Austin 78758 Building Permits: Small-Scale Housing by Month and Year
This report covers small-scale housing only — new houses and 2- or 3-unit sites, projects of one to three units. That is the boundary Austin’s own review track turns on: three units is what the city’s HOME rules allow on a residential lot, so it is the line that decides which process a project goes through.
The accuracy check is run at a slightly wider boundary than the one reported here, and deliberately so. The U.S. Census Bureau’s Building Permits Survey publishes its size classes as 1-unit, 2-unit, 3-or-4-unit and 5-or-more — it never separates a 3-unit project from a 4-unit one. So the comparison against Census is made on the combined one-to-four-unit total, where it is an exact match rather than an approximate one, and the figures shown on this page are the one-to-three-unit subset of what was checked. Four-unit sites are counted in the check and left out of the tables.
Apartment buildings of five or more units are permitted through a different process at the city and are not included here at all: that series has known counting problems we have not finished resolving, so we are not publishing it until it is right.
These figures are drawn from City of Austin permit records as filed. Some records contain errors — for example, a unit count that does not match the floor area recorded on the building permit — and every project on this page is checked for that before publishing. A project that fails the check is flagged and reviewed; it is not removed, and its units remain in the counts below.
That floor-area check only works where Austin’s own records include a project’s floor area, which is essentially every project since 2007. For anything issued before 2007, this page’s figures are checked only against the U.S. Census Bureau’s annual survey, not against floor area directly — a real difference in how thoroughly a number from 1995 has been checked versus one from 2015, stated here rather than left implicit.
“2-unit site,” “3-unit site” and “4-unit site” describe how many dwellings a lot holds in total once a project’s work is done, not only how many were newly authorized: a “2-unit site” is usually two newly authorized homes, but can also be one new home added beside a dwelling that was already there and stayed. We count it that way because that is what determines which zoning review track a development goes through, not how much of it is new construction — the separate Units figure on this page covers new construction only and is not affected by this. A 2- or 3-unit site is often an attached duplex, triplex or fourplex, but not always — permit records do not consistently say whether the dwellings are attached or are separate houses sharing one lot, so we count and label what the record actually supports rather than assume a building form it doesn’t state. Where the city’s own construction-class code and the summed permit count disagree about how many dwellings a single BUILDING holds, we use the higher of the two and flag the disagreement for review rather than silently pick one.
This page covers ZIP code 78758 only — the site address ZIP as recorded by the City of Austin on the building permit, not a mailing ZIP or council district. It is one of 18 ZIPs with enough small-scale housing activity to get its own monthly and annual history; the other ZIPs with any activity are covered only by the citywide by-ZIP summary, which links to all 18 of these pages.
78758's housing mix, trailing twelve months
In the twelve months through September 2026, 78758 recorded 22 single houses and 1 2-unit site — 4% of its 23 small-scale projects were multi-unit sites (two or more units on the lot) rather than single houses.
78758, month by month (last 24 months)
Newest month first, matching the year x month grid below. Click a month’s Projects count to see the addresses behind it — every address is drawn from the public City of Austin permit record and, where the city assigned a project ID, links to that record’s own page. A month with more than 8 projects lists the first 8 and states how many more, rather than every address, to keep the page a reasonable size; the count in the closed row is always the true total either way. The bottom row’s total expands the same way, listing up to 50 addresses across all 24 months before pointing back to the monthly rows for the rest — the same-shaped control at a higher cap, not a second copy of every address already shown above.
† Still settling: the last 6 months, marked above, can still change classification as later permits land on the same lot -- a 1-unit lot marked here can become a 2- or 3-unit lot once a second building on that parcel is issued, sometimes over a year later. This bias runs ONE DIRECTION ONLY: a marked month can only gain 2-/3-unit lots over time, never lose them, so it currently understates how many multi-unit lots it holds -- read a low multi-unit count in a marked month as incomplete, not as a shift toward single-family construction. Units authorized is not affected by this at all; only which lot a unit is grouped into can change.
A month with no small-scale activity in 78758 shows as zero, not omitted, and the bottom row totals all 24 months.
Reading this table: Units is new homes authorized, the figure comparable to Census. Projects is how many lots saw work — one entry per lot, whatever it ends up holding. Single houses/2-unit sites/3-unit sites sort those same lots by how many homes each one holds in total, counting a preserved home as one of them: a 3-unit project is a 3-unit project even when one of its three homes predates the permit, because total units on the lot is what sets the zoning review track it goes through.
78758, every month, 1981–present
Newest year first — at 46 years, scrolling past four-plus decades to reach the current one is a real cost a shorter table doesn’t have. Each row’s twelve months sum to its own “Year total” column.
Reading the grid: a plain 0 means no small-scale permits were recorded under 78758 that month, and every unit issued citywide that month is accounted for under some ZIP — a confident zero. An – also means zero were recorded under 78758, but some unit(s) issued that month citywide have no ZIP on record at all, so this could be concealing one of them rather than a true zero — shown, not guessed at. A blank cell is a month that hasn’t happened yet. A bold, bordered cell is one of this ZIP's own busiest months (at least 60% of its single highest month on record) — shading paired with weight and a border, not colour alone, so the emphasis holds in greyscale.
| Year | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Year total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 (YTD) | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 24 | ||
| 2025 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 25 |
| 2024 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 72 | 9 | 8 | 102 |
| 2023 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 3 | 20 |
| 2022 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 12 |
| 2021 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| 2020 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 12 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 35 |
| 2019 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 8 |
| 2018 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2017 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
| 2016 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
| 2015 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 2014 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| 2013 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 14 |
| 2012 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 21 |
| 2011 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| 2010 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2009 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
| 2008 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 13 |
| 2007 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 22 |
| 2006 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 16 |
| 2005 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2004 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| 2003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5 |
| 2002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2001 | – | – | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| 1999 | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | – | – | – | – | 1 |
| 1998 | 0 | – | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 1997 | 0 | 1 | 0 | – | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 1996 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
| 1995 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
| 1994 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| 1993 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 10 |
| 1992 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| 1991 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1990 | 0 | 0 | – | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 1989 | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1988 | – | – | – | 0 | 0 | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1987 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | – | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1986 | – | – | 0 | – | – | – | 2 | 0 | 0 | – | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 1985 | 2 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 2 |
| 1984 | – | – | 4 | 1 | 1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 6 |
| 1983 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 8 | – | 1 | – | – | – | – | 25 |
| 1982 | 22 | 12 | 26 | 15 | 11 | 25 | 132 | 3 | 12 | 15 | 9 | 17 | 299 |
| 1981 | 64 | 83 | 41 | 48 | 57 | 27 | 12 | 7 | 13 | 4 | 8 | 3 | 367 |
Starting from 1981, the earliest year this dataset's ZIP field is reliably populated citywide (verified: at least 97.8% of small-scale units in every year back to 1981 carry a well-formed 5-digit ZIP). Some ZIPs in this set were largely undeveloped or outside city limits for long stretches of this history — a genuine run of zero years, not a gap in the data.
78758: how many units per lot
A DIFFERENT count from every units/projects figure on this page: not how many new units were authorized, but how many lots ended up holding 1, 2, or 3 units once the work counted here was done. A lot’s size counts any dwelling that was already there and stayed, alongside the new ones — that is what makes a 3-unit lot a 3-unit lot, whether all three were newly built or one was preserved. Grouped by the city’s own parcel ID, not by street address, so a corner lot with two street frontages is not miscounted as two separate lots. This is a count of lots, not a count of units, and must never be added to the units/projects figures above.
Checked against a control group of permit descriptions that state a lot’s size in words: 2-unit lots agree with that independent check 77.5% of the time, 3-unit lots 65.7% of the time. 4-unit and larger lots are not shown here -- the same check found them right in only a small fraction of cases, evidence the grouping method misses some of a large lot’s permits, not that such lots don’t exist. We would rather withhold that count than publish one we cannot stand behind, the same standard already applied to apartment buildings of five or more units.
† Still settling: the current year, marked above, is attributed lots by the year of each lot’s EARLIEST permit -- a lot whose first building was permitted this year can still gain a second building (and move up a size bucket) before the year is out, the same one-directional understatement series.js’s own monthly tables carry. It never affects a completed prior year.
By year
Newest year first.
| Year | 1-unit lots | 2-unit lots | 3-unit lots | 1-, 2- and 3-unit lots |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 † | 20 | 1 | 0 | 21 |
| 2025 | 22 | 1 | 0 | 23 |
| 2024 | 20 | 6 | 0 | 26 |
| 2023 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 11 |
| 2022 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| 2021 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 2020 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 23 |
| 2019 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2018 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2017 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 5 |
| 2016 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| 2015 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 2014 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
| 2013 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| 2012 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2011 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| 2010 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2009 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 2008 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 12 |
| 2007 | 19 | 1 | 0 | 20 |
| 2006 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| 2005 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2004 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| 2003 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| 2002 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2001 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2000 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| 1999 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 1998 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 1997 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 1996 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| 1995 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
| 1994 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 1993 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| 1992 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| 1990 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 1986 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 1984 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| 1983 | 12 | 6 | 0 | 18 |
| 1982 | 143 | 14 | 0 | 157 |
| 1981 | 151 | 84 | 2 | 237 |
Last 24 months
Newest month first.
| Month | 1-unit lots | 2-unit lots | 3-unit lots | 1-, 2- and 3-unit lots |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| September 2026 † | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| August 2026 † | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| July 2026 † | 5 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| June 2026 † | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| May 2026 † | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| April 2026 † | 4 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| March 2026 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| February 2026 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| January 2026 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| December 2025 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| November 2025 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| October 2025 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| September 2025 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| August 2025 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| July 2025 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| June 2025 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| May 2025 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| April 2025 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| March 2025 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| February 2025 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| January 2025 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| December 2024 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
| November 2024 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| October 2024 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 24-month total † | 54 | 3 | 0 | 57 |
Other high-volume ZIPs
The other 17 ZIPs with their own monthly and annual history:
7861778653787027870378704787217873178736787447874578746787477875178752787547875678757
Every active ZIP, including ones without their own page, is in the citywide by-ZIP summary.
Common questions
Send us an address and we will tell you what we find
We do this research ourselves on every project we take on — zoning, floodplain, watershed, trees, whether it is a legal lot. Send us an address and we will run it and tell you what we find. It works the same whether you own a vacant lot, a house you are thinking of adding a unit to, or a house you are thinking of replacing. No charge and no strings, and if it is a bad lot we will say so.
Send us an addressWe are homebuilders, not the City of Austin. This page explains how we read the code in practice — it is not legal advice and it is not an official determination. Always confirm with Austin Development Services before you rely on it for a project. The authoritative text is the Austin Land Development Code; permitting questions go to Austin Development Services Department.