Despite some consternation about the impact to the neighborhood in terms of scale and potential for displacement, Planning Commission members have voted in support of a new multifamily development on Montopolis Drive between Caddie and Fairway streets.
The project is expected to bring around 189 units to the 2 acres that currently stand empty. Victoria Haase, who is with Thrower Design and representing the developer, told the commission that, in addition to housing, the project would bring commercial development to Montopolis Drive using the city’s new DB90 density bonus program. If the zoning were to remain unchanged, she estimated that 20 to 30 single-family homes could be built on the land.
Though there were three speakers signed up to speak in opposition, they were not present when it was their turn to speak. However, 29 neighbors objected to the rezoning in writing, according to the meeting’s agenda.
Commissioner Nadia Barrera-Ramirez said that she had been in talks with Council Member José Velásquez and the Montopolis neighborhood planning contact team about the project and noted that out of the 20 planned Project Connect stations, the Montopolis station was the only one experiencing active displacement.
When asked if she had discussed participating in Project Connect anti-displacement funding, Haase said she had not but wouldn’t be opposed.
“On this particular project, there aren’t any homes to be displaced, but I understand what is going on in the community, so I definitely think there is worthy conversation to have about it,” Haase said.
Cynthia Hadri, who is with the Planning Department, confirmed that, when looking at displacement, staff evaluated the site itself and, because the project will be built on an empty lot, there were no tenants that would be displaced.
DB90 requires 10 percent of units be developed as affordable. However, as Barrera-Ramirez noted, the affordability mandated by DB90, which is aimed at households that earn $63,000 to $97,800 for a family of four, is still out of reach for many community members.
“I think they are seeking opportunities for a greater affordability,” Barrera-Ramirez said.
Commissioner Grayson Cox expressed concern about a sole single-family home that would be surrounded by the project if it moves forward.
“Are we literally reenacting the movie Up?” he asked. “Because I am looking at the most adorable little blue house that apparently decided not to sell to your applicant. And I’m envisioning a 90-foot multifamily building around this tiny little house.”
Haase said that, yes, the property does share three property lines with the project and the owners were not interested in selling but did not oppose the rezoning. She said that they did not plan to build the entire project at 90 feet, though they would technically be allowed to do so if the zoning change is approved.
Cox wondered why, in a previous case, a less-intense zoning was sought for the property closest to the neighborhood, but not for this one.
“That’s a good question,” said Haase, who represented applicants in both cases. “The idea didn’t come up for this project, and maybe it’s something to consider.”
As to why planning staff was recommending the zoning in Montopolis but not across the river in the previous case, Hadri said that the surrounding zoning and proximity to the bus stop played a role and it felt “like a great compromise.”
Barrera-Ramirez said she was in agreement with the density and use of the site, but her main concern was affordability. She encouraged the developer to work more with the community on the plan.
“I know that this community can do better. I feel that the developer can do better,” she said. “And I would like to see that.”
Commissioner Danielle Skidmore pushed back on “the Up narrative,” and in support of the zoning change.
“Great, walkable, affordable, transit-friendly cities have more density and more density means being taller. And if we want to have those things, we have to be willing to let the city grow and evolve to support that,” she said. “I know it’s unsettling for change to occur in our neighborhoods, but this change is happening incrementally and organically and it is the way that we can build more affordable housing for more people to live in Austin.”
Commissioners recommended the zoning change to City Council in a vote of 9-2-1 with commissioners Cox and Barrera-Ramirez voting in opposition and Commissioner Alberta Phillips abstaining.
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.
And we’re honored you look to us for serious, in-depth news. You know a strong community needs local and dedicated watchdog reporting. We’re here for you and that won’t change. Now will you take the powerful next step and support our nonprofit news organization?
City of Austin Planning Commission: This commission addresses issues of land use as assigned to it by Austin's City Code. These include the abilities "[t]o make and amend a master plan, recommend approval or disapproval of proposed zoning changes and control land subdivision within neighborhood planning areas and submit, annually, a list of recommended capital improvements." It has sovereign authority, or the right to make final decisions on certain cases.
