Travis County Commissioners Court
December 21, 2004
Items 31 & 32
31 is consider and take appropriate action on amendment number one to the
road construction agreement with ringgold partners and catoosa springs partner
force the construction of howard lane.
>> this someone ready to go now. This is a private partnership
agreed to dedicate for the additional right of way and pay for half the cost
of roadway at the time it was estimated to be 3 million bucks. And that's
what we entered into an agreement with. Once begun into the engineering design,
we came across some additional cost to improve the intersection. As you may
know, one of our high access locations in Travis County n the process of building
this project we want to make sure that intersection was designed correctly
so that was going to cause some additional money. We're also accepting some
draibage off of the highway 35 which caused the storm sewer system to be upgraded
and these are costs typically not borne by the adjoining subdivisions when
they come into the plat. Looking at the equity of the cost participation arrangement,
we thought it was probably logical that the county pick up the additional
cost to give us items that were to be added to the project that came in after
we signed our agreement. So the private partners are still good for the $1.5
million and our budget goes up slightly but it's -- I mean our costs go up.
This is still well within budget for the cip project. There will be some savings
at the end of the day. So we have -- we have a bid, we competitively ed by
the project. We have things from engineering to bring down the cost of the
project and so we've tried to do everything we can to keep our costs down,
going to cost more money than we originally anticipated when we signed the
agreement with the property owners.
>> it was the amount of the additional cost that stood out
for me. You believe the additional cost that we're picking up are things that
routinely the county would pay for?
>> I think so. These are truly costs that are because of
a larger public system of roadways, weren't necessarily because of what [inaudible]
lane is doing.
>> [inaudible]
>> approval of item number 31.
>> motion approved. Seconded by Commissioner Sonleitner.
Any other discussion? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> number 32 is approve contract, contract modification and
making of contract for the mosquito field ridge parkway improvements project
ifb number b 040087jj to the low bidder, rgn constructors lp.
>> and this is the construction contract.
>> let's move approval of...
>> second.
>> what is the relationship of 32 to 31?
>> 32 is the project. 31 sets up the agreement for cost participating
in 32. 32 is the actual project where the county is bidding out. We will be
paying for 32 and 33 out of money that we have in our cip accounts and out
of money that there is provided to us under the agreement under 31.
>> discussion?
>> all in favor. That passes by unanimous vote. You vote
in favor?
>> yes.
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 2:28 PM