Laserfiche WebLink
<br />--- <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />would have to come up with come kind of street <br />access from 96th to the north. <br /> <br /> <br />Carnival: Following a little farther than with this thought <br />process the financing becomes somewhat of a con- <br />cern. Seems to me that before W-470 and before <br />the Parkway issue came in there was an MTDC 20- <br />Year Plan, that included improvements along Dillon <br />Road, 96th street. That money that was allocated <br />in that 20-year plan, part of that came from the <br />City of Louisville. We were apportioned an amount, <br />were we not, that we would have been given X- <br />number of dollars to fund the highways within our <br />city? <br /> <br />Phare: The MTDC from approximately a year and a half ago? <br />I can't recall that they ever said that they would <br />return to the local governments for their use <br />funds or whether they would be expended through an <br />authority; or through the state; or through the <br />county. I hadn't heard specifically either way. <br /> <br />Carnival: Ok. I guess my concerns are that depending on <br />where we put this highway and the costs, are some <br />of the other projects going to be depleted, are <br />there not going to be money for other projects <br />like the extension of 96th street to 42, because <br />of the awkward alignment that we're going to have <br />to have to meet our access to STC and CTC? Let me <br />go on to say and that's why I think tolling, <br />should at least be considered as an option, <br />because if we can generate money by tolling and I <br />understand that local people going to STC and CTC <br />may have to pay if they are going to use the <br />highway, but yet to eliminate that totally as a <br />means of financing the entire package seems to me <br />doesn't make a lot of sense. Somehow the citizens <br />will have to generate some additional funds to do <br />the improvements that we're looking for that we <br />conceived in that 20 year plan. <br /> <br />Phare: The whole issue of cash flow and project priority <br />really hasn't been nailed shut, has it? <br /> <br />Hornbostel: No. Not really, but what I think is clear is <br />that this is the major problem area. In the <br />work plan that was in one of the attachments, this <br />is the first engineering area that is going to be <br />looked at even before put out to vote. So you'll <br />know what alignment is going to be and I was given <br />the impression that it would be a first priority <br />because they don't want to bottleneck either. <br /> <br />Carnival: So, I guess do we need to be specific or is gener- <br /> <br /> <br />6 <br />