This is the official website of Travis County, Texas.

On This Site

Commissioners Court

Previous Years' Agendas

Intergovernmental Relations Office

Administrative Ops

Health & Human Svcs

Criminal_Justice

Planning & Budget

Transportation & Natural Resources
 

On Other Sites

Travis County Commissioners Court

October 19, 2004
Item 24

View captioned video.

24 is next in joe gieselman is nearby.
>> did dana need to come back?
>> I have no idea.
>> it the parking fees over at u.t.
>> I don't think we need her, do we?
>> I don't think so, either.
>> 24. 24. Consider and take appropriate action on request for Travis County to participate in public hearings on the alignment of ih-35 between mexico and oklahoma. In the backup is the same letter that I received from the people in dallas. And it looks like -- there are numerous public hearings scheduled around the state of Texas and already one here in Travis County. On -- I think on October 25th. And I took the liberty of posting on our agenda that in -- a quorum of the Commissioners court may attend that, it's on October 25th, it's at the east communities ymca, located at the intersection of east 51st and 183.
>> yes, this is part of the trans Texas corridor analysis where the state is looking at these 1200-foot wide corridors that would be multi-purpose. Freight, rail, pipelines, basically all encompassing transportation corridors, extendive public -- extensive public hearings throughout the united states. One of the corridors is i-35 from oklahoma to mexico. Basically the nafta corridor. They are looking at alternative alignments within that central Texas area and part of the feedback that they hope to get for the local governments is where to place this 1200-foot wide strip. Not necessarily and probably not along the existing i-35. As you can see from the map, thafg attached, looks like the western most used to be the western alignment of state highway 130. My guess it -- if it were to be located anywhere within that area, it would be the existing location of state highway 130. But that corridor is not 1200 feet wide. If they are looking for that wide swath of right-of-way. Additional right-of-way would have to be purchased along state highway 130 or they would have to look for another corridor somewhere in this central Texas region to put this Texas route -- in looking at this map, it appears that the aggies are contending for that roads are closer to bryan/college station. That's a joke [laughter]
>> but it could be as far over as bryan/college station. The effort I think of the dallas mayor is to alert local governments all up and down the i-35 corridor that this process is going on, to get engaged in the public hearing process. There are certainly economic consequences if it were to be located much further to the east than somewhere close to Austin.
>> do you know what it is that entails all of district -- that new district?
>> this is actually the entire --
>> what's the number?
>> 25. All the way [multiple voices] it's doggett's district. [laughter]
>> I haven't super imposed that doggett's district. I was just noticing the counties.
>> looks familiar.
>> district 25. Joe, have you talked to any of the outlying communities that have participate understand the preliminary talk abouts this trans Texas corridor?
>> I have not spoken with them. I read the newspapers. Multiple multi-
>> I have spoken -- I mean because on carpo, I mean capco, carppo, part of it, I’m going to tell ya, this plan makes the toll road plan in central Texas look accepted. I mean this is a deal that not only is it $180 billion project, I guess that, you know, we are going to have to go through this process to just watch people get ballistic about it. I thought that whenever I first read this backup that this pertained more to -- to the i-35 corridor nav take versus the I 69 corridor that a lot of people are pushing to go through houston, through east Texas. But apparently this thing really is the trans Texas corridor, you know, part of this thing. But I -- i've heard from many people that the dallas people are obviously very concerned about this. Because, you know, if you take this thing, if you take i-35 and basically make i-35 not what it is today, you decimate dallas. I mean from a -- from an economic, you know, engine. And --
>> I think 80's voting rights issue -- I think it's a voting rights issue if you take out district 25.
>> well, I mean,, you know, you get out of 25 pretty fast once you get north of 183. 183 ought wait to -- all the way to oklahoma. Granted there's a part of 25 that's a huge part of that but really when you start, I mean, coming out of mexico, you know, the laredo area that's where the majority of the nafta, you know, comes out of. Not to say it doesn't come from brownsville and harlingen gun, that area which is part -- harlingen, that area, which is part of 25. It will be real interesting to, I mean, I would love to be part of sitting in this initial meeting which is what we are basically talking about where we have a spot. But boy you start talking to these country folk about 1200 feet of right-of-way taking basically, you know, which is kind of what it all boils down to, that's kind of what it is, it's going to be pretty interesting.
>> pretty extensive.
>> the thought about the corridors it's actually a very interesting theoretical discussion in terms of ought the state when it is making large investments, particularly in the area of mobility, thinking of trying to double, triple, quiewd group people dip -- quadruple dip, thinking about other things that can happen within that same right-of-way. The idea that you would perhaps put rail in that same corridor. When I have gone up to visit north Texas toll authority, they actually have utility right-of-ways set aside from the right-of-way to be able to resell part of that right-of-way related to fiberoptics, for example. But this went beyond that because they are also talking about trying to piggyback oil pipelines, some of the things that just are counter intuitive that you would want to co-locate some of these things together in terms of the discussion. So it's -- it's entertaining. It's certainly interesting. But the only one that I saw that had even a glimpse of even going anywhere is the I 69 corridor simply because it doesn't exist yet so you have the potential to be able to kind of overlay some of those things. But, I mean, the biggest piece that's going to be controversial, well most of them are, is this whole idea about the oil pipelines, the kinds of that just make people crazed just knowing what we went through just on the longhorn pipeline. And others about whether that appropriately needs to go into the right-of-way. But I don't see this going in Travis County at all because of the missed opportunities, the lost opportunities on the s.h. 130 corridor, forget the pipeline stuff. They couldn't even figure out how to get rail into that right-of-way because they didn't do the grade studies correctly on that one. So I think it's going to be an interesting fight. You are right, Gerald, it's going to make toll roads look tame. I think we ought to monitor it, but I don't see this is being a big Travis County issue. But I can certainly understand where everybody along the corridor is being alerted, but they are just considering the lost opportunity on 130, it isn't going there. To go further east, well, you are in another county. Then you start messing with toads in bastrop, start messing with alcoa in milam. Go up the corridor in terms of whoops can't hit military, this or that, fort worth, dallas, the whole metroplex, oops we can't go any further.
>> urban counties.
>> I would be more than happy to sit in, I mean, volunteer along with joe whatever from our camp, I mean, as one member from the court whoever wants to go. But, you know, just to listen to them. Obviously hate some legs. You have the governor sitting over there pushing, the highway commission that's got it on their radar screen because of the governor.
>> you know that would be a discussion that I would love to hear at some point in terms of hum do we put $180 billion into this or do we try and get a few more kids back on children's health insurance and maybe get dental and vision back. I know where I would be investing my money.
>> they are asking for three things. [laughter]
>> it's the second one.
>> [indiscernible] participation in the public hearing as much as we can. Is our position that we think 35 has aligned.
>> voting rights issue.
>> they are looking at the 35 corridor, they are not looking at 35.
>> that's what I’m saying.
>> they want to know where do we think it ought to be. One question?
>> east.
>> second question is whenever we think that is, they expect us to get our local people to rally behind that. They are assuming our answer to number one would be close to theirs, right? Otherwise they would not want us to rev up our people. Third thing is the resolution they sent us. Did you get a chance to look at that resolution?
>> I think our issues may be different than dallas.
>> very.
>> so I would be cautious of just adopting a resolution.
>> you think this is a dallas resolution more than anything else.
>> I think so.
>> judge, I think this could go a lot of different directions. Maybe [multiple voices]
>> not an official comment. Just go to listen. The right-of-way is a large acquisition. It's not going to be popular. In a lot of different areas. Both rural and urban. On the urban side it's going to be extremely costly if you try to go through a city and acquire that much right-of-way. That would lead you to go to the rural areas, I can assure you it's not more popular in rural than urban. The notion of a highway is one thing. On a traditional 300 feet of right-of-way. But this is something entirely different than that. It's a very broad multi-purpose corridor. I think there's a lot of -- a lot of stuff to settle out here first before we I think as a local government launch on a position.
>> backup says texdot is having 45 public hearings.
>> yeah.
>> is -- does texdot have a preferred alignment?
>> no. That's -- that's kind of what they are trying to come down on right now. Is they -- multiple alignments, I can assure you that they do, in this corridor that you see on this map, there are probably two or three different alignments for that 1200-foot corridor. What they are trying to do is get some input from these local governments and citizens on where to put it within this wide corridor. This is just the i-35. I mean, you have other trans Texas corridors that go east, west, north, south. This one that's shown is just the i-35 corridor.
>> okay. We did post for the whole court to go to the public hearing if -- if it desires to do so. October 25th. 5:00 p.m. To 8:00 p.m. And at the ymca.
>> judge, did you need a motion related to I am plea at this -- simply at this point we monitor and that joe and his staff simply report back to us if there's something that we need to do beyond monitoring at this point?
>> I don't think [indiscernible]
>> not a problem. > looks like the decision is not to take any action today. Until we all are a little bit more informed. If there are handouts at the public meeting, it would help to get those, I guess.
>> okay.

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: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 3:32 PM