Laserfiche WebLink
constant basis. Probably deal with <br />it on a complaint basis, based upon <br />residents in that area. I'm <br />assuming that the signage has been <br />provided for in that area. <br /> <br />Howard: <br /> <br />Sisk: <br /> <br />For the City to grant this is going <br />to give the City a long term <br />liability, taking some Police <br />service that we don't have to have <br />on other streets. Same problem with <br />St. Andrews Lane, 32 ft. I am <br />looking at it from the point of view <br />of what does the City of Louisville <br />face over the long term, without <br />changing the "rules of the road". <br /> <br />When the original Development was <br />approved, the Developer said that <br />they would build streets that would <br />be a 50 ft. right-of-way with a 36 <br />ft. wide street. <br /> <br />Franklin: <br /> <br />Sisk: <br /> <br />Except for certain areas. The areas <br />that were proposed to be built to <br />narrower standards, either have been <br />built as in the island Filing No. 1, <br />South Park and in the case of this <br />Filing No. 4. It's per the zoning <br />and the approved Agreements. <br /> <br />Are you saying that we agreed to <br />allow narrower streets with Filing <br />No. 4? <br /> <br />Franklin: <br /> <br />It could be construed that we looked <br />at it back then and approved <br />documents and noted narrower streets <br />in this area. Yes. <br /> <br />Sisk: <br /> <br />Unless someone can point to me a <br />document of agreement, I see no <br />reason to deviate from our norm. I <br />think we're sending mixed signals to <br />people like Mr. Bellock. To me this <br />is a non-negotiable item. <br /> <br />Franklin: <br /> <br />The entire staff has been and <br />continues to be concerned about <br />maintaining standard streets. The <br />initial comments and a lot of time <br />and consideration were put into <br /> <br />21 <br /> <br /> <br />