Highway Teardown Tour | 4. Austin, TX

Summary

The Big Dig – “Highway Teardown Tour | 4. Austin, TX” (June 10, 2026)

---

Episode Overview

This episode, hosted by Ian Coss and recorded live at the KUT Festival in East Austin, dives deep into the fraught politics surrounding the I-35 highway expansion and proposed “cap” project in Austin, Texas. With perspectives from local reporters, two city councilors, and urban infrastructure experts, the discussion confronts the transformative, costly vision of highway caps: are they urban repair, harm reduction, or a distraction from larger systemic injustice and climate threats? The conversation reveals the complex trade-offs and emotional stakes inherent in local infrastructure decisions in the American South.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. What is a “Highway Cap”? (02:00–03:45)

• Definition: “A cap is basically a roof or a deck… built right on top of a highway… In theory, can knit the land on either side back together.”
  — Ian Coss (02:04)
• Context: Many U.S. cities are experimenting with caps (Dallas, Denver, Philadelphia) to reconnect urban areas divided by highways, but the approach remains controversial—even among anti-highway activists.
• Politics: In Austin, as Koss notes, “the debate around caps has become, in the words of one city councilor, ‘a death match.’” (03:15)

2. The I-35 Expansion: Scope & Rationale (04:18–06:06)

• Expansion Details: I-35 runs through central Austin—currently 12 lanes (six each way, including frontage roads), planned to expand to 20 lanes.
  • Megan Kimball: “About five years ago, TxDOT… unveiled plans to make that 12 lane highway about 20 lanes across.” (04:48)
• Motivation: State leaders, particularly Governor Greg Abbott, champion widenings in hopes of speeding up traffic—a promise underpinned by major funding shifts (Texas Clear Lanes program, $80bn+).
• Critique: Urbanist research shows widening typically fails to fix congestion, as more lanes simply attract more cars.

3. Austin’s Racial & Urban Geography: The Legacy of I-35 (06:30–07:49)

• Historical Division: I-35 traces the former “East Avenue”—Austin’s line of legal and later de facto racial segregation.
  • Nathan Bernier: “It became a concrete barrier that really split the city—not just physically, but… psychologically…” (06:45)
• Project Plan: The state proposes to depress the rebuilt highway into a trench, which could allow for a cap above—potentially reconnecting downtown and East Austin.

4. The Vision for Capping I-35 (07:50–14:51)

• Potential Amenities: Parks, splash pads, rock-climbing walls, athletic fields, new buildings, even music venues.
  • Mike Siegel: “You could have live music venues on 6th street on this essentially city owned property.” (07:50)
• Financial Reality:
  • Support structures: $86 million
  • Deck/Deck parks: $370 million
  • Amenities (event spaces, etc.): $258 million
  • Total: ~$600 million, not including annual maintenance (~$9 million/year)
  • Funding burden falls squarely on Austin taxpayers—not the state.

City Councilor Perspectives: Vision vs. Skepticism (10:27–14:51)

• Chito Vela (Pro-Cap):
  • “That would be quite possibly the best park in the city... Its potential for huge events that we all have all the time here in Austin.” (12:26)
• Mike Siegel (Critical):
  • “This is not [Boston’s Big Dig]... The state should be paying for this. The federal government should be paying for this. Our city is not equipped to pay for a project of this magnitude that doesn't directly benefit the people of Austin.” (13:13)
  • Raises opportunity cost: for $600 million, could build many smaller parks or affordable homes, instead of one downtown linear park.

5. Federal/State Funding and Political Limits (14:52–16:00)

• Lost Federal Grant: A $105 million “Reconnecting Communities” grant rescinded by the Trump administration hurt local prospects.
• Reality Check: Without state or federal buy-in, Austin must weigh library and park closures against the cost of capping I-35.
  • Chito Vela: “It should be a part of the rebuild... The state and the federal government should take responsibility for mitigating the damage.” (15:46)

6. Are Caps Real Solutions, or Distractions? (17:42–22:51)

• Urbanist Perspective:
  • Megan Kimball: “Clyde Warren Park in Dallas is a wonderful park... But this expansion is going to take 42 acres of land from the city of Austin and we might get 14 acres back if we decide to spend $600 million. That to me seems like a bad bargain.” (18:07–18:44)
  • Suggests the cap is used to “sell” the expansion, not to truly repair past damages.
  • Mike Siegel: “I see these caps as lipstick on a pig…” (19:29)
• Climate & Equity Lens:
  • Kimball underscores the climate threat: the expanded road will increase emissions and worsen Austin’s climate. “Texas already leads the country in greenhouse gas emissions from our trucks and vehicles... This expansion will make that measurably worse.” (23:39–24:26)
  • Opportunity cost: more funds for transit or local parks would bring greater benefits.

7. Political Process and What’s Next (24:53–29:29)

• Immediate Decisions: TxDOT accelerated its timeline, requiring city staff to specify which caps (if any) to fund by May 2026.
  • Nathan Bernier: “The council is under the impression that they would have until November to make that decision.” (26:02)
• Current Status: Austin council voted to “future-proof” some caps (i.e., pay for support structures now, but not the cap itself), leaving the big dollars and amenities in limbo—potentially for decades.
  • Mike Siegel: “We fought almost a death match last spring about how much to commit… the status quo is that we have future proofed three of the caps…” (26:46)
  • Chito Vela: “The loss of that federal grant… changes everything. So my role on council was to future proof… But I don’t see in the short term this council taking any more action or putting… more funds toward the caps.” (27:23)
• Cost Escalation: Delays make future caps more expensive as construction costs rise.
  • Siegel: “At some point the cost doubles or more.” (28:52)

8. How Councilors Weigh Long-Term Vision vs. Immediate Needs (29:29–32:17)

• Cheeto Vela (Long-Term View): Compares to San Antonio’s Riverwalk, urging that leaders “plant those seeds that future generations will ultimately harvest.” (30:07–31:40)
• Mike Siegel (Immediate Needs): "I feel more driven to deliver for people right now... My fear is that even the 100 million we’ve allocated towards the roadway elements will never bear fruit." (31:40–32:17)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “When you add lanes to highways, more drivers fill those lanes and it doesn’t work.”
  — Megan Kimball (05:11)
• “It became a concrete barrier that really split the city—not just physically, but… psychologically...”
  — Nathan Bernier (06:45)
• “You could have live music venues on 6th street on this essentially city owned property.”
  — Mike Siegel (07:50)
• “Our city is not equipped to pay for a project of this magnitude that doesn't directly benefit the people of Austin.”
  — Mike Siegel (13:13)
• “That would be quite possibly the best park in the city… one of the best parks in the state of Texas.”
  — Chito Vela (12:26)
• “I see these caps as lipstick on a pig, right. The best thing to do would be to actually reduce the interstate or route it around the city...”
  — Mike Siegel (19:29)
• “The solution here is not caps. It's more people in buses and trains… I would sacrifice a park for that vision.”
  — Megan Kimball (24:28)
• “To me, that's that kind of opportunity there where you've got to plant those seeds that future generations will ultimately harvest the fruit of.”
  — Chito Vela (30:07)
• “My fear is that even the 100 million we’ve allocated… will never bear fruit. If you compare that to, we could have built 20 community parks, or… a couple thousand units of affordable housing... we’ve already wasted an opportunity.”
  — Mike Siegel (31:40)

---

Important Timestamps

• 02:00–03:45 | What is a highway cap? How do cities use them?
• 04:18–06:06 | The scale and rationale of the I-35 expansion
• 06:30–07:49 | Austin’s history and how I-35 deepened segregation
• 08:14–09:10 | Funding breakdown: who pays, and how much will it cost Austin?
• 10:26–13:13 | Councilor perspectives: The dream (Vela) vs. the cost (Siegel)
• 14:52–16:00 | The challenge of lost federal/state funds
• 18:07–18:44 | Is the cap a good deal for Austin? Critique from Kimball
• 19:29 | “Lipstick on a pig”—harshest critiques of the cap
• 23:39–24:28 | Climate change, transportation, and what’s truly “livable”
• 26:02–27:57 | Accelerated political timeline, city council’s “death match,” and grudging “future-proofing”
• 28:52–29:29 | The risks of delay—mounting future costs
• 30:07–31:40 | How politicians weigh generational vision vs. today’s urgent needs

---

Tone & Style

• Open, at times adversarial debate, laced with locally specific humor (“Old Sixth Street,” “lipstick on a pig”).
• Sober realism about political process and trade-offs; a blend of wonkish detail and personal stakes.
• Both heartfelt visions of public space and sharply skeptical urbanist analysis.

---

Summary Verdict

This episode captures the passionate, complex, and unresolved debate over highway caps in Austin. Listeners come away understanding that the “cap” isn’t just an architectural gesture but a revealing flashpoint for issues of equity, city vs. state power, climate, and the limits of urban dreaming under America’s infrastructure regime. Highly recommended for anyone interested in the intersection of infrastructure, politics, justice, and urban life.

Transcript

[A]

Summer always makes me rethink what I'm reaching for every day. Lighter fabrics, better materials, pieces that are easy to wear and look effortless. That's why I keep coming back to Quince. They focus on high quality essentials. Think breathable linen, soft organic cotton, washable silk. But without the luxury markup, everything feels elevated but still easy. Quince has beautiful everyday pieces like 100% European linen pants, dresses and tops. With style starting at $32. Everything at Quince is priced 50 to 80% less than similar brands. Quince works directly with ethical factories and cuts out the middlemen. So you're paying for quality, not brand markup. And it's not just clothing. Quince has really become a destination for elevated essentials across home kitchen and bedding. And with summer travel season coming up, I decided to update my luggage with the Quince Carry on bag. It's ultra light but still sturdy. There are interior compression panels and a removable laundry bag. And the 36060 degree spinner wheels and telescopic handle will make navigating through the airport a breeze. Elevate your summer wardrobe. Go to quint.com bigdig for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. Now available in Canada too. That's Q-U-I-N c e.com bigdig for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com bigdig and also from the Cape

[B]

Playhouse in Dennis Village, now playing Nat Zagre's Mozart to Pop Chart, a theatrical concert exploring and exploding musical traditions. Tickets for Mozart to pop [e-mail] if there is a hot trend in the world of highway activism, it is the so called cap. A cap is basically a roof or a deck, as it's sometimes called, built right on top of a highway. Assuming that highway is below grade, meaning it's down in a trench, basically, then the cap, in theory, can knit the land on either side back together. Now, you may be thinking what I'm describing is just a tunnel, which it sort of is. But unlike the Big Dig, say here in Boston, these caps are small, maybe just a few city blocks long, like a little tunnel, a small fix for a big highway. Dallas has one, Denver has one, Philadelphia is working on one. Portland and Atlanta are hoping to build one. And there are dozens of other cities looking at the idea. But even among people who hate what highways have done to our cities, these caps are controversial. I'm Ian Koss. Welcome to the Big Dig Highway Teardown Tour to explore the fraught and layered politics of highway caps. I have come to Austin, Texas, where the debate around caps has become, in the words of one city councilor, quote, a death match. When I was at our live taping, I met a guy in the audience wearing a war on cars T shirt who told me that the cap issue had tormented him for weeks. He'd go to sleep one day thinking he was for it, wake up, sure he was against it, and then somehow be for it again by the end of the day. It is not a simple issue. And as you will hear in Austin, the particular nature of Texas politics has made the stakes of the debate especially high. We recorded this conversation as part of the KUT festival in East Austin, the part of the city that is divided from downtown by the interstate, I35. To kick it off, we have with us Kut's own Nathan Bernier and Megan Kimball, who is a local journalist and the author of the book City Limits, Infrastructure Inequality, and the Future of of America's Highways. Go ahead and grab your microphones, folks.

[C]

Hello.

[B]

So I am from Boston. I'm used to Boston scale highways. When I was coming in from the airport today, I noticed you have bigger highways. I35 in particular looks pretty big. I understand that the state wants to make it bigger. Just how much bigger, Megan, would the state like this road to be?

[C]

So i35, which goes through right through the heart of Austin, it is currently

[B]

12 lanes, six in each direction.

[C]

Six in each direction, and that includes frontage roads. And if you haven't been to Texas, our frontage roads essentially act like highway roads. They're very fast moving. So we count them as part of the highway lanes. And then, you know, about five years ago, TxDOT, the Texas Department of Transportation, unveiled plans to make that 12 lane highway about 20 lanes across.

[B]

So what is the rationale for a 20 lane highway through the middle of downtown Austin?

[C]

Make the traffic go faster. But decades of evidence has showed that when you add lanes to highways, more drivers fill those lanes and it doesn't work. And then our governor, Greg Abbott, ran for office in 2014, and one of his campaign promises was to fix traffic in Texas cities. So there's a somewhat famous campaign ad of our governor, who's in a wheelchair wheeling along the shoulder of a highway in Dallas, saying, a guy in a wheelchair can go faster than traffic on some Texas highways. Elect me and I will fix this.

[D]

Wow.

[C]

The voters of Texas did indeed elect him, and he delivered on that campaign promise and he created what's called Texas Clear Lanes. Voters approved sales Tax revenue diversions into our highway trust fund. And since that program was created, the Texas Clear Lanes program, it has siphoned about $80 billion to widen highways in five major Texas cities, including the i35 project.

[B]

Nathan, you have been covering all this drama as it unfolds for KUT here in Austin. How do we get from this widening project to. A lot of what we're going to talk about today is actually a covering project of what to do on top of the highway. How do we get from. Well, they want. The state wants to widen it to. The city is now talking about covering it. What's that journey?

[D]

I think a lot of it has to do with the history of i35, where it was built along East Avenue, which used to be a segregation, a legal segregation line when segregation was legal, and then became a de facto segregation line when segregation was not legal. And it is, when it opened in 1962, it became a concrete barrier that really split the city. Not just physically, but I think psychologically in many ways, and certainly physically as well. This is a very important thing. And so the idea behind covering i35 was, well, in Dallas, there's a park, a five acre park called Clyde Warren park that kind of connects uptown and downtown Dallas. It's actually quite a pleasant park. I visited it a couple years ago, 2024. And the idea is to do something similar here, but on a bigger scale.

[B]

And I think something that was really reinforced for me coming here today and looking at the highway is that it's elevated, but not on structure. It's elevated on. It is literally a wall of dirt. It's this like mound of a highway that is a very strong visual, physical barrier. And so part of the rebuild is to depress it, put it down in a trench. And that's what creates this opening for capping it.

[D]

Right. So the vision was, let's hide the highway, conceal it beneath these caps.

[E]

And you could.

[D]

And on top you could have farmers markets, splash pads, rock climbing walls, athletic fields, even buildings up to two stories tall that could. You could have live music venues on 6th street on this essentially city owned property.

[B]

So Texas DOT is paying for the expansion. Who has to pay for the caps?

[C]

The city of Austin.

[B]

How much does it cost?

[D]

I have a table right here.

[F]

Greater.

[D]

Gonna ask that. So it's, you know, basically 14 acres of deck, parks of capsule, just the roadway elements, which are the support structures that would hold up the caps, essentially thicker walls and extra excavation. That's 86 million for the 14 acres. And that's phase one. And then you have the decks themselves. You're looking at $370 million. And then for all of the nice things that go on top, the splash

[B]

pads and the rock climbing, rock climbing

[D]

and the venues in the buildings, pickleball courts. Dare I say, I wouldn't be surprised. 258 million. And so total, all in, it's around $600 million. And that does not include annual operations and maintenance required just for the structures. It's around 9 million.

[B]

$600 million. 600 million just to get it.

[D]

Now, that's an estimate. And these estimates have a tendency to grow as time goes by.

[B]

Part of what I find so interesting about the Austin case and part of the reason I wanted to have this conversation here is you can look at a lot of cities right now that are weighing different kinds of caps, different ways to cover up highways. And I find that often the debate around the value of the caps is a little abstracted because it's usually somebody else's money. It's often like, oh, there is some state money for this, or maybe there's a federal grant that's covering this. And so it's like, well, why not? I mean, sure, like the highway is there. Might as well cover it up. In Austin, the citizens of this city have to make a very direct choice of whether they want to pay $600 million in order to cover up this highway and create these caps. And so I want to welcome into our conversation two additional guests who know this debate very, very well because they are at the center of it. We have with us two city councilors from the city of Austin, Mike Siegel and Chito Vela.

[F]

Pleasure. Pleasure to be here.

[B]

So, Chito, you have been a big booster of the cap project, so I'm hoping you could just lay out your vision. Really just like a visual picture. If you walk down this cap in 10, 20, 30 years, what do you see?

[F]

You know, Austin has this world famous 6th street, which is a lot of nightlife, a lot of fun. The caps would. 6th street would go right through that. So that creates the opportunity for major events on the.

[B]

And does 6th street actually dead end on either side or. It does go under.

[F]

It goes through. It goes through the i35.

[D]

Right.

[B]

But you gotta walk under the noisy overpass and all that.

[F]

It's an unpleasant. Doesn't walk between. Across I35 on 6th street, but, you know, you have E6, which is a bunch of bars and fun and whatnot. What some people call Dirty six or what they're trying to call Old sixth Street now, which is kind of.

[B]

That's a smart rebrand right there.

[F]

That's the traditional Sixth street, the kind of center of it all, where all the bars and the partying and everything is. And, you know, and then you've got West 6th street, which is kind of fancy 6th Street. And so you have. If you build the caps, you're building a venue basically right in the heart of kind of the downtown Austin. And so there's an opportunity for concerts and events and, you know, all kinds of community activities. So when I think about the vision, I just think about that stretch of land from first street through seventh street, basically six blocks of contiguous cap. And, you know, the. I think it's seven or eight acres. That. That portion of it would be about that. That one cap, that one. There would be actually, I think two of them. But. But back to back.

[B]

Yeah, yeah.

[D]

Almost nine acres, according to this table.

[F]

Thank you. That would be quite possibly the best park in the city. I mean, it would be one of the best parks, honestly, in the state of Texas. Just in terms of, like, the amount of people that will be on there. Its potential for huge events that we all have all the time here in Austin. So when I think about big picture vision, that's what I think.

[B]

Yeah. Nathan, it's good we got you situated right in the middle here. You've got the tables and charts on hand, so you can just like real time fact check everybody.

[F]

Oh, yeah.

[D]

I'll be jumping in at every opportunity.

[B]

Okay, great. Mike, you have been. Is it fair to say critical or skeptical of the value of the caps in particular? So what's wrong with the vision that Cheeto just laid out for us? Why wouldn't you want that for your city?

[E]

Well, I hate that I'm the Debbie Downer in this conversation, the critic. I love the vision that he just shared. And I've told you, Ian, that I was going to undergrad when they were digging the Big Dig, and I love the Big Dig in Boston, but this is not that. And so I think I have two areas of critique. One is the cost and really the opportunity cost, and two is actually the quality of the experience. I don't know if it's quite what Cheetah was laying out, but in terms of the cost, the state should be paying for this. The federal government should be paying for this. Our city is not equipped to pay for a project of this magnitude that doesn't directly benefit the people of Austin. When I think about building a roof over the freeway, I'm thinking Of all the thousands of people that need a roof over their heads. When I'm thinking about building a very beautiful, potentially but expensive linear park downtown, knowing that we could build dozens of parks in neighborhoods around the city, especially in neighborhoods that don't have a nearby accessible park. And so it's really the opportunity cost. Yeah. If we could snap our fingers and build this and didn't have to sacrifice a senior center in Northeast Austin or a long desired park in another part of town or a library in a community that doesn't have a library, I would support it. But I think right now, council should be focusing on capital investments that directly benefit the people.

[B]

Chito, would you close a library in order to keep this project alive?

[F]

No. No, I would not.

[B]

But we live in a world of finite resources and real trade offs.

[F]

We do, and we recently lost. And I think it's a really important part of this discussion. $105 million federal for this project. It was called the Reconnecting Communities and we were granted it. And then when the Trump administration came in and pulled it back kind of at the, at the last minute. This is fundamentally a federal highway managed by the state. It should be a part of the rebuild of i35 that the state pays for it. Again, even at the cost that we were just outlining. It would be, you know, what, 5%, 10% of the total cost of the i35 rebuild. In other words, there's no reason why they shouldn't be wrapped into the total cost of the highway. The state and the federal government should take responsibility for mitigating the damage that these highways create.

[B]

Well, let me tell you, if the Big Dig had been paid for in Boston property taxes, it would, it would not have been built. Not even close.

[F]

Have a, have a drink for Ted Kennedy tonight when you're on 6th Street. Okay.

[B]

Exactly. Yes. I'm going to raise glass for Ted Kennedy and getting that federal funding for us. Coming up, what would Austin actually get for all that money? And are these caps just a distraction from the real issues of urban highways? Support for the Big Dig comes from New England Recovery center providing inpatient addiction treatment in state of the art facilities located in Westborough, Mass. All major insurance plans accepted. Learn [e-mail] and also from the MIT Federal Credit Union Banking built on innovation and guided by real people. Memberships open to the public [e-mail] federally insured by NCUA. I want to bring it back to the experience of these caps. So what is it that the city of Austin is like scrounging around in the couch cushions for change to pay for. Megan, I was wondering if you could speak to this because I know you've looked at Dallas, you've looked at some other cities that have done this. Do you see value in those spaces or what value do you see in those spaces on top of highways?

[C]

Clyde Warren park in Dallas is a wonderful park. You can forget that you're on top of a highway there. I've been to a cap in Denver which is also a really wonderful space over i70. So I would say, like these parks when they're built can be wonderful value added spaces. And you can forget again that you're on top of a highway and it feels sort of like magical. It's like public space sort of conjured from thin air.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

The question though is like, what do we have to give up to get that space? This expansion is going to take 42 acres of land from the city of Austin and we might get 14 acres back if we decide to spend $600 million. That to me seems like a bad bargain. A lot of the caps were built over highways that were already there. They weren't being expanded. They were just simply enhancing what was already there. This one, I think was very much used to sell a highway expansion. And so I'm very cynical about the kind of like value add experience. I'm like, why I would prefer not to have that highway expanded. As a resident of Austin, I didn't get to make that decision though. The residents of Austin were not asked.

[B]

So you feel like here the cap really was a justification to kind of push through the expansion itself?

[C]

Yeah, I think it was. The caps were absolutely used as a narrative to sell highway expansion. Again, using that language of reparative justice, we are going to repair the harm created by this highway. TxDOT released renderings of caps and there was a little asterisk saying, we're not going to pay for these. But here are what you could have. Citizens of Austin, these beautiful parks over this highway when they were doing the public engagement process for the i35 expansion. To me that feels fraudulent. And I think that was very much used to justify the expansion. It's going to make central Austin so much better. It's going to reconnect our city even as we displace 170 properties and take 42 acres of land.

[E]

And those justifications came in at the same time that our local movement to stop the highway expansion was getting at its most powerful moment. We had a group Rethink 35 that was organizing these rallies and votes and going even to the regional metropolitan planning organization to try to push back against the expansion. And I see these caps as lipstick on a pig, right. That, you know, the best thing to do would be to actually reduce the interstate or route it around the city. We have this new toll road on the outskirts of town. We could have routed it that way and restored the inner city in a profound way, but instead they gave us this really terrible choice. And to me, one of the key aspects of it, and Megan earlier mentioned the frontage roads. The caps only cover the interstate, but on each side there's going to be three or four fast moving frontage roads. And to me, when we talk about the experience, to me, when you go into a park, you want to feel seclusion, right? The idea that you can, you know, hear the birds and look at the wildlife and so forth, I don't think you would feel that. I think you're still going to be able to see the highway. We never got accurate air quality data. We never really got a true sense for what the experience on top of these caps would be.

[B]

Chito, do you. You know, Mike called it lipstick on a pig. Megan called it essentially like an astroturf operation that was sort of like, you know, thrown into these renderings just to kind of as a distraction. Do you see the cap that way or do you see the cap, you know, as something that you believe in for the city? I guess, like, how are these two things?

[F]

What I would say is that an expanded, uncapped i35 running through the heart of Austin is a complete and total disaster by virtually every metric.

[B]

So you accept that as a fait accompli, the highway is going to get widened?

[F]

Oh, those contracts are out of contract now.

[B]

We have to do the best we can.

[F]

Yeah, I mean, it's over. Exactly. And again, we didn't vote on this. This was a state legislature, and people in Austin really don't like the current state legislature. But we just could not stop it. We could not control it. We tried to mitigate it in as many ways as we possibly could, but ultimately it's a bad idea. I would call the calves kind of harm reduction.

[B]

Lipstick on a pig, or a harm reduction.

[F]

Harm reduction seems better, but I'm trying

[B]

to think of a better metaphor for something you could put on a pig that is more meaningful than lipstick. Take ideas later. Megan, I'm curious for you. Do you accept that some of these roads, you're not gonna be able to remove them all? Some of Them the states are gonna push to widen them. At what point do you accept mitigation measures like a cap as a valuable step forward, even if they are expensive? Or do you feel like anything we do to mitigate the highway and make the expansion more palatable and is feeding into the expansion existence of the highways in the first place? You know what I mean? Are you willing to make the highways more livable or do you feel like we should do as little as possible to make them livable to remind us what they are?

[C]

That's a great question. I mean, as a resident of Austin, I would love for there to be a Park over I35. I bike over it every day. That would be fantastic. I think though on an existential level, the thing I am actually much more connected concerned about are all the greenhouse gases that are getting emitted by the 350,000 cars that are going to drive on that highway. Most of those cars over the coming decades will be gas powered cars. Texas already leads the country in greenhouse gas emissions from our trucks and vehicles. A stat I came across when I was reporting my book deep in a TxDOT technical report from 2018 and I don't think it's been updated since then, is that of the total global worldwide carbon dioxide emissions on road emissions in Texas, emissions from cars and trucks in this state account for half a percentage of total worldwide emissions.

[B]

Wow.

[C]

This expansion will make that measurably worse. We will increase our measurably increase our city's contribution to those on road emissions. We will make our summers hotter. We will make them drier. As someone who wants a livable city, that's what keeps me up and that's what I think is the existence existential threat facing all of us is what is climate change going to do to our city? And do those caps help make this a more livable city? And you know, given the realities of climate change like I don't think they do, I think what would be better in terms of an opportunity cost is like investing in transit. You know, the city of Austin is largely left to its own devices to fund our transit operation. A lot of people don't know that the state of Texas, our transportation funding, 97% of state transportation funding is constitutionally required to be spent on roads.

[B]

97%.

[C]

97%. So tech stocks, you know, $100 billion, 10 year budget, 97 billion of that roughly speaking, is going to go to roads. And so to me it's like the solution here is not caps. It's more people in buses and trains. Off these roads to begin with, emitting less carbon, emitting less pollution. I would sacrifice a park for that vision.

[B]

So, as I understand it, the city of Austin is kind of at a fork in the road right now where there's some money that has been committed, but there's some decisions that, you know, if the city really wants to go for this cap, they need to be made soon. I was wondering if, Nathan, could you kind of set up looking ahead at the next year, the next couple years, what are the decisions that the city has to make or what are the possibilities at this point?

[D]

You're right. So TxDOT is working with the city on this project, and I think threw off some city staffers by switching up the timeline for their own reasons. And essentially what happened is TxDOT went to the city and said, we need by May of this year for you to give us just a general idea of which caps you are willing to fund. Let us know, city staff, what the council's gonna do, Just ballpark. The city staff responded by saying, well, we don't have the authority to make those estimations. We have to get authorization from the city council. The council is under the impression that they would have until November to make that decision.

[B]

So it's been a moving target.

[D]

Moving target. But now the target got moved up because TxDOT says, give us an estimate. The city says, we need council to approve that. So this month, now, The City Council,

[B]

May 2026, will be required to vote

[D]

yes on which of the cap. Now, they've already agreed to fund the support structures which will, you know, in TxDOT's words, future proof the highway for caps that could be built at some point in the future. But now they're asking the city to make a commitment, not necessarily not pay right away. They'll do it in installments, year after year. But which caps to go on those are they going to authorize funding for? And as you can tell, there's quite a bit of disagreement on the city council over that. So that vote is coming up this month, and I don't know how these guys are thinking.

[E]

Well, I think where it is right now is we fought almost a death match last spring about how much to commit, and council voted by a pretty close margin. I was against it, but to support the support structures, and we would have to vote again to do anything more or any less. So I think the status quo is that we have future proofed three of the caps, and I think we're just going to have to wait for future years, maybe decades from now. To see whether any money will materialize to actually build the decks and the amenities.

[B]

Cheeto, are you going to push for more funding in the next year?

[F]

No, I wish we could. I wish we were in a different situation, but we're not. And the loss of that federal grant, I think changes everything. So my role on council was to future proof and some other council 20 years from now, 40 years from now, again, hopefully with a better state and federal government that are willing to, you know, lift a heavy load on the, on the cost of the caps, we'll take that up. But I don't see in the short term this council taking any more action or putting any more funds toward the caps.

[D]

But even if they do vote it down in May, they can in the year after that or the year after there's new administration in the White House. They could vote at that point to amend TxDOT's construction contract because TxDOT is building the caps, it is paying for them. But of course the costs go up the further you push it.

[F]

And to put one caveat on that, if in 2027, let's say the Democrats take the House and maybe the Senate and give us that $105 million back, I think that's a different conversation then I think that that's a different conversation that we're going to be having.

[B]

But then we'll see round two of I think city council.

[F]

But unless something like that happens, I don't think that we're going to be putting any more money in the short term into that.

[B]

But to emphasize the longer this decision is pushed back, the more expensive the caps ultimately become.

[E]

At some point the cost doubles or more.

[B]

So you future proofed it, you've left the door open, but it still becomes more and more expensive the longer you wait.

[E]

Even the part we've future proofed is not quite definite. I mean, Nathan laid out we were almost gunned to the head required to assign this so called advanced funding agreement in the next few weeks. But even that doesn't protect us against cost escalations of concrete labor costs, et cetera. And so it could be that by the time TxDOT actually builds the full build out, maybe five years from now, that they'll give us a bill for more.

[B]

So maybe the question I want to end on for the two city councilors is setting aside the specifics of this debate or how much it's worth or not. I am curious how you think about a decision like this that has a potentially long term transformative impact, but very present right now costs you are elected, you know, to serve a term of a certain amount, to serve constituents, but also to envision a city, I imagine. I'm curious how. How you think about a decision like that.

[F]

I would, honestly. So I'm originally from Laredo, Texas, and I'll tell a very quick story. This gentleman, Zachary, H.B. zachary, years ago, approached Laredo about building a canal through downtown Laredo connecting one part of the Rio Grande with another part of the Rio Grande through, you know, downtown Laredo. And at the time, you know, the civic leaders were like, no, no, we're not interested in that. And he pitched it as kind of a tourism and, you know, a beautification project and whatnot. So he went up the road and talked to San Antonio about doing a similar project, and San Antonio built this thing called the Riverwalk, which y' all may have heard of. To me, that's that kind of opportunity there where you've got to plant those seeds that future generations will ultimately harvest the fruit of. To again, to leave the highway uncapped with no mitigation is just the worst place that we could possibly end up. Caps reuniting east and West Austin, connecting downtown, an important link. There's a lot of opportunities there. There's a lot of things that can happen. I think that, you know, the residents of Austin in, you know, in 2080 would. Would be happy that we had done that.

[E]

I guess from my point of view, I feel more driven to deliver for people right now. As much as I want to believe in the vision that Cheeto is laying out, it feels very speculative. There's a lot of contingencies and potential roadblocks. My fear is that even the 100 million we've allocated towards the roadway elements will never bear fruit. If you compare that to, we could have built 20 community parks, or we could have built a couple thousand units of affordable housing, or fill in your unmet capital need for the community that we've already wasted an opportunity.

[B]

Well, I think, needless to say, we'll all be watching with great anticipation to see what you all do with this. So thank you again to our guests. Chito Vela, Mike Siegel, Nathan Bernier, Megan Kimball. Give it up, folks. A couple days after this taping, Nathan Bernier at KUT published a piece titled, Council Member Jose Chito Vela Backs off More City Money for building parks over I35. This was not exactly breaking news. Cheeto had signaled this shift already, but this taping was the most direct and public statement the councilor has made that the fight for more cap funding is over for now. It's certainly not over for good. Next up on the Highway Teardown Tour, a place I have heard an awful lot about because it's the one city in America crazy enough to attempt a downtown tunnel project like the Big Dig. That would be Seattle, Washington. We'll get into that story, but also step back and consider just how much the debate around highways has changed since the time of the Big Dig. A very special thanks to KUT in Austin for putting on this live taping under extremely difficult circumstances. Two days before the festival, the University of Texas told KUT that they could not have any festival events on campus property, so the entire thing got relocated and rescheduled at the very last minute. But they did pull it off and I think that right there tells you a lot about the relationship between the city of Austin and the State of Texas. As always, if you want to stay up to date with what we're working on and also get some behind the scenes notes and images from me and the team, you can sign up for our mailing list. That'[e-mail] thebigdigital the highway teardown Tour is produced by Fiona Boyd and myself, Ian Coss, with support from Isabel Hibbert. Our editor is Lacey Roberts. The Executive producer is Devin Maverick Robbins. The artwork is by Bill Miller. The Big Dig is a production of GBH News and distributed by pr. Hey, I want to make sure that you know this series you're listening to right now is part of an ongoing feed telling stories from the past to help us understand our present. Our first season is all about infrastructure. The second season is about gambling and we've got more seasons planned. So if you want to stay on top of what the team and I are doing, go ahead and follow or subscribe to this podcast wherever you listen. We've got some really exciting stories coming up and I hope you'll stay with us.

[D]

Thanks

[C]

from PRX.