=
| Council Member | Received Date | Question | Status | Answer |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Velasquez; Vela; Alter; Qadri | 2025-04-04 00:00:00 | Regarding the northern cap between 38th Street and the CapMetro Red Line, a) What are the assumptions behind the TIRZ analysis? b) Can we see scenarios with varying development assumptions, from more modest three to six story buildings to high-rise development of twenty stories or more? c) How would the addition of a Red Line station on the northern cap influence the analysis? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/01.pdf |
| Velasquez; Vela; Alter; Qadri | 2025-04-04 00:00:00 | What is the comprehensive economic impact of all the proposed caps, including those the University of Texas plans to build? | POSTED | Staff will not be able to provide a comprehensive economic impact analysis to inform a May Council decision. Doing this exercise in general presents a number of chellenges. The future economic impact of highway caps is highly dependent on a final decision related to the number, location, design, use, and programming of future caps. That information, once finalized, allows direct impacts to be estimated (for example, construction-related spending). Estimating indirect and induced effects of highway caps in Austin, also part of an economic impact analysis, however, would be highly speculative due to compounding effects of economic development near the caps. Many efforts, such as the burgeoning Innovation/Medical District investments, Waterloo Greenway and chain of parks, UT campus development, Capitol Complex redevelopment, and ongoing mixed-use redevelopment in Central Austin are already creating significant economic activity and enhancing land and property values. This limits the ability to accurately isolate the anticipated economic impact of caps. Staff will provide at the May 6 work session details on return on investment (ROI) assessment for the potential City-administered caps. |
| Velasquez; Vela; Alter; Qadri | 2025-04-04 00:00:00 | Taken together, these caps could form a linear park over I-35, similar to Boston’s Rose Kennedy Greenway. What long-term economic and quality-of-life benefits would this offer to Austin? | POSTED | Parks and open space provide an array of quality of life benefits to their communities, including positive impacts to health and wellness, mobility/connectivity, community resiliency, local property values, and economic activity. Studies show these impacts may vary by location and size, where larger, connected greenspaces may have more significant impacts. The future I-35 highway design does not allow for the development of a continuous cap similar to Rose Kennedy Greenway, but rather segmented caps. Connectivity will be supported by a multi-purpose trail running north-south along the highway corridor, which is being planned regardless of cap investment. It is also important to note that downtown caps would run parallel and adjacent to the Waterloo Greenway, which will offer many quality of life benefits to residents, businesses, and visitors in the same corridor. The City's financial consultants will provide a return on investment (ROI) assessment for the potential City-administered caps. |
| Velasquez; Vela; Alter; Qadri | 2025-04-04 00:00:00 | Conversely, what are the projected outcomes for economic development and livability if we don’t pursue caps? | POSTED | The City Demographer notes that the Austin metro area is among the fastest growing regions in the country with the city as a major driver. With strong population and job growth, Austin is projected to continue to attract investment. An array of economic and real estate development activities are underway with significant investments from public and private sectors in the I-35 corridor. This includes but is not limited to: the Innovation District, Waterloo Greenway, Capitol Complex, Convention Center expansion, and ongoing mixed-use redevelopment in urban core. The City's continued investment in these transformational projects as well as ongoing investments in parks, trails, mobility, and public facilities will continue to spur future economic development and enhanced quality of life in this corridor and citywide. |
| Velasquez; Vela; Alter; Qadri | 2025-04-04 00:00:00 | How have caps performed elsewhere in terms of costs versus returns? | POSTED | Total costs and returns vary by location, but direct returns to funding entities are low given the very limited earned income opportunities from the caps themselves. In the case of Rose Kennedy Greenway, just 3% of revenue thus far has come from earned income, indicating how heavily subsidized these spaces are not only capital for construction, but ongoing operations and maintenance as well. Caps can provide a park premium effect, which increases land values in the vicinity, and those positive returns are shared among taxing jurisdictions. Further, the value of returns depends heavily on the source of funding. Cap parks across the United States receive the majority of their funding from sources other than the local government. Rose Kennedy Greenway was funded 40% by the Massachusetts DOT, with 60% coming primarily from donations and endowment funds. Klyde Warren Park in Dallas similarly received only 19% of its funds from the City of Dallas, with most coming from USDOT, TxDOT, and private donations to the foundation. This shared funding model with limited municipal financial participation has resulted in a good return on investment to the city entities. The City's financial consultants will provide a return on investment (ROI) assessment for the potential City-administered caps. |
| Velasquez; Vela; Alter; Qadri | 2025-04-04 00:00:00 | Which cities have seen the most success, and what made their projects effective? | POSTED | Klyde Warren Park in Dallas is among the most successful examples of highway cap parks. While their ongoing success can largely be attributed to effective programming, management, and fundraising by the Woodall Rodgers Park Foundation, its initial success is due to several location-specific features: 1) Cost: a relatively low construction cost of $112 million for 5-acres (less than half the cost estimates for Austin's similarly sized Cesar Chavez-4th Cap or 38th-41st Cap concepts); 2) Timing: significant value was captured from downtown surface parking lots and incomplete new construction projects nearby as the cap was under construction. Those parcels have since redeveloped, providing park-related funding through a TIRZ and PID. Austin has significantly less value capture potential from those tools as adjacent areas are largely built out; and 3) Partners: funding partnerships existed from the beginning, with $50 million in private donations, $20 million from TxDOT, $16.7 million from USDOT, and $20 million from the City of Dallas. |
| Velasquez; Vela; Alter; Qadri | 2025-04-04 00:00:00 | Are there standard metrics or benchmarks we can use to measure cap performance and outcomes? | PENDING | No, as metrics are customized to the given transportation infrastructure and real estate market conditions as well as local priorities of each city. Staff has compiled comparative data with caveats for Council consideration at the May 6, 2025 Work Session. |
| Velasquez; Vela; Alter; Qadri | 2025-04-04 00:00:00 | Given the scale of this project, what are potential funding sources beyond general obligation bonds? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/08.pdf |
| Velasquez; Vela; Alter; Qadri | 2025-04-04 00:00:00 | Are there federal or state grants, public-private partnerships, or philanthropic contributions that could help fund the construction phases? | POSTED | Staff has considered all viable sources. No private or philanthropic funding souces have yet been identified or committed for Cap & Stitch, particularly for roadway elements and deck structures. Staff continue to pursue applicable state and federal grant opportuntities, and if successful, will be folded into the funding sources for TxDOT construction. |
| Siegel | 2025-04-07 00:00:00 | What funds will be used to support any commitment the City makes to TXDOT in May 2025? | POSTED | Funding would be from multiple City sources depending on which scenario Council chooses. |
| Siegel | 2025-04-07 00:00:00 | To the extent any future General Obligation Bond funds will be relied upon to fund roadway elements of the proposed freeway caps, how would the City fulfill its commitment to TXDOT if voters reject funds for Cap & Stitch? | POSTED | It may be necessary to issue Certificates of Obligation (COs) for roadway elements and request voter approval for subsequent investments (deck structures and amenities). Relying on General Obligations bonds to fund future Cap & Stitch obligations poses the risk whereby current State law prohibits the issuance of COs for any project voters rejected in the preceding three years. A variety of funding sources – public, private and philanthropic – will be needed to make the caps a reality. Outside of City debt, public sources may include grants, loans, bonds, tax increment, and special assessments on taxable property. |
| Siegel | 2025-04-07 00:00:00 | To the extent that funding sources other than General Obligation Bonds will be used to fund Cap & Stitch roadway elements, how would utilization of such funds impact the City’s bond capacity and credit rating? For example, even if GO Bonds were not used, would using other funding sources for Cap & Stitch mean the City should not seek the same level of voter-approved bonds in November 2026, in order to maintain its credit standing? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/12_1.pdf |
| Siegel | 2025-04-07 00:00:00 | Has any other highway cap project in the country ever been funded with majority City funding? For context, it appears that the Klyde Warren highway park in Dallas cost about $112 million, with only $20 million from the city of Dallas (18 percent); the Alaskan Way Viaduct project in Seattle cost $3.1 billion, with only $28.4 million from local funds (9 percent); and the Big Dig in Boston cost $14.8 billion, with no significant funding coming from the city of Boston. | PENDING | City staff and consultants could not identify any city whose caps were funded primarily by the municipality. While many caps received significant public funding, that has by and large come from federal and state sources. City staff will provide additional information on comparable projects at the May 6, 2025 work session briefing. |
| Siegel | 2025-04-07 00:00:00 | In the presentation, it is estimated that operating and maintenance costs for all caps south of the Red Line would amount to $48 million a year. Is this more than the operational budget for the Parks and Recreation Department to maintain all existing City parks? (See page 383, listing budget for park operations and maintenance next year as $37 million.) | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/14_2.pdf |
| Siegel | 2025-04-07 00:00:00 | What analysis has been done of the potential air quality on caps? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/15_2.pdf |
| Vela | 2025-03-19 00:00:00 | In the Brodie Oaks and Uptown ATX examples, was green space included in the FAR calculation? What is the FAR in those examples if you do not include the green space? For context, for development around the caps, the caps themselves would satisfy most of the demand for green space in those areas. | POSTED | The City’s value capture analysis uses Seaholm District, Brodie Oaks and Uptown ATX projects as sample projects to illustrate different Floor Area Ratios (FAR) at the district-level. FAR indicates the level of density over an entire site area, including green space, streetscapes, parking, service areas, and building footprints. Green space is thus included in these calculations. Brodie Oaks includes 13.7 acres of greenspace. As indicated in the value capture presentation, the district FAR for Brodie Oaks is 1.89. Omitting all green space from the calculation would increase the Brodie Oaks district FAR to 2.98. Uptown ATX includes 11 acres of greenspace and district FAR of 2.43. Omitting all green space from the calculation would increase the Uptown ATX district FAR from 2.43 to 2.92. While the caps could provide significant open space to support the adjacent developments, some amount of green space, especially adjacent to multi-family development, would still be necessary to support residents. Private landowners within the defined district will retain discretion of how (and whether) to redevelop their sites and which, if any, voluntary zoning/planning tools to utilize Additionally, as the caps would represent 100% impervious cover, pervious areas are still needed on adjacent parcels to allow rainwater to percolate and mitigate flooding, as well as address other urban issues (heat island effect mitigation, shade provision, pet relief areas, etc.). |
| Vela | 2025-03-19 00:00:00 | What is the FAR in the North Burnet Gateway area? | POSTED | Uptown ATX is in the North Burnet Gateway Area with 2.43 FAR. Of the 66 acres in the Uptown ATX plan, 11 acres are green space. Omitting green space from the calculation would increase the district FAR from 2.43 to 2.92. Uptown ATX represents a denser development than adjacent areas within The Domain, which has a FAR below 2.0. Note: the Domain was legally limited to 3.0 FAR until 2024. |
| Vela | 2025-03-19 00:00:00 | What is the FAR in the Rainey District? | POSTED | While regulations permit a maximum 15:1 floor area ratio (FAR) on individual parcels through the density bonus program, the actual FAR for the district is much lower due to lot coverage. An analysis revelealed the built-out core of Rainey Street (Rainey Street to East Avenue between Driskill and River Street) to have a district FAR of 4.539, accounting for the cumulative building square footage between the centerlines of the four bounding streets. |
| Vela | 2025-03-19 00:00:00 | What is the FAR of the development around the Klyde Warren Park? | POSTED | Downtown Dallas is legally restricted to a 24.0 FAR. Calculating current district FAR is complicated due to the number of condominiums, which limit appraisal district data, but buildings directly adjacent to Klyde Warren park range from below 0.25 FAR (Nasher Sculpture Center) to approximately 6.5 FAR (Museum Tower, 42-stories). |
| Vela | 2025-03-19 00:00:00 | Are there other economic benefits that would improve our tax base beyond the value that could be captured by a TIRZ? | POSTED | Economic benefits will largely be dependent on the programming and success of cap developments. This may include direct sales and mixed beverage tax collected from retail and special events on the caps as well as increased local demand for retail, multi-family, and office on adjacent parcels. City staff will provide a more detailed "return on investment" analysis for the May 6, 2025 Council work session. On-cap revenue will be estimated, yet is expected to be small. By comparison, Rose Kennedy Greenway in Boston receives only 3% of its revenue from earned income. Note that increased growth will also have increased demand for public services and infrastructure. |
| Vela | 2025-03-19 00:00:00 | What is the potential property tax impact for other taxing entities such as Travis County, AISD, ACC, and the state? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/21_2.pdf |
| Vela | 2025-03-31 00:00:00 | Regarding Waller Creek TIRZ, can we amend TIF boundaries? what is current performance? | POSTED | Modifying the boundaries of Waller Creek Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) #17 requires an updated Project and Financing Plan approved by its Board of Directors and the City. Amending the boundaries would also require a "but-for" analysis demonstrating that redevelopment within the zone would not occur solely through private investment in the foreseeable future and improvements would significantly enhance the value of all taxable real property within the zone above that which would reasonably occur without the public investment. The Waller Creek TIRZ has dedicated 100% of its incremental City tax revenue since inception to projects in the Project Plan. In 2018, the Project Plan was updated to include the Waller Creek "chain of parks" that will connect Lady Bird Lake with Waterloo Park. Funds for those projects are fully dedicated through 2040. The 2018 Project and Financing Plan estimates for tax increment in the district are currently behind projections, which limits funding capacity for additional projects in the zone before the 2040s. City staff and consultants will be evaluating potential setbacks on properties within the TIRZ, which could reduce future tax increment potential. |
| Vela | 2025-03-31 00:00:00 | Capital View Corridors- how much could some of the downtown properties (including APD's building) be worth without the CVCs? | POSTED | Capitol View Corridors (CVCs) are State- and City-mandated "view corridors" with height limitations that seek to preserve views of the Capitol dome from various locations in Austin. Several corridors originate from viewpoints on the current elevated I-35 highway in the downtown area. If corridors related to the elevated I-35 were to change, more than 25 blocks downtown might see changes to their height restrictions. The impact to land values will vary significantly by location, as the CVCs restrict some parcels more than others. It is certain if CVCs restrictions are fully removed that the redevelopment potential -- and value -- of City sites such as APD headquarters and 1215 Red River (former HealthSouth building) would improve markedly. Staff would need to secure formal appraisals to determine actual values. |
| Ellis | 2025-03-18 00:00:00 | Could you please tell us what a Scenario 5B would cost, where the only difference from Scenario 5 is that it includes 1 full Northern Cap instead of 1 800' Northern Cap? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/24_2.pdf |
| Laine | 2025-03-10 00:00:00 | Can staff please provide funding stacks of the various Dallas caps? | POSTED | The 5-acre Klyde Warren Park was a $107 million project funded by philanthropy ($50 million), City of Dallas bonds ($20 million), TxDOT ($20 million), and the USDOT ($17 million). Operations and maintenance are managed by the Woodall Rodgers Park Foundation which receives funds largely from sponsorship and donations, as well as the public improvement district (PID), tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ), and earned income ($6.4 million annually). The Southern Gateway Deck Park is an active 5.5-acre cap park project in South Dallas, anticipated to cost $300 million for all infrastructure and amenities. Cost increases have required the project to break into two phases, with the first phase consisting of a 2.8-acre park at a cost of $112 million (up about 27% since original 2020 estimates). For Phase 1, roadway infrastructure costs are $47 million, with funding committed with $7 million in 2017 bond funds from the City of Dallas and $40 million from the Council of Governments (NTCOG) (federal pass-through funding). Funding for future phases is still in progress, led by the Southern Gateway Public Green Foundation, which is soliciting grants, private donations, and philanthropic contributions. As a notable example, they received $23 million in naming rights from the Halperin Foundation. |
| Siegel | 2025-04-07 00:00:00 | Would the City of Austin’s commitment to fund this project without assurances of majority outside funding be unprecedented? | POSTED | City staff and consultants could not identify any city whose caps were funded primarily by the municipality. While many caps received significant public funding, that has by and large come from federal and state sources. City staff will provide additional information on comparable projects at the May 6, 2025 work session briefing. The Council decision set for May 22, 2024 is whether to commit to fund 1) remaining design work (from 30% to 100%); 2) roadway elements and 3) deck structures to be included in 2026 TxDOT let package. Future Councils would decide whether to commit further funding based on participation from private and other public sources at that time. |
| siegel | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | In terms of total dollars, what is the most that a city has spent on a cap project? | POSTED | Cap parks in the United States receive a majority of their funding privately through donations and endowments as well as a considerable amount of funds from transportation agencies. Staff and consultant research did not identify any muncipalities that had issued more than $20 million in municipal funds. (Dallas issued $20 million in bond funds for Klyde Warren Park.) The I-70 Cap Park in Denver is partly funded by $37 million in annualized availability payments from the City and County of Denver, but these funds supported both the cap park and the overall interstate highway reconstruction effort. |
| Siegel | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | What are the repayment terms for the State Infrastructure Loan? | POSTED | As outlined by staff in the April 8, 2025 Work Session briefing, the final Advanced Funding Agreement between the City and TXDOT will sets final terms to be paid from City's debt service. Those terms include: a 20 year term with interest rate 3.54% which aligns with tax exempt debt. |
| Siegel | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | How does the current market instability impact the cost projections for Cap & Stitch? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/29_2.pdf |
| Siegel | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Assuming we decide to fund all of the caps, currently projected at $1.4B in capital dollars needed, not including operations and maintenance, is there a high end of how much that could grow over the course of the project? Could it be $2B? $3B? Have you studied this? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/30_2.pdf |
| Siegel | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Whatever the City spends on the cap will impact the availability of funds for other unmet needs. Can you expand on this a little bit? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/31_2.pdf |
| Siegel | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | I like the idea of a once in a generation investment opportunity for a Cap and Stitch but there might be other once in a generation opportunities whether it is housing or other necessary Capital projects. Is there anyone who can provide a high- level summary of other Capital needs to put this in context? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/32_2.pdf |
| Siegel | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Is there any other highway cap in the country where the city had to make a contribution along the lines of what we are being asked to do? | POSTED | As ACM Rogers stated at the April 8, 2025 work session, he was not aware of any city that has provided majority of funding for caps as most rely on private dollars. Staff and consultants have not identified any US city that has or is considering such significant municipal funding for caps. |
| Siegel | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Will TXDOT be required to adhere to City of Austin labor standards? | POSTED | As Director Mendoza stated at the April 8, 2025 work session, TXDOT would manage the Federal NAE grant if awarded and thus be subject to Federal procurement and labor standards, however, any City standards above those would not apply. |
| Alter | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Please explain the City's debt limit policy - benchmark to carry no more than 2% of assessed valuation in debt. What are the other factors (pension, anticipated debt & sales, pension obligations)? | PENDING | One metric of the City's financial policies is the the City's outstanding debt would not exceed 2% of the assessed valuation of the of the City of Austin in its entirety. There are a number of other metrics. The City is engaging its financial advisor to provide a more detailed answer looking at the metrics that credit rating agencies utilize at the May 6 City Council work session. |
| Ellis | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Do caps last forever or are they the type of project with a cadence that requires readjustment and realignment every 60 years or so? What is our timeline for longevity for the structures? Who will do inspections? | POSTED | As Director Mendoza stated at the April 8 Work Session, the life cycles are typically designed and built for about a 75 to 90 year lifespan. Sometimes that can be extended given routine maintenace and ensure the inspections and maintenane are kept up on the structure. TXDOT is expected to include the caps in their biennial inspection of Austin bridges. |
| Ellis | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | What are the options for deciding types of decks in May? | POSTED | Council has the opportunity on May 22, 2025 to determine which cap decks to fund and thus be included in TxDOT construction letting package summer 2026. If Council chooses to fund a cap deck(s) after May 2025 yet before 2032 when TxDOT’s construction window closes, the cost of the change order(s) could add 35% to costs. Any cap decks added later than 2023 would incur cost increases of 100% or more. There are several reduced cap options along the corridor that are smaller than the caps in the Vision Plan. Cesar Chavez-4th Street and 4th Street-7th Street caps have an 800’ cap option. All of the northern caps have a reduced 800’ cap option as well as a 300’ stitch option which can still provide additional amenities next to TxDOT’s enhanced crossings. |
| Qadri | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | What would it look like to have no caps? How would that affect quality of life in terms of quality of life, walkability east to west and in the most walkable parts of the city, sales tax revenue and developmental possibilities? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/38_2.pdf |
| Qadri | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | What are opportunities for public-private partnerships along the cap to help build decks and amenities? | POSTED | Staff are beginning to explore the variety of opportunities for public-private partnerships to help fund and build cap-decks and on-cap amenities. The City and its partners can change order a cap deck into the CapEx-C construction timeline from Summer-2026 to 2032. On-cap amenities can be construction in one or multiple phases starting in 2031-2033 as funding becomes available through said partnerships. Staff are working with Opportunity Austin to meet with prospective developers and investors the week of April 28, to share what opportunities may be available with the City of Austin Cap and Stitch Project. |
| Duchen | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Please provide additional data (1) is it possible to provide a "Tax Payer Impact Statement" as done for residential rate payer for both the capital costs and M & O, for maximum -- all scenarios, if possible -- assuming city is paying for all. | PENDING | Staff will provide at the May 6, 2025 Work Session additional information on fiscal impacts of Cap and Stitch program. |
| Duchen | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Have we looked at the opportunity cost against parkland acquisition from an environmental perspective? | POSTED | Parks and Recreation (PARD) estimates a cost per acre for urban defined areas of $800,000/acre and approximately $200,000/acre for suburban defined areas. M&O costs for raw land upkeep at City parks is estimated at $27/acre. In contrast, caps are estimated to $28.6 million/acre downtown and $35.5 million/acre in Cherrywood-Hancock. The cost for M&O to TxDOT for inspections/maintenance alone is $526,000/acre, plus an estimated $1.3 million/acre for operating and managing the completed amenities. In addition, cap decks can be compared to urban land that allows for up to 2 stories of mixed use development on site. In 2024 land value for comparable parcels in adjacent areas of town for the downtown caps was ~$7.15M per acre and ~$2.85M per acre for the north caps. Cap parks can provide an array of recreational amenities, but they do not serve the same purpose as parkland, which can better address stormwater and water quality issues since caps are essentially 100% impervious cover. |
| Duchen | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | How did staff came up with the criteria for the matrix? Is there a way to expand on the matrix to include other factors? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/42_2.pdf |
| Duchen | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Can staff calculate costs per acre in comparison to PARD data? To make a comparable analysis of urban vs suburban costs per acre parkland, structural costs and M&O? How much would it cost us to buy 15 acres of downtown land? | POSTED | Considering only the roadway and deck costs for caps (Phase 1 & Phase 2 expenses), the downtown caps have an average cost of $656/square foot or $28.6 million per acre. The northern caps have an average cost of $814/square foot or $35.5 million per acre. In contrast, a sample of adjacent appraised land values near the downtown caps averages $221/square foot or $9.6 million per acre. A sample of adjacent appraised land values near the northern caps averages $74/square foot or $3.2 million per acre. This suggests it is roughly twice to three times more expensive for downtown parkland to be located on a cap and ten to eleven times more expensive for Hancock/Cherrywood parkland to be located on a cap. For PARD acquisitions (2021-2025), acquired parkland in urban defined areas had an average value of $802, 275 per acre. Acquired parkland in suburban defined areas had an average value of $199,400 per acre. Land value estimates above suggest a cost of $119 million to acquire 12.4 acres of downtown property, the total acreage for all potential downtown caps and stitches. Providing roadway elements and decks (Phase 1 and 2) on all potential downtown caps and stitches is estimated to cost $343 million. |
| Duchen | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Have we been able to collect any data like paybacks and incremental tax revenue to compare against potential benefits? | PENDING | Staff will present estimated incremental tax revenue associated with cap investments during the May 6, 2025 work session. |
| Duchen | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Do we have any detailed information about the economic development impacts that the Klyde Warren caps had in Dallas? | POSTED | The Woodall Rodgers Park Foundation commissioned a study by the firm HR&A to estimate the economic impact of Klyde Warren Park. Using an input-output model commonly used for economic impact analysis, HR&A estimated an incremental value impact of $1.3 billion. Subsequent studies have suggested an economic impact of $2.5 billion. Input-output models have significant limitations, particularly in urban areas with other major ongoing public and private investments. If, for example, a special event moved from a nearby park to a cap, or if a farmer's market or local business relocated from elsewhere in Austin, this would be quantified as new economic development. These models aim to capture all direct, indirect, and induced effects, but the projected values are highly speculative and can often be attributed to the individual or compounding effects of other adjacent investments (i.e., the Convention Center redevelopment, Waterloo Greenway Trail, Capitol Complex redevelopment, Rainey Street redevelopment). It is also important to note some key differences between Klyde Warren in Dallas and Cap&Stitch in Austin. Klyde Warren benefitted from significant value capture and economic development due to project timing. The park was developed while there were still numerous downtown surface parking lots, locking in tax increments before many construction projects in downtown and Uptown were completed. Dallas also lacked strong competing recreational areas downtown, where Austin has a number of potential alternative parks. |
| Vela | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | TXDOT wants us to both identify the foundational elements that we are going to build and then also identify any caps that we want to include as part of their initial bid package, their RFP. Is that correct? | POSTED | Yes. The only option for building the foundational elements is to include them in the 2026 TxDOT letting package. The most cost-effective option for the decks is to include them in the 2026 letting package. This will allow the City to benefit from TxDOT’s lowest bid, as well as TxDOT's mobilization for the highway construction. Costs will rise 35%-45% if the decks are included in a change order after 2026, and will double if added after 2033 when TXDOT contract has closed. |
| Vela | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | My understanding is that the cheapest, most efficient way to build the foundational elements and the caps would be to include them as part of the TxDOT package. Is this a correct understanding? | POSTED | Director Mendoza stated at the April 8, 2025 work session that staff is confident in TXDOT’s 30% design cost estimate which includes a 20% contingency. The only option for building the foundational elements is to include them in the 2026 TxDOT letting package. The most cost-effective option for the decks is to include them in the 2026 letting package. This will allow the City to benefit from TxDOT’s lowest bid, as well as TxDOT's mobilization for the highway construction. Costs will rise 35%-45% if the decks are included in a change order after 2026, and will double if added after 2033 when TXDOT contract has closed. |
| Vela | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Where would I look to see cities who have done these types of projects, see how they have experienced them, and see how it has turned out for them? | POSTED | The most relevant complete examples include Klyde Warren Park (Dallas), I-70 Cap Park (Denver), Rose Kennedy Greenway (Boston), and Olympic Sculpture Park (Seattle). |
| Fuentes | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Am I correct in thinking that in May we are going to say that we want all of these roadway elements or some of these elements, and then we are also deciding on which cap decks to fund at that point as well? | POSTED | Yes, in May, 2025, City Council is required to decide which Phase 1 Roadway Elements the City wishes to move forward and commit design and construction funding for those Phase 1 Roadway locations. The City Council will also need to commit to 100 percent design funding for selected Phase 2 decks. The Council also has the opportunity to consider if the City can commit to Phase 2 deck construction funding for selected locations to secure current 30% cost estimate pricing, or Council can defer Phase 2 deck construction funding to a later date through 2032 at which time the City may fund via change order, which would likely entail cost escalation. |
| Fuentes | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Can you walk us through why the Northern caps are almost double the cost of the Downtown caps? And why they also scored lower on equity? | POSTED | Transportation Officer Michelle Marx stated at the April 8, 2025 Work Session that the excavation costs, the incremental cost for TXDOT to sink road lower to accommodate northern caps, adds significant costs compared to the downtown caps, whose roadways is already lowered. The northern caps scored lower in Equity on the Prioritization Matrix, slide 7, because of the demographics of census tracts adjacent to the caps. The downtown caps’ adjacent census tracts have lower incomes and nonwhite populations than the northern caps. |
| Vela | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | The University of Texas is going to add 17 acres of open space and park space and additional enhanced community benefits that all Austinites can enjoy. The question is, does it make sense for the City of Austin to continue to invest in these type of park decks or should we focus in and do some of them downtown where we can really build them out and then invest in the rest of the city? | POSTED | Transportation Officer Michelle Marx noted at the April 8, 2025 Work Session that UT is effectively extending their campus across their caps with buildings, open space, and other amenities. All of the City of Austin's capping opportuntities can provide community benefits to all of Austinites. |
| Siegel | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Please advise about what the human experience might be on top of a cap in terms of air quality, noise levels, etc. We have received questions from the Sierra Club, for example. What are trade offs or health impacts, if any? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/52_2.pdf |
| Alter | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Consider impacts of not building the caps. Do we have information on heat island impact? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/53_2.pdf |
| Harper-Madison | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | How to measure the social and economic impacts of CAPS -- value of restoring E-W crossing? | POSTED | The economic impact of caps is measured by estimating the direct, indirect, and induced effects of the cap developments, which can be complicated in an urban environment with other nearby active public and private investments. The social impact is qualitative, though some economists will estimate a dollar value of these public benefits as well (improved local environment, connectivity/mobility, health and wellness). |
| Harper-Madison | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Concern for caps impact on adjacent neighborhoods -- rising property values; How do caps address structural poverty? | POSTED | Caps have the strong potential to create a "park premium" effect on land values in the vicinity. These land value increases can increase displacement pressure on nearby businesses and households. Displacement prevention techniques that the City is currently employing in other locations may be helpful to deploy to mitigate displacement risk along caps that are advanced through construction in Austin. |
| Vela | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | How does this compare to transformation of Lady Bird Lake / Butler Trail begun in 1950-60s? | POSTED | The 10-mile path around Lady Bird Lake is one of Austin's most popular parks. Austin Parks and Recreation and The Trail Conservancy share the trail's early history began in 1971 with formation of the Town Lake Beautification Committee, a unique public-private civic effort. Its largest fundraiser took place in 1973 at the LBJ Ranch and Austin's garden clubs were enlisted to help with maintenance. |
| Vela | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | What is the relative cost of purchasing 15 acres of downtown land vs. 15 acres created on caps? Parkland dedication purchase along Shoal Creek 0.5 acres cost $XXM | POSTED | Considering only the roadway and deck costs for caps (Phase 1 & Phase 2 expenses), the downtown caps have an average cost of $656/square foot or $28.6 million per acre. The northern caps have an average cost of $814/square foot or $35.5 million per acre. In contrast, a sample of adjacent appraised land values near the downtown caps averages $221/square foot or $9.6 million per acre. A sample of adjacent appraised land values near the northern caps averages $74/square foot or $3.2 million per acre. This suggests it is roughly twice to three times more expensive for downtown parkland to be located on a cap and ten to eleven times more expensive for Hancock/Cherrywood parkland to be located on a cap. |
| Vela | 2025-04-08 00:00:00 | Reference DAA testimony, what is the economic impact of Klyde Warren Park? Southern Gateway acknowledges equity issues? Compare this with an economic impact estimate for Austin caps? Look at Dallas models instructive given within TX. | POSTED | The Woodall Rodgers Park Foundation commissioned a study by the firm HR&A to estimate the economic impact of Klyde Warren Park. Using an input-output model commonly used for economic impact analysis, HR&A estimated an incremental value impact of $1.3 billion. Subsequent studies have suggested an economic impact of $2.5 billion.Input-output models have significant limitations, particularly in urban areas with other major ongoing public and private investments. If, for example, a special event moved from a nearby park to a cap, or if a farmer's market or local business relocated from elsewhere in Austin, this would quantified as new economic development. These models aim to capture all direct, indirect, and induced effects, but the projected values are highly speculative and can often be attributed to the individual or compounding effects of other adjacent investments (i.e., the Convention Center redevelopment, Waterloo Greenway Trail, Capitol Complex redevelopment, Rainey Street redevelopment). |
| All | 2024-11-19 00:00:00 | What are the potential Impacts of Executive Orders on the City’s Cap and Stitch Project | POSTED | The execution of the City’s $105M Neighborhood Access and Equity (NAE) grant for the construction of the cap between Cesar Chavez and Fourth Street is currently pending. Staff is currently awaiting clarification regarding the impacts of recent Executive Orders on our ability to execute the grant agreement with the US Department of Transportation (USDOT). The 90-day review of all agency programs subject to the Executive Order should be complete mid-April 2025. In the event that the Federal government does not permit the City’s NAE grant to move forward to execution, the City’s cap project between Cesar Chavez to Fourth Street could be at risk. TxDOT requires a commitment by May 31, 2025 for all City-funded Cap and Stitch elements to be included in their mid-2026 construction letting package. This commitment includes all Phase 1 structural support elements that the City would like to move forward with, as well as deck and tunnel elements associated with the Cesar Chavez to Fourth Street Cap grant project. Cost estimates to-date for the Cesar Chavez to Fourth Street Cap assume inclusion in the TxDOT bid package and construction by TxDOT contractors. Should funding for those deck and tunnel elements be deferred to future change orders or to construction outside of the TxDOT project, Council should anticipate significant costs increases. |
| All | 2024-11-19 00:00:00 | Has staff done any independent vetting of the TxDOT 30% cost estimates for roadway elements and cap decks provided to the City? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/60_2.pdf |
| All | 2024-11-19 00:00:00 | Is there potential for a future Red Line Commuter Rail stop on a northern cap where the CapMetro Red Line crosses I-35 near Hancock Center? | POSTED | In response to this question from Council, City staff reached out to CapMetro, who provided the following response: The CapMetro Rail Red Line was originally constructed to be a commuter service along the 32-mile route. Operationally, the line has more closely functioned in a hybrid manner, something between true commuter rail service and light rail service within Austin. CapMetro’s long-term vision for the Red Line lean into this hybrid model, considering more frequent trains between the Domain area and downtown as well as potential infill stations. CapMetro is currently conducting a planning feasibility analysis of Red Line infill stations including a potential station in the Hancock-Cherrywood area. The CapMetro Rail infill review is an opportunity to assess how our rail service currently operates between downtown Austin and Leander under current conditions. The infill review process will consider critical factors from the future I-35 Cap and Stitch project while focusing on ridership (current and projected), operational needs and costs of the service, and the overall capacity of the entire line. This review process will also yield an order-of-magnitude cost of new stations. While we have not identified a funding source for these capital investments and increased operating costs, this planning effort is a critical first step in exploring the possibilities for future consideration into our transit network. As it relates to a potential new station near I-35 and 41st Street, near the Hancock shopping center, CapMetro understands that TxDOT’s current designs do not include or preclude a future station in this area, including on top of a future highway cap. The options for station placement, if warranted and recommended based on the infill review, may be on top of a future cap, or to the east or west of the highway along the rail line. CapMetro staff anticipate the rail station infill analysis to be completed in time to inform the Transit Plan 2035, which CapMetro intends to adopt in late summer/early fall 2025. |
| All | 2024-11-19 00:00:00 | Is the new street connection across I-35 at 5th Street necessary? | POSTED | Transportation and Public Works staff worked with TxDOT starting in 2020 on identifying opportunities to add multimodal connections east and west of I-35. 5th Street was determined to be one that could improve existing conditions by providing a more direct egress from downtown to I-35 while providing a direct connection into growing east Austin. There is significant value to maximizing multimodal circulation in, out, and through downtown. At this time, staff do not recommend removing the new 5th Street connection across I-35. Staff have confirmed with TxDOT that there will be opportunities for temporary street closures at 5th and 6th Streets to provide space for festivals and events. The City and TxDOT currently have a process in place to facilitate such event-based street closures. |
| All | 2024-11-19 00:00:00 | How do the 30% cost estimates provided to the City compare to those provided to the University of Texas for their proposed caps? | POSTED | TxDOT has been coordinating with the University of Texas (UT) on the UT capping opportunities between 15th Street and Dean Keeton Street, following similar cost estimating methodologies. TxDOT used the same engineering firms to provide estimates for UT and the City of Austin. The 30% cost estimates for both UT’s and the City’s capping opportunities do vary from cap to cap due to differences in structural design, roadway design, excavation costs, utility design, and much more. The City of Austin’s phase 1 roadway cost estimates range from $6.7M to $8.2M per acre as an example of the varying cost estimates within the City’s capping opportunities. In response to this question from Council, City staff reached out to UT staff, who confirmed that the roadway elements 30% cost estimate for one of their cap opportunities with full fire, life, and safety elements is $6.9M per acre. |
| All | 2024-11-19 00:00:00 | Are there cost estimates for the proposed East Avenue Trail betterments? | POSTED | Staff is currently coordinating with TxDOT on the process and timeline for identifying and estimating the City’s requested betterments to expand TxDOT’s planned 10-foot shared use path (SUP) to a widened and shaded bicycle and pedestrian trail (the proposed East Avenue Trail). Staff submitted the betterment project for grant funding through the TxDOT Transportation Alternatives (TASA) 2025 preliminary application on February 21, 2025, The City can anticipate eligibility notification by April 16, 2025 and after gaining permission to apply from City Council, the City will be required to submit a detailed application by June 20, 2025. In response to this question from Council, City staff reached out to TxDOT, who provided the following response: The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is working with City of Austin staff to determine the feasibility of implementing the East Avenue Trail (E.A.T.) design concept within TxDOT’s I-35 right of way and to provide a probable cost estimate for construction. Additional improvements beyond the 10-ft shared-use path provided by TxDOT would be considered a local government “betterment.” If the City of Austin chooses to fund this betterment, an Advanced Funding Agreement (AFA) would be developed, and design of the E.A.T. facility would be integrated into the project. |
| Duchen | 2025-03-18 00:00:00 | Can staff provide a Vision Plan summary and provide each caps’ Amenity Plans? | POSTED | https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/TPW/OF35/65_2.pdf |