Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, April 5, 2011 (Agenda)
Item 15
15, consider and take appropriate action on the crosswater yacht club roadway improvement agreement in precinct 3.
>> good morning again.
anna bolin, theresa caulk continues and steve manila, Travis County t.n.r.
I'm going to have theresa lay out the particulars of the roadway agreement and with that.
>> good morning, judge, Commissioners.
the agreement we're here to talk about related to two permits that we have been reviewing applications for.
these are administrative permits that we anticipate issuing permits for soon.
they are for the crosswater yacht club parking facility that's located on the the end of hurst creek road, just under a 5-acre property that includes a parking facility for 125 vehicles as well as an on-site wastewater system that would be permitted for -- that would treat wastewater floating to marina in lake Lake Travis.
also would be above ground storage that would be regulated by tceq.
the second permit relates to a waterline extension down hurst creek road that the cross water yacht club developer would extend water to you all floating marina facility.
related to the waterline application, there are provisions in the permit that address roadway repairs.
the waterline extension is extensive, about 2,000 feet down hurst creek road.
about a quarter includes waterline within the payment of hurst creek road and Travis County is requiring in those locations that the developer provide an overlay across the entire width of hurst creek road for the areas where the waterline is outside but adjacent to the pavement, we're requiring that the developer repair any areas that have been damaged by the waterline construction.
the roadway improvement agreement document that we have this morning basically formalizes the process for completing the roadway repairs.
and basically includes provisions for a pre construction existing condition survey completed by Travis County to determine the condition of the roadway before any of the construction takes place as well as the physical posting of $20,000 from the applicant before any construction work actually occurs.
after the waterline facilities are completed and the parking lot, it includes a post-construction survey to determine the actual condition of the roadway.
this would also be after the overlay portions are completed by the applicant.
after the repairs are completed to hurst creek road, there would be a final survey to confirm that the repairs are complete and fiscal could be released at that point.
I also just want to mention that the floating marina on Lake Travis has been permitted in 2008 and it's already received its permit.
but in terms of the roadway improvement agreement, because it formalizes the process to effect the repairs to hurst creek road, we do in fact -- staff does recommend approval of the roadway improvement agreement.
but I also wanted to make just a statement that we have a couple of layers of protection to protect the condition of hurst creek road.
when the contractor comes in to pull their permit for the construction of utilities in the right-of-way, they also are required to post a bond to ensure that the repairs are completed to hurst creek road.
so we feel that we have multiple layers to basically assure that hurst creek road will be repaired to the condition, good or better than prior to the construction of the crosswater yacht club improvements and so we do recommend approval of the agreement.
>> ms. Brown.
>> thank you, judge and Commissioners.
I have a statement provided by my lawyer.
I can provide you a copy.
the court has taken a preliminary jurisdiction issue raised by crosswater under advisement to rule on and based on rule whether there will still need to be a hearing to enforce the court's final judgment with respect to the no commercial development on the 128.5-acre original stewart tract which includes under water.
in any event, as of this time there has been no ruling by the court.
I also personally would like the court to know that I've been sued again, and I was sued originally, slap suited.
I won my case protecting my property rights, my deed of record.
and now I find myself sued again in a situation involving the person that bob leonard, who owns west beach marine, who foreclosured on the person, harbor ventures that that ihad the original suit thad sued me.
and now this incident involving ken odom, the former Travis County attorney, I'm being sued, and I really feel I did nothing wrong except ask what he was doing driving on the easement property.
he refused to identify himself.
I asked who gave him permission and he refused to tell me.
and so now I'm involved in another huge lawsuit draining me and I don't know how the average person stands up to this, to these corporate developers or people.
I have never told anyone to get off the property.
you know, there isn't an owner of the property but I have property rights over that to the lake.
and my case have been upheld in court and now I have this case where I'm trying to get a writ of enforcement.
and it's just been draining me over and over.
and I'm a nurse, I moved here in 2004 and this has been going on since then.
I have had no peace.
and I'm not a confrontational person.
I don't like to speak in public.
I don't like legal action.
and this has been a nightmare.
and one thing that you need to remember is common sense.
Lake Travis is a reservoir.
is lcra really protecting our valuable resource or is it being sold to the highest bidder?
and also I feel that lake -- that graveyard point, and it documented in deed and records and plat maps, it is a deeded noncommercial neighborhood and everybody fails to remember that.
so I'm praying that the court, you know, I know that you are -- you are limited in what you can do as far as permits go, but I'm just praying that the court will be allowed to make decisions and not be dragged out for years and years in -- in lawsuits that drain the people that really do have easements that protect the watershed and the neighborhood.
I don't feel that 20,000 -- two 20,000 or 10,000 gallons of gasoline or fuel belong in the watershed in front of our houses.
I don't feel that parking belongs in the watershed.
it's 2011.
I don't feel that -- that, you know, a neighborhood should be destroyed and the people turned against each other in lawsuits that they can't afford over and over.
so, you know, I'm just praying that the court will take into consideration what we as individuals are up against here.
thank you.
>> thank you, ms. Brown.
any questions for ms. Brown?
does staff have a response?
>> where we are at this point is the developers have satisfied most if not all of our comments from reviewing what they are proposing to do.
we're ready to issue permits for both the waterline and the driveway construction.
we've got put into place security for the road.
we also still have behind the scenes is an offer from the -- that the developer will make to Lakeway to pass $20,000 more if we find it's needed for additional improvements to the road.
the issues between the property owners out there though, that is a civil matter between them, from our perspective.
>> I just have the one comment, you are right, we don't have authority to prevent incompatible uses.
we are attempting to get such authority from the legislature, but the prospects aren't great.
we were rebuffed pretty resoundingly by the home builders association and the -- the aggregate industry as well as one of the heftiest think tanks from the conservative side, and your comments, although they don't fall on deaf ears, there's not much we can do, but you are absolutely right, the property rights in Texas are only for those rich enough to defend them.
>> yes, and one of the things that's important to remember when you talk to these conservative think tanks is that nothing can be sustained without clean water.
and I'd like to know how this marina is good for us and good for us and our watershed.
thank you.
>> Commissioner Huber.
>> I just want to say I remain adamantly opposed to development of these under water projects.
not just these but all others that have such impact on the property values particularly in the unincorporated areas where we have very little authority to do anything bit.
we have to do what we have to do that meets our regulations, and when it's appropriate I'll move approval of this -- of this roadway agreement because we need to be sure that we protect our own interests in this county road.
but I am adamantly opposed to this project.
I do have a question.
was a t.i.a.
done on this?
is there a threshold for a t.i.a.?
>> we do have a threshold but that was in vehicle trips per day and this facility was small enough it wouldn't trigger the need nor a t.i.a.
>> I would like to say in concert with this and follow on from what ms. Brown said, I would -- I would challenge lcra to pay attention to the permitting of these marinas because they are not just a revenue stream for them, they have impacts on every -- the water and the land around them and it's time lcra started looking at the broader impacts of the permitting of these marinas.
>> Commissioner Davis.
>> thank you, judge.
I have -- you know, I have -- you've heard the land use issue come up over and over and over and over again how the county is limited in its ability to regulate land use.
of course, every year, whenever the legislature meets, we're continuing to beat the bush to try to see if we can be granted more authority when it comes to land use.
currently there's a bill right now that's still pending.
hb 662.
the sponsors are representative rodriguez dealing with issue of land use.
yet the state considers to not for whatever reason grant it whereby, and as you heard my colleague say, whereby this kind of challenge is not only in your area where we have protection of water, in eastern Travis County where it's challenging people.
where people live.
giving an example of above ground water storage tanks -- I mean above ground fuel tanks right there on johnny morris road where it came before the court, this Commissioners court, and we looked at this and it went through the same t.n.r.
review as being here and, of course, we had to do what we had to do according to permit, but the above ground storage thanks were right across from a school, gus garcia middle school.
right adjacent to residents out there in that area whereby it could hurt people if something goes down wrong.
so it is a big concern of ours and it's going to continue to be a big concern until the state grants us the type of authority that we need to have in such situations.
we've been struggling all across the board with this.
notification of things that are coming in which is involving the city and the county under title 30 and chapters 82 for the county.
still haven't got there yet, but we're working on that as far as notification.
so it's not that we are not trying to do anything, but the tools that they are making available to us are so limited it isn't funny.
it's just ridiculous, in my opinion, because we have to -- each one of us has to be confronted with this every now and then.
case-by-case basis.
I didn't support this particular situation when it came up in precinct 1 on johnny morris road with those above ground storage tanks, and I did it because of principle.
I think somewhere I'm making a statement that no, we're not going to continue to tolerate this incompatible land use type situation.
in my opinion, it's not acceptable.
tolerate may be a little too strong.
but acceptable.
but the bottom is, the bottom line is that the residents are continuing to holler and scream out yes, we think we need it, but when it comes to the legislature won't grant it.
I'm not going to support it because it's consistently doing the same thing that's happening in eastern Travis County.
with limited land use authority where it affects people, human beings.
you are saying water, yes, water is something we protect also, but human beings.
so it's no way in the world I could support this motion as far as -- well, when you support the whatever you are going to do, Commissioner Huber.
I just can't go there.
>> Commissioner Huber?
>> I reluctantly move we approve this roadway agreement.
>> second.
>> seconded by Commissioner Gomez.
any more discussion on the motion?
all in favor?
show Commissioners Gomez, Huber, Eckhardt and yours truly in favor.
>> Commissioner Davis opposed based to statement I made.
>> Commissioner Davis voting against it.
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.
