Travis County Commissioners Court
June 7, 2005
Item 16
16 is to consider and take appropriate action on draft requests for qualifications. 20500098 lp, professional engineering services for the walnut creek erosion and flooding project. Now, I had as of late yesterday, I was still looking for the draft rfq... And then are we still working on that or did we have that.
>> we have it. There's a few comments from the city of Austin but they're minor that we need to put into the document.
>> okay. The court has a copy of this?
>> we sent it late yesterday afternoon and then we sent -- we e-mailed it and we sent you a hard copy late afternoon.
>> okay. 55 pages.
>> yes, sir, 55 pages. And that is our standard rfq document. What changes basically each time is the scope of work. We're asking for an engineer who has experience in hydrology and a bunch of stuff that I can't even pronounce.
>> let's see what the city had to say and then ms. Cubeck has some comments.
>> yes, john, environmental officer, just to kind of bring you back, it was just two weeks ago y'all said go forth and get an rfq together, we did that in short order and I simultaneously shipped it to expertise at the city that can review this type of stuff and they have been very, very copive. It took them a bit of time to get some comments back, they were very minor comments and looks like we're kind of off on the right foot with the general approach that we're taking, so really -- I mean I know I spoke with ms. Cubeck and she had a couple of comments herself. I don't -- I mean I think this is going just find and it's -- it's essentially ready to go.
>> so, now, does the copy in our possession contain the latest recommendations or are they pretty minor?
>> very minor. They are not -- the recommendations they've gotten from the city have to do with essentially editing, you know, verbiage, not technical changes to what you have in your packet, and I know ms. Cubeck has some suggestions on the extent of the study and so forth, which are also minor in my opinion.
>> okay. Ms. Cubeck?
>> hello, I’m christina cubeck, secretary of walnut place neighborhood association. Thank y'all for the opportunity to speak on this issue. Today I am glad that things are going in a forward motion, I like that. I did have the opportunity to read this 55-page document as i've been sitting here this morning. There -- yeah, well, I’m trying to block out everything else that has been going on around me just to read it an focus, but really it's good. I had minor questions that I asked john coole and there's one area that occurs on two pages, on page 6 and on page 7, in regards to the stretch of walnut creek between where it says between 3610 and 3632 quiet drive. It needs to be between 3610 and 3636 quiet drive. 3632 is my neighbor and I’m 3634, and my neighbor over at 3636 in between us is an area which is not as severe as the kelly's or the magners, but it has indeed dropped off, it swirls there and land sliding is occurring in that spot, so I believe that that should be corrected so that that gets...
>> [inaudible]
>> ... Addressed by the professional.
>> from 3610 through --
>> 36.
>> 3636, is that correct.
>> yes.
>> instead of 32.
>> yes. And --
>> is that on another page?
>> okay, it's on page 6 in that first paragraph general scope and then on page 7 it's phase iii, specific project information location and limits in the middle okay. And that is all I saw in my proofreading and editing.
>> judge, I would like to move approval.
>> okay.
>> of 16 unless there needs to be further discussion on this. This -- let me ask one question. Did I get a second on this that?
>> yes.
>> Commissioner Gomez seconded it.
>> okay. Thank you. Can you tell us when this probably will be completed and brought back to the Commissioner's court with the --
>> we will have to advertise for fifteen days. Normally we advertise for 21 days.
>> okay.
>> and then probably another at least two weeks to evaluate and whether you want us to come back or not to get a -- to give a recommendation on who to negotiate with or whether you want us to go into negotiations, it could be a two-month process or about a 3-month process.
>> okay.
>> where we have a actual contract back to you.
>> okay.
>> something like this would help us to know --
>> what the ranking is --
>> -- who we are recommending to further negotiate with.
>> okay.
>> and may as well make sure the residents are on board at the time we make that decision also.
>> exactly.
>> okay. I think it would be interesting to see who the choices are and the whole process.
>> yes.
>> okay.
>> yes, sir?
>> just for cleanup, says on page 25, you might want to take executive assistant barbara silly off of that list, and put martin zanzow, probably wants her listed.
>> is that the key list? I forgot my copy down stairs, but probably the key list.
>> she needs to be moved over to former employees.
>> yes, she doesful we need to update that.
>> we just checked that again to see if it's still current. That's everchanging anyway.
>> that changes on a daily basis, I’m glad you pointed out that.
>> anything else on this motion? All in favor. That passes by unanimous vote. Thank you very much. Ms. Cubeck. Thank you for your patience this morning.
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, June 8, 2005 7:12 AM