$104 million. That’s how much the city of Austin will commit to funding structural elements that could support potential caps and stitches over a sunken I-35.
Austin City Council approved a scaled-back version of the original cap-and-stitch plan on Thursday, May 22. The vote came after weeks of discussion and just ahead of a deadline issued by the Texas Department of Transportation, which is leading the I-35 Capital Express Central Project.
What it means
It’s still unclear whether the actual cap structures — which could feature amenities such as parks, sports courts, food kiosks, sculpture gardens, and more — will be built on top of the support columns that the Austin City Council voted to fund. The Council now has until November of 2026 to make that decision.
In the meantime, the approved funds will be allocated toward the roadway elements necessary to support several key projects in Our Future 35’s vision plan. Support structures were approved for:
- Cesar Chavez Street to 4th Street Cap | This 5.3-acre cap would connect the East Cesar Chavez neighborhood to Downtown Austin by creating a new 3rd Street promenade for pedestrians with a food truck and pop-up space.
- 4th Street to 7th Street Cap | Our Future 35 envisions this area as an epicenter for nightlife and events. The new land bridge would create a walkable link between 5th and 6th streets and be home to several one- to two-story buildings.
- 11th Street to 12th Street Cap | This cap would connect east Austin’s African American Cultural and Heritage District to Downtown Austin.
- Two stitches in north Austin | Our Future 35 designed these zones to be easily integrated with other proposed projects and the nearby Red Line commuter rail.
In their own words
Here’s what a few Austin City Council members had to say during the Thursday, May 22 meeting.
Council Member José Chito Vela for District 4: “I remember at one time, I heard somebody say how the Pfluger Bridge was a waste of money. ... Most recently, the echoes that I hear from this conversation right now are the soccer stadium. (It was) a very similar discussion about, ‘Why are we building a soccer stadium?’ ‘Why don’t we do affordable housing on that land?’ ‘Why don’t we turn it into a park?’ I just don’t think anybody at this point in Austin thinks (Q2 Stadium) was a bad idea. ... Ultimately, that was a huge benefit to the community. It’s something that everybody loves nowadays.”
Council Member Ryan Alter for District 5: “I’m really excited about the opportunity we have here today. You know, we have thrown around that word a lot: opportunity, generational opportunity, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. ... I strongly believe, as I think everyone who’s been listening knows, that we should do as much as we can and we should be as creative as possible.”
Council Member Michael Siegel for District 7: “I do think history is watching, but I’m actually more concerned with the near future than the far future. I’m concerned that five years from now, we won’t have enough money to fund our housing needs, that we won’t have enough money to fund adequate parks, to fund our public health programs. I’m concerned that in five years, the people of Austin will be very disappointed with us that we funded a project we didn’t know how to complete.”
Council Member Marc Duchen of District 10: “The extensive feedback we’ve gotten from a lot of constituents, especially over the last two weeks, is that these dollars could be used for other services and projects that could otherwise be essential to their safety and quality of life.”
Council Member Zohaib “Zo” Qadri for District 9: “I think this moment is about more than infrastructure and funding. It’s about our values and vision for Austin, and it’s about hope.”
