Council: Mucho Housing Needed

There's no regular City Council meeting today, March 30; the next regular meeting is April 6, and the early agenda (finalized tomorrow) is a rather paltry 37 Items, which suggests there is much more to come.

The current Item 37, as it happens, is a public hearing on the proposed adoption of the Austin Strategic Housing Plan. Erica Leak, manager for planning in the city's Neighborhood Housing and Community Development Department, previewed the Plan (technically an amendment to the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan) last Thursday, and was given a fairly thorough grilling by the dais for her troubles. She delivered an energetic presentation, and the Plan is certainly aspirational, but it was flatly impossible to sugarcoat the details.

Consider just a few relevant statistics. The Plan estimates overall need for housing over the next 10 years for all income categories (the federal calculation for a median family income in the Austin area is $78,000 for a family of four):

22,000 units for households below 30% median family income;

25,000 units at 31% to 60% MFI;

16,000 units at 61% to 80% MFI;

25,000 units at 81% to 120% MFI;

50,000 units at 120% MFI and above.

Those rounded-up numbers (138,000 total) deliver the rough goal of 135,000 units (market-rate and subsidized) over 10 years – or 13,500 new units a year – which the planners estimate (in current terms) to require $6.48 billion in public and private investment, not including land costs. Unfilled, by 2025 the financial gap would grow to $11.18 billion.

If that's not sufficiently daunting, just look at the line graph comparing wage increases and housing costs, from 2006 to 2016. (See below: "Austin Income vs. Housing Costs, 2006 to 2016") Most of us – no surprise – are bunched around that sea-level line of median income, while rents and mortgages steadily ascend.

Planners are by definition optimists, and Leak did her best to spin her report as a city shift toward goal-oriented progress. But the numbers told their discouraging tale – and then the dais responded: Yes, but ... it's much worse than that. Council Members Ann Kitchen and Leslie Pool each asked for more specific data (by district and mapping, if possible), and then Kitchen pointed out that as she read the numbers, 135,000 in 10 years would really be running in place, and that with projected population growth (20% in the city, 34% in the region), the 10-year need was closer to 170,000 units. Leak essentially concurred, and although there was some comfort offered (via CM Alison Alter) that at least one recent year saw construction of about 12,000 units overall, the annual average (in good economic years) has been closer to 7,500 units (although "affordable" remains a different matter altogether). Getting anywhere near an achievable goal on the city's needs for additional housing, of all kinds, sufficient to put a dent in housing costs, is a very steep climb.

In short, we need much more housing, and we're not currently producing enough to address that need. Some of the official numbers may change somewhat, but the Strategic Housing Plan (presented to the Planning Commission Tuesday) returns to Council April 6 for a public hearing (and potentially, adoption). Depending on the response, it might demand further revision.

In other Council business:

• Under the Oaks: Council passed, on second reading, an amended version of the Austin Oaks planned unit development (on Spicewood Springs Road at MoPac), which would expand the residential component, and also office space. The move came after lengthy public testimony (mostly opposed to the PUD) and a tense split on the dais over the fairness of the proposed deal. Third reading is not yet scheduled. (See "Once More Into the PUD," March 27.)

• Who Follows Ott? Although interim City Manager Elaine Hart appears to be doing a bang-up job, she's not currently a candidate to follow former manager Marc Ott, and Council received an update from consultant firm Russell Reynolds, which is just establishing the candidate search process. They recommended that a citizen task force be appointed to establish the hiring standards and implement wide public outreach on that criteria. More surprisingly, Reynolds spokesman Steve Newton recommended – and Council unanimously agreed – that only Council's final choice (among, perhaps, 10 candidates) would be publicly revealed. Back in the mists of time – a decade ago – Ott was among two finalists presented to the public for feedback, before Council made its final choice. The guess here is we haven't heard the end of that discussion.

• Historicity: After some hesitation, Coun­cil granted historic district status to Aldridge Place (30th to 34th Street between Guadalupe and Speedway), following a grassroots effort in the neighborhood. The district would require "contributing structures" to maintain architectural consistency, but would not otherwise affect zoning rules. Supporters say it will not, therefore, affect inclusiveness or discourage affordable housing (e.g., accessory dwelling units or student rentals).

• DNA Under Contract: If things go extremely well, the four contracts approved last week (with Travis County, state DPS, Van Daal Consulting, and Bode Cellmark Forensics) will steadily clean up the DNA forensic analysis backlog (mostly sexual assault cases) by April of 2018. That's a long time for one public nightmare.

Austin Incomes vs. Housing Costs

Relative increases in local median income, housing prices, and housing rents, from 2006 to 2016.

Annual median family income (for a family of four) has hovered around $75,000 throughout the decade; meanwhile, median home value began at about $200,000, dipped a bit through the recession, and has since risen close to $275,000, while median rents have steadily risen as well. (Source: City of Austin, Neighborhood Planning and Community Development)