Travis County Commissioners Court
June 6, 2006
Item 17
17. Receive briefing and take appropriate action on the county's policy position relating to txdot's design of u.s. 290 east at springdale road.
>> do we think we can get to the springdale partnership?
>> there's so many pieces I think that --
>> I think -- I would like to proceed to do that one right now.
>> do you know -- all right. Let's call up four then if it's quick.
>> I move approval.
>> second.
>> thank you for your eloquent presentation. Questions? [laughter]
>> questions? All in favor?
>> what would the -- number four.
>> number 4. It's the -- the best qualified faulkner engineering, based on the backup.
>> all right. Thanks.
>> everybody in favor?
>> yeah.
>> that passes by unanimous vote. Thank you all for waiting.
>> thank you all.
>> regarding 290 east to springdale road project.
>> okay. What I would like to do is basically quickly go over where we are. This relates to to the -- to the -- to the design of u.s. Highway 290 east, as you -- as you know txdot and -- and is -- is now going through the environmental clearance process. They are in a phase of what they call schematic designs. Kind of a general concept of what they are trying to do to upgrade what is currently a four lane divided arterial to a six-lane limited access toll road. And they are following the -- the campo adopted transportation plan in the preparations of those schematics. There was a -- there was a -- some discussion at the last campo meeting with regard to what is going to happen at springdale and 290. Maybe perhaps I ought to start with that. This is highway 290, this is north. What you see here is a -- is the green is the main lanes of the toll road proposed toll road. The yellow are the -- are the frontage roads on either side of the main lanes. At tuscany way, there is currently planned in the schematics as -- as in conformance with the adopted transportation plan an interchange which means there's a -- the main lanes of tuscany will go underneath 290, so there will be a connection between -- between tuscany and 290. A way to get across the roadway at this point. Tuscany of course goes north and then eventually will come south and hook into springdale road. Springdale road on the other hand there is no connection between north and south along springdale. The frontage roads go eastbound on the south, westbound on the north. And then at -- at arterial a, arterial a will come in from the north, it will have a bridge with a -- with the arterial a going underneath the main lanes of 290. There will be a way to get from the north and south at arterial a and tuscany but not at springdale road. Our intent was to preserve this neighborhood called walnut place or trace subdivision, place, trace, I think there's -- there's depending on what -- let's just call it the walnut subdivision. One of the older subdivisions in Travis County. At one point it was at the edge of the world. The urbanized area, Austin was far off. What we have is an industrial park to the west, this area around what we call tuscany. Major trucking depots, you have got -- you have got the main post office, you have all sorts of -- industrial uses that are now bumped up against this neighborhood. You have a -- of course the landfills on the other side -- of all nut creek and then what you have developing to the north is a whole new set of subdivisions and -- and traffic generators. You can have samsung which is located on parmer lane up in this right here. And samsung as you know has -- has just announced that it will triple in size. You also have a pioneer crossing which is a large subdivision occurring up in this area and it is -- it is being developed over a period of years. And that is what we are trying to keep our eye on with regard to this neighborhood and the development of the surrounding roadway system. The Travis County's approach to servicing this area would be to develop two alternative routes, to springdale road. Which we -- which would be tuscany way, tuscany would connect springdale road, come underneath 290 and back up and connect with ferguson and then provide a route, this is the -- this is the cameron road, sprinkle cutoff. So this would -- would bleed off some of the traffic instead of coming down springdale road, we come around the neighborhood in this way. Plus all of the truck traffic that's being generated in this area rather than come down ferguson to springdale and then to 290, would have an alternate route to get -- to get to 290 without coming through the neighborhood. It would come down 290. This multi-lane arterial would basically take this traffic being generated to the north, be able to tie it down to 290. Again without coming down springdale road to 290. This road right now is scma complicated because of the fact that the proposed route is going through an already permitted landfill site. That's owned by waste management. And -- and it was a candidate in our last bond election, we decided not to -- to push -- to put that in the bond package because of the complications and its implication with regard to the -- to the permitting of the expansion of the landfill. It is still in the plan, and at some point -- once the landfill issues have been decided, I think we could probably address this purely from a transportation perspective. What we have been trying to do over a series of movements Travis County replaced a substandard bridge on sprinkle cutoff, that was done. We have entered into contracts with -- with -- with the city of Austin, and we have designed funded a project to connect to tuscany way and ferguson lane to continue to pursue that. The issue is in the right-of-way dedication at this point with the landowner, we believe we are working our way through that -- through that right-of-way issue. Then just recently Commissioners court appropriated $250,000 to begin the preliminary engineering design on this segment of tuscany between 290 and springdale road. That is in the corporate limits and we would envision that -- that when we went to fund that project that would be done joint by -- jointly by the city and the county. Then we have been working with txdot in how they design 290. In such a way as to make sure that there are interchanges being designed for the upgrade of 290, both at arterial a and at -- at tuscany way. Then we have also asked them to follow the campo plan by not providing a bridge here at springdale road. This is -- this is basically current policy. And we wanted to -- because this issue make come up at campo's meeting a week from yesterday, we want to basically allow, prepare the court for that discussion. If need be revisit the policy, staff is recommending that we continue the policy as adopted in the campo plan. Which is to have tuscany and arterial a as the alternative routes for traffic. These being generates understand the northern area of this -- of 290.
>> amen.
>> any citizens with brief comments?
>> good morning, judge.
>> good morning.
>> the facts of the matter are now that thousands of people use springdale, the intersection there every day. We should have a connection there. I fully agree tuscany should be connected with sprinkle cutoff. That should be pushed through. I agree with -- you know, I知 sympathetic to the -- to the people who live in -- in walnut neighborhood. You know at one time hyde park was on the edge of town, however they have thousands of cars that travel through hyde park on several different major roadways now. That's going to happen in walnut. I can understand maybe blocking truck traffic through that neighborhood. But we need a bridge at springdale. Secondly, the alternative plan requires two bridges to be built instead of one. How many is that, 25 or 30 or 50 million? It's too expensive. That's why you are forced to go to things like tolling. We need a sensible plan that preserves a bridge at springdale. Thank you.
>> thank you.
>> ms. Engle?
>> one of the things that I want us to discuss is it is the study that you authorized about two weeks ago, -- for the extension of tuscany. And you found it in a 1984 bond issue. Well, we have been waiting on a creek study for 24 years. And then we got it because -- because of a waste management sep funding. There's not equity here. You are going to be concerned and spend $10 million is what you consider mr. Gieselman, that the -- that the county has invested in springdale road? We are on [indiscernible] now, they are concerned about being on a buy out. We are on buy outnow, they are concerned on being on a buyout. I find myself trying to think about how I would have traveled when I had young children. They went to wynn elementary, l.b.j. High school. So they had to go all the way around to get there? It was a five minute trip. There -- people who are moving into capital pacific have young children. They look at the face of a landfill. Their children are going to grow up under the influence of that. You are not protecting them mr. Gieselman. You are not protecting the -- the -- the citizens of this -- of this neighborhood by -- by investing the money to get what you want. And he's going to very -- very long ways of telling you that. It's a diatribe. It's using a lot of very educated engineering kind of documentation to confuse the public and make you depend on him.
>> so ms. England you favor --
>> I favor that there is a road that takes it across. U.p.s. Never drove their trucks into our neighborhood. I never saw a central freight truck. The only large trucks that we had before the circles were -- were from applied materials who would turn and come down there and turn on ferguson lane. I learned many, many years ago, from my own father, who was a country boy, from a family of 10, you never buy a house right next to the road. Because a road usually grows. It gets wider. It's going to -- if you don't want to live on one, stay from away from one.
>> thank you.
>> anybody else to give brief comments?
>> good morning.
>> good morning.
>> sorry about that.
>> yeah, I知 going to be -- I am -- this it's trek english again for the record. I am stunned at what I致e just heard. Frankly I feel that you are making a joke out of this whole thing. On number 16 you cannot look at cumulative impact but on number 17 we look at subdivision increased traffic, future problem, future growth, finally crossing Sam -- pioneer crossing, samsung, you look at the whole picture, how the traffic is going to become worse. I was trying to show you the same problem with the creek, but somehow there's a disconnect there. Only the people that live next to a road are getting protection. But not people next to a creek. Ask for -- as for I guess in answer to Commissioner Sonleitner, I guess you and I do not communicate well, I am opposed to any dirt moving. Since I didn't do it before. I am being too reasonable, I guess Commissioners court, Sonleitner, I知 am possessed to any dirt being moved for any toll road or anything! Is that what you want me to say? You don't even want me to be reasonable. It isn't because s.h. 130 is being built that I知 supposed to accept the -- the wilder tract to be completed denuded of any vegetation. That's all that you are asking, you are going to replace s.h. 130 moved away from our location because of environmental problems with arterial a, that doesn't seem to connect, either. Frankly what I am hearing his presentation, mr. Gieselman's presentation, I知 starting to think that number 16 is being granted to facilitate the construction of arterial a. I think this whole thing is a sham. No public meetings at any time, at any time on any screen saying that you were going to discuss the overpass at springdale, the tuscany, nothing. We never have public meetings on awful these. Now you are having public meetings on the toll roads because nobody knows what's going on. This overpass issue it's a sham, on the books for five years, what were the public meetings? This was concerned, it's a public road, everybody pays for it. Not just 10 people from one neighborhood. Why is it that we were not being made part of this. So -- so you know I didn't come here for this number, but when I put the two together, something is terribly wrong. You are favoring one scenario over the other. You don't seem to idea where we are coming from.
>> are you in favor or not in favor of having the complete -- complete grade separated intersection there at springdale. Do you think springdale ought to continue. I知 not going to answer that question, because that's not the way you answered my problem on number 16. You went on this s.h. 130 analogy which was the most ridiculous thing that I ever heard in my life. I知 not going to answer this one either, I知 going to answer like you do on the side.
>> then I will say that you have no opinion on this and I appreciate your comments. Thank you very much.
>> thank you.
>> good morning, I think still, mark mcafee. At this point the northern extension of tuscany is not a done deal. Not under the impression that it is -- that it is really that close to being a done deal. The citizens bond committee removed arterial a from the package last -- last fall I guess it was. Because of the very substantial problems that they saw of crossing landfills prepermitted sales. A road that crosses a landfill lowers the value of over property in the area. I cannot have potential clients drive to my business along arterial a. They will not book. The same goes for people trying to sell a home in the area. If their prospective clients drive up arterial a to get to their pioneer crossing home, they are not going to get the same price for the house. So real estate people mark out their path to get to a home before they drive the prospective buyers there to make sure that they take them by the best area. It is very, very important for me and for melanie and i, it is very important for our business that arterial a does not get built. No matter what. It will kill us. The owner of dakoti coffee has been paying higher property taxes because he was at the intersection of a major arterial and a major freeway. His property taxes have already been paid, now this road has -- is being moved and we act like that -- that to some degree the rhetoric has been the campo plan is such but the campo plan was changed in 2000, my -- my neighborhood associates, I was a member of the walnut place neighborhood at the time, they never told me that they were removing the road that my business was on from the campo 2030, 2025 plan I guess at the time it was. And -- and so I had no input into that at the time. It is extremely critical, I mean, I would -- if tuscany can be punched through, that will be good for me because it is further from the landfill and -- and since the landfill did not plant the trees they were supposed to along springdale road, the ever green trees, the wenter time was really bad for us out there in terms of our bookings because folks could just see the landfill and if you see it, you are not going to book. So -- so in the late 90s, because -- because springdale road was the major arterial for that area, I will also add to it that it's a major arterial all the way to cesar chavez, and -- and nice straight road, and I think that because this was a major arterial, melanie and I made a substantial investment in our property only to find a little later actually we didn't find it in 2000 because we didn't know this whole road process thing. Again we were not informed by our neighborhood association, but the -- but the -- the -- we finished making that -- that major investment in the year 2000, the same year that the new 2025 plan was -- was put into effect. So -- so I am asking that you do put an -- put -- that the county, Commissioners court take a stand that preserving a -- a -- an overpass at springdale road for the -- for the reasons that I have already -- I have already given you, but also because for -- for into perpetuity, if we had done this with all of our roads, my parents moved down to the West Lake Hills area, they did not buy a home on Bee Caves road, it was a two lane road because they wanted to be in a neighborhood. If Bee Caves road had to be nubbed off, jogged over another mile and a quarter, picked up and go out, if we do that to all of our roads, we are going to have a heck of a mobility problem in this city. Like london where only the cabbies know how to get from one place to another. I really urge you to keep an overpass at springdale road. I think it's critical. Thank you.
>> also support the tuscany way extinction, south of -- south of that, in fact feeding into springdale road at this particular location. You also support of that?
>> I do. Now, again if arterial a is built, it will kill us. I cannot call my prospective clients to tell them don't go down arterial a.
>> if it ends up breathing life into the landfill, [indiscernible] same thing my --
>> even -- things have not changed.
>> you see what I知 saying -- will kill me. I want to make sure this tuscany way situation also is addressed because this is something that's been -- been around for a long, long, long time.
>> sure, we are all for the tuscany being punched through. There are some issues that we would have with that. I don't know the exact alignment, we would love to have a buffer to protect one of Austin's few remaining national historic treasures, you know, from -- from truck traffic, et cetera, et cetera. We will need a buffer when that comes to -- to -- hopefully comes to fruition. At this point we do not have any of that -- at fruition. So again an overpass at springdale road I believe at this point with nothing else really finalized is critical. So I don't see how the Commissioners court can take a stand against that overpass with -- with nothing on tuscany way either north or south being finalized.
>> okay.
>> who else plans to give testimony on this item? Looks like we are -- we need to before for lunch.
>> uh-huh.
>> we have a couple of people who are obligated to be at a luncheon, lunch meeting. And even if we take this item back up after the corporations, I think we are looking at 1:45. This afternoon. Otherwise we would have to rush through it. So -- so that's how it's looking to me. Okay?
>> move adjourn until 1:30.
now let's call back up the matter that we were discussing just before lunch. And a few residents indicated their intention to address the court on item 17 relating -- receiving briefing and take appropriate action on the county's policy position relating to txdot's design of u.s. 290 east at springdale road. And after this we will try to discuss the public-private partnership on road projects. Okay.
>> I値l go first. I知 joyce thorson, president of walnut place neighborhood association. I知 going to give mr. Gieselman our completed petition that we had partially complete a couple of weeks ago. Just to remind you, the petition was against a north-south crossover at the intersection of springdale road and highway 290 east. I support retaining the neighborhood collector. This is a designation of springdale road. I support the existing highway 290 east design and north-south crossover at the intersection of tuscany way and a turnaround at arterial a. The petition was circulated to 148 occupied homes within the boundaries of walnut place neighborhood association. It comprises 207 individual signatures representing 118 households. 80% of the residents in walnut place are against a springdale crossover at u.s. 290. The residents of walnut place overwhelmingly support the intersection design, which includes a crossover at tuscany way and a turnaround at arterial a. As always our desire is to limit cut-through and truck traffic and encourage compliance with the speed limits along the 1.6 miles of springdale road north of u.s. 290. This stretch of springdale, which dead ends at sprinkle blue goosen compasses 23 residential driveways, 37 homes and a number of side streets. It is a neighborhood street. Most of the homes have deed restrictions that allow residential use only. Decisions to increase the volume of traffic would constitute a taking of the use and value of the residential properties on springdale whether or not the road is widened. Our association has taken formal votes and we are for arterial a. We are for tuscany way extensions both north and south, and we are for no crossover at springdale on 290. Please continue to support decisions that protect the safety and quality of life of walnut place residents. We appreciate your assistance in the past. Thank you.
>> thank you.
>> how many people are the total number? You had 118 households that were actually canvassed and you said --
>> 118 households in walnut place that have people living in them. Oh, I知 sorry, we have 207.
>> 207 people signed the petition, and we had 118 households represented out of 148.
>> I知 christine kubak, I知 from the walnut place neighborhood. A trace is all that will be left of us if we get trampled by more traffic gridlocking us into our neighborhood. My parents bought my home in 1976 when I was six years old. I remember it very well. When I was 10 they bought me my first big bike and I loved to ride it all over the entire neighborhood. And when a new kid would move in I gave them a grand tour. It was safe to ride a bike around there back then. My first voting experience was in (indiscernible)'s garage, an old pink house on springdale road where we could go vote in her garage. She no longer lives in that house anymore, that's why we don't vote there anymore, but she didn't leave the neighborhood, she moved to be closer to the heart of walnut place. We've been here from walnut place in Commissioners court speaking before you on numerous issues too numerous to count over the years. And there's one basic theme. We value the quality of life and the safety of the residents in walnut place. Therefore I知 asking you to also value the quality of life and the safety of the residents in walnut place and to vote to keep that quality of life and safety. And for no crossover at springdale. Thank you.
>> thank you.
>> mr. John hutchison, walnut neighborhood association. I want to have you all think about the intersection of monterrey oaks and 71. When that roadway was built, 71 -- the engineers went to the neighborhood and the people that live off of stone oak boulevard or road, street, and asked them how would you feel about not being the overpass and move the overpass down to monterrey oaks? And at first the people said, no, not too sure about that. That sure will cause some trouble. He said otherwise if we do build the intersection then, then traffic will use you as the cut-through road. Simply put, the people over there aren't tickled that they didn't put the overpass there. I just called one of the residents that live over there just to verify a few minutes ago and he said oh, I didn't agree with it at first, but boy has it made a difference. We don't have the people blowing through here. And the idea of people blowing through is one of the things I want to bring up. Deputy hutchison, Travis County sheriff's department, shot radar on Saturday. He shot 18 tickets and he only wrote tickets to cars going at least 15 miles per hour over the speed limit. A couple of weeks ago he chased one guy down that was doing 70-plus miles per hour through the neighborhood. So we do have a traffic problem. If you build the bridge or I should say txdot builds the bridge at springdale road, there's an overpass there, there is a chance that despite the best plans of this Commissioners court, springdale road will be upgraded. Especially if there's no other arterial to feed from the people that are moving in off of -- between harris branch and parmer lane and there's going to be about 20 something thousand extra people coming in up there, 25,000 according to some survey. They're going to want to get down to 290. Cameron road is already very, very busy. Parmer and i-35 is always very, very busy. And the easiest way for them to get to 290 will be springdale road. And if enough hue and cry occurs, they will want springdale road widened and we will be back here discussing brodie lane all over again. That's been a hot button switch for mr. Daugherty and I知 sure he wishes it didn't happen that way either, but we're facing it even worse because at least in some of the pictures I致e seen of his area, the roadway -- the infrastructure isn't going to take up as many houses. Right now we'll lose 17 houses if they come in there and wide 10 out to four-lane. That's just not right. I know I知 talking about the future, but I was told by txdot not a year ago that 290 wouldn't be upgraded for 20 years. Three months later they're putting it on the fast track and here we are discussing a toll road coming down through the middle of 290. So everything is fluid. And I feel that the traffic count in our neighborhood already is high, and that we sit there some days and watch car after car and it just does not stop. I might as well be on north lamar. I mean, there's that many cars going by on Saturday or Sunday afternoon. I知 usually at work during the day, but in the morning it's a thrill to try to get out on to springdale road without getting runover. In fact, Monday morning of this week, deputy shot radar on a lady who ran the yield sign and nearly clipped another person and did 46 miles per hour in a 30. She got two tickets. The problem is that traffic will take the path of least resistance. They always have, they always will. And unfortunately, our neighborhood is that route. And we want to protect our homes. We're not here to satisfy the needs of business owners that won't sell the property at a later date and make money. We're here because we live in this neighborhood and we love this neighborhood. It is gorgeous. I sit on my front porch and I enjoy the weather, I enjoy the neighbors coming by and sitting down, sitting and talking, but I tell you what if that road gets widened and the traffic count gets any higher we won't be able to enjoy our houses. Thank you for your time and we do appreciate any help that you can give us.
>> john, I would say it is probably less about brodie because of the driveways. You are gattis school road. And on gattis school road we had what they thought was a neighborhood street that turned into a regional collector, and just that section of the neighborhood that we are having to fix is going to require a million dollars' worth of right-of-way from three home that will be taken away, and a three-million-dollar project just through that neighborhood. Your project is far bigger than gattis school, and that is one where we only had to remove three houses to get the driveway situation taken away.
>> I understand that. What's even worse is if they had to come in and retrofit a four-lane through us. Not only would it be the 17 houses on the west side of 290 -- west side of springdale, you would also have to put a secondary bridge in at walnut creek. And that was just put in a few years ago and it was very expensive to put that puppy in.
>> and the decision on this section of springdale was made back in campo in 2000 when we upgraded or updated the plan. This is also consistent with what we did on behalf of 38th and a half street, manor road and the cherrywood neighborhood in terms of a neighborhood that, oh, darn, got in the way of the robert mueller development, redevelopment. And we as a group in campo, unanimously down graded those roads that previously were arterials to neighborhood collector status because the neighborhood had rights too. And that robert mueller needs to be served, but not through a cut-through, several cut-throughs through east Austin neighborhoods. So this is just as important.
>> there is one other thing I would like to mention to the Commissioners is that if arterial a overpass isn't built and the road is built -- the overpass is built at my street, is people in chimney hills, chimney hills north and the new housing apartment complex that's across 290 from them will have to drive all the way to giles road to turn around to come back. So arterial a overpass needs to stay in the program. Whether arterial a is built or not. I don't really -- at this point that's moot because of the landfill issue. We're not going to go there. But that overpass will feed the houses on both sides of 290. Without it the people couldn't get home, but to get to work they will have to go all the way to giles road to the landfill to come back. So that kind of needs to stay in the program.
>> I appreciate the fact that you brought up that because we got letters from practically every state representative and state senator encouraging us to go ahead and build in the overpasses for the future on sh 130 that even though howard lane, for example, is not there now, but to plan for the future. We don't know when howard lane is going to punch through, but it's the idea that you plan for future. If we didn't do it then, we would not have the overpass at howard lane, we would have had it at greg manor. And that would have been an inappropriate place because that's where the little country road was. That's not where the east-west arterial was.
>> thank you very much.
>> mr. Mcafee.
>> I just wanted to say something, judge. John, as you know, we're kind of rocky with this issue for awhile. And in fact, when I served on the campo board I can remember very distinctly discussing some situations dealing with tuscany way. And basically not only looking at the sprinkle road off the bridge to make sure we didn't have traffic coming down with the traffic that was there, but also that trucks were not going up and down springdale road. You were part of that, and of course tuscany way was something that we want to see continue, and also is still a part of this particular outreach to relieve traffic and ensure that the neighborhood collector concept stays in place. My question to you today, though, is are you still in support of the tuscany way project, including the tuscany way south of 290 to springdale? Are y'all still in support of that?
>> I would have to say 110%? I believe that would allow the big brown worm in the morning, which is ups, to get out both directions, relieving a lot of the intersection has sells at tuscany and 290. It will allow people that want to cut through and get over to springdale on the south end quicker and easier access. It will relieve mr. Mill instead's issues about how his people leaving his rental building will get out and back over to 290 and go westbound. It would solve so many problems, it would be wonderful.
>> I have not yet heard any opposition to tuscany way so far at all. Everybody says we want to go ahead and make sure we do it at tuscany way, but of course this other issue is an issue on the 290.
>> the only opposition I ever heard to the tuscany extension on the northern section was from the gentleman sitting next to me last year when he found out about it because he was worried about it pushing more truck traffic past the front of his business. But I understand now that he's changed his opinion on that. So that means that I have not heard anybody upset. We would love to see the traffic use tuscany.
>> it would give the truckers no real good reason to cut through our neighborhood because they would be back on the street that was designed for it. A road that is big and wide and concrete and they can go on out to rundberg or wherever they're going, cameron road, and not jake brake in my neighborhood. Thank you very much.
>> okay. Thank you.
>> mr. Mcafee.
>> good afternoon, judge, Commissioners. Mark mcafee. We have almost the same number of signatures on our petition we started just a couple of weeks ago. We actually haven't put the effort into it. We can get many, many more. People have been using this road for 50 years. It's long before any of the homes were built in there basically other than a couple of them were back there. So I don't know when john moved to the neighborhood, but it was well after I moved and started my business in this same neighborhood. And so he sort of built a house on the road -- on my road is the way I look at it. He talks about it like he owns the road. And if it's going to be a private road, would it be kept up by the neighborhood as well? Is it a private road? Our signatures represent a wider cross-section of the county than just one neighborhood. You can have the situation occur all over, and you'll find that there will be people who bought on a major road who want to have it closed down. And if these folks take over the neighborhood association and manage to basically cow everyone in the neighborhood, most of the neighborhood in the people to sign it, we end up with this exact situation. And no, if tuscany does get pushed through, Commissioner Davis, I知 all for it, but it's obviously -- it can be problematic for me if I have a lot of u.p.s. Trucks going past the barr mansion and making noise, it could be very, very problematic. So some sort of a buffer would be appropriate for an historical structure such as that. Again, as I said in the morning, tuscany is not a done deal yet. The north end is not punched through. And we have to know that we have decent access not over a landfill to -- for our clientele to come in. So I know we keep to referring this is on the campo plan, arterial a is on the campo plan. Well, the campo plan is -- it was a mistake. It got put on the campo plan crossing two previously permitted landfill cells, and there's no other way for it to actually be done other than to cross those two previously permitted landfill cells. That is the giant elephant in the closet in terms of this issue is not so much why did it get put on there, but we need to -- how do we get it off of there. We keep having to deal with this particular road issue just because it got put on top of a landfill. Thank you for your time.
>> thank you.
>> move approval of staff recommendation.
>> second.
>> my name is trek english for the record, and I wouldlike to know if I could obtain a copy of any agreement -- on the 290 overpass or the springdale overpass or the tuscany overpass, and I would like to make a request for any communication that have been -- that's transpired in the last two months. I am concerned that there's a preferential treatment of certain people that seem to get the information weeks ahead of us, and we just find out at the last minute that there's a meeting, but somebody else finds out in may. And I want to know whether such a concern on the claims, which I知 concerned also, where there's no concern about saving our homes. There's not even a single e-mail sent out in our neighborhood informing the neighborhood that several of the homes on the creek were going to be on the buyout program. There is nothing as to the results of the study from the alan plumber engineers. There's nothing saying to the neighborhood -- sent to the neighborhood to let them what's going on with the creek problem, but yet we receive --
>> what does that have to do with this?
>> it has a lot to do with it because on this particular item I received this flyer which said -- and I致e asked the county to tell me where this information came from. That they're going to redesignate springdale as a major arterial. That we're going to have a no truck status, that we'll decrease the speed again. That we'll need 17 homes. I saw the homes that were going to be on the buyout for the study on the creek, but I haven't seen anything to back up these statements. And I知 asking where do they get their information?
>> I haven't seen anything either. I don't know that I致e seen that. But I tell you what, send us a request, send it to my office and I値l get with our people and we'll get whaw the county has.
>> I made an open record request and they gave me nothing. They gave me a transcript of a tceq hearing. I didn't get everything. Everything is under the protection of the attorney general.
>> I don't know that I have what you just mentioned. It may have come from the neighbors who have been supporting, not pushing springdale north of 290 east. But in terms of what the county has, you send us a request and I値l hustle up whatever we have from the different departments that should have it. If I have anything, it may be an e-mail, but I don't know that I received anything during the last week or 10 days. This item was put on here today because campo takes it up Monday morning -- Monday evening. This is our last meeting before campo meets again. This issue has been outstanding at least since our last campo meeting, right, which was like two months ago. It came up then.
>> but it this came out a few days after that meeting, and I wasn't aware of any of these things having been discussed -- it was from the neighborhood. Who was given that information?
>> I don't know.
>> maybe they did it on their own.
>> I realize it was generate odd their own, but somehow -- they couldn't make it up.
>> if your request is for a copy of that --
>> I just want to know what the backup is for -- this was very scary for me because between this we're looking at no trace of the neighborhood here. So that's why I知 wondering what's going on here, where did this information come from.
>> there's a motion outstanding. I don't know that we can help with that. What we have, if you send me a request, we will give you whatever we have in response to that request. I may have documents that were sent to me, but as to the source of the information, I don't know. But whatever documents I have I壇 be happy to share those.
>> thank you, judge.
>>
>> so everyone understands, I知 going to support this, but I知 supporting it based and contingent on the fact that arterial a, if it crosses the landfills, into the existing landfills where they are right now, the 290 landfills, of course I don't support the arterial a, which is still a part of the policy here, but I just want to make sure that when I vote for this, the arterial a -- it was brought up several times by folks and by staff. Because the landfill issue has still not been resolved. I want to let folks know I am not in support of arterial a, especially if it breathes existing light into those existing landfills.
>> this on number 17?
>> yes. My name is david martinez. And I also live in that neighborhood up on the hill at colonial place and I want to go on the record saying that myself and a lot of my neighbors that I have talked to about the overpass at 290. There are a couple of things. Everywhere else in Austin, we're really concerned about the way the growth that we're having, everywhere it's growing, and to me it would seem to me that we have the same concern with greenbelts and anywhere else. Here we have a greenbelt that we're just dying to get rid of. We'll keep it for the same reason that we want to keep it in other places, except here we also have situation where it's necessary because of a landfill that's adjacent. So we have all the same reasons to keep this greenbelt there, but that it helps clean up that area a little bit from the gases and such. Also, the traffic on springdale, you have -- a lot of people use that road. Part of the problem of people zipping through there and the backup that happens is it's inadequately handled for the traffic. There's no stoplights. We have these circles that really don't do anything there except pose more of a danger than anything because a lot of people don't know how to use them. They don't know who has the right-of-way. So I think if you develop that road better and handle that traffic properly through spotlights and proper stop signs, that would alleviate a lot of the traffic problems that happens at springdale.
>> see -- and you brought up a good point, sir. Let me tell you exactly what's going on here. If 290 was not going to be a toll designation, which I oppose. I oppose toll designation on existing roads. It's no big secret. If that had not been the case, then we would be discussing an overpass there right now. But since it is, you try to mitigate situation is as much as possible, it lessens s the impact of what is of that toll designation on 290. The tuscany way project, which is another reliever of folks to get in and out of the community and even points north, and ensure that the neighborhood collector concept stays intact is something that has to be considered. And --
>> and tuscany would help.
>> you are for tuscany?
>> I am. I知 opposed to arterial a.
>> I am too.
>> I知 for tuscany and I知 also for pushing -- keeping springdale open at 290, making an overpass there. I mean, here you have -- and cuss company is a great idea, but then you would have all this traffic that's here. Just in the neighborhood I知 in there's about 250 homes that's completed. Each house has two cars. The traffic will also be backed up with -- -- all the businesses that are in that area are going to use it as well. So you're going to block us in, create more of -- to me anyway it's going to be more of a traffic problem when a lot of the traffic problems we have there now, the way I see it could be alleviated by properly handling the traffic that's going through there through -- I believe statistics show that most traffic is handled at the intersections through stop signs and stoplights. That's where you have one part's going while the other one stops so you don't have everything funnelling in at the very end of one light and everything gets backed up. You know what I知 saying?
>> I think that one wants this to become a brodie lane. And I guess what -- I guess the question is if you do create the overpass will it create another brodie lane. I don't think anyone wants another brodie lane. Joe, could I have some type of answer from staff, because I think it's very important to know what the consequences or the impact by having an overpass or not having an overpass as far as traffic is concerned. I壇 like to hear an answer publicly for that, please.
>> we can do a study of that so that we can forecast what will happen on the various circumstances. If you have tuscany open, arterial a open, springdale not open, we'll look at that relative to opening springdale and tuscany and not arterial a, so with the help of the campo staff, what we're going to do is a technical analysis about those alternatives so perhaps to give you and all of us a little bit better guidance on what happens in the future as these areas develop out and you have different types of roadway configurations done. Perhaps that will shed some light on your question.
>> all right. When can we have that available? Because as the judge just mentioned, they're looking for some type of direction.
>> it will not be ready by Monday night.
>> it will not be?
>> no.
>> we need to stop using the words closing. It's opened or it's closed. Springdale -- I know that, but somehow there's an impression here that springdale on the north side of 290 is not going to be an open, public road. Of course it is, but it will be have ead that you will have -- it will be a road that you have to take a right turn out. So if you do like you do in Austin, you do like you normally do --
>> you don't know what I do, ma'am.
>> if you go down springdale, you will go down springdale, but you will only be able to make a right turn. If you are coming from Austin, you would have two choices, assuming the timing on this, you could either take your cut across at tuscany to get back into the neighborhood or you would go one more down and do a turnaround at the arterial a intersection. I知 not assuming that there's a roadway there at all, but there would be --
>> the area is growing really quickly.
>> no kidding. That's the point.
>> right, exactly.
>> we have one more citizen here to give comments. Ma'am?
>> he's in the middle of his --
>> no, ma'am. You have to give your comments or we have to make a vote. I知 not sure we're making any progress. Would you like to give comments.
>> yes, sir, I値l go ahead.
>> something new and different, please. We heard some testimony this morning, some this afternoon. This is an issue that we've worked on reducing traffic for, for 17 years that I致e been with the Travis County Commissioners court. For the court to change its mind I think it will take more than a request to aaffirm to campo what it is. I assume it would be what it has. If there are reasons that we ought to change that, then I need to hear them. There are more issues related to this, but our problem is we have many other items that we need to discuss today. We have a motion, and I don't know that -- I don't know that a whole lot more testimony today will change anybody's mind here. Other studies and stuff, might, though. Your comments, please.
>> I知 going to make it real quick, and I知 sorry I don't have a solution for you completely at this point. The road overpass that you're planning through the 290 springdale area is planned in such a way to be overbuilt and much too wide in order to accommodate frontage roads for future toll roads. The large multilane bridge in that area is not context sensitive to the environment or the neighborhoods in that area. On one side the neighborhood has to put up with a landfill and traffic congestion and dirt from construction, and on the other side of the neighborhood there will be a huge construction of the multi-lane toll road at that overpass. I believe that by deciding to use pass-thru financing rather than the conventional toll roads might help answer this problem in that the road wouldn't have to be overbuilt for extra lanes. I ask that you postpone the decisions on this item onned agenda until the neighborhoods have been able to discussion these issues more at length and bring more study and education to the problem. Thank you.
>> ms. Mcafee, anything new and different?
>> I hope so, judge. I find the county report appalling and troubling. It's crucial that Travis County represent the possibilities as fairly and accurately as possible. It's important that as representatives on the campo board that they bring to the table all that they know so that campo can make intelligent and viablebly economically feasible decisions. This report that I heard today does not do this. The important issues are not even on the table. Arterial a must be removed from consideration. The problems surrounding this road are monumental and completely infeasible. The county should recommend that it be removed from the campo plan. The county has tried and tried to negotiate with the landfills, and each and every time their efforts have failed. The toll road time is now. The overpass connections are being decided now. It is totally insane to plan an overpass connection through a working landfill. That is the situation today. The county is on road now stating that they are against the landfill expansion. None of these facts are discussed in any intelligent manner in the report of mr. Bees gieselman. For the county to recommend a future road through a working landfill is crazy. The county has a responsibility to share with campo the worth of land of a permitted landfill. The county lost their opportunity for arterial a when they allowed their present permit to happen. Giles road, tuscany or springdale is the only options that should be on the table. To setup arterial a as a viable solution is an omission of the facts and reality of the situation. If the county a truthful about opposing landfill expansion, then let the record show how they plan to acquire a roadway through an operating landfill without granting landfill expansion. If this huge decision is made to have an overpass at a made-up road, who will be in the driver's seat to get what they want? The landfill will have the county with their pants down. The county will be forced to give waste management what they want. Why would the county make such stupid decisions for the future residents of northeast Austin.
>> thank you. Any more discussion of the motion?
>> yeah, judge. I just want to finally ask mr. Geeses he will man -- easel man, when will he -- gieselman, when will he have that data available. There's a public hearing tonight as far as txdot's design of this overpass and taking public from the general public that's being impacted by this overpass to be at springdale and 290 or not to be at springdale and 290. And my concern is that that information -- the input that txdot will gather at that time, will it interfere with what we're doing here today or will it complement or oppose anything that we're doing today? So I知 having concerns about that, especially if we don't have volume, traffic volume of anticipated traffic impact on this particular road. So I知 kind of concerned about that. Can you maybe enlighten me a little bit?
>> first of all, I believe to characterize the meeting tonight is I think really one of a listening session by txdot to find out what the community has in terms of issues on 290 or springdale, tuscany, whatever those are. I don't think txdot is coming to the meeting tonight to progeny answers or solutions. They're there mainly to pick up information that they will go back and take a more detailed look at. With regard to the study of alternatives, that will take probably -- I don't know. I知 really relying on the technical staffs of campo to do the technical analysis for us. And I don't have a date on when they can get around to doing that. I would expect it's a matter of weeks before they can do that. I do know that they cannot perform the work either by this meeting tonight or by Monday.
>> okay. Judge, that's the last question I have, but I知 really concerned about that.
>> right now on the txdot design, the crossover is at tuscany, not springdale.
>> that's correct.
>> staff recommendation is basically to reaffirm that.
>> right.
>> that's correct. Basically everybody's following the campo plan as adopted.
>> that's correct.
>> and the motion is basically to approve that.
>> that is the motion to approve that.
>> any more discussion of the motion? I wanted to make sure I understood what my motion was.
>> exactly.
>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Thank y'all for your input.
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 7, 2006 12:54 PM