Objections arise over Project Connect’s plan to use parkland

Now that the Austin Transit Partnership has released its huge draft environmental impact statement for Project Connect, parks advocates are raising concerns about the proposed expropriation of city parkland by the rail system without the permission of Austin voters.

Larry Akers, president of Friends of the Parks of Austin, along with parks advocates Steve Gerson and Laura Templeton, have outlined their objections to ATP’s taking of public parkland without complying with the Austin City Charter. ATP and the Federal Transit Administration stated in the draft environmental impact statement that “there is no feasible and prudent avoidance alternative to the use of a portion of Waller Beach at Town Lake Metro Park. The permanent use of land from Waller Beach at Town Lake Metro Park, including a portion of the Ann and Roy Butler Hike and Bike Trail, would constitute a Chapter 26 taking of publicly owned parkland.”

Chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code requires a public hearing and a vote before parkland can be used for non-park purposes.

In addition to the Waller Beach property, ATP’s current plan includes building a Travis Heights Station that would take about 12 percent of the off-leash dog park along the south shore of Lady Bird Lake between Interstate 35 and East Riverside. That area will also be significantly impacted by the state’s decision to enlarge I-35 through Central Austin. Planners have recommended that ATP go ahead with the Travis Heights station.

However, that decision does not necessarily preclude a public vote on whether it is appropriate to take that parkland for the station. Akers and his supporters argue that ATP’s use of Waller Beach and the Norwood tract would be illegal without a vote by Austin voters.

It will be up to City Council to hold a Chapter 26 hearing, but parks advocates believe that is only the first step. After that, they say the matter must go to the voters. There is no mention of a public vote in the draft environmental impact statement.

The draft environmental impact statement lists a number of instances in which the project will interfere with use of some parkland. That includes Airport Commerce Pocket Park, “which would be 30 percent affected by the project, more than half of that permanently consumed,” according to the parks advocates. It is not clear why that taking of a significant part of a park does not require a Chapter 26 hearing.

At the same time that the parks advocates are expressing their criticism, the city and ATP may still have to face one or more lawsuits over the very existence of Project Connect in its current iteration.

Bill Aleshire, an attorney for several plaintiffs who have sued the city and ATP, explained that he has asked Travis County Judge Eric Shepperd to hold a hearing on a lawsuit that was dismissed in late December.

The judge may not arrive at a decision before March, Aleshire said. In the meantime, the Texas attorney general’s office has asked the Texas Supreme Court to overturn a ruling by the 15th Court of Appeals in another case related to Project Connect.

Photo made available through a Creative Commons license.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.