The first round in the City Hall fight over the future of I-35 has ended, and it was an ugly one.
The bout, which culminated at City Council’s May 22 meeting, centered over whether or not the city should pay for structural support columns along the highway through Central Austin, which will soon undergo a massive, state-mandated transformation. It’s possible that the city might, one day, be able to pay for the construction of parkland on top of the expanded highway’s new sunken lanes.
On one side of the fight were Council members Ryan Alter, Natasha Harper-Madison, Chito Vela, Zo Qadri, and José Velásquez, who were pushing for a large package that would devote more than $400 million from a creative mix of city revenue streams to the project (city staff put the kibosh on most of their ideas days before the big vote, however).
In the other corner of the ring stood CMs Paige Ellis, Mike Siegel, Krista Laine, Marc Duchen, and Mayor Pro Tem Vanessa Fuentes. Citing economic concerns and the potential impact the project could have on the amount of money Council could ask voters to approve in a 2026 bond, these CMs initially proposed a much-slimmed-down $49 million package. Mayor Kirk Watson stood somewhere in the middle, choosing not to enter the fray publicly.
In the end, after months of increasingly dire warnings from city staff on the project’s fiscal implications and a growing number of bitter spats on the dais, Council agreed to a compromise package that will devote $104 million to the project. That money will pay for the support columns (known as “roadway elements”) along Cesar Chavez through Seventh Street, 11th and 12th streets, and on the Red Line Parkway trail along Airport Boulevard. The downtown columns can support “decks” or “caps” that can be used as parkland, while the 11th/12th/Red Line columns will only support what are essentially land bridges to improve bike and pedestrian crossings across the highway.
After a slightly larger version of the $49 million package offered by Ellis was voted down, 5-6, the $104 million package, offered by Qadri, was approved on an 8-2-1 vote, with Laine and Duchen voting against and Siegel abstaining. It’s a deal that has both sides claiming victory, depending on who is asked, which could mean Council really did land on the consensus position – a package that is not as big as half of the dais wanted but not as small as the other half wanted.
“It appears both subquorums have been able to wiggle a little bit,” Ellis said after the vote. “It’s clear that everybody wants to see the beautification of our community and wants to be able to include really important generational investments over I-35. We’re just trying to balance competing needs [and] make sure that every dollar stretches as far as possible.”
“It’s clear that everybody wants to see the beautification of our community.” – Council Member Paige Ellis
With the Phase One vision for I-35 now cemented, the city will soon have to pony up. The city has six years to pay the Texas Department of Transportation for the full $104 million cost of the roadway elements (TxDOT will contract with a construction firm to do the work, which could result in cost overruns, which the city will have to pay). The first payment, for 15% of the total ($15.6 million) is due at the end of 2026, with more chunks each year until 2033.
The city is already in possession of a $41 million loan that can be used to pay for the roadway elements, so Council won’t need to appropriate any additional funds for this phase of the project until at least 2029. To that end, Alter offered a resolution at the May 22 meeting directing City Manager T.C. Broadnax to spend the next 10 months studying all available financing options Council could deploy to pay the balance of their $104 million commitment – with a primary goal being to avoid dipping into too much of the city’s debt capacity (i.e., how much money Council can ask voters to approve in the 2026 bond), which staff estimates to be around $750 million.
But, again, all of this money is just for the infrastructure needed to support the “parks on top of the highway” envisioned in renderings offered by TxDOT. The vision is similar to what was realized in Dallas’ Klyde Warren Park. Council will also have to find funding for the “caps” portion of the project. A city spokesperson said staff is still working up estimates on those costs.
If that funding is secured, the city will have to make an initial payment to TxDOT in 2032. In other cities with highway caps, private philanthropy has accounted for a significant amount of these costs, and Council is hopeful – now that the city has committed to funding portions of the project – that the same will be true in Austin. But, so far, no group or individual has stepped up to provide it. If 2032 comes around and the city has been unable to find partners to help pay for the caps, Council will have to decide if the city should fund them independently – or just let the support structures go unused for a period.
It’s a potential future that some on Council, like CM Chito Vela, are embracing. “The seven contiguous blocks from Cesar Chavez to Seventh Street [create] a stretch of parkland that may be the best park in Texas once it’s built,” Vela told his colleagues from the dais, May 22.
Maybe so, but there’s still a long way to go.
This article appears in May 30 • 2025.