North Lamar/Burnet Development Thread

[Armybrat]

Originally Posted by AusTex

Highland is now Central Austin now which is desirable. Full Stop. Old Austin attitudes are hard to advance. Outsiders know the difference.

When I moved into Bouldin 30+ years ago from out-of-state I was endlessly criticized for the poor choice. I stated that the next boom in Austin would target south of Town Lake....Now look at the neighborhood. I was also endlessly laughed at when I said East Austin would be next on the list! Location, Location, Location.

Lol
When my brother bought a little Crestview house on Piedmont in 1959, there was a working farm on the other side of his back fence.
Anderson Lane was out in the boonies, and Northwest Hills was cedar chopper country with an abandoned quarry.
Anything south of Ben White was rural woods with a few scattered houses.
And the Twin Oaks shopping strip center was the latest new thing.

[wwmiv]

I'm old Austin. Don't tar us all with the same brush.

That said:

There's a big difference between "desirable" versus "transitioning" both placed in distinction from "downscale" (or whatever other less polite word you want to choose), "new build", and "eclectic" neighborhoods for the purposes of the real estate market.

IMHO: the general pattern outside of neighborhoods platted for one-off custom built homes for the wealthy is: largely similar tract housing built for the middle class ("new build"), fallen into disrepair due to deferred maintenance ("downscale"), targeted for gentrification by the wealthy due to centralized location ("transitioning"), and then gentrified to some degree or another ("gentrifying") until the low hanging fruit are gone and the action moves to another area ("eclectic" or "desirable" depending on the thoroughness of the gentrification***).

Highland is "transitioning", it is not yet "desirable" ... and probably never will be within any of our lifetimes, and is more likely to end up being "eclectic". Until (a) the transition within the Highland neighborhood proper (e.g. the single family home dominated portion) is further along (or even begins) and (b) neighboring neighborhoods St. Johns and Georgian Acres get better. The Highland Campus is wonderful and a great addition to the area, but it is less than 1/10th of the land area of the neighborhood and is relatively disconnected from the neighborhood itself, so the ongoing developments there aren't affecting the single family home core as much as anyone here is claiming. Rather, larger market forces forcing a change of demographics in the neighborhood is causing it to get cleaned up (see below). Furthermore, none of the south or east Austin neighborhoods any of you mention are truly "desirable" neighborhoods. They are "eclectic." They contain thorough mixes of housing typologies and price points, gentrification was not complete nor thorough.

This is fundamentally different than neighborhoods like Barton Hills, Rollingwood, and Tarrytown which have way more purchase on the term "desirable" than anything else in our inner core. Doesn't mean all the rest aren't wonderful places to live (in fact, I prefer them: I live in Hyde Park, which is "eclectic"). This is yet another example of how the terminology in our housing market has allowed popularity and marketing driven groupthink to raise prices beyond what is sustainable. It isn't a math problem, it's a cultural problem. You have to moor yourself to reality for prices to ever stabilize, which means accurately describing the product being sold rather than exaggerating beyond reason. Let's moor ourselves to reality and admit that Highland is not a "desirable" neighborhood. And just for good measure: it is surrounded on two sides by worse: St Johns and Georgian Acres, both of which are more interconnected to the core part of the Highland neighborhood (St. Johns between Guadalupe and Northcrest) than even the Highland ACC Campus that's within it. The Highland ACC Campus itself functions as its own separate neighborhood.

Edit: I'd even add another category which is: "cleaned up" (or cleaning up).

Neighborhoods that don't actually experience much construction or churn in the housing stock, but that nonetheless have un-deferred their maintenance. I'd wager that Highland actually qualifies for this category rather than "transitioning." How many tear downs are we seeing in Highland? Hardly any. In order for a neighborhood to qualify as transitioning there must be new housing stock replacing old. Highland is still near uniformly the same lower middle income tract housing it was originally built as. A good south Austin equivalent is East Congress. Same housing style, same price points, same vibe, being cleaned up, but not experiencing much transition of housing stock.

***Further edit: The big difference between these two is diversity of price points. Desirable neighborhoods are those where there are near-uniformly high price points with builds and finishes rationally supporting those prices points regardless of housing typology (which may or may not be diverse), whereas eclectic departs from that in one or more of the following ways: irrationally priced housing relative to the builds and finishes of the structures, diverse price points, builds, and finishes, and diverse housing typologies intermingling in close proximity. There isn't much of inner Austin that is actually, truly, verifiably, genuinely, 100%, legitimately desirable. There's a lot of shit that's being marketed as in a desirable neighborhood so they can achieve a higher price point and pocket the commission. Those two things are not the same.

[Lobotomizer]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

I'm old Austin. Don't tar us all with the same brush.

That said:

There's a big difference between "desirable" versus "transitioning" both placed in distinction from "downscale" (or whatever other less polite word you want to choose), "new build", and "eclectic" neighborhoods for the purposes of the real estate market.

IMHO: the general pattern outside of neighborhoods platted for one-off custom built homes for the wealthy is: largely similar tract housing built for the middle class ("new build"), fallen into disrepair due to deferred maintenance ("downscale"), targeted for gentrification by the wealthy due to centralized location ("transitioning"), and then gentrified to some degree or another ("gentrifying") until the low hanging fruit are gone and the action moves to another area ("eclectic" or "desirable" depending on the thoroughness of the gentrification***).

Highland is "transitioning", it is not yet "desirable" ... and probably never will be within any of our lifetimes, and is more likely to end up being "eclectic". Until (a) the transition within the Highland neighborhood proper (e.g. the single family home dominated portion) is further along (or even begins) and (b) neighboring neighborhoods St. Johns and Georgian Acres get better. The Highland Campus is wonderful and a great addition to the area, but it is less than 1/10th of the land area of the neighborhood and is relatively disconnected from the neighborhood itself, so the ongoing developments there aren't affecting the single family home core as much as anyone here is claiming. Rather, larger market forces forcing a change of demographics in the neighborhood is causing it to get cleaned up (see below). Furthermore, none of the south or east Austin neighborhoods any of you mention are truly "desirable" neighborhoods. They are "eclectic." They contain thorough mixes of housing typologies and price points, gentrification was not complete nor thorough.

This is fundamentally different than neighborhoods like Barton Hills, Rollingwood, and Tarrytown which have way more purchase on the term "desirable" than anything else in our inner core. Doesn't mean all the rest aren't wonderful places to live (in fact, I prefer them: I live in Hyde Park, which is "eclectic"). This is yet another example of how the terminology in our housing market has allowed popularity and marketing driven groupthink to raise prices beyond what is sustainable. It isn't a math problem, it's a cultural problem. You have to moor yourself to reality for prices to ever stabilize, which means accurately describing the product being sold rather than exaggerating beyond reason. Let's moor ourselves to reality and admit that Highland is not a "desirable" neighborhood. And just for good measure: it is surrounded on two sides by worse: St Johns and Georgian Acres, both of which are more interconnected to the core part of the Highland neighborhood (St. Johns between Guadalupe and Northcrest) than even the Highland ACC Campus that's within it. The Highland ACC Campus itself functions as its own separate neighborhood.

Edit: I'd even add another category which is: "cleaned up" (or cleaning up).

Neighborhoods that don't actually experience much construction or churn in the housing stock, but that nonetheless have un-deferred their maintenance. I'd wager that Highland actually qualifies for this category rather than "transitioning." How many tear downs are we seeing in Highland? Hardly any. In order for a neighborhood to qualify as transitioning there must be new housing stock replacing old. Highland is still near uniformly the same lower middle income tract housing it was originally built as. A good south Austin equivalent is East Congress. Same housing style, same price points, same vibe, being cleaned up, but not experiencing much transition of housing stock.

***Further edit: The big difference between these two is diversity of price points. Desirable neighborhoods are those where there are near-uniformly high price points with builds and finishes rationally supporting those prices points regardless of housing typology (which may or may not be diverse), whereas eclectic departs from that in one or more of the following ways: irrationally priced housing relative to the builds and finishes of the structures, diverse price points, builds, and finishes, and diverse housing typologies intermingling in close proximity. There isn't much of inner Austin that is actually, truly, verifiably, genuinely, 100%, legitimately desirable. There's a lot of shit that's being marketed as in a desirable neighborhood so they can achieve a higher price point and pocket the commission. Those two things are not the same.

Thanks for posting. I always enjoy your commentary.

[wwmiv]

I should add that the goal should be near uniform "eclecticity." Obviously we will have pockets that are nicer than others, and pockets that are less nice than others, and special purpose districts (office, hotel, entertainment, etc. like Downtown and the Domain), but our neighborhoods should all offer a diverse array of price points in a diverse array of housing typologies. All of them. Rich people need to stop selfishly gating themselves off into desirable neighborhoods and forcing the poor into downscale ghettoes while the rest of the people (the middle class) continue to experience declines in our standard of living. They have all become unmoored from the realities of life for the vast majority of us after a long stretch of governance (from roughly the 30s to the 00s) where that wasn't the case.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Agreed! Or at least densify the site somehow. I love the 1950s office building. Everything else can be demo'd and replaced though.

The DPS offices shouldn’t move. That’s a major driver of ridership in the light rail corridor. You can’t just have housing (origins) in a major transit corridor. You also have to have destinations. What should happen:

• redesign the complex in an urban fashion
• build a parking garage to service the governmental/bureaucratic public facing needs on site
• relocate those services into a new single building facility on site adjacent to the parking garage (however tall and however many square feet necessary)
• move the maintenance facilities to the periphery of the city
• raze everything else
• plat the remainder of the land into blocks and sell it off to developers for:
1. mixed-use, mixed-income housing
2. ground level retail facing Lamar, perhaps Koenig as well, and maybe a coffee shop and neighborhood focused boutiques at Skyland and Guadalupe
3. a park at Guadalupe and Denson across from Reilly Elementary School

The corridor does have other big developments ongoing and potential future sites as well:

The other state bureaucracy campuses (DSHS Central and the HHS Campus) are midway through refurbishment and addition master plans, so those eggs have been laid. They'll generate some inbound transit traffic, which is good for the health of the rail system. Same for the State Hospital Campus. The real action in the corridor will be the small parcels and assemblages taking advantage of height increases near stations. This will have the effect of extending our skyline through Heritage (that neighborhood will end up looking a lot like a non-student West Campus throughout) into Hyde Park (many of the older apartment complexes on Avenues A and B will be torn down and replaced with towers without parking) over the next 30 years. I sincerely hope that the historic commercial structures lining Guadalupe between 40th and 43rd remain*** and are refurbished into a hip commercial strip. We've already lost an Austin icon to a standard-issue Walgreens.


***specifically:

4301 Guadalupe
4227 Guadalupe*** must save -- has architectural merit as a mid-century streamline moderne gas station and garage and is wasted on an interior design company. I'd love to see a coffee shop and bistro in that location with the entire outdoors redesigned as a cafe seating area in a garden.
Hyde Park Theatre Bldg
All of the 4100 block, particularly the Hyde Parket Marketplace Bldg
4023 & 4029 Guadalupe

[Sigaven]

Hey as someone who lives in St John's on the west side of I-35, I always like to claim I'm in Highland because...well St Johns is still pretty

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Sigaven

Hey as someone who lives in St John's on the west side of I-35, I always like to claim I'm in Highland because...well St Johns is still pretty

I meant no hurt or mean spirited-ness. Part of how we keep those areas cheep is not just the price point of the build, but the cultural cache surrounding the neighborhood. When places don’t have insane demand (because they don’t have cultural cache), they don’t have outrageous prices detached from the fundamental quality of the built structure.

In all fairness, Austin does not have any truly impoverished areas and even our worst neighborhoods at their nadirs were substantially better than their contemporary equivalents nationally. St. Johns would pass as a generally safe lower middle class in Houston or Dallas.

[Urbannizer]

The Ander: New Residential Project Redefining Austin Living

AUSTIN, Texas, June 18, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Ledgestone announced today the launch of The Ander, the new ground-up residential condominium project in Austin, Texas, with architectural design by STG and interior design by EDGE MDS, LLC. Douglas Elliman Development Marketing will handle the exclusive sales and marketing for The Ander. The Perry Henderson Team at Douglas Elliman has been tapped to be the exclusive team of agents for the project.

Comprising 198 one- and two-bedroom residences ranging in size from 679 square feet to 1,457 square feet, The Ander blends eastern and western modern design elements into harmoniously organic living spaces. Located at 2001 West Anderson Lane in Uptown's Crestview neighborhood, the five-story boutique building offers residents enviable proximity to eateries, live music, curated shops and small businesses.

[Urbannizer]

Originally Posted by agsatx88

I think this project at 5210 N Lamar wrapping around the Taco Cabana at North Loop/Lamar has FINALLY broken ground. I drove past last night (no picture as it was dark and I was driving) and it looked like dumpsters and an excavator where onsite. The old foundations of whatever was there before were removed over a year ago so I think this must be for groundbreaking. There is a license agreement for two tower cranes that filed over the summer last year that is still In Review. If I'm remembering correctly, this property has been vacant ever since I moved to Austin back in 2015.

https://abc.austintexas.gov/public-s...ertyrsn=467859

https://bcsaustin.com/white-construc...ar-north-loop/

Continuing to build upon their tenured relationship, BCS has partnered with White Construction Company (WCC) to build a new, 396,000 sq. ft, mixed use Apartment Complex on North Lamar Boulevard. Boasting 227 units over 6 elevated levels, and 120,00 square feet of subterranean parking, this cast-in-place concrete structure will accentuate North Central Austin living.

On-site dining, elevated amenities level and roof-top pool and cabana are just some of the highlights of this complex project. Working in conjunction with WCC project team of Brady Bowers (superintendent), Collin Hipps (PM), And Dan Wettig (Project Executive), BCS Superintendent Beto Garcia, General Superintendent Carlos Garcia, Site Safety Manager Jonathan Cardoza and PM Reed Boyd intend to turn over a complete structure in early 2025 with building completion in early 2026.

[Urbannizer]

Broadstone N Lamar

[the Genral]

Two things...where has A-MAX Insurance been all my life? Seems like they would be a reliable and reputable alternative to the more expensive and obscure State Farm I've been using for years. Second, are ALL the telephone poles leaning to the right or is it the camera angle?

[Urbannizer]

Originally Posted by the Genral

Two things...where has A-MAX Insurance been all my life? Seems like they would be a reliable and reputable alternative to the more expensive and obscure State Farm I've been using for years. Second, are ALL the telephone poles leaning to the right or is it the camera angle?

The first one is leaning and they all sit directly in the new bike lane, quite comical. I wish the city would require developers to bury them.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Urbannizer

The first one is leaning and they all sit directly in the new bike lane, quite comical. I wish the city would require developers to bury them.

They aren’t going to impact the functionality of those bike lanes, since nobody anywhere city wide uses them.

Also: has anyone noticed that a good portion of Airport has two way bike lanes on both sides? That’s a waste of money. Targeted bike lanes where people will actually use them are great and a broad urban core network is important, but… at what point are we starting to waste money?

[drummer]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

but… at what point are we starting to waste money?

Short of providing an exhaustive analysis of this issue, I'd say when you leave telephone poles in the middle of them.

[IluvATX]

I’m more interested in what the “quicky” sign is for.

[mtb_jeremy]

Originally Posted by drummer

Short of providing an exhaustive analysis of this issue, I'd say when you leave telephone poles in the middle of them.

Similar to that, the are in the process of redoing the intersection at Burnet and Gault Lane. All of the work is done (since early this year) except for moving the power pole. So it has been months with only one northbound lane for Burnet while they wait for the pole to be moved to finish the paving work of the road.

You can see in Google Street view the situation in place since before April this year: https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4048...5409&entry=ttu

[AustinInAustin]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Also: has anyone noticed that a good portion of Airport has two way bike lanes on both sides? That’s a waste of money. Targeted bike lanes where people will actually use them are great and a broad urban core network is important, but… at what point are we starting to waste money?

The city is improving walking and biking access to transit, which is why Airport, with its bus route and Red Line, was chosen. Bike lanes along Airport will extend all the way down to 183, connecting Mueller and other high-traffic biking areas on the east side. Currently, only one section is complete in a less bikeable area, so I'm not surprised traffic is low.

The Airport corridor enhancements are a crucial part of Austin's future urban core network. As part of the Red Line Trail initiative, it will form the mini loop within the future big loop. It will also connect to the future East Avenue Trail, which will link all of the cap and stitches on I-35. While these plans are optimistic and may take decades to fully realize, this project marks the first step in creating many important network connections.

[JAM]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

They aren’t going to impact the functionality of those bike lanes, since nobody anywhere city wide uses them.

Also: has anyone noticed that a good portion of Airport has two way bike lanes on both sides? That’s a waste of money. Targeted bike lanes where people will actually use them are great and a broad urban core network is important, but… at what point are we starting to waste money?

And they didn't make them any safer in some places. Example, Shoal Creek Blvd, when driving, I often find someone coming at me head on in my lane because they are afraid to hit the concrete domes. What to do, pray, stop, swerve into the bike lane? Or be proactive, and just straddle the car tires over the bike lane concrete domes with half of the car in the bike lane. Not really any good options, other than to design the lanes correctly in the first place. I don't see commuters on these lanes, I see people out on their $5000 racing bikes getting exercise.

[atxsnail]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

They aren’t going to impact the functionality of those bike lanes, since nobody anywhere city wide uses them.

Also: has anyone noticed that a good portion of Airport has two way bike lanes on both sides? That’s a waste of money. Targeted bike lanes where people will actually use them are great and a broad urban core network is important, but… at what point are we starting to waste money?

I couldn't disagree more. We need bike lanes everywhere, including on both sides of street on major corridors like Airport. I use most of the bike facilities around North/Central Austin and see people using them all the time. This includes the new ones on Airport, which are very nice. The key feature for these is that they are separated/protected. Painted bike lanes on major arterial roads like Airport or Lamar suck and are a waste of paint. Separated bike facilities like these terra cotta ones are awesome. Everywhere else in the world it's been proven that bike use sees a massive jump after safe, all-level bike facilities are built in places people need to go.

The bike lane in front of that new apartment building on N Lamar is unlikely to see any use for many years. This is not because bike lanes are a waste, but rather that it's an orphaned lane and doesn't connect to a wider network. It's still good that it's being built, however. We had a crappy attitude about requiring developers to build sidewalks for too long and that's how we ended up with a crappy and disconnected sidewalk network.

[myBrain]

I live in Highland and just used the new bike lanes to bike down to Lazarus on Airport this weekend. Previously I could either take the short-but-sketchy Airport route or I'd have to go all the way down Guad and cut up through North Loop. The new bike lanes made this super easy -- up until the point that they end, after which you have a stretch of broken parking lots up to Lazarus. Mueller -- which is psychologically kind of far away -- would be an easy bike if they extended the bike lane all the way and improved the 35 crossing.