1. Phoenix International Raceway (PIR) Presented By: Nicolaas Swart Traffic Engineering & ITS Program Manager Maricopa County DOT April 26, 2006 Presented By: Nicolaas Swart Traffic Engineering & ITS Program Manager Maricopa County DOT April 26, 2006 Traffic Management

2.  Background  Traffic Management  Benefits & Successes  Lessons Learned Overview

3.  4 th largest & one of the fastest-growing counties in the nation  More than 3 million people  24 cities and towns Maricopa County

4.  Southwest of Phoenix metropolitan area  400-acre, multi-purpose facility  Attendance 200,000 over 3-day event; 100,000 on the day of main event  On-site parking for 28,000 vehicles, 4,000 overflow  4,000 off-site parking park-n-ride Phoenix International Raceway

5.  Size and duration of events  Reduce Travel Time to and from event  Incident Management during event ingress and egress  Reliability of traffic information to motorists (parking, access, etc.)  Roadway capacity Challenges

6.  Access (freeway and arterial) - few alternate inbound/outbound routes 2 Hours Prior to Event

7.  Improve freeway and arterial access to PIR  Improve parking guidance and circulation  Centralize traffic management functions  Coordinate incident management  Improve traveler information  Minimize impacts on nearby neighborhoods Goals

8.  Program Planning  Event Operations Planning  Implementation Activities  Day-of-Event Activities  Post Event Activities Comprehensive PIR Event Management Plan

9.  Regional Level (PIR, ADOT, DPS, Cities, Sheriff, ALERT, REACT, PIO, ITC)  Local Level (jurisdictions of signalized intersections)  Agreements  Permits Program Planning

10.  Performance goals & objectives (Attendee, non- attendee, transit)  Measures of effectiveness for assessing performance objectives (parking, intersections, freeways, streets)  Design Parameters (traffic lanes, ramp capacity, emergency vehicle lanes, lane capacity) Event Operations Planning

11.  Traffic Management Plan ―Site Access & Parking Plan ―Traffic Flow Plan ―Traffic Control Plan ―Traveler Information Plan ―Local Resident Information Plan ―Traffic Surveillance Plan ―Incident Management & Safety Plan ―Staffing Assignment Plan, Contact List ―Contingency Plan Event Operations Planning

15.  Equipment  Personnel Assignment  Testing & Verification Implementation Activities

16.  Monitoring  Unified Command  Communications & Coordination  Manage change – Adjustments (though the overall planned goal remains paramount)  Media interaction  Traveler Information Dissemination Day-of-Event Activities

17.  Evaluation (planned framework, measure of effectiveness)  Analyze surveys  Stakeholder debriefing  Post event plan amendments  Recommend potential applications for future events Post Event Activities

18. Key Features  AZTech Institutional Framework  Capacity Enhancements  Application of ITS (cameras, DMS – fixed/portable, TMC)  Rental Car Center Displays  Marketing (511 on information brochures) TM

20. Key Features – Unified Command Organization

21. PARKING LOT STAFF PARKING COMMAND (PIR Contractor) OFFICERS IN FIELD TRAFFIC COMMAND (MCSO) COMMUNICATION CENTER 511 Phone*/ Fax/ E-Mail** Nextel Clear Channel Phone* OTHER RADIO Fax/E-Mail ** TV Fax/E-Mail ** NEWSPAPER Fax/E-Mail ** MCDOT/PIR COMMUNICATION PLAN Information Flow April 5, 2006 * Phone = Hard line & Cell ** Fax/E-Mail = electronic, simultaneous, immediate Key Features – Communications Plan

22.  Travel Time Savings (outbound: 5.5 hours in 1998 to 2.5 hours in 2005)  First such application on 511  Collaborative efforts marketing efforts (logo in exchange for services)  99% parked 1 hour before race began  Rental Car Center Displays  Marketing (511 on information brochures)

23.  Highway Advisory Radio may not work (frequency conflicts)  ITS elements are good tools but cannot replace experienced judgment  Dedicated Project Manager  Involve public safety/emergency personnel early on  Begin PR and media campaign early  Conduct regularly scheduled meetings and debriefings with all public and private partners  Collect data for evaluation ― Video and traffic volumes  Plan a post-event meeting with all partners to review what worked, what didn’t, and what to improve

24. Phoenix International Raceway (PIR) Traffic Management