Travis County Commissioners Court
October 18, 2005
Item 11
It is 2:31. And number 11 revised language: consider and take appropriate action on granting an exemption from platting requirements for a condiminium project in precinct three: indian hill estates. (three detached structures - one common-wall unit, total of four dwelling units - 20.89 acres - indian hill road - no fiscal posting - sewage service to be provided by onsite wastewater system, wcid #17 water supply city of Austin 2-mile etj).
>> this is a -- as you read, a condominium. We treat condominiums just like we do subdivisions, so we are reviewing this under the same standards as we would a subdivision. This has a particularly difficult access issue, and that is somewhat the crux of why we have as many parties as we have here today. It's a fairly rough terrain, steep. The applicant is asking the county for approval of a drive way are not the right-of-way of a platted subdivision adjoining his tract, that is his access. He gets access to his tract from another subdivision with an abutting street and he is putting a drive way within that right-of-way easement. With that said, the terrain in that right-of-way corridor is very steep. As is the property itself. It's got in challenges -- top graphic challenges. The applicant has gone through an arduous process, being reviewed by the city and the county, and he is hoping to get some approval here today for a four-unit condominium. I think I started out with more units than that, but in the negotiation process has boiled it county to four single-family units. The fire district has reviewed this. Again, as I said, that was very important because of all of the peculiars about this, that is the issue for our staff is how do you get access to these four units, and what happens in emergency situations. The grades of the drive way are steeper than we would like to see in a development like this. But on the risk side, we are saying this is not as many units as they might have had on a similar sized track. We are talking about four units. And for my part, since our role has been typically consumer protection, I wanted legal notes that would alert those four future buyers to the grade of the drive way and then under certain circumstances like snow and freezing conditions, their access may be problematic. Now, I think the issue here in part today is meeting county standards. The steepness of the drive, and being able to build that drive in such a way that it doesn't compromise surrounding property owners. With that, I would open the flar for the applicant to explain -- the floor to the applicant to explain the process they've been through, and then I think there are people here to speak, adjoining property owner who is concerns.
>> at some point will someone explain to us what the colors mean? That is a part of yours?
>> judge, I have one technical question before we get into this? Wasn't there a restriction they could not resubdevice this property and no more than four units was also going to be a restriction in terms of consumer protection for if we do something today it doesn't get changed by some future Commissioner court of revisiting the issue and changing something.
>> all right.
>> okay.
>> good afternoon, judge, Commissioners, I’m jim, the land development consultant here, serving as agent for the property owner who is sitting next to me. Our civil engineer unfortunately was called away on short notice on Sunday for a family matter in mexico, and he said he is hopeful to return on Thursday, but he unfortunately couldn't be here today for the meeting. Judge, to answer your questions, the colors here represent -- first of all, it's indian hills estate, 20.9 acres outlined in red, and as was said, we are restricted. Our only point of access is the indian hill right-of-way, dedicated in 1962 by the former property owner for the sole purpose of providing access to this property so that it wouldn't be land locked. The orange color here represents the residential properties that border us. There are 23 lots adjacent to the indian hills property, and most of those range in size from a quarter to an achier in size. Some of those have been combined but you can see the relative size of those lots compared to our property. The green is property owned by the lcra and the county conservation land, that is permanent green space. Just above the paper here is like travis. This property slopes down and eventually does go to Lake Travis. The orange -- the three orange spots within the indian hill property represent the locations of the proposed housing units. As was said, one of them is designed to be possibly a common-wall unit, so a total of four on this property, and the yellow of course is the dave way proposed. These plans have been in review for a significant period of time, years. This plan has gone through a number of reviews and approvals to date. The fire marshall signed off on this plan originally in February of 2005. And he, again, signed a letter October 10, 2005 reiterating his approval of the plan. I’m not sure what the scope of your review is today. What I saw posted on the agenda is whether this should be exempt from the platting requirement. I’ll be happy to talk about design issues but I guess I’m respond to questions rather than take your time.
>> this is a quick one. Related to a joint-use drive way, we allow without variance up to how many?
>> eight.
>> so this is well below the standard on that, okay.
>> my name is paul, I’m the applicant. And you have prepared this in consultation with tom, the declaration of easements and restrictions which identify in there the paragraph I believe [indiscernible] earlier with respect to the accessibility of the roads and the declaration with respect to Travis County's position on that, as well as the four single-family structures, limitation on this property with no more than four to be constructed and this is only allowed to be modified or changed as well as enforceable by Travis County. So those are in the restricted covenant that I have, I believe to be signed and recorded today, along with the indian hill homeowner association which has been formed as required, to file these restrictive covenants. So I have that available for all of you to look at. I don't want to take a lot of our time today, so I’ll just basically respond to questions as well. But this property was initially purchased for the purposes of my homesite and I intend to build my home on this process. I’m getting quite gray through the process, and the first time I ever talked to one of the Commissioners about this property was probably in 1999. I may have had a few less gray hairs at the time --
>> me, too, but there is lots to deal with.
>> the primary thrust here is for me to be able to build my home. Because it's 21 acres I intended it to be a family compound of sorts. And I don't like that term "compound" but a place where several members of my family could have a home. But mother unfortunately passed away in the intervening time, but we are still interested in having several homesielts on the property -- home sites on the property. And the costs of getting to where we are today have been fairly expensive, and this will allow me to recoup some of that, and these are my flaib neighbors, and where I want to build my home, and I have to make peace with them. I’ve endeavored to be a good neighbor through this process. We started off wanting seven single-family home sites, brought it down to six and then five, and it's come down now to three home sites with four structures. This is my final plan that has made it through the city, and now I’m just trying to get to my property which is from the top of mountain trail down to the beginning of the property itself. Just as a kind of a footnote, back in 2000 I submitted a request to stayy over at the -- stacy over at the county offices to construct a 20-foot wide drive way in a 50-foot right-of-way, and I submitted that because it was my hope to start getting things moving. I was probably a little bit naive but I had put on my application there would be seven home sites on the property and my drive way permit was approved and I have that permit here, along with my communication to the county office at that time. So this is definitely become a long, arduous process, but I do want to do it correctly, and it is going to be my home. So we are glad to answer any questions and hopefully with resolve it today.
>> joe, did you build by the staff recommendation of approval for this? Is anything -- has anything come up that would cause you to want to retract this application? It meets all county standards and --
>> I would like to talk to the engineer one last time before I -- there has been some information presented regarding the topography of the right-of-way. I would like the engineer who designed the drive way to look at that and certify that he can build the drive way as intended. I mean, it's really a technical fact issue for him, and he is the one that prepared the plans. I think he ought to look at this information and tell me that he can do it.
>> what has happened where you would need to relook at this versus -- I’m sure before you would have signed off on staff recommends --
>> well, typically.
>> has something come up?
>> the engineer who designed the drie way basically from the aerial photography that gives him the topography of the right-of-way, that was basically alternate contour intervals of about two feet. We have a ground survey now on a 1-foot contour interval that is of course, more detailed given that it's a ground survey. And that may or may not affect what the engineer told us on the aerial ser view. I’m not -- survey. We base our review on the seal of an engineer who comes in and says he can do this. And maybe he comes in and says my opinion hasn't changed. Week still do this, but we do rely on the engineer's seal to make our recommendations to the court. And I think it's due del judgment and sentence for have that -- due diligence to ask that engineer to look at this before we file it.
>> I think the court also needs to understand if something is not done, you know, this week or next week, that it jeopardizes the applicant of really being thrown into a situation where I mean, the whole process -- and this may be because of what the city of Austin -- is that your understanding as well, joe? > yes, the city of Austin has a related deadline in terms of the submittal deadline we are running up against.
>> and what might that necessitate, paul? A six-months delay, would that put it into -- some of this has been declared stale, if you will, and they have to relook at --
>> I think all of these things are possible, and it probably does throw it into a six-month delay, which of course interferes with my schedule of being able to build my house, because I have to respect the construction restraints in that part of the county. So, yes, it's fairly time sensitive and we would like for the commission to be able to act if possible.
>> pretty tight deadlines with the canyon lands and disturbing the birds.
>> correct.
>> yes, sir.
>> [indiscernible]
>> okay.
>> judge, Biscoe and Commissioners I’m will wilson on behalf of stewart king. If I may approach this over here. [indiscernible] other than other than is that microphone on the end? It will just snap right off and if you would use that for us.
>> all right. He owns the property on both sides of this road, which, legally speaking gives him a set of unique standing in this matter and he is very concerned about his property rights and has been and has expressed that for a long time. I would say the threshold questions for the court today is that for a long time we've been looking at some kinds of plans and saying that survey just doesn't look right. And now he went to the trouble of hiring a survey and having a 1-foot on the ground survey done and sure enough, there are big serious differences between the on-the-ground survey on the the copy brought to us today, and I have copys for the Commissioners. What that means is that the plans as submitted are not accurate. We have a registered engineer here, forest powers who has examined this and has drawn a set of plans and has examined the plans. There have been a number of changes by the applicant, and so we may not have all of the changes but the ones we've seen have significant serious inaccuracies in them like the topo and the slope and where the trees are, and the exact location of it. So what we have here, and I’m not an engineer or a surveyor but we have certified documents from a surveyor and a licensed engineer saying these plans are not accurate. And if the survey was not accurate and the plans and approvals got on these plans are not accurate either. Furthermore, the engineer for the county, who is here and can speak for himself has sent out a memorandum saying this is not safe. So the Commissioner's court is in a situation where you're being asked to approve a road project that is not save by your own engineer, whose plans have not been approved by the county engineer, and who you now know have an inaccurate survey. Now, mr. Miser has owned this property since June 29, of 2005, this is his deed here. And what I would respectly request of the court is this is an engineering battle -- in the a battle, but an issue between the civil engineer, and this is a technical engineering point and I will ask mr. Forest powers to explain this but I would request it wait a few weeks and allow the engineers to sit down and resolve these matters and I am confident they could be resolved. That is really what we think should happen here. We have tried to goart this in good faith -- negotiate this in good faith and have not been able to do so up to now. This hearing was a surprise to us. In any event, I would like to have mr. Powers explain in more detail f that is all right. Mr. Powers.
>> my name is forest powers of powers engineering, a registered professional engineer and I’ve been asked by stewart king to look at the proposed submitted plans. I walked the right-of-way and it appeared to me there were inconsistence with what the plans showed and what I saw on the ground. So we hired a registered surveyorer to do an on-the-ground survey which is before you now. -- within the center lieb of the right-of-way that meets the 50% grade and the standards set out in the Travis County transportation guidelines.
>>
>> ...i believe not, no.
>> okay.
>> but they could have access with -- off of mountain trail. As easily as -- as off of the -- of the driveway. If they wanted to, right.
>> Commissioners, that's the difference -- funnel cloud
>>
>> ...and what they do down there is of no concern in this matter. If the county engineer says -- and we may not agree, but I believe that is an engineering thing, and the first question is what is the real slope? And we've been saying for quite a while, this doesn't actually represent the slopes. If you look at the plan caiivegly it doesn't represent what is really on the ground. So we went out and hired a surveyor and that is what came out.
>> so you believe there is an engineering solution to this.
>> and can we do that in a week?
>> mr. Sedillos is out-of-pocket right now, and also depends on design surveying. I know that mr. Wilson's client paid for the design surveys and the question is would you be able to share that cost with their engineer for their use?
>> I have to clarify with the client --
>> and if we were to move this forward administratively, you know what? Say we don't have an issue with this and we can move forward with contingent on this thing getting worked out, you know, then, I don't have an issue with this. We want to you understand we are okay with that, provided we can get it from an engineering standpoint and y'all are telling me then, hey, we don't have an issue with somebody going back there and doing on on 20 acres, 21 acres but we want it to be as right as y'all do.
>> as long as we can design it to meet the minimum standards and address all of the seart issues associated with that -- and that type of roadway and topography, I think we can come to an agreement.
>> would that help -- I mean, would that send a message that you need to the city? Knowing that you have, the pressure, paul, on you and make sure that engineering-wise you can go out and make this work.
>> I would respond in two parts. First is I hear my neighbor saying if it can meet county standards, being 15% grade where the county staff has already approved me moving to a 17%. So they also said they may not agree with the county staff. So I think we have an issue that will still be here aweek from now, which is that we'll be presenting a plan that the county staff may be fine with, but it's possible my neighbor may not be fine with. We want to work to staff the county and the county staff and immediate as many standards and approvaled as required. We have no question about that. And we thought we met that standard coming into this meeting. So I think the issue with my neighbor when you overlay their survey and our sawr vie, if I can just say it in broad terms, along the lines of this drive way that is in place is not significant at all. And from an engineering standpoint is easily achieved in terms of altering a couple of inches up or down the road at couple of locations. But we did talk about the issue more fully earlier when speaking with the neighbor's desire in the future to access this drive way that I’m building. He is going to have to cross some part of the public right-of-way because it doesn't touch the boundary line, and he is going to have to obtain just like I did, permits and approvals, and I guess he is going to have to get two curb countries one on indian hill and one on mountain trail, and I’m not sure if that is allowed or not, but he is going to have access on mountain trail and then on indian hill. He also indicated he would want that only at the upper elevation levels where the property is basically flat, has only like a few percent slope. So this is about a section of indian hill, about 25 feet long before it hits the slope that is not going to impact my neighbor at all from a drive way standpoint. And whether it's appealing to my neighbor at all, is not engineering-wise or otherwise effecting my neighbor.
>> I’m not interested in whether aesthetically a person likes it.
>> right.
>> I’m interested in whether it works from an engineering standpoint and then let him do whatever it takes to get the curb cuts and access the drive way. And I’m willing to work with him as well, and not try to stop him coming in and getting something as well. But I think it ought to be the thing that stops you if we can from an engineering standpoint get through this thing, that's what I think we ought to move.
>> and I think I’m building my drive way that in the future accommodates some desire of my neighbor to access is a hard standard for me to meet because I’m not going to be touching his lot. He has to cross that public right-of-way, therefore whether it's 10 feet or 20 feet, he has to have a curb cut and an approved set of plans and that is in the city's jurisdiction, so he has to have full city approval. I don't know whether that can be achieved or not. And I don't want to be here today or next week trying to achieve that goal when all I can put before you is what my plans show for my homes. I also wanted to point out just in terms of time, on September 20 is when my neighbor obtained this survey for the property that they were concerned that maybe our city of Austin topo was not accurate. So they obtained it but did not share it with us nor with the county until yesterday. I am really working in all ernest to make this happen and make it happen in an accurate and a dutiful and respectful way to my neighbors but I do want to keep in mind that sometimes we have different goals, and if my goal is to do what I’ve stated, I’m not always sure what other people's goals are. So I want this information to speak for itself. That is why I am interested in moving forward with staff's blessing as quickly as possible.
>> well, I’m certainly willing as the precinct they are Commissioner to move forward next week, especially if it is going to be that, you know, we put this thing contingent from an engineering standpoint and we send the message for the city of aws than we don't have a -- Austin that we don't have to a problem with what is going on here as long as we can do what needs to be done to fix the deal. That way you get what you need and will's client is okay, and I don't have a problem with him coming in and seeing us when it comes time for him to do a drive way, access, the private drive. I mean, to nea is the way we -- that is the way that we aught to handle it.
>> just a response to some of the things that paul said. We met with paul and his agent several weeks ago. At that point in time, we were told that this road has been designed based on an on-the-ground survey and asked that that information be provided to us, so we were forced to go out and obtain our own on-the-ground survey. And secondly, our client, mr. Stewart king, has approved drie way per -- drive way permits to access that right-of-way. And we are not taking into consideration that in the design that has been submitted to the county.
>> I want to understand what you just said there, you have an approved permit, and so there is a presumption along that drie way of where -- drive way of where that cut will be?
>> there is.
>> which is it.
>> he has a stretch showing an approximate location where he assumes those driveways to be.
>> so you have permits for a project that doesn't even exist?
>> that is correct.
>> when was those permits pulled?
>> when?
>> you have them.
>> I mean that seems just a little strange, if you're trying to design something and you don't have it designed yet, how would you know to the inch why your drive way scut going to be.
>> it's just knowing that it's a logical place, and you have it submitted on the plans for the county, and we walked the site and I found areas between rarj groups of trees and to have the drive way go through where the grades going into the site are appropriate and those are the locations we showed on the plans.
>> and you obtained this permit when?
>> I don't have that information in front of me.
>> I’m looking for it, Commissioner, I’m sure I have it, but I can't lay my hands on it.
>> do we have a sense this is recent or a million years ago? Give me a sense --
>> well, I believe it was this summer, but, you know --
>> stacy is that nod a yes?
>> incidentally I sent that survey to the county on October 4.
>> is there -- I mean, will, do you think there is -- do we have an issue if we -- if you know that we are going to move forward, but it's contingent on having an accepted engineering plan from the county? And this is where it's important. I mean, I realize that somebody may differ. You find an engineer saying well, I don't think that is right, but you all know that the governmental entity is the one that has to okay this thing. If we think it's already, then he would -- all right, then I would expect y'all toll say, okay, okay, you've done what you're supposed to do and we are accepting of that. And I think you ought to take the staff to task on every thing and somebody has to come out and we obviously are going to be the responsible party if we permit it, but to me, it's the way to move this along, and not hold somebody hostage over, you know, trying to move ahead with what they want, but not looking beyond -- I mean, I certainly don't want the integrity of somebody's house or wall or whatever property they have, I mean, I would want that to happen with your client, will, any more than I would want something to happen to paul. So let's just find a way. Do you think you are going to be each other's christmas list? I doubt it, but I’m just trying to get you to a spot where you can move forward and each of you get something that you want.
>> I couldn't tell you exactly when the permit wrs issued. I’ve done about 2700 so far this year. It's not unfeasible I would have issued drive way permits for these folks for access, these are just proaf permits -- approach permits and go from the property line to the pavement or gravel, whatever is there.
>> so it's not a specific -- I’ll use the word "curb cut" although that is probably not the right word. But it's not that it says it's, there but just that you'll have permission to do that.
>> it's going to be 10 foot off of the property line, and when you get on site, sometimes you have to adjust for trees and slopes, whatnot.
>> judge, I’m happy to give it a week to see if we can move forward with this thing, but I will say that this time next week, I mean, if somebody is nodding from our camp that they think we can get this deal worked out, I’m inclined to make a motion to grant the exemption. But I’m also willing to get them get back in a week and get back sooner than later. And y'all can work on the thing and see how that works there. Is there anything -- I mean, staff, would y'all find that acceptable if we were to move forward that way? And, will, if you're client has a major issue with this thing that our engineering feel like they need to know along with -- then by all means sit down and see if you can work the thing out. That's all we are trying to do here. I mean, y'all got a point? That's great, we have folks here that need to move forward and that's all aim after.
>> judge, I would ask we have this back on next week.
>> do we have y'all's dmoiment try to get together?
>> yes, sir.
>> yes.
>> and it's really going to be critical to get the sharing of that on-the-ground new survey, and that gets us closer to something that works for your client and the other side as well.
>> so you are going to go for Travis County, we need anybody from the sheriff's office at this meeting or do you think you'll be all right?
>> I’ll bring stacy.
>> we'll have it back on next week and try to get to you earlier than 2:30.
>> excellent, thank you.
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 18, 2005 10:46 AM