Travis County Commissioners Court
January 23, 2007
Items A1
A 1 is to consider and take appropriate action to a request to consider a local transportation project advanced funding agreement. 4 a, stp met upon tan mobility project. Precinct 3. 3..
>> good afternoon, judge, Commissioner I'm steven with tn r.. What we are presenting to you today is an advanced funding agreement between Texas and Texas dotment we'll commit the fund county to fund 20 percent of the cost of an improvement project between brody and man chak. Total estimated cost is $the million. The county--09 million. We have administrative costs that we need to pay Texas dot. Approving this will allow us to move forward with getting the consultant to board to start the design process so we can initially the right-of-way that we-- we--identify the right-of-way for the project project. When campo approved the project in July of last year they stipulate that had we need the right-of-way in hand within five years of the date that their federal funds become available, which is this coming October October. So we have already put into place some measures to get started on that. That's the other agenda item that sits here, item 13. We request your approval advanced funding agreement.
>> with the discussion that we have had here today, can you tell me, if the court decides to approve this advanced funding agreement and all the other things surrounding this, for this particular project, how long would it take before we see some action with things happening, here with the arrangement we have today. In other words, when will something start happening to make this thing, not make ut move, but to see movement. That's the question. To see movement.
>> actual construction ?
>> yeah.
>> within two years, I would think.
>> within two years.
>> yes, sir. We're going to need at least a year for design and to get through the federal regulatory approve process. This is feds recall funds. We have to go through more analysis than we would norm normally do. We will start acquisition late this yearment we also have to rely upon funding in the next county's budget to provide funding to help us start that right-of-way acquisition process. In addition to the federal fund.
>> we won't see that next participation level, stars the county, we are doing this now now--
>> we are doing it now but we will have to do further in the next fiscal year. The court approved in the last fiscal year a budget process, 700,000 to be used for the purpose of getting the consultant on board.
>> okay. What will this actually do as far as that type of construction? You have already mentioned the front end of it, but as far as the construction itself, what will actually take place on this particular project ?
>> right now it's a two-lane roadway about 1.3 miles.
>> exactlywe will be looking at converting that initially to a three-lane section. But during the design process I'm going to ask the consultants to examine the feasibility of jumping straight to the five-lane section, which is what the ultimate load roadway section--roadway section is intended to be. Either a minimum three-lane section, I think likely a five-lane section. We'll know as we get further into the design which is more appropriate. When the project was initiated many years ago, three-lane was thought would meet the needs but traffic has continued to increase and a five help lane might be the more appropriate thing to go to. Plus you get the savings by building the five lane first.
>> okay. Thank you.
>> what's the city of Austin position ?
>> I have not heard of any opposition to it, judge. We are east of the area that they did not want us to go through.
>> water quality lane.
>> have we elicited their response or they just haven't contacted us ?
>> they are aware of the project. I don't think they have expressed objection.
>> but we haven't called.
>> they said it's in the cam camo.
>> if they opposed it, the line of opposition would typically be to amend the transportation plan, to take it out of the plan. I think--
>> assuming we approve this today, I think we should make sure we phone them today or tomorrow and say, hey, we didn't hear any objection for you, the Commissioners court went ahead and approved the funding for the engineering for frate barker that's not in the water quality area.
>> I can do that.
>> we may as well know if there is opposition.
>> the reason I don't think we've gotten any opposition is because most of that area out there, the city has annexed and they love the fact that somebody is going to be encouraged, maybe I will buy a house out there because of this. Probably the reason we haven't heard anything. And staying off--
>> I don't want to speculate.
>> should I ask if they financially participated.
>> interesting idea.
>> we know as long as you have the water quality land, that's the issue that they have had.
>> second ?
>> discussion?
>> all in favor ?
>> I would like to, I would like us to contact the city of Austin to make the affirmative step of contacting before we take a vote. It is right near their water quality area that they have opposition. I think that that would be a good move for us.
>> who would you want me to call?
>> the city manager.
>> do what ?
>> I would call the city manager.
>> bring it back after launch ?
>> fine would me.
>> this is the frate barker portion from brodie all the way to manchak. That's part of this.
>> I just want to say.
>> come on up.
>> as a residents I'm in favor of this road.
>> state your name again.
>> stephanie miller, brodie and akma right.
>> just to reaffirm that it is in the campo plan so it's nothing that's crazy.
>> that the making a big presumption.
>> I do actually have a printout of the 2002-2005 saturation counts from the c campo website. Just so you know, the measurement that they have listed has increased by 37 percent on that roadway in just three years. And that's two years old, that piece of information.
>> two years, you know, I polled the question to staff a little earlier, from the drawing and right-of-way and completion, and also what would the project really look like as far as in completion, and of course you mentioned the various lines, continuation, a whole bunch of other stuff. But my concern is that you all don't have any opposition to this road from where it is to the loop. You haven't heard of any opposition.
>> I haven't heard had of any.
>> to man chak.
>> I haven't heard of any and I do talk to a lot of people as a resident who has tried to exit from frate barker onto man chak, almost killed my mother there one time, and I know that road roadway is very dangerous intersection. It needs to be upgraded. And I have tried. I do leave my house sometimes when brodie is backed up,ly go south. Now that there's been so much increase to freight barker, I guess the intersection and the light is restrictive because there is only one linelane, you're if a one-lane, and you're trying to turn on a one-lane one-lane. So.
>> okay.
>> do it over it lunch and we'll do it this afternoon.
now, the two items we said we needd to wait on until--
>> well, it may object kay for toe by and me. Hard to get toby in one day.
>> I think it was the assessment.
>> you want one week? We tried to, I do think we ought to try today.
>> I do too. But I feel comfortable voting on it mow that we have made the effort and will continue to after the vote.
>> the motion ?
>> move approval.
>> make sure everybody fose what we are talking about. Item a 1 which we discussed just before the recess for lunch and this involved frat frate barker and the s?rk tp metropolitan mobility project with the Texas department of transportation and the key words are advanced funding agreement in which basically we would advance the state's share of the money that would later reimburse us. We have $700,000 in the budget this year. So by approving this item we basically would proceed. And the motion from Commissioner dougherty is to do exactly that.
>> and judge, if we would also, Commissioner dougherty we could also throw in there it would be good if we could hear something from the state about the future. I guess, what the future input is into that process. It would be good to know what they want to do. In other words, we didn't get a thanks to get with tob toby, but it would be good to know exactly what the city is thinking.
>> I'll give you some feed feedback once he gets to me. The other thing that we need to probably be well aware of is that by the time this thing get done, it's going to be, what, 870,000. Is that the way I read that? By the time we finish this. Obviously, that will be in '08 budget'08.
>> that's in '09.
>> on board and taking it as far as we can we need a total of two million 70,000. There was a discrepancy. What I told you the total should be, I made a math error, an engineering math error. The 20 percent share for the county on a non9 million project is 1.8 million. I mistakenly told you 1 toy 2 million.
>> 1 .8.
>> when we went through the budget process, that's the number being used. That's the dollar figure that you have in your mind, Commissioner. We need to come back to you in fy '08 in that budget process and ask for the balance to get us up to 2,70 000.
>> right. So that the 00,000 plus an additional--
>> we have 700,000 now for two million 70 minus 700,000 is what we need to pull together.
>> knowing that '08--
>> we're looking in '08 but some of that I guess, we won't have to look to that debt service until '09.
>> we'll need to sort it out in the fiscal year '08 budget process.
>> we sort it out then. But as far as--
>> as far as when we need the money, it would come in 2009.
>> right.
>> steve, what is the amount amount? Is it 600,000?
>> total amount that the county needs to put into this project is 2,70,000. What you approved in the fy '07 budget was 700,000. So we need the balance.
>> 1,370,000.
>> thank you.
>> anymore discussion? Questions ?
>> anybody second the motion motion?
>> yes.
>> I didn't hear a second.
>> were you about to say something ?
>> nos.
>> all in favor. That passes by unanimous vote.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, January 24, 2007 7:48 AM