I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:
I won’t truly consider Austin to have a major dense urban core or skyline until all of the following conditions are met:
1. Towers over 500’ throughout the area bounded by Lamar, I-35, the river, and MLK.
2. Multiple supertalls.
3. Overflow of skyscrapers in at least three directions (north already has West Campus, but zoning needs to go taller, south has plans for the South Central Shore, and east has the potential developments in the Riverside Corridor).
4. Cohesive apartment infill on all major corridors within the inner loop (Lamar, Congress, Oltorf, Riverside, 7th, Airport, MLK, Burner, 2222, Anderson, Cameron, 38th, Guadalupe, and Far West)
5. Accelerated redevelopment of existing single family home lots using what is becoming the Austin standard of front/back or front/back/middle single family homes with small yards to create a uniquely Austin “urban farmhouse belt” (akin to a bungalow belt) in most of the inner loop particularly east of Lamar, softly boosting population density.
I’d say we’re a third of the way there. And almost of it has happened in my lifetime.
And it’s actually the reverse order of prevalence. 5 is happening more than 4, which is happening more than 3, etc.
A. There’s a wide swath of the inner east side where lots have been or are currently being redeveloped, creating an urban farmhouse belt. This style is also being done elsewhere, particularly in South Austin and even in sporadically in places like St. Johns, though it remains and will likely remain not a thing in west Austin residential neighborhoods. Everywhere else it will accelerate in the next few years. St Johns, in particular, may become the next area to flip overnight.
B. Although our corridors are comparatively filled with more built-to-lot-line apartments buildings than they were 10 or 20 years ago, the development of these buildings has simply kept steady as assembling parcels is difficult. I’ve even wondered if this has slowed, and been replaced with mega developments where huge lots can be subdivided and developers don’t have to bargain with multiple existing owners. Division is easier than assembly. In fact, many existing parcels that currently are being held by developers where they weren’t successful in assembling neighboring parcels to fit the required two stairwells may now start flipping those lots with smaller live/work developments now that commercial properties can be used for residential and live/work.
C. Although we have plans for some of these east and south projects, its vaporware until dirt is turning. Beyond those mega projects, what other true skyscrapers are planned for immediately or near immediately south and east of downtown? Not much.
D. It’s only a matter of time, but we only have one U/C and no other concrete proposals.
E. Our skyline is heavily concentrated against the river. It’s going to take another two decades of proposals to sufficiently boost density and height on the north side of downtown, by which time all of the above will have likely already occurred. We have height and breadth, but we don’t have depth or heft (density of towers, in large part because of the CVCs).
What I’m looking for is all four factors situated within a region of single, double, and triple family lots stitched together and made urban by apartment corridors.
__________________
HTOWN: 2305k (+10%) + MSA suburbs: 4818k (+26%) + CSA exurbs: 190k (+6%)
BIGD: 1304k (+9%) + MSA div. suburbs: 3826k (+26%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 394k (+8%)
FTW: 919k (+24%) + MSA div. suburbs: 1589k (+14%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 90k (+12%)
SATX: 1435k (+8%) + MSA suburbs: 1124k (+38%) + CSA exurbs: 18k (+11%)
ATX: 962k (+22%) + MSA suburbs: 1322k (+43%)
Last edited by wwmiv; Jan 5, 2024 at 3:06 AM.
|
Prev
.jpg.40eed2954885da36b73abf77c1320aa7.jpg)
Linear Mode
