[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6474322,"mediaKeyId","5742159-279c4f7524be8dbad5c663db10a73ebb","parentId",5742159,"title","Austin council work session explores fund to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing","audioSeconds",115,"startMs",138545,"endMs",253825,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5742159-279c4f7524be8dbad5c663db10a73ebb&start=138&end=253","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5742159-279c4f7524be8dbad5c663db10a73ebb/thumbnail_138545.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6474322/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/Austin-council-work-session-explores-fund-to-preserve-naturally-occurring-affordable-housing","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6474322-644ef73ec89fbef6485bdd383ce9cae7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770522165&Signature=fsHNrg5wjdgO062UQpv6vwUXYFypfrd8RXYjr2ToiIrVN2YhTqznBIaN84BRCwclE55eomZsC~5DXMOj6CWRDmG2~yOE1sA1hXnlVuESHjtFb-~lL~KjQuVwwctT6FH9E0xbND8SM-IN3rc7Krc1-GVOC7MfB-fG-ESBf8S26jyyRUlO0lN7B0snlp36ij8f7pafhApw3vur44AXTW35KHe1~0Tx1ulX5oUsWU1aAdSQdcW15f~h1N6X4AEi8O5e-hJrU3l3wNhTc1jCmnAZ51vaFNslAnwDO9QwsUumi7zD5e9GiguGxUVcyG5PfBGty1rLR-m51HcIz1LXYoNHtA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Austin","date","2025-09-09T00:00:00Z","article","Mayor Pro Tem Vanessa Fuentes and council members discussed an approach to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing, or NOAH, during a work session at Austin City Hall.

Assistant City Manager Dr. Eric Anthony Johnson briefed the council on NOAH's size and the preservation fund model under consideration, saying the approach used in other cities pairs a small public seed with private, philanthropic and banking capital. “The trifecta would be grant‑based sources for NOAH capital improvements, a low‑cost fund for acquisition/new construction and a services component,” Dr. Johnson said.

Why it matters: staff warned that many aging multifamily properties commonly identified as NOAH are attractive to investors because acquisition plus modest renovation can produce substantial rent growth. Dr. Johnson cited CoStar data staff used for the briefing showing an estimated local NOAH inventory and a market forecast that, if realized, could lead to substantial loss of units by 2030. He described a preservation strategy that targets properties that are repairable rather than those considered functionally obsolete.

Staff overview and proposed structure

Dr. Johnson told the council that locally NOAH includes older multifamily buildings and that CoStar’s taxonomy — used by many cities and investors — groups properties by condition. He said Austin’s NOAH stock is concentrated in thousands of units across several hundred buildings and that market forces create incentives for acquisition and rent increases.

He described a three‑part fund model tested elsewhere: 1) a grant source to pay for capital and deferred maintenance so owners can keep units habitable without raising rents; 2) a low‑cost loan/acquisition vehicle to preserve or acquire at‑risk properties; and 3) a services component tied to resident needs and property stewardship. “It’s not necessarily buying down the rent,” he said. “It’s saying to an owner…we could provide a grant to do the capital improvements in exchange for a covenant on the property to guarantee affordability for a certain percentage of affordability over a period of time.”

Leverage and precedent

Dr. Johnson and council members discussed how a city contribution can serve as a loan‑loss reserve or seed that attracts banks and philanthropy. He cited Dallas’ experience, where a relatively small public commitment helped draw private capital into a larger preservation fund, and mentioned funds or initiatives in San Francisco, Charlotte, Detroit, Cleveland and Washington, D.C. as comparators.

Council questions and concerns

Council members asked for more detail on several practical points: how properties would be selected; the difference between properties that need full redevelopment versus those that can be preserved; how to weigh ownership/land‑banking against covenant agreements; whether the fund would offer below‑market loans and what returns investors would accept; and how utilities, weatherization and underground infrastructure factor into rehabilitation costs.

Councilmember Ellis raised utilities and weatherization costs as important drivers of deferred maintenance; Dr. Johnson agreed that older complexes can have single, shared mains or aging systems that are costly to repair and that those risks affect which properties are feasible candidates for preservation. Several council members asked staff to map clusters of NOAH and to analyze pipeline risks tied to transit‑oriented development or other redevelopment pressures.

Data and clarifying figures

Staff cited CoStar figures during the briefing: an aggregate NOAH inventory, a per‑building average unit size figure, and a forecast that described potential demolition and redevelopment pressure that staff characterized as material through 2030. Dr. Johnson also discussed examples of fund sizes in other cities and said that the city’s initial contribution is usually intended as a signal to leverage outside capital.

Next steps and timeline

Council did not take formal action during the work session. Members pressed staff for criteria to target properties, for a pipeline analysis, and for recommendations on fund structure, covenant length and resident protections. Dr. Johnson said other cities have moved quickly once partners and capital were available — Dallas organized the initial structure in months in his account — but that timelines vary with market conditions and capital commitments.

No formal vote or ordinance was introduced; councilmembers indicated interest in moving the item to the regular council meeting schedule for further consideration and in receiving staff proposals that would define selection criteria, affordability levels and program guardrails.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Austin - City Council Work Session","oneSentenceSummary","Mayor Pro Tem Vanessa Fuentes and council members discussed an approach to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing, or NOAH, during a work session at Austin City Hall.","taxTitle","Austin, Travis County, Texas","taxId",2819,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6474316,"Staff briefs council on proposed PUD at 606½ East Riverside Drive; environmental measures and height waiver flagged",283,3221630,3505040,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5742159-279c4f7524be8dbad5c663db10a73ebb&start=3221&end=3505","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5742159-279c4f7524be8dbad5c663db10a73ebb/thumbnail_3221630.jpg","/articles/6474316/Austin/Travis-County/Texas/Staff-briefs-council-on-proposed-PUD-at-606-East-Riverside-Drive-environmental-measures-and-height-waiver-flagged","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6474316-bbcf1b096d872e99a50c0db66ba9cffb/orig.mp4?Expires=1770522165&Signature=WSfeA0W1JbDUnVrJBGlC34eR60GlNECVxuVrIB22zAQfFgC1Eo4pM0VI2dFQSguEasardzJ2PR5fLugO~Px~Eph8oEtnpub3rSrpLvTcNEd8y6cWjCNzQcWvBtOwKaNYtnq8woOLwt3jCJZiyVE9LcIo2Gko4Eljf367hDSbRfW~TiKLc9ugIF15DLB1SK~fyeD3JPvQ8H7o1xN2vDF7pbCEtwfvplG8gPELlhYw8UAdKVX15URr93UQBweQFK~6F-vOT-uCzmOBdHf1R3lQ~yYh0H-EfV9dSRx1hOhJZRbfxjdxPgJUNxxuO55nKUBlws4BFCLXtZZC7QzbSuYBJw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Joy Harden of the Planning Department briefed the Austin City Council on a pre‑application development assessment for a proposed planned unit development (PUD) at 606½ East Riverside Drive during the work session at Austin City Hall.

Harden said the site is about 1.75 acres, currently developed with a single‑story commercial building and surface parking, and sits within the South Central Waterfront Vision Framework Plan and the Greater South River City neighborhood plan. The applicant proposes PUD and P zoning for a mixed‑use development with roughly 200 residential units and about 208,000 square feet of retail/restaurant space, and requests 22 code modifications including an increased maximum building height beyond the waterfront overlay standard.

Why it matters: the site lies inside an urban watershed and adjacent to the Austin light rail alignment, and the applicant’s requested entitlements would require council consideration of tradeoffs between added density/height and environmental safeguards.

Key details from staff briefing

Harden said the site’s baseline zoning (L district) allows up to 200 feet but that the waterfront overlay limits height to 45 feet; the applicant is requesting a higher maximum (recorded in the assessment as 510 feet). In exchange, staff said the applicant proposes multiple “superiority” items intended to mitigate environmental impacts, including restoring roughly 6,000–10,000 square feet within the critical water quality zone to floodplain forest and wetland planting, providing on‑site water quality treatment where none exists today, and conveying and treating runoff from about 0.5 acres of Riverside Drive that currently drains into a local creek.

Procedural context and review

Harden described the development assessment as a code‑required pre‑application step intended to surface staff and commission comments before a formal PUD submission. She said the assessment compiles feedback from multiple city departments; following an application the project will go through formal review, including environmental commission, planning commission and a final council public hearing.

Council questions and staff reflection on process

Councilmembers asked technical and procedural questions. Councilmember Marbella asked about the boardwalk and pedestrian connections; Harden said the applicant is coordinating with Parks and Recreation and other departments. Councilmember Alter raised concerns about the length and cost of the pre‑application development assessment and asked whether the city could instead surface the same review during the formal PUD review. Harden said she believed a consolidated, early review during the standard PUD process could reduce duplication and shorten timelines, but noted that the development assessment is currently required by code and is intended to gather council input before a formal application.

Flooding and environmental review

Councilmember Madietchen and others asked about flooding and how the applicant’s superiority items respond to public concerns. Harden said the applicant has worked with Watershed staff and that the assessment and subsequent environmental commission reviews will address flooding, water quality and green infrastructure measures; she noted that additional environmental commission review is expected before a formal application returns to the council.

No final decisions or votes

No formal action was taken during the work session. Harden reminded council that after the assessment the applicant may submit a formal PUD application and that staff comments will be incorporated into the development review process. Councilmembers requested clearer timelines and suggested staff and council consider whether the development assessment procedure could be streamlined.","Planning staff gave a pre‑application development assessment for a proposed planned unit development at 606½ E. Riverside Drive, describing a mixed‑use project that requests multiple code modifications and proposes environmental 'superiority' measures; council members asked about review timing and flood concerns","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Austin council work session explores fund to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing

Staff briefs council on proposed PUD at 606½ East Riverside Drive; environmental measures and height waiver flagged