FEB24WKSHOP - publicdocs.txdot.gov · Web viewThe substance of these rule revisions are to make minor grammatical corrections and to reflect changes in department organizational structure

1

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

COMMISSION MEETING

Commission RoomDewitt Greer Building125 East 11th Street

Austin, Texas

9:11 a.m.Thursday,

February 22, 2001

COMMISSION MEMBERS:

JOHN W. JOHNSON, ChairROBERT L. NICHOLSDAVID M. LANEYRIC WILLIAMSON, appointee

STAFF:

CHARLES W. HEALD, Executive DirectorHELEN HAVELKA, Executive Assistant, Engineering Operations

ON THE RECORD REPORTING, INC. 02/22/01(512) 450-0342

12

12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334

34

2

I N D E X

AGENDA ITEM: PAGE:

CONVENE MEETING.......................................6

1. DELEGATIONS a. TRAVIS AND WILLIAMSON COUNTIES Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization/ Capital Area Transportation Coalition Request construction funding for US 290 West/ SH 71 from Williamson Creek to FM 1826, US 183 South from Loyola Lane to Boggy Creek and Interstate 35 North at Greenlawn Boulevard....11

b. HARRIS COUNTY West Houston Association Request accelerated construction of Interstate 10 (Katy Freeway) from Interstate 610 to the Fort Bend County line........................39

c. VARIOUS COUNTIES Alliance for I-69 Texas Provide update on the development of this corridor from Laredo and the Rio Grande Valley through Northeast Texas to the Louisiana state line.........................................57

2. Approval of Minutes of the January 25, 2001, regular meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission and emergency meetings before the House Transportation Committee on February 6, 2001 and February 13, 2001.......................72

3. Aviation Approve funding for airport improvement projects at various locations (MO)........................73

4. Promulgation of Administrative Rules Under Title 43, Texas Administrative Code, Part I, Pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, the Government Code, Chapter 2001:

a. Final Adoption


12

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445

34

3

(1) Chapter 5 - Finance (MO) Amendments to §5.43 and §5.44 (Payment of Fees for Department Goods and Services)...74

4. Promulgation of Administrative Rules a. Final Adoption (Cont’d)

(2) Chapter 9 - Contract Management (MO) Amendments to §9.31, §§9.33-9.38 and §9.41-9.43 (Contracting for Architectural, Engineering, and Surveying Services).....75

3) Chapter 21 - Right of Way (MO) Amendments to §§21.31, 21.43, 21.44, 21.48, 21.50, 21.51, 21.53, and 21.54 (Utility Accommodation............................77

b. Rule Review In accordance with Section 9-10.13, Article IX of the General Appropriations Act, and Government Code, §2001.039, as added by Senate Bill 178, 76th Legislature, Readoption of 43 TAC Chapter 17, Vehicle Titles and Registration (MO)............................78 5. Traffic Operations Various Counties - Approve additional environmental speed limits in the Dallas/Fort Worth area (MO)...79

6. Transportation Planning a. Harris County - Approve construction of on- state system direct connectors at IH 610/Spur 548 and IH 10 with the northern and southern termini of the toll-free extension of the Hardy Toll Road, at a cost not to exceed $17,000,000, and enter into any necessary agreements with the Harris County Toll Road Authority (MO)...............................80

b. Kerr County - Advance project to replace the Hermann Sons Road bridge on the Guadalupe River to Priority 1, Category 6B, Off-State System Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Program, of the 2001 UTP (MO)................81

c. Various Counties - Approve adjustments to


12

12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849

34

4

participation ratios for projects located in economically disadvantaged counties (MO).....82

d. Various Counties - Approve policy for limiting frontage roads on new controlled access facilities (MO)..............................80

7. State Infrastructure Bank Harris County - City of Bellaire - In accordance with 43 TAC 6.32(c), consider granting preliminary approval of an application from the City of Bellaire to borrow $3,180,000 from the State Infrastructure Bank to pay for an additional storm water trunk line within the IH 610 right of way in Bellaire (MO).........84

8. Contracts a. Award or rejection of highway improvement contracts: (1) Maintenance (MO)........................85 (2) Highway and Building Construction (MO)...87

9. Routine Minute Orders a. Speed Zones Various Counties - Establish or alter regulatory and construction speed zones on various sections of highways in the state (MO)........................................111

b. Load Zones Various Counties - Review load restrictions on various roads and bridges on the state highway system (MO).................................111

c. Highway Designation Hunt County - SH 224 and BU 67-T - Removes the designation of SH 224 from the state highway system from SH 34 to BU 67-T; and redesignates a segment of SH 224 and BU 67-T from US 69 to IH 30 as State Highway Spur 302 in Greenville (MO)........................................111

d. Right of Way Disposition, Purchase and Lease (1) Bexar County - FM 1535 - Northwest San Antonio near Loop 1604 - Consider the lease of right of way for a bridge to the abutting landowner (MO).............91

(2) Bowie County - SH 93 at US 82 in


12

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051

34

5

Texarkana - Consider the sale of a tract of surplus right of way (MO)...........111

(3) Cochran County - SH 114 south of West Grant Avenue southeast of Morton - Consider the sale of a surplus maintenance site (MO)..............................111

9. Routine Minute Orders (Cont’d.) (4) Gray County - FM 291 northwest of Alanreed - Consider the exchange of a surplus right of way easement for new right of way (MO)......................112

(5) Grayson County - SH 11 at US 69 in Whitewright - Consider the sale of a tract of surplus right of way (MO).....112

(6) Grayson County - US 69 at Eckels Lane in Whitewright - Consider the sale of a tract of surplus right of way (MO).....112

(7) Harris County - IH 610 at Buffalo Speedway in Houston - Consider the sale of access rights (MO)............................112

(8) Montgomery County - US 75 at FM 2432 in Willis - Consider the sale of a tract of surplus right of way (MO).....112

e. Eminent Domain Proceedings (1) Various Counties - Request for eminent domain proceedings on noncontrolled and controlled access highways (MO)........112

(2) Harris County - Consider the condemnation of land to be acquired for addition to the Houston District Headquarters (MO)..112

10. Executive Session Pursuant to Government Code, Chapter 551 ....................................113

OPEN COMMENT PERIOD.................................113

ADJOURN.............................................114


12

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647

34

6

P R O C E E D I N G S

MR. JOHNSON: Good morning. It is 9:11 a.m. and I

would like to call this meeting of the Texas

Transportation Commission to order. I would like to

welcome you to our February 22 meeting. It is a pleasure

to have you here this morning.

Let me note for the record that public notice of this

meeting containing all items of the agenda was filed with

the Office of the Secretary of State at 11:03 a.m. on

February 14, 2001.

Before we get started I would like to ask my

colleagues on the commission if they have any remarks or

comments they would like to make.

David Laney?

MR. LANEY: It's just nice to see the turnout. I

know we've got a number of delegations this morning, and

as many of you know, this is likely to be my last meeting,

and most of the faces are now -- I'm slow on the uptake --

but after six years they're familiar, and virtually all

those six years most of the faces have been very

supportive of our efforts, and I can't tell you how much I

appreciate it. It's made our jobs much easier and more

effective over the last six years, so I appreciate it, and


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

7

I'll miss you guys. Thanks.

MR. JOHNSON: Robert?

MR. NICHOLS: I'd also like to thank all of you who

have taken time out of your day to come and talk about

transportation with us. Some of you traveled short

distances. Some of you have traveled long distances

across the state, and we appreciate the effort that you

have made to try to explain your needs.

And also since this is probably David's last meeting

I'd like to publicly say how much I have really enjoyed

serving with him for the last four years. He's been very

good for Texas. He's been a very back to basics kind of

leadership, but also with a vision. He's been fun to work

with and is a real class act, and, David, I really

appreciate what you've done.

(General applause.)

MR. JOHNSON: Well, David, since you broached the

subject I'm going to pile on.

Six years ago right after it was announced that

Governor Bush had named me to the commission, the first

phone call I got was from David Laney. The second,

ironically, was from a reporter, but in these past two

years David, as that first phone call showed, has been


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

8

very helpful and very supportive, and from a personal note

I couldn't have learned as much as I did as quickly as I

have if it weren't for David's being always available in a

role -- as a quasi-mentor.

And then I look around at what has happened in these

two years not only within the department but also

statewide in the arena of transportation and

transportation planning, and I just marvel at what has

happened under his leadership, and he has been a

remarkable leader, and I think it will be exhibited over

time just how effective his service to this commission and

also to this state will be.

But, David, personal note and also from the citizens

of this great state, thank you for a job well done.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Johnny. I appreciate it very

much.

(General applause.)

MR. JOHNSON: We have with us this morning as of

Monday named by Governor Perry as David's successor, Ric

Williamson, from Weatherford, Texas, and Ric, if you would

stand up so everybody could get familiar?

(General applause.)

MR. JOHNSON: I remember two years ago when I was


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

9

introduced, Anne Wynne had said something about having a

bad hair day and then David said, Well, here's somebody

who's never had a bad hair day, so we welcome you and look

forward to working with you.

We have a full slate of business today, including

three delegations. Before we get into our first

delegation I notice that Senator Todd Staples has a

meeting in about 15 minutes and has asked to be able to

lead off. He's going to speak on I believe the I-69

route's behalf.

So, Senator, welcome.

SENATOR STAPLES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I

appreciate that. Commissioner Nichols and Commissioner

Laney, it's certainly good to see you and Commissioner-

designate Williamson. We thank you for the job that you

do for Texas.

I am here today to speak on behalf of the I-69

alliance that will be making a presentation to you later

this morning. As I think about the tremendously important

job that you do and the balancing act that you have to

weigh to balance the resources to the needs that are faced

in Texas, I can only think of what a great opportunity

this is to build a new interstate in our state.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

10

It is a corridor that benefits not just a region of

Texas but all of Texas, and truly benefits as an

international project because of the ramifications that it

has. This project, as you know, will be a relief route

for other overly congested routes in Texas, and I think

it's just a tremendous opportunity to show what your

vision is for our state and for our country with the

implementation and the progress that can be made on I-69.

I know that there are dedicated citizens that are

carrying the load with you. They're doing their part, and

they're here today to make a presentation to you as well,

and I commend them for the cohesiveness that they have

shown so many times. It's difficult to balance the

projects that we need, but I've seen just a tremendous

gathering of individuals and resources from throughout

Texas to rank this as a top project, and I thank you for

your consideration of it this morning and thank you for

letting me get here so I can lay out a bill.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you very much.

Our first delegation represents the Capital Area

Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Capital Area

Transportation Coalition.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

34

11

TRAVIS AND WILLIAMSON COUNTIES DELEGATION

(Senator Gonzalo Barrientos, Pike Powers, Todd Baxter, Mayor Kirk Watson, Mayor Robert Stluka, Rep. Ann Kitchen)

MR. JOHNSON: Senator Gonzalo Barrientos will start

us off. Welcome, Senator, and thank you for letting

Senator Staples intervene. Commissioner Laney has pointed

out that your last few presentations before the commission

have been extraordinary in entertainment value, and we're

expecting no fall off in that regard.

(General laughter.)

SENATOR BARRIENTOS: May it please the commission,

good morning, Chairman Johnson, Commissioners Laney,

Nichols, Wes Heald. Thank you for your time and courtesy

to receive our delegation's request for funding for these

three very important highway projects for Central Texas.

Allow me a few brief words. Brief as there is a

session going on, and I will be receiving -- sitting on

the finance committee will be receiving the freshmen

senator who just spoke here a while ago, so I have to get

back there and hear his bill to see how we're going to do.

(General laughter.)

SENATOR BARRIENTOS: I also look forward as a member

of the nominations committee to quickly confirm my


12

1

2345

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

34

12

colleague -- former colleague from the House, Ric

Williamson. He's going to be a very good addition to this

important body.

Now, as the chair of CAMPO, the Capital Area

Metropolitan Planning Organization, I am pleased to tell

you that our delegation brings today 50 percent of the

funding needed for the requested projects. Now, this is

more than twice what we committed last year. These funds

include 80 percent of CAMPO's STP 4(c) funding for the

next three years.

Now, I'd like to introduce the elected officials who

are here today. If they would rise, just very briefly we

have Representative Ann Kitchen; Commissioner, Travis

County, Todd Baxter; Commissioner Travis County, Karen

Sonleitner; Hays County Commissioner Bill Burnett; our

Austin mayor, Kirk Watson; our council member for the City

of Austin, Will Wynn; Mayor Robert Stluka of Round Rock;

board chair of TTA, Pete Winstead; from our chambers Gay

Valdez, Cliff Davis, Mark Hazlewood; and I'm sure I have

missed someone, so, Pike Powers, please take up the slack.

Now the chairman of the Capital Area Transportation

Coalition, Mr. Pike Powers, who will provide the details

of our request, and by your leave, I have to get back to


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

13

work. Thank you so much.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, Senator.

(General applause.)

MR. POWERS: Chairman Johnson, Commissioners Nichols

and Laney, and Director Heald, and soon-to-be-Commissioner

Ric Williamson, my name is Pike Powers and I'm the chair

of the Capital Area Transportation Coalition, and it's our

pleasure to be back again this year. Before we start I

think on behalf of Central Texas we would like to take our

hat off to David Laney.

David, your door was always open. You always

listened. You were very thoughtful and sensitive in

everything you said to us over a number of years. I can't

tell you how much we appreciate the time and trouble you

took to spend with us, to encourage us, to nurture us, to

push us forward. So can we give you another round of

applause from all of us?

(General applause.)

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Pike. I'll send you a bill.

MR. POWERS: Well, I hope you will.

Can I ask everybody from the Central Texas

delegation -- and by the way, this includes Travis, Hays,

and Williamson County -- would everybody stand up


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

14

representing those various groups? Thank you very much.

You can see we have a strong delegation, Mr. Chairman

and commissioners, here today to tell you again our story,

which we think is a positive, constructive, going-forward

story. We were here last year on these same three

projects. We're back with more money and more vigor and

enthusiasm than ever.

We do want to say to you and the staff that we

appreciate what you did during the last year, the access

roads on 290 West, which is the highest-ranked project of

our three. I think about 9 million got actually spent on

those endeavors, about 1.88 million as I understand it

from local funds, so thanks to you and the staff for those

efforts. We appreciate what we did get done but we've got

a lot more to do, and we're here to tell you that story

today.

We believe that Central Texas has its act together.

We have a strong delegation as you can see from the people

behind me. We bring money. We bring enthusiasm. We

bring involvement. We bring support for your activities,

and we want to go forward working with you in the future.

I think it's important that we mention the successful

local dedicated funds that we're bringing. Significantly,


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

15

since the last time we were here we have had successful

local bond elections in both Williamson and Travis and the

City of Austin, and all of these people will be here to

talk about it. The voters of these communities have voted

and spoken, and they want the roads. They want the

mobility, and so we're here to tell you that story in

spades hopefully today.

We believe we've set new benchmarks for both the

local leveraging and hopefully also with our video, which

you'll see in just a minute. We worked hard to meet your

expectations, and we pledge to you that we'll work hard in

the future to keep up our commitments.

Do we have our projects up on the screen? I know you

have a paper in front of you with the Capital Area

Mobility that lays out these three projects. You'll see,

unlike last year when Project One was one and Project --

the other two projects were ranked two and two equally, we

have had a reallocation of priorities and tried to put the

second highest priority on 183 South that you'll hear

about in just a minute, so that's a bit of a change from

last year. That paper material is in front of you and we

would welcome any questions as we go along.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

34

16

Let me turn to our video in the interest of time. We

think you'll find this both informative and entertaining,

and we appreciate the opportunity to present it to you.

(Pause to watch video.)

MR. POWERS: We have a momento to present to

Commissioner Nichols. Given the fact that the legislative

battles are going to be fierce and tough and we're going

to need all the help we can get, so here's your helmet to

go through the battle with, Commissioner.

(General applause.)

MR. NICHOLS: That's great.

MR. POWERS: Well, we'll try to be more entertaining

next year. We're working at it.

It's my pleasure now to introduce Travis County

Commissioner Todd Baxter to present the 290 West project

and its money.

Todd, please join us.

COMMISSIONER BAXTER: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and

commissioners, Mr. Heald, and Commissioner-designate Mr.

Williamson. Thanks for having us. I think the video is

plenty to see. I think there's going to be a secondary

market for half-tracks on 290 now.

I want to thank you for hearing our delegation today.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

17

It is an honor to appear to you -- appear on behalf of

Travis County and as a member of the Capital Area

Metropolitan Planning Organization, and we certainly

appreciate the cooperation and assistance of the

commission in the past. We are very thankful to get the

frontage roads for 290 last presentation, and we hope to

build on that and move forward. Representative Kitchen is

also here in support of the project, and you'll be hearing

from her shortly.

But let me say that these highway improvements are

absolutely critical for improving safety, in fixing the

mobility issues, and reducing congestion. The CAMPO

policy advisory committee has committed $32.1 million from

STP(4)(c) funds to help the commission to build these

projects. As the graph shows that we have up there, this

is over 80 percent of our total STP(4)(c) funds for the

year 2003, 2004, and 2005.

This is truly an unprecedented amount of contribution

from our region, and I think is indicative of just how

committed we are to these projects.

In addition to these funds to show our strong support

for these projects Travis County has also committed $2

million towards a US 290 project, and that was recently


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

18

approved by the voters and clearly you can see by the

voter support that was another example of how committed

our community is to this project.

All three of these projects are important to our

region and economy, but the project that received the

highest priority again by CAMPO is the Highway 290

project. Clearly this project's time has come and maybe

even be a little bit past, but certainly I think now is

the time to fully fund this project and move forward with

getting it all done.

This project would extend the existing western

terminus of the US 290 freeway from Williamson Creek to

west of 1826, as you can see on the map there. With your

help we've made this major east-west thoroughfare a

freeway from IH-35 to just west of Williamson Creek, and

that's just short of Motorola.

I know Commissioner Nichols has driven that portion

of roadway during rush hour, and as he knows and as we

have expressed before, what you really have is this

beautiful super-freeway situation where it literally slams

down to one lane. It is just causing major congestion in

the area, and I think we have a great opportunity, so

really what we need to do is continue this project beyond


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

19

the Y in Oak Hill so we can better link the eastern and

western parts of Travis and Hays County for access to jobs

and schools, to improve safety, and to reduce congestion.

The strong community support for CAMPO's number one

priority ranking for Highway 290 West illustrates why we

believe the time has come to fully fund this project.

I'd also like to thank all the residents and

businesses of Oak Hill and the surrounding communities for

their patience and persistence. They have all been

wholeheartedly committed to this project, even when it's

meant personal sacrifice and disruption of their lives and

businesses, so I'd like to thank them very much for all

their commitment.

I'd like to thank you, Mr. Chairman and the

commissioners, on behalf of the citizens of the state, and

thank you for consideration of this very important

project. And, Commissioner Laney, we know that this is

your last meeting, and it's an honor to be here with you

at your last meeting, and I know just how much hard work

you've done for the state of Texas and how committed you

are to improving transportation opportunities for the

state of Texas, and I'd like to present you with a helmet

as well.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

20

We should have probably given this to you earlier so

you could wear it every once in a while when you needed

it, but I know there are times I wish I had this on 290,

so maybe I'll get one for myself too. Thank you.

MR. LANEY: Thanks, Todd.

(General applause.)

MR. POWERS: Well, for emphasis I'd just like to say

one more time we do have a number of people from Hays

County here today in support of this particular project as

well who stood earlier.

And now our distinguished mayor and Austinite of the

year as of this week, Mayor Kirk "Wheels" Watson.

(General applause.)

MAYOR WATSON: Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman

and commissioners. At the risk of taking too much time

but I feel like I would be remiss if I didn't say a

special thank you to you, Commissioner Laney. As a mayor

who came in during your tenure here and as a mayor who

wanted to address the transportation needs of my

community, I always found you to be someone that was ready

to help me and to help educate about different ways we

might achieve those results, so I want to say a special

thank you on this day.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

21

MR. LANEY: I appreciate it.

MAYOR WATSON: The other thing I want to say is that

we sincerely appreciate the funding that has occurred for

different projects in this area over the past couple of

years and last year as you've already been -- as people

have said already. And you've all heard it before. In

fact you heard it in the video, but I want to emphasize

one of the points, and that is that the population of this

area, while it's been growing extraordinarily rapidly in

the past couple of years, it's expected to double -- the

population is expected to double in the next 20 years, and

you folks know how bad the congestion is in this area

already because you're many times caught in the very same

traffic that we're caught in.

So we have the conditions we have now. You have in

addition to that the growing population over the next 20

years. We need to start paying attention to where we're

going to be 20 years from now.

And one of the points I most would like to stress is

the link between what is a very healthy state economy in

the Austin-Round Rock-Central Texas' region's economy.

This region is a vital part of the state of Texas'

technology-driven economy, and it has to be supported with


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

22

safe and efficient transportation infrastructure in order

to sustain the healthy economy, not just here but in the

state as a whole.

These highways are needed because they make good

economic business sense. Let me give you some statistics.

According to the Texas Workforce Commission from 1990 to

1999 Travis County employment has increased by almost 71

percent. Now, just by way of comparison and just to put

it in perspective, Dallas and Harris County employment

levels increased by 30 percent and 23 percent respectively

in that same time period.

The pattern is even more pronounced for the suburban

counties, Williamson and Hays, which as you know surround

Travis County. The jobs in those communities have

exploded by over 107 percent and 142 percent. And again,

by way of comparison to Collin and Fort Bend counties, the

increase was 102 percent and 87 percent respectively.

The Austin region's dynamic economy is directly

linked to the state's economy, as I've said. Our growth

contributes to the state's growth, and as our workforce is

expanded significantly we're feeling the effects on our

transportation system.

My job today is to tell you a few words about US 183.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

23

We're particularly interested in the grade separation of

the two remaining stoplights on US 183. As you all know,

in previous years there has been money put forth to take

out some of those stoplights, but we're down to the

remaining two stoplights on US 183. One is at Loyola Lane

and the other is at Technicenter Drive.

What this would do is it would complete a nonstop

route from Cedar Park to Austin-Bergstrom International

Airport. It would also in my view provide some relief on

Interstate 35. In my opinion this roadway improvement is

essential for us to have any sort of effective multimodal

transportation system.

We're cognizant of the funding at TxDOT and the

shortage TxDOT has in terms of money, so I'm pleased to

report that the City of Austin is contributing $13.7

million to help with the construction costs, and as you

can see from the graphic, the addition of that to the

overall amount of money that is being brought forward.

I would also like to point out that I'm very proud

that the citizens of the City of Austin back in November

passed $150 million bond election to help us, 90 million

of which is set aside for help on different projects in

terms of right of way and matching funds. We also


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

24

recognize that for the foreseeable future this local

financial participation is going to be extremely

important, and it's become a way of life, and so the City

of Austin I think stands ready to be a part of all these

projects.

Again, thank you for all you do for the state of

Texas. Thank you all for all that you have done for the

capital area, and I have another helmet that I want to

give out, and I'm going to give this to Chairman Johnson,

and you may wonder why we have so many helmets. Here in

the City of Austin when the legislature is in session we

buy them in bulk, so --

(General applause.)

MR. POWERS: Thank you, Mayor.

We've been joined in the last few minutes by Travis

County Commissioner Ron Davis. I know he strongly

supports this project as well and would like to say just a

word.

COMMISSIONER DAVIS: Good morning. How are you doing

this morning?

Listen, commissioners. We really do need some

relief. I live in this area. This particular area is in

my precinct, and on Loyola Lane in the morning and the


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

25

evening folks coming out of those neighborhoods are just

at a standstill because they have to compete with the

traffic that's already on 183 South going toward the

airport.

Technicenter Drive is the same scenario. You have

Motorola sitting there. You have other companies, Fed-Ex,

in other areas that are there. In fact, we have a new

subdivision coming in right off Technicenter Drive, which

people are going to need access. They're going to be

competing at those traffic lights with the way the traffic

is now flowing down 183 South toward the airport, so I'm

really encouraging you to please go forth, fund us. We

need the funding. We are doing everything we possibly can

to ensure that people are made safe.

And again, thank you very much, and let's relieve

some of this congestion on 183 South. Thank you very

much. Have a good day.

MR. POWERS: Thank you, Commissioner.

It's now my pleasure to present the mayor of Round

Rock, Mayor Robert Stluka. He has no nickname he tells

me.

MAYOR STLUKA: Not that I'm willing to share with

anyone here.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

26

Chairman Johnson, commissioners, Mr. Heald, thank you

very much to give us this opportunity to make this

presentation.

And I must also take this opportunity, Commissioner

Laney, to say thank you to you, thank you to what you've

given the state of Texas and what you have given

transportation in the state of Texas. I certainly want to

thank you for your guidance and perseverance. I think it

was three sessions ago that Pete Winstead and I and you

walked the halls of the capitol when we were putting the

Texas Turnpike Authority together, legislation that

granted that, and I learned a lot at that time and I

appreciate all your perseverance as well during that time.

Last year we appeared before you with a request to

fund the Greenlawn interchange, and it's an integral part

to our overall regional transportation plan, and as the

graphic above you shows, it is an integral part to

connecting a loop around the major intersection of 1325

and 35, not only to serve the Dell needs of

transportation, but that whole area has now become a major

development for us in South Round Rock and the southern

end of Williamson County.

Today I am pleased to report that Round Rock has


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

27

completed its construction of Greenlawn Boulevard and

TxDOT has also completed the ramp onto Greenlawn

Boulevard, and daily we are seeing an increasing number of

vehicles using the street and reducing the usage of the

highly congested intersection of 1325 and I-35.

As I am sure you know, we are in negotiations with

TxDOT to determine the final construction of that

particular bridge at that intersection, and we too have

pledged -- and as we have pledged before, we stand ready

to fund up to $5 million for that particular interchange.

We're here today truly as a part of a regional effort

because it is important to us in Round Rock, just as it is

in the City of Austin, Williamson County, and Travis

County to seeing these projects completed to be able to

move our people around more efficiently, more effectively,

and most important, more safely.

So thank you again for your consideration of this

presentation today, in particular in my case the Greenlawn

interchange, and we certainly look forward to a

groundbreaking very soon.

And last but not least, Mr. Heald, we have a helmet

for you as well. It's my understanding that Dell issues

these pretty much as standard equipment for all their


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

28

employees that have to drive through that intersection.

(General applause.)

MR. POWERS: Mr. Chairman, commissioners, it's my

pleasure since she ran on the campaign slogan of putting a

Kitchen in the House to introduce to you our state

representative, Ann Kitchen, to say a few words.

(General applause.)

REPRESENTATIVE KITCHEN: Thank you. I want to

reiterate what Commissioner Todd Baxter has said to you

already about 290 West because it is so important to us as

the first item in our ranking, and also to my constituents

in Oak Hill.

So as you know, US 290 West has been a long-term

project for the past 20 years, and as you can see by the

turnout and determination of our audience, has the strong

support of people throughout Oak Hill and the counties

that feed into that area.

You know that -- I want to reiterate that this

project would benefit people not only in Travis County but

also Hays County to the southwest and Blanco and Burnet

counties to the west. US 290 and SH 71 are used by people

from all four counties to commute to Austin for work and

shopping and recreation.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

29

So I know you are aware of this but I just want to

reiterate that as the roadway currently exists we have

traffic on a multilane freeway that funnels down and slams

to a halt, dead-ending into a single lane. Not only does

this create severe traffic congestion -- it backs up for a

mile and a half -- but also presents a very dangerous

situation as people come up over that hill and slam to a

halt.

Construction of freeway main lanes, frontage roads,

and an interchange with SH 71 would increase the capacity,

help alleviate traffic congestion, and provide safer

transportation. Most of the right of way in this freeway

section has already been purchased, and with our region

contributing a considerable portion of the cost, now is

the time to complete 290, and I thank you for your

consideration.

(General applause.)

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

MR. POWERS: Thank you, Ann.

Do we have any other elected public officials that --

Karen Sonleitner, one of the Travis County commissioners,

is with us.

Did you want to say anything, Karen?


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

30

COMMISSIONER SONLEITNER: We appreciate your support.

MR. POWERS: Thank you for being here with us.

I would also like to recognize, Mr. Chairman and

commissioners, Tiffiny Britton is here from Senator

Ogden's staff, as well as Joe Morris from Senator

Wentworth's staff. We appreciate their involvement and

participation today.

Well, thanks for the time. We're out of time, but

thanks for giving us this time.

David, thanks for the memories in the past. We look

forward to working with you in the future, and Ric, we

very much want to work with you in the future and look

forward to telling you the stories in a meaningful way.

You've got a good guy seated right to your left. Just

listen and do whatever he tells you to do.

In wrap-up -- and I know we are out of time, Chairman

Johnson -- we did want to put one graphic up before you

just to demonstrate how far we've really come, and that as

you will see reflects the fact that we've gotten $32.1

million from CAMPO, $2 million from Travis County, $13.7

million from the City of Austin, and $3 million from the

City of Round Rock.

We applaud all these local jurisdictions for their


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

31

attempts to raise almost $52.8 million for these projects.

We've just about made 50 percent. We're at 49.99 percent,

so it looks like we're a little bit shy. Is it $29 that

we're shy. We'll have this extra $29 so we can make sure

that we get to 50 percent. Here it is. $29.

(General applause.)

MR. POWERS: Well, you guys were good guys to be in a

foxhole with. We want to win this war and we want to work

with you, so thanks for having us today, and if you've got

any questions of any of our delegation, we'd be glad to

receive them.

Thank you very much.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions, Robert or David?

MR. LANEY: My comment is looking at that last

graphic you put up from where you were five years ago, you

really have come a long way. My compliments to all of you

for the combined efforts of this part of the state, which

is a terrific regional effort. My hat's off to you.

MR. POWERS: Thanks.

MR. LANEY: But a note to Johnny, be sure and count

what's in that --

(General laughter.)

MR. POWERS: Don't worry. We counted it before we


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

32

put it in there. Thank you very much. We look forward to

being back.

MR. JOHNSON: I think Robert --

MR. NICHOLS: Well, I really had some comments more

than questions.

MR. POWERS: Okay.

MR. NICHOLS: We went over it pretty thoroughly

yesterday in our meeting, and I appreciate that. When we

met yesterday I tried every way in the world to get a

glimpse of the video. They wouldn't give it to me.

But for those of you from the area who may not know

some of the things that were asked of your elected

officials, we had asked over the years that the community

figure out a way to step forward with a vesting into some

of these projects to show a strong support. Honestly, we

don't have enough money to build a lot of these projects,

and you have done that. You have stepped very -- a big

step forward in putting up the money including the last

$29, but it is a huge step for the area, and I know it's

taken a lot of work to do that.

We also ask you to, as a region, try to establish

priorities. There are so many projects that need to be

built in this area that trying to figure out which ones


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

33

are the most important is a very difficult thing for your

communities to sit down and do that, and if you can't sit

down and do it yourself you can imagine the problem we

would have. And they have done that, so we asked you to

do that, you did that.

We also asked you to try to, as you did this process,

to end up with a communitywide support of the action you

have taken, and you have done that. So you have done

absolutely everything that we have asked you to do. My

hat's off to you. My compliment to your leadership and to

the community. I wish I'd had this helmet two days ago at

the legislature, but I appreciate it now.

Thank you.

(General applause.)

MR. JOHNSON: My observations are much along that

same line. I think that you're a prime example of what

can be done by working together. So often we see areas

that have not organized and do not work together, and they

have much more difficulty in getting things done, and

my -- I salute you. I would take off this hat, but it's

too heavy.

It's a prime example of what can be done, and you

ought to be congratulated.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

34

Secondly, as Robert mentioned, you brought

considerable leverage to these projects, and it's almost

to the point that it's a deal that we can't refuse.

Hopefully we can't -- better go back and tell them I

tried.

(General applause.)

MR. LANEY: He said almost to the point.

MR. JOHNSON: We do have some controlling factors,

obviously, and those are our budgetary numbers, but I

think you have done, as Robert has said, as much as

possibly could be asked of you, and hopefully we can do

our part also.

Thirdly, I'm a little bit saddened to think that if

you get all of this, the next video might not be able to

compare with entertainment value of this one, but as

Robert also said I know there are many projects that

remain undone and unfunded, and so I'm confident we'll see

and hear from you more, but I do want to congratulate you

on the presentation.

Before we take a brief recess I've been advised

there's several members of the House of Representatives

here who would like to come forward and be heard. They

have very tight and busy schedules, and we're grateful


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

35

that they are here. And I'm going to start, ladies first,

with Representative Beverly Woolley. Then Gary Elkins and

William Callegari are all going to speak on Interstate 10,

and then Jim McReynolds on I-69.

So Representative Woolley?

REPRESENTATIVE WOOLLEY: Good morning, Chairman

Johnson, my friend and constituent; Commissioner Nichols,

my campaign buddy from California when we were working for

our good governor; and Commissioner Laney.

I too want to thank you for your service. Texas is

really fortunate to have the caliber of people like you

three men here willing to serve the state, and we are all

deeply grateful for your service.

And to my former colleague in the House, welcome,

congratulations, I look forward to working with you.

I am here on behalf of the West Houston Association

and their plea to move the project for I-10 up to priority

1 status. I have to drive this personally, and I drew the

black bean this session. I have an eight o'clock Monday

morning committee meeting, so I left home at about ten

minutes after 5:00 a.m. last week, and I was shocked at

the number -- at the amount of traffic at that point of

the morning both ways. It's amazing.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

36

I know that it is crowded and it's a parking lot 11

hours a day. It's 340 percent over capacity, and we need

help desperately. I know it's a big project. We would

like to see it start by 2003 and be completed by 2009, if

I've got the dates correct.

Whatever we can do to help on that, I'm willing to

try. I wish we could borrow Travis County's video and

show it again. It was wonderful. I think -- we don't

have the video but we've got the same problems, and they

are extremely acute. So we plead with you, we ask for

your help, and let us know what we can do, but I do hope

you take this into every consideration.

Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, Representative.

Representative Elkins.

REPRESENTATIVE ELKINS: Thank you. Thank you,

Chairman Johnson and commissioners.

I'm going to say ditto to what Beverly said, but just

add a couple of points. One is, as you are all aware, we

have a tremendous air quality issue in Houston, and part

of the air quality issue is that the cars are all parked

on I-10, and so we need help desperately, and we are going

to urge you to make I-10 a priority 1 this session, and we


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

37

don't want to wait until 2003 to start. We want to start

next week if possible.

We were all amused at the movie presentation, and

during the movie presentation I saw Winston Churchill give

his speech about victory at all costs, which reminded me

about a famous speech that he gave at a college

graduation, which went simply like this. And if I

remember right no graduate that year forgot the speech.

It was simply, Never give up, never give up, never,

never, never give up. And Chairman and commissioners,

from the West Houston delegation of Harris County we are

never, never, never going to give up until I-10 is a

priority 1 and completed.

Thank you very much.


Representative Callegari, welcome.

REPRESENTATIVE CALLEGARI: Thank you very much. I

appreciate the opportunity to talk to you this morning.

My district is 130 and it consists of the area

basically from the -- it includes I-10 from Eldridge to

the Fort Bend County line at Katy. Quite often the

question that's asked me more often than anything else is

what can you do to fix I-10? Every time I meet a


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

38

constituent it seems like somebody wants to know about

that.

I-10 as you know is a mess. It's a real problem. I

live in Katy and every time I go downtown or to the

Galleria or anywhere east of Katy it takes considerably

longer than it used to.

I can remember a few years ago when I could get

anywhere close to downtown in 45 minutes. Now it takes a

minimum of an hour and a half and sometimes two hours if

I'm in peak traffic time. And I-10 is a problem not only

during the week but on the weekends as well.

The biggest problem that I see with I-10, other than

the obvious advantages that we would have if we -- as we

get it fixed of reducing air pollution and moving the

traffic is we -- as I travel around the country and around

the state I hear a lot of Houston bashing, and while

that's bad for Houston it's bad for the entire state,

because as people look at relocating businesses or look at

moving offices into the Houston area if they keep hearing

how bad the traffic is -- and they don't distinguish

between Houston and Dallas and Austin or anything else.

They just hear that traffic in Texas is bad -- it

translates to a situation I think hurts our economic


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

39

development.

I urge you very strongly to put I-10 into priority 1,

let us get the funding, let us move on. It's going to be

tough as construction's going on. The longer we wait the

harder it is. If we don't start moving dirt and making

things happen we're going to have a problem that's going

to be almost insurmountable. We need your help. Please

help us.

Thank you.


Representative McReynolds, the professor from East

Texas. Welcome.

REPRESENTATIVE McREYNOLDS: It's so nice to be in

front of you today, and in a little while you'll be having

a hearing on the I-69 corridor, and I thank you for

accommodating my time and it's a joy to be with you.

I know that building 1,100 miles of an interstate

corridor traversing 36 counties is no little project. By

the same token I know that you guys have been bold in this

building named after Billy Greer, and you know what a

challenge is, and I thank you for standing up to that

challenge.

I'd like to thank you for the jump-start that you've


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

40

given to the program already by directing monies to

commence our environmental impact studies and our routing

studies along this corridor. I'm particularly pleased and

possessive of the fact that my region housed over in

Angelina County has really gotten out ahead on this

project, and I'd also like to say thank you very much for

being sensitive to assist with the mobility in the

existing corridor.

I had my staff pull up yesterday through this new

project management database just to see what you're doing

in that corridor already, and it's awesome. And I read

somewhere that there's already in terms of normal planning

122 projects that we have scheduled in this I-69 corridor.

I want to thank you and I want to thank our friends

with the Alliance for I-69 Texas in keeping us in Texas in

tandem with Washington. They're going to go next week I

believe or week after next, and we're going to try our

best to see U.S. drive dollars into this project as well.

Well again, thank you for this project that maybe

we'll see in our lifetime and certainly will be wonderful

for our children and children yet unborn. Thank you so

much for letting me testify.



12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

41

We will take a short recess to let those who would

like to get back to commerce and industry to do so, and

any others who want to enter may do so. The operative

word is short, so we stand in recess.

(Whereupon, a short recess was taken.)

MR. JOHNSON: Our second delegation this morning

comes to us from the Houston area. I believe Roger Hord

with the West Houston Association, will begin the

presentation.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

34

42

HARRIS COUNTY DELEGATION

(Rep. Gary Elkins, Rep. William A. Callegari, Roger Hord, Lynn Grafing, Senator Jon Lindsay, Wallace Henley)

MR. JOHNSON: Roger, welcome.

MR. HORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner and

members of the commission.

Mr. Heald, thank you very much for receiving our

delegation. We have a very -- what we hope to be quick

and short and punchy enough presentation that we'll get in

and out real quick.

I want to introduce two people who are going to be

making our main presentation, then we'll have some

representatives of -- a representative from John

Culberson's office and Talmadge Heflin's office.

MR. JOHNSON: Roger, could I interrupt you?

MR. HORD: Yes.

MR. JOHNSON: I have made an egregious error. There

are two representatives that have compressed schedules and

need to --

MR. HORD: Absolutely.

MR. JOHNSON: -- speak. Representative Hawley and

Representative Morrison, if I haven't run you off by not

recognizing you, would you please come forward? And I


12

1

2345

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

34

43

apologize. I know your time is critical and you need to

return to the other side of the street, and so welcome

whoever wants to go first.

Representative Hawley?

REPRESENTATIVE HAWLEY: For the record, I'm Judy

Hawley. Thank you. If you hold us here a long time we

won't go do damage over there, so it may be in your best

interest.

MR. JOHNSON: We'll remember that.

REPRESENTATIVE HAWLEY: There you go.

I would just like to speak on the I-69 project and

just add my voice of total support for that. I just

attended a Mexican-American caucus meeting before coming

over here, and one of the things they were talking about

was sort of a Marshall Plan for the border, and a very

integral part of that is having these international

gateways, and I lend my full support to that.

As you know, the projected I-69 corridor goes through

eleven senatorial districts, 48 House districts. You're

going to have widespread support from obviously the Texas

delegation. Thirty-four counties, huge economic impact,

and I just urge you to do -- implore you to do whatever

you can to help us draw down those federal funds to make


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

44

it a reality, and to know that you have a group here

working, which has been in place for some seven years,

working to make this dream a reality.

So just adding my support to that. A tremendous

expense for the state of Texas but as we lobby for those

federal funds, those billions of dollars we'll need to

make that happen, know that we're with you. We'll work

with you. We will do whatever we have to from the Texas

legislative standpoint to help draw down those funds and

to expedite this project.

So thank you very much for letting us appear before

you today, and I'll turn this over to my wonderful

colleague, Geanie Morrison.


REPRESENTATIVE MORRISON: Good morning. Good to see

you this morning.

As Judy said, I-69 will be very vital to continued

economic development of not only my district, District 30,

but South Texas as a whole. The infrastructure in our

area has developed in a manner that can both stimulate and

maintain a growing economy in our area. Due to the

accessibility of four of the five major metropolitan

areas, my district, District 30, which includes Victoria,


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

45

DeWitt, Goliad, and Lavaca counties has the distinct honor

already of being called the crossroads of Texas.

In addition, our close proximity to the ports and to

the plants make District 30 and this area a very unique

environment capable of accommodating a wide variety of

business and industry. And of course I'm here in support

of I-69 and as you know, my county judge, Helen Walker, is

helping to lead the charge, and I certainly support her

and all that she's doing and encourage you -- as Judy said

we are here to help make this a reality, and anything that

we can do within the legislative process, we're here to

offer our support and our help to make that a reality.

Thank you so much for having us.


Roger, before you were so rudely interrupted by the

chair -- please continue, and I apologize.

MR. HORD: No problem at all.

What I was going to say is this presentation we're

going to make updates on one we gave to the commission in

April 1999. I want to first introduce Rose Hernandez,

who's representing County Judge Robert Eckels, and then

following Rose will be Lynn Grafing, the chairman of the

West Houston Association.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

46

MS. HERNANDEZ: Good morning, commissioners. I'm

deeply honored to be here before you representing --

actually in two capacities. I'm here on behalf of Judge

Eckels representing the alliance of I-69 and the I-10

group as well.

First of all, I'd like to if I may read this letter

on behalf of Judge Eckels concerning the Katy Freeway.

"Commissioners, thank you for the opportunity to

reaffirm the Houston-Galveston region's support of the

efforts to expedite reconstruction and improvements of

Interstate 10 West, the Katy Freeway. I offer the

following remarks as chairman of the Transportation Policy

Council, the metropolitan planning organization for the

eight-county Houston-Galveston region and as county judge

for its largest county, Harris County.

"Interstate 10 West, known as the Katy Freeway,

accommodates more vehicles per lane per day than any

comparable facility in the state. Moreover, its pavement

and structures have long exceeded normal designed life.

Routine maintenance alone cannot adequately ensure

serviceable pavements. The deployment of transportation

management measures such as HOV lanes have improved

corridor mobility but reduced lane width and all but


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

47

eliminated inside and outside shoulders.

"Increasing development pressures to the west of

Houston and the continued rapid growth of goods movement

in this international trade corridor produce the region's

most extended periods of bidirectional traffic congestion.

Intensive traffic use and reduced design standards coupled

with inadequate corridor drainage leave the facilities

susceptible to major traffic bottlenecks as a consequence

of minor incidents or inclement weather.

"Therefore, the reconstruction and improvement of

this corridor is of highest regional and state priority.

"In 1999 the Transportation Policy Council took the

unprecedented step of pledging $256 million in federal

funding and surface transportation funds and congestion

mitigation air quality funds to reconstruction and

improvement of the Katy Freeway. I urge the commission to

complete its commitment to implementation of these

improvements as soon as possible.

"Thank you for your continued partnership in

improving mobility, safety, and environmental quality in

the Houston-Galveston region. Sincerely, Robert Eckels,

chairman of the Transportation Policy Council."

And in the judge's behalf we just want to continue


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

48

your support and thank Chairman Laney for all he's done in

the past. Thank you, gentlemen.

MR. GRAFING: Thank you, Commissioner Johnson, and

fellow commissioners for the opportunity to be here this

morning.

My name is Lynn Grafing and I'm the board chair for

the West Houston Association. We're a business group who,

among other things, promotes infrastructure improvements

in the West Houston area, and in the 21 years of our

organization's existence we think this may be the most

important issue that we've addressed, and that is the

reconstruction of the Katy Freeway.

Roger mentioned also that we specifically would like

to ask this morning for priority 1 status on this project,

and I'll get into that a little bit more in a moment.

The Katy Freeway has a reputation around Houston as

being one of the most dangerous and congested freeways in

Texas, and today we want to focus on three major areas.

One, the need for quick action, the current status of the

project, and our delegation's request to you, which I

alluded to just previously.

The need for reconstruction is obvious to most of the

folks who drive the Katy Freeway daily, truck drivers,


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

49

commuters, and others. They're concerned that the

construction has been delayed and that the construction

period is longer than it should be. We want to focus on

about 21 miles of the Katy Freeway, from Loop 610 out to

the Fort Bend County line.

This is extremely congested. As you can see,

vehicles per day are about 260 percent above capacity on

that section, and on an individual lane about 340 percent

over capacity -- beyond congestion capacity. Much of the

time this section operates at level of service E or worse

in terms of congestion. Congestion occurs eleven hours

per day over the entire length of this section in both

directions during the weekday and on weekends, and the

cost of this delay due to congestion has been calculated

at about 100 million.

The Katy Freeway also operates at the margins of

safety because of high traffic volumes and the inability

of the design to accommodate that volume.

It's also a major interstate for commerce. Movement

of goods is limited by the severe local congestion in the

West Houston area.

Let me talk about the current status for just a

moment. The people who work and do business in Houston


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

50

are concerned about the delay in the start of the project

and the length in the construction schedule, and their

concern is that there is going to be impact on economic

development and quality of life in West Houston.

We have very strong local commitment, as you can see,

to this project. To date about $317 million have been

pledged. That's about 26 percent of the funding for the

project. When you add the other sources that have been

committed, we have about 42 percent of the funding we

believe committed for this project.

But we are asking for action by the commission now to

designate this as a priority project. We're concerned

about the delays, the high cost, the limited cash flow

that's available for projects like this, and competition

from other projects in addition to TxDOT's piecemeal

development of these large projects can all contribute to

those delays.

The local TxDOT office has identified an aggressive

schedule for completion of this project, which we endorse

and many other business groups in Houston. It calls for

an initial letting of two major portions of the project in

2003, primarily based on that local funding that I

mentioned, and bidding the remaining sections by 2006. By


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

51

doing so the project could be completed before the 2010

estimate.

We also are concerned that using the traditional

methods for development of this project construction could

likely extend to 12 to 15 years based on experience with

similar projects in the Houston area. Just a four-year

delay in this project could result in additional costs of

up to $65 million. Travel time cost to the public could

amount to 85 million, cost of acquiring right of way could

increase about 6 percent per year.

In summary, the local community recognizes this is an

important project and have committed an unprecedented

level of support. We're concerned that delayed

construction and a protracted construction schedule would

impact the economic development, and we would like to

respectfully request, as was done by Mayor Lee Brown and

County Judge Robert Eckels in 1999 that the commission

move this entire project to priority 1 status.

We'd also like to respectfully request that you urge

TxDOT to commit to the aggressive schedule mentioned

earlier, and in return you can count on us to continue to

work at all levels to look for innovative approaches to

dealing with the funding gap that we still have in place


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

52

and working cooperatively to complete this project.

Thank you very much for the opportunity. We want to

recognize the hard work that you do, the difficult

priorities that you have to manage, and the limited funds

to get these projects done, but we assure you we're going

to do our part.

Thank you.

MR. HORD: We have been joined by Senator Lindsay,

whose district is bisected by this project.

Senator.

MR. JOHNSON: Senator, welcome.

SENATOR LINDSAY: Thank you, and thank you, Roger.

And, David, is this going to be the last time we see

you at this table?

MR. LANEY: Yes.

SENATOR LINDSAY: Well, thank you for serving the

time that you did. It's been great.

MR. LANEY: Thank you for all the support.

Appreciate it.

SENATOR LINDSAY: And it's all been said, and I'm not

going to say it over again, but needless to say we in the

community believe this is the most important project we

have in our neighborhood, and I think you believe that as


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

53

well, having talked to you all about it from time to time.

I wanted to reassure you that you have my support,

and you will continue having my support in trying to get

adequate funds to do what needs to be done. I'm even

going to introduce some controversial things that says you

guys get more money at the expense of additional taxes,

which is not popular among some of my colleagues, but it

needs to be put on the table and discussed, and I'm

willing to do that. Might call for a referendum to prove

that there is community support out there for your efforts

to build more and better roads in the state of Texas.

And there's a lot of projects I know that need to be

done. I hear about them all the time. We've got more

than one in my district and my area. Certainly I am most

interested in this project, but I'm also interested in the

Grand Parkway, would like to see Interstate -- I-69 get to

the point where we know where it's going through our area,

because I think it will be a great benefit.

And I understand all the problems associated with it,

but I want you to know that I do support it, and I support

these people as well. I want them to know that I'm here.

I'm out of breath getting over here. I've got to run

back. But thanks again for your time, and thanks again


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

54

for your service.

MR. LANEY: Senator, I appreciate the support. Thank

you very much.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, Senator.

MR. HORD: I have several letters from the

legislators that I will leave. I won't bother to read

them now, but one's from Representative Charlie Howard and

the other one's from Senator Buster Brown.

Mr. Henley, would you like to come to the podium?

This is -- Wallace Henley represents John Culberson.

MR. HENLEY: Thank you, Mr. Hord, and Chairman

Johnson, commissioners, thank you for the opportunity to

speak today on behalf of United States Representative John

Culberson, for whom I have the privilege of serving as

district director.

I express very much his appreciation for the thought

and consideration that you've already given to this

project, and for the opportunity you extend us to interact

on this very crucial issue. We're cognizant -- the

congressman is cognizant of the partnership that will be

required to accomplish this huge project and your very

important role in it, and I have today a letter from the

congressman that with your permission I would like to read


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

55

and then distribute a copy to each member of the

commission.

"Dear commissioners: On behalf of the 700,000-plus

citizens in Congressional District 7, I want to request

once again that the commissioners take whatever action is

necessary to accelerate the reconstruction of Interstate

10, the Katy Freeway, in Harris County.

"Progress on the freeway appears to have fallen

behind schedule. Deadlines have been missed, and it is

very difficult to get precise information on progress and

impossible to get a timetable on which taxpayers can rely

on the agencies to keep. I know you and all the

commissioners share my concern for improving mobility for

our citizens.

"Traffic congestion is intolerable on the Katy

Freeway. The constant freeway gridlock causes

immeasurable damage to Houston's economic vitality,

subtracts an untold number of irreplaceable hours from

family and work time of west Houston residents, and

threatens the health and safety of citizens who need to

reach a hospital but cannot because of a traffic jam.

"On November 10, 2000, when Chairman Johnny Johnson

and I met to discuss this project, I was heartened by his


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

56

understanding of the situation and his concurring belief

that the Katy Freeway expansion should have a Texas

Transportation Commission top priority status.

"Since that meeting I have been working nonstop at

the federal level to acquire new additional federal

funding for the Katy Freeway expansion. I have met with

Senator Phil Gramm, Congressman Tom DeLay, and House

Transportation Committee Chairman Don Young as well as

numerous members of those committees and the

Appropriations Committee. All have pledged their support

for the project and offered their assistance in securing

funds.

"However, each time I explain the critical need for

funds the first question I am asked is, Does the Texas

Transportation Commission consider this project a

priority? I cannot answer that question properly because

I have no tangible proof that I-10 is a top priority of

the commission.

"I therefore urge the commission to move the entire

Katy Freeway expansion project to a priority 1 status,

issue a news release to that effect, and take whatever

other action is necessary to accelerate its completion.

Every day that I represent District 7 in Congress, I will


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

57

take action in some form to accelerate the completion of

I-10. I will not rest until I have done everything in my

power to open this nightmarish freeway as fast as humanly

possible.

"This project is my highest legislative priority, and

I look forward to working with you to help remove every

impediment to its rapid completion. Sincerely yours, John

Culberson."

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, commissioners.


MR. HORD: Next we have a representative from

Representative Talmadge Heflin's office.

MR. WELCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members,

Commissioner Heald. For the record I'm Matt Welch and I'm

with Representative Talmadge Heflin's office.

Mr. Heflin is not submitting any written comments

today because he's been too busy with you all week, but we

just wanted to state for the record our interest in this

project, and also the I-69 alliance. He is supportive of

that.

This -- the Katy Freeway expansion is one we feel is

a critical need at this time, and there's probably nothing

I can tell you that you don't already know or haven't


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

58

heard, but just know of our support.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to address

you this morning.


MR. HORD: By my watch we're giving you back five

minutes. Thank you for your attention. This is a

critical project for us.

MR. JOHNSON: That's obviously an impressive group of

presenters, and I think I speak for the commission that

obviously I-10, as I deal with it every day sometimes more

than once, is known to all of us in terms of its

importance not only to the Houston community but also the

entire state as a trade route and as a major corridor, and

problems are well known, and I think you can rest assured

that it's going to get our highest attention.

MR. HORD: Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Any other observations? David.

MR. LANEY: Johnny may be a little reluctant to say

it, being from Houston. I'm from the North Texas area,

Roger, as you know, and we have a number of very important

projects, but nothing in the state is as important from a

project standpoint in my judgment as the Katy Freeway and

I-10 West. Nothing is.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

59

We have economic -- financial constraints, as you

know, and we have overhanging this entire thing as you

know also the air quality nonattainment issue that could

take the fate of this project totally out of our hands and

out of our control. We also have legislation that Johnny

and Robert are trying their best to shepherd through

effectively that would enhance our ability to finance

projects like this with bonds.

I don't know the fate of that. So we've got a number

of moving parts, some of which work directly against us,

and some of which could work very effectively in favor of

our effectively moving this thing forward on a much more

accelerated basis than usual.

But if there is any doubt about the commission's

perspective on this project I think hearing the three of

us today should dispel any concerns that this is at least

among if not the most important projects in the state to

move forward, but it's got enormous challenges in front of

it, and we need help.

MR. NICHOLS: Just to make sure you did hear all

three of us, I'm going to reaffirm basically what they

both said. It is one of the highest priority projects in

the state from our vantage point, and we're going to do


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

60

absolutely everything we can to see that it does become a

reality at some point.

MR. HORD: We appreciate it very much, and on behalf

of the West Houston Association and others in the Houston

area we commit to doing whatever we can to make this a

project that you really can't say no to, so -- and we want

to thank you for your help in the past.

And, David, good luck. Thank you.

MR. LANEY: Thank you, Roger. I appreciate the

support.

MR. JOHNSON: As all of our presenting delegations

are well aware, we do not make decisions on the spot

relative to the requests that the delegations make, but

they in each case present a very good picture of what's

going on in communities across the state, and they go a

long way to clarifying in our minds just how important

meeting those challenges are.

We're going to take a very slight, short recess so

the West Houston people can vacate, and we'll stand in

recess for just a brief period of time.


MR. JOHNSON: Before we get to our third delegation I

would like to mention the backbone of TxDOT is contained


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

61

in its 25 district engineers, and I see, I believe, at

least two of them here have come great distances to be

with I presume their delegations: Billy Parks from Corpus

Christi and Gary Trietsch from our Houston district are

here, and I cannot tell you how good a job these gentlemen

do.

I believe John Kelly from San Antonio is here, and on

behalf of the commission, congratulations and thanks for

all the work you do for your district, but it all adds up

to great work for this state.

Our third delegation is the Alliance for I-69 Texas,

and I would like to welcome Victoria County Judge Helen

Walker.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

34

62

VARIOUS COUNTIES DELEGATION

(Judge Helen Walker, Judge John Thompson, Mayor Louis Bronaugh)

JUDGE WALKER: Thank you, Chairman Johnson, and

members of the commission. We're appreciative of the

opportunity to be here today to discuss the status and

path forward for the development of Texas' newest

interstate, I-69.

I'm Helen Walker, the county judge of Victoria

County. I'm here today as chairman of the Alliance for

I-69 Texas. This is a coalition of public and private

sector leaders from more than 34 counties from east,

northeast to through South Texas.

The group was established in 1993 with the single

goal of building I-69 to its completion. We have held

this coalition together for more than seven years, which

is perhaps an unusual feat for that many counties,

multiple cities, many chambers of commerces, economic

development corporations, as well as private sector

members.

As Representative Hawley told you earlier this

morning, the proposed route passes through eleven state

senatorial districts and 48 House districts. We didn't


12

1

2345

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

34

63

ask them all to be here today. You have heard from

several of them and we're appreciative of those efforts.

Many of the dedicated project proponents are here

with me today to demonstrate their continued support for

the project, and at this time I'd like to ask them to

stand and be recognized.

(Pause.)

JUDGE WALKER: As evidenced by this group here today

we've built tremendous grass-roots support for the

project, which will spur economic growth and facilitate

both international and interregional trade. This support

and local involvement will be critical as the alliance

works with you and other state leaders to secure

additional funding for I-69.

Our presentation today is designed to provide an

update to you of the progress of I-69 and the alliance's

plan to further advance the project at both state and

federal levels. I'd like to take a few minutes to share

with you the recent I-69 accomplishments.

The creation of the National Corridor of Planning and

Development and the Coordinated Border Infrastructure

Program in 1998 was a major milestone for the project. It

established a dedicated federal funding source for


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

64

corridors like I-69. We're pleased that through these

federal programs and direct appropriations Texas has

received more than $25 million in federal funding for

projects along the corridor since 1999.

Furthermore, we appreciate that last year TxDOT

authorized $19.2 million for the environmental studies of

the route through Texas. The blending of state and

federal funding has enabled the state to commence the

environmental impact and routing study along the corridor

in Texas. However, we clearly need to increase funding

for the project in order to build it to completion.

Another major milestone achieved has been the

selection of Parsons Brinckerhoff as the general

engineering consultant, and eleven other engineering firms

to conduct the environmental and routing studies on each

of the 13 sections of independent utility in Texas. Now

the detailed studies can commence on each segment of I-69

in Texas.

Finally, with the assistance of the firm of Shiner

Moseley and Associates, Incorporated, the alliance has

developed a project management database that enables us to

track all projects along the corridor in Texas. We

believe that this can be an invaluable tool not only for


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

65

members of the alliance to track individual projects in

their regions, but hopefully be of value to the consulting

engineers conducting environmental and routing studies as

well as to you and your staff.

I'd like to call on Judge John Thompson to preview

the project plans and state initiatives.

JUDGE THOMPSON: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and

commissioners. I am John Thompson, the county judge in

Polk County, and I serve the alliance as a secretary-

treasurer.

As Judge Walker mentioned, the alliance has developed

a comprehensive corridor project database which is

accessible through our alliance's website at

www.I69texas.org. While we're aware that these projects

may or may not fall on the ultimate alignment of I-69 they

do represent activity under way to improve the mobility in

the corridor, and we do realize that the environmental

clearance process will determine the preferred alignment

of I-69.

The database was developed based upon the UTP

approved by the commission in September in the subsequent

meetings with TxDOT officials in eight districts along the

corridor. The database is map driven and provides project


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

66

detail sheets on 122 projects in the I-69 corridor that

are currently in the department's normal planning and

development process. These projects span approximately

1,100 miles and cover some 36 counties in Texas.

Without a doubt, the size and therefore the cost of

constructing I-69 presents a significant challenge. The

results from the project database demonstrates TxDOT's

commitment to improving the mobility on many of the

existing routes in the corridor, and I'd like to take just

a few moments to walk you through a sample of the database

for which we are very pleased.

First, from the state map you go and select the

district you're interested in. For example, we'll click

on the Lufkin District and bring you to that map. From

that you'll see the counties which lie within that

district, and for today's demonstration we're going to

pick Angelina County, where our previous chairman, Mayor

Louis Bronaugh, and the City of Lufkin are from.

Each county map consists of a highway and projects

along the I-69 corridor, and there are three different

symbols used to indicate the level of authority, and the

fourth being the ones that are under construction, and if

you click on one of those projects in a county you see a


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

67

project detail sheet.

As you can see, there's a tremendous amount of

important information available about the project. For

instance you see the estimated cost, the local cost, the

status as far as the environment design and right of way

acquisition. There's also a description of the action

needed and a list of potential funding sources. This

database will enable the alliance to work with you, TxDOT

staff, and local officials to advance projects listed in

the database.

More importantly, we will use this database to

demonstrate to Congress the significant level of

commitment by the state and local jurisdictions to improve

the mobility in the corridor. The ultimate mobility

project itself will be I-69 once we've completed the

proper environmental process to locate the alignment and

begin the development process. Demonstrating this support

will be critical to the effort to secure additional

federal funding for the entire project during the

reauthorization of TEA 21 in 2003.

Now, to summarize the results of the project

database, TxDOT has 122 projects in the corridor presently

totaling $2.2 billion. While we recognize again that the


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

68

results of the ongoing environmental and route studies

will determine the specific location of I-69, we consider

that the development of these 122 projects contributes to

the mobility improvements in the corridor.

Now, Congress has designated I-69 in Texas as a

combination of US 59 from Texarkana to Laredo, the stretch

from Nacogdoches over towards Shreveport, plus US 77 and

281 to the Rio Grande Valley. As such, the alliance

supports all work that TxDOT is doing along these routes

to meet the demands placed on the corridor from trade as

well as regional and interregional transport of people and

goods.

While clear progress is being made on I-69 today,

significant additional funding is necessary to expedite

the completion. The alliance is addressing that issue at

both the state and the federal level. The alliance is

also actively supporting statewide legislative initiatives

to increase overall state funding for transportation. We

recognize that we must increase the size of the funding

pot in order to increase the share to I-69 and other

critical projects throughout the state.

The major state funding initiatives include

reallocating road and highway user fees for road and


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

69

highway improvements, continuing the process of reducing

the diversion of funds from State Highway Fund Six, and

permitting innovative financing, construction, and right

of way acquisition methods.

The alliance is also committed to working with the

GEC and the consulting engineers to facilitate the timely

completion of the environmental and route studies. We

hope the alliance can be a resource to you and your

engineering consultants.

In addition, the alliance will continue to increase

grass-roots support for the development of I-69, which

will establish the critical trade links across North

America, will spur economic development in Texas, and will

facilitate intergovernmental traffic movement.

Yesterday members of the I-69 delegation that you see

here today participated in I-69 Day at the capitol, and

hopefully some of you were able to make the Taste of I-69

last night, which was a real treat. The day-long event

was designed to show the alliance's support for increased

transportation funding and to reiterate to our state

officials the importance of completing I-69. We feel that

Texas cannot afford to miss the opportunities that I-69

will generate.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

70

The alliance, as we've talked about earlier, has

recently launched a website to house the project

management database and to disseminate information about

I-69 to all interested parties. We believe that our

website can be a powerful tool in the effort to build

grass-roots support and to keep elected officials apprised

of the project's status. We hope that you will have some

time to visit our site again at www.I69texas.org.

At this time it is indeed my privilege and pleasure

to introduce a friend and fellow alliance board member,

The Honorable Mayor Louis Bronaugh of the City of Lufkin,

and we like to refer to Mayor Bronaugh or Louis as the

father of I-69 in Texas, and he's going to talk to you a

little bit about our federal initiatives.

Mayor Bronaugh.

MAYOR BRONAUGH: Thank you, son.

(General laughter.)

MAYOR BRONAUGH: I meet the age requirements of that

father thing.

Good morning, gentlemen. I want to say that the

months ahead present a tremendous opportunity for I-69 as

the new administration establishes its priorities related

to transportation. We are fortunate to have a president


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

71

who has his firsthand knowledge about the burden placed on

the border states' infrastructure by international

commerce.

We look forward to working with President Bush and

officials of the US Department of Transportation. This

year Congress and the administration will begin the

groundwork for the reauthorization of TEA 21. We share

the common goal with the commission to significantly

increase funding for I-69 by increasing funds available

through the corridors and borders program, limiting the

corridors that can compete for these funds or perhaps

establishing a new more narrowly defined program.

Successfully securing additional funding in the

authorization of TEA 21 is critical for the future

development of I-69 and would be a major focus of the

alliance efforts in 2001. The alliance will seek

opportunities to participate in sessions organized by DOT

and Congress to formulate priorities for the

reauthorization.

The alliance will continue to support appropriations

for I-69 development if Congress opts to earmark funding

for particular projects. Based on our efforts to date in

Washington we know that working with regions of similar


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

72

interest is critical to advancing initiatives in

Washington. The alliance will continue to work

cooperatively with the Midcontinent Coalition, the

nation's I-69 alliance, to demonstrate the national

support for I-69 and to develop a common agenda for

reauthorization.

Please use the alliance as resources as you begin the

public involvement portion of the environmental process.

We welcome the opportunity to help disseminate information

about the progress being made on the project. To this end

the alliance would like to request the commission organize

a corridor workgroup consisting of leaders along the I-35

and I-69, the state's most established trade corridors, to

identify a common agenda to advance during the

reauthorization of TEA 21.

The intent of this effort would be a core group to

develop possible legislative and congressional issues to

present to the other interested parties in the state and

perhaps throughout the nation.

We appreciate the opportunity to be here today and we

look forward to continue to work closely with members of

the commission and the TxDOT staff. Thank you very much,

and I'll return six minutes of the time. Thank you very


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

73

much.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

JUDGE WALKER: Maybe only five. I'd like to add our

appreciation for our ability to be before you today to

thank former Chairman Laney for his service to the

commission.

I visited with him briefly about one of the first

times I was here was to talk about courthouse funding, and

I told him that we -- Victoria County was able to do our

courthouse with private funding and we will -- it has been

completely restored for use as court space, and including

my office, which will be in the new-old building in the

same place that I started to work for Victoria County some

40 years ago.

But the Texas Transportation Commission over the

years has done many, many things for the betterment of the

state of Texas, and we appreciate the opportunity to work

with you. We hope that you will use the Alliance for I-69

Texas as a resource in the future.

Thank you, and I'd like to thank all the people who

are here with us today.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, Judge.

Any questions, comments, observations, Robert?


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

74

MR. NICHOLS: Comments. I'd like to thank all of you

for coming to last's night gathering, because a lot of you

have come a long way, and it's really interesting to see a

coalition of such magnitude of geography in this state,

which shows the significance the corridor will develop

over the years.

I think you already know that the department is very

supportive of the corridor and is putting energy into

developing the environmental steps and so on to get those

pieces locked down to exactly where they're going to be.

And also we all know there is no interstate construction

money from the federal government at this time, but we

think there's a very good chance there can be, and with

the efforts that you are putting together -- and I

encourage your continued work -- to work not only in Texas

but at the federal level to help Texas secure the funding

for the interstate construction on -- it will be TEA 22 or

whatever they're going to call it next time -- in roughly

three years.

But my hat's off to you, and thanks for all that

you're doing.

MR. JOHNSON: David.

MR. LANEY: I really have nothing to add other than


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

75

this is a major challenge, but an enormous opportunity for

Texas, and one way or the other I think you're going to

find the support from the department and the commission.

We just need to figure out how to move the thing forward,

and the website will be an invaluable resource, and my

compliments to you.

I think it's going to be a nice model for a lot of

other corridor projects around the state, probably around

the country. Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: I also would like to thank you for the

presentation and reiterate what my fellow commissioners

have said. Together we can be successful on this project.

There are significant challenges. Funding is the engine

that drives the train, obviously, and we do need to be

collaborative in that effort, and we do look forward to

working with you.

This is an enormously important corridor for this

entire state as a reliever to some of the congestion on I-

35, a lot of the NAFTA trade traffic, but just within our

state it's also -- has its significance too, so we do look

forward to working with you and we thank you for being

here today.

We will stand in recess for five minutes, and we will


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

76

reconvene at that time. Thank you very much.



12

1

2

34

77

P R O C E E D I N G S R E S U M E D

MR. JOHNSON: A couple of housekeeping items before

we move on. I would like to remind anyone in the audience

who would like to address the commission to fill out a

card in the registration table in the lobby. To comment

on an agenda item we would like for you to fill out a

yellow card, and then if it is not an agenda item please

fill out a blue card and we'll take your comments at the

end of the meeting.

Before we get to the rest of our agenda, I think we

have a special presentation to make. There's a gentleman

up here who has worked for the past 40 years for the

Department of Transportation and its predecessor. Can you

figure out who that is?

MR. HEALD: By looking.

MR. JOHNSON: Wes has worked tirelessly to make our

transportation network in Texas one of the best, if not

the best, in the country. For the past three years he has

been doing that at the helm of this agency, and under his

leadership we put an increased focus on our bridges and

maintenance, core functions of our department and its

mission.

I want to personally thank Wes for his assistance


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

78

when I came on the commission -- and I'm sure I speak for

the other commissioners whom I will offer time to express

their things, but when I say that we believe that this

agency could not be in better hands.

David, do you want to -- you've known Wes the

longest.

MR. LANEY: But not for 40 years.

I have very little to add, Johnny, other than to say,

Wes, I can't tell you how much I appreciate all you've

done long before you reached the position you're currently

in and since that time as well, and as far as I'm

concerned if there's anybody in the department that

personifies the best of the department, it's you.

MR. JOHNSON: Robert.

MR. NICHOLS: Wes, the state is a better place

because of the work that you have done over the last 40

years, and I want to tell you it has been a real pleasure

working with you for the last three years. It really has.

So congratulations on your 40 years.

MR. HEALD: Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: I think we have a presentation and

maybe a photograph opportunity, a Kodak moment, but, Wes,

I had a silver watch to give you --


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

79

(General applause.)

MR. JOHNSON: Wes, I think it's a great honor for

each of us up here to have joined in saluting you. I work

in a family enterprise, and we've had a few employees with

long tenure, and I can't tell you how uplifting it is and

how great as Robert said your service to this state and to

this agency have been over the last 40 years, and we're

better for it. Thank you so much.

MR. HEALD: Thank you. I appreciate it. I'm a

little bit overwhelmed right now, but it's been a very

rewarding career, and I've been very blessed in probably

as much as anything the support of my family, but also the

support of a good commission.

I don't know ever when I can ever remember that we've

had such a good quality commission to work with, so I've

been blessed, and I guess as far as the 40 years go it's

just good to be alive.

(General laughter.)

MR. JOHNSON: Our first item of the agenda -- main

part of the agenda is the approval of minutes from our

regular commission meeting in January and also the

emergency meetings before the House Transportation

Committee on February 6 and February 13. Is there a


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

80

motion to approve those minutes?

MR. NICHOLS: So moved.

MR. JOHNSON: Is there a second?

MR. LANEY: Second, but I think I have to abstain

before the other two. I don't think I was part of the

emergency meetings.

MR. JOHNSON: Well then, I'll second the motion. All

in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: That motion carries.

Now, Wes, if you've sufficiently recovered we'll turn

over the rest of the agenda to you.

MR. HEALD: I think there's been a little deception

going on, or I need to talk to Linda as soon as this

meeting's over with.

Okay. Getting into the regular business portion of

our meeting, the first item is aviation to approve funding

for certain airport improvement projects, and Dave Fulton

will present this.

MR. FULTON: Thanks, and congratulations, Wes.

Commissioners, my name for the record is David

Fulton. I'm the director of the TxDOT Aviation Division.

Item 3 is a minute order containing a request for funding


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

81

approval for two planning and four airport construction

projects.

Both planning projects and three of the four

construction projects are programmed to be funded with

federal and local funding. The remaining project, if

approved, is programmed to be funded with state and local

funding. Total estimated cost of all the projects on the

Exhibit A is approximately $5.4 million, approximately 4.6

million federal, 200,000 state, and approximately 500,000

in local funding.

A public hearing was held on February 5, 2001. No

comments were received. We would recommend approval of

this minute order and would attempt to answer any

questions you might have.

MR. JOHNSON: Any questions?


MR. LANEY: Second.

MR. JOHNSON: All in favor, signify by saying aye.

(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries.

David, thank you.

MR. FULTON: Thank you.

MR. HEALD: Under administrative rules we have three


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

82

minute orders for your consideration, all under final

adoption starting with 4a(1), finance, James Bass.

MR. BASS: Good morning. For the record I'm James

Bass, director of TxDOT's Finance Division.

This agenda item proposes amendments to Sections 5.43

and 5.44 of the Texas Administrative Code, which deal with

the payment of fees to TxDOT for goods and services.

These amendments would exempt products sold through Texas

highways to prevent any conflict with existing Section

23.27 that governs the sale of travel promotional

materials.

In December you approved the proposed amendments for

publication in the Texas Register, and no comments were

received. Staff recommends your approval.



MR. LANEY: Second.


(A chorus of ayes.)


MR. HEALD: Thank you, James. 4a(2) under contract

management, Robert Wilson.

MR. WILSON: Good morning. I'm Robert Wilson. I'm


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

83

director of the Design Division.

The minute order I bring to you this morning is for

final adoption of rules modifications to Title 43, Chapter

9, Section 9.31, 9.33, 9.38, and 9.41 to 9.43 pertaining

to contracting for architectural, engineering, and

surveying services.

These amendments were originally the result of a task

force of TxDOT, Consulting Engineers Council, Texas

Society for Professional Engineers, and DBE/HUB

representatives that reviewed our process and made

suggestions to streamline it as much as possible and

arraign it in compliance with law and qualifications-based

selection.

A goal was set of not causing any unnecessary

paperwork at TxDOT or consultants, keeping the process

open and fair to all qualified firms and providing a

quality exchange of information in the process of

selecting the best firm. It is believed that these

amendments do that and are a continued move in that

direction.

The proposed amendments were first brought to you at

the December meeting and you approved publishing those for

public comment. We received two comments. These are


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

84

outlined for you in Exhibit B attached to that minute

order along with the explanation of each amendment.

One comment was from the Consulting Engineers Council

indicating support for the amendments and commending TxDOT

for taking steps to streamline the process and improve

consistency and flexibility. The other comment was from

the City of Amarillo questioning why we were striking the

references to using past performance in the selection

process.

However, we are not striking that criteria but rather

we are moving it from being used for every firm submitting

a letter of interest to later in the process when

evaluating the firms on the short list. This will reduce

paperwork for firms and shorten review times significantly

for TxDOT reviewers, but past performance will be a key

factor in evaluating the firms on the short list to select

the most qualified firm.

We believe that the best firm will get the contract,

and we believe that these amendments are beneficial to

everyone involved in the process. Staff therefore

recommends your approval of this minute order adopting

these amendments as final rules for implementation.

I'll be glad to answer any questions.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

85


MR. LANEY: So moved.

MR. NICHOLS: Second.


(A chorus of ayes.)


Thank you, Robert.

MR. HEALD: Item Number 4a(3), right of way, John

Campbell.

MR. CAMPBELL: Good morning. I'm John Campbell,

director of the Right of Way Division. I'd like to

present for your consideration Item 4a(3), minute order

for the final adoption of rule revisions to 43 Texas

Administrative Code Chapter 21. The eight listed sections

all pertain to the procedures and policy for accommodation

of public utility facilities on the right of way,

collectively referred to as the TxDOT utility

accommodation policy.

The substance of these rule revisions are to make

minor grammatical corrections and to reflect changes in

department organizational structure and references to

business titles no longer utilized by the department.

The Right of Way Division has reviewed the proposed


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

86

rule revisions and recommends your approval.



MR. LANEY: Second.


(A chorus of ayes.)


Thank you, John.

MR. HEALD: Agenda Item 4b under rule review, Richard

Monroe.

MR. MONROE: Good morning, commissioners. In our

ongoing program of rule review as dictated by the Texas

Government Code, Chapter 17 of the Vehicle Title and

Registration Rules were duly published. No comments were

received. The division is of the opinion that the rules

are still needed, and by this order you would readopt

them.

I would recommend approval of the minute order.





(A chorus of ayes.)


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

87

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries. Thank you.

MR. HEALD: Agenda Item Number 5 under traffic

operations, and this is approving some additional

environmental speed limits for the Dallas-Fort Worth area.

Carlos Lopez.

MR. LOPEZ: Good morning, commissioners. My name is

Carlos Lopez and I'm director of the Traffic Operations

Division.

The minute order before you authorizes environmental

speed limits on 28 miles of State Highway 34 in Ellis and

Kaufman counties. This highway was not included in last

month's minute order because of incomplete information on

the limits of the speed zone. We're also including a

correction to a mileage calculation on US 287 in Tarrant

County.

We recommend approval of this minute order.




(A chorus of ayes.)


MR. LANEY: Carlos, before you leave --

MR. LOPEZ: Yes.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

88

MR. LANEY: -- you need to get with my successor

about speed limits, help him understand how they work.

MR. LOPEZ: Okay. We'll do that.

MR. HEALD: Okay. Under Item 6 we've got three

minute orders for your consideration, and, Al, I believe

we're going to defer 6d. Right?

MR. LUEDECKE: Yes, sir.

MR. HEALD: So just go ahead and handle all three of

them.

MR. LUEDECKE: For the record, I'm Al Luedecke,

director of Transportation Planning and Program Division.

Harris County Toll Road Authority intends to

construct and maintain a toll-free extension of the Hardy

Toll Road from Interstate 610 at Spur 548 to the central

business district of Houston, downtown at Interstate 10, a

distance of approximately three and a half miles. The

firm's been requested to facilitate the operation of this

by constructing on state system direct connectors to the

northern and southern termini of the project at Interstate

610 and Interstate 10, respectively.

The approximate cost for the entire three and a half

mile extension is approximately $70 million, which

includes $17 million for the construction of the direct


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

89

connectors. Construction of the project and the direct

connectors to the state highway system will enhance the

level of service to Interstate 45 North, which parallels

the Hardy Toll Road, and it's estimated that approximately

25,000 vehicles a day will be drawn from the I-45

corridor.

The minute order presented for your consideration

authorizes the executive director to proceed with the

project development, including the construction of the

direct connectors of previously described limits, and that

construction cost not to exceed $17 million and to enter

into any agreements with the Harris County Toll Road

Authority necessary to carry out this order.

We recommend your approval of this minute order.



MR. LANEY: Second.


(A chorus of ayes.)


MR. LUEDECKE: Item 6b is minute order authorizing

replacement of a bridge in Kerr County on the Hermann Sons

Road at the Guadalupe River approximately six-tenths of a


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

90

mile south of State Highway 27 near the Kendall County

line. The bridge was damaged due to flooding and has been

closed to traffic since October of 2000. The ten-mile

detour affects school buses and the postal service and is

the most direct route to the Hermann Sons Retirement Home

which has approximately 80 residents.

Since this bridge serves as a direct route for many

of the county residents the county has requested the

department to accelerate this project. The estimated cost

to the bridge is $450,000, which includes 10 percent local

participation by the county.

With your approval of this minute order we can

proceed with a replacement of this bridge using Category

6b Off-state Highway System Bridge Replacement and

Rehabilitation Program funds in the 2001 UTP. We

recommend your approval.

MR. JOHNSON: Questions?




(A chorus of ayes.)


MR. LUEDECKE: Item 6c -- we bring to you the second


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

91

quarter program for disadvantaged counties to address

matching fund requirements. In your books is Exhibit A

that lists the projects and the staff's recommended

adjustments for each of them. The adjustments are based

on the equations approved in earlier proposals.

There are ten projects in five counties and a

reduction in the participation for these projects is

$235,117. We recommend your approval of this minute

order.

MR. JOHNSON: Questions?

MR. NICHOLS: I'll move but I also wanted to make a

comment, and I think it's important. I know a lot of

people here are our staff people. There are other people

here also that the counties have received a benefit of

about $22 million related --

MR. LUEDECKE: Yes, sir. A little over 22 million.

MR. NICHOLS: With that I move we approve it.

MR. JOHNSON: Is there a second?

MR. LANEY: Second. Let me add a comment too though.

We get to the point where we make these adjustments and I

see that the estimated local participation after the

adjustments is sometimes so minimal as to be not worth the

effort. We might want to at least consider going


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

92

forward -- after I'm long gone, but going forward -- a

threshold below which you just don't ask for

participation, whether it's $5,000 or something, 10,000,

because it's a $252 contribution --

MR. LUEDECKE: Yes, sir. Some of the projects are

quite small. Of course, some of them are very large too.

MR. LANEY: Right.

MR. LUEDECKE: You need a threshold.

MR. LANEY: Not a percentage threshold, a dollar

threshold.

MR. LUEDECKE: Yes, sir. We'll certainly work on

that.

MR. LANEY: Anyway, second.


(A chorus of ayes.)


MR. LUEDECKE: Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Thanks.

MR. HEALD: Agenda Item Number 7 -- we have one SIB

loan for your consideration, James Bass.

MR. BASS: Again, for the record, I'm James Bass,

director of the Finance Division.

This minute order seeks preliminary approval for a


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

93

loan to the City of Bellaire in the amount of $3.18

million to pay for a portion of storm sewer management

improvements in connection with their rehabilitation of

Interstate 610 from north of Braeswood Boulevard to south

of Bellaire Boulevard.

When the application was originally submitted in

September of 2000 the city requested an interest rate of

4.75 percent over six years. I'd like to bring your

attention that since that time market rates have continued

to drop, so if approved the negotiations may result in a

lower interest rate than that, and staff would recommend

your approval.





(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: Motion carries. Thank you.

MR. HEALD: Item Number 8, award or rejection of

highway contracts, being 8a(1) and (2), Thomas Bohuslav.

MR. BOHUSLAV: Good morning, commissioners. My name

is Thomas Bohuslav. I'm the director of the Construction

Division.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

94

Item 8a(1) is for the consideration of the award or

rejection of highway maintenance contracts let on February

6 and 7, 2001, whose engineers estimated costs were

$300,000 or more. We had 16 projects bid. We have three

projects we recommend for rejection.

The first project is in Coke county. We received six

bids, the lowest bid being about 80 percent over the

project. The district would like to go back and do some

redesign. We looked at that project to see if there was

any way they could get the prices down on that project.

Another project recommended for rejection is in

Matagorda County, FM 457. The project is number 4022. We

received three bids on that project of 27 percent over. On

this product we had mobilization that overran a lot

higher -- I believe it was $35,000. We estimated 5,000

would be a big impact. This is an emergency fender system

repair. It's kind of a call-out basis whenever we have a

problem with those fenders, and we'd like to go back and

rebid that project.

The last project in the maintenance contract

recommended for rejection is project number 4025 in

Victoria County, US 59. In the other projects that we

let -- this is a MO contract -- in that area we received


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

95

much better competition and got lower prices. Even though

this is only 13 percent of it we'd like to go back and see

if we can get some more competition and get better prices

on this project.

Staff recommends approval of all projects with the

exception of those.

MR. JOHNSON: Thomas, when you have what I understood

to be an emergency situation like that and you want to

rebid it, what are the procedures? How much time are we

talking about?

MR. BOHUSLAV: When I saw that wording on there I was

concerned that -- and that's kind of a misnomer. It's a

call-out contract where if we do have something that's

hit, we can call the contractor and they can come out

there on an emergency basis, so it's what we might call an

evergreen contract where we just keep them there and we'll

call them out whenever we do have some problems out there.

So it's not an emergency right now. It will be

possibly in the future when we do have the hit to those

fenders.

MR. JOHNSON: Is there a motion to approve

recommendation on item 8a(1)?



12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

96



(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. BOHUSLAV: Item 8a(2) is for consideration of the

award or rejection of highway construction and building

contracts let on February 6 and 7, 2001. We had 99

products that were let. We have three projects

recommended for rejection.

The first project is in Dallas County, and this

project -- there was a requirement in the general notes

that there's a mandatory prebid, and the apparent low

bidder did not attend that mandatory prebid and therefore

they were -- should not have been qualified to bid the

contract. We did receive their proposal.

We didn't follow -- therefore we should not have

accepted their proposal. However, we didn't follow our

normal procedures for notifying contractors of mandatory

prebids, and that we normally advertise in the newspaper,

and we also send notices out to contractors that there's

mandatory prebids.

Because it was in the general notes the contractors

didn't know about it until after. In some cases for the

contractors that there was a mandatory prebid, so what we


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

97

want to do is reject all the bids on this project and go

back and rebid it.

The next project recommended for rejection is a

project in Bexar County. It's heating, ventilation, and

air-conditioning for a facility there. We were 78 percent

over on this project. We'd like to go back and see if we

can make some changes and try to save some money on that

project and relet it.

And again, in Sabine County, project CBC 4704-00-034.

There was a project there that we're 41 percent over for a

maintenance facility in the Beaumont District, and we'd

like to go back and have the consultant rework that

product to see if we can get that cost down on the

project.

Staff recommends approval of all projects with the

exception noted.

MR. JOHNSON: On item 8a(2) we have somebody that

would like to speak, Jim Bell, from City of Rosenberg, the

director of project development.

Welcome, Mr. Bell.

MR. BELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the

commission.

The project that I represent the City of Rosenberg on


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

98

is an overpass project within Fort Bend County. We've

been working on this project for over six years.

Actually, it's a dream of many of the old timers of our

city that exceeded over 50 years.

We only have three grade crossings in the city, and

we are blessed with two major railroad complexes of the

Santa Fe and the Union Pacific.

In 1993 we were doing the engineering studies for

this overpass, which will be an S curve type program four

lanes wide. At that time we determined that there was

going to be in ten years not 16 trains per day but 57

trains per day through our city, of which we only had

grade crossings.

Today we are at 33 trains a day, minimum. We already

are facing gridlock. Also, you as a commission

established an evacuation fund I think around 1994, at

which time Highway FM 723 was designated as an evacuation

route. With what we knew coming to be a gridlock of the

57 trains, we moved rapidly, working with you in

partnership to try and get a new overpass, which was

approved to take place.

Our job was we acquired 19 properties either

partially or in full. We were responsible for all the


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

99

utility relocations, and thankfully HL&P worked closely

with us, and we have to actually transverse through a

major substation right there in the city. That has been

taken care of.

We also have been participating with your district

office, and we funded upgrading the railings and

appearance of the overpass and the lighting, all of which

will fit within the architecture of the old city.

I do wish to thank very much the cooperation we've

had with your staff. Mr. Trietsch came from this office

to be our district engineer. We never missed a heartbeat

from Mr. Dietert's retirement to Mr. Trietsch, and also

with his very able associates, Mr. Johnson and Mr. Darden.

We felt for all these projects we'd been through --

and I know, Mr. Laney, you've sat in on several of them, a

series of them -- that we respectfully thank the

commission's consideration and the citizens of Rosenberg

and Fort Bend County. This connector which will allow for

the development of the north area into the city and down

in to tie into US 59 does become more critical each day,

and we certainly thank you for your help and

consideration.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you for being here, Mr. Bell.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

100

We'll entertain a motion for the approval of the

recommendations under 8a(2).


MR. LANEY: Second.


(A chorus of ayes.)


Thomas, thank you.

MR. HEALD: Mr. Chairman, under routine minute

orders, I'll handle those as normal. We're going to move

out of 9d(1) to the front at this time. That has to do

with an aerial easement in Bexar County on FM 1535 near

Loop 1604. In other words, consider the lease or an

aerial easement for a bridge to the abutting landowner.

MR. JOHNSON: We have several speakers who have

signed up to speak on this particular agenda item.

Representing the City of Shavano Park, Thomas Peyton,

who is the mayor, Jim Bastoni, who is a councilman, Don

Wallace, who is also a councilman, and Frank Burney, who

is a city attorney -- or an attorney in the city.

Welcome. Do you want to speak for all the gentlemen

or does each want to speak?

MAYOR PEYTON: I will start. I have had a little


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

101

cold. It's hard for me to talk too much, and I'll defer

most of it to the other two gentlemen.

MR. JOHNSON: For the record, please identify --

MAYOR PEYTON: My name is Thomas Peyton. I'm the

Mayor of the City of Shavano Park, which is in northwest

San Antonio. The 1535 is the main thoroughfare through

our city, and just north of that is where this proposed

bridge is going to go.

I'd like to -- this matter first came up I believe

back in October and you deferred it until now, and I guess

I'm at a loss as to why it's coming up now because as far

as we're concerned there's -- nothing has changed since

October. We still have lawsuits filed in this matter and

there's nothing been cleared up, and they still haven't

changed any zoning on the property, so there's no reason

to have a bridge.

I am also a little concerned because of the short

notice that we got. We weren't noticed until the end of

last week about this meeting, and this is a matter that's

high priority for our citizens. We would have had quite a

few here. In fact, we wish that we would have a hearing

in San Antonio because we feel like there's still a lot of

citizens that are concerned about this.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

102

Martin Marietta has applied for a tunnel permit for

this, which our citizens don't object to, but they do the

bridge because this area that -- the 1535 goes out to Camp

Bullis and out to Eisenhower Park. It's one of the main

jogging, running, and bicycling areas in our city, and to

put this 100-foot-or-so-wide bridge over this road we feel

not only will be unsightly but also dangerous. They're

proposing a two-way road, a railroad track, and a conveyor

belt to go over this bridge.

And you have to understand that this quarry is one of

the largest quarries in the United States and does have

the largest rock crusher in the United States there, and

we do get a lot of dust and truck traffic, and our

citizens are concerned. I think all we're asking for is

for this to be postponed until all of our legal problems

are settled with Martin Marietta.

I'll defer to the other members. Thank you.

MR. BASTONI: Good morning. My name is Jim Bastoni,

councilman for the City of Shavano Park. Mr. Burney is

going to review a couple of facts so I just want to pass

on one or two things.

First, I wanted to just express our appreciation when

Mr. Kelly took the opportunity to come to the city hall in


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

103

Shavano Park and attend a city hall meeting that we had.

We had in the neighborhood of 200 people attend from our

city to speak on this issue. We don't have a very big

city hall. It kind of filled our room and spilled out

into the outside.

And then we found out subsequently that this was

going to be an agenda item, and we had arranged buses and

such. We were going to have a good group of people come

here, as Tommy mentioned. But in the interim we received

a letter from Mr. Kelly, and it was addressed to Mr. Vaio,

Martin Marietta Materials, and it looks like each of you

gentlemen received a copy as well.

At that time he told us that the Austin leadership

has decided that due to the continued controversy it would

be prudent for TxDOT to defer consideration of the lease

to allow more time for discussions to continue, and they

have continued. Once the hoped-for compromise is achieved

then TxDOT would be prepared to consider -- to act to

consider the lease, and as Tommy said, it was our

understanding of what the timetable was going to be.

We have several suits pending. One having to do more

with the zoning issues; the other is a nuisance suit.

That suit was scheduled for trial March 13 and we have


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

104

been moving forward in that regard. Just in the last week

or so Martin Marietta has asked for an extension and

received an extension from the judge, so that case will be

going to trial in first part of June, I believe.

And that's the heart of our case with them right now,

that if in fact we go forward and we are unsuccessful in

completing our negotiations with them then we have really

no other recourse than to try this case. We believe that

we'll win this suit just as we've won the other

nonconforming rights lawsuits that we have pending against

them in the past, and that will make the -- this bridge

issue really a moot point, as what we're seeking in our

nuisance suit is a permanent injunction on quarrying on

the east side of Northwest Military Highway.

I want to hit one more issue, and it's kind of tandem

with our nuisance suit and why we have some 200 or so of

our residents that come out to one of these hearings to

discuss this, and Northwest Military, as Tommy pointed

out, is the main artery that comes through our town. Mr.

Kelly has also come and given previous presentations to us

of your plans to expand Northwest Military and widen it to

carry more traffic.

Our residents use that as our primary north-south


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

105

ingress-egress into town. It's the way people come from

1604 and go back in and out of San Antonio. It's also for

us the path that takes us north of 1604. My children and

many of the residents in our town attend Texas Military

Institute, which is -- you go up Northwest Military

through Camp Bullis and you come back out into this area.

There's also Eisenhower Park, which is a north side of the

quarry and tucked just below Camp Bullis.

And at any given time there's pedestrians,

bicyclists, obviously now a lot of parents carting

children up and down the street. And we've expressed our

concern to Martin Marietta that despite their best

intentions -- I'll give them that -- and their assurances

that accidents don't happen, accidents do happen.

In the last year or so there was an incident where

some fly rock landed on the road from Northwest Military.

My wife's car suffered about $1,200 worth of damage from a

quarry vehicle where some aggregates flew off the front of

the truck and bounced off and literally ripped a hole in

the hood of her truck.

I've seen cement trucks that have tried to navigate

the turn from 1604 access road onto Northwest Military

going north that rolled over because of the high rate of


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

106

speed, and I've seen the aggregate trucks blow right

through the red light, frankly. We do have and continue

to have legitimate concern about how this industrial

corridor that's developing just to our northern border

does affect our citizens and our quality of life, and

we're going to advance the discussions to the extent that

we can in this interim time between now and the beginning

of the trial, which is now just a few months away, but in

the absence of any kind of settlement then we'll have to

take whatever legal remedies are due us.

As Tommy said, we were under the impression that we

would get some consideration from this commission that

while this was still pending that this issue would be set

aside, and we believed it was going to be resolved in

March when we were scheduled for trial, but now as it's

pushed back a little bit until June we ask for your

consideration to wait just a little bit longer.

Thank you.

MR. BURNEY: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission,

my name is Frank Burney. I'm the attorney for the City of

Shavano Park. We are glad to be here to address this

issue on what we affectionately call the bridge to

nowhere, because in fact this bridge cannot be connected


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

107

with any property because it doesn't have any of the

permits that are necessary to do so.

We appreciate your prior support, and the commission

has historically always not entered into a discretionary

decision, which is what is asked for in this case, until

there is some local resolution of the issues and the

issues have been resolved, and we appreciate that position

by the commission to not interfere with what we consider

to be a local issue until there is some kind of

resolution. And as we had stated, we thought that's where

we were at this case.

If the commission does intend to consider this issue

today I think there are four findings that the commission

has to make, and I'd like to address three of those, the

first being that this thing has to be in compliance with

all laws. There's no question that this bridge is going

to be built over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, which

is the primary drinking source for over 1.5 million

Texans, and there's been no evaluation of any impact on

that bridge and the construction going in there too.

Additionally, this property has recently been

categorized as a category four by the Department of the

Interior Fish and Wildlife Division, and it's a sensitive


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

108

property with various endangered species. There's been no

evaluation of the impact to those species as well.

I would also point out to you that there's been no

zoning -- change in zoning for this property. The

property located on one side of the road on the east is

zoned residential R1. There's been no change in that

zoning by the City of San Antonio. No decision whatsoever

has been made.

On the left side the case is at the Supreme Court at

this point in time. As it exists today the Fourth Court

of Appeals has ruled that there are no nonconforming

rights existing to allow quarrying on that property to the

east side -- the west side of this property.

So at this point in time you have no nonconforming

rights to the west, you have no zoning to the east. This

is literally a bridge to nowhere. I think some members

have already mentioned there are six or seven different

lawsuits involved in this particular tract that are in

various stages of discovery and trial, all the way from

the state to the federal court.

A second finding that this commission has to make is

that -- to assure the safety of the area and the

beautification interests of the state of Texas. There is


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

109

already in the files of the transportation department

evidence that this quarry has created a dangerous

condition at this location. There are reports of fly rock

from the quarry blasts that have ended up on this farm-to-

market road. Bicyclists use this road on a regular basis

as well as vehicular traffic, and I don't think there's

been any studies whatsoever to evaluate the impact to the

safety of those that use this road at this point in time.

I think it would be very difficult for this

commission to reach a finding that this beautiful,

pristine Hill Country area would be enhanced -- the beauty

of it would be enhanced by the construction of a massive

railroad conveyor belt bridge with the accompanying dust

that would go with it.

The third finding that this commission would have to

make is that it has some economic benefit. In this

particular case we're talking about $15,000 a year for a

lease that may last 15 to 20 years. The local office has

already indicated that they've spent far in excess of that

$15,000 studying this issue to date, and so there is

actually no economic benefit to the state of Texas for

this. No appraisal has been performed.

We believe that the $15,000 figure is vastly


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

110

understated, and there's been no effort to truly determine

the market value of this bridge to this particular

industry, and we think you ought to consider the fact that

you are vastly understating the income that the state of

Texas could receive if it did market-value this bridge

itself.

Economic benefit also has a broader term, not only

for the Texas Department of Transportation, but we believe

that the construction of this bridge will severely impact

property values in this area and continue to affect

homeowners in this area.

I guess in final I'd say is this $15,000 more

important than the impact to these neighborhoods in this

area, and the impact on the recharge zone and the

environmentally sensitive properties. This bridge to

nowhere that's mired in litigation should not be approved

by this commission today. You ought to give the local

parties the chance to work through the issues if they can.

We've had ongoing discussions over the last six months on

various occasions to try to resolve our disputes.

We still are at the table trying to negotiate these

issues, and we hope to be able to work those out, and we'd

ask for you to table this motion until we have a chance to


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

111

work through it on a local basis. Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Is Councilman Wallace here?

MR. BURNEY: No, he is not. He did not make the

trip.

MR. JOHNSON: There are two speakers who are here to

speak for this agenda item, and I would like for each

speaker to remain and answer any questions that any of the

commissioners might have. Representing Martin Marietta is

Bruce Vaio, and then Tony Ferraro is also here to speak on

behalf of the agenda item.

MR. FERRARO: Good morning. My name is Tony Ferraro.

I'm the president of the Rogers Ranch Crosstimber

Homeowner's Association, and I'm here representing our 350

families that live in the area that is directly east of

this new quarry and the expansion of Martin Marietta's

quarry. We will be, as we continue to develop, a thousand

feet from the eastern edge of this quarry.

Over the past six months I want to tell you that we

have worked very hard and diligently with folks at Martin

Marietta and Mr. Vaio and his staff in developing an

agreement that Martin Marietta has stepped up to make some

significant restrictions in their operations as they move

to quarry this land, and it will create an opportunity --


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

112

it's created an opportunity for us to have a positive

quality of life.

It won't change anything as far as we're concerned in

the environment that we have in our subdivision, and we're

looking forward to their moving across Northwest Military

and mining this land. We believe it's a benefit to San

Antonio and we urge your support, and I am here to answer

any questions you may have.


Mr. Vaio.

MR. VAIO: Thank you, commissioners, director. My

name is Bruce Vaio. I'm the president of Martin Marietta

Materials Southwest.

Many of you have operated in the conditions in the

environment that we have in the year 2000 and beyond. We

started this quarry in 1935, and I will tell you we cannot

operate a quarry the way we did in 1935, much less the way

we did five years ago. As groups have moved closer and

closer to this significant asset to the City of San

Antonio and to the state of Texas we've had to revisit the

way we do business, and in John Kelly's letter back in

October when he said that he suggested we revisit the

neighborhood groups, the City of San Antonio where we


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

113

reside and see how we do operate, I can tell you that we

have changed the way we've done business significantly.

We have entered into a landmark agreement with the

people of the Rogers Ranch Homeowners Group in conjunction

with the City of San Antonio that basically applies the

most restrictive conditions to any quarry in the state of

Texas. We have agreed to reduce our blasting levels

measured by peak particle velocity by almost 72 percent of

what is required by the City of San Antonio.

We've agreed to drop the amount of explosives we use

by over 50 percent. We've agreed to establish meaningful

buffers and build berms that are architecturally pleasing.

We have done things to change the way we do business.

As each and every one of you know that's representing

the Texas Department of Transportation you can't make

everyone happy, and it takes a little more time to

communicate what these real positive changes are.

You had heard the opposition mention that on

Northwest Military Highway, FM 1535, that the concern is

that basically with Camp Bullis, an Army depot, not being

used to its fullest extent anymore that it's primarily

being used by joggers and those that are using it for

recreational activities. Two years ago we pulled 1,200


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

114

trucks a day off of there and relocated our exit route so

that we could improve the compatibility between the quarry

and the community.

The reason that we're asking for a bridge is just

that. If we were to go completely underground as we have

with the existing lease with TxDOT we would actually have

to extract the side elevations to where we would diminish

from the visual appearance of that corridor. By us going

aboveboard we can assure the communities, including

Shavano Park and the City of San Antonio where this

resides, that we can by 100 percent eliminate any of the

quarry vehicles moving across between the west and the

east side.

This is good. This is standing up and doing the

things that John Kelly requested in his letter by being a

good, compatible citizen.

I appreciate your time and your consideration of this

matter. Although there is a dispute that's ongoing, the

amendment of the lease that's in front of you today is

really just that. It's an amendment of an existing lease

that we have which we believe will be in the betterment of

all involved, and I appreciate your time and am willing to

answer any questions you may have.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

115

MR. JOHNSON: I have a couple of questions, and maybe

Mr. Laney and Mr. Nichols might have one or two

themselves.

Mr. Burney referred to several important issues that

I'd like for you to address. One is safety, one is the

aesthetics of the area as it pertains to this aerial

easement and the bridge, and thirdly is the environmental

considerations. Would you address those issues?

MR. VAIO: Sure. Let me address each one.

First and foremost and what's a priority in our

company is safety. We did have an unfortunate situation

in our quarry that they have referenced. It's a single

event. I've been in the company for five years and we

have never had another replication of an event like this.

Since this time we have employed the most state-of-

the-art techniques into our detonation activities. We

have employed the services of the San Antonio Police

Department to where for a period of 45 seconds we go ahead

and hold traffic and defer anyone. We clear that part of

the roadway out to make sure as the belt and suspenders

approach that there is -- that we operate under 100

percent safe conditions. By doing that we guarantee the

motoring public that we will do that.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

116

The second element is there have been extensive

studies on the impact. The San Antonio water system, the

Edwards Aquifer Authority have all investigated the impact

of a quarry operation on the representative eastern

portion of the Beckmann Quarry. We have had studies by

the environmentalists. That has been complete. It hasn't

been specific to a bridge linking the two, no, but the

quarry has been completely assessed.

The final thing, there was a mistake I think that Mr.

Burney had indicated. The property is not zoned R1 for

residential. It has not been zoned by the city, and when

it is not in that condition it's actually zoned -- it's in

a fallout category called R/A, residential/agricultural.

It has not been zoned, and the city council has confirmed

it in an eleven to zero vote that we have nonconforming

rights on that property to mine.

I might have missed -- did I miss one of the other --

MR. JOHNSON: Well, two further questions. One, what

about the safety of the users of the military highway? I

appreciate the safety concerns for the quarry and the

people who work within the quarry, but people who are

using the military highway. And then secondly, the

aesthetics of the area and how they might be enhanced or


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

117

not hurt by the presence of a bridge using an aerial

easement.

MR. VAIO: If you were to take a copy of the

presentation I gave you, on the front cover is a digital

graphic representation of the bridge. What is

significant, under our existing lease, if we were to go

ahead and to mine underground we would have to remove that

elevation, the natural berm that's on each side that has

been cut by TxDOT to put -- or whoever put that road in at

the time.

Both those sides would have to be brought down to

grade level, so we would have to extract that rock, from

my perspective diminishing from the visual appearance.

The second element if you'll notice on the bridge,

the conveyer that will run across the bridge will be

completely covered so that no material could ever come off

of that conveyor and drop down below. The safety is

enhanced by people that are actually using Northwest

Military because they will never encounter any large

quarrying equipment that will be moving between the east

and the west.

By us putting the bridge up above we will be able to

shuttle equipment back and forth without ever having to do


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

118

any add grade crossings on Northwest Military Highway,

therefore anyone that's planning to use this for

recreational purposes is not going to be hindered by our

activity.

MR. JOHNSON: David or Robert, do you have any

questions?

MR. NICHOLS: I really don't have any questions.

MR. JOHNSON: David?

MR. LANEY: I just want to make sure if John Kelly

wanted to add something.

I don't want to put you on the spot, John, but do you

have any comments you want to add one way or the other?

MR. KELLY: For the record, my name is John Kelly.

I'm the district engineer in San Antonio for TxDOT.

Commissioner Laney, I appreciate the opportunity to

come up. This has been a very difficult issue for us.

We've found ourselves caught in the middle between two

competing interests, but I feel like at this point as far

as our particular requirements as far as leasing right of

way I believe that those requirements have been met

satisfactorily, and I would suggest that it would be time

to go ahead and consider this lease. I believe that it

will be beneficial.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

119

I think the key benefit that I see if there is going

to be quarrying on the east side of Northwest Military

Highway the benefit of doing the aerial lease is that as

Mr. Vaio has said, the construction of the bridge will

preclude any interaction between their quarrying equipment

and any of the traffic, whether it be pedestrians,

bicyclists, or motorists on Northwest Military Highway,

and to me that's the key safety benefit that we would

derive from that bridge construction.

Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, John.

Any questions of John, Robert, or --

I have a question of Mr. Burney. The action that is

being considered here today by the commission in no way

affects your continuance in the pursuit of a legal answer

to your situation. Is that correct?

MR. BURNEY: Well, we think it would be more prudent,

I guess, from our position to let the process run its

course. We have ongoing negotiations. We have litigation

pending. Let those decisions be made rather than going

ahead and approving basically a bridge that may have other

conditions.

This commission has the authority to set additional


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

120

conditions on your approval, and it may turn out that part

of the compromise that we reach is some additional

conditions that we might bring to you as suggestions to

enhance this particular bridge. We may be able to work

out a compromise on that, and what we're saying is let

that process run its course.

Let the parties negotiate. If not, let them resolve

it through the litigation, and at that point in time we

can come back to you that if Martin Marietta wants to

continue to do this then they can do so.

One of the conditions might be that the tunnel be

used rather than a bridge. That might be one of our

points of settlement, which would basically negate the

need for this amendment. You've already heard Mayor

Peyton say that the tunnel would be -- is okay in the

minds of the residents of the City of Shavano Park.

So we believe that you're being -- we don't need to

reach this decision today, that it would be prudent to

take the time to table the decision and wait until all the

facts are resolved.

MR. JOHNSON: David?

MR. LANEY: Let me ask Chairman Johnson's question

again. I think if you can just get right to the point.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

121

MR. BURNEY: Sure.

MR. LANEY: If we approve this lease today would it

have any impact on the ongoing litigation?

MR. BURNEY: Well, the litigation won't have any

impact on -- we believe that it will impact the settlement

negotiations, because every time one player has one more

advantage it makes the settlement negotiations that much

more difficult.

MR. JOHNSON: Robert, any questions?

MR. NICHOLS: No. I move we approve the lease.

MR. LANEY: Second.


(A chorus of ayes.)


MR. HEALD: Okay. Back to the normal order of

routine minute orders, starting off with 9a, speed zones.

Establish or alter regulatory and construction speed zones

on various sections of highways in the state. There's a

list for your review.

And we go on with b, load zones. Revision of load

restrictions on various roads and bridges on the state

highway system. Under highway designations, 9c, in Hunt

County, remove a segment of State Highway 224 from the


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

122

state highway system in Greenville from Lee Street north

to State Highway 34, a distance of approximately 1.24

miles; redesignates the segment of State Highway 224 as

State Highway Spur 302 in Greenville from US 69 East to

State Highway 34, a distance of approximately 1.84 miles;

and redesignates BU67-T as State Highway Spur 302 in

Greenville from State Highway 34 East to Interstate 30, a

distance of approximately 2.09 miles.

Your 9d, right of way disposition purchase and lease

with one in Bexar County -- sorry, two. Bowie County --

this minute order provides for the sale of a .16-acre

tract of surplus right of way land being appraised value

of $41,820. (3), minute order provides for the sale of a

2.905-acre surplus maintenance warehouse site and

improvements in Cochran County on State Highway 114.

Again, that was based on appraised value.

(4), minute order provides for the release of a .3035

acre surplus right of way easement in exchange for 1.197

acres of fee title right of way, and there is a difference

in value, which we receive. (5), this minute order

provides for the sale of a .412-acre tract of surplus

right of way land in Grayson County off of State Highway

11, based on appraised value.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

123

(6), Grayson County off of US Highway 69 -- this

minute order provides for the sale of a .183-acre tract of

surplus right of way based on appraised value. (7),

Harris County -- this minute order provides for the sale

of a surplus access rights along 610 in Houston, and

again, that's based on an appraisal, and the landowner has

agreed to pay the state $42,000 for the conveyance of

access rights as well as a state service fee.

(8), This minute order provides for the sale of 1.42-

acre tract of surplus right of way land in Montgomery

County off of US 75 at FM 2432 based on appraised value.

That takes care of that.

Moving to eminent domain proceedings, request for

eminent domain proceedings on noncontrolled -- just

noncontrolled highways, and there's a list for your

review. 9e(2), consider the condemnation of land to be

acquired for addition to the Houston District

headquarters. I believe Mr. Trietsch is here if you have

any questions on that.

Mr. Chairman, that completes the routine minute

orders.

MR. LANEY: I've got one question.



12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

124

MR. LANEY: Question. I want to ask Gary Trietsch to

come up. Since this is my last -- potentially my last act

of office, I want to get one thing really clear. I want

to make sure this new site is right next to a toll road.

(General laughter.)

MR. TRIETSCH: It's not, I don't think, but it may

change. But it is next to a railroad.

MR. HEALD: But, Gary, we do have an option, don't

we? Next to a toll road or --

MR. TRIETSCH: I've got one next to a toll road.

MR. JOHNSON: Any other questions, comments,

observations? We'll entertain a motion to approve.




(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. HEALD: And we're not calling for an executive

session at this time.

MR. JOHNSON: Is there any other business that needs

to come before the commission?

(No response.)

MR. JOHNSON: There being none, we'll entertain a

motion to adjourn.


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

34

125




(A chorus of ayes.)

MR. JOHNSON: For the record, we'll stand adjourned

at 12:17 p.m. Thank you.

(Whereupon, at 12:17 p.m., the meeting was

concluded.)


12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

34

126

C E R T I F I C A T E

MEETING OF: Texas Transportation Commission

LOCATION: Austin, Texas

DATE: February 22, 2001

I do hereby certify that the foregoing pages,

numbers 1 through 115 inclusive, are the true, accurate,

and complete transcript prepared from the verbal recording

made by electronic recording by Penny Bynum before the

Texas Department of Transportation.

2/27/01(Transcriber) (Date)

On the Record Reporting, Inc.3307 Northland, Suite 315

Austin, Texas 78731


12

1

234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829

30

34

Documents

FEB24WKSHOP - publicdocs.txdot.gov · Web viewThe substance of these rule revisions are to make minor grammatical corrections and to reflect changes in department organizational structure