Encouraging support for SMTX Housing 4 All

We would like to draw a parallel line between where we today find ourselves as a nation, working hard to right the long-standing housing inequalities American citizens continue to experience, and how local appointed and elected leaders make decisions that either eliminate or perpetuate these inequalities. When city leaders refuse to take action or worse, actively resist strategies/opportunities that would support the creation of affordable housing types, the overall health and welfare of the community is negatively affected. Housing is a human issue.

Through our work on the SMTX 4 All Taskforce, whose members were intentionally assembled to represent the diversity of San Marcos, our community was able to gain insight into the housing shortfalls that directly impact our citizens. Our first step was to understand what types of housing were currently available in San Marcos, both for rent and purchase.

Our intention was to gauge whether or not the housing our community needed was in line with what was being delivered by our city’s ongoing development efforts. What the numbers revealed was consistent with what we were hearing anecdotally from taskforce members and the community at-large. Our families are substantially lacking in available affordable housing options both to rent and buy.

We also found that overwhelmingly our city leadership was approving the construction of either large multifamily buildings or detached single-family homes. While both play an important role in the housing market, there is a section of the market being completely ignored, one that also plays an important role in providing affordable housing options for families — the missing middle.

We then looked broadly across the policies, codes, ordinances and community attitudes that served as barriers to creating these missing middle homes, which include duplexes, townhomes, condominiums, small multifamily buildings, cottage courts etc.

With the support of city staff, our taskforce engaged in over 40 community con versations, which included the school district, multiple nonprofits, large local employers, numerous civic organizations and private businesses. All participants consistently expressed concern about the lack of housing affordability and diversity. Many cited concerns regarding their clients’/ employees’ ability to find suitable housing that would allow them to live and work in San Marcos.

Through data collection and conversations with hundreds of community members who took time to share their housing stories, taskforce members worked hard to develop a tool that could be used as a blueprint for change. In the Strategic Housing Action Plan we outlined concrete steps, that if taken, guaranteed the needle would move on a richer, more inclusive community by fostering the construction of diverse housing that would set the stage.

Last October, the taskforce completed and delivered our action plan and it was taken before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Unfortunately, the response we received was not what we hoped. Our well-informed blueprint for creating affordable housing, which did not obligate P&Z or Council to take action, but simply recommended proven actions for change, was stripped of its most effective/efficient strategies.

As of today, almost a year post delivery, the Strategic Housing Action Plan remains in limbo. Council continues to delay adopting it in any form, meanwhile the affordability crisis continues to grow. This inaction has been truly surprising, particularly because the motivation behind launching our efforts were directly tied to Council having listed affordable housing as one of their top priorities for two years running.

We seem to continue to develop the tools for change but avoid using them. We’ve also experienced this in regards to San Marcos's recent land development code update. CodeSMTX was the product of over four years of extensive work lead by our professional city staff in partnership with and in service to the community. Although adopted two years ago, city council made the decision to stop short of implementing the new code.

What that means, is in order to construct “missing middle” housing types, which were defined and available through the new code, citizens are required to go through the cumbersome rezoning process. This requires applicants to hold a community meeting, go before P&Z once and council twice. A process which can take between 90-120 days. Unfortunately, the majority of all applicants are denied. Especially when the proposed project is located adjacent to or within existing neighborhoods that are primarily zoned single-family.

Over time and history, we’ve seen the preference for single-family zoning emerge and replace racebased zoning as one of the most popular local governing tools for segregating American communities. This policy prevented the construction of small apartment buildings or multifamily units of any kind (think “missing middle”) in certain neighborhoods, ensuring that only those who could afford single-family homes could live there. As white households typically had higher incomes and better access to a range of federal home loan programs, single-family zoning produced racially segregated neighborhoods without explicit race-based ordinances. This is something we continue to see in our community today.

When defending their actions or inactions some Councilmembers talk about “not breaking promises made to their constituents” and being against projects “that are pro-developer.” They also couch their arguments in terms of “protecting neighborhoods” and “historic preservation.”

In response some could argue; 1.) City council is an at-large elected body. Each member is tasked to represent the entire community. 2.) By not opening-up a space for smaller scale development city Council is ensuring only those with deep pockets, like large developers, have opportunity to construct in San Marcos 3.) The term “neighborhood protection” is frankly outdated, classist and grounded in a history of exclusionary zoning. 4.) While historic preservation is something we believe most people agree with, it should not be used as a means to justify exclusionary zoning. Renovating large historic homes into duplexes or multi-unit apartments creates opportunity for all types of people to live in our historic districts. And a small multifamily building constructed on an infill lot in an historic neighborhood does not make the historic homes any less historic. Again, it simply allows opportunity for more diversity in those neighborhoods.

While the Strategic Housing Action Plan lists 22 strategies that support the creation of affordable housing, there are only a few with the ability to broadly, significantly and quickly make an impact and at low or no cost to the taxpayers. A few of the most effective are listed below. All of which have either been removed, delayed until after the new Comprehensive Plan is delivered in 2022 or are awaiting a next step before approval — a process lacking a specific timeline.

P&Z and council committee both recommend action be removed.

Action B1. Development Codes and Zoning — Support diverse and vibrant neighborhoods by expanding the types of zoning districts and building types allowed within existing neighborhoods. Use a community driven process with a focus on accommodating residents through all stages of life.

P&Z and Council Committee both recommend action be removed.

Action B3. Infill Housing Assistance — Assist builders with fee waivers, clear-path permitting, and regulatory incentives like reduced parking or additional units in exchange for permanently affordable housing in pre-identified infill sites.

P&Z recommends action be removed.

Council committee recommends action be delayed until “appropriate places” for affordable housing are identified. What?

Action D2. Accommodate Growth through Appropriate zoning the city should pro-actively zone both undeveloped and infill areas in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan to ensure that the capacity for residential growth is in excess of the anticipated population growth instead of relying on each individual project to request zoning.

P&Z and city council committee recommend step 2 and 3 be removed.

Three-Year Action Plan Item D2. Accommodate growth through appropriate zoning:

1. Identify areas in intensity zones from the Comprehensive Plan that are vacant or underdeveloped and are appropriate for higher density zoning districts.

2. Utilize a small area planning process in Existing Neighborhoods on the Comprehensive Plan to build community support for zoning districts that provide opportunities for additional diverse housing that fits in to the neighborhood.

3. Proceed with a rezoning in Intensity Zones while ensuring mixed incomes and diverse communities.

At this time in history we are again reminded that it will never work to favor the desires of a few over the needs of many. We are a community of many different needs and policy set by council should take every citizen’s need into account. Finding quality, affordable housing should be achievable for everyone.

The city council will vote on, not only the Strategic Housing Action Plan, but multiple proposed amendments to our land development code, all of which have the potential to negatively impact affordability during Tuesday's meeting. We encourage everyone who supports keeping San Marcos the vibrant, inclusive and beautifully diverse community it is, to write, call, email or sign-up to speak next Tuesday and let Council know you support SMTX Housing 4 All.