Laserfiche WebLink
r-. <br />[h <br />h'. <br />.r <br />I: <br />.: <br />County Road 6 - The preliminary study did not project counts for <br />this routeT <br />The issue that the traffic forecasts address are which of the <br />3l^ternativeSf if any» does nmeet the transportation <br />objectives. If there are ones that do not meet this initial <br />test# there is no reason to further consider it. The purpose of <br />the traffic forecasts is not to determine any alternative as the <br />best as there are numerous other cost, social and economic <br />considerations. The goal of the next round of meetings (June <br />19th for Policy) is to eliminate any alternatives that do not <br />meet the basic transportation objectives. <br />It is additionally noted in Attachment B that the C’ty of Medina <br />has gone on record opposing either of the northern corridors that <br />would cross their community. <br />Issue #2 “ Meeting with the Commissioner - City was con^tacted <br />by the ”Cdlhmissioner of Transportation's office to establish a <br />meeting between the Commissioner and representatives from the <br />City. A similar meeting request has been extended to the City of <br />Long Lake. It is anticipated that this meeting would consist of <br />a couple of elec.ed officials and other representatives that the <br />City would desire to have with them. <br />ALTERNATIVES <br />1. Accept the information <br />2. Discuss and give appropriate direction. <br />3, Table until the June 10th meeting. <br />4. Discuss among Council and determine direction regarding the <br />meeting with the Commissioner. <br />RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended *■ Council accept the <br />information and give direction regardii', ’•he meeting with the <br />Commissioner. <br />PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by that Council <br />• ^ -s m * _ A- ^ ^ ^ ^accept the information and give staff direction regarding setting <br />up a juceLir.g with the Commissioner. Ayes _, Nays _. <br />J