AUSTIN | Project Updates Thread Part II

[The ATX]

Nice updates. I especially like the shot of Seven and Aspen Heights.

[JoninATX]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Nice updates. I especially like the shot of Seven and Aspen Heights.

Thanks... I have several more pixs that I'm about to upload here in a sec.

[the Genral]

That's a pretty deep hole at 5th and West. The orange plastic fencing doesn't look like it would prevent someone leaning against from falling, especially a drunk doober. I hear there's one or two drunks walking about dt every so often. Nice update. What's with the white wall at 5th and Colorado?

[JoninATX]

Originally Posted by the Genral

That's a pretty deep hole at 5th and West. The orange plastic fencing doesn't look like it would prevent someone leaning against from falling, especially a drunk doober. I hear there's one or two drunks walking about dt every so often. Nice update. What's with the white wall at 5th and Colorado?

Thanks Genral!

[JoninATX]

Last but not least a skyline shot from Whole Foods balcony. This is by far one of my favorite places to take skyline shots.





Now for the pit at Shoal Creek.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by JoninATX

Decided today to go downtown and explore a little bit. While I was out for only a brief moment do to the fact I was in flip flops (my shoes where wet) was a little bit chilli.

5th + Colorado finishing up the exterior.

I have a feeling we'll be seeing some projections or something off that wall. The material and color they are using wouldn't make any sense in comparison to the rest of the facade other than used for projecting advertisements or murals ect...

I've also had a thought about this building. Someone mentioned earlier I think in the thread dedicated to 5th @ Colorado that it's like an incomplete version of 3rd @ Colorado and it really does look kinda awkward especially when your driving on South 1st just before you get to the river. The window color is very similar particularly light reflection when comparing the two but it's the way the rooftop of 5th @ Colorado looks that doesn't seem complete. The conversation about adding floors to existing buildings popped in my head. Kevin posted the link to the highrise in Chicago which they did just that.

Not sure if the structure of the building is designed for future floors, though it seems like it took them awhile to get it built for such a short office building primarily made mostly of parking, but I could imagine new levels being added in the future. If it's possible and is something the company that owns the building decided to do, this building could actually be pretty impressive.

[paul78701]

Ownership group seeks developers’ proposals for Statesman property

http://www.statesman.com/news/business/ownership-group-seeks-developers-proposals-for-sta/nqLtQ/

[AustinGoesVertical]

Originally Posted by Jdawgboy

I have a feeling we'll be seeing some projections or something off that wall. The material and color they are using wouldn't make any sense in comparison to the rest of the facade other than used for projecting advertisements or murals ect...

I've also had a thought about this building. Someone mentioned earlier I think in the thread dedicated to 5th @ Colorado that it's like an incomplete version of 3rd @ Colorado and it really does look kinda awkward especially when your driving on South 1st just before you get to the river. The window color is very similar particularly light reflection when comparing the two but it's the way the rooftop of 5th @ Colorado looks that doesn't seem complete. The conversation about adding floors to existing buildings popped in my head. Kevin posted the link to the highrise in Chicago which they did just that.

Not sure if the structure of the building is designed for future floors, though it seems like it took them awhile to get it built for such a short office building primarily made mostly of parking, but I could imagine new levels being added in the future. If it's possible and is something the company that owns the building decided to do, this building could actually be pretty impressive.

I agree. IMO, this building should have been 10 floors taller, with some sort of crown on top. Even if it was just lighting around the edges. The glass is actually very nice from a distance and I do generally like how it looks, but to me it feels like they chopped the top off. Especially looking from across the lake or Cesar Chavez, it just feels extremely awkward; almost like someone took a thin 40-story building and crunched it like a soda can.

[SkyPie]

Originally Posted by the Genral

What's with the white wall at 5th and Colorado?

Fortunately, it's doesn't look quite so bright and white in person. It's actually a light to medium shade of gray. Still not great, but not quite as bad as the picture would lead you to believe.

[Jdawgboy]

Originally Posted by SkyPie

Fortunately, it's doesn't look quite so bright and white in person. It's actually a light to medium shade of gray. Still not great, but not quite as bad as the picture would lead you to believe.

I still wouldn't be surprised if we see some sort of advertisement or mural projection on it. We'll see come SXSW since that's usually when we see things like that.

[Urbannizer]

Crystal Lagoon under development for Austin

http://www.crystal-lagoons.com/projects

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

Crystal Lagoon under development for Austin

http://www.crystal-lagoons.com/projects

These developments seem to be pretty big by the looks of them. If this is anywhere in the core, it could be a big deal.

Here's Charlotte's:

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/development/article59349962.html

Here's a completed one:

http://www.floridatrend.com/article/17845/crystal-lagoons-builds-projects-in-florida

Obviously it won't be anywhere near as big as that one, but Charlotte's is pretty impressive and they're a similar size market to us.

Also, the company is Chilean, and seem to have a record of successful international development, so we may see swift action on this one. Whenever international money is involved, things get going, and the U.S. economy - contra what other people have said lately - is doing better than most western economies, so we're a safe bet for investment for foreigners. Money may be tighter than it was the last few years, but that doesn't mean it is tight in the absolute sense.

Also note that Austin has the highest economic growth potential over the next couple of years according to these studies by the US Association of Mayors:

http://usmayors.org/metroeconomies/0615/report.pdf

http://usmayors.org/metroeconomies/2014/06/report.pdf


So it's no wonder why we haven't slowed down as much as other areas, because we're still expected to grow fast economically. That's attractive both domestically and internationally. We are one of the best markets in one of the world's richest and best performing post industrial western economies. I don't see that as a recipe for a slowdown. If other areas of the world are slowing down, that simply makes investment here more likely.

In fact, we have a higher growth rate than all the other cities that have gotten proposals in the U.S. (as the fastest growing economy for a large city). Two other cities that have proposals from that quick google search are Orlando and Charlotte. Orlando's economy, despite being a significantly larger metro area, is only marginally bigger in 2016 stats in the first link above than Austin (130.4 to 122.3). Charlotte is at 162.2, which is appreciably larger, but they're also a significantly larger metro.

In 2021, Austin is estimated to have an economy that is ~165.3 billion, a growth rate of 6%. San Antonio is estimated to have a 5.3% growth rate, which is great, to 144.4, so they won't regain their previous lead on Austin. Charlotte will be at 207.5 with a 5.1% growth rate and Orlando will be at 171.4 billion with a 5.7% growth rate in 2021. Unemployment is expected to remain in Austin at 3.5% thru 2017, keeping Austin as an attractive residential investment market.

Note: a bunch of this is in response to a bunch of recent comments about slowdowns, when the most recent studies anticipate no such thing.

[lzppjb]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

Crystal Lagoon under development for Austin

http://www.crystal-lagoons.com/projects

The CEO of Crystal Lagoons, Kevin Morgan, was a guest at the F1 race in 2014: https://texaswideopenforbusiness.com/sites/default/files/packet-oct2014-web.pdf (page 13)

I guess he liked what he saw.

This is separate from NLand Surf Park, right? Any guesses as to where this resort would go?

Seems like water parks and resorts wouldn't do well in a place that routinely goes through droughts and isn't sure how it'll handle the massive population growth during future droughts. The Lane City Reservoir will definitely help.

[wwmiv]

And get this: one of the studies linked above estimates population for metros from 2014 to 2044 (a bit long-term, but I want to draw these numbers out for y'all because I find them interesting and we all love talking about this kind of stuff. I'm just gonna list all the metros over 1 million at the 2044 date and bold the cities in Texas and the two examples above.

(city: 2014 metro estimate in millions to 2044 metro forecast in millions)

New York City: 20.10 to 20.44
Los Angeles:^ 13.27 to 14.53
Dallas-Fort Worth: 6.97 to 10.93
Chicago: 9.56 to 10.48
Houston: 6.51 to 10.12
Atlanta: 5.62 to 8.49
Miami: 5.93 to 8.05
D.C.: 6.04 to 7.75
Phoenix: 4.50 to 7.49
Riverside:^ 4.45 to 7.42
Philadelphia: 6.05 to 6.37
San Francisco:^ 4.60 to 5.59
Boston: 4.74 to 5.25
Seattle: 3.68 to 4.77
Detroit: 4.30 to 4.25
Minneapolis: 3.50 to 4.18
San Diego: 3.27 to 4.17
Tampa Bay: 2.92 to 4.10
Denver: 2.76 to 4.02
Orlando: 2.33 to 3.90
Charlotte: 2.39 to 3.63
Austin: 1.95 to 3.63
San Antonio: 2.33 to 3.58
Sacramento: 2.25 to 3.31
Las Vegas: 2.07 to 3.19
Portland: 2.35 to 3.10
Baltimore: 2.79 to 3.07
St. Louis: 2.81 to 2.99
Indianapolis: 1.97 to 2.63
Kansas City: 2.07 to 2.61
San Jose:^ 1.96 to 2.53
Nashville: 1.80 to 2.45
Columbus: 2.00 to 2.42
Pittsburgh: 2.36 to 2.32
Cincinnati: 2.15 to 2.27
Raleigh: 1.25 to 2.17
Jacksonville: 1.42 to 2.06
Hampton Roads: 1.72 to 2.05
Cleveland: 2.06 to 1.97
Salt Lake City: 1.16 to 1.82
Oklahoma City: 1.34 to 1.73
Providence: 1.61 to 1.67
Milwaukee: 1.57 to 1.62
Memphis: 1.34 to 1.59
Richmond: 1.27 to 1.53
McAllen: 0.83 to 1.50
Louisville: 1.27 to 1.48
Tampa: 1.01 to 1.38
New Orleans: 1.25 to 1.30
Cape Coral: 0.68 to 1.29
Birmingham: 1.14 to 1.27
Fresno: 0.97 to 1.27
Bakersfield: 0.88 to 1.26
Hartford: 1.21 to 1.22
Albuquerque: 0.90 to 1.20
Grand Rapids: 1.03 to 1.17
Omaha: 0.91 to 1.16
Sarasota: 0.75 to 1.13
Greenville: 0.86 to 1.12
El Paso: 0.84 to 1.10
Honolulu: 0.99 to 1.08
Boise: 0.67 to 1.08
Oxnard: 0.85 to 1.06
Columbia: 0.80 to 1.06
Knoxville: 0.96 to 1.04
Worcester: 0.93 to 1.02
Ogden: 0.63 to 1.02
Rochester: 1.08 to 1.01
Charleston: 0.73 to 1.01
Stockton: 0.72 to 1.01

Note some metros that Austin would now be larger than: San Antonio, Sacramento, Las Vegas, Portland, Baltimore, St. Louis, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and Cleveland.

... and tied with Charlotte...

Cities new to the 1 million club: Albuquerque, Bakersfield, Boise, Cape Coral, Charleston, Columbia, El Paso, Fresno, Greenville, Honolulu,* Knoxville, McAllen, Sarasota, Ogden, Omaha, Oxnard, Worcester

*Honolulu's growth I think is underrated here, as they only show 100,000 growth over this time period and they've already surpassed 1 million.

Metro areas that are screwed: Buffalo legit falls beneath a million (from 1.14 to 0.98), while Cleveland, Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Rochester shrink some as well, but with less stunning contractions.

South Carolina will be a Democratic state in no time: by 2044 it'll be completely dominated by 3 large metropolitan areas (Greenville, Columbia, and Charleston), which are all undergoing artistic class revolutions a la Austin in the 1980s and 1990s, the suburbs of a liberalizing metropolitan area (Charlotte), and two mid sized cities (Spartanburg and the trashy Myrtle Beach). And I think these estimates undersell these five cities population growth potential. South Carolina's own state estimates predict larger growth, iirc. That, combined with the fact that South Carolina's Republican base is the rural areas of the upstate, which are shrinking, whereas the smaller African American cities (Florence, Orangeburg, etc.) are going to roughly stay the same in size. The one Republican smaller city is Hilton Head, and that's gonna get bigger but will not be large enough to dominate state politics.

^I cannot imagine that by this time Riverside and Los Angeles are not a single metropolitan area, and for that matter with the inclusion of Oxnard. That would make it the largest MSA in the country. Whereas the lackluster (relative to SoCal) expected growth in NorCal would make be incredibly surprised to see the unification of the Bay Area as a single MSA by that time.

Here are all the other Texas MSAs (in thousands):

Brownsville: 420.9 to 711.1
Killeen: 425.4 to 660.7
Corpus Christi: 448.8 to 562.8
Laredo: 267.2 to 506.5
Beaumont: 405.6 to 449.5
Lubbock: 306.2 to 367.3
College Station: 243.5 to 357.3
Amarillo: 260.2 to 336.9
Waco: 260.7 to 329.2
Tyler: 219.3 to 316.0
Longview: 217.6 to 266.2
Midland: 161.6 to 205.4
Odessa: 154.1 to 198.1
Abilene: 168.8 to 189.8
Texarkana: 149.3 to 159.6
Sherman-Denison: 123.7 to 158.2
Wichita Falls: 151.6 to 151.5
San Angelo: 118.4 to 139.6
Victoria: 98.7 to 118.7

As Las Cruces may begin to operate more as a far northern suburb of El Paso, it's important to consider it's numbers in as well: 213.8 to 342.4, which brings El Paso's grander region up to 1.44 million in 2044. The RGV is arguably in a similar position, given that (a) the growing communities are those in between what are truly weak "core" cities (McAllen and Brownsville) and (b) that they're only a single county and : 2.215 in 2044. That's incredible.

The broader region that is central Texas, Waco thru San Antonio, would be populated by 8.20 million people. I don't think at that point it'd be a stretch to call that a cohesive mega-region (not as advanced or tied as a CSA at all) especially the Killeen thru San Antonio area, at 7.87 million, considering that significant chunks of that growth is likely to be located in communities in between the core cities along Interstate 35.

But I'd like to draw out a really interesting parallel here: from Georgetown to the south edge of San Antonio on Interstate 35 is 130 miles. San Antonio's explosive growth is likely to be intensely focused in the northerly direction toward New Braunfels and Seguin, and Austin's (although focused to the north) is so explosive that we're going to see growth everywhere, including in San Marcos, filling in that region. Georgetown and Round Rock are going to explode in population. Let me point also out that Miami's multipolar metro (it really is anchored by multiple relevant cities: Miami, firstly, but Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach are true urban cores as well) has a very similar pattern: north/south oriented development patterns that are hemmed in because of geography and preexisting transportation networks... and the distance between the north end of that single MSA, which is currently 5.93 million, and the south end of the MSA is 120 miles. If people don't think that by 2044, when Austin and San Antonio are 7.21 million together (that's less than a million shy of what Miami metro will be in 2044), that they'll be, at the very least, a CSA anchored by 2 true urban cores - San Antonio and Austin - and three major other economically important and probably (at that point), urban cities - Round Rock, San Marcos, and New Braunfels - with a battery of suburban cities of substantial size that we all know about and talk about every day, then they're kidding themselves. The Miami MSA is one of the most economically multipolar MSAs in the country according to the first report (pages 63-64), moreso than even DFW.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by lzppjb

The CEO of Crystal Lagoons, Kevin Morgan, was a guest at the F1 race in 2014: https://texaswideopenforbusiness.com/sites/default/files/packet-oct2014-web.pdf (page 13)

I guess he liked what he saw.

This is separate from NLand Surf Park, right? Any guesses as to where this resort would go?

Seems like water parks and resorts wouldn't do well in a place that routinely goes through droughts and isn't sure how it'll handle the massive population growth during future droughts. The Lane City Reservoir will definitely help.

He seems to want to build near the core in Charlotte, which is a great sign for us:

http://www.charlottestories.com/negotiat...stal-clear-artificial-lake-in-charlotte/

Orlando's development is at Lake Nona, which is outside the core, so that's a bad sign. Tampa's are in Pasco and Hillsborough County, also suburbs, but note that the pricing at the Tampa development is supposed to be affordable, in the 200s:

http://www.tbo.com/pasco-county/proposed-pasco-development-will-feature-man-made-lagoon-20141112/

Houston's, of course, will likely end up in the suburbs:

http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/morni...-amenity-for-houston-master-planned.html

I don't like the framing in that article, though, of the investment structure.

[wwmiv]

I know this won't happen, but I would secretly love if this were a bunch of street interactive hotels with retail, etc. with the lagoon along the riverfront or something at the current statesman site. The acreage is the right (18.9 acres) amount given what I've read about their other developments in the U.S.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that this'll probably end up being by the river out by the race track, though.

[The ATX]

I didn't read through all the links. But I saw on the TV news (KVUE or KXAN) last week that Round Rock was getting a new water park. Is this it?

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by The ATX

I didn't read through all the links. But I saw on the TV news (KVUE or KXAN) last week that Round Rock was getting a new water park. Is this it?

This isn't a water park, exactly, so I doubt it. And there haven't been any online news reports other than their own website, which doesn't indicate where in town or how far they've gotten into their process.

Here are some more photos of some of their projects:

http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/blog/...nona-s-mega-lagoon-may-look-like.html#g4

[The ATX]

I strongly suspect this will go somewhere near SH130/SH71 like COTA, and NLand. There are not very many large empty tracts of land left around Austin near major highways that can be had relatively cheaply.

[wwmiv]

States by number of metro areas over 1 million:

CA: 11
TX: 6
FL: 6
SC: 3
TN: 3
OH: 3
VA: 2.5 (D.C.)
PA: 2
NC: 2
NY: 2
AZ: 2
MA: 2
MO: 2
UT: 2
MI: 2
MD: 1.5 (D.C.)

MN, AL, ID, OR, HI, NE, OK, LA, CT, RI, WI, KY, IL, IN NM, WA, NV, GA all have one.

WY, ME, NH, VT, DE, WV, MS, AR, KS, SD, ND, WY, MT, and AK have no urban centers over 1 million by 2044 in those estimates. Though I'll note that there are a bunch of states on this list (and others) that house suburbs to major cities: NH (Boston), DE (Philadelphia), KA (Kansas City) from those as well as SC (Charlotte), WA (Portland), IL (St. Louis), KY (Cincinnati), IN (Louisville and Chicago), WI (Chicago and Minneapolis), and CT (NYC). And then there's New Jersey... which is split between two major urban centers entirely (NYC and Philadelphia). Oh, and there are multiple cities other close to 1 million in these estimates: Allentown, Baton Rouge, Bridgeport, Colorado Springs, and Greensboro are all over 900k. Statistically, they have an outside shot at surpassing 1 million by then. That'd bump LA, CT, and CO up to 2, and NC and PA up to 3.