The town's engineer presented staff's review of two NTTA alignment alternatives for a planned regional roadway and told council that, on balance, Alternate 1 remains the recommended option.

Jenkins summarized the technical differences: "Alternate 1 displaces 3 residents. Alternate 3 displaces 5 residents," he told the council, adding that Alternate 3 would reduce the size of a parcel NTTA labeled undevelopable but did not clearly create considerable new lakefront acreage. He noted that NTTA bears the cost of any utility relocations and that both alternatives present tradeoffs in topography, drainage and property impacts.

Multiple residents and property owners from the East Fork area told the council they had concerns that the published route information is dated and that newly built homes may now lie in the previously identified corridor. One resident who said he built in the area within the past year told council he preferred Alternate 3 because Alternate 1 would run over his new home; another urged council to re-evaluate the public comments compiled after more recent meetings.

Council members repeatedly referenced the 2012 resolution and the citizen-led study that produced the long-standing Alternate 1 routing, with several elected officials saying changing the long-published route now would be unfair to others who relied on the 2012 materials. Jenkins recommended staff prepare a formal resolution reflecting council's current choice and transmit it to NTTA; he said staff would bring a resolution back at the next regular meeting or the first January meeting for formal action.

No binding vote on the alignment was taken at the Nov. 10 meeting; council direction was to have staff prepare the appropriate resolution and continue coordination with NTTA.