Travis County Commissioners Court
April 27, 2010,
Item 17
Now we will call back up item 17, which was the public hearing item number 4.
>> and the only thing i had on that i guess basically was just to make sure that shows things that we discussed during the public hearing, any safety measures that you guys had brought up as far as with txdot, are the things to do.
>> do we need to go ahead and review the agenda item? Item 17, consider and take appropriate action regarding a proposal to temporarily close mckinney falls parkway between william cannon drive and colton bluff spripgz road for roadway construction beginning on arrest about may 4, 2010 and continuing through august 21, 2010 or until construction is completed.
>> we heard staff address the concerns. I think what we had collectively here, i want to make sure that these things are adhered to, especially if it reduces the risk -- the signage, those kinds of things. There may be some instances where we may have to be responsible for all the signage. I don't really know. But i think that's what i'm hearing as far as the signs that will have to be placed. So can you answer that question for me as far as signage that was brought up?
>> sure. Typically we follow the requirements of the texas man al wal of uniform traffic devices to set up our detour signing. In addition to that we do monitor the performance of those signs. And we can make adjustments to them to the entire scheme of signing. There are signs on the map that we provided earlier, dozens and dozens of signs all over the place f we see an opportunity to improve the safety of it, it's to our benefit to do that as well. It's kind of an ongoing type of a process, but the very basics of it is what's in the mutcd.
>> anything additional?
>> i have a question. I am a little concerned about the safety issues and the longer time frame as opposed to the shorter time frame. And -- this really is a question in the sense that if we were to embark on this program with the longer time frame in mind, if we were to find in the first few weeks of operation that it really was seriously, significantly impacted from a safety issue, we still have the option to go back and accelerate it. And is there a way to monitor that?
>> i would think that we could still do something like it. It may not be able to get the full effect of the accelerated time frame because you're into it. I don't think that us awaiting to see what happens to decide what to do will prevent the contractor from being able to accelerate the schedule for probably the same amount of money that he's talking about.
>> i agree with you that it would be the same.
>> as i look at the four-month time frame, and you essentially have about a month of school left, and then the three months of summer, and the longer the time frame for construction on those projects, the greater the delay for weather and things like that. So we could indeed then bump into the fall school term. And i just have questions without answers on these safety issues, not only on 183, but at the intersection of william cannon.
>> okay.
>> if we were to pay for the expedited process, my understanding is it would basically cut in half the time that -- that the crucial stretch of road is closed.
>> it would cut it from 16 weeks to six weeks.
>> even further down than half. And that is by expediting the work schedule with additional workforce?
>> that is probably what the contractor is thinking of. He will apply more equipment to get the excavation done sooner and hauled away sooner. So that would be part of the number, yes.
>> and from where would the 48,000 travis county contribution to that come from?
>> from our project budget. This is a 2001 bond funded project and it would come from that source.
>> and do we know whether the city of austin is willing and able to do the additional 7,000 for the water main portion?
>> i don't know that we asked them specifically about that. But that's a very small number compared to what they're investing in that water line and we've worked with them a lot getting this water line project done. I think they'll work with us on that.
>> are they already in the -- pun intended -- pipeline in the timing for this? I know we had a project on 71 delayed that was city of austin water. Construction related.
>> this is a new water line for them. So what it would entail is our contractor having to change the sequence of when the water line goes under this section of road that will be lowered eight feet. So they're in the pipe on the construction methodology. They've reviewed the plans. It's their design for the water line. We're in essence changing the timing of one sequence of the work. But that shouldn't prohibit them from completing their project on time.
>> do we have a motion?
>> i move approval. And i want for make sure that the things that are discussed here, that we consider them and do something about it srches possible -- as much as possible. And we go especially with the accelerated timeline on this. And of course this is -- since this is being funded by the 2001 voter approved bonds, the money that would be utilized to accelerate this project from a 16 week -- in fact, it's a little more than 16 weeks, it would be reduced to an accelerated time of six weeks i think is worth it. But i think we also need to be very cautious about the safety issue that have been discussed here today. And of course, we heard the residents say that they prefer -- if it's road closure, they prefer the six weeks as opposed to the greater than 16 weeks for the road closures. So i would like to move approval with taking consideration in being highlighted in this particular project.
>> so your motion is to use the additional cost to accelerate the project?
>> yes, which was included in the 2001 bond -- voter approve bond package money in 2001, which was -- is already funded. They're just going to take that money from that particular project to deal with this.
>> i second that motion.
>> all right.
>> any further discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> okay.
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, April 27, 2010 2:35 PM
