The joint land-use committee (City of Austin, Travis County, and State of Texas) submitted a lengthy set of questions to the promoters of the Austin F1 event, Full Throttle Productions. These are routine questions that must be answered before permission can go forward.The questions deal with transportation, emergency response, the environment, and the existing floodplain.
This is not bad news. The committee has put their combined concerns into one document and that helps the promoters to organize their response. Many of these questions have already been answered by the engineers, particularly the onsite issues, but none of that has been formally submitted to the authorities. The formal response is a couple of weeks away.
Their response to the traffic issues are the biggest unknown at this point. The committee wants an analysis of improvements needed in an eight mile radius of the site, and that is well beyond the scope of the promoters. This radius includes many of the highway-to-highway intersections that are clearly the responsibility of the State and Federal governments, but traffic analysis will be provided.
It is expected that Full Throttle productions will provide funds for road improvement in the direct vicinity of the circuit, but it is doubtful that they would fund major highway improvements to State and federal highways many miles away.
Here is the full text of the questions:
Texas Department of Transportation, Travis County and City of Austin Questions and Issues Regarding F1
Transportation
We are concerned about the ability of the existing roadway network to support the transportation and traffic demands of the proposed Formula 1 site and related activities. A substantial amount of planning will be necessary to address traffic and transportation related to this facility, including traffic forecasts, traffic operations and management planning, traffic impact analyses, and ultimately roadway improvements. Accordingly, we ask the following questions:
1. What are the applicant’s thoughts on how to handle and fund traffic control on local streets before, during, and after events? When is it expected to have an on-site and off-site transportation plan finalized?
2. Describe the proposed locations where the site will be accessed from the surrounding roadway network. Has the applicant considered increasing the number of access points to the site?
3. Has the applicant set aside funding and a schedule for improving offsite roadways?
4. We understand the site plan to be conceptual in nature at this time; however when can we anticipate that a final site plan will be available?
5. When does the applicant anticipate completing a long range, regional transportation study that encompasses up to a 6-8 mile radius and that evaluates approaches to the site from all directions (including other cities) and the loads on those highways? This study would also include future arterial roadway placements, possible rail feasibility, etc. (in other words, a multi-modal, multi-jurisdictional approach)
6. When is it anticipated scoping and completing a traffic impact analysis? The TIA should analyze more localized traffic loads (up to 4 miles) and operational plans with local improvements and costs associated with those improvements. Please keep in mind that each jurisdiction would like to discuss and concur with the scoping of the study prior to its completion.
7. Would you provide contact information for the traffic and transportation consultants that you have retained? May we work directly with them?
8. Has it been estimated how many spectators the site can accommodate for a peak day race? How many parking spaces have you estimated?
9. Describe the camping that is foreseen on the site. Is it anticipated that tent camping or RV camping will be permitted? Is there a plan to place any type of geo-grid or soil stabilization matting for the unpaved parking areas? If RV parking is anticipated, will utility hook-ups be provided?
10. Are shuttle bus operations planned? How many spectators are anticipated to take mass transit? Where will bus patrons park, be picked up, and dropped off on-site? What routes is it anticipated the busses will take that will keep them out of the standard vehicular queues? Where will busses pick up patrons off-site? Have you looked into capacities of bus service providers and what their capabilities are?
11. Has it been estimated the number of additional flights that will be coming into ABIA, for the weeks prior and on event days? Has ABIA been contacted regarding the proposed site?
12. Has the FAA been contacted regarding proposed helicopter traffic to the F1 site?
13. Are events planned before and after the race event to help disperse peak traffic demands?
14. Will there be a charge for parking? If yes, will the charge be added to the ticket price or collected at the gate? As parking fee collection can have a negative impact on site access delays, we strongly suggest that no parking fees be collected at the on-site parking lots on the days of the race.
15. When contraflow is to be used for traffic circulation, a traffic operations and management plan will need to include an approved traffic control set-up plan. It is the responsibility of the applicant to fund this activity.
16. On race days, there will be an extensive need for traffic control officers; have the numbers of officers needed for traffic control during contraflow measures been estimated? The cost for hiring traffic control officers is anticipated to be borne by the event holder.
17. Has the applicant considered a circulatory roadway system internal to your site to better disperse traffic trying to park and/or exit? How will the internal roadway system utilize several access points for maximum efficiency?
18. Has the applicant considered a process for informing the public of upcoming races and which roadways to take and to avoid? Will this include information given with the tickets, and will information be distributed through the press, radio, television?
19. Which roadways are planned to use to access the site for construction purposes? Has it been determined where construction traffic will enter and exit the site?
20. Are any construction vehicles using adjacent roadways expected to exceed legal weight or maximum permitted weight limits?
21. Is it expected to have any construction vehicles with loads exceeding the legal width of 8’6” which would require a permit?
Emergency Response
1. The Travis County Commissioners Court adopted the International Fire Code in 2009. The County expects to review and permit structures and hazardous materials (fuel) storage on the Formula One site related to this code, including the fire apparatus access roads, fire suppression water and location of all structures on the property.
2. Does the applicant have an incident action plan? The incident action plan should address how traffic will arrive and leave the site. Other issues to be addressed in the incident action plan are security, communications, law enforcement, fire and emergency medical service (both ground and air). The plan should address how emergency services will be provided to the event and continue to be provided to the surrounding areas before, during, and after an event, especially if the roadways are to be blocked by contra-flow.
3. Does the applicant have a plan addressing the coordination between the multiple jurisdictions necessary to implement an operational and incident management plan?
Environmental
1. How will the significant amount of loose sediment be stabilized and prevented from eroding offsite during the site grading process? What kind of phasing or sequencing of construction can reduce the risk of erosion? Can the site plan provide numerous sedimentation basins throughout the site to retain runoff and prevent erosion?
2. Please provide documentation from the US Army Corps of Engineers addressing whether CWA Section 404 permit will be required for proposed construction.
3. Several drainage areas are proposed with larger than 50 acres of contributing drainage upstream of detention, which does not appear to be consistent with County Code recommending controlled alteration of natural floodplain and City DCM guidance recommending no greater than 50 acres.
A. With the larger drainage areas proposed, as well as the extensive channelization of several natural creek tributaries flowing through the site which appear to be Waters of the U.S., the applicant is encouraged to consider alternatives that combine the detention/water quality facilities proposed with numerous additional low impact development techniques throughout the site. Structures that store water in much smaller catchments could include placement of additional ponds, water amenities and landscaping, underground vaults, pervious pavements, reinforced grass parking areas, and similar techniques. Such multiple, smaller catchments will result in greater upstream infiltration, slower velocities, and lower runoff volumes, which will better mitigate the extensive improvements proposed for this site.
B. How does the applicant propose to comply with the County Code recommending controlled alteration of natural floodplain and City DCM guidance recommending no greater than 50 acres?
4. Have the proposed development plans considered potential public safety and environmental risk associated with the proximity to multiple hazardous liquids transmission pipelines owned by Shell, Phillips Pipeline Company, and Lo-Vaca Gathering Company with respect to construction activities and proposed land use on the site?
5. The grading/drainage submittals show filling of some tributary streams and wetland areas. Has the applicant been in contact with the US Army Corps of Engineers on the need for a federal CWA Section 404 permit?
Floodplain
1. Approximately a third of your site is within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain. What activities are planned in this area? If the applicant is proposing development activity in the FEMA floodplain (such as building a road, bridge or placing fill material) the applicant will need a FEMA approved Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and possibly have the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) approved Section 404 permit prior to start of construction.
2. We have heard that there may be a significant amount of parking and camping in the floodplain during events held at the track. This area is prone to flash flooding. The County requires that owners of recreational vehicles (RV) obtain a permit prior to placement of an RV within the FEMA floodplain. What type of evacuation plans have you prepared to ensure the safety of the campers? What types of provisions have you made to ensure that RV owners visiting your facility are compliant with County permitting requirements?
Comments