Council tailors ETOD zoning, affordability requirements to maximize transit use

Included in last week’s slate of land use changes approved by City Council were adjustments to the density bonus incentives and other guidelines covering equitable transit-oriented developments intended to maximize usage of transit corridors throughout the city.

Following the prior day’s marathon public comment session, Council reconvened on May 17 to consider a dozen amendments that in most cases were opposed or abstained only by Council Member Mackenzie Kelly, who was also the only vote against the larger resolution. The main pieces of the resolution addressed affordability requirements for developers participating in density bonus programs within an ETOD, as well as spelling out what commercial uses and existing zoning districts and overlays are compatible with ETODs, and how existing businesses in areas changed to ETOD zoning should be included in redevelopment efforts. As defined by the city, ETODs are designed to ensure that development around future Project Connect stations is equitable and does not exacerbate displacement.

The resolution also spelled out the compatibility requirements within ETOD zoning to encourage the desired amount of density within proximity of triggering structures. Compatibility standards can limit height and density based on a project’s proximity to things like single-family homes.

Mayor Pro Tem Leslie Pool offered three amendments, the most substantial of which adjusted the amount and rate of affordability figured into buildings eligible for density bonus incentives, with staff reporting that current market conditions called for lower requirements. For 60-foot structures, 10 percent of the units would need to be affordable at 60 percent of the area’s median family income. At 90 feet, the level changes to 10 percent of units at 50 percent of MFI or 12 percent at 60 percent MFI. At 120 feet, the affordability levels increase to 12 percent of units at 50 percent MFI or 15 percent of units at 60 percent MFI.

“We tried to keep an eye toward the numbers that we know are working well in current programs. The whole approach is based on the staff report and the consultants findings that the higher proposed affordability levels, as much as we would like to get there, are not feasible at this point,” Pool said.

An amendment from Council Member Vanessa Fuentes asked staff to prepare language that would prohibit short-term rentals in ETODs, with Fuentes clarifying her intention is to limit STRs that aren’t occupied by owners.

Council Member Paige Ellis, who abstained from the Fuentes amendment, showed a preference for addressing STRs in specific Council action outside of the ETOD-specific resolution.

“We’ve had a number of executive sessions on STR legislation over the years, and I’m not sure that we as a body have tackled those in the last year and a couple of months,” she said. “When people do travel to our region, where is the best place for STRs? And should they be in interior neighborhoods or should they be on transit lines where people don’t need cars to be able to get to them? I understand the principle of this, and I agree with wanting to make sure that we have as much access to transit as possible.”

Mayor Kirk Watson offered three amendments to the ETOD resolution, the most substantial of which targeted the guidelines on compatibility.

Prior to the final vote, Council Member Alison Alter said the creation of ETODs throughout the city will offer the best chance for Project Connect and other related programs to succeed in helping the city meet the demands of ongoing population growth.

“Planning for growth on our transit corridors could simultaneously support our transit investments, incorporate affordability requirements and further our environmental goals. I also believe in Project Connect and the work that we have done as a dais, together with Cap Metro and with our community over the vast number of years that we have spent moving that forward, and I believe that this policy is important,” she said. “The ordinance isn’t perfect, but it is based on planning. It’s based on significant outreach and it strives to balance the complexity of our housing, transit and environmental goals.”

Photo by Larry D. Moore, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.