Travis County Commissioners Court
January 24, 2006
Item 36
We need to take one executive session item in open court. We've got mr. Sweeney here. I put this item back on because there were clearly some outstanding issues. I know staff plans to give us legal advice because there is a little issue that has surfaced. So number 36 for an open court discussion, and that is to receive briefing and take appropriate action on issues raised and basic development permit application of bill sweeney and sun dial trust. If y'all on would give us your full names, we would be happy to get your comments. Is.
>> good morning. I’m the owner of lone star ready mix.
>> bill sweeney, trustee of sun dial trust.
>> I guess it would help us to know what issues are still outstanding and what the court needs to do. The court did look at several issues last time and gave directions on what we thought would resolve them. Some have been resolved, I take it, some have not. Okay.
>> we were in here on January 3rd before the Commissioners court, and at that time tnr representative was here, stacy, and several items came up for discussion, and it's my belief and I think the evidence will show that it boils down to three items left to be reconciled. My wife brenda and I went straight over to tnr offices with stacy to make sure we had a meeting of the minds on most of the items. There were a more detailed site plan, a certified or licensed person to make a determination of the effluent treatment capabilities or existing on-site septic system. And the third item had to do with a part of the old bastrop road that allegedly still belongs and is owned by the county. And so stacy agreed that those are the three items.
>> there was one other one.
>> my side provided those three items forthwith. The fact of land to be purchased -- at that time we were talking about vacation of the property. Subsequently stacy said that a deed was discovered. I don't know what that means other than someone apparently deeded the property to the county, but it was my understanding this was a state highway. And then highway 71 was constructed parallel with the old highway. A part of the old highway was abandoned and sun dial trust owns property on three sides of this little extension of the old bastrop road, so it doesn't make any sense for the county to continue to maintain this 200 some-odd feet of road. We had put a gate across it several years ago at that point where our property actually enters the right-of-way property, as we understood it at that time. Anyway, we took care of those three items. We still maintain the position that it's stacy's office's obligation to issue this permit because there's an existing agreement between -- this is in the e.t.j. Of the city of Austin. There's an existing agreement between the city of Austin and Travis County wherein the four issues that are involved in development as I understand it are bridges, road, environment, and what's the other one, fred? There's four items. Anyway, the city has jurisdiction over environment and utilities. We do not need the city's utilities. We have satisfied the city as to the environmental issues. That leaves roads and permitting for the county. So stacy has taken the position that we as an applicant as of June the 30th we applied for this permit seven months ago almost. It's tnr's position apparently that we have to pass mustard of all the other entities. Tceq, which she as the owner of the concrete plant has already made her application with tceq, she's pursued that. But it not our position that we have to submit to all these other things that -- equipment perhaps to the operation of this business from a permitting standpoint. I have over the years -- I’ve been in business 51 years. I’ve gotten permits to be a wholesale beer, liquor dealer. I’ve had federal gun permits and licenses. I’ve had over 3100 permits issued for building permits in bexar county. I hold a water works license to operate water systems. I’m a licensed on site sewage treatment installer. I also know how to drive a truck. I’ve had all kinds of permits. I have never had to spend over 60 days to carry a permit and I’ve been pursuing that for seven months. And it's frustrating. May I approach the court?
>> certainly. It would help us to find out what issues are outstanding. So we can figure out if we can make progress on them today.
>> this is the chronological order of sequence of events that spells out the procedure. I have an engineer in attendance. One of my engineers who is very well qualified who has worked for the county of travis, another engineer, very well respected in the community, kirk risener, was unable to be here. But if you have engineering questions, I think he can answer them. We'd like to get this project on, get an answer from the court that you're not going to permit tnr to issue the permit and we will take the next option.
>> okay. Staff, can you tell us what issues are still outstanding?
>> basically the last time we were here, mr. Sweeney had specific comments on the review comments we sent out, specifically number 4, 6, 7, 10 and 11. Those were the only one in question. Now, I can go through each of the comments and I guess that would be helpful. Comment number one was a signature block on the cover sheet. As of the 12th, which was the latest set of plans, we had a revision block, but not a signature block on the cover. That one is still outstanding.
>> a signature block for who to sign?
>> Travis County and all of other applicable entities that would review the permit application.
>> so what other entities would that be?
>> city of Austin, txdot, possibly tceq.
>> why don't we put four lines down there and put names to the left or right of them and we'll deal with the issue that way?
>> that's usually how it's done. Keep in mind we don't usually have the comments. We wanted to go over it with them first. I don't think that will be a problem for his engineer to do. No problem at all. Easy.
>> so I guess if the engineer won't do it, what's to keep us from taking a ruler and doing four lines?
>> we need a little bit more than that on the plans. The four-line trick would work, no problem.
>> but we need a place for the entities to sign or somebody there that represents the entity to sign certifying approval by that particular entity.
>> yes.
>> so in addition to needing the place for signature, we need the actual signature of those entities.
>> that's the issue.
>> so it's not the lines for signing, it's the signature of approval.
>> okay.
>> may I speak again?
>> do you understand that, mr. Sweeney? Okay. Go ahead.
>> we have our development permit on the same subject line as well as an on-site sewage treatment system permit application. One of tnr's engineers has signed a construction and development permit, construction for an osff. That's a septic system. And I have a message here from tnr dated the 23rd, a development permit has not been issued at this time. When I called for an inspection from tnr, the inspector says, well, bill, where is your septic system permit and where is your development permit? I don't have a permit development, it's not been issued, the septic system has been issued. We installed the septic, we call the inspector. The inspector comes out, he doesn't find the development permit. So whose time is lost, the county's time and my time.
>> but does that address your concern?
>> no.
>> okay. Place for approval by the four entities, including Travis County, what document is that, ms. Sheffield?
>> the document mr. Sweeney has?
>> no, what document do we need the four entities, including Travis County to approve?
>> we call it a cover sheet. It's the cover sheet to the plans.
>> we need a cover sheet to the plan that the four entities, including Travis County -- [overlapping speakers].
>> I would think that the two departments would speak to each other. We don't know this.
>> mr. Sweeney, --
>> we never saw the system. -- we installed the system, we called for the inspection. The inspector comes out, he walks the job because I don't have my development permit, but I have my on-site sewage treatment permit.
>> what if we do this can we copy that cover sheet that, say, another party has submitted to us that we have approved and just send that to mr. Sweeney so he will know exactly what we're talking about?
>> absolutely.
>> we'll send you a sample of what the department is asking for? And I don't know that -- that's what I’m saying, you were going to the septic system a minute ago. Is there an issue from the septic system from our perspective.
>> I believe it's clear, provided they take off the notes to any new structures that are noted on the plans we receive on the 12th.
>> what's the importance of the notes regarding new structure?
>> it's just continuity of the plans. Site plan doesn't show any new structures, the latest version; however, the notes on the plans state that there's new structures, so it's kind of one of those which is it. If there's new structures, the fire marshal, all that, septic has to be involved, if there's not they don't, but they need to take off all references to new structures.
>> so he's saying the septic system seemed to be okay, but you made reference to new structures. And but you're telling us there are no new structures?
>> the new structures were perhaps on that-- there was a storage building or something that the engineer had placed on the development plan. That has subsequently been removed. There are no structures other than the concrete plant. Is that right?
>> that's right. The structures that we're referring to are columns. It's all concrete structures for a portable concrete batch plant, but there's no structures where any person are going to occupy. So there's really no need for any other sewage or treatment.
>> okay. Wait a minute. So if the document reflects that, that ms. Rodriguez just said --
>> okay, there's two issues. They're conflicting, the plans are conflicting. And writing it says that there are new structures, new office type buildings. They're in the impervious cover calculations. On the site plan it doesn't show them. They did remove them from the site plan, they just need to catch up and remove them from the impervious cover calculations as well.
>> do you understand that?
>> what does it boil down to now?
>> she said you have two documents and they represent something different. One of them --
>> it's the same document.
>> okay. But there are two different different indications, right?
>> you need a fourth revised document, right?
>> actually, I think this one would be number five. I will get you a copy of these comments.
>> so you need another site plan.
>> I just need a revision of the latest site plan that your engineers delivered to me.
>> what else?
>> you need the site plan to be internally consistent?
>> pardon?
>> exactly.
>> you need to be internally consistent.
>> the wrilg on it and the on -- the writing on it and the drawings consistent?
>> exactly.
>> okay. What else?
>> I’m just going to go through the rest of these comments. We asked that they include Travis County construction notes on the plans. Typically this is also done on the cover sheet. There's one little sticking point here, because this property is completely within the floodplain, this development, you're going to have to modify the note that says no stockpiling within the 100 floodplain. You're going to have to make it some sort of a floodway note. I think your engineer will know what I’m talking about here and he will also get a copy of those comments.
>> what, stock pond?
>> stockpiling, our standard construction notes do not allow stockpiling within the 100 year floodplain; however project as a batch plant will have things in the floodplain. Therefore that note will have to be modified. We'll help you out. Don't worry.
>> let me ask here. Mr. Sweeney, let me ask you something. Because it's real obvious that you're asking for something that is kind of foreign to you that would be -- I can imagine me sitting here trying to follow this thing. You've got a guy back here that's your engineer. You've got a guy that probably knows her language. Fred, please come up here and take your client and say here are the things that stacy needs to have in order for this gentleman to get his permit. I mean, you've got a guy that used to do this for us.
>> Commissioner, I’m a subcontractor on this. I did the floodplain analysis. I don't have anything to do with the site planning other than working with the engineer towards that end. The fact that there may be issues with the site plan, I’m here because mr. Sweeney asked me to be and I can answer any questions you might have related to the floodplain or the analysis there of, how it affects the property or anything like that, but I don't have -- I didn't prepare the site plan.
>> and ms. Rodriguez, I want to make sure I say this to you as well. Nothing would please me more than to get you quickly through this process, but we've got rules here and we've got a process here that needs to be respected as well. And we are not asking anything that anyone else with a concrete batch plant, be it a county road or state highway would be asked, requested to do. And we're trying to be helpful and we want to be helpful here, but we can't bypass process. If we had to go through this on each and every site plan of somebody saying, well, you need to capture that, you need to track that down, you need to put it altogether, we would never get any work done over at transportation and natural resources. Hang on a second, mr. Sweeney. I’ve got the floor. So that needs to be respected. We want to get you through, but some of this stuff falls on the applicant, and in this case it's mr. Sweeney, not you because he owns the land. You need to work with us on getting this in. We want you to get this done, but it falls on the applicant to provide all the information. We're not supposed to be the ones preparing all this work, we're not supposed to be the ones -- we want to be helpful, but some of this really is the responsibility of the applicant, and we need you to please help us take ownership of this process. And we're willing to be helpful, but some of this is stuff that you have to do and it's not for us to go running around looking for signatures and signature blocks because that's what goes with putting together a completed application. And again werks not asking you to do anything anyone else would not be asked to do.
>>
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>> ...why can't the government regulatory agency follow the rules like we are required to follow the rules. Just a simple question. Why doesn't the other side follow the rules and as I have to follow the rules.
>> we ought to follow the rules --
>> by responding to my application within 14 days, it took 40 days. Stacy says I have in my hands quickly what you need. I received those items yesterday. On the 23rd, I have the fax document here she sent to my attorneys as well as three. Attorneys -- as well as me. I bill swinney hereby file this application for a basic development permit. In the permit herein applied for is granted acknowledgements have to be bound for Commissioners court of Travis County to see that all provision of the permit are faithfully performed. I certificate tie that the above statements are true and correct. Authorization is hereby granted to t.n.r. To enter upon the property for inspection purposes and I signed it. Doesn't say I have to do all of these things prior to -- to the issuance of the development. It says that I have to comply. Why can't we get it done so that ana can move forward with the business and we get this thing off the dime. I will be glad to sign any document that she brings to me that says the permit is hereby issued subject to you performing these simple items, can we do that? We discussed that last week, mr. -- last meeting, January 3rd. Got legal advice and explained to you the county's position on that. So I’m not sure that we are making purchase progress by going back over that. What's the next issue?
>> we are up to comment number 3. Were we asked to provide a drainage report for viewing approval. We asked that it be specific about the site, including proposed and existing impervious cover. And drainage information. We did get the latest set of plans, we are asking that the engineer modify those to reflect the lack of new buildings, no office space. New office space. Also as I understand with conferences with fred, he has prepared a flood way study. We believe if we can get a copy of this, look at this, that this will satisfy our other issues with the floodplain on this. This and the modification of the note as in the previous comment.
>> we need to note -- the note modified as to the drainage report and the -- what kind of study?
>> a floodway study.
>> a copy of the floodway study that we understand has been prepared. Has that been prepared?
>> we have done a floodplain analysis, yes, sir.
>> that's the report that we are talking about?
>> yes, sir.
>> if we could get a copy of that, if there are no issues with it, along with the modification, this pointings away. Because it would have been satisfied. Next?
>> okay. Comment number 4, this was one of the contested ones from the last time we were there. We asked that a traffic impact analysis -- be provided because of old bastrop highway and concrete trucks being placed on that. That road is not in a condition to accept that kind of traffic and those type of trucks. At the time of the last meeting, I believe is it the third, we thought it would be a simple abandonment or vacation of the right-of-way. Almost the next day we found a deed which means the right-of-way has to be sold to mr. Swinney. There's still some issues that we need to go over in executive on this. To date mr. Swinney has gotten a signoff from blue bonnet, I believe it is. He's having some trouble getting a few of the other signoffs like from the water service provider. We think we still may have a solution, sale of the right-of-way is still a viable option. If we can work through it, that comments will go away.
>> why is the impact study required when we are not entering a county road from the plant? We are entering a state highway?
>> according to your site plan, you are crossing an existing county road.
>> we are buying that.
>> yeah. You haven't yet.
>> if we buy it, it's ours, right.
>> mr. Swinney, we are trying to work out a way for you to buy it. But the utility companies have easements, right if.
>> that's correct.
>> so we are -- on this property --
>> another easement. Whatever the utility company may want. If we own it, we will issue a new easement.
>> but it has to be captured in legal documents, sir. It just isn't does we can just put on and say it happened. It has to go through a process --
>> [multiple voices]
>> do anything, anyone else would not have to do related to moving easements and making it all in legal language that gets recorded at the Travis County clerk's office.
>> I think on this aspect, t.n.r. Does support mr. Swinney's purchase of this right-of-way. But there are some issues that we need to talk about in executive session.
>> for legal, is there a way for us to support the purchase, make the transfer, subject to the easesments that are there where they just -- they go forward with the property. Give me the legal answer to that in executive session. Okay?
>> okay.
>> we are trying to work through that issue. It's a little more complicated on January 3rd. We didn't know about the various easements that the utility companies had. We thought it was simply you and Travis County. Beg your pardon?
>> a little community water system about a quarter of a mile away. The water line currently along the right-of-way of the subject property. Now, in the event the trust purchases this strip of land, then we purchase it subject to any existing easement. That may be of record, if it's not of record, we would be glad to convey it to the water company, the necessary easement to access his water line. If we can legally do that and the utility companies agree, they would have to agree, wouldn't they, tom? That makes about as much sense to me as anything else, we will try to get that done. There's a little bit more work than we thought would be required.
>> we can always make more work.
>> okay.
>> or we can always make it less work. [laughter]
>> > was always one of the contested ones, this is the exact same issue where we asked about the proposed truck traffic on to our right-of-way. This is going to be addressed if we can get the sale of this right-of-way we also want a restrict. He provided me a letter saying we could construct something that would prohibit concrete truck from getting on to our roadway, old bastrop highway.
>> agree to install [indiscernible] close enough to passageway of a motor vehicle on to the county road. Satisfied.
>> various --
>> post like a 7-11.
>> those would be all right [multiple voices] in fact it's done. Okay.
>> comment number 6, was -- was that again this is another one dealing with the right-of-way. We wanted details of the crossing of the right-of-way from this property on one side of old bastrop to the other side. Again, these -- the sale of this excess right-of-way should take care of this.
>> okay. Now, do we have any idea about how much time it would take us to get with utility companies, execute whatever legal documents are necessary, assuming they agree with us?
>> I can't predict what their reaction would be or how quick they will respond to us, judge.
>> okay.
>> this is the applicant's responsibility. Mr. Swinney is working with the utility companies. There's just some specific issues on -- on how far we are going to go and deviate from our own internal policy on the sale of right-of-way.
>> what would we need to see? Letters from the utility company?
>> yes, I have an entire list which I faxed to mr. Swinney yesterday. Typically we have a preprinted form that the utility companies would sign.
>> the mistake that I made a while ago, this -- to throw it out, listening ears, right? Any existing easement that the utility company has of record that purchase is subject to that easement. Why do they have to sign-off again? Why do we have to do what you say when as a practical matter if they want additional easement, [indiscernible] granted. If they don't already have a -- I’ve not seen a recorded easement for their water line. We will be glad to provide one if they want it. An easement agreement. Why isn't that satisfied? You keep bringing up various utilities, there are only two. Electric signed off and the water is taken care of. There are no cables, nothing else that I know of. No telephone lines underground. Why wasn't that satisfied.
>> do we have reason to believe that there are more than two?
>> to be honest, we don't know.
>> well, we would expect those two to give us something in writing that evidences their agreement to the transfer of ownership subject to their easement rights.
>> when we get rid of excess right-of-way that is our policy to have them sign away their easement rights, yes.
>> but in this case we are not asking them to sign them away. We are asking them to allow them to transfer to sun --
>> that's the policy issue. Son dau.
>> this situation is a little different than what we are accustomed to. So the question is how do we facilitate it. Clearly we would need something from the utility companies, though, that indicates to us that -- their agreement to -- to whatever final arrangement we work out. Let's discuss that in executive session, too, tom. Next issue?
>> okay, comment number seven was provide evidence of review and approval from txdot for the proposed driveway connection. On this one mr. Swinney did provide a copy of a driveway permit issued by txdot for access for his existing office building. This driveway permit does not grant access from the subject property where the batch plant is going to 71. So we would still ask for a txdot review and permit on this -- on this driveway.
>> why is that necessary? The existing driveway access has been used for years, see, I don't know it, but the very basic fundamental fact is that txdot requires certain gauge of culvert type which is what was installed to accommodate any anticipation traffic. That's just the way it is. I have read the book frontwards and backwards. Have you ever read it, the txdot book? That's the way it is. Now you want me to go back and bother them and take another month, they like -- regulatory and permitting agencies take a lot of time. We already have a permit. It's been used for years. Since 1999. Concrete trucks, heavy equipment trucks, it has not collapsed, it has -- it has probably three feet of cover over it of -- of base material. This is redundancy.
>> why is that permit, if there is one, why is it insufficient? Or do we not know.
>> the permit wasn't granted for this particular property to access highway 71.
>> okay. Legally, tom, is that for us or txdot? I think it's for txdot to decide that. I understand mr. Swinney is saying. I think stacy is saying txdot need to speak for txdot, no mr. Swinney. I think all sties see is stacy is asking for is verification from txdot.
>> that it's okay. Verification that it's okay.
>> which is highly routine, we often get frustrated that txdot does things without talking to Travis County. We are trying to reciprocate there.
>> verification that the driveway permit is okay for a batch concrete plant.
>> that's correct. To serve a different purpose than what the permit was issued for. That's also correct. Sung property is direct -- subject property is directly. Highway 71 is here, the driveway is here, correctly in the perpendicular 90-degree angle, straight into the property is subject batch plant property. We are going to go around this way, we are going to straight in to this driveway that's been used, the only difference is that this little strip of -- of -- to be vacated strip of -- of old bastrop road separates the subject property from existing property that's been using the driveway for six years. They say it's a different property. Well ... It could be a different property, but we are not going -- we are not -- circumventing the permitting rule it's just that this little -- the location of the driveway is appropriate for -- for our project. We don't want to build another one. The 425-foot space requirement between driveway accesses on state highways. I can't build another one. We have a permit from an existing one. She wants me to go get it repermitted. Just confirmation that they don't have a problem with that, mr. Swinney. Is that -- do you think that that is not something that --
>> it's just time consuming, sir.
>> I realize that, but just like this is time consuming, I can see how frustrated you are. But at this stage, this is not getting anywhere. I mean it's -- there's no use coming over here and saying because -- how many of the things have been done since the last time that we had this conversation.
>> I think that we have made significant progress. The fire marshal is no longer in the picture with the new building being taken off the plans. Provided that the -- that the impervious cover notes that referenced the new building are also taken off. The septic system, the letter from mr. Swinney is perfectly okay with our program manager for onsite sewage, provided the references on the plan to the new buildings are taken off. We have made some progress as far as the electric utility signing off on the -- on the sale of the excess right-of-way. We are getting there. We are not all the way there, but we are getting a lot closer. Seems to me that there are -- six or seven things that have to be done and it is -- it's not arbitrary, unfortunately, it is cumbersome to get these things. Of all of the permits and things that you have done, mr. Swinney, have you never had to get a permit through Travis County or through the city of Austin? Have you -- of all of the permits that you have said that you have done, maybe most of yours have been done in bexar county.
>> in Travis County, probably -- probably over 100. Permits. On site sewage system permits, development permits.
>> obviously there are some complications --
>> I have never been confronted with a matter like this that's taken seven months to reconcile.
>> have you ever done a site --
>> never! T.n.r. Didn't respond in a timely fashion to my application. It just sits there. In the meantime ana and I are proceeding with other matters pertaining to this project, she pent a lot of money, I have spent a lot of money on it, hiring an appraiser. Hiring engineers, it's been in this -- in the hours toward pursuing, getting what she continues to demand of us. Why does a simple permit take so long?
>> because it's not simple.
>> it's as if the other side didn't know what they were going to need and they kept discovering what they wanted. Kept discovering what they wanted. Kept discovering some more what they wanted. It would seem that they would know what they want from the start, the professionals.
>> mr. Swinney is there anything that she was asking you today that you were not aware of from the last time that you were here.
>> absolutely. Boiled down to three things last meeting. All of these other things she brings up. It's on the minutes of the meeting.
>> mr. Swinney.
>> she agreed that she would provide them. She didn't provide them, so I went over there with my wife to make sure we understood what the three items were. Do you remember? Do you -- you had to go have a smoke while we waited for you to come out with the answer. You came out, said yep these are the three things, I agree.
>> it wasn't three issues --
>> we did it.
>> it was four. And there were always going to be other notes and things that are not policy things here in terms of what's needed to be done. We are trying to be helpful. But you are not helping matters here.
>> I know that.
>> there you go. So this is not a simple development permit.
>> I have been a businessman a long time and -- I understand right from wrong. I try to work, always work within the framework of the law. I make it a point to know what the law is. And like in the contract dealing with ana or anyone else, I sign a contract to do certain things, I do it. I expect the other side to do it.
>> we are trying.
>> she's the other side in this issue. By -- by the very wording in this permit application, her obligation is to issue this permit. I signed it that I would accept this permit subject to certain requirements within -- within the realm of what she normally requires. She keeps bringing up other stuff that I have never been with in this development permit before. I have probably applied for over 100.
>> did we cover all of the outstanding issues?
>> no. Still have a few more.
>> all right. Let's cover them.
>> try to make it quick. We asked that mr. Swinney provide copies of all permanent permits. In the city's five mile e.t.j. Typically the city, either a site plan exemption is requested or their signature on that cover sheet. Again this is typically done with the cover sheet. Txdot, Travis County, any city of Austin, any other regulatory agency that has a stake in the review would sign this cover sheet. Comment nine was erosion, sedimentation erosion control plan. Provide copy of their storm water prevention plan. The latest site plan did include some sedimentation erosion controls. Typically, plans include a little more like how these are going to be maintained during the construction project. From the impervious cover calculations, we can tell that there will be something around two acres of disturbed land, this falls under the tceq permitting requirements. As an addition to the comment, we are asking for the signed notice of intent. And a copy of the storm water prevention plan as submitted to tceq.
>> [indiscernible] I don't think we -- [inaudible - no mic]
>> I appreciate of course time and patience. I am the owner of the plant that you just referred to right next to star flight. So to date mr. Swinney has been handling and unfortunately -- unfortunately he was not aware of all of the requirements that -- that -- that were needed. I do feel that -- that -- that the -- that the department, Travis County development department has -- has taken longer time that -- that -- that should have been coming up with certain issues that -- that I -- I just would like to note that if these issues are resolved, there won't be any more issues for the more prolonging the permit. Number one. And number two, we have never with -- I built five batch plants here in Austin, we have never had to issue tceq ferment permit for the last one you referred to, I can't remember what the name of it is, I don't know why that is required, because tceq does not require it for this particular purpose. For this particular construction. And on the -- on the -- I was not quite clear, on item no. 12, as far as obtaining all signatures prior to Travis County approving this development permit. Because we -- I personally met with city of Austin and what city of Austin is -- because we submitted several environmental plans to the city of Austin. And city of Austin is requesting Travis County approval of the permits since we are so far out on the -- on the Travis County -- on the city of Austin's jurisdictions. And so now we go back and forth, I want Travis County -- Travis County wants the city of Austin approval, city of Austin wants Travis County approval and I just want to be clear as to -- as to how we are going to proceed on this matter.
>> I think that I can answer that for you. It's all done with that cover sheet. Typically, we will sign-off on the cover sheet first when all of our comments are addressed. You take that to the city of Austin. That is enough of our approval to get them to sign-off on the approval. Once when we get all of those signatures on the cover sheet, is when we will release our permit. To answer your question, yes, once these comments are -- are answered, are addressed appropriately, we will issue the permit.
>> thank you again for your patience and understanding.
>> we want to get you through this ms. Rodriguez, we really are. You are seeing the difficulties that we've had.
>> I have, too.
>> thank you.
>> the last one was -- was the erosion and sedimentation controls. There's supposed to be a document that -- that could describe what controls have been -- are in place?
>> yeah, it's called a storm water prevention plan and ana and I can talk about this on how far we need them to be along with tceq. Notice of intent is the very minimum. Before we release development permits. But we can certainly negotiate on how far along they need to be. Before we issue our permit.
>> okay. Next issue?
>> again these last two are the real easy ones. Comment number 10 was that all commercial structures require a fire marshal review. All new commercial structures. They have taken that off the site plan. They just need to make the plans coherent by taking them out of the notes and the impervious cover calculations. The next note was number 11, this was the health department note. Regarding the onsite sewage. Mr. Sweeney as an installer has written me a letter saying their existing office, they run their septic business out of will be enough to handle the additional folks from the batch plant. As long as they take the notes for the new buildings off the plans, we are okay with that letter. The last comment we ask that they address the wash down area. There's a clarification we provided on this. And that's provide an explanation of how you are going to deal with the concrete wash down. And it could be something that -- that maybe ana writes us a letter saying it's followed tceq and which rule, which regulations, what not. Again, that's -- that's a point that we can -- we can further clarify. We did add two other comments, they are just slight ones based on the plans we received on the 12th. We asked that they label the improvements on the plans. We are having a hard time telling what's a batch plant part versus a new building. We also ask that they indicate the types of impervious cover. Because this is floodplain, we need to know, are we talking asphalt or are we talking crushed granite. As you know it kind of matters in the floodplain. Some of these materials tend to float off more than others.
>> [inaudible - no mic]
>> all I ask is that this is noted on the plans.
>> ms. Rodriguez, when you did your other plants in Travis County, were they outside the city of Austin?
>> no.
>> so this is the first time Travis County government has been asked to give you a permit?
>> the second time, the second time. Unfortunately like I -- I just explained, mr. Swinney has been handling all of this process and I’m kind of an outsider, you know, being -- looking in, we invest quite a lot of money and equipment and I don't see so that's why I inquired to mr. Swinney where are we in this process. Like I said I appreciate, I fully understand those comments, we will get them submitted as soon as possible. But however dealing with city of Austin and previous experience with permits, there's always another comment after another comment and that prolongs the process and I just want to ensure that this was the final list. And --
>> certainly any time anything is submitted new to us, we have a chance to comment on it. Are we going to come up with something major? Probably not. The two comments that we added on to our original set were basically just simple clarifications. Which was --
>> the label -- label the improvements and indicate impervious cover types. These things typically don't take a lot of time or energy to -- to provide.
>> well, would it help us to -- to try to reduce the list we have covered today to writing? Or do you think that you will remember all of them?
>> we will be happy to provide everybody involved a copy of the comments.
>> I think we ought to do that. And -- and so we know exactly next time it comes to court, we will have a list that follows the court discussion. To follow. And either mr. Swinney will do it or not. I mean, a lot of these can be as simple as you make them. But if you make them complicated, they are going to be complicated. Now, so far the biggest one that I have heard has been working with the utility companies. I mean we have to get from them some evidence that they agree to whatever strategy we end up with. But we are trying to facilitate transfer of this property to mr. Swinney as soon as possible.
>> if the -- if the issue of -- of the legal department prolonging, you know, approval of this permit, could we issue the permit subject to the legal writings or whatever it is a process that we have to so that we can present this letter to -- to city of Austin, the city of Austin of course has another list or another item list that we will need to follow. And I would not -- I will not like to -- to wait for the legal department to finish up. I don't know what the lengths of process would that take. I’m pretty sure that we can comply with these comments by tomorrow. I mean, that's -- I have listened to them, I think they are pretty simple. The only issue will be txdot and -- and they probably will concur by the end of this week, if what mr. Swinney indicated was -- was correct.
>> I sense that the best way to speed up our determination, especially as to that property, is for us to get some formal communication from the utility companies about their agreement. And if we know that they are in agreement, and it takes a few more days to prepare the document, we are in a much better position to take action, I think. But so far, though, we have just heard from mr. Swinney who has said what the utility companies [indiscernible] typically we would expect something a bit more formal directly from the utility companies before we rely on it. As far as I know, that's for everybody.
>> [inaudible - no mic]
>> have you received the copy from -- from the electric company? A letter from the electric company? Stating that the easement is okay?
>> yes, ma'am, we have. It's the water company that's --
>> the water company, yeah, that's fine. I met with them last week, that was not an issue. So --
>> just need something in writing from them so we know what -- what steps to take.
>> okay. Ms. Rodriguez, we appreciate you visiting us. We will do what we can to expedite this.
>> I need to raise one more issue so there's no misunderstanding. Mr. Swinney represented that there will be no traffic from the concrete batch plant on old bastrop highway. You are agreeable with that?
>> definitely.
>> and you are agreeable with putting that commitment in writing in some way?
>> certainly. It's not our intention to go through that road, particularly because it's -- it not in very good condition and it will just damage our own equipment. So it's just not our intention.
>> we will need to put that in permanent language, a restrictive covenant, something to document that.
>> sure. No problem.
>> thank you. It was very helpful for you to be here. I think that you are beginning to see why we've had some problems.
>> yes. I understand.
>> thank you very much.
>> 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, January 25, 2006 9:19 AM