy Road.  Mr. Small noted also, on page 11, the existing streets carrying the approximate amount of traffic expected onto Weaver Dairy Road in the year 2025—20,300 vehicles.  Mr. Small pointed out that on page 4—the extension of Weaver Dairy Road west of NC 86—the State had not yet accepted the narrowed median alternative.  He said he was not sure that it would be accepted, although narrower medians than the standard width had been accepted in other projects over the past few years.

 

Derrick Weaver, Project Planner for the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), said the maps and charts represented a “worst case symmetric-widening scenario,” by looking at the widening as equal on both sides of the road, in all the alternatives.  He said once the alternative decision was made, then the designs could be altered as needed to lessen impacts, such as on creeks.  Mr. Weaver added that if the Council chose either the three- or four-lane curb-and-gutter cross-section alternatives, the NCDOT would have to approve the choice.  He pointed out that Weaver Dairy Road was on the Thoroughfare Plan for extension to Highways US 15-501 and NC 54, so whatever alternative was chosen, the future of the road must be considered.  Mr. Weaver said the money must be spent wisely, because this would probably be the only improvement the NCDOT would be making on Weaver Dairy Road for many years.

 

Council Member Brown asked Mr. Weaver to comment on the “no-build” alternative. Mr. Weaver said if the Town asked for a “no-build” alternative then the NCDOT would definitely consider that as an option. He pointed out that the Town had asked the NCDOT for rebuilding or improving the road.

 

Mayor Waldorf pointed out that if the Council did chose one of the alternatives, construction would not begin until 2004 at the earliest.

 

Bruce Sampsel, speaking on behalf of the Chesley Homeowners’ Association, said the neighborhood urged the adoption of Alternative 1 because it was a long-term solution.  He said Alternatives 3 and 4 were “bandaid” approaches, and would be less safe, with limited traffic-carrying capability. He said Alternative 1, with its 68-foot design, would meet the standards already in place with the connector sectors already constructed. He said Alternative 1 was 18 feet narrower than Alternative 2, and less costly.

 

Patrick Rhodes, speaking on behalf of Countryside subdivision, presented a list of names in support of Alternative 1 to the Council.  He said in all the alternatives except #1, the neighborhoods would lose their properties, and would be most significantly impacted.  Mr. Rhodes said they would lose their buffer, trees planted by the neighborhood association.  He urged the Council to save his neighborhood by voting for Alternative 1.

 

Janis Dempsey, a Silver Creek resident, said her house backed up to Weaver Dairy Road, and she was able to observe the traffic.  She said it was not heavy, but that speeding was a problem, and aggressive drivers often passed on the right, using the Chesley turn-offs as a passing lane.  Ms. Dempsey said her biggest worry was that widening the road would see an increase in speed, traffic, and accidents.  She urged the Council to consider Alternative 5, but, if not possible, to chose Alternative 4 or 4A.

 

Michael Cuffe, a Silver Creek resident, said his house backed up to Weaver Dairy Road, and he felt unsafe walking along the north side of the road because of speeding vehicles along the road.  He said he knew the road had to be widened, but for the safety of pedestrians and bikers, the real problem was speed and cars passing on the right-hand side of the lanes.  Mr. Cuffe reminded the Council that this road passed through mostly residential neighborhoods.

 

Susan Schulz, a resident of Silver Creek, said the reasons that she and her husband bought into the neighborhood was because it was close to schools, parks, shopping, and a “super highway”  - I-40.  She said the probability of another “super highway” in her front yard was ludicrous.

 

Jack Houston, a Coventry resident, said that the proposed widening of Weaver Dairy Road would affect six of the residencies in the Coventry neighborhood.  He said the NCDOT engineers had stated that the trees and the berm protecting their neighborhood from the traffic noise would have to be removed for the widening.  Mr. Houston said this would significantly reduce the sound barriers and the resale value of their homes.  He urged the Council to require the NCDOT to construct visual and sound barriers, and that consideration be given to moving the road away from Coventry, where no homes would be affected.  Mr. Houston said he felt that two bike lanes and two sidewalks were excessive, with one of each being safer and less costly.

 

Barry Cleveland said he supported one of the three-lane alternatives, or the “no-build” alternative.  He said I-40 was already a “super highway” and asked why Weaver Dairy Road had to become one also.  Mr. Cleveland added that US 15-501 South was one of the main arteries into Chapel Hill and still remained a two-lane highway.  He said widening the interior roads would make Chapel Hill like Cary or North Raleigh.

 

Wayne Pein, former bicycle research transportation professional and a bicyclist, said that bike lanes on Weaver Dairy Road would not be safe.  He said a far better alternative would be a wide outside lane, to accommodate both drivers and bicyclist.  Mr. Pein said he preferred the “no-build” or three-lane option, and that bike lanes should not always be considered.  He distributed a four-page memorandum to the Council on the specifics of bike lanes.

 

Sue Olshen said she concurred with the remarks of her neighbors, and asked the Council to consider the “no-build” alternative.  She said there were two hazards on Weaver Dairy Road, one was speeding and the other was difficulty in crossing the road, for both cars and pedestrians.  Ms. Olshen added that by adding turn lanes, sidewalks and bike lanes, although needed, would not solve the problem of crossing a major artery.  She said she was concerned that her neighborhood would serve as a cut-through area during the construction.  Ms. Olshen urged Alternative 5.

 

Cindy Risku, President of the Silver Creek Homeowners’ Association, said she wished to speak to the Council as the mother of two children.  She said she was OK with the widening of Weaver Dairy Road at the connect point with Sage Road, and the widening of the road where the several developments had been and will be constructed, but that she was not OK with making the road another Airport Road or a five-lane highway.  Ms. Risku said one part of the road had commerce and the other part was neighborhoods, where pedestrian crossing would be dangerous.  She asked why the road had to accommodate more traffic, and why the Town should be turned into some large city, and not remain the town that Chapel Hill should be.

 

Janina DeMasi said that Weaver Dairy Road was no longer a major thoroughfare, but had changed with the addition of the high school and many neighborhoods.  She said people should be urged to use I-40 instead of Weaver Dairy Road, and the Town should discourage any additional and speeding traffic on the road.  By widening it, Ms. DeMasi said, it would endanger the children who crossed it.

 

Chris Grace, a resident of Silver Creek, said her issue was basically safety, and she challenged the NCDOT to find a safe speed along Weaver Dairy Road, especially on the downhill section.  She said even the sidewalks were not safe if a car ran out of control and over the sidewalk, because pedestrians could not get out of the way of a runaway car, since there were walls on the other side of the sidewalk.

 

Del Snow said Weaver Dairy Road did not serve the purposes of the other direct routes in Chapel Hill, and that I-40 was a good east-west option.  She read some excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan regarding pedestrian safety, harmony, and minimizing improvements that increase automobile capacity.  Ms. Snow added that a four- or five-lane option would not be a viable alternative within pedestrian zones and bikeways.  She urged either a “no-build” or three-lane highway.

 

Mia Burroughs said she lived near Cedar Hills Drive, an area of frequent accidents, and she recognized the need to widen Weaver Dairy Road.  She cited stormwater flowing through her property, and, although the Town had increased the culverts, she had been cautioned that this might not work.  Ms. Burroughs asked the Council to add to the list of negatives to widening the road the quantity of impervious surface which would be required.  She urged the Council to address stormwater drainage solutions in the final design of the road.

 

Paul Vancil, a resident of Chandlers Green subdivision, said his neighborhood was not directly affected by the widening of Weaver Dairy Road, but as a newcomer to Chapel Hill who traveled the road several times a week, he did not perceive a traffic problem on the road.  He asked the Council to provide more information as to why the road-widening project was needed, especially in lieu of the fact that most people speaking this evening were opposed to it.

 

William Hutchins, Chair of the US 15-501 Advisory Committee, said he had looked at the Sage Road extension of Weaver Dairy Road, and he suggested closing off Erwin Road at the intersection of US 15-501, and directing all traffic to Sage Road, which was the same distance.  He said this would leave the lower end of Weaver Dairy Road with only local traffic.

 

Jim Call, Director of Facilities at Carol Woods Retirement Community, said there were two concerns with the widening of Weaver Dairy Road—the safety of the residents of Carol Woods entering the road, and the destruction of the two-hundred-year-old oaks at the Carol Woods gateway.

 

Bruce Ballentine, a resident of Silver Creek, pointed out that the widening of Weaver Dairy Road did not include the areas already widened from Chesley to Silver Creek.  He said that the area where Weaver Dairy Road intersected with Erwin Road was a daily bottleneck and turning lanes in the area were dangerous.  Mr. Ballentine said the planned joining of Weaver Dairy Road and Sage Road should go ahead, leaving the part of Weaver Dairy Road which intersected Erwin Road as a local traffic area.

 

Phil Conrad, a resident of Weatherstone Drive, observed that it would be a shame to forfeit the funds for the sidewalk projects.  He said he felt that widening Weaver Dairy Road to five lanes would serve as a “trip attractor,” attracting cars from I-40.  Mr. Conrad pointed out that the temporary sidewalk should be constructed along the side of the road where the multi-family developments, the high school, and the retirement community were, for safety reasons.  He said he felt the widening project was a good one for the Town, and the right pedestrian accommodations were the key, for safety concerns.

 

Mayor Waldorf thanked the speakers for their courtesy and said their comments and questions would be addressed by the staff in their report back to the Council.

 

Council Member Brown asked the staff to address the safety and speeding issues which had been brought up, since it was not part of the configuration, but was an important issue.

 

Mayor Waldorf underscored what Council Member Brown said, and that all the alternatives should be looked at from the point of view of safety

 

Council Member Brown said she was concerned about the speeding issue that had been highlighted.

 

Council Member Foy asked that the crossing issues be addressed in the staff report, since there had been problems identified at Hamilton Road and NC 54, and he felt that the crossings needed to be identified for the discussions of alternatives.  He stated he wanted to know which, the Town of Chapel Hill or the NCDOT, would fund the improvements.

 

Council Member Evans asked for a report on the alignment of the road, since some stretches of the road had development and other stretches did not.  Mr. Horton said the staff would identify the locations for the Council, but said he believed Mr. Weaver said that the NCDOT was aware of the fact that certain stretches would be wider than others.

 

Council Member Wiggins asked for more information on how, and how safely, the widening and narrowing of the road would be as they blended.  Mr. Horton asked if Council Member Wiggins wanted to know how the configurations would match up between five, four, or three lanes.

 

Council Member Ward asked for a report, if the Council chose an alternative with a median, on where the cut-outs would be and where the traffic lights would be installed.

 

Council Member Bateman asked for clarification of whether the already-widened parts of the road would be widened further.

 

Mr. Weaver said the area that had been widened would remain exactly as it was, and the alternatives to changing the lanes could be met by restriping them.  He noted he felt that putting a median in those areas was not a good idea.

 

Council Member Brown asked Mr. Weaver to describe how the process would work and what the role of each entity would be—the Town, the citizens, and the NCDOT.  Mr. Weaver said the NCDOT was funding the majority of the project, under the Federal Highway Administration, but since it was a Chapel Hill road, the comments the NCDOT received from the Town and the citizens would influence what the NCDOT did.

 

Council Member Foy asked what the NCDOT would do about sound barriers and how would that be determined.  Mr. Weaver said typically the Department did not put a noise wall up because it was ineffective since there were so many driveways entering the road. He said if the NCDOT had to take down trees or berms, the homeowner could replace these with the money paid to them by the State for taking their property.   Mr. Weaver said in the past, the NCDOT shared the cost of landscaping and visual barriers with the town or city.

 

Council Member Strom asked the staff to have a full discussion of pedestrian safety, and what would happen to the sidewalk scenario if Alternative 5 were approved.  He said he was concerned that some of the alternatives might conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, and he would like that addressed in the report.  Council Member Strom asked, as well, for a report on the stormwater issue and how it would impact downstream and protect citizens’ homes.

 

Council Member Wiggins asked that bicycle safety be included in the section of the staff report on safety.  She asked if the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board would be asked to comment on the road-widening project.  Mr. Horton said he felt that every board should be asked to comment.

 

Council Member Bateman asked what the five-lane alternative did to the Cedar Falls Park ball field.

 

Council Member Foy asked for a report on the visual and sound barriers from the Town’s perspective.

 

Cindy Risku commented on the discrepancy between the computer-generated maps, which indicated that homeowners’ property would be taken on the wall-side of Weaver Dairy Road, between Silver Creek and Chesley, and the fact that Mr. Small had indicated that no land would be taken, and the road in that area would not be widened.  Mr. Small clarified these discrepancies.  He noted that the computer did not show the walls, and there were some spots on the maps where the computer lines showed that the walls would be disturbed, but it was not the intent of the plans to disturb the area between the walls.

 

Susan Schulz asked what the speed limit would be on the road. Mr. Horton said it would probably remain at 35 mph, and he was not aware of any reason for it to increase.

 

Council Member Ward said he would be interested in a two-lane road with a median, and extra turn lanes only where the openings were.  He said he saw this type of road as a pedestrian-friendly, wonderfully looking, slower, safer road, regardless of the disturbance.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE DISCUSSION TO THE MANAGER.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

 

Mayor Waldorf asked Mr. Horton if he thought the staff would be able to report back to the Council in December.  Mr. Horton said given the amount of questions and comments, the report probably would not be ready until January 2001.  He asked citizens for their e-mail addresses and street addresses so that the staff could send notices to those interested.

 

Item 2 – Special Use Permit Modification for Carol Woods

Retirement Community

 

Council Member Wiggins asked to be recused from the discussion since she is a member of the Board of Directors of Carol Woods.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO RECUSE COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS FROM DISCUSSION ON THE CAROL WOODS SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION APPLICATION.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

 

Planning Director Roger Waldon said there were four changes in the existing Special Use Permit that Carol Woods Retirement Community was seeking:

 

·        Change the boundaries of the Special Use Permit,

·        Modest additions to the dining hall,

·        Add a small building to be used as a workshop area, and

·        Add a set of six garden apartment buildings, two cluster homes, day care center, and a new entrance on Sunrise Road.

 

Mr. Waldon pointed out that road improvement would be required on Sunrise Road, and the staff recommended this in the resolution.  He said the staff recommended approval of the modifications of the Special Use Permit, including the recommendations from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board that were distributed this evening.

 

Pat Sprigg gave a brief summary of the history of the retirement community, the makeup of the residents, the fact that there were 119 apartments, and 43% were affordable housing, ranging from $50,000 to $90,000 entry fees.  She said that Carol Woods has emphasized its civic duties to the Town of Chapel Hill over its 20-year existence, establishing a livable wage-structure for all regular employees, and a minimum wage of $8.00 per hour.  Ms. Sprigg said in 1991, when Carol Woods received its tax-exempt bond issue from the State, it continued to pay its Orange County tax in the amount of over $400,000 per year, even though being legally tax exempt.  She said that Carol Woods had never used the refund from the North Carolina State and Use Tax, but instead has turned the fees back into the use of the local community, and has funded grants to help agencies such as Habitat, The Charles House, Helping Hands, Interfaith Council, and the Department on Aging.  Ms. Sprigg said that Carol Woods serves as a special site for the Red Cross  and a mini-site for the sight-impaired and has opened its assembly hall to be used for all not-for-profits at no charge.  She said whatever Carol Woods plans it always has the larger community in mind, and is known for its park-like setting, recycling, tree covers, environmentally-sound practices, and ride-shares by employees.

 

Dan Jewell, of Coulter, Jewell, Thames, P.A., speaking for the applicant, introduced his colleagues, and reviewed the plans for the proposed expansion.  He said that the plans for the new buildings were in keeping with the existing campus, and located within walking distance of the center, where the dining room, activities center, and the health care facilities were located.  Mr. Jewell said the plans included numerous bioretention areas around the property so stormwater runoff can be stored and treated.  He reiterated the areas where Carol Woods followed good environmental management practices:

 

·        use of integrated pest management,

·        using pesticides, mainly soap and oil based, when they are needed,

·        using live traps and relocating techniques to deal with any nuisance animals on the campus, using biological pest control methods,

·        limiting the use of fertilizer to only those specific areas recommended by ongoing soils analysis,

·        extensive onsite composting, including leaf mulch materials from the Town of Chapel Hill, leftover food from the dining center goes to the Interfaith Kitchen,

·        encourages the residents to use  peak and off-peak demand for electric usage, and

·        has won numerous recycling awards.

 

Mr. Jewell said when the plans were before the Design Commission it was recommended that the amount of paving and parking surfacing be reduced, and these recommendations were included in the plan before the Council this evening.  He said the plans incorporated the ideals of Carol Woods by creating a walkable residential campus within a park-like setting.  Mr. Jewell noted that on the tables prepared by the staff, that even with the proposed expansion, the campus will only have about one-half of the floor area permitted in the zoning districts under the Development Ordinance, and has almost doubled the livability space required by the Ordinance.  He said there had been strong recommendations for approval from the advisory boards.

 

Mr. Jewell said the applicant was in agreement with all the staff recommendations except for one, the road improvements.  He pointed out that I-40 was the end of the Chapel Hill urban growth area, and was only several hundred feet north of the extent to which the staff has recommended improvements to Weaver Dairy Road.  Mr. Jewell said the bridge on Sunrise Road over I-40 was not wide enough for a sidewalk, or for widening the road to allow a center lane, or road improvements.  He said the traffic impact on Sunrise Road was minimal and the proposed driveway into the property from Sunrise Road did not connect into the street system of Carol Woods, but was proposed for emergency vehicles access, and an access to the child care center.

 

Mr. Jewell said about 20 feet of the woods, mainly large hardwoods, would have to be cleared along Sunrise Road in order to make the road improvements and he urged that the setting remain as it was.  He said the Planning Board recommended providing a pedestrian trail connection from the end of the garden apartment cluster to the corner of Sunrise Road and Weaver Dairy Road.  Mr. Jewell said the applicant urged the Council to accept the unanimous recommendations of the Planning Board and the Design Commission to approve the project, but not to widen Sunrise Road.  He said this is reflected in Resolution B.

 

Dick Henry, adjoining property neighbor to Carol Woods, said he was very happy to be a neighbor and fully supported what they were doing.  He asked the Council to pay particular attention to the fact that in both Resolutions B and C, the decisions were unanimous approval by the advisory boards.

 

Council Member Bateman asked the staff why it had recommended widening Sunrise Road, and who would be walking on it.  Mr. Waldon said the staff believed that the proposed cross-section for Sunrise Road was appropriate, but that the prospects for widening at the bridge crossing over I-40 were limited.  He said this recommendation was standard with regard to increased traffic in a development, by recommending improvements to the developer’s half to meet the Town standard.  Mr. Waldon said employees of the day care center and the residents of the garden apartments would be using the road to walk to Weaver Dairy Road.   He said the staff felt the recommendation was reasonable, for the developer to improve its part of the road to meet the Town standards.

 

Council Member Foy asked who would use the day care center.  Ms. Sprigg responded that the day care center would house about 64 children, with 25% of available space used by staff.  She said experience has shown that not every child is driven in a single car, but usually two children are driven together.

 

Council Member Foy asked if the only purpose for relocation of the existing Special Use Permit boundary was to include the existing building within the property.  Mr. Waldon said if the building was to be included for staff use, it would be necessary to extend the boundary.

 

Council Member Ward asked if the staff had looked into requesting the applicant for aid in building a sidewalk on Weaver Dairy Road.  Mr. Horton said it might not be a rational nexus on this particular project, but he said on another construction project at Carol Woods the staff had recommended that they construct sidewalks and Carol Woods was not interested in doing so at that time.  He said the Council decided not to require it.  Mr. Waldon said that because there was no proposed intensity of additional use on that portion of the site, the staff decided not to make that recommendation.

 

Mr. Jewell said the Planning Board recommended building a meandering path from the garden apartments and the day care center to the corner, and the safe place to cross Sunrise Road to get to the high school was at the Weaver Dairy Road intersection.

 

Council Member Evans said she supported the meandering path concept, which would eliminate destruction of trees, and would help to get the residents of Carol Woods safely to the high school, where many of them volunteer.  She added that the residents were also looking forward to the day care center, so they could volunteer there, as well.

 

Council Member Foy pointed out that the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board recommended that the amount of new parking spaces be reduced to 63, and he supported that reduction.  He said if the Council supported not widening Weaver Dairy Road, they should not be encouraging more parking spaces to accommodate more cars.

 

Council Member Bateman thanked the applicant, Carol Woods, for including the day care center in their plans, as there was always need for more sites for day care.  She agreed with Council Member Evans that it was a wonderful intergenerational phenomenon.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, THAT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO CAROL WOODS BE CONSIDERED CONTIGUOUS.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY  (9-0).

 

A RESOLUTION DETERMINING CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY WITH RESPECT TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION APPLICATION FOR CAROL WOODS

(2000-11-20/R-1)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council, having considered the evidence submitted in the Public Hearing thus far pertaining to the application for Special Use Permit Modification for Carol Woods, hereby determines, for purposes of Development Ordinance Section 18.3, Finding of Fact c), contiguous property to the site of the development proposed by this Special Use Permit application to be that property described as follows:

 

All properties adjacent to the site.

 

This the 20th day of November, 2000.

 

MAYOR WALDORF MOVED, SINCE SHE WAS NOT PRESIDING, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO DECEMBER 11, 2000, AND TO REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

 

Item 3 – Development Ordinance Text Amendments to Create New Liaison for the

 Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board on the Community Design Commission

 

Mr. Horton said that adoption of the ordinance would carry out the option chosen by the Council.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, THAT THE ITEM BE REVIEWED BY THE COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 11, 2000.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

 

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

 

The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m.