Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, December 14, 2010,
Item 9
>> item number 9 is to consider and take appropriate action on the following: a, a response to the kimley horn and associates traffic and transportation analysis for the formula one united states grand prix site near elroy road in precinct four.
and b, applicant's request for a variance to chapter 64.121-k-2, Travis County regulations for floodplain management, to alter a floodplain prior to receiving a conditional letter of map revision from the federal emergency management agency for the formula one track.
>> good afternoon.
joe gieselman.
stacy sheffield, anna bow lien, david greer from tnr.
we have been working with the applicant for the formula one race track for months.
as you know from prior presentations it's their goal to have construction started this month for a race track in order to be open for a race in 2012.
to that end they have submitted documents to the staff to review.
as any other development would do.
and we have reviewed these.
they are asking us today for a variance on one of our requirements and we'll get into that in a little more detail.
that's on part b.
but one of the chief concerns that tnr has about this facility is the ability to get patrons to and from the site on the weekend of the event.
we realized when it was represented to us that 120,000 people converging on one site, particularly in the rural area and southeast Travis County, can present some challenges.
most of the roads to and from the site are two-lane roadways and our initial analysis indicated that if they did nothing there would be up to a 12-hour delay for people to get to and from the site, which is in our opinion unacceptable.
they did at our request hire a traffic consultant, transportation transportation, kimley horn.
this is the same group that did a master plan for the motor speedway up in fort worth because they had a like example.
not entirely equal, but definitely they've had experience in a mass gathering in a tense peak characteristic in terms of arrival and departure.
so kimley has completed their analysis.
they presented it to the staff and I壇 like to take just a moment for david to preview that analysis with you and then we'll add our comments to that.
>> good afternoon, Commissioners and judge.
>> good afternoon.
>> my name is david greer from Travis County traffic engineering, and like joe was saying, we did receive their traffic report from kimley horn and associates.
and I知 just going to go over some basic information that is in that, and a little more information as far as what we think is important in the study.
the attendance will be about 120,000 spectators on the peak race day.
it will be a three-day race event.
Friday and Saturday is usually qualifying rounds, other things to come and see.
and then the actual grand prix race would be on the Sunday.
that's what we're looking at in the study is that Sunday race, which is the highest peak attendance.
spectators arriving by vehicles, rv vehicles and buses are all included.
and they're talking about around 84,000 people attending by vehicle, by car.
and that is basically based on three and a half people per car.
and about 24,000 parking spots that they're going to supply on their site.
that's taking up every single one of the parking spots on site.
they will also have camping and rv.
they will have about 20,000 people showing up in rv's, usually probably a day or two before the race starts.
and that would be about 5,000 parking spots for those.
and the bus shuttle services, there will be about a little over 13,000 people showing up on buses.
they will have a remote site.
so far they're trying to find a spot that they might think works and it's going to be at the corner of state highway 71 and 130.
and shuttle people in from there.
everyone has heard so far the delay.
how long is it going to take people to leave the site or come into the site.
and the study has focused on people leaving the site, which will be the most intense situation where everyone is trying to leave at once.
they've gotten the study down to 3.25 hours of delay.
which is pretty good.
we had asked them -- we wanted something down to three or less, three hours or less.
and they worked really hard on this and some of the ways they got down to three and a half hours of delay was utilizing heavy reliance on contra flow lanes.
that's taking traffic, all the traffic on one road and sending it in one direction.
they use that, they used efficient routing of traffic.
they did a good job on this, figuring out where he everyone is going to come from, which regions and where they will send them without having traffic crossing each other.
you want everything to flow as smooth as possible so you don't want any conflict points.
a well thought out parking plan.
we've made sure that we're not going to have people paying to park when they arrive.
it will be purchasing your tickets online and your parking pass online beforehand and then when you get your tickets there will be a map telling you where to go.
if you're going to park in lot 1 you need to take this route, things like that.
of course shuttles and other modes of transportation.
they talked about bicycles, helicopters.
and a little bit of everything to get everybody to the site.
and in the report they also -- this worked out really nicely actually.
txdot was going to already repave fm 812 on the southern side of the site, and we've talked with txdot and txdot has agreed to restripe that road, which is a two-lane road, two nice wide lanes with shoulders to restripe it to where we can actually use it as a four-lane roadway when we need to.
it will be striped as a two-lane road with wide shoulders, but when you need to for the site, for the race we can actually use all four lanes.
also on the report from kimley horn it talked about priority -- short-term improvements that they said -- they didn't say were necessary, but they seed these are high priorityism proovments that we think will be -- improvements that we think will be beneficial.
one of those was widening elroy road from a two lane to four lane road.
and they had actual delay reductions if this happens, from 3.25 basically down to 2.86, so under three hours delay.
the other issue was widening fm 812 from a four-lane road to a five-lane road.
and then the third improvement was constructing a new north-south roadway that connects elroy up to pearce lane.
and so they've kind of included those in the report as well.
this is a visual.
--
>> what was that a last one, construction of what?
>> a new north-south roadway that would connect -- here's a map here.
connect elroy road up to pearce lane to the north.
it would be at least a three-lane road.
that would just help with circulation of traffic in the general region as well.
so that was the third improvement.
here's a visual I guess of overall.
the red is the actual formula one property.
and the white triangles you see around are driveway access points.
you will notice when we first came back in September and showed you the 12 hours delay, that was a good baseline for what traffic would be if we only had two access points.
and we only had two lanes coming in the property.
so they've increased the access points by another four access points, contra flow operations, including off-site parking with shuttle services.
and repaving fm 812 to use as four lanes total.
and here's a assumed in version.
-- a zoomed in version.
I guess some of the issues that we had with the report was including bus traffic in with the actual vehicular traffic on elroy road.
and I tried to use chris' colors here, but we have red and green.
the red and green arrow you see on elroy road, that represents a shared lane that the buses will be in with the traffic.
and we don't believe the shuttle services will be successful if we combine the actual bus service with the vehicular traffic.
this would be about a mile section where they would be stuck in traffic and we've already talked, there's a three and a half hour delay and we don't want buses getting stuck in that.
we believe that you need an additional lane specifically for buses because there will be at least one bus per minute, every minute for eight hours that day.
four hours coming in and four hours leaving from the day.
and so there's going to be a lot of buses coming in and out.
and also we need an additional lane on elroy road for emergency services to go the opposite direction of traffic to access pretty much the whole northern side of the property.
so we felt the elroy road needed to be widened.
in addition to what they were showing in their report.
and I致e been talking to capital metro too about some of the shuttle services they do provide.
one of them is Austin city limits that was here this summer.
it's a little smaller, only a 70,000 spectators per day.
it's also a three-day event.
they use about the same number of bus riders, 15,000 people they bussed in everyday.
and then I have over on the right side of this the actual data that formula one submitted for their shuttle services, and then on the left is what the city limits show.
it's pretty similar.
the formula one study was a little more ambitious with how many people they can get on a bus and how many shuttles I think they can get and how long it would take for the route.
but it's fairly similar.
and then I hate to mention u.t.
football after this season, but we had --
>> [ laughter ] they do have bus services.
it's a very small percentage.
and it's a different animal at u.t.
football games because there's so much parking and parking facility.
the parking garages, there are a lot of sidewalks, people to walk to the games and it's different than what we had, but I wanted to mention that they do have some bus service for that.
>> let me ask you before you go off to that one, the Austin city limits shuttle was at -- I知 sorry, it was 15,000 for a 70,000 person per day event?
>> correct, yes.
>> okay.
>> I don't believe they had people actually driving to the event.
you had to either walk or take a shuttle.
>> so your choice is walk or take a shuttle.
>> basically.
>> and I just want to get that comparison down.
and the shuttle distance is from where to where?
is it the state parking garages?
>> the shuttle started at fourth and guadalupe and went down to the -- down to zilker park.
>> so it's a very short shuttle ride.
>> correct.
it's a four mile round trip.
and the shuttle services, formula one is having is about a eight to nine mile round trip.
about twice as long.
>> and of course walking will not -- the choice will not be between walking and taking the shuttle.
it will be between private vehicle or hot air balloon.
>> hot air balloon, helicopter, whatever.
>> helicopter, helicopter.
>> yes.
>> private automobile or helicopter or bicycle.
>> or bicycle.
they are suggesting that 3,000 --
>> I知 not leaving out the bicycle.
>> don't leave out the bicyclists.
>> I just the comparison with acl because the choice is between walking and riding and most people will take riding.
so I don't think that that comparison would probably be apt under this circumstance.
u.t.
might be more apt, but I知 concerned that our ridership of buses just generally speaking is less than five percent and the assumption in this -- in that kimley horn report is a more than 10% bus ridership for more than six mile trip, which I think is ambitious, I think is the word that you chose.
>> yes.
I think it is ambitious.
you're exactly right.
it's about 10% of the people.
one thing to keep in mind, though, is they are using every single parking spot on their property.
so anything beyond what they're providing by vehicles has to come in some other way.
>> I wanted to include this then because it gives you the idea of operations of how many buses you need.
and the amount of people arriving by buses is a pretty large number.
and you need quite a few shuttles, a very large number of shuttles to do this.
but yes, it is very ambitious.
>> one thing that I did challenge the applicant to, and that was the opportunity to show us and demonstrate to -- and convince me.
and I asked him about the moving persons in and from -- to and from this particular site and what they could do to improve that because of the mass gathering type situation that we have there.
how are we going to move people?
and of course, I suggested that we -- at that time we look at some buses and other opportunities to move people to and from the site during the time of that event.
and of course, I know they have addressed some of these concerns and I -- I see that the reduction as far as the time that we were looking at before as far as delays have been reduced to what it is today.
and apparently they have taken into heart some of the considerations that I brought forth and charged them to do and bring back to this court.
and of course, it's a big deal in my mind to make sure that the applicant did these particular things, because I really wanted to make sure that the person had other opportunities to get to the site other than just getting in a car and just saying hey, I知 going to the formula one event today and da, da, da.
so I guess from that perspective, sooner or later I would like to hear what the applicant -- I know we have a report and all these other things, but to ensure that -- you mentioned cap metro.
I don't know if cap metro may -- there may be other type settings other than cap metro that maybe even can suggest a higher participation level of transit opportunities.
so I think that may even can be expanded upon a little bit more by the applicant because I definitely want it to.
and as I致e spoken to them on this particular consideration of how we can move persons in and from that site because it can be done.
so sooner or later I guess the applicant will address that because I -- I really have some legitimate concerns about it and hopefully the plan will reveal that as we move forward.
>> and then the other thing is especially on buses, if you don't have that dedicated bus lane, those buses are not going to move.
and they'll be mixed up with the vehicular traffic.
and it really makes people angry to not be able to get there faster on the bus than in their cars.
so that would have to be something that just can't be overlooked, if that's going to work.
and especially to meet our concerns about mobility.
these 84 people who would ride buses, 84,000 who would ride these buses who get on the bus and go out there, where would they park?
somewhere downtown?
>> you're exactly right about the bus lanes and things like that being separated from traffic.
the buses, it would be just under 15,000 people riding the buses and they would be parking -- they've identified a parking spot that they can use right now, a parking lot, about 50 acres on the southwest corner of state highway 71 and 130.
>> so people would drive there and then get shuttled?
>> correct.
about 15,000.
and the rest of them would drive all the way to the site.
>> and then the other -- do you have a cost on the construction or that new southwest parkway?
whatever the name of it is?
>> the elroy road widening?
>> the other one that would connect elroy to --
>> I don't have a cost estimate on that.
>> would that be our responsibility?
>> I don't know.
I知 not going to say one way or the other.
>> we made a recommendation that all the costs of widening the roadways be bourne by the applicant.
first.
>> okay.
and txdot would take care of the five lanes on 812?
>> yes.
they were going to do that anyway before formula one even came on board, resurface it.
so really what they're talking about is restriping the asphalt to enable four lanes and all of those lanes will be used by formula one.
I think it's important to note here that during this weekend anyway, a lot of the existing capacity will be consumed by the event at no cost to the applicant.
they're basically going to fill up the road network.
so our request for that additional -- those additional lanes on elroy is really just what we believe we need to have to ensure a minimum level of emergency services and also to accommodate some of the shuttle service that we believe need to be separated.
we believe that six million dollars is well within their capability to finance.
they will be charging for parking, both on-site and the shuttle service, so part of the costs may be transferred to those who arrive by car and either park or shuttle.
so that they can transfer that cost to the users of the system instead of the general county taxpayers.
>> okay.
obviously the mobility is still a big concern as is mine.
I guess one question needs to be answered, given the article that came out in the paper today about the bridge needing fixing out there and the -- these expansions on the road, and I致e said all along that Travis County hasn't had that money just sitting around waiting for projects to come along to see what it is that we can provide them.
it would col cawl for maybe a bond election and ask all of the taxpayers of Travis County to tax them so we can have this money available to just hand over to them.
and I don't think that we are in any position to do that.
>> I certainly wouldn't --
>> believe me, this is not from the staff's point of view, we would not be using public tax tblars dlars to widen the bridge or widen elroy road.
that would be their obligation to finance as part of their investment.
and that we would require them to do that as a condition for permit when we finally got down to the permit, that that would be a contract phasing agreement and they would agree to do that as a condition for permitting.
>> okay.
and then safety, of course, is a big concern that is still there.
and that's why the flooding -- we'll get to that item later.
but I think it's just an issue of safety just like e.m.s.
is.
not too long ago when margot frazier was still the sheriff in Travis County, we had a deal with the flooding that occurs.
it always occurs in precinct four as well as one from time to time.
but -- and I think we're due for a flood interpret pretty so.
and it's coming.
it's going to come, given our experience.
and -- but her recommendation was that we really be careful about sending out staff in the middle of the night trying to save people from being -- from being carried away in floods.
it puts the residents as well as staff in danger of losing their lives.
so given my experience with these issues, with past projects, I just have to say that I have to be concerned about the safety, the public safety, the mobility and how it contributes to the safety of people in precinct four.
so I think these need to be -- one question I guess that the applicant can also answer for me.
are they ready to come to the table with all of the money that is required for ticketing that bridge and fixing the -- for fixing that bridge and fixing the roads that would handle the mobility and the safety of precinct four residents?
>> was that a question that the applicant can answer?
>> I guess the -- Commissioner Davis has one question he's answering.
I need that one answered.
>> okay.
I just basically wanted to know, judge -- the question I was basically posing was the moving of people.
are there any other additional work planned to move folks as far as mobility is concerned?
of course, I charged -- challenged the applicant to that when they first came here to the court.
I think we did discuss some of the things, but mobility was definitely still a part of what I知 concerned on.
and of course the movement of persons because we're talking about a three-day event with several, several thousand people attending.
the charge I made again is to move persons.
there may be some other things that have may be around that we haven't been exposed to.
the applicant has to answer that, but of course again, I wanted to champion the point of being -- of having the authority, the ability to move persons.
how can we do that?
and I know it can be done.
and so my question to the applicant is what have they done with that particular request that I made of them, and as far as dealing with the mass transit and any other type of transit type situations to move persons in and out of that event without -- without significant delay.
so that is still my concern as we go through this process, among others, but that's my main one right now.
>> mr. Greer started by summarizing the transportation report that the applicant provided, right?
>> that's very true.
>> in that report the applicant is recommending many things.
>> correct.
>> and you responded to some of them.
>> yes.
>> yes, I responded to some of those.
and I think overall we agree with a lot of the assumptions they made.
I think the one disagreement we have is with elroy road, is that it's a two-lane road and they're doing contra flow lanes on that, so sending both lanes in one direction, which doesn't leave any room for -- there's a picture right there of elroy road.
there are no shoulders.
it's a narrow road.
if someone breaks down, runs out of gas, where do they go?
if the shuttles get stuck in that, you will be sitting there for hours as well.
and I guess I also want to mention is when they say 3.25 hours of delay, that's if everything works.
that's if everything is set up properly, the traffic control.
this is going to be in the middle of summer.
air conditioning is running in the cars, overheating.
all sorts of things can go wrong.
and if one thing goes wrong the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.
the 3.25 hours is based on the assumption that everything works.
we believe that one of the issues that we have to have is the bus shuttle service has to be on its own separate lane and we need an emergency service lane as well.
that's the summary, I guess, of our interpretation.
>> david, may I ask, you said that tnr staff agrees with the siewmghtses, but then you used the term house of cards come tumbling down.
I wanted to check because I am concerned about these siewmghtses and the possibility -- these assumptions and the possibility that these these assumptions will hold.
with regard to the 180,000 people expected on Sunday, and that is what the break down is from kimley horn when they go through the numbers.
>> that is correct.
>> what I was alluding to previously is the bus ridership is more than 10% even though in the regular population bus rider ship is less than 10%.
the camping, I understand there is a considerable amount of camping in other events of this type.
I知 not quibbling with that.
but the 3,000 arriving by bicycle when there is no -- I知 a biker and I actually have a couple of friends who are tough enough to ride out east 71 to go to mckinney falls state park and whatnot, but that's like maybe two people in the entire city of Austin that would be willing -- well, a lot more than two, but very few would be willing to do that.
I don't think that 3,000 people would be willing to ride bicycles out there.
am I -- am I --
>> and my initial reaction was the same as well.
and then -- I think they took some of Ron Davis' ideas, Commissioner Davis' ideas about getting different mods in.
they're trying to accommodate that.
I would love it if 3,000 bicyclists would be doing that.
but that's more than 2.5% of the thousands there.
and the number of bicycle commuters in the nation is .4%.
>> right.
>> and I know.
you're exactly right.
>> then there's the 500 arriving by helicopter.
which I don't know.
maybe this is the kind of event that attracts folks that will take an air taxi to the event.
that also -- I can't quibble with that because I just don't know.
but I think this 3.25 hour delay like you say is based on some assumptions that if everything holds yes, it will be 3.25, but based on the assumptions I don't think that there's a high probability that everything will hold.
>> and I think the first year it's probably going to be a mess.
I really do.
when I went to the Texas motor speedway in fort worth, there's guys there that have been working that contra flow setup they have up there for 10 years.
and it took them several years to perfect it.
so it's almost an art form.
and it's -- there's ways of handling those issues as they come along, but you have to have people that are experienced with handling those.
and so I don't think it's going to be perfect the first time, first two or three times.
I think it will get better over time as people get more familiar and we work out the kinks.
>> I think also when you look at the kimley horn report they do talk about other improvements that may be needed.
there's a little hedging the bet there that perhaps for the first race rather than go in and make substantial investments, I think the investors are probably looking at let's wait and see.
let's have the first event, see how it goes before we step into additional investments and capacity.
and that's kind of the way we look at it as well.
okay, we'll let you try it and your assumptions are right on the edge of they're reasonable, but there's a high probability that at least in the first event it's not going to happen like you say it's going to happen.
but you know, part of it is they have a good bit of management going on in the traffic analysis.
they also have control.
they have control of the parking.
they have control of their subtle service.
they have control of pricing.
so they can create some incentives that in fact provide more incentive to shuttle instead of drive your car to the event.
on the flip side the event makes their money by on-site parking.
so that is part of what drives the on-site is that's where the money is to be made.
the model, the business model you understand is in part attracting people to the site.
>> and the report also points out that there is a likelihood that outside vendors of parking will spring up around this event, which will also drive down the demand for shuttle -- shuttle usage.
so that's something that -- that's a variable that the developer can't control, and there is no zoning authority in the extra territorial jurisdiction to prevent that from occurring.
but I am intrigued to hear from -- there seems to be a deaf ening silence.
y'all are in the odd position of stating the case for the developers and I do see some representatives out there.
it would be nice to hear from them.
>> I have a question for staff, though, first, if I may.
>> sure.
I知 just remarking that it was odd to get the -- to get the developer's perspective from staff.
>> the question -- there have been several questions asked.
I really don't know how to -- Commissioner Gomez has questions.
I know I had a lead question that talked about mobility.
Commissioner Eckhardt has brought up several questions.
I guess I would like to hear from you, especially on the commitment that I have really hammered, hammered and hammered and hammered on, that's moving folks in from the site.
I know there have been several things that have been mentioned here today as far as the transportation analysis, the transportation type of thing that are going to be embraced as we go through this process.
is there anything in addition to what has been discussed here today to -- that you may want to bring up or?
have there been any commitment for mass transit opportunities, parking?
just the whole nine yards in addition to what we're discussing soday because again I want to hammer this home to make sure that the plan in my head that I envision was to move persons in and out of there and reducing delays as much as possible.
can you maybe expand a little bit more on that?
>> sure.
judge, members of the court, my name is richard suttle on behalf of the formula one project here today.
I also have a representative of kimley horn here who can talk -- if we want to get technical on the traffic study.
but let me make a quick opening remark.
first of all, since the last time we've been here a lot has happened and we've had a lot of good meetings with the county staff and a lot of collaboration.
there's a lot more progress than the last time we are here.
and I want to tell you that we have enjoyed those conversations and look forward to continuing those because this is going to be a work in process.
the most exciting thing to me about talking about traffic is that everybody is talking about a lot of people coming to our community and that this event it going to be a wild success.
that's what we're counting on.
I think that's what the county staff is counting on.
what that translates into for our county and our city and our state is a lot of jobs, a lot of economic impact, a lot of taxes, a lot of property taxes for the various entities, school districts, a lot of sales taxes.
just a lot of positive economic impact.
the way we look at it is we're planning, trying to plan for moving a lot of people and that translates into a very successful event.
that means that we're all pulling in the same direction for a successful event.
it gives us great heart to know that we're all pulling in that same direction.
along the lines of the traffic, I知 going to embarrass Commissioner Davis a little bit probably because the last time we met and Commissioner Davis and I met and when he uses the word hammer he's not kidding.
he hammered me with we've got to move people and I want to you look at the shuttles, I want you to look at the buses, I want you to look at cap metro, I want you to look at how to get people out of here.
and I named it the Commissioner Davis plan as we had our internal discussions because what you see in the kimley horn plan is a heavy use of shuttles that we think we can manage through operating because if a person buys a ticket and we can assure them that they can buy a ticket and then park in a reasonable manner off site and have a comfortable ride on a shuttle to the facility, we think the first year we're training people, but year after year, people just like at acl will become accustomed to an alternate way of get to go an event.
something we haven't done here.
and Commissioner Davis plan, as I named is, involves a heavy use of those shuttles and we're in the process of getting a meeting with capital metro to to see what we can do to facilitate that.
the more trips we can get off site and bring them in, the better we all are.
in addressing the safety and mobility that that Commissioner Gomez raised, that's a high priority because we've been in meetings with peement that live out there around the site.
it's going to be a high priority to make sure two things.
one, that safety vehicles can get in and out of there during the event.
remember, we're talking three days out of the year.
can get in and out of there and adequately serve the area, but also the person living over there has got to be able to get out and get a loaf of bread and get back to their house.
we can't totally disrupt their life now.
it's going to be challenging and there's going to be a lot of traffic, but the safety and mobility in my mind is very important and will be addressed through the traffic management plan.
in addition to the shuttle, and Commissioner Davis' ideas on all of those that you see in the back of the report, the recommendation for a taskforce is there.
and that to me is the critical point of this because that means we continue these discussions with the county staff, with you, with our staff, and we continue to churn these ideas and fine tune this so that in the next 18 months we can come up with a traffic management plan that will include all of these things that are important to you and to the citizens of Travis County and that taskforce I think can not only fine tune it for the first event, but for events after it.
because as david said, we're going to have glitches.
I wish I could say don't worry about it, it won't be a problem.
we'll have glitches, unhappened glitches and we'll be constantly tweaking them.
but again, if we're tweaking them that means eat vent is very successful.
that means that it's successful for our county and region and for our state and that's what we're hoping for.
>> mr. Suttle, I guess my question is are y'all ready to come to the table with the money it will take to especially prove elroy, to improve that bridge and the other items about the dedicated lane?
because those are all issues of safety.
if that bridge -- if we have a flood and that bridge just falls apart, I don't think it can be patched.
I think it needs to be replaced.
and are y'all ready to come to the table with the money?
>> the recommendation in the report says we are -- we are coming to table with the money.
we're coming to the table with a lot of money to bring the facility to your precinct and Travis County.
>>
>> what we would like to do is continue to meet with the staff to make sure we have thought through the best way and the best infrastructure improvements and the timing of those as we go along.
question to that is yes, we have the money to go to the table.
do I have the money to go to the table today?
the answer to that is no, but I think that is a discussion point that we're willing to discuss because remember, formula one guys are making a huge investment in this in hoping it's going to be successful.
the last thing that they want is a complete break down in the traffic because then they've got a stranded investment that doesn't work and now of all the folks that have all the money out, they would be the ones with the most to lose.
so rest assured they were ready to come to the table.
they are bringing the checkbook for this facility and the related things and we look forward to identifying exactly what ought to be done and if it includes the widening of elroy and the widening of the bridge, then we look forward to those discussions.
there may be a way that we could create a district where this facility actually helps pay for itself and pay for added infrastructure in a bigger area.
and that is something else that I would like to open discussions with at some point with your staff or with you because there may be a way that we can actually have this become an economic generator that generates money for things beyond elroy and the bridge.
>> so are you speaking of a public improvement district that would reimburse the county's essentially fronting the costs of these improvements necessary to make your endeavor work?
>> I think it could be a public improvement district, I think it could be a sports authority.
I think there are other financing districts that -- I don't presume to know what you guys would think is the best idea and that's why in the report it suggests a taskforce.
I would suggest an agenda item in that taskforce discussion of what would be appropriate and what would you think is appropriate for the county.
>> and is your client's position at this point that you all would be willing to look at a -- a special assessment creature or special taxing unit to reimburse the full costs of the improvements of elroy road and the replacement of the bridge?
>> I think my client would be willing to look at all of the above, yes.
>> and one thing I知 curious about with regard to -- this is just -- this is my ignorance.
I知 mostly learning about the particulars of this deal actually from the newspapers unfortunately.
with regard to the Texas major events trust fund, that's $25 million a year from the state to the developers to cover essentially the franchise costs, correct?
>> essentially, yes.
it's the sanction fees for bringing this worldwide event to the state of Texas.
>> and perhaps this is a question for legal, although not an executive session item, this is just fact.
as long as this location is outside the incorporated city limits of the city of Austin, none of the local jurisdictions would receive sales tax?
>> maybe an emergency service district out there or some other district that collects some sort of tax.
certainly city sales tax is not collected outside the city limits.
so as long as this facility is outside any city limits, then the people that buy retail and, you know, services at that facility are going to pay only the state's sales tax and not the higher sales tax that you pay inside the city limits.
>> unless the county takes additional actions.
>> right.
>> we can take actions that would enable us to access sales tax.
>> the legislature would have to take action to authorize you to collect the sales tax.
>> we think there's an alternative method that would allow the county to take action that needed to be approved by voters with specific voting approval projects.
more about that later.
pbo has been looking at that and that's the briefing I got as late as yesterday.
but we need to -- my only point is there are steps that the county can take to access sales tax revenue.
we have not done it to date.
>> but currently the status quo anti, the spinoff investment and economic impact at this point without the creation of any special district is down to the state and possibly without esd is out there.
>> well, if you limit that to sales tax, but there's a huge property tax increase.
>> that's true.
there is an increase in the value of the property.
>> and the added jobs and the added -- just the economic impact of having a worldwide event in our region.
>> there's also the sales tax revenue that's generated inside constituent by hotels -- inside the city by hotels and transactions that take place inside the corporate limits.
the hotel occupancy, the restaurants, the car rentals at the airport, all of that because of this event.
there are some sales tax being generated, but not necessarily at the county level.
>> right.
>> okay.
now, remind the court that there is an action that we need to take and deliver some papers to a certain location downtown at 4:00.
>> yes.
>> we also have judges here on another item involving odyssey versus facts computers.
8 is a transportation study that we've had a chance to review and we've responded to.
what action, if any, is requested by the court in 9-a?
>> no action at this time.
>> then may I suggest that we move to 9-b and have 9-a with additional more specific language on our agenda at some point?
some point in the future, preferably early 2011, so in January?
mr. Gieselman, one brief -- on 9-a.
>> I believe she had a question that she was going to address to staff and I don't think she had opportunity to address it.
>> I think you answered it.
I was going to ask for more detail and you can give it later.
that's the phasing agreement that would be required prior to final site plan.
and would it incorporate most of what is in here in your recommendations and would that be phased and responsibilities operational responsibility and financial responsibility be components of that.
>> yes.
that would be imbedded in the phasing agreement that comes prior to the agreement.
>> and in general we talk about the first event.
the special event management plan and detailed traffic controls, will the phasing agreement talk to who the responsibilities on those future events as well as the first one?
>> yes.
>> okay.
>> so there are seven or eight items that we need probably a legal briefing on and another more specific agenda item, and if we entered in pursuant to whatever potential revenue generation abilities we have, that would require research by some county folks and us having a full discussion soon.
b is more specific, though.
it asks for --
>> it's basically a variance to our chapter 64 relating to the floodplain.
and I値l have stacy brief you on that request.
>> that is a very iffy issue for me and I think that my job is to make sure that we treated everybody the same and not play favorites.
that is extremely important.
we've had to invite fema into this community over flooding issues in precinct 4.
we've gone through buying people out because they have flooding.
and so I知 not in favor of this.
I would move that we deny this variance and we get that comber before moving forward.
>> is there way to get a formal reading from fema regarding the quoamer.
>> they are not required to participate in the national food insurance program.
there is an area where Travis County is stricter.
we have reviewed the application.
we concur that altering this floodplain will not increase flood heights or velocities at any point in the community.
the applicant is also posted $925,273 in fiscal.
this fiscal would be for the removal of any material they put in the floodplain and restoration of the floodplain should they not be able to obtain the clommer.
so we feel like all the risk here is being taken by the applicant.
>> but money doesn't necessarily guarantee the taking care of risks.
and the fact that we're totally overdue for a flood.
we can't predict what's going to happen there.
so that's why we have the whole issue of cloamers to make sure that we take care of risks that come out.
and I don't blame staff and I think that you're presenting the information the way we have always used it on other developments, other projects.
and we're not necessarily coming down harder on you than anybody else.
I think consistency is extremely important in this case and staff is very professional.
they bring up the facts as we have approved them in terms of policies and participations that we have with federal agencies.
and so that is my -- the whole reason why I think that we need to be very, very careful if we are to provide flood insurance for other folks in this county.
>> have we granted a variance like this before?
for work to proceed before the final approval?
>> this requirement really came into play with our floodplain regulations.
we were trying to have consistency with the floodplain regulations where we require submittal of a cloamer for a preliminary plan and prior to construction we want the cloamer in place.
>> what happens if they don't get this by the time the race is supposed to take place?
>> from what I understand on the construction sequencing it would be nearly impossible for them to start work.
to put their erosion controls up they need the access to the floodplain.
this wouldn't be good for the project to get it done by 2012.
>> let me ask this question.
almost a million dollars that's been set aside, pending the way of what I think the clommer is going to reveal and that's basically going to come from fema according to what we're seeing here is about a six-week time frame.
can you explain to the public what this fiscal -- what this actually would be used for?
what would that be used for?
>> the fiscal would actually be used for physically removing materials placed in the floodplain.
>> could you repeat that, please?
>> would be for physically removing materials placed in the floodplain as well as revegetation of that floodplain.
in addition it would cover some engineering and surveying costs to make sure the floodplain was restored back to its original condition.
>> okay.
>> and we feel that this -- that this fiscal 921,000 is adequate for returning the property to status quo eant if the clommer were not approve.
>> the applicant actually got a bid from a contract for approximately 4 fist thousand and some -- 450,000 and some change to remove the material.
we feel the extra money would be used for the engineering and surveying required.
>> I think in the spirit of cooperation and since we are looking for -- we do have a stated goal of having developers bear the financial responsibility and risk of their actions, I think that b is an example of that.
and in the spirit of cooperation I would offer a substitute motion of approving the --
>> I second that.
I second that motion, Commissioner, with the intent of following it very, very closely.
and of course making sure that fema is involved with this particular process as much as possible, which they will be under the terms of the clommer type setting.
that we move forward with this and allow this particular variance to take place.
ef.
the commitment to make sure that it's goes accordingly.
so with that I would like to second this motion that Commissioner Eckhardt just made.
>> let's remember that is it really possible to ever return land to its original state.
once it's been damaged, I don't think it's possible to do that.
then we have to settle for what we can get.
and no amount of money will ever restore anything back to its original state.
>> and then I just wish we had kept some video of the flooding events that we've had.
they're not pretty.
they are dangerous and I just -- I think they'll achieve whatever they need to achieve by going -- waiting for this letter from fema.
and it's just part of the planning process.
these are some of the questions that should have been researched at the very beginning, what was going to be required for this project.
and not let us find out what was required as we went along, hoping to get approved in a piecemeal manner.
and not with that phasing agreement that Travis County requires so that all of these questions can be covered.
>> and Commissioner, I share your concerns.
I mean deeply, I really do.
and I guess to staff let's -- I guess can we basically answer at this time some of the concerns that Commissioner Gomez had?
because she is making some concerns especially with flooding.
and flooding does take its toll in this community east of i-35.
there's a lot of flooding.
and of course, we address those accordingly.
I want to rest assure that staff staff and the applicant will really look at this and make sure that Commissioner Gomez's concerns are addressed and we minimize in every attempt imaginable that we can end up doing to minimize the flooding events that have taken place in this -- in not only this area, but we talk about this area today, but in this particular area how can we maybe address that to make sure that it's minimized to address our concerns.
>> I stepped off the dais attend to an emergency.
did that die for lack of a second?
and did I hear from Commissioner to approve the request, seconded by Commissioner Davis?
>> judge, can I get some clarification from tnr on a technical point.
what's the trigger for the county being able to draw on the fiscal?
is it going to be cash fiscal?
what form does the fiscal take?
>> cash bond or letter of credit.
>> because we'll need a trigger, we'll need a deadline that basically says we don't have the clomr, now the floodplain is either to be restored or we draw on the fiscal.
what would that deadline be?
>> I would certainly say six months.
>> that's typically what we're expecting.
rather than have them get well into the process of filling in the floodplain, you don't have it within six months, you should probably cease and save yourself some money.
I think -- let me put it in context here.
the floodplain of dry creek has been studied.
it's not like we're talking about the entire 100 year floodplain.
we're talking about fingers of the floodplain that go up into the property.
in some cases they're minor fingers.
and so the -- the whole context of things, we're really only talking about the contribution of those fingers to the level of flooding and the dry creek -- the floodplain of dry creek.
that's why it's not quite the stretch that you may think.
it's not like we're totally redefining the floodplain, it's only those fingers and to the extent those fingers have any extent whatsoever on the floodplain, that's what the cloam clomr is really addressing.
so I don't think we would be recommending this if the floodplain had not been studied at all or that if we were talking about the entire floodway.
so that's part of our assessment of risk is that they will likely get approval from fema for their clomr as has been submitted.
and with the data that they have already generated on the effect of those fingers on the floodplain.
so it's not like it's totally unknown, and really the letter of credit or the bond that's put up is just added measure for us to secure the county in the event that this does not happen at all.
six months should be enough time to process a clomr through fema.
>> and let me suggest that the way we're proposing this is that we're posting the fiscal in order to get the permit.
bhow if we say do we reach an agreeable trigger with the law department.
I don't want to say six months --
>> it would be tnr, not the law department.
>> [ laughter ]
>> I don't want to say six months and six months five days later we get our clomr, but if we said we'll post the fiscal, we'll reach an agreement on the trigger with you guys and that might be final denial of the clomr or administrative denial of the clomr, something like that.
>> but joe, I think he laid it out kind of plain.
not plain, not plain toward you, but just laid it out whereby what they actually are going to end up looking at probably are the fingers in the floodplain.
study.
>> that's exactly.
what actually happened on this, just so you will know, the floodplain was studied and there were lines on the map that cut these fingers off basically.
and there's a read that that meant that the new study showed that those fingers were no longer in the floodplain.
upon further examination of the map it meant that that's where the study actually stopped because they cut the little bitty fingers off.
so we were put in the position of those little fingers are still there, so we need a clomr and we're late in the game and we're going apply for it.
and the purpose of the fiscal is to let us have our permit so we can start grading and get the clomr in place.
if we don't get the clomr is when the trigger would be to come and rehab.
so I think you hold all the cards because you're not going to hand us our permit until we reach an agreeable trigger mechanism and so if we could leave it at that, I think we'll work that out and we'll probably use a form that you're comfortable with.
>> let's not forget that dry creek is a misnomer.
>> oh, I know.
>> just because it's named dry creek does not mean that it does not flood.
>> yes, ma'am.
and we've stayed completely away from it.
>> and it goes outside its banks.
>> yes, ma'am.
>> and so -- there are still problems there.
>> Commissioner Huber?
>> just on another angle.
if we haven't given a variance back to -- have not given a variance along these lines because it's only been a new set of conditions since 2008, what kind of precedent might we be setting for future projects along these lines?
>> I think the issue here is more timing than present.
I think they will get a conditional letter of map provision.
it's just when do we issue the development permit, before fema issues the clomr or afterwards?
I think that's the only precedent here.
again, these are fingers of floodplain.
these are not mainstream dry creek.
they're not in there doing construction.
>> how did we handle it with wandering creek, the residential development that was previously platted for this piece of property that was also going to have to pursue a clomr?
>> wandering creek at that time we came before court was a preliminary plan.
all they had to do under our subdivision regulations was submit for the clomr. They subsequently did receive a clomr. Unfortunately it's for different types of work.
so the f1 developers needed to go back in and apply for a clomr for their specific activities.
>> if I may say one thing very briefly, the permit that we're looking at right now is a site grading permit.
there will -- there will be a subsequent permit for the -- well, a traditional site plan for the vertical structures that they would look to put on the site.
I would imagine certainly that this clomr would be issued prior to any other site plan permitting.
>> Commissioner Davis, you have --
>> basically, judge, I just had one final question.
has fema under clomr settings, has fema ever responded quicker than a six-month time frame?
and as far as our experience is concerned?
>> yes.
>> they have?
go ahead, I知 sorry.
I didn't mean to cut you off.
>> it usually takes a couple of rounds of comments with fema.
specifically what a clomr is is fema's comments on a project.
it is not necessarily an approval from fema that it's a good project or they recommend it.
they're specifically giving comments for the county or a community to use in making a permit decision.
>> the risk still lies with the county in this particular case.
>> any more discussion on the motion?
>> I have a slight amendment to the motion.
I think that we do need a hard date from this motion, but if it appears that a clomr is not forthcoming within that hard date, but probably is coming, it's just going to be a little late, then it just comes back to the Commissioners' court for a decision, so I would insert into the motion a six-month time frame.
because that does appear to be the reasonable time frame for these sorts of things.
>> is that agreeable -- acceptable, Commissioner Davis?
>> yes, it is.
>> any more discussion of the new motion?
all in favor?
show Commissioners Davis, Eckhardt, Huber and yours truly voting in favor.
Commissioner Gomez voting no.
that carries by a vote of 4-1.
thank you very much.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Tuesday, December 14, 2010 2:33 PM
