Laserfiche WebLink
0 <br />• <br />WHEREAS, no need has been shown or demonstrated for this <br />additional highway construction, and <br />. WHEREAS, the Minnesota Highway Department has declared <br />that traffic demands west of Wayzata do not require any additional <br />highway construction beyond the existing 2 lane highway until at <br />least the 1990's, which indicates that most traffic demands east <br />of Wayzata would be commuting in nature which could be met by a <br />mass transit system, and <br />WHEREAS, there has been no consideration given to the <br />alternative of not constructing any additional highway lanes east <br />of Wayzata and constructing an effective rapid transit alternative <br />in. lieu thereof, and <br />WHEREAS, the environmental impact statement on file totally <br />fails to address itself to that alternative, and <br />WHEREAS, shortages of petroleum will require greater <br />dependence upon mass transit and less dependence upon the auto- <br />mobile in the foreseeable future,.and additional dependence on <br />the automobile should not be abetted by further highway construc- <br />tion, and <br />WHEREAS, these various factors clearly indicate that <br />additional highway construction would only attract more traffic <br />and more intense development to this corridor in areas that are <br />not equipped for or desirous of such development, all of which <br />is contrary to the planning and land use principles on both <br />a metropolitan and a local level in this area, and <br />WHEREAS, that the construction of I-394 as proposed has <br />been determined by the City Council of the City of Orono to <br />be contrary to the best interests of its citizens and of the <br />proper and orderly development of the City of Orono, <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT <br />1. The City Council of the City of Orono opposes further <br />consideration of additional highway construction in the I-394 <br />corridor,at least until the alternative of constructing only <br />a rapid transit facility is thoroughly considered by an objective, <br />independent agency. <br />2. That there be presented to•the appropriate federal, state, <br />metropolitan and local units of government a clear demonstration <br />M <br />