|
DRAFTTH 12 CORRIDOR STUDYCitizen’s Committee Meeting
<br />Maple Plain City Hall
<br />September 24, 1991
<br />Members Preseit.. S. Hay, G. Cook, K. Nordin, L. Olson, R. Gnitka, G. Johnson, J.
<br />Massopust
<br />Alteniatw Preggpi*.'.on
<br />Others Present: L.R. Harris, L. Scal£, M. Underhill, M. Volkewart, K. Wenger.
<br />M, Wenger, J, Mans, J. ^son, M. Miller, D. Molin, G. BoUis, D Lewis, C. Rowleite, A.
<br />Paster, L. Drawert, B. Alexander, J. Pederson, S. Rettinger, A. Streir. J. Streir, R.
<br />Volkenant, M. Leutkner, B. Dulin, C. Meyers, A. Pederson
<br />S.Hay called the meeting to order at approximately 4:05 p.m. The minutes of the August
<br />27, 1991 meeting were amended to clarify the alternatives that Mn/DOT is considering
<br />through Long Lake (Alt 2 and 2E), and then approved with the correction.
<br />Hay theii updated the Committee on the status of the alternative layout' for TH 12. He
<br />said Alternatives 2 and 2E are being completed and will be mailed out shortly. There
<br />were no comments from the Committee on the layouts as received.
<br />L.Dallam then discussed the results of the applir - rton of impact evalua »n criteria to each
<br />alternative, using the summary prepared for Hennepin County as an example. He stressed
<br />that the data received is still preliminary, is awaiting Mn/DOT and Committee review, and
<br />that modifications arc ciut^u.'v being made. (Several changes made by HNTB were read
<br />at the meeting). DaUam expiamed the judgement' that were applied in counting residences
<br />and businesses in the corridor and within 4(X) ft. of a highway lane, and the elements
<br />considered in the costs of building an urban roadway rection, which increases the
<br />construction cost of Alternative 2 and its subaltematives.
<br />Comments by the Cjuimittee included the need to include I..ong Lake as a naturtd resource
<br />(lake) within th'a corridor for Alternatives 2,2A, 2B, and 2C, Dallam said final r evisions to
<br />the evaluation criteria will be mailed to the Committees and, as requested by the Techmtai
<br />Committee, assumptions and descriptions applied to measure the evaluation cnteria would
<br />be supplied to assist reviewers in assessing the differences between the altemaiives and to
<br />screen the number for further study. Hay also commented that HNTB u-ill rank the
<br />alternatives for the next meeting, giving each of the evaluation criteria weight.
<br />Dallam then discussed a handout showing the 2010 Daily Traffic Forecasts that were
<br />prepared for 4-lane expansions of TH 12, TH 55, and CR 6, as requested at a prc c,ous
<br />meeting. Dallam said, in summai;, that such an upgrade does little to alleviate the traffic
<br />on the TH 12 corridor. It would require an umu eded a'grade of CR 6, and as such, it
<br />would not be cost effective and does not solve the transportation need caused by the TH
|