On Oct. 21, 2025, the Austin City Council received a briefing on a development assessment for a proposed planned unit development, or PUD, on two parcels at 1400½ and 1404 East Riverside Drive in the East Riverside Corridor.

Joy Harden, with Austin Planning, told the council the site is 2.62 acres, is currently undeveloped (previously the site of Acton Business School), and lies in the Lady Bird Lake watershed and waterfront overlay. She said the applicant proposes a residential project of approximately 381 units, seeks CS (General Commercial Services) as the baseline zoning for the PUD, requests 12 code modifications and is asking for a maximum building height of 180 feet where the site is now limited to 96 feet.

The proposed project includes a set of “superiority” items the applicant offers in exchange for additional entitlements: 15 on-site affordable units at 60% of median family income (MFI), off-site stormwater capture and treatment using innovative water-quality controls, dedication of 1.17 acres as parkland (about 44% of the site), on-site long-term bicycle parking at 150% of code requirements and open space 10% above minimum code. Harden said the property is near the hike-and-bike trail and roughly a quarter-mile from a proposed rail stop.

The development assessment is a required pre‑application step under the city’s land development code. Harden said the assessment is a “dry run” that allows staff from multiple departments to provide comments before an applicant files a formal PUD application. If the applicant files, Harden said the project will go through the usual review process, including environmental commission and planning commission review before returning to council.

Council members focused questions on process cost, affordability and how fee-in-lieu would be calculated. “How much did this process cost the applicant to get here?” asked Councilmember Ryan Alter. Harden said staff did not have a complete figure on the record and that notification and submittal costs would be “thousands of dollars,” and she offered to look up the precise amounts and report back.

Councilmember Mike Siegel asked about the fee in lieu for additional affordable housing. Harden said the code allows a fee in lieu for square footage above 60 feet and above the project’s floor-to-area ratio; she said the fee would be approximately $9 per square foot in the rough calculation she described, but that final amounts would be determined once a site plan is presented and after subtracting the 15 on-site affordable units. Harden cautioned that the exact cost was not available at the briefing.

Another councilmember, identified in the transcript as Councilmember Balter, criticized the timing and cost of the pre-application process and urged the city to consider steps to shorten the timeline and reduce expense so developers are not carrying extra months of cost. Balter said staff and applicants had “put a lot of effort and time” into reaching the assessment and suggested a partial check-in or other process changes that might increase the project’s affordability yield. Councilmember Jose Velasquez asked a clarification about the share of units the 15 affordable units represent; Harden said the East Riverside plan requires roughly that number for the project’s square footage and that the 15 units would remain even if the applicant seeks to come out of the plan.

No formal action or vote was taken during the work session. Harden said that once the briefing is complete, the applicant may submit a PUD application and that the item will progress through multi-department review, environmental commission and planning commission before any council vote.

The briefing followed an executive session earlier in the morning in which the council discussed personnel and utility competitive matters. Councilmembers noted the council will take up a separate, forthcoming item on Thursday related to the city auditor (an announced motion to direct a consultant to negotiate with a proposed candidate), but that was not part of the public briefing on the Riverside site.

Council members asked staff to provide follow-up details, including exact applicant costs for the development-assessment step and a fuller breakdown of the fee-in-lieu calculation, before any formal PUD filing and subsequent council consideration.