The Austin airport doesn’t have enough fuel for its flights, but plans to build new storage tanks are running into stiff opposition from neighbors in Texas’s booming capital.
For homeowners trying to preserve Austin in the face of exploding growth, the airport fight is the latest in a series of squabbles over the fate of the city. A major expansion of I-35, a new land development code and even the relocation of a downtown courthouse have spurred stiff opposition from some residents.
On the other side are nearby residents who charge that the airport didn’t do a sufficient environmental study to add massive new fuel tanks and want the plan stopped.
“That is simply not OK,” said Austin City Councilwoman Vanessa Fuentes, who has taken up the cause. She put forth a resolution that is up for vote Thursday to halt the plan. “Austin has a history of environmental injustices.”
For some in East Austin, near the airport and traditionally home to more Hispanic and Black residents, the proposed project recalls a local petroleum tank that leaked for decades. The 1950s-era storage tank was found in the 1990s to have contaminated water and soil, leading to health issues for people nearby.
The fuel facility project, which received federal approval through an environmental study required by the National Environmental Policy Act, kick-started last summer after air travel resumed amid widespread Covid vaccination roll-outs. The project is part of the airport’s broader 20-year master plan which won approval from the Federal Aviation Administration and City Council a couple years ago. The airport says the tanks are needed to cope with passenger traffic at the airport that’s expected to reach a record 20 million this year. Travel has surged as the metro area—home to 2.3 million people—became the nation’s fastest-growing in the decade ending in 2020.
Just last week, the airport was forced to issue a fuel-shortage notice, advising airlines to fly in with extra supplies because the local stockpile wasn’t sufficient to refill them.
While the shortage didn’t cause any flight disruptions, it was the fourth low-fuel warning this year. In October, several commercial fights had to make unscheduled stops en route to Austin to refuel, according to Sam Haynes, a spokesperson for Austin-Bergstrom International Airport.
“The implications of further delaying the project is further strain on our ability to meet air service demand,” Haynes said.
Airlines including Southwest Airlines Co. and American Airlines Group Inc. have said that fuel storage needs to be beefed up to keep up with growth. The project to build more storage capacity is being led by consortium of airlines, and they are responsible for the financing of the development and leasing the airport land.
Residents who live across the highway from the planned site, along with the owner of a nearby business park, oppose the project, citing health and safety risks, as well as aesthetic concerns. They argue that the airport and fuel consortium’s environmental impact study didn’t sufficiently take into account how the fuel farm could impact neighboring areas.
The airport’s current fuel storage facilities have operated since 1999 without any major leaks or fires, Haynes said.
For Austin growth cheerleaders, the dispute at the airport is emblematic of the difficulty in pushing through major infrastructure improvements in a city where many residents still have a romantic attachment to its more laid-back past, when the city was known for Willie Nelson’s ability to unite local cowboys and hippies, rather than the domain of wealthy tech engineers and blockchain enthusiasts.
An effort to rebuild the nearly always-clogged Interstate 35, the main north-south artery through Austin, has been met with backlash from residents and businesses that will be displaced to accommodate the expansion as well as activists who think the money would be better spent on improving public transport.
Last month, an appeals court ruled against the city’s attempts to rewrite its land-development code to encourage higher density, effectively killing an idea that advocates said would improve housing affordability but opponents said would ruin neighborhoods. Meanwhile, the city is battling residents of downtown high-rises over the location of a community court that mostly serves the homeless population.
The disputes all point to growing pains for the city as it struggles to keep up with the arrival of 115 new residents a day on average.
“We have been the fastest growing in the country for a number of years,” said Matt Geske, the vice president of policy at the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce. “With that comes a lot more people, and our infrastructure is stressed.”
