Laserfiche WebLink
116 <br /> <br /> On motion by Mr. Toscano, seconded by Ms. Richards, Council unanimously <br />attthorized the Mayor to send the letter to the Virginia Department of Transportation and <br />Federal ~ghway Administration as proposed by Ms. Slaughter. <br /> <br /> Ms. Daugherty expressed concern about the resolution approved by the County <br />opposing the 29 Bypass in terms of the overall transportation scheme, and that she would not <br />approve the CATS with that in it. Ms. Daugherty also expressed concern about the <br />statement that the 29 Bypass will not be built until all of the Meadowcreek Parkway is built., <br />even though funding does not exist for all of the Meadowcreek Parkway. <br /> <br /> Ms. Twaddell explained that the County asked that their opposition to the 29 Bypass be <br />part in the history section of the Bypass, but noted that the 29 Bypass remains a part of the <br />CATS. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said she thinks Council should request some clarification on the Bypass <br />issue. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said that he feels clarification is needed about the eastern connector and asked <br />if the County supports t_his road. Mr. Cox also asked how Council can get more financial <br />commitment for alternative means of transportation. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said she understand that some monies committed to road projects may be <br />available for rail transportation. Ms. Richards said she thinks the Council should request that <br />the MPO undertake a study of light rail and funding alternatives for it. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano made a motion to continue the CATS discussion at the December ! st <br />Council meeting and for Councilors to put their questions in writing and circulate suggestions <br />prior to that meeting. Ms. Daugherty seconded the motion and it was unanimously approved. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox questioned whether Council should request a deferral of the MPO's vote on <br />the CATS plan. <br /> <br /> Ms. Twaddell said that the MPO will hold a public hearing on the CATS on December <br />8th, but may not vote at that time. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox made a motion to ask that the IMPO defer a final vote on the CATS plan until <br />Council has heard from the State about the 4f review. <br /> <br />Mr. Cox's motion died for lack of a second. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said that she does not want to hold up the entire CATS plan, though she <br />feels that portion could be delayed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Slaughter said she feels that the public hearing included good discussion, with valid <br />points being brought up. Ms. Slaughter said she feels the burden is on the opponents of the <br />Parkway to prove that Council should not move forward. Ms. Slaughter said that Council <br />needs to think very carefully before changing their minds about the Parkway, and if they do, <br />they do need to do so for good reasons and should have alternatives for dealing with <br />transportation concerns. <br /> <br />CONSENT AGENDA <br /> <br /> Mr. Brad Barnhilt, 109 Shale Place, expressed concern about the appropriations <br />involving federal funds. Mr. Barnhill said federal drug laws have no atttho_rity locally and he <br />thinks the federal funds are a bribe to the states to allow them to enforce federal drug laws. <br /> <br /> Ms. Daugherty noted that at least three of the appropriations have to do with crime <br />prevention which she feels is valuable. On motion by Ms. Daugherty, seconded by Mr. <br />Toscano, the following consent agenda items were unanimously approved: <br /> <br /> <br />