I'm not sarcastic. I do like F1TopFan's comments as I like your responses. I have no clue in hell what you guys are talking about (well I get the idea, but couldn't tell who is right or wrong) and find this a fascinating discussion. On a way more intricate level than most discussions on here. Most "arguments" on FChat are just folks spewing their opinion. So I'm really thrilled to see a debate based on facts. As it should be. Keep at it. Seriously. <grabbing my popcorn>
In summary: F1TopFan made the claim that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FERC had yet to release the permits for pipeline rerouting on the facility. I assumed that since the local building permits had been released, they had gotten any regulatory approval needed. And deffered to my mom, who works in a place that handles things like that on a regular basis. She said it'd fall under the Texas Railroad Commission and not the FERC. I went to the TRC's website, and found all of the open construction projects for pipelines in Texas that have filed in the past year (Form PS-48s). The only two that were open in Travis county were a 3inch pipe, and a 20inch pipe. That correlated with the information of the local building permits. Found a handy applette on their website that allows you to explore all of the pipeline data for the state. The two pipeline operating permits (T-4s) that had open construction permits (PS-48s) infact ran through the construction site. (that was the two pictures i posted with the differing red lines delineating the respective pipes) This however didn't dissway F1TopFan, he still said the Longhorn Pipeline isn't permitted to move.. I now ask a simple question - Who said they're gonna move it?? I can't find any reference to it in the building permits. A logical conclusion seems to be that they aren't going to
It's actually more of a quip on my interactions with others. intellectually smart; socially stupid. Facts are fun though; part of what makes Formula 1 so appealing to me.
Originally said they weren't going to move them. Suttle (FTPs lawyer) explained at one of the variance hearings that the track as planned would sit on top of the lines. They have to move them because they agreed with Travis County to follow Austin's pipeline ordinance. The ordinance says no public gathering within 150 ft of a gas line. The 3 inch line is non-volitole liquids and not a big deal. The 20' gas main is old as dirt and needs replacing. Suttle reasoned that it will be less expensive to replace them at start up than have to go back and tear up the track in 5 years to get to them. If they didn't replace them I wouldn't go near that place. They are doing the neighbors a service by replacing them. All the schematics are in the Austin permit folder on the pipelines. They're hard to read becuase they are broken into sections of phased work.
Thanks Ernie. So are they moving two pipes or three? The records I pulled from Texas Railroad Commission's site had very close to the same linear footage as to the amount specified in the County's permit folder. But they only require the filings for construction over 1 mile. You make it to a lot of the permitting hearings? Been looking, and can't find any info related to the public road improvements as to who is going to pay it, and when they're going to allow them to start building permanent structures.
With 25 years of oil and gas operations experience in Texas (and elsewhere, including offshore GoM), including ownership of an exploration and production company, I have to say that your statement is not factually correct.
No word yet, you can register to receive email updates. Don't worry about spam, they've only sent me 1 email in 3 or so months http://www.formula1unitedstates.com/contact.html
I thought from reading the posts here that there was some degree of inciteful discussion intended. I have a very specific reason for not disclosing personal information. Some posts here bespeak a distinct lack of memory or perhaps an unwillingness to have to admit things as they are. And lest I be misunderstood or my comments misconstrued, I have never met Mr. Suttle, I am not a disgruntled "competitor" who missed out on a bid. I am merely someone with accurate information that I thought others might find interesting Ernie's observations about what Suttle has said are interesting but incomplete. If you go back toward Day #1, when first asked about the pipelines, Suttle made the amazingly absurd statement that they (Hellmund and crew) had a title report that showed there were "easements" on the property but that they didn't know that there actually were "high pressure" pipelines installed in the easements. (see AustinPost report 8/17/201) DUH! What developer doesn't check such things BEFORE buying the dirt? What lawyer allows his client to buy the dirt without knowing such things as what's there? Then as Ernie says, Suttle says they won't have to be moved then they will have to be moved. One would think that someone would ask whether these people have any idea what they're doing. If you go back to Day #1 Suttle said they had no economic impact statement, no environmental impact statement, no permits, no traffic plan, no road improvement plan, no existing utilities. Yet these guys signed a deal with Bernie to be open in 2012. I suggest that so far as anyone could have known then, a US race would be tied to Canada and, therefore, be staged in June. The FIA regs clearly require a final inspection 90 days out which takes things to March. At that time the extensions given to Korea hadn't yet happened. It would be foolhardy to think in May of 2010 that a new track would be OK not meeting FIA regs. So what fool signs a deal that requires him to do in 22 months everything that we know has to be done and no one has done anywhere in the world in that amount of time? References like those made here to China, Malaysia and other places are naive. Those were built by national governments that had no money to raise and no permitting to go through. Do you really think it's a fair and reasonable comparison to say that Hellmund and crew could do in 22 months what the Chinese government could do? If you recall the announcement about Sochi (done with much more fanfare than the phone call Suttle says Bernie made which I construe as resignation on Bernie's part that he had to do something, anything, in the US and didn't really believe in Hellmund's deal), the Russians said there was no way they could build a new track in less than 24 months. And they don't need money or approvals - they just do what they want. Sochi is the site of the 2014 Olympics and all new infrastructure was already well under way. Yet the Russians wouldn't commit to the insane schedule Suttle allowed his clients to commit to. If you go back to Day #1 you may recall that Hellmund kept telling the world he had all the money and neither needed nor wanted investors. It seems that that little fabrication has also gone by the wayside. I've asked thesimpleone (whose posts I interpret as those of a cheerleader in the COTA camp) to show me the money. Still hasn't happened. As for the final pipeline issue, I note that Axecent has weighed in to say my info is wrong. If you read my posts all I've said is that federal permits are required and I haven't seen any issued. I have no idea what thesimpleone is referring to when asking me to show some paperwork. How does one show what one hasn't seen? It's not my obligation to show anything. I've said permits are required. If one disagrees than one should provide some guidance on the issue. I'm happy to admit if I'm wrong. So far no one has shown me that I am. A few years back the City of Austin litigated issues regarding the Longhorn Pipeline and LOST based on the fact that the pipeline was not subject to state or city laws or regulations. It was a federal issue than and remains so. The COTA plans I've seen (which may have been changed with the way this fiasco is going) show an access road from the north running right over the pipeline. My information is that roads can't be built over pipelines without the approval of the pipeline owners and receipt of permits. Even then they require special engineering to spread the inevitable forces of traffic so as to not disturb the piepline. Tell me Axecent. Am I wrong? Can anyone build anything over a pipeline regardless of what the pipeline owner says? Is or is not special engineering required? Is or is not the cost significantly higher than building a road that doesn't cross a piepline? You claim exprience in these matters. Show me! Tell me simpleone. Have the pans changed? Are 140,000 fans (roughly 56,000 cars) going to be brought to this mess on a single 2-lane road? We've seen plenty of pipeline explosions around the country to know what can happen if things aren't done right. I for one would not want to be sitting above a natural gas pipeline moved or rebuilt by a crew that displays more of the "Gang that couldn't shoot straight" than they do of being competant developers. My apologies to all for the length of this post but it seemed necessary to the occassion. I see no further reason to continue posts with additional and, I assure you, accurate information. I shall return to my troll cave and merely observe.
Very well. But with your informative posts, I hope you change your mind and stick around. Good information.
Not much to add to the discourse, I just thought this video was an interesting view of what is said to be 1 month of construction: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ7WRt6-h0w&feature=player_embedded[/ame]
Fair enough, and I can respect that. Disclosure of where your interest in this project comes from though, could be helpful in understanding your motives for posting here. i.e. John Doe, concerned citizen......or something to the like. They've publicly said they're building to June. Interesting indeed. I think everyone here would love to see proof positive that it is fully funded. Without proof otherwise, I take someone at their word. As far as what we have seen (excavation) Tavo & co. put up a performance bond with the city of almost $900k to get started because they were going to need to get permits from FEMA for flood plain changes. I would hazard a guess, that if they're willing to do this without even guarantees of approval they have the $$$ in place.......(they might as well just dig a hole and burry a lot of money in it) The case you reference is about re-purposing an existing pipeline for transmitting a different product (interstate). What you are talking about here, is a minor change (instate) of an existant pipe. No need to go to FERC, RRC has domain over that. Funny you bring that case up.......Guess who was Mayor of Austin at that time.....yes, Kirk Watson. The same guy who is now a State Senator, and has been showing support for the project. Me thinks he's brought it up with Tavo We actually welcome your posts here. You try and bring information to back up your claims, rather than just announcing that they don't have money and aren't going to make it. I hope you don't take my remarks personally.
They are moving 2: the 3 inch NVL line and the 20 inch natural gas line Never made it to a hearing, but they are all on video on line. Guess you call that "virtual". The latest action on the road improvements was on April 26. Found it online. The county commissioners went into a private (executive) meeting with the county attorney. 32. RECEIVE BRIEFING FROM COUNTY ATTORNEY AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING LEGAL ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE IMPACT ON COUNTY INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE CIRCUIT OF THE AMERICAS FORMULA ONE U.S. GRAND PRIX SITE IN PRECINCT FOUR The short answer is they are going to study it some more. COTA doesn't want to pay for the road. The county has proposed a special taxing district. What they would do is capture the rises in property values around the area into a fund to pay for the road. Thing is it's not just a road. The county wants a bridge built to allow the water from the creek to flow off the property to reduce the flood plain within COTA. My take is that getting all this done by March for a June race is not likely. I think they are going to have in September. I read somewhere that's what Tavo prefers.
Thanks. That matches with the building permits I've seen, and the regulatory filings with the RRC (texas Rail Road commission). Just making sure. F1TopFan made mention of 3 pipes getting moved. Their own schedule puts them finishing up in June/July. The march mentioned by most online is just misinformation. Now the $400MM question. When are they going to be able to start putting up buildings? Thanks, you have been most helpful
Could you expand on that? Why is the race not before October? When I refer to March I include the FIA inspection period. 90 days before June. COTA trying to get the inspection waived is just going to be more bad press. As for the buildings, they haven't requested the permits for buildings yet. There are no folders for buildings @ city of Austin. Has anyone seen this? They should get this guy on a stage in Austin for a promo! http://www.youtube.com/embed/JN1MPBt0iJI Formula 1 on a guitar!
check pages 91 - 106 of this http://www.ushca-austin.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/austin_commercial_bp14.pdf they're planning construction up until July Very cool video indeed.
That is riding on the razor's edge. Looks like they've used up the weather contingency on the stalled permits. They still have two potential wet seasons to go through - fall and then spring of 2012.
The article referenced mentions that the race will be combined with Brazil and not Canada. That moves it into October if not November
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/politics/senate-keeps-25m-for-f1-austin woo hoo. said it was political grandstanding from the start. The state is gonna keep the tax incentives intact And Kirk Watson voted against it. wonder if he has to return his COTA jacket now
