Travis County Commissioners Court
September 9, 2008
Item 29
Joe, we're ready for 29. Consider and take appropriate action on the following requests. A, proposed update to the capital area metropolitan planning organization mobility 2035 plan of william cannon drive along southern route from mckinney false to fm 812. And b, authorize transportation and natural reseniors to review and approve right-of-way dead indications, plats and construction documents based upon the proposed realignment in advance of the campo mobility 2035 plan update approval.
>> shouldn't it be fm 812?
>> yes.
>> this is in southeast Travis County. And as you know, we adopt the campo long-range transportation plan as a bases for the alignment of new arterials in the unincorporated area or up grading. When a piece of land comes in to be subdivided we look at the campo plan and that's pretty much how we set did you know the route and ask the developer to dedicate the right-of-way and put up fiscal for construction of these arterials. Campo is not -- is going through some amendments to the long-range plan, but it will be years out before they adopt a new plan. In the meantime, we have development that comes through and we know like this one it's probably a good idea. We would like to proceed on the basis of a new alignment, but it's not official yet. So that puts us in a position of making some decisions anticipating that campo will agree with those modifications when the time comes to amend the plan. This is scenic, right now in the transportation plan, the alignment for the arterial is along scenic drive, which is an old county road, two-lane, probably 60 feet of right-of-way. It's on a ridge line. It comes around and then ties back into fm 812 at 183. What this alignment is proposing to do, it's actually a better alignment topographicly and it goes through undeveloped land, which usually it's easier to get new alignments and right-of-way dedicated to a higher standard when it's in open territory not constrained by small lots that have developed along an existing old county road. This will also tie in with fm 812 at 183. So it will end up at the same place, it will just take a more southern route. So what we're asking the court to do is give its blessing to this new alignment, southern route, and also allow us to use it for the purposes of subdivision platting along this route. And we will proceed in the interim while campo is still updating its plan to use our plan, the county plan, as opposed to the campo plan just for this eye linement. The other alternative would be to do nothing, to wait until campo approves an updated plan and then use whatever arterial network is in the campo plan for platting purposes.
>> but this is the county plan, per se, that -- I guess let me ask this question. At 183 and 812, does -- will it stop there? Because the reason why I'm asking that is because if you take 812 out toward sh 130, for example, you've got 973 that -- that intersects right into 812 and then it's -- it's a tremendous curve that goes around and hooks into 130. Part of the concern -- and I guess I need to ask this question and this is long-range stuff that we need to probably look at, are they looking at -- txdot looking at 812 going into sh 130? Because part of the conversation we've heard from some of the folks that came and testified here on that wandering creek subdivision thing is the intersection, the dangerous "-which it is, it's a pretty dangerous intersection, is 812 and fm 973. And so will that -- is txdot considering looking into taking 812 to where it will be a straight shot into 130 at that particular location or are they just going to stop the project at 812 and 183?
>> the -- that is not part of today's agenda, but yes, the answer to your question is they are looking in the campo plan long range to basically mofidy the alignment of 812 to straighten out that s curve you are talking about at 973.
>> yes.
>> it's a separate issue, but yes.
>> but probably interrelated as far as --
>> ultimately as you continue to go east on 812, will you have a realignment so that there's a four-way intersection there instead of the s curve.
>> right. It's a dangerous situation. A lot of accidents, from what I understand, occur there. And at that -- as we heard the folks testify and you hear it every so often about that s curve at 812 and 973. But this here stops right at 812 and 183 as far as what we are talking about today. Is that correct?
>> that's right.
>> and keeping those facts in mind, the folks from carman I met and we talked about these issues and the safety issues and also we talked about needing to do all of this, this legwork so that we would be prepared for the campo plan. And so that has been very helpful to be in tune with y'all about what needs to occur. Also for you to stay in touch with our t.n.r. Staff so we can be on the same page, you know, as to the needs that we need or the changes that we needed to have occur. The other issue I guess would then be later as to whether this would qualify for the bond election in some sort of way because of the roads and the safety issues that would need to be addressed, correct?
>> this is a big deal.
>> that's correct, Commissioner. Steve, t.n.r. The folks at karma have asked for the benefit of the county to consider funding a future project. I have advised them we have a lot of needs and they will have to compete with a lot of other projects around the county. But they would like to press on.
>> judge, I believe that we ought to go ahead and take action today so that it is -- we can do all the preparatory work to get this to -- in the campo 2035 plan. And we can begin making all of the -- the preparations to have this be a successful project that will address is safety for our citizens out in that area. So I would approve a and b. I mean move approval of a and b.
>> I second that and with this caveat added to that, of course there are things in the campo plan, some things I gray agree with, some things I do not. But this is something we can do from the county's perspective to make sure we have a better route leading into 812 and hopefully in the future as Commissioner Gomez said look at the possibility of taking 812 all the way into sh 130. That's something that's coming up later, but I think in the best interests of state and also better access, I can support this motion. That's why I second it.
>> we believe this is a good idea.
>> I believe this, judge. We've looked at it, talked it off with the city, with txdot and I shared with you over the weekend an e-mail, which I would like to enter into the record. I would like to label exhibit b and c and distribute those if you don't mind.
>> this is what you have already provided the court, right?
>> yes, sir.
>> let's just give the clerk a coach. Then you will be if I recallly a part of the record, mr. Manila.
>> thank you, sir. Anybody here in opposition to this application? Any more discussion of the motion? I assume there's no opposition, the applicant doesn't have any comments.
>>
>> [inaudible].
>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> thanks to everybody.
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:
Tuesday, September 9, 2008 1:37 AM