| Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... |
For years, the Austin City Council has been so receptive to developer rezoning requests that critics say that the process has been reduced to an automatic rubber stamp.
Dense apartment projects near transit corridors? Approved.
Upzoning rapidly changing neighborhoods? Also usually approved.
Upending that predictable process, the council recently rejected two very different developer rezonings in East Austin.
One was a redevelopment near Esté restaurant that opponents argued would accelerate displacement pressures already reshaping the neighborhood.
The other was the Montopolis Fairway project, which would have cleared a cluster of homes near a planned Project Connect rail corridor to make way for a dense multifamily development, one without significant affordability components.
The failure of the ventures to win approval surprised both proponents and opponents of dense redevelopment.
Consider that the city council approved 110 rezoning applications in 2025 and rejected just two, the Austin Free Press reported. Both rejected cases involved owner-opposed historic zoning cases rather than developer-backed redevelopment proposals. In all but three of those 110 rezoning cases, every present and participating council member voted as a bloc to approve the rezoning.
In the two recent cases, however, council members broke from their rezoning pattern to side instead with neighborhood activists, who for some time have pushed the city to demand greater neighborhood compatibility and such community benefits as affordable housing.
Credit: Andrew Wheat
Fractured consensus?
For the past decade, City Hall’s pro-housing contingent has operated largely in alignment. Developers, urbanists, major employers, planning staff, and council members agreed that Austin needed more housing of nearly every type.
They argued that the city’s affordability crisis could not be solved without significantly increasing housing supplies. To that end, council members loosened zoning restrictions, approved density bonus programs, and encouraged transit-oriented redevelopment. But the recent East Austin fights suggest that the council consensus could be fracturing.
After years of rapid redevelopment — and strong neighborhood pushback — the city council is showing some moments of hesitation in supporting market-rate projects in East Austin based solely on the premise that they will produce future affordability benefits citywide.
José “Noé” Elias, a member of Austin’s Community Development Commission, said many lower-income residents are not seeing the benefits promised by the city’s supply-side housing strategy.
“If you’re not building housing that’s affordable to the people that live here, it’s definitely going to cause displacement,” Elias said.
Deep affordability
That argument carried weight in the Montopolis Fairway case, where activists argued that land near transit infrastructure should prioritize housing that’s affordable for current residents.
Josh Brunsmann, the developer behind Montopolis Fairway, said the project was specifically designed around Austin’s transit-oriented development goals and would have placed hundreds of new housing units within walking distance of a future rail station.
But who would benefit from that housing? The Montopolis Fairway fight raised a question about Project Connect’s vision: whether transit-oriented redevelopment will benefit existing lower-income residents or accelerate new waves of displacement.
Longtime residents claim the city has focused broadly on increasing housing supplies without paying sufficient attention to what’s happening at the lower end of the housing market.
While average rents across Austin have softened, organizers in East Austin say deeply affordable units – accessible for households with incomes at or below 30%- 50% of the Area Median Income – are vanishing due to redevelopment and rising land values.
“People are celebrating that rents are going down,” Elias said. “But that’s not the case in the lower end.”
Political pressure
That growing skepticism toward market-rate redevelopment appears to have become harder for some council members to ignore.
Projects that once may have sailed through the rezoning process now look more vulnerable if they lack meaningful affordability components or become symbolic of concerns about who benefits from Austin’s growth.
The political fallout surrounding the controversial Acacia Cliffs redevelopment fight last summer sharpened those tensions. Residents there accused city leaders of prioritizing redevelopment over longtime community members, while activists argued that the city council had become too cozy with developers.
Election-year politics also appears to be playing a role, community members said. Both the Esté restaurant and Montopolis Fairway fights unfolded in districts where council seats are up for grabs this fall.
“You have people that are up for elections, and they need a case where they really went on the people’s side and not the realtor’s side,” said East Austin activist Susana Almanza, who has organized against multiple redevelopment efforts.
More of the same?
What may be changing is the political calculus around redevelopment in historically Black and Latino communities, where rising property values and demographic shifts have deepened skepticism among longtime residents — so much so that, in recent cases, density alone has not been enough to overcome concerns about displacement and who gets to remain in the city they helped build.
Chad Swiatecki is a 30-year journalist who relocated to Austin from his home state of Michigan in 2008. He most enjoys covering the intersection of arts, business and local/state politics. He has written for Rolling Stone, Spin, New York Daily News, Texas Monthly, Austin Monitor, Austin Business Journal, Austin American-Statesman and many other regional and national outlets.
