Browsing by Subject "Density bonus"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Evaluating the density bonus as a tool for affordable housing production in Austin, TX
(2020-05-07) Altazan, Elisabeth Ashleigh; Mueller, Elizabeth J.
Inclusionary zoning practices include policies that require or incentivize real estate developers to include affordable housing units in their market-rate developments. In Austin, this is done by a policy mechanism called the density bonus, which offers developers the option to include more density than is allowed in the base zoning in exchange for including affordable units or paying a fee that will be used toward affordable housing development in other locations. Austin has employed density bonus policies since 2003, which have produced 1,665 affordable units and have raised over $6.5 million dollars used toward developing or preserving affordable housing in the city. They City of Austin plans to expand the use of density bonus programs to produce affordable housing in future changes to the land development code. This study evaluates the success of Austin’s density bonus programs and how proposed density bonus programs may perform. Costs and location of density bonus programs and other city-funded affordable housing programs are compared to evaluate the performance of the density bonus programs. The analysis finds density bonus units are much cheaper to the city and out-perform other city-subsidized units in terms of providing affordable housing in areas that do not have existing concentrations of poverty or minority populations. In addition, the study analyzes how local rents and other regulations affect density bonus unit production and finds the proposed density bonus programs are unlikely to be successful without accounting for hyper-local housing market trends. Last, the study offers recommendations for Austin’s density bonus programs based on the analyses
Family-friendly city : envisioning a "missing middle" density bonus in Austin's single-family neighborhoods
(2017-11-09) Moskol, Samantha Eve; Wegmann, Jake; Mueller, Elizabeth
As Austin’s population grows, it is increasingly difficult for low and middle-income families with children to find suitable, affordable housing in Austin’s central neighborhoods. This is partly because Austin’s current zoning is highly restrictive in which lot size minimums and unit maximums keep housing supply low. Families add to Austin’s vibrancy, and it is an Imagine Austin goal to enact policies to retain them. I propose one such policy that should be incorporated into CodeNEXT, the rewrite of Austin’s land development code: a density bonus in areas tentatively zoned “T3,” through which developers could create more units than allowed by right, provided that some are affordable. This bonus would allow for the production of “Missing Middle” housing more dense than a detached single-family home, but less dense than an apartment in a mid or high-rise. This would create a larger supply of both market-rate, middle-income housing and low-income housing that is designated as such. I justify the need for this through two analyses. 1) I found that two of Austin’s most widely used density incentives, the Vertical Mixed Use and Transit Oriented Development bonuses, have produced an overproportion of affordable studio units, and minimal affordable two-bedroom units, which would be appropriate for families. 2) I analyzed residential demolition and building permits in Brentwood and Crestview to understand the change in the built environment under the current, “SF-3” zoning. This showed that demolitions of old homes rose in the mid 2010’s, despite the restrictive zoning. New-builds on nearly half the lots were single-family homes, and the average square feet was 2.2 times larger than the home they replaced. There is, however, great market demand for smaller units that split land cost between one another- allowing them would serve affordable housing needs. Currently, consultants have proposed a similar density bonus for “T4” and “T5” zoned areas. The bonus should be expanded to “T3” areas, which would include Brentwood, Crestview, North Loop, Zilker, and parts of Bouldin Creek. Allowing such a bonus would be a political compromise: in exchange for more units, developers would be required to provide much-needed family-sized, affordable housing.