Item 4-Equity_Overlay_CDC_Final_Report_02_10_26 — original pdf

Backup

AUSTIN EQUITY OVERLAY STUDY FINAL PRE SE NTATION February 10, 2026 1 AGENDA 01 02 S COPE OVERVIEW Primary Questions & Project Phases REVIEW OF DELIVERABLES Phase Overview FINAL QUES TIONS 03 Project Closeout 2 01 SCOPE OVERVIEW Primary Questions & Project Phases PROJECT UNDERSTANDING that would permit, The City of Austin approved a HOME Phase 2 Ordinance among other entitlements, the ability to build up to three single- family units on what would historically be one single-family lot. The City would like to “study the feasibility, merits, applying an equity/anti-displacement overlay and the impacts that such an overlay could have on affordability, displacement, and property values. The focus of the equity overlay would be to mitigate speculation and displacement by gentrification. and risks of areas most affected in 45 YEARS OF APD URBAN PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 4 Our deep understanding of the policy and regulatory issues related to community development financing, combined with our experience as planners and real estate developers, gives us a unique perspective on how sustainable housing and economic development influence neighborhood growth and expand housing options. Our firm is widely recognized for its expertise in analyzing identifying disinvestment life cycles, neighborhoods' historical patterns, and designing comprehensive reinvestment strategies that include long-time residents and community stakeholders. PRIMARY QUESTIONS 01 02 03 Based on existing data and analysis, what neighborhoods are at ris k, or have the most potential to be at risk, without some form of E quity Overlay “companion” to the HOME Ordinance geographic expansion? What are the community concerns within the neighborhood areas determined to be most at risk of displacement regarding affordability, dis placement, and property values as they relate to the HOME Ordinance? Displacement Risk Analysis Community Feedback What policies and programs could be put in place to addres s community concerns while at the same time s upporting the goals and objective of the HOME Ordinance? Program Recommendations 5 PROJECT PHASES Displacement Risk Analysis + Community Feedback = Program Recommendations PHAS E 1: Community Engagement Conducted 15 stakeholder interviews virtually and in-person, and attended CDC meeting for Q&A PHAS E 2: Policy/ Program S tudy and Analys is Analysis of City’s previous plans, studies, and density bonuses alongside peer city reviews and HOME policy analysis PHAS E 3: Dis placement Ris k Analys is Analysis of City’s previous anti-displacement studies and updated demographic risk of displacement with census and property data PHAS E 4: Final Report Summarized findings into written report, along with suggested program recommendations 6 7 02 REVIEW OF DELIVERABLES Phase Overview PHASE 1: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 15Stakeholder interviews Housing Affordability • Impact on marginalized/low-income communities • Limited housing options for <30% MFI • Development cost barriers Displacement • Historical concerns with Austin’s development • Displacement as result of HOME cost barriers • Displacement of middle- income households 1E astern Crescent Community Tour Community Engagement • Authentic community engagement • HOME disproportionately affecting those who feel S peakUpAustin is inaccessible Housing Production • Class and race divides still prevalent • Not receiving HOME P1 and P2 as tools for housing production • Opportunity for younger generation • Lack of transparency in engagement to enter housing market process 8 PHASE 2: POLICY/PROGRAM STUDY AND ANALYSIS t n e m e c a p s i D l - i t n A s ’ P 4 k r o w e m a r F l a u t p e c n o C Plan • Analyze existing Protect • E nhance the patterns, anticipate displacement pressures, prepare and revise anti- displacement measures and strategies housing stability of existing residents by giving them more freedom and time to make the choice to stay or move Preserve • Preserve existing subsidized and older market- affordable housing units and reduce the likelihood they exit the affordable housing stock Produce • Produce dedicated affordable housing units in changing neighborhoods through new construction or acquisition or rehabilitation of existing properties Source: Local Housing Solutions Lab 9 PHASE 2: POLICY/PROGRAM STUDY AND ANALYSIS Seattle, Washington San José, California • Developed comprehensive list of dis placement ris k indicators for regional tracking • Released recommendations for incorporating anti- dis placement s trategies into major comp. plan updates s w e i v e R y t i C r e e P • San J osé Citywide Residential Anti- Displacement Strategy outlines 10 recommendations and actions to prevent and mitigate dis placement, including Tenant Preferences Program • Extens ive community engagement and local res earch identifying gaps in existing policy, past discriminatory practices, and ongoing policy developments Columbia Heights, Washington, D.C. • Columbia Heights neighborhood able to res trict over 20% of its hous ing units for low- income renters and pres erve affordable hous ing in the face of rapidly rising housing costs and gentrification • Incorporated dis placement mitigation s trategies into early redevelopment plans Portland, Oregon Toronto, Ontario Atlanta, Georgia • Toronto City Council adopted Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By- L aw Amendment to permit multiplexes citywide to provide more housing choices for residents • Residential Infill Project's success at increas ing the production of middle- hous ing units at lower price points has created more affordable homeownership options • City's updates to comprehensive plan brought City and community together to find anti- dis placement s trategies , as s es s ing the effects of land us e planning and gentrification on Portland's vulnerable communities • Organizations spearheading initiatives to pres erve and expand affordable hous ing through des igning, financing, and building ADUs on homeowners' lots • Backyard ATL initiative developing ADUs at 60% to 80% AMI to meet needs of low- to- moderate income communities. 10 11 PHASE 2: POLICY/PROGRAM STUDY AND ANALYSIS Timeline i s e d u t S d n a s n a l P 2012 2017 2018 2019 2021 2023 2025 Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan Strategic Housing Blueprint Strategic Housing Implementation Plan Uprooted The People’s Plan Strategic Mobility Plan Austin Climate E quity Plan Austin Strategic Direction 2023 E quitable Transit-Oriented Development Policy Plan E quity-Based Preservation Plan Comprehensive Analysis of Density Bonus Programs Location-based plans and HOME-specific studies (Affordability Impact Analysis and Heyman HOME Report not listed) 11 12 Housing Production Density Affordability Displacement ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS Plans & Implementation Tools Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan Tenant Notification and Relocation Ordinance Strategic Housing Blueprint Strategic Mobility Plan Affordability Unlocked Density Bonus Project Connect Anti-Displacement Programming Austin Climate E quity Plan E quitable Transit Oriented Development Policy Plan HOME Phas e 1 & Affordability Impact Statement Austin Strategic Direction 2023 DB90 Density Bonus E quitable Transit Oriented Development Overlay Phase 1 HOME Phas e 2 E quity Based Preservation Plan Short-Term Rentals and Preservation Bonus Amendments i s e d u t S d n a s n a l P Year 2012 2016 2017 2019 2019 2020 2021 2023 2023 2023 2024 2024 2024 2024 2025 PHASE 2: POLICY/PROGRAM STUDY AND ANALYSIS Key Takeaways • • • • i s e d u t S d n a s n a l P Since Austin’s Comprehensive Plan adoption in 2012, the city has encouraged the development of mixed- us e, trans it- oriented communities , the us e of green infras tructure, and innovative hous ing s olutions . The City looks to balance pres ervation of neighborhood character with economic growth while ens uring equitable acces s to resources and services. The City’s goals around affordable housing development, green infrastructure, and increased mobility have shaped recent policy decisions, and many of those policies aim to treat Austin’s communities more equitably, though communities may not have felt the intended impacts of thes e policies . Implementation of programs or s trategies connected to the HOME Ordinance s hould look to fill gaps in current policy and build upon recommendations aligned with community input and City’s equitable intentions . 13 13 PHASE 3: DISPLACEMENT RISK ANALYSIS American Community Survey, 5 Year Estimates (2019-2023) e l i f o r P c i h p a r g o m e D 967,862 Population 440,294 Households $91,461 Median Household Income 34.5 Median Age 2.14 Average Household Size 56% Renters 14 14 15 PHASE 3: DISPLACEMENT RISK ANALYSIS To quantify displacement risk over time (2016 to 2022), a scale of 1 to 3 was used, and a new displacement risk typology was created for this study to allow for a more streamlined trend analysis. Vulnerable -areas where at-risk populations remain but demographic change has not yet occurred; Active Risk -communities experiencing ongoing population turnover; and Chronic Risk -areas where displacement has already taken place. s i s y l a n A k s i R t n e m e c a p s i D l 16 PHASE 3: DISPLACEMENT RISK ANALYSIS H.O.M.E. Permits and Exemptions Analysis s i s y l a n A k s i R t n e m e c a p s i D l • H.O.M.E. permits are more frequent in lower-value submarkets (generally east of I-35) • Analysis of Jan-Jun 2024 Permit data indicates that only 31% of the 223 approved H.O.M.E. permitted properties had homestead exemptions. • Approximately 70% of H.O.M.E. permits on properties without homestead exemptions show development indicators, mostly concentrated east of downtown, in primarily Active Displacement Risk census tracts. PHASE 3: DISPLACEMENT RISK ANALYSIS Key Takeaways • • • • A more streamlined displacement risk typology was created to consistently measure displacement trends in the City from 2016 to 2023. The significant and rapid change in Austin’s demographic makeup required a deeper dive into the unintended consequences of unchecked market pressures. H.O.M.E . permits are more common in lower-value submarkets and less common in higher-value submarkets, likely because deed restrictions are fewer in lower- value submarkets or development costs are higher in higher-value submarkets. Analysis indicates current H.O.M.E . program is most beneficial to two distinct groups: • • Homeowners with sufficient resources and fewer restrictions, and Developers focused on lower-value properties s i s y l a n A k s i R t n e m e c a p s i D l 17 17 PHASE 4: FINAL REPORT 1. Implement anti- dis placement s trategies to protect vulnerable and existing residents in communities facing gentrification, specifically renters and those in existing affordable housing. 2. Create inclus ive opportunities for low-to-moderate income and legacy homeowners to take advantage of HOME through increased access to capital. 3. Alleviate cos t barriers for high-income homeowners to access HOME through simplified permitting processes and legal assistance for HOAs and deed restrictions. 5. 4. Activate non- profit development opportunities for low-to-moderate income and legacy homeowners navigate the technicalities and implementation of H.O.M.E . Es tablis h a Community Quarterback Model to provide a wide range of services, including legal aid services, to assist vulnerable residents and small businesses facing displacement pressures. Conduct an outreach and education campaign on H.O.M.E. as a housing production tool to clarify how homeowners can benefit from H.O.M.E . as a source of income and a means to retain community ties. 6. s n o i t a d n e m m o c e R m a r g o r P 18 18 PHASE 4: FINAL REPORT Conclusion • For a more equitable approach, implementation of the combination of the recommended strategies would prevent displacement pressures from migrating to less protected areas. • • Incorporation of real time local data into City monitoring and tracking systems would allow for continuous risk mitigation and quicker policy recalibration when needed. By pairing the H.O.M.E . Ordinance with the strategies recommended in this study, grounded in data, community voice, and enforceable protections, the City of Austin can transform a zoning reform into a true equity initiative, that aligns with the City’s long-term vision for inclusive prosperity. 19 19 Staff Recommendations Staff Recommendations Staff recommend that the City of Austin consider:  Continue to utilize Community Land Trust to develop affordable units  Creating additional Homestead Preservation Districts where property tax increases are restricted to help preserve affordable homeownership and prevent involuntary loss of homesteads for low-income households  Expanding educational programs and information to include legal, financial and housing information regarding HOME and its uses via outreach and educational campaigns or creation of Community Quarterbacks  Developing non-profit and community-based partnerships to assist with bridging the gap between technical policy and household-level execution of HOME developments 3 20 03 QUESTIONS / ANSWERS 21 THANK YOU!