AUSTIN | Projects & Construction II

[priller]

That's great that they're doing these reports. Very informative. Still need a web cam, though.

I WANT MY WEB CAM!!!

[Gallup]

It’s probably just because I’m not living there that I’m glad they don’t have a webcam. I like to be surprised at what is going on and the webcam makes it almost too easy to just check it at any time of day. If I bought a unit there I would want it but not as an enthusiast. It’s really going to be fun watching it climb into the sky. How big are the floor plates? Anyone know?

[hookem]

I'll admit it -- I am addicted to the 360 web cam. I looked at it almost every day (pretty much still do). So I'm afraid the luxury of suprise is not an option for me, it's an addiction now. If the Austonian doesn't have one, I'll suffer withdrawls. The only light at the end of the tunnel is that Novare will hopefully be starting their next project here soon, which will have a webcam like all their others...

Well, there is one more light at the end of the tunnel for me -- y'all posting your downtown pics so regularly. That will usually give me my fix for the day. So thank you for that ... things would get ugly otherwise!

[MichaelB]

Originally Posted by hookem

I'll admit it -- I am addicted to the 360 web cam. I looked at it almost every day (pretty much still do). So I'm afraid the luxury of suprise is not an option for me, it's an addiction now. If the Austonian doesn't have one, I'll suffer withdrawls. The only light at the end of the tunnel is that Novare will hopefully be starting their next project here soon, which will have a webcam like all their others...

Well, there is one more light at the end of the tunnel for me -- y'all posting your downtown pics so regularly. That will usually give me my fix for the day. So thank you for that ... things would get ugly otherwise!

Do you need an intervention?

[Louisville Lowes]

I think all this is very cool to have going on in your city. My question is when all these projects are complete who going to fill all this space? I know very little about austin since i am from Louisville. I do know the U of Texas is a big ecom engine in Austin.

[ATXboom]

Welcome Louisville,

Most of the highrise being built are residential. There is a solid demand for downtown living due to all of the entertainment and live music - both pent up locally and from an influx of people coming from California, Florida, etc. Californians due to the better tax laws and similar culture, climate and companies [see Apple, Intel, AMD, Samsung, Google, etc with office in Cali and Austin].
Also empty nesters from Dallas, Houston, etc who want part time residence downtown Austin.

These residential buildings are not built until they reach a certain percentage of contractual obligations to purchase... preventing an "over built" scenario as south Florida experienced. Loans must be secured based on this approach prior to building - as we know loans are difficult to come by these days so when financed these projects are quite solid.

Historically and currently Austin is one of the fastest growing metros in the country. In 2000 the metro population was right around 1 million. Currrently it is just over 1.6 million. This historical fact and current trend is expected to continue due to corporate relocation and talent relocation [people moving in without jobs for the culture - jobs follow them]. By 2025 the metro population is expected to be near 3 million. High growth industries in Austin include Gaming, Movie/Entertainment, Biomed, Nanotech, medical, and software/tech companies.

I would expect a large downtown office project to be announced in the next 2 years or so.

Hope that helps!

[M1EK]

I would expect a large downtown office project to be announced in the next 2years or so.

I would absolutely not expect any more large-scale office projects to be announced anytime soon - unless I'm dead wrong about commuter rail and it turns out to be a runaway success (which would require people to be hanging off the sides of the train like they do in India, since even a complete seats-full outcome still only brings in 2000 people a day).

The roadways into downtown don't have any more capacity; and there is no logical scenario under which we can convince more people to ride buses which are penalized even more by that traffic congestion than their cars would be. In other words, there's no way to get any more people into downtown than we're getting in now and there won't be substantially more people living downtown who also work downtown to make a big dent in that for years to come.

As usual, I have to play bad cop. Oh well.

[priller]

I think you're absolutely right, M1EK.

Now the city evidently thinks if there is simply more parking space available, that will do much to solve the problem. And it will help the parking issue, at least, but it will only exacerbate the traffic problem. That's why this push to build more parking seems a little wrong-headed to me.

Plus parking garages are ugly.

[M1EK]

I'm actually a bit optimistic about the parking thing - remember that traffic for retail rarely matches up with traffic for employment - i.e. people might drive in at night or on the weekend to park.

Ideally, no office buildings would have garages, and we'd have privately-funded open-to-the-public garages which could efficiently serve both populations. But what we have now, thanks to years of zoning which mandated it, are a bunch of private garages which are only variably and inefficiently open to the public.

So the traffic capacity actually isn't that much of a problem (coming into downtown on a weeknight or on a weekend presents little problem), but it's actually a bit more difficult to park.

[arbeiter]

While I can see the lack of mass transit as an eventual impediment to large-scale office development, Austin's traffic is still by national standards only moderate and the increase of rich executive types within 2-5 miles of downtown will make some incremental office space growth possible. There are still lots of niche companies that could both afford and prefer a downtown location. I think the occupancy rates are beginning to creep towards a rate that would justify one or two buildings within the next 5-7 years, barring a really dramatic recession. I don't see how even 2 25 story buildings would dramatically alter traffic patterns.

Consider how much larger Houston's downtowns are and how until recently they were not served by rail. Even now, rail is only a small part of the downtown transit pattern there.

Just look at Silicon Labs - if downtown's future scenario were that grim, companies like them wouldn't be considering downtown. There is an intangible "downtown cachet" that will only become more irresistable as Austin's tech scene matures and as downtown becomes more filled in and attractive. I bet there are a number of Silicon Valley firms that would just love to have a signature tower, but the costs and restrictions/regulations in California make that a pipe dream there.

[priller]

barring a really dramatic recession

Let's keep our fingers crossed on that one.

[ATXboom]

Well we did have an office component proposal on the table with T. Stacey's 501 Congress. Occ rates make it likely baring a big downturn as mentioned.

I agree traffic flow in/out of downtown is a huge issue but not a barrier to a singular development which may hold as many as 1000 employees or so.

Hit Chicago or NY or Atlanta... or even Dallas. Austin's traffic is considerable but it is not comparable to major major metro areas.

[hookem]

I agree with arbeiter on this one. Traffic into downtown has not yet reached the levels of other major metros -- the truly brutal traffic in Austin is crosstown, either N-S or W-E.

For people living in reasonably priced housing in S, SW, E or W Austin, downtown is very accessible. It is not a bad commute at all. Problem is, most jobs are elsewhere (mainly north).

So yes, from the vast northern suburbs getting to downtown can be horrible. And for many people in other locations, commuting crosstown to the north (where the majority of employment is) can be horrible. But that doesn't mean routes in to downtown are at capacity, not by any stretch of the imagination -- it's readily accessible from many (most?) parts of town, IMO.

Face it, people just don't have a reason to go there -- yet. Getting there is not the problem. From Circle C? Easy to get to downtown. Bee Caves? Far away, but getting Downtown would be about the easiest place to go. South Austin? Getting downtown is easy. East Austin? Downtown is easy.

Circle C to Round Rock? Horrible. Bee Caves to Pflugerville? Nasty. Cedar Park to the airport? Rough.

Crosstown is the problem.

[Dragonfire]

Well, Cedar Park to the airport isn't that bad anymore, if you don't mind paying for the toll roads (183A -> SH 45 -> SH 130).

But I agree, the crosstown commutes are the worst. I would said that E-W crosstown the traffic is the worst, because there are really no high-capacity roadways going E-W, especially through central Austin. N-S is horrible during rush hour (I go through it frequently), but at least with that traffic there are highways running N-S.

[M1EK]

Originally Posted by arbeiter

WConsider how much larger Houston's downtowns are and how until recently they were not served by rail. Even now, rail is only a small part of the downtown transit pattern there.

Just look at Silicon Labs - if downtown's future scenario were that grim, companies like them wouldn't be considering downtown. There is an intangible "downtown cachet" that will only become more irresistable as Austin's tech scene matures and as downtown becomes more filled in and attractive. I bet there are a number of Silicon Valley firms that would just love to have a signature tower, but the costs and restrictions/regulations in California make that a pipe dream there.

Houston's downtown has many times more freeway and arterial lanes feeding into it - even proportionate to its population. As for Silicon Labs, they're filling space which somebody else was using and then moved out of - no net gain.

[Gallup]

Originally Posted by M1EK

I would absolutely not expect any more large-scale office projects to be announced anytime soon - unless I'm dead wrong about commuter rail and it turns out to be a runaway success (which would require people to be hanging off the sides of the train like they do in India, since even a complete seats-full outcome still only brings in 2000 people a day).

The roadways into downtown don't have any more capacity; and there is no logical scenario under which we can convince more people to ride buses which are penalized even more by that traffic congestion than their cars would be. In other words, there's no way to get any more people into downtown than we're getting in now and there won't be substantially more people living downtown who also work downtown to make a big dent in that for years to come.

As usual, I have to play bad cop. Oh well.

Sorry to disappoint, not that I think you will mind, there is one project in the works that will be in the 500’ range and will be more than 95% office. This will be in a place we do not expect however we will all enjoy and appreciate. We’re looking at 8-12 months before an announcement so take it for what its worth, which may not be much. How’s that for beating around the bush? Skyscraper fans have reason to be optimistic right now in regards to new office space. Austin is hot, the vibe is felt and rents are waaaayy up. Slap it!

[JGFrisco]

There are many freeways leading to downtown Houston, but they come together, and there really AREN'T that many entrances. Example: 288 and 59 merge in the south, and 45 and 10 merge on the north side. When you consider that Houston has three times the population of Austin, you'll see that Austin has better freeway access per capita.

[arbeiter]

Originally Posted by M1EK

Houston's downtown has many times more freeway and arterial lanes feeding into it - even proportionate to its population. As for Silicon Labs, they're filling space which somebody else was using and then moved out of - no net gain.

I know it wasn't a net gain, but it was a solid zipping up of occupancy rates. Houston does have many more freeway lanes surrounding downtown, and more roads with more lanes, but the overall density is still much higher than Austin's downtown. Either way, barring a truly in depth analysis of Austin vs. other cities, we don't know.

I just don't see how downtown is effectively at capacity for companies. Traffic isn't terrible in Austin. I did it for years like the rest of you, and east-west crosstown traffic (or more accurately, central-west traffic) and IH-35 were the two truly horrible spots. Downtown is surrounded on all four sides by development and incremental residential infill combined with incremental commercial infill is possible. Just think if the housing developments out on the eastside blossom - add all of the condos in inner East Austin and suddenly you have a middle-class traffic pattern on a series of roads that are under capacity.

With the exception of Cesar Chavez's piecemeal route directions and the interruption of the grid around the Capitol, downtown's wide multi-lane roads are far from true capacity. Some of the traffic will be from inner node to inner node, and some of the residential traffic will be commuting outward to Round Rock. A future office building downtown will likely serve downtown CEO's, east-side graphic designers, Travis Heights salesmen, in addition to Cedar Park administrative assistants.

People are simply inflexible and whiney about Austin's traffic. I took side streets north-south for 2 years straight and never experienced more than a few real delays. You can drive Lamar from its headend near Wells Branch down to Westgate Mall with good flow. I've driven Burnet countless times from end to end, with nary a delay. The roads that are overtaxed are east-west arterials, like 2222, which is a several-stoplight affair near Burnet and Lamar. Cesar Chavez sucks because of its silly do-si-do of route directions. 5th and 6th aren't flawless, but they do well considering that they are basically the two densest downtown streets in terms of automobile entry and exit. Riverside doesn't help, because our love affair with scrub oaken xeriscapes dictates that it has to end right at Lamar and not continue to Mopac. Oltorf is hardly an east-west road and lacks a center lane in parts. 38th, 35th and 38 1/2 street is basically a road doing an interpretive portrayal of gradually raising and lowering of interest rates, requiring every car to do a 'market correction' to continue on their onward path.

Most of Austin's central core traffic problems could be solved with zero freeways; smooth flowing east-west corridors should be a priority. Even one would help. Cesar Chavez is the closest we have to a near-downtown road that can get you from the Airport to Tarrytown. make it bi-directional the whole way.

[Saddle Man]

The city is already working on Cesar Chavez.

[ATXboom]

The area surrounding TX130 can fill in with a million people very easily. The homes will be very affordable and 130 will ge them north toward employment. However there is a great need for expanded capacity from that area to downtown - IE MLK, etc.

Once utilities are filled in out there it will expolde - I anticipate that area/land pricing alone to accelerate the Austin metro growth rate.