Annotations for Audience: Politicians

"Local and Federal governments can offer things like tax breaks, fee waivers, or density bonuses, which allow developers to build more units or save money if they include affordable housing in their projects. It's a win-win for the government if they lower homelessness at the same time.". This gives the call to action for politicians as well as shows the true message that we want to get across through this.

Let's creatively use City of Austin zoning to address these issues. We will ask that the Planning Department and the Planning Commission consider these proposals and recommend that the City Council of Austin enact them into law. Our plan has two parts. Logos here introduces the argument.

First, we will change zoning to relax restrictions on development in wealthier areas. We will aim for allowing more luxury, high-rise buildings, speeding the approval process for new construction, and rezoning nearby land to allow for an expansion of the rich areas. Then, we will also use zoning to restrict certain types of development in traditional low-income neighborhoods. --- Logos is used here in adding detail to the proposal.

Specifically, we'd forbid developers from making affordable housing into luxury. Let's talk about what zoning is and how the City can use it to implement these policies. According to Kenton, writing in Investopedia, zoning refers to municipal or local laws and regulations that govern how real property can and cannot be used in certain geographic areas. Ethos is used by referring to the published expert's definition. Logos is used in the further advancement of the proposal.

Kenton goes on to explain that municipalities create a master plan and petition the City into neighborhoods and districts. Different rules will apply to different petitions in order to achieve goals such as creating certain types of living space for residents or promoting economic development. A crude example would be that you can't build an oil refinery in a residential neighborhood, but a more subtle example would be that certain neighborhoods are only for single-family homes with yards, not apartment buildings. --- This passage entirely uses logos to give details of how zoning works to provide a foundation for the proposal.

Turning to the City of Austin specifically, the City is divided into what are called base districts. There are 16 of these, which fall into basic categories such as single-family only or medium-density apartments. However, there are huge complexities within this through the use of what are called overlays --- Logos continues to be used in this passage as the general description of zoning is applied to the City of Austin.

These can get quite specific. For example, there is a Capitol View overlay district, which preserves views of the Capitol Dome by limiting the height of buildings along certain corridors. There are also specific overlays to preserve the character of historic districts, such as Aldrich Place, which is north of the University in the City of Austin. Logos continues to be used as the details of how zoning works in Austin are described.

But in practice, the rules are created and defined by the Planning Commission, a pointed group of volunteers, and the Planning Department, a division of the municipal government. We propose that Austin use overlays to selectively relax housing restrictions in some trendy, wealthy districts. This could include allowing more high-rise buildings, speeding the approval process for new constructions, and rezoning nearby land to make it part of the wealthy areas. --- Logos is further used to give details to the plan. This section also uses Ethos, because the legitimacy of the idea is demonstrated by the speaker's deep knowledge of zoning.

But so that these areas stay desirable, the City can, in effect, require that only new upscale housing be allowed. This can be achieved by, for example, requiring a certain size floor plan for new apartments. Even specific materials for construction and faucets could create more of the type of housing that would attract the wealthy newcomers. -- This section is entirely focused on logos as more details of the proposal are presented.

However, there is a potential pitfall here. Fewer apartments that are harder to find could create scarcity that makes traditional low-income housing more so often, and even more expensive once they are remodeled into luxury. We propose to attack this problem by limiting the ability of developers and new residents to make existing rental units more upscale and desirable. Nothing can be built in Austin without a building permit that describes the work and the cost of the work. The City could set a limit on how much you could spend upgrading apartments and avoid these pitfalls. --- Logos is deployed here to highlight a possible problem and then demonstrate the proposal has a solution. This also invokes this because the speaker is shown to have carefully thought through the implications of the proposal and therefore the speaker has more credibility.

City planners and local government: Addressing city planners and government officials directly shows how their decisions can shape the future of Austin’s identity. By contrasting two possible outcomes, it persuades listeners to care more about policy choices. This encourages community engagement, urging local leaders and community members to take action before Austin loses its unique history, culture, and image.

demonstrate counter argument

The possibility of a CLT is in the hands of the city.

CLT's are like a group project, everyone needs to chip in their fair share.

Portland has already implemented something similar with its Anti-Displacement Action Plan. They offer rent assistance, repair grants, and support for community organizations. They didn't stop development. They just made it more balanced. This could be established in Austin. There are also other ideas we should explore, such as inclusionary zoning, which would require developers to incorporate affordable housing into new construction, or community land trusts, which can keep housing permanently affordable by removing the land from the market. These solutions already exist. We don't have to invent anything new.

We just have to care enough to use them. Beyond policy, though, this is about values. Do we want to be a city that protects its people, or one that only accommodates wealth? Do we want to preserve what makes Austin what it is? And no, this isn't about being anti-business or anti-growth. I use real examples and practical solutions to show that cities like Portland have already taken steps to balance growth with fairness, and I shift the focus from just policy to values by asking what kind of city we want Austin to be.