Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cdbg Mit Award topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Coryell County awarded roughly $3.4 million in CDBG‑MIT funds for bridges, drainage and crossings
Summary
The commissioners announced a CDBG‑MIT award of about $3.4 million and reviewed four priority projects—two county low‑water crossings, a Gatesville bridge replacement and storm‑drain work in Copperas Cove—while staff set a project schedule and cost estimates for design, environmental review and construction.
The Coryell County Commissioners Court announced that the Texas General Land Office (GLO) has awarded the county just under $3.4 million through the Community Development Block Grant–Mitigation (CDBG‑MIT) program and discussed the four projects the court previously selected.
County officials said the county and its municipal partners earmarked two county projects—a low‑water crossing replacement on County Road 274 and a clear‑span bridge replacement on Bald Knob Road—plus a street/culvert replacement near Bridge Street in Gatesville and storm‑drain improvements on East Avenue B in Copperas Cove. The judge told the court the next step is assignment of a GLO program manager and engagement with the county’s grant manager vendor to begin kickoff and delivery steps.
Staff and the county’s grant vendor provided preliminary cost estimates and a proposed schedule. One project’s construction‑plus‑engineering estimate was cited at about $800,000 and another at about $1.4 million; the presenters described additional costs for grant administration and environmental reviews beyond pure construction line items. A vendor representative said the proposed procurement timeline anticipates engineering design and environmental review this fall and winter, bid advertisement in early 2026 and construction notices to proceed in mid‑2026 with roughly a year of construction and a subsequent closeout period.
Officials emphasized follow‑up tasks for the court, including confirmation of project scopes against other mitigation or PW (public works) lists and coordination with the county’s grant manager to ensure compliance. The court asked staff to cross‑reference the shortlisted projects and return with final recommendations on funding sources and sequencing prior to the next court meeting.
The court did not take final construction contracts at the meeting; staff said they will provide kickoff documentation and schedule future briefings once the GLO assigns a program manager.
