My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-12-1990 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1990
>
02-12-1990 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/23/2024 1:31:11 PM
Creation date
8/23/2024 1:21:01 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
422
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
I 2590.2 <br />TO: <br />PROM: <br />DATE: <br />Mayor and City Council <br />Mark E. Bernhardson# City Admi'*istrat <br />Feb. ja-y 5, 1990 <br />? • <br />- -- : vj! <br />• * . w w» <br />• « <br />SUBJECT: Highway 12 Corridor Study <br />Attachment: A. Hand Outs From MnDOT's 2/1/90 Meeting <br />ISSUE - <br />1. Present information to the Council regarding the corridor <br />selection meeting held by MnDOT on February 1, 1990. <br />2. Decision as to appointments to the various corridor selection <br />committees. <br />INTRODUCTION - The initial meeting for the corridor selection was <br />held by the Minnesota Department of Transportation together with <br />Larry Dallam of Howard, Needles and Associates at Delano on <br />February 1, 1990. <br />DISCUSSION - It is expected the consultant will officially start <br />the first part of April but MnDOT is able to begin work with the <br />communities prior to that. It. is not anticipated at this time <br />that a joint powers arrangement will be needed but that MnDOT <br />would like represented committees with appointed representatives <br />from the communities to act as advisory to the process. <br />As a result of the meeting it was proposed that there be three <br />advisory groups, they are as follows: <br />Policy Advisory - This would be a representative of <br />ich of the communities that would be an advisory board <br />ocusing primarily on policy issues and be the board <br />eventually in ':harge of making recommendation.^ As this <br />is only a recoi.’.mending body and that any selection would <br />have to be adopted by the individual communities a <br />proportional representation is probably not an issue. A <br />primary and alternate could be appointed. <br />B. Technical isory Committee - This would be composed <br />of one to two, probably staff people, from the areas of <br />planning, engineering and/or public works anticipating <br />having a primary and an alternate to this committee. <br />C. Citizen Task Force - This would be two persons from <br />each community t'* initially provide input as to issues <br />that they may be "re of in each of the communities and <br />also be able to p» *de a communications link and advise <br />on how to publ ‘ -i information on the corridor study <br />and eventually t upgrade. <br />MEETINGS - A meeting of the Technical group is tentatively
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.