In 2012, Austin began the process of rewriting the city’s land-use regulations. The project came to be named CodeNext, and it has been mired in controversy, animosity, and finger-pointing ever since. While detractors have raised numerous points about the process of developing CodeNext, they haven’t questioned the principles underlying it. And those principles are the cause of the divisiveness surrounding CodeNext.
As an example of the controversies, some in Austin want to see more affordable housing built. But this requires higher development densities, which preservationists oppose. These two groups have competing goals, and an attempt to satisfy one will necessarily mean disappointing the other. Repeat this over and over again, with many different groups pushing their own political agendas, and controversy and divisiveness are the natural and logical outcome. Matt Lewis, who briefly ran the CodeNext project, told the Austin Statesman, “It is unfortunate that something so grand could be so divisive in this community.”
What is truly unfortunate is that advocates of land-use regulations do not understand why their “grand” plans are so divisive.
The purpose of land-use regulations is to control how owners use their property. Such regulations might control density, lot sizes, the height of buildings, architectural styles, the amount of “open” space, the particular type of use for a parcel of land (residential, commercial, or industrial), and countless other details. In short, land-use regulations attempt to plan the development within a community. Ultimately, this has an impact on everyone and everything that uses land in one way or another. Which means, everyone and everything.
Housing requires land. Mandate minimum lot sizes or restrict housing density, and the cost of housing will rise. At the end of the day, consumers are the ones paying those higher costs. Businesses require land. Mandate “public spaces” or limit building heights, and the cost of doing business will rise. Again, it is consumers who ultimately pay those higher costs. CodeNext will impose economic costs on the residents of Austin.
But land-use regulations do more than increase costs. They also limit choices. Developers cannot use land as they deem best, but only as the regulators permit. Developers cannot act on their own judgement to offer new and innovative land-uses unless regulators give them permission to do so. And this gets to the heart of the issue–the moral cost of CodeNext. That will be the topic of the next post.