Laserfiche WebLink
215 <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said that ifthe City does not say we want an interchange we are not <br />going to get it. Mr. Lynch said ali we are doing is exacerbating the traffic in the City. <br /> <br />Mr. Cox asked how the interchange issue will move forward. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati proposed that. the City seek authorization and funding for an <br />interchange, including going to the MPO and Commonwealth Transportation Board, and <br />in the meantime we need to proceed with the road. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards noted that ifthe City wants VDOT to do a study Council must pass <br />a resolution requesting that. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said he feels the resolution is appropriate, but feels the number of lanes <br />are fuzzy. <br /> <br /> Mr.. Lynch said he favors maintaining the 17 lane iatersection which he feels is <br />the minimum pedestrians can cross until we get the interchange. <br /> <br />Mr. Cox said he will support 17 lanes. <br /> <br /> Mi'. Caravati, referring to the previous work session, asked if Council agrees that <br />they had asked Mr. RieleY to. come up ~4th a Iist of design criteria and comments, and <br />Council agreed. Mr. Caravafi said that staff and he will come up with a resolution in the <br />form of a letter which will be voted on by Council at a regular meeting. <br /> <br />Mr. Lynch said he would support holding a public hearing. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said he would want the issue presented as a report, and is not sure about <br />the advisability of holding a public hearing unless Council is willing to negotiate these <br />points. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards noted that VDOT typically holds a public hearing after a design is <br />submitted. <br /> <br />There was no agreement to hold a public hearing on the proposed letter. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked if Council wants to change the language regarding regional <br />transportation. <br /> <br />Mr. Cox said he favors the new language that was circulated to Council. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati read his proposed language: "To this end, the City's approval for the <br />Meadowcreek Parkway is contingent upon the completion of a new regional <br />transportation network plan within one year of~ resolufion~ The development of this <br />plan will include the CounlTg of Albemarle, the City of Charlottesville, and VDOT and <br />shall focus on reviewing all new data that has been developed and in appreciation of the <br />extensive work of the MPO~ The goal of the plan Shall be to develop new regional <br />approaches to solve our current and future traffic prOblems. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said he favors the language suggested by Mir. Lynch, as follows: <br />"completion of a new regional transportation net work plan which does not result in <br />significant increases ia traffic on City residential streets through the year 2015," adding <br />"the University" and "The goal of the plan shall be to develop new regional land use and <br />transportation approaches to solve our current and future traffic problems'without <br />adversely impacting existing City and County residents or overly depleting our region's <br />natural resources." <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said that the only way the road makes sense is in the context of that <br />network. Mr. Lynch said it is unwise to go forward wkhout looking at ways to take <br />traffic off City streets. Mr. Lynch said that the traffic counts show- most streets getting a <br />50% increase, and the network we currently have envisioned does not reduce traffic. Mr. <br />Lynch said it is not enough to have a plan, it has to be a plan for success. <br /> <br /> <br />