Travis County Commissioners Court
December 20, 2011 (Agenda)
Item 1
Item no.
1 is a public hearing to receive comments regarding a plat for recording: steiner ranch phase 1, section 10-d, resubdivision of lots 303-315 and lots 324-339 (resubdivision final plat - 34 total lots
>> [33 single-family lots and 1 greenbelt lot] - 15.17 acres - shoreview overlook drive) in precinct two.
move that the public hearing be opened.
>> second.
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
good morning.
>> good morning.
anna bolin and steve manila, Travis County t.n.r.
the purpose of this action is to further resubdivide 25 lots creating an ultimate 34 lots.
there was some concerns raised.
I believe at the zoning and platting commission, but this meets our requirements and the -- the lots along the streets will have approximately like 90 feet of frontage.
so they are of a good size.
this meets our requirements.
we recommend approvals.
>> and -- and I assume that when objections are called to our attention we try to address them.
>> yes, sir.
since we put this item on the agenda, we have had a couple of calls just asking, you know, what this was about, and we told them it was for resubdivision and -- and I don't think that we've had the amount or the type of corresponds that the city -- correspondence that the city had previously.
>> the concerns were predominantly with regard to density, is that right?
>> that's right.
>> and I mean this is a new territory for me and actually Commissioner Huber has represented this area well since she will actually be able to speak to it more than i.
but this area is essentially isolated by the geography of the river, the canyon land and the endangered species habitat, correct?
>> yes.
>> I believe that the concerns with regard to density is that the -- that the -- is -- are we still using a multiplier of nine trips per household?
>> yes, ma'am.
>> so even though this is a small increase in lot number, it represents roughly 81 additional trips on to 620 daily.
but I agree with staff that it meets all of our requirements and I don't believe that we have the authority to deny it at this point.
but I would like to see us work toward -- toward coming up with some ability to say we've hit capacity on the roadways that service this area.
and the likelihood of increasing the capacity is -- is non-existent.
and at some point say we can't continue to -- to -- to -- to permit additional density because we know we can't move any more people in and out of there.
I don't think we've hit that yet.
but I understand the concerns for that.
>> and I would also add that I believe that there's -- there's a few -- some initiatives that are trying to work on how to find a second way in, in emergency circumstances for steiner.
and --
>> that's absolutely vital.
but would you all agree that with regard to the capacity of the roadway network.
if you're not working out there, the ability to get out of that area, not -- not just for fire, just for daily commute, is -- is -- is limited in that there's only -- there's only the one bridge across the river there and it's not likely to be widened.
2222 is limited in its capacity and 620 is also limited in its capacity.
we can improve the safety and the efficiency of the roadway network out there, but the ability to increase capacity is fairly limited.
>> it would take additional lanes for example or alternative means of transportation, working towards transit that sort of a thing.
not relying on just one mode of transportation
>> [indiscernible] to keep in mind.
>> it's not currently in the capital metro service area.
so aside from private van pooling, it's -- it's not a transit probable corridor at this point.
>> I would agree with her comments.
and I would like to say, though, that -- that this meets our current requirements, as we move into looking at -- at our fire safety code, I think that -- that the volume of transportation on the existing neighborhood should be very closely looked at,
>> [n particularly where there's really even -- even when you get to the feeder road, there's only one way to go.
so make a note of that because we are moving in this direction of looking at these future codes and it's just -- it's just very -- very -- very scary having to keep approving subdivisions when you know that they are going to -- that there are going to be safety issues related to them.
>> thank you for delving into them so thoroughly.
>> this is a public hearing.
if you would like to give comments during the public hearing, please come forward.
move that the public hearing be closed.
>> second.
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
this is action item no.
13 on today's agenda.
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.
