Travis County Commissioners Court
January 25, 2005
Item 25
25. Consider and take appropriate action on a road construction agreement with sealy heatherwilde, l.p., And new wells point partners, ltd. For the construction of wells branch parkway and heatherwilde boulevard in northeast Travis County. (Sonleitner)
>> good morning, joe gieselman with transportation and natural resources department. This relates to a 2001 capital improvements project. A partnership agreement with sealy heatherwilde, l.p., And new wells point these are both landowners in the vicinity of our project. We have been negotiating with them for some time. On the cost participation and the construction of these two roadways. Both roadways are in the capital transportation plan as arterials. Wells branch parkway is a six-lane divided arterial, heatherwilde is a four lane divided arterial. We will be constructing sediments of both roadways under this agreement. The agreement basically, the terms of the agreement have us sharing in the cost of the engineering and the construction. All of the right-of-way that is necessary for the roadways and the drainage ways will be dedicated free of charge to the county by the private property owners. So that comes to the county. And then the private parties participate in the cost of the construction. On wells branch parkway, they pay 40%, the county pays 60%. On heatherwilde boulevard it's 50-50. That goes mostly for engineering and also for the construction. Travis County will also pay for the -- for the water quality features associated with roadway. If -- if the private parties want to enlarge those for the runoff coming from their properties, they can do so at their cost. But we will pay for the capture of the storm water from the runs themselves. The -- these roads will have pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The -- the contract provides for the private parties to employ an engineer, [indiscernible] incorporated so the designs are owe owl be underway. -- will be underway. The county, once the plans are completed, the county will bid the project. So we will bid the project and we will manage the construction once it's underway. One change that I wanted to highlight, slightly different from my backup memo. Initially we had -- we had the engineer was covering errors and omissions insurance for his design of the project. Since I wrote that memo, the property owners have also agreed to back up the -- any error or any -- any error on the part of the engineer to the same portion that we have for the construction of the project. For up to one year. So it more closely reflects what we would otherwise require of a private developer during a one-year performance of a project. And then the earlier version of the contract, the county was totally at risk. Once we used up the engineer's insurance. So this more accurately distributes any risk, in the event that there is an error on the part of the engineer. First we will go toward the engineer's insurance, if there's an error. But then after that, it would be shared proportionately by the private sector and the county. Which actually is better. Better provision from the county.
>> what we are going to ask to approve today is really a segment of a much larger project, right?
>> this is a -- yes. There is a larger project, there is another segment of wells branch parkway that was platted but not built within two subdivisions further to the east. And we will enter subsequent to this agreement, we will enter into an interlocal agreement with Pflugerville. Pflugerville has employed an engineer and is currently designing wells branch parkway within the corporate limits and so this additional section is right up next to the city limits. So rather than us go ahead and separately design yet another project, where we are going to interlocal with the city of Pflugerville, they will add that to their design contract and construction contract, so basically we will pay Pflugerville to build, to design and build the short section of wells branch parkway, just on the other side of the city limit line. Then there's finally one more section of both wells branch parkway and heatherwilde which is in a piece of property called north town. Those sections of roadway will get built either when that property owner subdivides his property and builds the routes or comes to the county and enters into the construction agreement like this agreement is, for us to cost participate in the construction. We are hopeful that at some point we will be able to enter into an agreement with the owners of the tract and have this entire project completed. But we decided to move forward and build the sections of both roadways with willing parties and we are going to do that. A time to get --
>> we think on this segment we have the participation of all of the necessary parties.
>> all of the necessary, also willing -- who are willing owners of property. Now, there's one piece of property which is owned by [indiscernible] bank. A little corner parcel. And they -- they have the property by virtue of a prior bankruptcy. I've spoken with the bank folks. They are willing to dedicate the right-of-way to the county as long as they don't have to pay for the transaction costs and dedication or contribute to the construction of the roadway. The construction of the roadway on that bill bank property will be shared 50/50 by the county and these two private property owners who are entering into this agreement today. So we have the wherewithal to build the road once we get the right-of-way from the bank. Judge Biscoe and I met for the two members of the Pflugerville city council last Friday as part of our new city council subcommittee and in terms of Pflugerville segments they are working some things out and they seemed hopeful, we will cross our fingers for them, that they can work out their issues with one of their land owners within the next six to 8 weeks, we will be moving forward, we hope, with their segments to the east of us, which will piggyback the gaston sheldon specie and settlers meadow, two pieces that platted long ago with michigan she will.
>> anything else from the court?
>> anybody else here on this item? Please come forward.
>> I think mr. Spurgess is waiting for us to move approval. Which I would love to do.
>> second.
>> any more discussion?
>> thank you, judge.
>> move approval.
>> that passes by unanimous vote.
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:
Tuesday, January 26, 2005 8:31 AM