Travis County Commissioners Court
May 24, 2005
Item A2
A2 is to consider and take appropriate action from the city of Austin for collaborative venture on the improvements of howard lane to sh 130. And court members, I received a letter from judge -- from the mayor that oi put in the backup. And this item is in response to the letter. And in the letter basically we ask that we collaborate with the city of Austin on improvements to howard lane to sh 130. And joe gieselman and his people are probably in the adjacent room. We need somebody from there to come in. And we have -- there he is right there. We have residents here today, so joe, if you have a response to give us.
>> I can certainly do that if you would like for me to -- and this is the project called howard lane, section 2. It's actually between cameron road and state highway 130. We discussed this with Commissioners court probably a year ago probably at this point. We were trying to enter into a public-private partnership agreement with three property owners within the unincorporated area. We never came to agreement with those property owners, so it's really been pretty dormant. There is a section of this howard lane that is within the corporate city limits of the city of Austin within the harris branch subdivision. It is the right-of-way for the roadway has been set aside, but the city would have to construct that section between cameron all the way through the corporate limits to the boundary of the city limit line. From there it goes from howard branch subdivision over to state highway 130. It is basically undeveloped property. There are three property owners. What we are trying to get is an agreement whereas the property owners would dedicate the right-of-way and build half the roadway and the county would build the other half. We never culminated that agreement. Since then the state has moved the interchange, agreed to redesign state highway one 30 so as to move the interchange down to the future howard lane. So that at least has been accomplished. Both the property owners and the county wanted that to happen. It has happened. So that will be constructed. I think what the mayor's letter is basically expressing the city's intent to proceed to construct its section if the county and the property owners do the section in the unincorporated area. And we further, oink in a gesture of goodwill, set aside a little over $400,000 in surplus in bond money to initiate the design on that section of howard lane. We knew at the time the city was also willing to participate in the cost of design. We made that contingent our expending those funds on design with the execution of the agreement with the property owners. And again, that agreement has not been executed and we're still a good bit off on the terms of the agreement.
>> joe, have you had an opportunity to discuss thoroughly in person with the city of Austin officials that really need to know the crux of the matter? Those things that you brought before the court, the things that you have just stated today and in the past, have they been explained to the mayor and city manager and those persons that will be involved in this process as we try to look for page 2 of going into sh 130? Are they aware of exactly where we are on this stuff? Have you met with them?
>> no, I have not met with the city manager or elected officials. I've just been dealing with staff.
>> I have personally met with mayor wynn and specifically discussed howard lane and what our process was and about the public-private venture portion of it and the need to get the private landowners to partner with us. I did not sense any kind of hesitation on behalf of our other governmental partner on this, but it clearly is going to take the cooperation of the three landowners there because we have a template that we are establishing that is going to be a standard for any public-private agreement because we have a bunch of these that are out there that potentially can go on a bond election. But I did have a very good conversation with mayor wynn about this.
>> okay. And I had not had -- the mayor had not contacted me at all. And I was hoping that staff would also be a part of that because it just occurred to me that there may be some areas that may need to be fleshed out a little bit to let those folks know where we are in this process. And really I think the positive steps that we have taken to alleviate some of the concerns or even the fact that we're using 1984 bond money to ensure that the a and e design work not only for this portion of howard lane, but also cameron road, all lead into sh 130. So I think we've done a lot in that regard; however, I really feel that the other partners may not know the extent and the history of where we are and even the inclusion of the interchange there at the howard lane at sh 130.
>> i'd be happy to do so. I think what's not being understood is that the county typically does not build roads in a new location. We usually want the subdivision process to do that. And whereas this is an important link and I think the city and the county both would like to see it happen, not to the point that we would jump in and build a road on a new location. And basically bear the cost of private development that should typically be borne by them when they sub subdivided their property. And that's the fair share we're trying to strike in the agreement and we're just not capable of doing that at this point.
>> proportionality.
>> mr. Buchorn, how you doing?
>> thank you for this opportunity to inject myself into your court time on this. My name is jack golhorn. I知 the president of the neighborhood association. Our association is made up of the first phase primarily of this. And I am here today to -- hopefully to do a couple of things, offer our exreetion frankly for what you guys have already done in moving this along and what I hope you will do in the future and encourage you to focus on maybe any opportunities that this city letter, the way I understand it, may present. Just very quickly to react, when sh 130 opens in late 2006 or early 2007, the cameron road entrance to 1230 is going to dump traffic down cameron road and they will dump into grove lane. As that is the first phase of the extension of howard lane. That means that traffic from 130 coming from howard lane going to 130 and coming back is going to go down our street for a big part of that. Some of it will continue down to parmer, but the part that you were talking about, Commissioner Davis, that goes down cameron road is in our neighborhood association. It is incredibly important from our perspective, and we're here as a neighborhood association, and I know a lot of times that neighborhood associations are not here saying build the road. But we know that development is coming and everybody said we're in a desired development zone. And we know it's coming. We've got to have that infrastructure or it's going to be impossible for us to live. I am here hoping that -- two things. First of all, I understand that both projects, the first phase from dessau to cameron and then the second part from cameron to sh 130 have been recommended to the citizens bond review panel, whatever the name is of that for their consideration. Anything that can be done to make sure the project are completed in the bond issue is incredibly important for the opportunities for it to be built. Secondly, we are very much supportive of moving forward on the planning part of the second phase or the second part of howard lane, which we think needs to be done. That's an incredibly important artery for our neighborhood to keep the traffic placed in the proper regard where it's going to be. We know it's going to be several years after the opening of 130 before howard lane is constructed. And if we don't make a movement now -- and I知 here saying that what I知 hoping is that you will take any advantage of any blink we get from the city that they're willing to cooperate that you will take full advantage of that, that you will consider moving forward. I have a lot of confidence in joe and his department and appreciate the fact that Commissioner Davis and Commissioner Sonleitner and you guys came to our informational meeting that was in our neighborhood a month ago. And our neighbors are all fired up and they're working with joe's people to try to submit their input into this. But the second part of this is also very important, we think, into the overall planning. And I know that it's been very frustrating, probably from both parties' standpoint because a lot of times i'll catch it and I知 sure joe's frustration would see it coming back from the landowners he's talking about. I really hope that you guys will figure out a process to make people come to the table and work that out. I know I believe that the people are working in good faith on both sides. Again, I知 here to say thank you, to again amplify how incredibly important these particular projects are for this whole section of the county because it's more than just our neighborhood, it's a huge part of the traffic infrastructure. Thank you. And if there's anything that you can tell us that we can do to help to make sure the projects are on the bond issues and obviously they are as Commissioner Davis has pointed out to me several times, we've got them on there and we have to get them passed. We understand that. We're trying to do our part as a neighborhood. We're here to tell you we support what you're doing and to encourage you to do this whole project as soon as you can. Thank you for letting me interject my two cents' worth.
>> and i'd like to thank him for his participation on the cameron road project because it was through his efforts that three of the property owners donated right-of-way for the county road project. And he and his family dedicated right-of-way. So I must say at the same time that every property owner that we're not able to agree with on howard lane, we're going to condemn for right-of-way on cameron road so. Jack has the spirit. I wish it was broadly shared by all the property owners in that area.
>> do we have the dedication instrument on the piece through the city of Austin? We might use this opportunity for the mayor that that piece that's through the city to make sure that we've got the right-of-way dedication instruments and to make sure that that's locked down.
>> I spoke with john joseph, who was the attorney for the subdivision, the harris branch, about that. And he and david lloyd, the city attorney, have been in contact. So what they have been missing has now been rectified.
>> that's very helpful.
>> thank you very much. Judge, Commissioner, my name is robert stark, I知 here with the consulting group. And we're here this morning just to say first of all to thank you and we appreciate the opportunity that you're taking in considering mayor wynn's letter and the gist of it in the cooperativeness between the city and the county resolving the howard lane issue. We do represent the landowners, developers there, and have been working diligently with them. We believe that this cooperative effort may help that effort along. And we want you to know that we're going to make ourselves available and willing to make ourselves available to you, the court, as well as the city to continue to work through this because we believe that the actions that are proposed in this letter and the action that you take is going to go a very long way to enhance a lot of development along that area that will both be good for the county and the city. So thank you.
>> I know the answer is already yes, but for the record you all have gotten a copy of the proposed public-private partnership draft that's pending before the Commissioners court. And I think you've also received we'll call it a template for a signing on with the county in relation to a public-private pip?
>> we have.
>> thank you. (indiscernible).
>> move to authorize staff to draft an appropriate response to the mayor's letter, that we indicate basically what's done on this project, progress made and what we understand the obstacles to be at this point. Basically it's noncompliance with the county standards, right, joe?
>> it's the standards we use for public-private partnership agreements.
>> I second that. I second the motion. And I guess if we can judiciously move forward so at least we'll know exactly where we are, moving forward. Meaning, joe, if you can get with the city officials to eventually come back and ensure that we can get those things on the table, resolved as quickly as possible and solve the differences.
>> the city of Austin I think from the very beginning has been cooperative, whether it's from design or construction of the harris branch subdivision. They expressed that early on. I think the mayor's letter just reiterates that.
>> right. [overlapping speakers].
>> I think we still need to verbally say some things -- (indiscernible). And again, i'd like to thank you with the neighborhood association and of course the representative from pete winstead's firm to show up and hopefully we can move forward with this project, private-public partnership down the road. But thank y'all.
>> and you can send the message back, we need the cooperation of three landowners. It's absolutely essential. The two governments cannot do this by themselves.
>> exactly.
>> judge, at some point in time if this thing continues to get stuck, I may be back here urging the court to try to get all these people to sit down and mediate this deal. This is something that we ought to be able to work out because I sense both sides definitely know the need to get it worked out. So maybe we can play a role in that and we'll be glad to help.
>> thank you.
>> all in favor? 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:
Wednesday, May 25, 2005 7:48 AM