Travis County Commssioners Court
December 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 1
Number 1 is a public hearing to discuss request to approve order prohibiting trucks from brodie lane on segment between slaughter lane and fm 1626 in precinct 3.
>> move it.
>> second.
>> that passes by unanimous vote.
>> morning, joe giselman, transportation and natural resources department. We have received a petition from residents along brodie lane in the shady hollow area to restrict truck traffic on brodie lane. The tnr has taken a look at the raffic situation on this roadway, and have concluded that we do agree with the citizens' request for various reasons. As you may recall, Travis County extended brodie lane to fm 1626 many years ago. It was done because brodie lane would be one of the many improvements to the road system in the area, including brodie lane, extension of 45 south to tie in to 1626. We also envisioned a network of roads that would connect brodie lane and state highway 45, including freight breaker. What has happened is we extended brodie lane, but that's all that's occurred. We've acquired the right-of-way for 45 south. Unfortunately, that road has still not been constructed, so a lot of the traffic from additional subdivisions that are being platted in that area as well as subdivisions and land development occurring in northern hays county are coming into Travis County by way of brodie lane. That's the only road out there. So all of this traffic is now coming through the neighborhoods along brodie lane. Whereas brodie lane is designated as an article in the campo plan, it was -- (indiscernible) portions were still a two-lane rural county road. Other portions of it, these subdivisions were platted prior to that. So it's really not quite an arterial. Better described as a collector street because it has some family residential lots fronting on brodie lane. Traffic volumes have just nearly doubled since we opened the connection to 1626. Well over 50% of that traffic is coming from hays county. And a good portion of that is -- are trucks coming from mining operations in northern hays county. Trucks full of gravel and other commercial trucking. What the neighborhood has asked for is really just a prohibition of trucks, and we're not talking about all categories of trucks. This would not include pickup trucks or duallys as they're included, which are large pickup trucks, it would be the trucks that you think of as 18-wheelers, large dump trucks and that sort of thing. And we're all talking about trucks that are going through the neighborhood. Any truck that has a legitimate purpose for a trip in the neighborhood, including hauling gravel or subsnces like that to a residence and lots being developed in the area can get to that activity. We're not prohibiting commercial activity within the neighborhood. We are recommending to the court, however, that we do ban tow trucks. Now, portions of brodie lane are both inside the unincorporated area, but also inside the city of Austin. To make this really work we need to set up the prohibition at fm 1626. That is within the county's jurisdiction. On the other side of it, though, on the north end, we need to set up signs at slaughter lane. That is inside the city of Austin. So we really need some cooperation from the city of Austin to likewise adopt some truck prohibitions. It's our understanding from at least at the staff level that they would support such a recommendation to the city council. With that said, this is a public hearing, as we typically do before we do any type of measure that affects so many travellers. We want to hear what the public has to say about this staff proposed action.
>> any clarifying questions for joe?
>> joe -- (indiscernible). And I thought txdot had a schedule to get it done, and I think we got our right-of-way done -- [inaudible - no mic]. It's 2003. It's six years later. What is the status of sh 45 in terms of the two lanes, the road supposed to be constructed and the monies set aside by the state?
>> it's my understanding that the district office continues to work on that and the money that was approved by the commission is still available. I did speak with the new district engineer, bob day, he said this is top priority and he's the district engineer. I believe it is moving forward. They had to do some additional environmental work on the project. I don't know whether they have gotten all their clearances from the u.s. Fish and wildlife service in order to proceed with the project, but I am told that that is a high priority with the district to execute that project. And they are well aware that we have completed our right-of-way acquisition and the right-of-way is now free and clear for them to begin construction.
>> I have every intention of supporting this, but this is a temporary fix. The true solution is working with the other people.
>> that is our thought as well. This traffic should truly be on the state network. If the entire network was developed out, brodie lane would not have this type of traffic on it. Unfortunately, there are just no other routes available at this point except for manchaca road, and that is a state highway and we are recommending that these trucks either go to i-35 or they come down manchaca, but they stop using brodie as their thoroughfare.
>> joe, in your discussion with the city of Austin, this project, especially with the signage that would have to be in the city's jurisdiction as to no through truck traffic and then also, of course, the county end of it, no through truck traffic at the 1626 portion of this brodie lane arterial, can you tell me did you discuss any enforcement of that signage, violators and stuff? How do you enforce it? Do you have regular law enforcement that would patrol the area to make sure that the no through truck traffic signs that would be installed would not be violated? How would that happen? Or did the city agree to have enforcement actions at their end of the slaughter lane as far as connecting in there? Did y'all go into any discussion at all on that?
>> once the regulations have been adopted by the Commissioners court, their enforceable by all law enforcement, be that the sheriff's departments or the Austin police department. Now, temperaturely our -- typically our deputies, and that would include anyone, could pull over a truck and ask for the documentation to show their destination. If they cannot produce documentation to show that they had reasons to be on brodie lane for commercial purposes delivering something to the neighborhood, they would receive a ticket. And if they were the type of class of truck that was prohibited. So it's basically any truck can be pulled over, but if they can show documentation that they had reason to be there, then they would not get a ticket.
>> some of those situations off of springdale road and that truck traffic in the area there where it's impacting the neighborhood, which is almost similar to something like this, but no through truck traffic signage is installed, especially if you had an alternate route that was provided to make sure the trucks could proceed. Anyway, I just wanted to check on the enforcement end of that. Thanks.
>> Commissioner Davis, let me say that I am fully prepared to go to scott burrows in the west command and let him know that we are going to be doing this because that will be very impactful. You need to get this started and send a message loud and clear from the git-go on this that this is something that we'll be highly supportive of doing. And Commissioner Sonleitner, let me say as a bit of a follow-up on something that you had asked, I just found out as late as yesterday that there perhaps are still some wrinkles in 45. I am amazed that we continue to watch the obstacles pop up in front of us, especially given that we so overwhelmingly passed the building of 45, but there is no question that there are a number of people in this community that still are vehemently opposed to 45 being built. We have got some issues -- I mean, from what I understand -- within txdot even that there are some people there that, you know, are not totally cooperating insofar as streamlining this thing. I say streamlining, that's sort of an understatement given that we've had now six or seven years that we haven't got this thing accomplished. I do think that the Commissioners court is going to have to weigh in and obviously with three of us sitting on campo that that is something that is going to take place. I do know that the new district engineer has mentioned to me that he is highly supportive of this not being just a two-lane, but a four-lane. And of course, that is a revenue issue with regards to what they have. But we have now found that the people that don't want 45, we have discovered another spider that might be living in one of the caves that the road -- where the road is supposed to be built. And perhaps, you know, it will rear its ugly head and put, you know, something else in front of us. So I think that we are going to have to really bow our neck on this project and let everybody know exactly how supportive -- I mean, when I was running for office it was my number one campaign issue is to get 45 built. And so I would hope, joe -- I know that we are working as cooperatively as we can with txdot, but now that we've got all of the new things in the mix with these roads, with the word toll, I think we have to sit down with txdot and make sure that we stay on top of this. But this is the first step that we can go forth with with regard to helping the people in shady hollow especially because brodie lane is absolutely -- basically unusable. And not to mention how dangerous it is. So I will certainly work and stay on top of this thing, joe, but this is the right step.
>> joe, will the deputy sheriffs have the authority to enforce this regulation in the city of Austin?
>> not unless the city adopts it within the city. Yes. It would have to be -- first of all, the city would have to adopt the regulations within the city.
>> what if we adopt it but the city does not?
>> we can still do it. It's a little awkward in that the signage -- ek enforce it within our jurisdiction, but it's -- what happens is the signage at the limits is midway into brodie lane, so we have to find a place for the trucks to turn around and come back out. And that's why it's so awkward. We'd like to do is at a designated intersection as opposed to the trucks coming halfway down the road and then finding out there's a restriction.
>> and how can truck drivers learn what trucks are covered and which ones are not?
>> on the sign.
>> that would be on the sign?
>> that would be on the sign.
>> okay. Any other questions for joe or staff? We do have citizens I think who have signed in. If we could have four of those chairs there. Jesse fender, if you're not here on this item, let us know and we'll know that you're here to speak on citizens communication. That is to allow citizens to address the court on any item not on the agenda. This list should be citizens signed up for number one. Debbie peterson and cindy nugs.
>> judge, let me make sure, are the children speaking on this subject matter? They are?
>> [inaudible - no mic].
>> okay. Good. I was afraid that you were sending them up here to talk about dare. This is not the dare part. That's all right. That's all right. We'll be to y'all's section soon. I didn't think they were coming to talk about -- you bet. Sorry, guys.
>> that's jesse and debbie?
>> no, I?m debbie.
>> shelby.
>> and ms. Peterson?
>> me first?
>> all right. And ms. (indiscernible).
>> yes, sir.
>> and could I get skipper lee to come forward too if he is here on the trucks item. Good morning.
>> good morning. Mr. Gieselman has done an excellent job of summing up the issues for -- I am debbie peterson, I?m sorry. I live in the shady hollow neighborhood. He's done an excellent job of summing up the issues. Traffic has been a concern for our neighborhood for a long time. And I ask for your support on this ban.
>> thank you.
>> cindy nettles also from shady hollow. I've spoken to y'all before and i'll give you you the cliff notes version this time because you are all aware of the issue. And we have safety concerns and you're going to address them today. And we thank you for that. And we wish you a happy holiday.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
>> I?m spper lee. I?m an attorney here in Austin and I would ask the Commissioners court not to hold that against me for my testimony today. [ laughter ] more importantly I think today, and I have appeared before you a number of years back and spoke on this same issue. At one time I lived on kellywood drive, which is right on the corner -- my house was on the corner of kellywood and brodie. And we moved about 20, 23 years ago. I grew up in Austin, too, so I had a real good feel for what brodie laip used to be when I was growing up. Y'all may or may not know that originally it was a drag strip. I was from mccallum high school and that was our local drag strip south until the cops showed up and then we beat it out there on slaughter lane or some other access to get out. Y'all are well aware that the neighborhood of shady oak -- let me back it with where I live now. We bought a house a few blocks south of the kellywood house in 1999. So we live in the estates of shady hollow area now. Perspective wise, if you can look at the geographic maps for a minute, the neighborhoods that are in there are clustered on either side of brodie. It's fair to say that the estates of shady hollow is basically west of brodie lane. Kellywood, my subdivision, was basically west of brodie lane. Palomino park basically east -- they're developed that way. They're developed under the understanding that brodie was the major street that fed the subdivision. There's one exception and one major, and that's the one that I think both of the previous people spoke to, and that's the shady hollow subdivision, which is bifurcated or that is split in two and made into two halves of shady hollow by brodie lane through the middle. The significance of that, of course, is the community affairs not only the traffic problem in there, but also you've got tennis courts on one side, you have a swimming pool on the other side of brodie, you have a community center on one side of brodie that attracts all sorts of groups. You have a park on -- you know, a major region al Austin-Travis County park on the other side. So y'all get the drift. It's not only a split of the neighborhood, but also services of the infrastructure within the neighborhood itself that is split by brodie. And how did that happen? Y'all I think again are aware of the idea that it happened because shady hollow was developed when there was a barricade at the end of shady hollow about where the Travis County volunteer fire department is. There was a barricade there for years and that subdivision, frankly, to be candid, was sold under the circumstances that that barricade would remain in place. An early bond issue, on the other hand, seemed to be forgotten about and nobody was ever going to really build out brodie until the issue came up again with the pressure to build it out. Some previous county Commissioners had to deal with the issue of whether to build it out or not, but the decision was made to build it out, and it's now in place. Let me sum up by saying that the significance today to this ban, I think, is that we're not going to remove traffic from brodie ever in the shady hollow area. We can, however, do something about the problem that's raised by street destruction and not only the traffic ishdz that have not only been addressed here today, but by the management of trucks and alternate routes, those have also been explored too, the alternate routes that are available to truck traffic, heavy truck traffic to take it off of brodie and put it on alternatives. It's not to ban it, it's just to put it on alternative ways. Y'all are well aware of the problems and the issues, and I?m getting acknowledgment from your non-verbal communication that you are. And I appreciate the opportunity to appear this morning two days before christmas with the best of the holiday season to you, but also with the idea that we appreciate the opportunity two days before christmas to appear and give testimony on this matter.
>> thank you.
>> shady hollow is going to adopt skipper for those good remarks.
>> jim downing, are you here on this item?
>> yes.
>> please come forward. And also stephanie miller.
>> can I be excused from the chair now?
>> yes. Thank you. Thank you for your comments.
>> morning, mr. Downing.
>> morning.
>> we'd be happy to get your comments.
>> I?m just here in the moral support of this ban. And I?m happy to say not a lot, other than the fact that I walk along this street every morning and have to put up with the dust flying off those big caliche trucks or whatever they are. It's not pleasant. It makes a lot of noise and it's not desirable. By the way, I have lived out there since shady hollow drive was built. And brodie lane was more potholes than it was asphalt.
>> thank you.
>> it's difficult to see what's happened to it.
>> sure.
>> thank you. Ms. Miller?
>> hi, thank you. I know you are in support, so I have a small statement I was going to make to plead for your support on this issue, so I?m just going to read it. My name is stephanie miller and he reside in section 1, lot 1, block c. My residential lot corners odie lane with approximately 283 feet of frontage with brodie lane. And I brought a picture of our plat so that you can see that brodie lane runs a significant distance along our property. I have two key points of opposition to the trucks that use brodie lane as a through road. These points are noise and safety. Since we moved into our home in December of 1998, back when sh 45 was still moving forward, the brodie lane was he is -- has increased tremendously bringing with it an increase in noise volume. These trucks are the biggest noise offenders. They're usually the first noise we in peaceful spring mornings, sometimes as early as 5:30 p.m. And they are what makes us have to shout to hear one another while trying enjoy our property. We have considered installing anite foot privacy fence to reduce the noise pollution, but 6,000-dollar personal price tag seems a bit unfair burden to put on our personal budget. Since we live right at the light, we often hear these trucks ielgding or honking as they choose to run the red light. This brings me to my second opposition to these truwhich is. We live in fear that some day one of these large trucks loses control, loses a tire or loses some cargo and whatever is lost comes flying into our back lawn while we are in it with our two children, one of which is here today. We have planted approximately 24 trees at r personal cost between 2 to 400-dollar per tree on our brodie lane frontage to provide some natural resistance to these accidents, but nothing is preventable. Our son has a friend who lives two houses down from us, but just across brodie lane. But he's not allowed to walk there for fear that he would ha cross this road on which the trucks travel. So many times as we wait to leave, we see them just fail to not just fail to stop at the light, but actually speed up to drive through it, often running the red. It is time to put an end to their reign ofon the residents of our neighborhood and to push them over to the roadways that were built to manage fic. That's what I am here to ask you today and I appreciate your support on this matter. Again, I?m anopoulos stephanie miller.
>> would anyone else like to give testimony during this public hearing.
>> move the public hearinglosed.
>> second.
>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
Last Modified: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 7:26 AM