Circle C Neighbors

Letter to City from Circle C resident

Mar 15, 2003

City of Austin
Lisa Gordon,

My recollection is that Steve Bartlett asserted in asides to various members of the team that no one would choose to use Escarpment as an alternate route to Mopac or FM 1826 if the road were pushed through to SH 45.

Terri McManus, however, made the statement that Escarpment was considered a north-south "arterial alternate to Mopac and FM 1826." This statement rendered me absolutely speechless, because to compare a residential feeder road with a speed limit of 35 mph and a school zone to a controlled access highway and a state farm-to-market road is ludicrous. Simply because the road has existed in that form on CAMPO plans does NOT make it the right road to build. Since the plan first appeared in 1985, the growth of the area has changed dramatically and there is now high density residential development along this road and heavy, heavy pedestrian and bicycle traffic, especially during school hours.

Extending the road to SH 45 will mean the inevitable restriping to two lanes in each direction; the necessity for more signals (currently there is only one); and the loss of dedicated bicycle/pedestrian/jogger lanes. There is no room to purchase additional ROW. The two lanes that would be created are narrower than corresponding lanes on either Mopac or FM 1826 -- if space is tight, lane width is narrowed.

To clarify the Council's confusion over "the residents wanting Escarpment extended": Some of the residents of the northern areas of Circle C, *north of Slaughter Lane*, support the extension of Escarpment NORTH from Slaughter to its current dead end in the Villages of Western Oaks. This would minimize cut-through traffic in Circle C North. However, the Villages of Western Oaks STRONGLY opposes that extension, which would increase traffic as well as push Escarpment over the Longhorn Pipeline.

For years the official position of Bradley Development AND the CCHOA was "reported to be" that extending Escarpment in either direction would increase crime, traffic, and use of our community's amenities for which we pay homeowner's dues (primarily our swim center). While the last point can be handled by the neighborhood, the first two points cannot. We currently have few problems with crime and response time from the Oak Hill fire station is excellent. Bradley Development and its employees, who are also the board members of the HOA, opposed these extensions *until* the Bradley agreement made their land salable by extending grandfathering. Then and only then was there an effort made to extend Escarpment.

"Bradley Development had considered extending the road but knew it would be relatively expensive because Escarpment is somewhat wide, and because the southern extension has to cross a creek."

There is a rueful joke that perhaps the fire station should be located even closer to the Longhorn pipeline -- AND the two other pipelines running through the area that few people know about -- I believe they are Shell and Texaco, and are certain to be reactivated if Longhorn is a success. The City fought the reopening of Longhorn while approving extensive new development *directly* over the pipeline.

You have the opportunity to prevent the destruction of a neighborhood as has occurred with Allandale with the increase of traffic on RR 2222 in its various sections. The more appropriate extension is to widen FM 1826 to *SH 45* and not merely to Slaughter. Austin is already footing the bill to widen FM 1826 to Slaughter; the state has refused to pay to widen the road citing right-of-way acquisition issues.

You should not approve massive development without ensuring that the infrastructure is there to serve that development AND that the existing residents will not suffer significant degradation of property values and quality-of-life. If you have ever shaken your head about the ill-considered decisions of previous Councils as they are recounted in the press, remember that by extending and widening Escarpment your Council will leave a similar legacy of heavy traffic and the destruction of a neighborhood.

Sincerely yours,

Amy Moseley Rupp