06-10-1991 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-rl-.. k:v' v’= : /f' * .r v'' 1 ' rr^y ■ .^K.. V-, ■■ii? f ' t ::- 'Jy,. I’ r: f- ■ 3: fci • ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 10, 1991 (•14)HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR CONTINUED familiar with this area. Goetten commented that the Commissioner had told her he had gone over each of the proposed corridors himself. Goetten pledged to sit down and work with the City of Long Lake in an attempt to reach an agreement. Otherwise, as the Commissioner stated several times during the meeting, MNDOT will make a decision early next year. She informed the Commissioner that should the south bypass continue to be an option that goes into the environmental impact statement phase, that every resident in Orono would contact him to express their opposition. Goetten stressed the importance of having a planned strategy before the next meeting takes place and getting some form of communication out to the entire community as soon as possible, especially to those residents that do not reside close to the proposed corridors. Jabbour indicated that he has learned from talking with people that Orono citizens living near County Roads 15 and 19 are being lobbied by other cities. He said, "Several people have told me that the position taken by the City Council will add traffic in their front yards. I told those people that the position was taken on behalf of the entire City, and it was based on the comprehensive planning that has been done since Orono became a city. It is up to the residents to do whatever is necessary to keep informed and to understand why we took the position we did. There are other sources giving these people incorrect information. I think it is also important to state for the record that officials from the City of Orono have met several times with officials from the City of Long Lake to discuss the Highway 12 Corridor issue.” Goetten stated that Commissioner Riley has been informed of Orono*8 past meetings and efforts with the City of Long Lake. Bernhardson stated that his May 31, 1991, memo also addresses the issue of the deletion of routes, which will be the next step taken at the upcoming Committee meetings. Bernhardson said, "The two northern routes do not do much in terms of addressing traffic limits for the current corridor. The Highway S5 route would allow traffic to increase from the current 10,000/19,000 to approximately 25,000 cars per day. The County Road 11 route, although it does reduce traffic counts down to 11,000 on the current corridor, it does so at the expense of doubling traffic on County Road 6. The question is whether that SMets transportation objectives. As far as County Road 6 and the south bypass, it could be argued that those may meet transportation objectives, but it is at the expense of adding traffic to certain north/south routes such as VJillow, Old Crystal Bay, and Brotm Roads, which would experience five to seven times the current volumes. I think one could argue that transportation Objectives are not being met. in the southerly route volumes are approaching 44 to 46 thousand cars a day, which then calls for an - 9 - i