Laserfiche WebLink
• On what data and facts do you base this assumption? <br />• What is the likelihood that this would happen? <br />• What is the likelihood this would not happen? <br />• What is the likelihood that this is an improvement to the current situation? <br />"It appears that the intention of the cut Landscape rather than easing traffic concerns." "The <br />home has operated as is for 40 years" & others "Grandfathered in" <br />• What data and facts do you base these statements? <br />• The is an untrue statement <br />• The assumption appears to have been made on data not provide to the City that is from a <br />limited study and other studies do so the opposite finding leaving it up to a subjective <br />judgment. <br />Counter Statements <br />1. Assuming status quo would never lead to innovation or improvements <br />2. There have been no children living in this house for 25+ years, we are certain <br />the traffic patterns are very different then they were 40 years ago, nor was <br />there a walking median for pedestrians 25 -30 years ago. <br />3. The design is based specifically on entering and exiting our driveway safely <br />(Without sacrificing trees or ethics to the general area) as it is on the up grade <br />of the hill and it is difficult to see cars and pedestrians from the angel we are <br />located. <br />4. This is very much heightened in the morning and evening rush hours. <br />5. The date of this ordinance would lead us to believe that others have been <br />granted this privilege or was done without approve and no demand for <br />correction was made. <br />6. Additional addresses you can note are: 2380 Diana, 2397 Diana, and 2437 <br />Sunset Ct all appear very new. Older address notes: 794 Schletty Dr, 801 <br />Viking, 2907 Labore, and 752 Labore <br />"Second curb cut, may in fact cause higher degree of traffic due to proximity to first curb cut" <br />• There is much data that would support the opposing view on this subject. <br />Counter Statement <br />Based on our research, there are as many ordinances that allow second curb cuts as there <br />are not. Both for the same /opposing reasons. Therefore, there is no proof, factual, or logical <br />reason to deny our request. Rather this would deprive us of privileges already enjoyed by other <br />residents (new and old). Furthermore, we have spoken with our neighbors and they have no <br />objection to the request, rather they like our plan and believe it would be safer given our location <br />on the street and the hill. <br />