HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002.0812.TCSEW.Packet0'tAIN
3 0�.
4
'bat is 9a
NOTICE OF SPECIAL, EXECUTIVE
AND WORK STUDY SESSION
OF THE
FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL
Mayor Beydler
Councilman Melendez
Vice Mayor Fraverd
Councilman Archambault
Councilwoman Nicola
Councilman Kavanagh
Councilwoman Ralphe
WHEN: MONDAY, AUGUST 12, 2002
TIME: 5:00 P.M.
WHERE: TOWN HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
16836 E. Palisades, Building B
0 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL — Mayor Beydler
1.) Consideration of EXTENDING THE CONTRACT with Sintra Hoffman for town manager services.
2.) Pursuant to A.R.S. §38431.03.A.4., VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR: Discussion or
consultation with the attorneys of the public body in order to consider its position and instruct its attorneys
regarding the public body's position regarding contracts that are the subject of negotiations, in pending or
contemplated litigation or in settlement discussions conducted in order to avoid or resolve litigation, specifically
mediation in the Hoffman/Robinson/Knapp vs. Town, et al litigation.
3.) RETURN TO SPECIAL SESSION.
4.) DISCUSSION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING MEDIATION CONTINUATION to August 13,
2002.
5.) ADJOURN THE SPECIAL SESSION AND CONVENE THE WORK STUDY SESSION AT 6:30 P.M.
PLEASE NOTE — THIS IS A WORK STUDY SESSION FOR THE TOWN COUNCIL.
THE PUBLIC IS WELCOME TO ATTEND AND OBSERVE BUT NO PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE
TAKEN UNTIL THE AUGUST 15 COUNCIL MEETING.
THE WORK STUDY SESSION IS SCHEDULED FROM 6:30 P.M. TO 7:30 P.M.
6.) Discussion of the PRELIMINARY PLAT for the 9-lot, 11.104± acre, Sierra Madre Estates, Phase 1, located
along the northwest side of Sierra Madre Drive, southwest of Golden Eagle Boulevard, Case Number S2001-16.
The discussion will include but not be limited to an independent traffic engineer's re ort by Burgess Niple
requested by the Town Council at the July 2 council meeting.
7.) ADJOURNMENT. DATED this 8t' day of August, 2002. L"e4�1 sz
By: Cassie B. Hansen, Director of Administration own Clerk
The Town of Fountain Hills endeavors to make all public meetings accessible to persons with disabilities. Please call 837-2003 (voice) or
1-800-367-8939 (TDD) 48 hours prior to the meeting to request a reasonable accommodation to participate in this meeting.
Burgess-Niple Traffic Engineering Review.doc
Chron 167
O�^fAT11T
o � �
u 0
that is
is
TO: Honorable Mayor and Con '1
FROM: Randy L. Harrel
DATE: August 12, 2002
Town of FOUNTAIN HILLS
Public Works Department
MEMORANDUM
RE: Burgess & Niple's Traffic Engineering Review
for Sierra Madre Estates
Staff has reviewed the initial submittal of Burgess & Niple's traffic report (dated 5-9-02). Our
initial review comments to the report are attached for your review. If the Council wishes to
incorporate Burgess Niple's initial recommendations, as they are currently written and reviewed
into this subdivision's design, the following project stipulations could be added:
�w • Utilize a 40 mph design speed with sight distances in accordance with the 2001 AASHTO
Geometric Design of Highways and Street manual, for new driveway and street intersection
design. Therefore:
• Grade down the existing "berm" and fully remove and relocate the existing monument
sign on the north side of the roadway, where needed for that sight distance.
• If that sight distance cannot be achieved due to the existing Sierra Madre roadway
surface itself, the Town may, at its discretion, allow supplemental intersection warning
signage, median extension (thereby restricting left -turn movements), U-turn prohibitions,
or other measures as determined to be additionally appropriate.
ITZ
att.
Burgess-Niple Traffic Engineering Review.doc Chron 167
Review Comments
for Burgess & Niple's Traffic Engineering Review Letter
of the Sierra Madre Estates Phase I Subdivision
Dated 8-9-02
Section 1 - Appropriate Design Speed
• Seven of the nine existing intersecting streets and seven of the eleven existing platted lots along
Sierra Madre pre -date the Town's incorporation and its subsequent design review. Their
sightlines were either designed (like the Sierra Madre roadway itself) for 25 mph, or were
undesigned. Many may rate at a much lesser design speed. The two Town approved street
intersections were designed for 30 mph. Why should the proposed street and two proposed
driveway intersections be designed so much higher (40 mph) and so inconsistent with the
remainder of the existing roadway corridor?
• You correctly note that "The addition of driveways and streets will typically cause drivers to
decrease their speeds. With the addition of the proposed driveways and street, one would expect
to see a decline in the existing 85`h percentile speed." Yet, you made no allowance for that
anticipated drop in your recommended design speed recommendations. Why not?
Section 2 and 3 - Intersection Sight Distance Standards Comparison
• The AASHTO values you noted are generally the basic values extracted directly from the
AASHTO GDHS tables for the various turning movements. Shouldn't those values be adjusted
for the:
• Minor street (Princess Court) or driveway approach grade (per GDHS Exhibit 9-54 and
9-57).
• Major street (Sierra Madre) approach grade (into a sag) (per GDHS Exhibit 9-53 and
page 664).
• Major street roadway and median width (per GDHS Exhibit 9-54)
• The "available/provided" sightlines were calculated based on the Town's (and MCDOT's)
standard sightline requirement of 2' of ground clearance in landscaped areas to allow for short
shrub growth (trees in critical locations have to be adequately spaced and/or skirted up in
roadway crest locations).
Please review: Do the AASHTO requirements specifically require this sightline ground
clearance and, if not, do the sightlines provided actually then come close to meeting the GDHS
requirements for the 40 mph speed? Or, by deleting shrubs in the critical areas, could the
sightline be taken at the ground line?
• The listed AASHTO "left turn from the Lots 3 and 4 driveway and Princess Court" values of
365' (for 30 mph) and 490 (for 35 mph) are 10% higher than the GDHS basic values (of 335'
and 445" respectively) but the lot 1 and 2 driveway values were not increased. Why? We
would have expected the following adjustments:
M
Burgess-Niple Traffic Engineering Review.doc
Chron 167
• Minor street (or driveway) approach
grade
• Major street approach grade (into a
sag): Looking left (Looking right)
• Major street width
Net change - looking left (looking right)
Change in required sightline
(+ = increase, NC = no change)
Princess Court Lots 1 - 2 Lots 3 - 4
NC (-) (-)
NC (+) + 0 NC (-)
+ (+ +) NC (-) NC (-)
For the right turn from Princess Court the "available/provided" distance is listed as 266';
however, we see no obstruction which would limit the available sightline so short. The
AASHTO required sightline is listed as 385; however, since traffic has to start from a stop or
near -stopped turning or crossing movement at Golden Eagle Boulevard, the actual required
sightline should be substantially shorter unless you believe that there will someday be a traffic
signal at this intersection (we don't).
Section 4 - Left Turn from Sierra Madre into the Lot 3-4 Driveway
• The 325' GDHS sightline noted should be adjusted downward 10% based on the 4% uphill
approach grade along westbound Sierra Madre (per GDHS, Exhibit 9-53), yet a much flatter (or
downhill) grade for the left turning vehicle.
Even without considering the above adjustments, the required (325') and available/provided
(312') sightline are within the limit of precision of the sightline diagram, and therefore cannot
be considered to be computationally significantly different (i.e., it's "close enough"). We do,
however, agree that an approach warning sign is an appropriate mitigation measure, as well as
the driveway slightly eastward and a small amount of shrub removal in the median. (Please also
note that this will be an uncommon movement and serves only two lots --there will probably be
about two such left turns per day.)
Iq
LA
BURGESS & NIPLE
Mr. Randy Harrel, PE, LS
Town of Fountain Hills
PO Box 17958
Fountain Hills, Arizona 85269
August 9, 2002
Re : Sierra Madre Estates Phase I Subdivision
Traffic Engineering Review
Dear Mr. Harrel:
Burgess & Niple, Inc.
5025 East Washington Street
This writing is in regards to the Sierra Madre Estates Phase I Subdivision proposed in the
Suite 212
northwest quadrant of Fountain Hills consisting of nine, one -acre lots. Lots one and two
Phoenix, AZ 85034
and lots three and four will access Sierra Madre Drive through two joint access driveways.
602 244.8100
Lots five through nine will access a new hillside -local classification roadway called
Fax 602 244. 1 sl 5
Princess Court that intersects Sierra Madre Drive west of Golden Eagle Boulevard. We
have completed the following as requested by the Town:
1. Evaluate the appropriate design speed for streeddrive intersections.
2. Review the Subdivision Ordinance's intersection sight distance vs. the 2001
American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (GDHS) requirements.
3. Review the developer's plan/profile's grading for conformance with AASHTO
and Town required streeddriveway sight distance.
4. Review the sight distance for the eastbound to northbound left turn from Sierra
Madre onto the lot 3-4 driveways and evaluate whether it meets the AASHTO
and Town requirements.
S. Evaluate Princess Court intersecting Sierra Madre on the inside of a curve.
The following is a list of reference materials utilized during this review:
➢ Sierra Madre Estates Preliminary Plat sheets
➢ Town of Fountain Hill's Subdivision Ordinance
➢ Sightline drawings by Kirkham Michael Consulting Engineers
➢ Left turn from Sierra Madre sightline drawing by Town at lots 34
driveway
➢ Town's intersection sight triangle
➢ Town's roadway sight triangle
➢ Town's sight distance requirements from Subdivision Ordinance
➢ Town's restrictions and pruning requirements within the sight triangle
➢ Letter regarding intersection sight distance and stopping sight distance for
Eagle Ridge North and Eagle's Nest
➢ Record drawings of Sierra Madre Drive
➢ Paving plans for Dove Drive and Sierra Madre Drive intersection
August 9, 2002
Page 2
➢ Memorandum regarding traffic s
g g peed/volume counts for Sierra Madre
Drive near Dove Drive
➢ Roadway functional classification system and transportation traffic counts
exhibit from the 2002 General Plan
➢ 2001 AASHTO GDHS
Also included later in this writing, are the following from the Town's Subdivision
Ordinance:
➢ Table 1 — Road Standards Table
➢ Exhibit 6 — Limited Collector Road Typical Section
➢ Exhibit 7 — Minor Collector Road Typical Section
➢ Exhibit 16 — Sight Distance Requirements
1. Evaluate the appropriate design speed for street/drive intersections.
Design speed is a selected speed used to determine the various geometric design features of
a roadway. The design speed should be a logical one with respect to the topography,
anticipated operating speed, the adjacent land use, and the functional classification of the
roadway. The design speed should fit the travel desires and habits of most drivers
expected to use a particular facility. A consideration in selecting a design speed is the
average trip length. The longer the trip, the greater the driver's desire to use higher speeds.
Lower design speeds are generally applicable to local and collector streets through
residential areas. They are also applicable to roads with winding alignment in rolling or
mountainous terrain or where environmental conditions dictate. High design speeds are
generally applicable to roads in level terrain or where environmental conditions are
favorable.
In evaluating the appropriate design speed for the street/drive intersections, several items
were taken into consideration. The first includes the original design speed for Sierra
Madre Drive. Based upon record drawings provided by the Town, the roadway design
speed for Sierra Madre Drive from Golden Eagle Boulevard to Montezuma Boulevard was
25 miles per hour (mph). Even though the design speed listed was 25-mph, most of Sierra
Madre Drive may meet a much higher design speed. The second item is the 30-mph
intersection design speed of Dove Drive with Sierra Madre Drive located across from lot
number 8 of the proposed Sierra Madre Estates Phase I Subdivision. The other existing
street and driveway intersection design speeds along Sierra Madre Drive are unknown.
The last item is the recent measured traffic speed taken near Dove Drive on May 29, 2002
through June 2, 2002. The 85`h percentile operating speed was found to be 41-mph.
Operating speed is the speed at which drivers operate their vehicles during free flow
conditions. The 85`h percentile speed is usually the speed range used by most drivers, and
it is the most frequently used means to measure operating speed associated with a
particular location. It is desirable that the running speed of a large proportion of drivers be
lower than the design speed.
Speeds on roadways are governed by such factors as posted speed limits and turns into and
out of driveways and intersections. The addition of driveways and streets will typically
Burgess & Niple
August 9, 2002
Page 3
cause drivers to decrease their speeds. With the addition of the proposed driveways and
street, one would expect to see a decline in the existing 85' percentile speed.
Sierra Madre Drive is approximately 1 mile long. Recent traffic counts taken 300 feet east
and west of Dove Drive indicate that the two-way average daily traffic is 1,367 vehicles
per day. Based upon Table I of the Subdivision Ordinance, these items would most
closely resemble a minor collector. The existing roadway cross section of Sierra Madre
Drive is similar to both a limited collector road (exhibit 6) and a minor collector road
(exhibit 7). The minimum design speed for these cross sections are 25-mph and 30-mph
respectively. The 2002 Town of Fountain Hills General Plan classifies Sierra Madre Drive
as a minor collector. Per the Town's Subdivision Ordinance, the minimum roadway design
speed for a minor collector is 30-mph.
Normally the design speed selected to determine the various geometric design features
would be based upon the topography, the adjacent land use, the functional classification of
the roadway, and the anticipated operating speed. In this case, the measured operating
speed cannot be ignored. The data obtained by the Town indicates that vehicles are
operating at a speed closer to 40-mph.
It is appropriate to use a 40-mph design speed to determine the intersection sight
distances for the new driveways and Princess Court off Sierra Madre Drive.
2. Review the Subdivision Ordinance's intersection sight distance vs. the 2001 American
Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Geometric
® Design of Highways and Streets (GDHS) requirements.
Sight distance is the length of the roadway ahead that is visible to the driver. The available
sight distance on a roadway should be sufficiently long to enable a vehicle traveling at or
near the design speed to stop before reaching a stationary object in its path. We have
reviewed the Subdivision Ordinance's intersection sight distance requirements (Exhibit 16)
versus the 2001 AASHTO GDHS requirements for passenger cars. The following values
listed are the minimum design intersection sight distance requirements per the 2001
AASHTO GDHS, and the Town's Subdivision Ordinance and are as follows:
Town AASHTO Town AASHTO
(30 mph) (30 mph) (40mph) (40 mph)
(feet) (feet) (feet) (feet)
Lots 1 and 2 Driveway
Left turn from the driveway 380 335 580 445
Right turn from the driveway 380 290 580 385
Lots 3 and 4 Driveway
Left turn from the driveway 380 365 580 490
Right turn from the driveway 380 290 580 385
Princess Court
Left turn from Princess Court 380 365 580 490
Right turn from Princess Court 380 290 580 385
Burgess & Niple
August 9, 2002
Page 4
As can be seen above, the Subdivision Ordinance's sight
g t distance requirements for
passenger cars is more than required by the 2001 AASHTO GDHS for each case.
I Review the developer's plan/proftle's grading for conformance with AASHTO and
Town required streeddriveway sight distance.
The developer's plan/profile's grading for the above referenced street/driveway sight
distances were reviewed and were compared to the AASHTO requirements for a 40-mph
design speed and are as follows:
Available/
AASHTO
Provided
Required
(feet)
(feet)
Lots 1 and 2 Driveway
Left turn from the driveway
500
445
Right turn from the driveway
380
385
Lots 3 and 4 Driveway
Left turn from the driveway
380
490
Right turn from the driveway
380
385
Princess Court
Left turn from Princess Court
380
490
ORight turn from Princess Court
266
385
N
Burgess & Niple
The available sight distance for a left turn from the lots 1-2 driveway is 500 feet. This
meets the AASHTO requirements based upon a 40-mph design speed. For right turns from
the driveway, no grading was needed in order to obtain the 380-foot sight distance. In
order to provide the minimum 385-foot sight distance as required by AASHTO, grading.
may or may not even be needed.
For the lots 3-4 driveway, the proposed plans show that grading is required in order to
obtain the required intersection sight distance. Additional grading to what has -already
been shown may or may not even be needed to provide the minimum AASHTO sight
distance requirements for a 40-mph design speed listed above.
For the left turn from Princess Court, the proposed plans show that grading is required in
order to obtain the required intersection sight distance. Additional grading to what has
already been shown will be needed to provide the minimum 490-foot sight distance listed
above. For the right tum from Princess Court, the required AASHTO sightline distance of
385 feet ends in the intersection of Golden Eagle Boulevard. The alignment of this
sightline intersects the existing north side curb and gutter just west of Golden Eagle
Boulevard. The area within this sight triangle shall be clear of any obstructions. Based
upon a field visit and record drawings, the intersection sight distance can be obtained with
the removal and or relocation of existing vegetation. Also, the developer is providing
advanced warning signs for vehicles approaching the proposed Princess Court in each
direction.
August 9, 2002
Page 5
As shown on the previous page, the Town requires a minimum sight distance of 580 feet
for a 40-mph design speed. The developer did not provide profiles indicating whether a
40-mph design speed can be met. The plans provided by the developer do meet the
Town's 30-mph design speed.
The 40-mph sight distance design speed should be analyzed.
4. Review the sight distance for the eastbound to northbound left turn from Sierra Madre
onto the lot 3-4 driveways and evaluate whether it meets the AASHTO and Town
requirements.
We have calculated the required sight distance for the eastbound to northbound left turn
from Sierra Madre Drive onto the lots 1-2 driveway, the lots 34 driveway, and Princess
Court per the 2001 AASHTO GDHS to be 325 feet for each based upon a design speed of
40-mph. The driveway of most concern is the lots 34 driveway since it is located near a
crest curve. The profile provided by the Town for this driveway shows an available
sightline distance of 312 feet, and we concur. As a back check, we used the record
drawings of Sierra Madre Drive to determine that the available sightline distance is at least
305 feet per AASHTO requirements.
The lots 1-2 driveway and Princess Court meet the AASHTO minimum sight distance
requirements for left turns from the Sierra Madre Drive for a 40-mph design speed.
® The lots 3-4 driveway do not meet the AASHTO minimum 325-foot sight distance
requirement for left turns from the Sierra Madre Drive due to the existing roadway
crest vertical curve. An advanced driveway approach warning sign for westbound
vehicles approaching the proposed driveway must be installed.
S. Evaluate Princess Drive intersecting Sierra Madre on the inside of a curve.
As indicated in the Subdivision Ordinance, intersections on the inside of a horizontal curve
on arterial, collector, or local streets shall be avoided, unless otherwise approved by the
Town Engineer. Sierra Madre Drive from Golden Eagle Boulevard to approximately 1,500
feet west is a divided roadway with landscaped median. From this location to almost 500
feet west, the roadway narrows from the aforementioned to two lanes. This is also the west
end of the Sierra Madre Estates Phase 1 development. There is also one existing local
street, Dove Drive, situated about 800 feet west of Golden Eagle Boulevard. It accesses
residential properties on the south side of Sierra Madre Drive. The land along the north
side of Sierra Madre is currently zoned residential and permits development.
Management of driveway/street access to collectors is desirable. Access control should be
used to reduce traffic congestion. Uncontrolled access will interfere with through traffic.
The developer has combined driveways for lots 1-2 and lots 3-4 into two joint access
driveways and has the driveways from lots 5 through 9 off of Princess Court. The
developer has reduced the number of driveway entrances off of Sierra Madre Drive from
nine to three. This reduces traffic congestion. The developer is also going to provide
advanced warning signs for vehicles approaching eastbound and westbound proposed
Princess Court.
Burgess & Niple
1�
Burgess & Niple
August 9, 2002
Page 6
Our evaluation is that Princess Court entrance off of Sierra Madre Drive is preferred
over having five driveway entrances. Princess Court can be located on the inside of a
horizontal curve as long as the minimum sight distance is provided. If the minimum
sight distance cannot be met, advanced warning signs must be installed on Sierra
Madre Drive.
As a final note, we recommend that the existing vegetation not only be relocated and/or
removed to maintain the required sight distances, but also that the vegetation that does not
require removal or relocating be maintained for years to come. This is for both the median
and along the edge of roadway.
Respectfully submitted,
Patrick D. Osborne, PE
Project Engineer
Enclosures
copy: Mr. Tom Ward, Town of Fountain Hills
Larry Woodlan, PE
essiona�
V 3J%Z}9 C
PATRICK D. <_
OSBORNE
Table 1
ROAD STANDARDS TABLE
e
Right -of-
Maximum
Minimum
Maximum
Minimum
Reverse
t
n
Wa y
2-Wa ADT
y
Design
Roadway
Minimum
Horizontal
Curve
Speed
Len th
Radius
Curve Length
Tangent'
Hillside -Local
26'
40'
300'
20 MPH
1,500,
100'
100,
0'
Local
321
50,
700
25 MPH
1,500,
200'
100,
0,
Limited Collector
40 '
82'
900
25 MPH
2,000'
200'
1001,
0,
Minor Collector
40'
60'
5,000
30 MPH
1 Mile
300'
150'
Major Collector
56'
100,
7,000
35 MPH
2 Miles
500'
'
150,
Minor Arterial
130'
22,000
45 MPH
--
80'
incipal Arterial
160'
45,000
50 MPH
--
108'
Notes:
Minimum length of tangent between curves in opposite directions (reverse
cures). Reverse curves without tangent section between the curves are not
permitted, except on local streets.
2 Fourteen foot wide landscaped medians are required on limited collector
roadways. 16 foot wide landscaped medians are required on major collector and
minor arterial roadways. 20 foot wide landscaped medians are required on
principal arterial roadways. All median widths are included in the pavement
width as shown on the typical sections.
Per the Town Engineer.
October 3, 1996 Article III, Page 3-13
K-1
Exhibit 6
LIMITED COLLECTOR ROAD TYPICAL SECTION
�N
_J a
O � �
W a a
� W
3N/7 411&
a 1 p
o - o
o
W
N
�Q
I
V1
_Z
m� J
1I
J O
a
W
Z V Q
p
O N a
W
N
W
J W
J U
a2
�
Naw
am
a�a
3�a
o2N
aao>z
N
� "
ct:
O
NN
�p0
S
O ZZ ;7:
a
V)a
z
UJ
O
2—
a
w
J
J 3 �
�
oo
In
a
1--
a
N
W
N
L
Q
Lo'
Z
N
�!
N
a
U
Cr
X
W N
p
W
p
m
cn N
Q
W
Z
1
om
�J
a
Wa
_ a
D>
Wo
J
> W
Q Ln
O p
JN/ 7 M1,y
�oU
W w
>
<
c�
zIn
a
In W
_za
a
�O
wz
o�
o
m
O O
V
October 3, 1996
Article III, Page 3-16
Exhibit 7
MINOR COLLECTOR ROAD TYPICAL SECTION
0
MQ)
3N/7 M/b'
�f
V)
z
Q
W
Q
�ICk:
J
Q
U
< W
W
U
<
Q O
a$
U
J �
m
a
Q -�
ti Q
U
W -
U
0 LO
�
W O
O
4
Ckf w
00vi
1
W
� �
a
mmz
ddW
O
J
Z j
N
_Z
J w
O
wN
fY�O
1
> >
l�
00
00Er
O
Lnnm
0ua.
CDa
aaa
OJ�ytADI
October 3, 1996 Article III, Page 3-17
is
18' STREET
10' DRIVEWA r
CURB L INE
DRI vER S EY
E
Exhibit 16
SIGHT DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS
0
-H � �O
� AREA MUST BE CLEAR OF SIGHT OBSTRUCTIONS
CENTER OF LANE
i 5 FFE-T E..»r`u I
` CENTER OF LANE
05 FEET HICH)
TRAFFIC SPEED (MPH)
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
D
240
300
J80
470
580
710
840
990
October 3, 1996
Article III, Page 3-27
l
a
a
that is A�
PUBLIC NOTICE
TOWN COUNCIL
COURT ATTENDANCE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, Wednesday and
Thursday, August 13, 14 and 15, 2002, at 8:15 a.m., four or more members
of the Fountain Hills Town Council nmy be in attendance to observe the
Hoffman vs. the Town of Fountain Hills trial at Superior Court of Arizona,
Maricopa County located at the Downtown Phoenix Complex Central
Court Building, Floor 4-C, Room 402, 201 West Jefferson, Phoenix,
Arizona.
This is not a meeting of the Town Council, rather a notice to the public
that a quorum may be in attendance to observe the proceedings.
Dated this 8th day of August, 2002.
By: Cassie B. Hansen, Director of Administration/Town Clerk
�w