Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Liberty County closes hearing on proposed no-through-truck restriction for County Road 109; no public objections
Summary
Liberty County held a public hearing Dec. 16 on a proposed no-through-truck restriction for a 1.8-mile stretch of County Road 109 North in Precinct 1; county staff said legal notices ran in The Vindicator, no one contested the proposal, and the court expects to consider signage at its next session.
Liberty County commissioners closed a public hearing Dec. 16 on a proposed "no through truck" restriction for a 1.8-mile portion of County Road 109 North in Precinct 1 after county staff said required legal notice had been posted and no members of the public objected.
Catherine McCarty of the county attorney's office told the court the notice was published in The Vindicator, a paper of general circulation in Liberty County, and had run for the period required by Transportation Code 251.152. "The notice is pretty self explanatory," McCarty said, and added that if no one contested the proposal the court would be asked at its next session to approve the no-through-truck sign.
A member of the commissioners court noted the roadway has been used for years by Kinder Morgan and said the state recently built a new bridge and provided $400,000 to the county to repair the adjacent north-side roadway, creating a better entrance for the company's plant. "This is a road ... that Kinder Morgan has been using for years," that speaker said.
County officials clarified that the proposed restriction would not bar regular passenger vehicles. It is intended to apply to large commercial vehicles that exceed applicable weight thresholds; during discussion a speaker used the phrasing "over 58,000" when describing the threshold but did not specify units.
After a brief pause to allow for public comment, Unidentified Speaker 1 stated, "Not hearing any objections or comments from the public after receiving adequate notice," and the court closed the hearing. The court then made and seconded a motion to adjourn; the motion carried and the court adjourned. The formal action to install the sign was not taken at the hearing and will be considered by the court at its next session, per McCarty's explanation.
The hearing record identifies Transportation Code 251.152 as the statutory authority cited for the process; the county said the required legal notice was posted in The Vindicator for the period the office believed was required.
No members of the public spoke in opposition during the hearing.
