Lack of funding delays rail plans

Lack of funding delays rail plans

Written by Christi Covington and Shannon Colletti Monday, 07 January 2008

Route scheduled to take commuters from Williamson County to San Antonio by 2012

Trains might be the ride of the future.

When Union Pacific opened rail in Central Texas during the late 1800s, its line soon became the center of growing communities.

Now some area leaders would like to make that same mode of transportation available for commuters who could travel from Georgetown and Round Rock to as far south as San Antonio.

“Until you have congestion on IH 35 that is so bad that people are starting to look for an alternative, it’s not viable, but we’re rapidly getting to that point,” said Michael Aulick, the executive director for the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, a federally mandated regional planning group.

Rep. Mike Krusee of Williamson County supports the idea of commuter rail, but acknowledges the major challenge is finding enough funds to relocate the privately owned UP freight line.

“From a standpoint of when is it possible, we could get funding in less than a year. Politically is that what the region wants to do?” he said. “I don’t know.”

Ongoing debate

In the 1990s, the Texas Legislature approved the creation of a commuter rail district, but it passed without a funding mechanism. Cities and counties joined the district and in 2003, the Austin-San Antonio Commuter Rail District was financed with federal money.

Krusee became interested in the UP right-of-way because he envisioned building two highway lanes along MoPac. When that was not an option, community leaders considered the possibility of moving the UP line to a more rural area, perhaps east of Austin. At this point, UP has said it is not interested in relocating by its own financing.

If UP did give its OK, and the money became available, it would not take too much time to build the extra rail, stations and get commuter cars, said Alison Schulze, a senior planner with the ASA district. ASA has spent the last few years visiting with community leaders and looking for funding.

“It’s not that big a deal,” she said, “We can easily lay a little track. Once they sign on the dotted line, it could happen really fast.”

Funding jumpstart

The concept of funding commuter rail is daunting for many. During the first phase, it would cost an estimated $613 million for everything from additional track, 15 platforms, vehicle parking to train cars. Of the total, half would come from the state and half from local entities, according to Schulze. Although original plans scheduled the rail to open around 2010, she said funding challenges probably will make it closer to 2012.

At first, ASA staff planned to access money from the Rail Relocation Fund, which originally was legislation sponsored by Krusee. Voters approved the fund designation in 2005. However, the Texas Legislature never allocated any actual dollars toward it during the last session.

Another possibility was tapping into money from the Federal Transit Administration New Start Program. That initiative failed after ASA realized the program was designed for very dense communities such as Boston or expansions of existing systems.

Williamson County Commissioner Lisa Birkman is a member of the ASA board and said she has heard a number of options for local funding mechanisms, including creating a Tax Increment Finance district. A TIF takes a designated area of land and earmarks it so when the owner makes improvements, any taxes collected on the improvements will go to a specific purpose, such as commuter rail.

However, Birkman said the first action she wants is a bond election so the community could indicate whether it is interested or not.

“I would like to see it happen as a public outreach. The public is pretty much unaware,” she said. “We need to get the assurance that the public wants this if the county gets involved.”

City interest

Round Rock’s Mayor Nyle Maxwell is less than convinced that the ASA is the best option for his community. Initially, the city would be asked to pay $50,000 with final costs not calculated.

“We’re still studying it. You’re not going to see anything in the next few weeks or months,” Maxwell said.

The spot tentatively dubbed for a station is downtown on the south side of city hall. Of the 15 stations targeted along the commuter rail, estimates suggest the Round Rock location would go up the least in incremental value because existing businesses already sit on the plot. Round Rock might have more interest if the city had a second station on University Boulevard near the hub of new hospitals and higher education facilities.

“That’s what we’re talking about,” Maxwell said. “We have not heard any commitments so far.”

The outlook for the station site chosen for Georgetown is more promising. It is at Maple Street and S.E. Inner Loop with “greenfield,” or undeveloped property, around it open for development.

In December, a new ordinance was drafted for the planning and zoning commission that would allow mixed-uses of commercial, retail and residential space. The city intends to encourage higher density growth around the area sited for the station. Chief long-range planner Ed Polasek said whether the rail comes or not, Georgetown must have a form of mass transit.

“As long as we have gas that keeps going up potentially beyond $3 a gallon, and we have more and more residents here, as long as employment remains in Austin and Round Rock, there’s going to have to be some type of commuter solution,” he said.

My parents’ room

If and when the money becomes available, the second step toward regional commuter rail is moving most of the UP freight, which means building more track. ASA sees plenty of reasons that UP would want to relocate. Municipal ordinance requires the trains to slow to 15-30 miles per hour in city limits, Schulze said. Krusee added that sharp inclines and turns also make it difficult for the trains.

“We could get them a faster route, so it could be much more efficient for them,” he said. “Time is money in that business.”

It is not enough of a reason to make UP want to fund major changes any time soon. Joe Arbona, a UP spokesman, said fuel costs, busy roads and the environmental benefits of rail have made the train industry cost effective, and as a result,

more valuable. So for UP it is increasingly difficult to consider relocation to make room for commuter rail. It is inconvenient for commuter and freight trains to run on the same line because freight trains typically do not keep a schedule. That is why UP would expect the community to pay for relocation efforts, he said.

“It’s kind of like me asking somebody if it would be okay for me to use a couple of rooms in your house,” Arbona said. “It’s really challenging because I’ve got my parents in that one room, so what am I supposed to do?”

Aulick acknowledges the final decision is with UP, who already operates an agreement with Amtrak to run a few passenger trains.

“Really, if you’re going to build commuter rail, it’s only cost effective by and large to do it on a line that already exists because it’s just too expensive and too disruptive to build a new rail line in an urban area,” he said. “So the right-of-way that exists is very precious.”

The Union Pacific Challenge

If funding became available to move Union Pacific’s freight line east of IH 35, it is still undecided where the rail would go. Originally, lawmakers intended for it to parallel Toll 130; however, the engineers did not plan for optimal rail accommodations. Because the highway travels through hills and has sharp curves, it would be difficult for trains to follow the right-of-way.

“We can put [rail] on 130, but it would be expensive,” said Williamson County Rep. Mike Krusee. “So that’s why we’re looking at other options. Perhaps it would be cheaper just to buy right-of-way somewhere else, a little bit farther east. That does not mean we’re going to do that. It could be that we run into so much public opposition that nobody wants a new rail farther east that we have to put it on 130.”

The first engineers are no longer working on the toll project, which means the unfinished portion of Toll 130 from Hwy. 71 to Seguin should be more optimal for rail, Krusee said.

Source: ASA Commuter Rail District

Commuter vs. light rail

An advocate for some form of mass transit, Rep. Mike Krusee of Williamson County is quick to note the difference between commuter rail and light rail. He supports the former going from Georgetown to San Antonio.

	Commuter rail	Light rail
Characteristics	Locomotive pulled or pushed and pulled single or bi-level cars or multiple electric units operating on railroad track	Articulated multiple unit cars operating on city streets, at-grade, elevated, or subway alignments
Power source	Diesel-electric or electric with overhead catenary, which is used to supply electricity	Electric with overhead catenary wire. Usually 600 to 750 volts DC
Stations and typical spacing	Low or high level platforms with or without shelter or station structure. Spacing of 3 to 5 miles	Low or high-level platforms with or without shelter or station structure. Spacing of ½ to 2 miles
Maximum operating speed	79 to 90 mph	55 to 65 mph
Route length	20 to 100 miles	8 to 25 miles
Maximum grade	3 to 4 percent	7 percent
Cars or units per train	3 to 12	1 to 4
Seated capacity per car or unit	80 to 170	32 to 90
Capital cost per mile (excluding right of way)	$2-20 million	$20-55 million
Capital cost per vehicle	$1-3 million	$2-3 million
Vehicle life expectancy	25 to 30 years	25 to 30 years
Availability	In production	In production

Source: ASA Commuter Rail District