Fulshear council backs 36A coalition resolution, conditions support on route staying out of city limits
Loading...
Summary
Fulshear’s council approved a resolution supporting the 36A coalition’s funding efforts but attached a condition that implementation not traverse Fulshear city limits; staff said several route options exist and routes through the city are unlikely but not yet ruled out.
Mayor Johnson called the motion to approve a resolution supporting the 36A coalition with a condition that the city’s support apply only if the proposed route does not traverse Fulshear city limits. Council member Russell introduced earlier concerns from residents and asked staff to confirm the route’s relationship to the city.
City staff told the council that the 36A coalition is studying multiple routing options; while two or three preliminary options had been identified that could pass near James Lane, staff said they were not believed to be preferred because of acquisition and engineering costs. Staff recommended that the council either postpone or condition its support. Council member Knappe moved to approve Resolution 2026-693 with the stipulation that the route not be within the City of Fulshear; the motion was seconded and passed on a voice vote.
The council did not adopt specific routing language or require a future formal review of any final route mappings, but staff offered to return with additional information if the coalition produces a preferred route that raises new concerns. The decision is supportive in principle and expressly conditioned on confirmation that any chosen alignment will not traverse Fulshear city limits.
What’s next: staff said it can bring the item back to council if the coalition identifies a preferred alignment that could affect city property or rights-of-way. The council did not specify enforcement mechanisms beyond the text of the resolution.
