Council Set to Petition State for Road Widening

The Town Council passed a motion Monday, forming a delegation to plead its case to the N.C. secretary of transportation asking that the three-lane expansion of Weaver Dairy Road be allowed to move forward. The N.C. Department of Transportation did not accept the council's recommendation for a three-lane expansion of Weaver Dairy Road.

On Jan. 22, the Town Council passed a motion endorsing an expansion of Weaver Dairy Road to a three-lane cross section. While the NCDOT had presented versions of the three-lane widening project to the town, the department responded to the town's decision with the statement that the construction of the three-lane project would not meet the needs of the roadway.

"It is the state's opinion that a three-lane project would not adequately meet the projected service and safety needs of this important transportation corridor. The NCDOT recommends construction of a four-lane divided cross section," wrote NCDOT project engineer Derrick Weaver in his letter to Chapel Hill Mayor Rosemary Waldorf.

Town Manager Cal Horton advised the council at its Monday meeting that if members did want to go along with the suggestion of the NCDOT they should appeal to state secretary of transportation.

"My understanding that the engineering staff at that level would not be able to proceed with the improvements that the council had set forth. ... You could appeal this to the secretary of transportation," Horton said.

Council member Kevin Foy, who had voted for the three-lane expansion, said he was not surprised by the actions of the NCDOT.

"I was not surprised. ... I was disappointed."

Foy said he thought that council had valid reasons supporting the decision they had made.

"I thought that we had a good discussion about why we made the decision that we made."

Council member Pat Evans, who voted against the three-lane expansion said she favored expanding Weaver Dairy Road to a divided four-lane highways with a median because of safety concerns.

"With three lanes there is no safe area for pedestrians," she said. "I did not support the three-lane design because I think that it is a most dangerous design."

Many residents were on hand Monday night to express their displeasure at the actions of the NCDOT and to urge the council to continue to fight against the four-lane widening.

Cyndy Risku, a representative of the Silver Creek community, questioned why the NCDOT had given an option only to deny it later.

"If they did not have any intention of honoring their offer, why did they even make it?" Risku asked.

Council member Jim Ward also questioned the fact that the NCDOT was not allowing the construction of an option that they had proposed.

"If the three-lane option was offered what are you doing now saying thanks but no thanks," he said.

Weaver, who was on hand to speak to the council at Monday's meeting, defended the NCDOT. Weaver said while the three-lane expansion was a viable option, it was after study that the department determined that it was not the best possible option.

"It was a viable option, it always was," he said.

"If we are going to build a road and spend this money we want to get it like it needs to be."

The City Editor can be reached at citydesk@unc.edu.