Laserfiche WebLink
p 22891.1 /C <br />TO: <br />PROM: <br />DATS: <br />Mayor and City Council <br />Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat <br />February 28, 1991 <br />SUBJECT: Highway 12 Corridor <br />a <br />!- <br />I. <br />V- <br />j- <br />i, <br />ly <br />1 - <br />k <br />Attachment: A. Planning Commission Minutes 2/20/91 <br />B. Highway 12 Corridor Memo Dated 2/5/91 (Memo Only) <br />ISSUE - <br />1. Prer.ent to the Council updated information regarding he <br />development of a recommendation from the Planning Commission's <br />process regarding Highway 12. <br />2. Determine what the Council desires to do once the <br />reconnendation is received. <br />INTRODUCTION - At the Council ’s January 25, 1991 Council they <br />requested that the Planning Commission undertake a review of the <br />Highway 12 corridor study. <br />DISCUSSION - <br />Issue #1 - Planning Commission Recommendation - In response to <br />tKe "CouncT 1*^ request the Planning Commission set up three <br />meetings for review of the corridor information which are as: <br />1. Review of information to date - February 6th <br />2. Public informational discussion - February 20th <br />3. Development of a recommendation - February 27th <br />A draft of the recommendation based on the Planning Commission <br />conceptual direction at the 2/27/91 meeting will be presented to <br />the Planning Commission at its 3/18/91 meeting for adoption. The <br />Planning Commssion will review the final draft of their <br />recommendation at their regular meeting, March 18th. The final <br />draft will be sent to Council on Tuesday, March 19th. <br />One of the issues that has been problematic during the Highway 12 <br />review process has been the connotations of the terms: <br />No build <br />Expressway <br />Freeway <br />Because of this it may be more fruitful to avoid using such terms <br />and as an alternative focus the discussion on the following <br />if