Travis County Commssioners Court
September 23, 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 20
Number 20, discuss and take appropriate action on waiving development permit fees for the lone star infrastructure, Texas turn paoeupl. How much do we think this involves on terms of what we think the fees would be, and two, how typical or atypical is this request? And three I guess would be what is staff's recommendation.
>> carol joseph, t.n.r. The answer to number one is that the approximate cost would be a million three. $1,300,000 for the -- that's what the permit fees would be to process these plans that come through.
>> the fees are based on the size of the project, and this is a huge one.
>> that's right. 49 miles. And there's 15 different stream crossings. And that's just looking at the fema function of those crossings. Okay. And I forgot the others.
>> I'm sorry. Is it standard? Are they asking Williamson county to do this? Are they doing this on the hector project? I'm just trying to figure out are we being asked to do something that everybody else is in which case sign me up. Or if this is something unusual and others have not waived and this is work we're going to do and we're not going to get compensated for.
>> I don't know.
>> [indiscernible] from the state, isn't tonight?.
>> yeah. Typically the state does not pay county development permits.
>> that's helpful to know.
>> that's all I was trying to get you all to say.
>> thanks for the record.
>> I think the only difference here is that this is the first time it's been done under an exclusive development. That's why it's l.s.i. And not the state.
>> Texas department of transportation.
>> yeah.
>> that's the only thing different is it's the first e.d.a.
>> I just wanted to get that on record. This would be an additional million-plus contribution if we were to charge the fee and get paid.
>> yes.
>> sit possible -- and I will absolutely support this in terms of, hello, we are partner in this. If we send back a letter saying yes, indeedy we're going to do this, we could also c.c. Members of the transportation commission because I sheu I would like to make sure they know that Travis County in addition to our $90 million investment in this project, that we are waiving fees to be able to again continue to be a partner and for them to know that we have done this as opposed to it stays at back level and perhaps the highers-up don't know what we have done.
>> that's fine. We could do this.
>> any reason we should not do this?
>> no, sir.
>> move approval.
>> discussion? Melissa, you got boast those, right?
>> why is -- it sounds to me like that this is being asked of us all of a sudden. I mean did we anticipate that this would be the asking? I mean that lone star, that 81 of this was ever discussed up front that this is generally how this was done, I mean where counties waive their fees? This is not something that we're just surprised about, is it?
>> no, we've been in discussions for about a year on this project. It was mainly a procedural deal a why we're bringing this to you now. They needed actually to write a letter formally requesting the fees be waived. They didn't do that until August 8th, so --
>> so in the bid process whenl.s.i. Got this project, it was anticipated at that time that this is something that generally is the case whenever you are building roadways in the state of Texas and -- but we are procedural going to come because we want to make sure that everybody knows that this is how this is done. This is not all of a sudden, you know what, we're sort of upside down with this project, I mean we're way over budget. We've got to find some ways to -- this is something that we should have known.
>> at the staff level, they did know. Typically txdot projects in the past haven't been permitted. They weren't required to. This is something new with state projects. But they also have to comply with local regulations.
>> this is not revenue we routinely expect.
>> right. And I think it's like tom said, it's just because this is an exclusive development agreement and not the state.
>> any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> and it was friendly too in our letter to send that on to the higher-ups.
>> yes, ma'am.
>> can we also add on there representative krusee because he is the chair of house transportation and has been [indiscernible] in terms of this project.
Last Modified: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:52 AM