Austin Transit Partnership Needs Your Input as Project Connect Enters Its Trade-Offs Era
Turn this train around
By Benton Graham, Fri., April 7, 2023
Greg Cannally wouldn't characterize the revelation of five scaled-back light rail options as under-promising to over-deliver. He would call it "realistically promising."
But it's a stark change in approach for the Austin Transit Partnership, which Cannally has headed since May 2022. In the years since voters approved Project Connect, ATP revealed exciting ideas to Austinites, such as a multistory system belowground connecting much of Downtown (complete with snazzy renderings) and a tunnel under Lady Bird Lake, as well as the maybe less tantalizing but highly important vision for two new MetroRapid lines by the end of 2023. A little over two years in, that big dream of six underground stations and tunneling below the river are completely out of the budget. And while it's not a budget problem, the MetroRapid lines are now slated for 2025 because of a miscalculation on electric bus charging.
So it's not surprising that the five new design ideas ATP presented on March 21 were disappointing (sometimes to the point of fury) for Austinites who feel that a project aiming to "connect" the city fails at that mission if it might not reach past UT at the top, or hit South Congress and the airport at the bottom.
But if the baby steps approach is disappointing, it might at least beat dreaming of a widely accessible light rail system for 40 years and still not having it. For Cap Metro president and CEO Dottie Watkins, the five options make the public transit expansion more real. "Cap Metro has spent the better part of two decades trying to figure out how to get light rail built in this community," she said. Watkins, who has worked at Cap Metro in some capacity for almost 30 years, said the idea of having a rail system was "already in the consciousness of the voters" when the agency formed in 1985.
Realistic promises seem to be the new goal at ATP. The new options don't reflect the grand vision for an Orange and Blue line that has been consistently splashed across Project Connect marketing, but ATP said it represents a feasible first step. "Around the country, other communities start with a vision, they start implementing, and they get to that vision over time, and I think that's where Austin is right now," Cannally said.
Awais Azhar, chair of ATP's Community Advisory Committee, said he appreciates the presentation of a more realistic project. "We were really pushing [for] honest trade off conversations with community members," he said. "I'm excited to see that I think that is indeed what's happened."
One line or two? Aboveground, underground, or on street? How many riders will it transport? Will it go to the airport? Where will it cross Lady Bird Lake? Will South Congress get any rail at all? And what about mixing and matching from multiple elements of the options? In response to the last question, an ATP spokesperson noted the organization's emphasis on community feedback, but did not confirm if mixing and matching is actually on the table.
Without flexibility to mix and match, Austinites are likely not going to immediately get the connectivity they've been hoping for and expecting. That could impact whether the city can meet its 2039 goal of a 50-50 split of people who drive alone versus using an alternative mode of transportation. Annick Beaudet, the city's Project Connect mobility officer, said the city would likely be reviewing progress to that goal next year, as well as creating new forecasts. She added that the additional MetroRapid lines will be key in helping the city reach a 50-50 split.
The city is also developing an implementation plan for equitable transit-oriented development, in part to plan for denser, more affordable housing near transit hubs. Assistant City Manager Robert Goode said that plan is expected in September, allowing time to pivot to focus on certain locations based on which of the five options is selected.
Show Me the Money
The budget is, of course, a primary reason for the pared down first step, and Cannally is adamant that the project will stay on budget. He said ATP expects the federal government to cover 50% – an increase from the expectation two years ago that it would cover 45% – of the $5 billion (in current-year dollars) that it will cost to build the project. City property tax revenue dedicated to Project Connect following the 2020 vote will cover the rest. Cannally said ATP has funding to pay for both building and operating the light rail system.
Staying at street level is a cost saver, and two of five options keep the train at street level for the entirety of the line, with the exception of crossing Lady Bird Lake. (Side note: An ATP engineer laughed at me when I asked if the maps not marking the river crossings as "elevated" meant that somehow the rail line would be floating on the river.)
However, ATP did insert a new wrinkle in its designs by looking at elevated tracks Downtown. "We did start talking about the need to look at elevated areas that hadn't been looked at, and to look at a simplified tunnel," Cannally said. "If you remember that the underground got really, really super complex with multiple layers and levels." He said the complex underground system Downtown was an example of scope creep – when additional elements get added during the design process, increasing costs. And the underground possibility raises accessibility questions. For example, other cities have at times struggled to maintain elevator operations. But Nancy Crowther, a Transit Forward board member, said it's "just going to depend on the topography and the needs of the area and community," adding that elevator technology continues to improve.
And of course there's the Legislature reveling in the opportunity to mess with Austin. State Rep. Ellen Troxclair, R-Lakeway, has taken a not-so-subtle jab at Project Connect's funding structure, filing a bill that would require the public to vote on local government corporations, like ATP, issuing bonds to fund projects. When asked about the legislation, which was set for discussion in committee as we went to press Wednesday, Cannally said almost 60% of Austinites already voted for Project Connect and that the vote was conducted according to state law. If Troxclair's legislation were to impact Project Connect, he added, that would go against the will of the voters. "It might mean that Austin and Texas aren't interested in moving forward on infrastructure projects, and there's lots of infrastructure projects that need to happen in Austin."
Should ATP hit any bumps in the road, they have set up a healthy contingency fund. Despite some speculation that leftover cash from that fund could be dipped into to extend lines, an ATP spokesperson told us the 40% contingency is in line with Federal Transit Administration guidance: "With where we are in design for the alignments, especially with the change in grade Downtown, it is fiscally prudent."
Speak Now Or ...
So as ATP reels in its Project Connect spending to lay the foundation for future expansion, how do we pick what limited pieces come first? Azhar said ATP needs to "prioritize conversations with folks who are generally left out or historically have been left out of these conversations." He said those groups include BIPOC, working-class, and LGBTQ communities, as well as people with disabilities.
Alex Karner, a nonvoting member of the CAC and associate professor at UT, said the most important thing is to actually speak with people who rely on Cap Metro. "If ATP hears from a bunch of folks that want airport alternatives, I worry that those voices are going to drown out people who actually rely on public transit today," he said, pointing out that wealthier people tend to be more vocal and prefer airport routes. Karner added that ATP needs to meet current transit riders in the community at places of worship, community events, and transit stops, to name a few. A Cap Metro spokesperson said in an email that the agency will offer support with outreach at bus and rail stops where needed in the coming weeks.
When asked about their preferred options, or even which factors they view as most important, ATP, Cap Metro, and city officials are united: Right now, it's up to the public. Through May, ATP will collect community feedback on the design options and use that information to inform its recommendation in June. You can submit feedback at atptx.org/about/light-rail.
It Takes a Village
With new designs proposed, here's what the city needs to sort out
ATP will build and Cap Metro eventually will operate the rail lines, rapid buses, and micromobility services. However, the city also plays a (slightly less sexy) role in Project Connect. Annick Beaudet, the city's Project Connect mobility officer, said she coordinates over 40 city departments involved in the project's execution, with about 25 of those "deeply involved" in the process to create a 30% design – the stage of the process where scope and timeline are generally determined.
Creating a well-oiled permitting system will be key to the project's success. Three of the options (38th Street to Oltorf and Yellow Jacket, North Lamar to Pleasant Valley, and 29th Street to the airport) include a bullet point stating they would require "significant utility relocations." Beaudet said that mainly references Austin Water and Austin Energy, but also storm drains overseen by the Watershed Department. "It's almost like a utility project because we're going to do water, wastewater, and Austin Energy," said Assistant City Manager Robert Goode. And utility relocations aren't necessarily a bad thing, he added. The city intends to take advantage of the economies of scale presented by such a large project to make upgrades to other infrastructure along the corridor, such as drains, water lines, bike lanes, and sidewalks. – Benton Graham
Got something to say on the subject? Send a letter to the editor.
