HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2016, 1:12 AM
drummer drummer is offline
World Traveler
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Austin metro area
Posts: 4,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by The ATX View Post
Increasing the supply is what lower prices. That's it. So many people think that we should stop letting developers build homes/condos/Apts. just because of the high prices/rents they are getting for them. I just keep SMH at how people don't see that stopping/eliminating development is what's keeping prices higher on existing places.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2016, 3:49 PM
nixcity's Avatar
nixcity nixcity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Austin, TX.
Posts: 768
Most reports show we are 40,000 residential units short of where we need to be. Let that number sink in, 40,000!!!! That amounts to 93 of our beloved 360s or 7 Muellers. And that number doesn't even account for units we will need for those that move here daily.
If we can't get these units centrally (ie Grove, 12 East, the other PUD that had to drastically reduce it's scope, and so many others) than it will continue to have to be in our periphery and the burbs. Either way what we get as an end result is a decrease in affordability and an increase in traffic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 1:53 AM
Tech House Tech House is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by The ATX View Post
Increasing the supply is what lower prices. That's it. So many people think that we should stop letting developers build homes/condos/Apts. just because of the high prices/rents they are getting for them. I just keep SMH at how people don't see that stopping/eliminating development is what's keeping prices higher on existing places.
Price is determined by what people are willing to pay. Abundant supply certainly gives buyers a better chance of negotiating a lower price, but it doesn't drive price to the extent you're implying. We could just as easily make Austin affordable by driving away employers and plunging the region into a recession, or we could see prices drop if (and when) we experience a severe multi-year drought that scares people away. Prices drop when costs drop, too. All of the specific requirements tacked on by local gov't add to the cost of living here. Then there's the cost of materials, labor, engineering for the site, on and on it goes. We're going to be an expensive city until some sort of disaster strikes, and I'm pretty sure we can't build our way out of that. We could have a boom in new housing construction and that would just help fuel more growth, while putting only a small dent in the supply-demand equation.

There's a shortage of people in just about all phases of construction anyway, so of course that means that those workers demand higher wages and salaries --- it's a big circle-jerk of inflation. In fact, i wonder if there isn't a "flow" aspect to housing prices, similar to traffic, whereby you don't see improvement until you fix the bottlenecks. Like, is there a component of housing prices that acts as a floor? I think social psychology is a big part of it. Buyers reinforce one another's perceptions, and people pay what they believe is a reasonable price based on their perceptions of Austin's real estate market and other intangibles. It's mob psychology. Buyers could go on strike and make Austin affordable in a matter of weeks. We co-create reality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 2:56 AM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Where the lights are much brighter
Posts: 12,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech House View Post
Price is determined by what people are willing to pay. Abundant supply certainly gives buyers a better chance of negotiating a lower price, but it doesn't drive price to the extent you're implying. We could just as easily make Austin affordable by driving away employers and plunging the region into a recession, or we could see prices drop if (and when) we experience a severe multi-year drought that scares people away. Prices drop when costs drop, too. All of the specific requirements tacked on by local gov't add to the cost of living here. Then there's the cost of materials, labor, engineering for the site, on and on it goes. We're going to be an expensive city until some sort of disaster strikes, and I'm pretty sure we can't build our way out of that. We could have a boom in new housing construction and that would just help fuel more growth, while putting only a small dent in the supply-demand equation.

There's a shortage of people in just about all phases of construction anyway, so of course that means that those workers demand higher wages and salaries --- it's a big circle-jerk of inflation. In fact, i wonder if there isn't a "flow" aspect to housing prices, similar to traffic, whereby you don't see improvement until you fix the bottlenecks. Like, is there a component of housing prices that acts as a floor? I think social psychology is a big part of it. Buyers reinforce one another's perceptions, and people pay what they believe is a reasonable price based on their perceptions of Austin's real estate market and other intangibles. It's mob psychology. Buyers could go on strike and make Austin affordable in a matter of weeks. We co-create reality.
You just went into a lot of detail about what affects supply and demand. If one wants to slice up all components of supply and demand and view them as separate issues that fine. But in the big picture they all add up to the same thing.
__________________
Follow The ATX on X:
https://twitter.com/TheATX1

Things will be great when you're downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 3:47 AM
Tech House Tech House is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by The ATX View Post
You just went into a lot of detail about what affects supply and demand. If one wants to slice up all components of supply and demand and view them as separate issues that fine. But in the big picture they all add up to the same thing.
Yeah, best to ignore my comments today (and maybe most days) because I'm just in a zombie state, staring at my monitor and typing robotically without having any real purpose to what I'm saying. Just totally detached. It's a glimpse of what we can expect when our future android companions are on the fritz --- disjointed regurgitation of fragments of memory. In fact, the way my brain's working tonight is reminding me of how the navigator app on my phone occasionally acts. It *kind of* makes sense, but it's just wrong.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 10:53 AM
H2O H2O is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech House View Post
Yeah, best to ignore my comments today (and maybe most days) because I'm just in a zombie state, staring at my monitor and typing robotically without having any real purpose to what I'm saying. Just totally detached. It's a glimpse of what we can expect when our future android companions are on the fritz --- disjointed regurgitation of fragments of memory. In fact, the way my brain's working tonight is reminding me of how the navigator app on my phone occasionally acts. It *kind of* makes sense, but it's just wrong.
I, for one, am glad you are back (or at least your sense of humor is). It seems like we hadn't heard from you lately, or maybe your comments just haven't been as colorful. I always enjoy your wit.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 3:02 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver
Posts: 5,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech House View Post
Price is determined by what people are willing to pay. Abundant supply certainly gives buyers a better chance of negotiating a lower price, but it doesn't drive price to the extent you're implying. We could just as easily make Austin affordable by driving away employers and plunging the region into a recession, or we could see prices drop if (and when) we experience a severe multi-year drought that scares people away. Prices drop when costs drop, too. All of the specific requirements tacked on by local gov't add to the cost of living here. Then there's the cost of materials, labor, engineering for the site, on and on it goes. We're going to be an expensive city until some sort of disaster strikes, and I'm pretty sure we can't build our way out of that. We could have a boom in new housing construction and that would just help fuel more growth, while putting only a small dent in the supply-demand equation.

There's a shortage of people in just about all phases of construction anyway, so of course that means that those workers demand higher wages and salaries --- it's a big circle-jerk of inflation. In fact, i wonder if there isn't a "flow" aspect to housing prices, similar to traffic, whereby you don't see improvement until you fix the bottlenecks. Like, is there a component of housing prices that acts as a floor? I think social psychology is a big part of it. Buyers reinforce one another's perceptions, and people pay what they believe is a reasonable price based on their perceptions of Austin's real estate market and other intangibles. It's mob psychology. Buyers could go on strike and make Austin affordable in a matter of weeks. We co-create reality.
This is true, but I think you're underselling supply. The problem is really that we're having artificial constraints in supply: not enough cheap labor to construct new housing, more expensive materials, and local legal requirements (all three things you've mentioned) are all causal factors that decrease new supply.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Apr 8, 2016, 4:19 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech House View Post
Price is determined by what people are willing to pay. Abundant supply certainly gives buyers a better chance of negotiating a lower price, but it doesn't drive price to the extent you're implying.
It doesn't just affect negotiating position (though that certainly helps). Supply also affects filtering (up and down).

Build enough luxury housing and fewer units filter up (fewer places do upgrades to take advantage of scarcity) and some start to filter down.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Apr 9, 2016, 3:23 AM
Tech House Tech House is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by H2O View Post
I, for one, am glad you are back (or at least your sense of humor is). It seems like we hadn't heard from you lately, or maybe your comments just haven't been as colorful. I always enjoy your wit.
Thanks, I genuinely appreciate that. I've been less interested in this forum for the last few months because we're in a slow period where there isn't much news about skyscraper development, and I've been wasting all my comment mojo on debates with climate change deniers. But that's an area of expertise and great interest for me, whereas I'm a neophyte with respect to the topics on this forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
It doesn't just affect negotiating position (though that certainly helps). Supply also affects filtering (up and down).

Build enough luxury housing and fewer units filter up (fewer places do upgrades to take advantage of scarcity) and some start to filter down.
Very interesting! So, if I understand you correctly, even if most of the new DT development is targeting the luxury market, it may contribute to affordability anyway? At times like this I really miss my pre-concussion brain, with which I'd be able to figure this out without having to ask.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2016, 2:11 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech House View Post


Very interesting! So, if I understand you correctly, even if most of the new DT development is targeting the luxury market, it may contribute to affordability anyway? At times like this I really miss my pre-concussion brain, with which I'd be able to figure this out without having to ask.
A slightly older but still very good explanation of filtering

http://www.austincontrarian.com/aust...g-part-29.html


and an example

http://www.austincontrarian.com/aust...in-zilker.html

There's a few other articles addressing filtering on that same site.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2016, 12:26 AM
Tech House Tech House is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 726
Thanks. I sort of get it. My general impression is that Austin's turning into a cross between San Jose and Sacramento, which is not intended to be taken (nor do I think it would be taken) as a compliment. But this is seemingly what the leaders and movers and shakers want, to attract a lot of investment and high-paying jobs and make it a tech-business-government boomtown that can't provide sufficient accommodations for its musicians and fry cooks. The skyline is gorgeous, one of the best in the country. Got mixed feelings. It's not the same city I moved to, no question about that. There's some good and some bad. Everything changes. I feel old.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2016, 4:38 AM
AusTxDevelopment AusTxDevelopment is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 808
Environmental Commission rejects PUD designation for the Grove, again.

Quote:
Without the PUD designation, the developer would have to go through a more-traditional zoning process that could delay it even further.

Martin said he intends to move forward with the project as proposed, despite the thumbs down from the Environmental Commission and "will continue to work with the community and city leaders to address concerns as we go through the approval process."
Austin Environmental Board gives the Grove at Shoal Creek thumbs down
http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/ne...oal-creek.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2016, 4:58 AM
nixcity's Avatar
nixcity nixcity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Austin, TX.
Posts: 768
This coming around the same time that ZAP recommends increasing the residential portion by 200,000 sq. ft. The environmental board looks like a joke, denying responsible growth like this only leads to more and more any town USA sprawl on the fringes and in the burbs. Still feel this one will move forward though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2016, 1:57 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by AusTxDevelopment View Post
Environmental Commission rejects PUD designation for the Grove, again.



Austin Environmental Board gives the Grove at Shoal Creek thumbs down
http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/ne...oal-creek.html
That was back in June.

Based on the ZaP approval a couple days ago, I think the pendulum may have swung the other way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2016, 6:09 PM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,263
Grove developers threaten to kill project

Quote:
In a letter addressed yesterday to Mayor Steve Adler and all 10 members of Council, Jeff Howard, an attorney for the developer, states that the company will abandon its plans for a planned unit development if Council adopts a number of changes to the project offered by Council Member Leslie Pool, the leading opponent of ARG’s proposed project.

If ARG ditches the PUD application and instead pursues conventional zoning, the developer warns, the resulting project will be a group of expensive single-family homes rather than a mixed-use development that includes affordable housing, office space, retail and more parkland than would be required under conventional zoning.

Among the many amendments Pool has proposed, the one the developers view as the most unworkable would reduce the number of daily vehicle trips the project is allowed to generate by 25 percent, from roughly 24,000 to roughly 18,000.

That limit, argues Howard in the letter, would result in a nearly 50 percent reduction in office space, a 33 percent reduction in retail development and a 25 percent reduction in residential units.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2016, 6:20 PM
Novacek Novacek is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
That's a somewhat inflammatory headline (I know you didn't write it LoneStarMike), the alternative would be "Pool amendments threaten to kill project"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2016, 7:41 PM
Flatiron's Avatar
Flatiron Flatiron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Austin
Posts: 198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novacek View Post
That's a somewhat inflammatory headline (I know you didn't write it LoneStarMike), the alternative would be "Pool amendments threaten to kill project"
Pool should realize that traffic is likely to increase in that area in the next few years even if no development happens.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2016, 8:34 PM
Sigaven Sigaven is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flatiron View Post
Pool should realize that traffic is likely to increase in that area in the next few years even if no development happens.
Traffic is increasing everywhere all the time and is no longer a valid argument against development.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2016, 11:43 PM
drummer drummer is offline
World Traveler
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Austin metro area
Posts: 4,470
^ Exactly, and ironically, because development is pushed farther out, creating a need for folks to commute.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2016, 1:43 PM
jbssfelix's Avatar
jbssfelix jbssfelix is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Central Park
Posts: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flatiron View Post
Pool should realize that traffic is likely to increase in that area in the next few years even if no development happens.
Pool refuses to realize anything outside of her own distorted, protectionist opinions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:51 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.