Envision Central Texas is collecting input from the locals. Why don't you head on over, fill out the survey, and contribute to steering a greener course for the future of the Hill Country?
South Texas Chisme remarks on San Antonio's water service rejecting a developer's application for water. A 1700+ acre development!
If only LCRA had been so responsive to our concerns when they chose to supply water to new developments along HPR. LCRA's board, appointed by the governor, just isn't as alive to citizens' concerns as San Antonio's water service, which I'm guessing answers to the city council. Go figure.
Commissioner Gerald Daugherty has been politer than I deserved, and he recently tangibly improved bicycle safety on Hamilton Pool Road. Thanks, Commish.
But out here on The Road, we're still voting for Karen Huber. We need proactive protection for Hamilton Pool, and safeguards in place to protect creeks and their wildlife, before the county builds the roads that bring the development that, unrestricted, destroys our natural resources. And our way of life.
And Gerald is all about roads and development.
Oh: Did I mention Karen's running? I endorsed her weeks ago.
From: Karen Huber To: Karen Huber Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 6:06 PM Subject: Travis County Commissioner - Precinct 3 raceHi!
Just thought I'd let you know it is official -- I've filed for the Democratic Primary.
Thanks for the encouragement. We're going to WIN this one!More later!
Cheers,
Karen
Thanks to Commissioner Daugherty for getting us "Share the Road" signs along Hamilton Pool Road! There are three in each direction between RR12 and the Blanco County line.
I think the biggest effect these signs will have is a subliminal message to motorists saying, "The county thinks it's OK for cyclists to ride on these roads."
For a great review, with charming photos, of what we seek to preserve out here on Hamilton Pool Road, see Ric's new post.
He sent out an email this morning, mobilizing the troops against the proposed Hammett's Crossing flyover:
As you are now probably all too intensely aware, the powers that be have big plans for our sleepy little Hamilton Pool Road. They (they being CAMPO with the complicity of Travis County) want to build a 4-lane divided highway all the way out to the Travis/Blanco County line. Many of us out here have resolved to not take this onslaught lying down. We need to organize. We need to fight. We need to make our opinions heard. Here's a first step: Annie has put together a petition. It can be found, along with supporting materials on this webpage: http://www.neighborsinparadise.org/4LaneHiway.html. If you don't want to look at the webpage but just want to download the petition and start collecting signatures, here's the link directly to it: http://www.neighborsinparadise.org/PDF/4-lane/Petition.pdf If you'd like the petition and booklet containing a rationale and lovely color pictures and maps, here's the direct link: http://www.neighborsinparadise.org/PDF/4-lane/Petition-BookletS.pdf. Please collect as many signatures as you can but, even if yours is the only signature on the page, send it in anyway. The address is on the bottom of the petition. Thanks in advance for your activism. Onward, Ric
Ric and Annie, thanks for taking up the gauntlet.
Minor points: Even though the CAMPO plan has Hamilton Pool Road down for MAD4, Commissioner Daugherty has conceded that point already. So we're fighting a three lane, not a four lane, highway now. That's almost a trivial point though. The three lane road they contemplate would support as many cul de sac subdivisions as they could ever put out here.
Pam Reese met with Gerald Dougherty and engineer Steve Manilla about Hammett's Crossing. Remember, we had had a meeting a few weeks ago about building a new bridge across the river. And most neighbors want no changes -- but most are OK with minor safety improvements (even though nobody can remember any actual accidents occurring).
Pam says the options are:
Number 3 above has been ruled out since the County and TxDOT do not have the funds to build such a bridge. However, number 2 above does appear the most likely approach after Steve's meeting with the TxDOT engineers. Commissioner Daugherty and Steve Manilla would like to form a committee of residents to help decide some of the parameters and design elements of this bridge. Starting in February or March, this group would meet perhaps once a month for several months to a year or more to give input on the bridge design. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SERVE ON THIS COMMITTEE, PLEASE LET ME KNOW SO THAT I CAN PASS THIS INFORMATION ON TO THEM.
- rehabilitating the existing bridge by widening it to two lanes, adding guard rails, etc.;
- replacing the bridge with a 2- lane bridge that will not overtop (flood) more frequently than a 3-year event (approximately 30 feet higher than the existing bridge)
- building a 100-year event bridge that will accomodate CAMPO's plan for Hamilton Pool Rd. being a MAD4 (4-lane divided highway) from Hwy. 71 to the Blanco County Line by the year 2030. This type of road is also described as an arterial class roadway.
Heloooo? They want a citizens group to rubber stamp for their decision for #2, get it?
Look: nobody at the meeting wanted a bridge three stories over the river. Guard rails: sure. Flyover: NO.
Pam tells us the Commissioner's real agenda:
Another outcome of the Friday meeting with Commissioner Daugherty and Steve Manilla is that the Commissioner agreed to pursue with CAMPO having Hamilton Pool Rd. from FM 12 to the Blanco County Line reclassified as a Hill Country Arterial. This is a 2-lane road with wide shoulders and a buffer of land on either side. The Commissioner mentioned that turn lanes would need to be added in places and that eventually he sees the entire length of Hamilton Pool Rd. from Hwy. 71 to the Blanco County Line being a 2-lane road with a third center lane. We should all thank and encourage the Commissioner for his willingness to work on getting the classification of Hamilton Pool Rd. changed in the CAMPO 2030 plan.[Emphasis original]
Pam. Pam pam pam pam pam.
A three lane highway west of RR 12. Across the river on a 30 foot bridge. Who is that for? Is it to benefit Kaila and me? Annie and Ric? Any residents out here at all?
No. The new bridge is not for us. It is for new cul de sac neighborhoods needed to house shoppers for the Hill Country Galleria.
The threat to make HPR a 4-lane was always a straw man. They presented it as option #3 above just so that they can make option #2 appear to be a compromise.
Option #2 was the plan all along.
The community meeting was a sham, providing cover for it. Now we have to fight, and keep fighting, just to preserve what it seemed we won that evening.
Raymond Slade has posted his must see Power Point presentation: Water Resource Issues in the Texas Hill Country. It's entertaining -- not dry. Everything you wanted to know about floods, droughts, groundwater quality, and groundwater quantity.
Sample: Here's Hammett's Crossing in 1952 after floods covered it to a depth of 60 feet:
(Via HCA)
In response to my apology, Gerald Daugherty invited me to breakfast last Wednesday morning. We met at a coffee shop at 360 and Bee Caves Road. You have to get up pretty early in the morning to meet the Commissioner.
We had a good discussion for an hour, covering a wide range of topics, including Hammett's Crossing, Reimers-Peacock Road, that crazy map showing a highway connecting South Mopac to 2222 and 620 (!), land use planning, cycling safety, and baseball. Visions of My Dinner with Andre.
(If you haven't seen My Dinner with Andre in a while, do so. I saw it again on TV last night. And I get it a lot more deeply than I did 25 years ago. Here's 5 minutes that will remind you why you need to see it.)
I appreciate his taking the time to discuss these topics with me, a simple constituent, not a power broker.
Nobody changed any minds on any topic. But there are areas it was easy to agree on.
I had started to give a full report of our conversation on this blog. But I changed my mind. You ought to be able to have a conversation with me and not see it on the Internet the next day, even if you are a politician. I'm not a reporter.
I will, however, mention a couple of policy promises he made.
1. He said the county can't really expect to do another bond issue before 2010. At that time, should a bond issue for improving Reimers Peacock Road be on the ballot, he would support it being in its own line item. That way, opponents can campaign against it without sinking other bonds. This seems a small concession to the neighborhood, but it's one we can hold him to.
2. He's going to look into signage along Hamilton Pool Road, to increase awareness of cyclists. I'll post later about my suggestions. He prefers shoulders and a turn lane -- yes, even west of RR-12 -- and I can't change his mind; but my suggestion costs negligible money, so is hard to resist.
[Updated to repair links]
Below is the complete text of the notes compiled by the organizers of the meeting about Hammett's Crossing bridge replacement. There is a certain consistency to the citizen comments, is there not?
Hammett’s Crossing Bridge Meeting Notes
Oct 23rd, 2007
Environmental Learning Center, Westcave Preserve
Flipchart comments addressing the existing Hammett’s Crossing low water bridge and the proposed new or replacement bridge:Next Steps:
- Leave the existing bridge as a walking trail
- Keep the scenic aspect of the bridge
- It needs to be a safe crossing
- No changes are necessary
- Switchbacks are good
- Real issue: more or less development
- Value of Westcave Preserve
- Concern about canyon and impacts on land
- Add guardrails to the existing bridge
- Need to consider EMS & Fire response access issues
- Consider bicycles
- Pace of subdivision and permits
- Impact of low water crossing on travel and commute
- Existing bridge as a limiting factor & positive psychological barrier
- Switchbacks are dangerous
- Problem with inadequate signage
- Try to span river or keep switchbacks?
- Concerns about clear-cutting near river
- Survey on bridge: 61 (both directions) from 7 – 11am
- 32 people surveyed: 27 said no new bridge; 2 said it depends on what kind of new bridge; 3 said yes new bridge
- In Bridge meeting: of the approximately 80 people present, 46 people were against the new bridge
- Safe bridge, not more traffic
- Coordination among the 3 counties is an issue
- Improving signage would increase safety of existing bridge
- New guardrails on switchbacks have helped
- Improve placement for the “no 30 ft. trailers” sign
- Need a turn around provision
- Road not wide enough for school bus
- Telephone contact or website for road conditions?
- Nearby larger local highways eliminate need for road improvement near bridge
- Consider area planned highways that may impact HPR/962
- What was the rationale for upgrading the expansion of HPR?
- It’s not local traffic, but popularity of the area that brings increased traffic
- Low existing bridge is safer; you can’t fall as far
- Is this a bridge safety project?
- Straighten bad curves west of bridge
- Construction could be detrimental to river
- Will the County Commissioner force the new bridge?
- People need a safe place to park to access old bridge
- Concerns about increased trespassing if there are places to park
- Look at ISD attendance zones & pickup routes
- Have project reports
- Do an E.I.S.
- Staff needs to listen to residents
- Need notice on every step of process
- Hold any public meetings in this area
- Get input from area visitors as well
Written comments submitted by local residents and other stakeholders present at meeting:
“Leave existing bridge as is.”
“Reclassify HPR to a MAD2 in the CAMPO Plan.”
“Develop a comprehensive land use plan before any road expansion plans are made.”
“Support county land use authority.”
“I would like to see the bridge stay as it is, but if there are going to be changes I would like to see the new bridge made just high enough to be above the flood and maybe just slightly wider and with guard rails. The existing roads need only be made slightly wider but no other changes on either side. Signs on both sides need improvement.”
“I would like to see a new bridge high enough to go straight across the valley from the curve at Westcave Preserve over to the curve on top of Hamilton Pool Road. Also keep the existing bridge for a nature walking & fishing trail.”
“The neighbors in general do not want a new bridge.”
“Please provide notice of all steps, additional info, etc.”
“I do not feel a need for a new bridge.”
“I commute in to Austin every week day and I do not need or want a new bridge. I’ve never felt unsafe.”
“Would like to see the bridge not accessible to 18 wheelers.”
“Please don’t upgrade this bridge…it is our last barrier to the rampant growth occurring elsewhere throughout Central Texas. To Commissioner Daugherty: I believe that there are 18 homes/45 residents in Travis County served by this bridge. This is .005% of the County population (approximately 900,000). An appropriate budget would therefore be (.00005) (x $102 million capital budget) = $5100!”
“We wish for the existing bridge to remain as is, with NO new bridge.”
“Hamilton Pool Road should remain two lanes. The present bridge should stay as it is except for repair of railings. If increased flooding over years, then eventually raise present bridge minimally. Improve signs to keep trucks off local/preserve-oriented road. Community is preserve-centered, not development oriented.”
“NO NEW BRIDGE. No bridge needed for the 61 cars that commute across the bridge. Concerning building a new bridge: I’m concerned about impact to the environment and new development that would be encouraged. If old bridge is ever used as just a foot bridge—absolutely no parking so as not to encourage trespassing.”
“My preferences: 1. Leave the bridge as it is; 2. Add signs well before switchbacks—preferably at HWY 71 and HPR, and 962 and Cypress Mill Rd. saying “water over road” and “no vehicles over ? feet”; 3. Set school districts boundaries so school bus doesn’t cross river; 4. Do not widen HPR; 5. Take the popular vote of residents; 6. Preserve a beautiful natural pristine area for the use of everyone; 7. Get input from people who use the preserves and parks—make the public aware.”
“There was a scale of 0 – 100 on bridges that was the condition of bridges. It was stated that 50 was middle ground—this bridge was rated 64 so that was good. The more in-depth problem is the road to the bridge. If the concern is 150 feet on each side of the bridge then these curves will not be touched. The bridge just seems to be an out to fix roads.”
“Save money and leave the existing bridge alone. No new bridge.”
“Do not build a fine bridge until you have the $ to build a better road.”
“Improve existing bridge signage, etc. NO NEW BRIDGE!”
“Better signs, turn arounds for 18 wheelers, plus fines for them—would prevent the current ‘safety’ problems. I feel the bridge is our quality of life safeguard, and want it to remain as is.”
“Use minimum design speeds and alternative vertical and horizontal alignment for road approaches. Estimate timeline and decision steps for process. Emphasize aesthetics of final design.”
“When bridge is closed signs should be placed on Hamilton Pool Rd. at HWY 71 and HWY 281 and RR12 instead of just at the closed bridge as has been the process.”
“No 4 lane roads! NO HOW, NO WAY, NO TIME!!!”
“Keep the bridge as is.”
This email came from Jody Karr-Silaski, Administrative Coordinator, Westcave Preserve.
With a different mindset, Austin and Travis County could regard cycling as a vital part of our economy, contributing to the wealth as well as the health. Here's a NY Times article about the impact in Portland:
Cyclists have long revered Portland for its bicycle-friendly culture and infrastructure, including the network of bike lanes that the city began planning in the early 1970s. Now, riders are helping the city build a cycling economy....in a city often uncomfortable with corporate gloss, what is most distinctive about the emerging cycling industry here is the growing number of smaller businesses, whether bike frame builders or clothing makers, that often extol recycling as much as cycling, sustainability as much as success.
In a report for the City of Portland last year, the firm estimated that 600 to 800 people worked in the cycling industry in some form.... there are about 125 bike-related businesses in Portland, including companies that make bike racks, high-end components for racing bikes and aluminum for bikes mass-produced elsewhere. There are small operations that make cycling hats out of recycled fabric. Track, road and cyclo-cross races are held year-round, and state tourism groups promote cycling packages.
We have many building blocks here in this county -- starting with seven time Tour de France Champion Lance Armstrong -- and a lot of racers who train here. There could be a world class velodrome here, along with a new home for the Olympic team.
So can't we take cycling - -recreational and commuting -- into account when we design road plans for 2030?
