Travis County Commissioners Court
August 24, 2004
Southwest Road District #1
Let's call to order the southwest Travis County road district number 1. The
-- the only item is to consider and take appropriate action on proposal for
sale of real property owned by the southwest Travis County road district number
1, located on southwest parkway in precinct 3.
>> judge, I would move that we would -- that we would pass
this. Given that it is a -- that it is a piece of property that t.n.r. Has
done its due diligence on with regards to best use for the county, which is
the sale of this particular -- I think it's around a five-acre tract. It probably
is going to help us in the long run because at one point in time, it was,
from what I understand, it was a dump or parted of, so given that somebody
wants to take this off of our hands, I think that it's a great opportunity
for us. Plus, we just happen to have someone that has some adjacent property
that, you know, needs this, is willing to take on whatever liability there
might have been with that particular thing. So I would move approval of --
of going through the sale.
>> second.
>> and I think what was also real important about it is that
our guidelines that we use, how will we assess real property that's out there
and decide what to do, this evaluated using those --
>> it was, it was very consistent with the policy.
>> very consistent with the policy and appropriate.
>> okay. So west Travis County road district number 1 is
still an active road district?
>> uh-huh.
>> and we have the authority to sell this property.
>> uh-huh. Yes.
>> okay. The motion is to --
>> the motion is to pass the -- go forward with the sale
of this particular piece of property.
>> any more discussion?
>> fully signed off on, judge, by the way, t.n.r., Like Commissioner
Sonleitner said, following our recent procedural inclination with -- with
how we value our property.
>> okay.
>> as far as we know, tom, we don't have any kind of legal
impediments to be leary of?
>> no. I would call your attention to the proposal given
to us by the attorney for trammell crow that does say they basically want
authorization to request the city council to rezone the tract before the sale
goes through. So they are basically asking for your authorization for them
to go to the city council and say we want this piece of road district property
rezoned.
>> my understanding, though, in terms of getting that zoning,
that will actually give entitlements to this property that should raise the
minimum amount of money that we ought to expect off of this. We kind of went
through this with ribland, it's the entitlement that drives the sales price.
>> right. They are essentially saying if they don't get the
requested rezoning, they don't want to go through with the sale. Basically
they want the sale contingent on the rezoning.
>> should we bring and/or resend that and bring this -- so
I rescind that or bring it back and let t.n.r. Bring forth a full presentation?
I mean, the backup that I had, I mean, that I got there were no issues whatsoever
with it. From -- from our folks.
>> how do we know that the value is $300,000?
>> it's actually -- it has been appraised --
>> even lower.
>> at 151,000, I assume that's under its current zoning.
>> that's what I mean. How do we know the value is 300,000
if the zoning is changed ?
>> as far as I know, we have no basis to know that.
>> but we think we are legally authorized to negotiate with
one prospective buyer, no responsibility to auction or hold out the availability
to --
>> the law is that you sell it by sealed bid. Now, I don't
think that precludes you from -- from going through some steps preliminary
to that sealed bid sale. I mean, essentially, the proposal from trammell crow
is that they go do the rezoning, then we do the sealed bid sale. If they get
outbid, they get outbid.
>> okay. That's the motion basically.
>> that's right.
>> authorizing our willingness to sell, have them do whatever
they do.
>> their due diligence on the zoning. Obviously they don't
have to do it. But given that we are giving the permission if they get what
they need, we will go forward with it.
>> they are also, essentially, I will point out they are
saying if you approve this, they are willing to post a $300,000 letter of
credit. And if they don't bid at the sale, we can basically pull down that
$300,000 and treat that as their bid. In essence, they are basically saying
they are going to bid at least $300,000.
>> we have the right to accept $805,000 if somebody were
to offer that.
>> absolutely.
>> that was seconded, also.
>> did Margaret second it? I can't remember who seconded
it. All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> move adjourn.
>> second.
>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote, also.
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.
Last Modified: Friday, October 28, 2005 8:22 AM