08-27-1990 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

[£zni] Til 12 Corridor Study Policy Committee Minutes ■ July 25, 1990 Maple Plain City Hail Members Present: Alternates Present: Others Present; G. Wetter, M. Johnson, A. Kunze, M. Alger, G. Acromite, J. Grabek, D. Lorsung, R. Bauman, T. Humbert K. Gabriel S. Hay, L. Dallam, R. Harris, R. Scheuer, P. Swanson, A. Vande Vegte, G. Johnson S Hay called the meeting to order shortly after 5: .'0 p.m. There were no changes made to the agenda. Hay discussed roles and membership of the three TH 12 Committees and their continued evolution. He also discussed an approach to conduct future meetings that would focus primary interaction with committee members seated at the tr )le, with input from their alternates seated in the audience. Others (citizens, technical committee members, etc.) attending the meeting would be able to have issues/concems addressed at the “Other Business" item of the agenda. Ensuing discussion: - Process to be used to ensure that compromises made by committee members will be equitably treated? - Who has authority to select corridors? Hay stated that the purpose behind the scoping process was to narrow the range of possible corridors, from input by all project participants, to a manageable and feasible number. L. Dallam added that these foible corridors would be addressed in an environmental impact statement (EIS), along with the issues, concerns and impacts identified in the scoping process. Dallam then presented the schedule of activities. He said it would be helpful if a preferred corridor was selected by July 1991 so that the corridor could be protected and uncert^nty in the community removed. He said it woul ' 'ilso be helpful to discuss the project with key people in each city -- and requested each member to mail or phone a list to him as soon as possible. Questions followed, addressed by Hay and Dallam: - G. Acromite asked whether the schedule of activities was for the Policy Committee or the entire study. Reply: Entire study. - A. Kunze asked whose goals/issues/concems would govern the process and how each would be rated to determine importance. Reply: Three segments may be individually studied to concentrate "micro-studies" within the project between neighboring communities. All evaluation criteria would receive equal weight. The sooner the key individuals, issues, goals, ^d concerns are identified, the sooner the consultant can begin to evaluate. An informal list of these items was requested.