Travis County Commssioners Court
May 6, 2003
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Item 10
10. Consider request to the Texas turnpike authority to design and construct an interchange at the proposed howard lane arterial during the initial construction of state highway 130, and take appropriate action.
>> good morning.
>> good morning.
>> joe gieselman with t.n.r. We do not have any new information on this proposal.
>> I'm sorry, joe. Can you turn up the microphone.
>> can I have the microphone turned up, please?
>> all right.
>> we do not have the legal documents back from the property owners yet on the dedication of right-of-way and financial contribution toward howard lane. Those documents are somewhat essential for us to move forward on this issue. So we are still waiting for the three property owners and their attorneys to return a special warranty deed as drafted by tom nuchols, our attorney.
>> okay.
>> joe, let me ask you this. Do you have any ballpark time as far as when they are supposed to get that wrapped up, as far as the warranty deed? The buildings, right-of-way, stuff like that, from the owe -- owe [indiscernible]
>> we were supposed to have it already. We were supposed to have it already. So it hasn't happened yet.
>> let me ask this second question. Will this -- what is the disposition of tta on the position of --
>> as far as what they are doing, as far as the timing element of this whole project, you know, they are going on with the initial work before on s.h. 130, however, where are they on that at this point and are they still willing to -- to I guess wait as they are doing on the -- you know, the little things that we have to to care of before we can commit to what we are trying to do.
>> they are -- the best way to characterize it, I guess, is they are impatient with Travis County. They wanted Travis County to act two weeks ago. They want desperately to proceed to design the highway as we requested, but they are reluctant to do that without an agreement with Travis County. Or at least an acknowledgment that Travis County is agreeable to constructing howard lane. And so -- so every week that we postponed, they become increasingly impatient about the entire proposition.
>> well, I guess my point -- tom, I guess looking at this, I know that it's very important, to get a commitment from the private [indiscernible] out there, to assure that we proceed accordingly. I guess as far as contacting those folks and stuff like that, I don't want to, you know, as far as jeopardizing what we are trying to do here, continue to wait with this. But, however, I'm looking for the possibility of trying to find [papers shuffling - audio interference] when as far as dealing with the property owners -- with the private owners as far as the donation of the right-of-way, a whole bunch of other things that will -- their portion of this particular project.
>> Commissioner, we are waiting to hear from the landowners. We send them a draft of a deed that contains all of the necessary assurances that Travis County needs and I haven't talked to them directly, but hi understanding from joe is, I did get a copy of an e-mail that said they would be sending back a revised deed to us and we just haven't heard from them yet.
>> there was another -- another issue that came up, I think Commissioner Sonleitner brought this up, which I totally agree with, and that is the letter from a higher authority -- from the city of Austin, especially looking at the howard lane incorporated area of Austin, where are we on that? Have we gotten such a letter to ensure that -- that they are definitely involved via letter other than the level of the letter that we received from that staff person with the city of Austin? In other words, is there another higher authority from the city of Austin as far as the commitment from them as far as dealing with the howard lane project from dessau to s.h. 130?
>> I have not gotten any additional information from the city. But on the other hand, I don't think the city council has met since that was conveyed to the city staff.
>> [indiscernible] I'm sorry.
>> I do not believe the city council has met since we conveyed that message to the city staff.
>> all right. Do you know whether or not it's going to be on this -- I guess they have a city council meeting this week, don't they?
>> I believe they do.
>> do they? Well, it would be good to know where we are all on that, also, it's kinds of hard to go -- kind of hard to go forward with this. Would it be anything out of -- out of the ordinary if we were to roll it for one week? Until we can get the necessary --
>> I think we --
>> what do you -- what are you recommending?
>> it's either that or give the property owners a deadline?
>> pardon me?
>> it's either roll it or give the property owners a deadline.
>> I suggest we roll it a bit.
>> I think so. I guess even one week would -- I guess, when we have made -- a lot of things can be done in one week, however they are going to have to get on the fast track, I guess, as far as trying to make movement. But not only that, the city of Austin also needs commitment as far as their -- that portion of howard lane and [indiscernible] howard lane, s.h. 130 from dessau as far as committing and making sure we have that commitment from them to [indiscernible] howard lane, branch, stuff like that, which is an incorporated part of the city of Austin. I'm kind of concerned about that, I think those two components, the missing links as far as what we need to do at this point. I guess maybe roll it one week, maybe we will have enough time to -- to get that done in -- and I don't know when the city council is going to take this up, but have they been placed on notice as far as what we need since we had this on the agenda last in.
>> I believe councilmember slusher was here when that was stated. I believe --
>> I think he was.
>> and got the message directly.
>> seems like we need to roll it a week because obviously we can't do anything without those deeds, the conveyance deeds in our hands. But we also need to give them a deadline. Their lack of action is threatening the exact thing that they want to happen. And this is not for lack of effort on Travis County's part. We have assembled everything we need to get together and we are waiting on those conveyance documents. That is the deal. And so we need those things signed and the more that this gets delayed the more they are putting at risk the very thing that we have all worked very hard to try to accomplish.
>> judge --
>> time --
>> [multiple voices]
>> take it up.
>> judge.
>> what kind of deadline is --
>> exactly.
>> tta wanted the county to act last week.
>> okay.
>> I move that we postpone this item until next week. And in the meantime we contact tta, let them know what's going on, what we are waiting on, that we notify the property owners that tta expected these documents to be delivered to -- to tta last week and time is of the essence, I don't know that we can do more than that.
>> second it, judge.
>> okay.
>> time is of the essence.
>> any discussion of that motion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you, judge.
Last Modified: Wednesday, May 6, 2003 7:52 PM