City Council Minutes 2001 01 16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Louisville City Council Meeting January 16, 2001 Page 7. Sisk asked Public Works Director Tom Phare if $12 million would by a 4-lane road. Public Works Director Tom Phare stated that $12 million would not construct a 4-lane road. Sisk asked Hogan if the 96th Street project is a 4-lane road. Hogan stated that the project will be a road that $12 million would build. Hogan noted that he has had discussions with Staff to identify the project. He stated that the original IGA provided only $8 million for the cost of the project. Sisk asked if Mr. Hogan was suggesting that the IGA commit a $12 million dollar cap, regardless of when the project is constructed. Hogan confirmed that and stated it is the same cap for Dillon Road. Sisk asked who would pay the overage for the Dillon Road project. Hogan stated that the Authority knows the cost of Dillon Road. Sisk asked if Lafayette benefits directly from Dillon Road in terms of access/egress. Hogan stated that Lafayette has requested that the Authority treat Dillon Road as a gateway to their city from the south. He noted that as a part of the project, the Authority will identify the gateway treatments at 96th Street, and at 1-25 and will be standard through out the project. Sisk asked if Lafayette's costs are capped and the City of Louisville is vulnerable. Hogan stated that the City of Louisville is not vulnerable. He explained that the $350 million bond is based on an intergovernmental agreement, approved by four jurisdictions, amended by four jurisdictions and this cannot be done overnight. He stated that there has to be some level of trust, whether identified as a project completed by the Authority or the City of Louisville. Sisk asked that it be stated in the agreement. Hogan stated that this is a good faith project and the Authority will make every effort to complete 96th Street whether it is completed by the Authority or the City of Louisville. Mayer stated that the Agreement states that the Authority "shall" complete 96th Street. He asked City Attorney Sam Light to comment on what would happen if the Authority did not meet their obligation. City Attorney Light stated that the Authority has a direct obligation. As to the question of whether the timing did not work out as anticipated, Light stated that it was his understanding that the only delay to the project would be the permitting process relating to the environmental approval process or local, city or federal regulatory approval or 7