Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007.0814.TCWSM.Minutes TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MINUTES OF THE WORK STUDY SESSION AUGUST 14,2007 AGENDA ITEM#1—CALL TO ORDER Mayor Nichols called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m. AGENDA ITEM#2—ROLL CALL Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Mayor Nichols, Councilmember Kehe, Councilmember Leger, Councilmember Schlum, Vice Mayor McMahan, Councilmember Archambault and Councilmember Dickey. Town Manager Tim Pickering, Town Attorney Andrew McGuire and Town Clerk Bev Bender were also present. AGENDA ITEM #3 — PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED LONG-RANGE SIDEWALK PLAN. Town Manager Tim Pickering provided the Council with background information relative to this agenda item. He noted that at the 2006 Council Retreat, one of the priorities identified by the Council involved pedestrian safety throughout the Town. He said that staff indicated that they were going to review all of the sidewalks in the Town and identify any major intersections that they felt needed to be addressed. He noted that one of the intersections was Avenue of the Fountains and said that they had already addressed that intersection. He advised that the project was slightly behind schedule (approximately one month) but stated that as the Council would see once they hear the presentation, the Sidewalk Plan was huge. Town Engineer Randy Harrel addressed the Council relative to this agenda item and commented that the goal of the Sidewalk Plan was to enhance pedestrian safety by having a coordinated, long-range plan to put in future sidewalks. Staff had prepared a Sidewalk Plan map (displayed in the Chambers) to be used for future developments, grant applications, coordination with other utilities and for programming capital improvement projects. Staff was estimating a 40-year time horizon on this (to build out the plan) both because of the project's massive cost and because of the longevity of sidewalks. Mr. Harrel pointed out that the map showed locations for future sidewalks and said that the main purposes for the sidewalks included: (1) To access major pedestrian generators, including schools, commercial areas, churches, shopping centers, parks, etc.; (2) To improve pedestrian routes along high speed arterial routes; (3) To link existing sidewalks; (4) For general pedestrian walking and exercise purposes. He added that nearly all of the lots within Town were a quarter mile distance or less from a sidewalk (as shown on the Plan). He provided a brief history relative to sidewalks in the Town and noted that very few existed prior to the Town's incorporation and many were the result of joint citizen efforts rather than development efforts. He reported that they currently had requirements in place for developers to put in sidewalks but they currently did not have very good requirements for additions (when they would require sidewalks as part of an addition or the construction of a pool, fence, etc.) or for single-family homes. They also had never done an improvement district for sidewalks. Mr. Harrel informed the Council that the proposed sidewalk system was estimated to cost the Town $323,000 annually (present costs, plus inflation of 3% annually) for the next 40 years and noted that allowances for some future grants and developer-constructed sidewalks had been deducted out of the estimate. He added that the estimated present Town cost for sidewalks would be reviewed from incorporation into the Long Range Plan cost estimate at its next update. Mr. Harrel said that staff also anticipated bringing forward future recommendations regarding sidewalk width changes to the Subdivision Ordinance (the sidewalk widths currently shown in the Town's Subdivision Ordinance were substantially widened in 1999). He noted that staff was concerned with the z:\council packets\2007\r9-6-07\08-14-07 work study minutes.doc Page 1 of 9 t impact of concrete sidewalks on walkers' leg joints and would be evaluating the potential use of more flexible sidewalk construction materials, such as rubberized asphalt,for major long distance and exercise/walking routes. „ilig) Mr. Harrel referred to the map and provided a brief explanation of the plan. Discussion ensued relative to the Staff Report and the fact that staff really researched priorities as far as the sidewalks and filling gaps particularly on arterial streets and where a lot of people walk as well as sidewalks that lead to the schools and to business areas; proposed projects for this Fiscal Year; what was needed with these sidewalks; the importance of easy connections; challenges associated with constructing sidewalks in Fountain Hills (topography related); easy connections; timeframes (now or later); and meandering sidewalks, which tend to give a more rural, suburban feel. Mr. Harrel indicated his willingness to respond to questions from the Council and added that staff was really looking for direction from the Council as to how they should proceed with the Sidewalk Plan (adopt it; go back to the drawing board, etc.). Mayor Nichols thanked Mr. Harrel for his presentation. Vice Mayor McMahan asked whether staff had a current priority plan and Mr. Harrel referred to the five locations outlined in the Staff Report. He noted that they were all short segments that they could do fairly easily and without huge expenditures. Staff had identified (in blue on the map) high priority sidewalks and said they were looking at doing those over a five-year timeframe. In response to a question from Councilmember Archambault relative to a ballpark estimate on the cost of the high priority sidewalks, Mr. Harrel advised that staff had split the cost out (total of$323,000 times five years would equal an estimated $1.5 million). He added that staff had laid out what they believe to be the highest priorities and added that it doesn't make sense to require a developer who was developing one lot to build a sidewalk if the ,vii) Town does not intend to build sidewalks on the other sides of that lot. He also confirmed that Four Peaks School was a high priority and added that staff had received a grant to design a sidewalk from the Charter School to the Four Peaks School and from Four Peaks down to Grande. They also had one high priority sidewalk that went to Fort McDowell (San Marcos). Mr. Harrel also discussed the proposed sidewalk on Lost Hills and explained that the reason for that was to get the school children farther into the neighborhood. Mr.Pickering informed the Council that staff had been budgeting approximately$60,000 a year for sidewalks and this year that amount was increased to approximately$116,000. Councilmember Archambault said that for him, a major priority was around the schools and the business areas. They need to have sidewalks in place for people who park and walk to the different services and he was totally in line with the inter-connecting sidewalks around the businesses and schools. Councilmember Kehe commented that it was his understanding that a bike lane was going to built on the State Trust Land at McDowell Road and asked whether a sidewalk would be a redundancy. Mr. Harrel confirmed that the Maricopa County Department of Transportation did have plans to build a bike lane on McDowell Mountain Road and said that staff anticipated that they would have sidewalks along the path for walking routes (as with other similar areas in Town). He noted that the bike lane would probably not come on line until the State Trust Land was developed. He added that staff anticipates that a developer would build those when the State Trust Land was developed. Additional discussion ensued relative to grant projects that were currently funded through Fiscal Year 2012; crosswalks and handicap ramps; the need for a crosswalk across Saguaro Boulevard; the fact that off-street trails were not addressed in the current Plan; the importance of achieving connectivity between trails and sidewalks in,tei) the future; Mr. Pickering's comment that the General Plan would include a section on trails and the Council z:\council packets\2007\r9-6-07\08-14-07 work study minutes.doc Page 2 of 9 would have the opportunity to provide input relative to that issue; the fact that if the proposed map was approved by the Council, it would be included in the General Plan; the effect on Development Fees; determining the order of the identified priorities and staff's desire to obtain input from the Council regarding the priorities as well as crosswalks. Councilmember Dickey commented on the fact that a number of sidewalks would be located right in front of houses and asked whether any negative feedback had been received from the potentially affected residents. Mr. Pickering responded that a significant amount of concern had been expressed by residents. He added that the magnitude of the change would dictate whether voter approval would be needed (as far as the General Plan) and noted that adding a sidewalk was not a major adjustment to the Plan. He said that each year during the budget process staff would prioritize the areas and stated that if a grant project came up, they were going to take advantage of it. He added that during the budget process residents were given the opportunity to provide input. In response to a question from Councilmember Archambault, Mr. Harrel advised that as far as mailboxes and obstructing deliveries, options included meandering sidewalks back and leaving mail boxes where they were; leaving the sidewalk curbside and just have a block out and let the mailbox intrude into the sidewalk; or moving the mailboxes back, which would involve discussions with the Post Office. Mr. Harrell commented on the fact that the Town had a number of streets that were actually too wide and another possibility would be to reduce their width to allow for sidewalks when necessary. He added that another possibility, as far as funding, may be the establishment of an Improvement District. He said that developers too might play an integral part in the process. Mr. Pickering noted that capital project such as these could always go before the voters (General Obligation Bond for sidewalks throughout the community). He said that staff would look into that if the Council so desires. Mayor Nichols stated that he was very happy that the Town was looking into a long-range plan and commended staff on the work that had gone into this issue. He added that based on the figures presented by staff, the magnitude of the whole project was that they had about$13 million worth of sidewalks to put in over the next 40 years and Mr. Harrel concurred with the Mayor's remarks. The Mayor asked how much of that money would come from grants, how much from developers, and how much would be the responsibility of the Town. He said that was information that the Council would like to have in the future. Councilmember Schlum commented that he would also like to get a better picture of the number of anticipated Town-developed sidewalks versus developer-installed sidewalks. Mr. Harrel advised that as far as the cost of the sidewalks, staff had already taken out an allowance for future grant projects and future developer projects in coming up with their estimated dollar figure. He confirmed that the $323,000 figure represented the net cost to the Town per year for the next four years. Mr. Harrel added that well over 90% of the sidewalks that had been added (per year) had been developer sidewalks since the Town's incorporation. Councilmember Kehe spoke in support of meandering sidewalks and asked whether there was sufficient room in the right-of-way to accommodate them. Mr. Harrel replied that staff prefered meandering sidewalks whenever possible. He added that on arterial and collector streets they had plenty of right-of-way. He added that the 64- foot wide streets would probably be narrowed and that would allow some meandering to occur as well. The local streets would mostly be tied to curbside unless they decide to procure a sidewalk easement behind the right-of- way, which was a possibility if topography or obstruction issues arise. He indicated staff's intention to meander whenever possible. Additional discussion ensued relative to the purpose of "short finger extensions" on sidewalks as shown on the Plan and staff's goal to ensure that most everyone in Town would be within one quarter mile of a sidewalk. z:\council packets\2007\r9-6-07\08-14-07 work study minutes.doc Page 3 of 9 In response to a question from the Mayor, Mr. Pickering stated that staff was seeking general feedback from the Council. He said that if staff was moving in the wrong direction they would appreciate finding out now rather than later on during the General Plan process. Councilmember Archambault asked what the life expectancy was for sidewalks and Mr. Harrel advised that they normally lasted 50 years but there were some that had lasted 100 years or more. Councilmember Archambault expressed the opinion that they needed to move forward with the Sidewalk Plan and added that it was long overdue. Councilmember Leger referred to a statement made by Mr. Pickering relative to the fact that should the Council decide to move forward with a more ambitious plan, there was a possibility of increasing the Town's Development Fees. He asked whether that, in the long run, would bring down the cost. Mr. Pickering advised that it would reduce the cost but noted that the Town could not use Development Fees for any of the existing areas. Those fees could only be used for new growth and perhaps in commercial areas where people tend to gather, creating a need for sidewalks. He added that he would not anticipate a significant reduction to the restrictions on how the monies could be used. Councilmember Leger stated that any time a 40-year plan was put into place it was a very ambitious move because they did not know what would happen a year from now let alone five years from now. He said that he became somewhat uncomfortable when they started planning for 40 years out but added that he believed that the safeguard here was that they would be evaluating the priorities each year during the Budget process and that made him feel more comfortable. Mr. Pickering concurred and stated that there were two additional safeguards, the budget and the General Plan, which could go for a maximum of ten years. Even if the Council decided to move forward and the Sidewalk Plan was put into the General Plan and adopted, ten years from now people might say it was not something that they really wanted to do. He added that they had actually been updating the General Plan every five years and the same was probably true of the Strategic Plan. Councilmember Leger said that he would like to provide input as far as when staff does move into residential areas that were considered rural. He noted that the Town was a rural community, and a lot of people did appreciate their privacy, oftentimes preferring that over a sidewalk. He stated that he would like to see them put into place a process to address residential concerns. If in Fiscal Year 2008-09 staff knew that they would be targeting a certain neighborhood, he felt they needed to have a process in place for conducting research, getting the information out and obtaining input from the neighbors before moving in that direction. Mr. Harrel said that associated replacement costs when landscaping in the easement was torn up (the Town's cost or the citizens), that decision was entirely up to the Town and they could establish a policy regarding that issue. He noted that they were putting in improvements that enhance values but on the other hand they would have obstructions and so as they moved forward there was a need to define a policy. Mr. Pickering stated that that was an excellent recommendation and one that staff could pursue. He said that part of the policy could be included in the General Plan update. Councilmember Leger added that he too preferred meandering sidewalks and so a policy would be crucial. Councilmember Dickey suggested that information be provided to the citizens and that this issue should be discussed during the Budget session as well. J z:\council packets\2007\r9-6-07\08-14-07 work study minutes.doc Page 4 of 9 Councilmember Schlum stressed the importance of keeping connectivity in mind as far as the trails go and as well (4000 as crosswalks and requested that staff bring back suggested options relative to funding. In response to a question from Mayor Nichols, Mr. Pickering stated that staff had received good direction from the Council and would follow up on the items discussed this evening. The Mayor said that overall the Council appeared to be in support of the proposal and thanked staff for their efforts. AGENDA ITEM#4—PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR TRAFFIC CALMING/ROUNDABOUT AT LA MONTANA DRIVE AND AVENUE OF THE FOUNTAINS BY WICK ENGINEERING. Mr. Pickering stated that Larry Woodlan with the Public Works Department had been helping out tremendously on this project and said that he would introduce to the Council the consultant that the was hired to look at this intersection. He noted that the Town Hall actually overlooked this intersection and staff was very aware of the problems associated with it. People don't know whether they should go or stop,they did not know who should go first and there had been accidents occur at the intersection. As part of the pedestrian safety/roadway safety process, staff had looked at the possibility of putting in a roundabout at that intersection. He added that there were also other alternatives that staff had looked at and the Council would learn about staff's research and efforts as part of the presentation. Mr. Woodlan addressed the members of the Council and introduced Debbie Wick, a consultant/professional Traffic Engineer with Wick Engineers, Inc. and provided brief background information relative to Ms. Wick's extensive expertise in her field. Ms. Wick thanked the Council for providing her the opportunity to present the results of the analysis that she conducted. She said that the intersection they would be discussing this evening was Avenue of the Fountains and La Montana and noted that a fairly wide median exists in the area. She referred to slides depicting the site and reviewed the surrounding land uses, both present and future. She noted that within approximately five years it was anticipated that Basha's may relocate to that area. Ms. Wick provided a brief overview of her report and explained that a modern roundabout was a circular roadway with splitter islands that direct the traffic itself and a central island and within the outer central island there was a truck apron that was used to assist larger vehicles like trucks,buses, garbage trucks to get through the roundabout. She noted that within the roundabout itself, deflection was used on approaches to maintain low speeds and added that priority was given to the traffic in a roundabout. A yield sign was used for entering vehicles and the size of the roundabout was typically based upon the design vehicle that was being used (a 50-foot wheel based truck or an Interstate truck that might be 67 feet long). People who come from the East coast were very familiar with rotaries, which were very large and had been around since the early 1900's. Discussion ensued relative to the fact that modern roundabouts were used for safety, traffic calming, to allow for higher capacity, for community enhancement and for environmental considerations; safety benefits and the fact that roundabouts convert all movements into right turns, eliminating vehicle-vehicle crossing conflicts; the fact that low speed (15 to 25 m.p.h. allows drivers more time to react to potential conflicts; the fact that a 74% reduction in injury accidents was realized after roundabouts were installed according to the Institute of Transportation Engineers Journal; crash histories and comparisons both before and after the installation of roundabouts and the significant resulting decrease in crash types, injury accidents, fatalities or incapacitating injuries and as much as a 75% reduction in delay where roundabouts replaced signals; the fact that roundabouts had 75% fewer vehicle conflict points; the fact that the direction conflicting vehicles would arrive from was more predictable for pedestrians at roundabouts; continues traffic flow that results in less vehicle delays; all legs z:\council packets\2007\r9-6-07\08-14-07 work study minutes.doc Page 5 of 9 A operate simultaneously; fewer lanes were needed; and traffic calming, community enhancement and environmental benefits. ,411) Ms. Wick summarized her presentation by stating that roundabouts were safe (right turns and slower traffic). They were good for traffic operations and require small sight distances. They had geometric flexibility and fit almost anywhere. They could have reduced ROW costs, could be maintenance free (especially compared to signals) and were aesthetically pleasing. She also stressed the importance of public involvement in the process and noted that implementing roundabouts was challenging and requires careful planning. She noted that change was oftentimes difficult and it was important to acknowledge people's fears and provide information/education in this area. She added that public involvement/education process should include flyers, information on the Town's website, open houses, community meetings and significant media exposure(newspaper and radio advertisements). Additional information ensued relative to existing conditions (2006) and future conditions (2026); design objectives; proposed roundabout Alternatives (1, 2, 3 and 4); anticipated costs; reasons for approving the Alternative#3 recommendation (provided the best level of service and least average delay; the left-turn radius and right-turn radius were closer in speeds, which improved safety; pedestrian crossings were shorter; provides a Post Office turn around (u-turn) on Avenue of the Fountains; maintained reduced speeds on Avenue of the Fountains and maintained existing driveway access. Ms. Wick advised that for the roundabout alternatives parking should begin 50-feet away and added that the Post Office drop boxes should be relocated further south. She said that the water feature was not recommended for the central island and for the roundabouts or the traffic signal, reduce the median width on Avenue of the Fountains. She further discussed final design construction, which includes: • Adding bicycle ramps/facilities • Refining the splitter islands for the design vehicle • Adding landscaping to the central island, which would accommodate the stopping sight distance • Designing the vehicle profile to maintain drainage west to east through the intersection Ms. Wick indicated her willingness to respond to questions from the Council and thanked them for the opportunity to address them this evening. Councilmember Kehe commented that it appeared to him that the roundabout would reduce two lanes in each direction down to one and asked what the impact of that would be on the traffic pattern, both in terms of safety and delays. Ms. Wick replied that the two lanes would merge into one lane and sufficient width existed for the traffic to taper. She added that the taper must be of sufficient length and the manual on uniform traffic devices, which provides equations to determine that factor, indicated that the proposal would be a safe way in which to proceed. The roundabout would not increase the probability of accidents or crashes when both lanes merge together. At the roundabout itself, because all legs would be moving and vehicles would not be required to stop at the intersection, the actual operation would allow more vehicles to go through the roundabout than a traffic signal would. Councilmember Kehe asked who would have the right-of-way and Ms. Wick said that when vehicles merge from two lanes down to one, the roadway was typically signed and striped to show which lane was dropping off, and the signage lets the drivers know who had the right-of-way and who needs to make the merging maneuver. She said that during the final design phase, the decision regarding which lane to drop would be made. Councilmember Dickey commented on the traffic count (3%) and asked whether that was based on what the consultant believes the population of the Town would be or whether it took into account increased activity. z:\council packets\2007\r9-6-07\08-14-07 work study minutes.doc Page 6 of 9 Ms. Wick advised that she and Tom Ward had discussions regarding the growth rate and his feeling was that because the Town was almost at build out, the figure should be at 1 or 2%. She said that she argued the point based on the fact that if the business area develops, there would be more visitors coming into that area so there might be more growth than anticipated based on that factor. She noted that she used the same traffic numbers in 2026 for all four alternatives. In response to a question from Councilmember Dickey, Ms. Wick advised that the cost for Alternatives#1 and#2 would probably be higher because the outer diameter of the roundabout was larger. Councilmember Schlum questioned whether roundabouts were considered more pedestrian safe and Ms. Wick noted that several universities around the country had put roundabouts in because of their associated pedestrian safety aspects. She added that she had not heard of anyone removing a roundabout because of an issue, either pedestrian or vehicular and once they were put in, people were pretty happy with them. Councilmember Schlum advised that he had seen some bad roundabouts, ones that were most likely put in for traffic-calming purposes. He said they were more like speed bumps and vehicles had to go around them but they could still maintain a speed of 35 to 40 miles-per-hour. He said that would be very dangerous in Town and added that it appeared that the proposed roundabout would be wide enough to require vehicles to slow down; there would not be a tremendous amount of space to take the truck or fast pace area. Ms. Wick stated that she always tries to bring the approaches in as close as possible and bring them back out to slow people down. Councilmember Schlum asked whether the roundabout would require some type of redesign in the future to meet growth requirements and Ms. Wick responded that she would not anticipate the need for a redesign within the next 20 to 30 years. In response to a request for clarification from Mr. Pickering, Ms. Wick said that the analysis she conducted on the three roundabouts and the traffic signal was based on the traffic that would increase between 2006 and 2026. A roundabout or a traffic signal would be designed based on 2026 traffic volumes. The levels of service were low enough to handle additional traffic, there would be additional capacity in 2026 and the design would work for the future. Mayor Nichols commented that he liked the idea of installing a roundabout and said that when growing up in Massachusetts, he found the rotaries there easy to navigate. He expressed the opinion that this represented a very good alternative for the Town and he noted the minimal amount of parking that would be lost as a result of this project. Councilmember Archambault stated his strong support for the proposed design and noted that the Town had needed something in that location for a very long time. He added that they had been struggling with the pedestrian traffic on Avenue of the Fountains and Saguaro Boulevard and asked whether a roundabout would be appropriate at that end of Town to allow traffic to continue to flow through while still providing pedestrian safety. He questioned whether this had been look at. Ms. Wick advised that Mr. Ward had mentioned that to her in January and so she had looked at that intersection and it would work. The intersection was very similar to the one being discussed as far as the right-of-way width. There were higher traffic volumes on Saguaro and she was not sure at this point whether they would need a single-lane roundabout or a two-lane roundabout in the future. She said that they would want to design it so that it would not have to be redesigned later on. Mayor Nichols stated that Ms. Wick had mentioned maintaining the u-turn for the Post Office and asked for more information on this and Ms. Wick referred to the proposal and explained how that would work. She agreed that Crie she was talking about a different type of u-turn that was currently utilized by the public. z:\council packets\2007\r9-6-07\08-14-07 work study minutes.doc Page 7 of 9 a In response to a question from Councilmember Leger relative to the recommended alternative, Ms. Wick stated that the cost for the additional recommendations she mentioned to mitigate other circumstances was included in the $1.5 figure. She noted that she budgeted approximately $15,000 for landscaping but that would depend upon how elaborate the Town wanted to be in this area. She also confirmed that by utilizing the single alternative they would not be losing traffic lanes. Mr. Pickering informed Councilmember Leger that to date no one had approached the Post Office to discuss the possibility of moving their drop-off boxes and that such discussion would definitely take place if the Council wished to pursue the proposal. Ms. Wick commented that she would prefer to see the drop-off boxes located further south of the currently location. She added that although the Post Office would most likely want the boxes to be as close to the building as possible to provide them easy access, from a traffic engineering point of view she believed they should be at least 100-feet farther south. Councilmember Kehe asked how long the construction period would be and Ms. Wick advised that it would take approximately three to five months depending upon the contractor (construction within the roundabout itself). Landscaping and sidewalks might take some additional time beyond that. She added that as far as maintaining traffic movement through the intersection during that timeframe,they could build half of a section (referred to the design) to bring people around to the outside and divert traffic the other way. She also noted that they had sufficient pavement width on the existing intersection where they could maintain traffic while the central island was being built. She discussed other options relative to this issue. In response to a question from the Mayor, Mr. Pickering stated that this evening staff was only seeking general feedback from the Council as to whether this was something they wanted staff to pursue. He added that the study was conducted because the Council and staff were aware of the problem at this intersection. He said that the next step would be fine tuning the cost and arriving at a figure that would be included in next year's budget. Councilmember Leger expressed the opinion that Ms. Wick had brought forth an excellent design. He stated that his concern had to do with the fact that he believed they had a more significant issue at the Avenue of the Fountains and Saguaro Boulevard. He added that he knew they were in the process of resolving that issue and part of the process was to install a three-way stop sign. He advised that he was not comfortable with this as far as it being a final solution and he knew that was just part of the process. He stated that he would prefer to take these dollars, with respect to prioritization, and solve that problem first. He said that next year that would be a priority for him and stressed the importance of a long-term solution to this serious problem. Mr.Pickering suggested that a roundabout study could be conducted for that intersection as well. Councilmember Leger responded that he would not be in favor of a roundabout at that location and said that they simply needed a pedestrian crosswalk at that intersection. Mr. Pickering stressed the importance of having an expert traffic engineer look at the situation and provide their recommended solutions. He added that they did not have to do a roundabout study on that location but they did need to obtain expert direction in solving the issue. Councilmember Leger concurred and said that the Public Works Department was moving in the right direction and noted that they had all agreed to install a three-way stop sign as part of the process (first step). He noted that Hawk Technology was very specific to addressing pedestrian crossing issues. Vice Mayor McMahan expressed the opinion that a roundabout would be more aesthetically pleasing at that intersection than ugly traffic lights. Councilmember Leger agreed and asked whether any fatalities had occurred at that intersection. He was advised that the background history does not reflect any fatalities at that location. z:\council packets\2007\r9-6-07\08-14-07 work study minutes.doc Page 8 of 9 In response to a question from Councilmember Leger, Ms. Wick advised that within the very center of the island, denser/higher landscaping was preferred. The Council congratulated Ms. Wick on her upcoming marriage and thanked her for her informative, articulate presentation. AGENDA ITEM#5—ADJOURNMENT Vice Mayor McMahan MOVED that the Council adjourn and Councilmember Dickey SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0). The meeting adjourned at 6:54 p.m. TOWN OF FOUNTAI LLS By v" Wally Nicho ,Mayo ATTEST AND PREPARED BY: Bevelyn J. B de own Clerk CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Work Study Session on the 14th day of August 2007. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present. DATED this 6th day of September 2007. --A. As Bevelyn J. n ,Town Clerk L z:\council packets\2007\r9-6-07\08-14-07 work study minutes.doc Page 9 of 9 J