1997 Travis County Highway Bonds

(Source: Austin Chronicle)

2001 Travis County bond election items of transportation interest:

Highways:

  • $32.7 million for SH45 north and FM1826
  • $66.2 million for SH130

Other interest:

  • $57.4 million for other road projects (none within city of Austin; city of Austin taxpayers charged same rate as people in unincorporated Travis County)

(From Travis County’s poorly maintained site):

  • $3.5 million for SH45 south right-of-way
  • $4 million for SH130 right-of-way

Other highlights in that election were:

  • $36 million for other road projects (none of which were inside Austin city limits; but paid for by all Travis County residents)
  • $1.6 million for MKT trail, which I don’t recall ever seeing any action on

2001 Travis County highway bonds

(Source: Austin Chronicle)

2001 Travis County bond election items of transportation interest:
Highways:

  • $32.7 million for SH45 north and FM1826
  • $66.2 million for SH130

Other interest:

  • $57.4 million for other road projects (none within city of Austin; city of Austin taxpayers charged same rate as people in unincorporated Travis County)

2000 Austin Bond Election Language

CATRANSCO summary of this package; city language follows below.
This election set aside $90 million for contributions from Austin for state highway projects.
(I’m excerpting these and saving because I don’t know how long the city will keep up these old pages).

The issuance of $150,000,000 tax-supported general obligation bonds to improve roadway intersections, acquire right-of-way, provide funds for highway and roadway construction, develop high occupancy vehicle lanes and related infrastructure, improve bicycle and pedestrian mobility infrastructure, construct related drainage facility improvements, and acquire land and other property interests for these projects; and the levy of a tax sufficient to pay the bonds.

If approved, the $150 million would be spent in three major categories:

  • To help accelerate major highway projects inside the City that are built by the State.
  • Capacity improvements on City roadways, including expanded lanes, improved intersections, and High Occupancy Vehicle lanes.
  • Pedestrian and bikeway projects.

The currently anticipated amount to be spent in each category is:

  • $90 million for matching grants.
  • $40 million for capacity improvements.
  • $20 million for pedestrian, bikeway and sidewalk projects.

The Austin City Council also established criteria about the expenditure of the bonds, should they be approved:

Unless the road is authorized by an election of the City of Austin or another jurisdiction and the spending is approved by the Austin City Council, the bond proceeds will not be used to fund matches for road infrastructure of right-of-way through:

  • The Drinking Water Protection Zone.
  • A City of Austin preserve.
  • A City of Austin destination park

For each proposed use of bond proceeds for a road project, City staff must make a recommendation on the proposed use through an analysis of:

  • The tax equity and social equity implications for City of Austin residents.
  • Impact of the proposed project on the Drinking Water Protection Zone.
  • Impact of the proposed project on increased mobility, decreased congestion and air quality.
  • Any alternatives to the proposed project that provide the same or better congestion relief with improved air quality.

1998 Austin Bond Election Language

There wasn’t any apparent donation to TXDOT for highways in this package; but it does show how expensive it is to maintain the city’s arterial network. Austin maintains a far higher percentage of its major arterial network than other localities in the area.

(Original city language below; I wasn’t able to find a good summary anywhere).

The issuance of $152,000,000 in tax supported General Obligation Bonds for improving traffic signal synchronization and control systems, acquiring and installing traffic signals, improving and reconstructing roads and streets, and constructing, reconstructing and improving drainage facilities related to roads and streets; and acquiring land and interests in land and property necessary to do so; and the levy of a tax sufficient to pay the bonds.

Several key transportation projects make up Proposition One.

The City of Austin periodically has the opportunity to apply for Federal and/or State funding to implement projects such as new roadways, road expansions, sidewalks and bicycle facilities. Approving Proposition One will provide required matching funds as well as funding for City-sponsored projects to improve and install sidewalks and bicycle facilities. This category also includes rights-of-way funding for mandated projects, including U.S. 183/290.

Street improvements that may be funded with approval of Proposition One include, but are not limited to: Loyola Lane from Johnny Morris Road to Decker Lane; Dittmar Road from South First Street to Manchaca Road; Manchaca Road from Matthews Lane to William Cannon Drive; Rutherford Lane from Interstate 35 to Cameron Road; South Congress Avenue; Barton Springs Road; and Dorsett Road. This proposition also would provide funding for the Great Streets program. This program includes projects to enhance the use and appearance of Austin’s streets and sidewalks, including landscaping, irrigation, pedestrian and other mobility improvements.

Additionally, funding is proposed to upgrade and enhance intersections by adding right turn lanes, left turn lanes or through lanes; adding sidewalks and/or bicycle lanes where appropriate; and generally improving traffic flow in the travel corridor as part of Transportation System Management.

Traffic signal system enhancement and the installation of new signals also would be funded through approval of Proposition One.

Finally, Proposition One would provide for a number of street reconstruction projects which may include, but are not limited to: Woodhollow Drive from Far West Boulevard to Spicewood Springs Road; 34th Street from Guadalupe Street to Funston Street; Enfield Road from MoPac Boulevard to Exposition Boulevard; Convict Hill Road from Kandy Drive to Wagon Train Road; and Cesar Chavez Street from IH-35 to Pleasant Valley Road. Some industrial-area streets that would be targeted for reconstruction include: Todd Lane from Burleson Road to St. Elmo Road East; St. Elmo Road from IH-35 to Nuckols Crossing; St. Elmo Road East from IH-35 to Congress Avenue South; Terry-O Lane from St. Elmo Road East (S) to St. Elmo Road East (N); Freidrich Lane from St. Elmo Road to Teri Road; Industrial Boulevard from St. Elmo Road East to Congress Avenue; roads throughout the Central Business District; and other roads citywide.