West Campus development

I've prepared a Google map charting the VMU development in the West Campus area.  It's a work in progress.  Most of the markers have only the name of the project and the number of units.  I intend to update the map with photos and other information.

Until I figure out how to embed a Google map, I will have to content myself with screen shots.  In the maps below, the blue markers/shading indicate the project is under construction.  The red markers/shading indicate the project has been completed.

>
North West Campus

South West Campus

Comments

[M1EK]

This shows what will happen as soon as you get the ridiculous caps on density lifted in what should be dense areas of town - it doesn't require subsidies; all you have to do is get the hell out of the way.

This also shows where the rail transit in this city needs to go. Guadalupe is not only where the density is TODAY; it's where most new density will be in the future. Not San Jacinto, as much as UT wants to force a streetcar through the back side to run by the east side of their campus, and as much as Cap Metro desperately wants to avoid the 2000 light rail corridor for PR reasons.

[AC]

Not only does the West Campus development not require subsidies, some of these projects are subsidizing affordable housing.

Considering this mad rush to develop, the absurd density limitations in WC must have inflicted an enormous cost on students over the years.

[el_longhorn]

It is amazing what is happening in West Campus. It is a gift to the city, freeing up affordable housing elsewhere in Austin, increasing property tax revenues, reducing traffic by bringing the students back to campus, etc. People say UT is too big, but i would love to see 65,000 students on campus.

I just got back from a trip to Houston and rode their light rail from the museum district to downtown. I was very impressed. The train comes every 10 minutes or so and is fast and nice. There were plenty of riders on the Thursday mid-morning I was there. It was $1.00 each way. Unfortunately, it made me think of what Austin almost had in 2000. Seeing the Houston line in operation makes me realize how successful a light rail line down the path of the #1 would be. It could really transform the city.

[The Overhead Wire]

I agree totally with M1ek. I also think that some of the value from these developments could have been caught and used to pay for part of that light rail line he was talking about. Does anyone remember if they put down a TIF district or have affordable housing requirements or did all the value created go into the developers pockets?

[AC]

Well, the property owners' pockets (as evidenced by the greeks complaining about their property taxes).

It's not a TIF district. There are incentives for affordable housing -- I don't remember the details as I sit here, but I think the developers have to put up some percentage of affordable housing to get out of the minimum site area requirements. That makes AH pretty much mandatory, since you can't build student housing on expensive land while observing suburban-style density limitations.

[GMV]

WC projects all must provide 10% of the units as AH. The also must provide additional AH or pay into a fund to help pay for more AH in WC. There are also particular provisions to add height, in some areas, if more AH is added.

Of course this area is PERFECT for light rail, but I think Cap Metro is so gun shy and whipped that they oftendo not make the best planning decisions.

[Kedron Jerome Touvell]

Do we have any idea how much we've increased the housing stock in this area? West Campus was fairly dense before, but given that the whole thing can pretty much be redeveloped with VMU, there has to be a massive increase in capacity. The estimated number of downtown residents is 25,000 over the next 10-20 years. If West Campus has a similar increase in population, and the later Domain phases also go dense, we might start to see some measurable progress in achieving ECT goals. That would really help the cause of allowing greater density in the environmental and neighborhood activist communities. Let's hope this happens.

[AC]

There were roughly 4500 multi-family units as of October 2005. 400+ have been completed then, and another 1600+ are under construction. When you add released site plans, it is probably a 50% increase in the number of MF units.

GMV, cities technically cannot mandate affordability under Texas law. They have to tie them to density bonuses.

[M1EK]

WRT suburban restrictions; the new code isn't all that suburban (and you know I'm the guy who would say so if it was); but AC is right - it does require some AH and even more to get to the good stuff - this is the "rather than futilely trying to dam up the density river, run it through some turbines" approach we've talked about before. Projects also are required to do Great Streets-style sidewalks and have street-level pedestrian uses, even though outside downtown.

[GMV]

I am aware that AH cannot be mandated and must be a option, however, it would seem UNO is designed in such a fashion that it is a "no-brainer" to develop under its standards even with the requirement for AH. The net gain in WC is probably on the order of 3 (low estimate) to 5 (high estimate) units gained for every one that was removed. The old Rio Nueces site does skew that down a bit, but, bottom line, there will be a whole lot more people in WC when this first round of development is over.

[Shilli]

I think to embed a Google map you just click the "Link to this page" link at the top right of the map, then paste in the provided html from the second box.

It will be interesting to see if the added density in West Campus reduces rental prices. I think one of the most frustrating arguments against density is that increasing density increases prices. I think the opposite is true - increased prices lead to increased density, and artificailly inhibiting density leads to even higher prices. It would be really great to have this as an example to point to (in West Campus we increased density and as a result, rental prices fell/didn't rise as fast compared to the rest of central Austin).

[AC]

Google/Internet Explorer crashes every time I try to get the html, so I'm still trying to figure it out . . .

It will be very interesting to see what happens with prices. I'd like to compare the rents the old units got before the boom with the rents they're able to get after the new units come on line.

[M1EK]

More likely is that this WC development will lower rents at Far West and especially Riverside. Even the older complexes in WC become more desirable because more and better businesses locate in the area, for instance; or because all your friends are there now.

[el_longhorn]

I think M1EK has the right idea...look for rents to drop where there are large student populations riding the shuttles to campus - Riverside/Oltorf, Far West, Cameron Rd., Lake Austin (maybe), N. Lamar/N. Loop. Demand is just too strong in and around West Campus for prices to go down. And with the cost of gas and parking going up, the tradeoff of paying higher rent in WC and going w/o a car looks better and better. Run a light rail line on Guadalupe and their is little incentive for a student to live anywhere else.