Do you think the Austin growth will stagnate?? (Spur: congested, deal)

[ScoPro]

Wane is correct, but HQs can move.


However, I don't see that much permanent "flight" in the making because of Harvey.

[Mr. Clutch]

Originally Posted by cBach

I predict that because of Hurricane Harvey, the wealthier from Houston will choose to telecommute from Austin, living in the high and dry hills while their company is in Houston.

There is also a chance that Austin could cannibalize some of the oil companies like we did Parsley Energy from Midland. I could imagine a few oil companies may move to SA or Austin so they don't have to worry about flooding anymore.

LOL. Good luck with that.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by BlizzardFlurry

Suburban growth will stagnate in the city, in my eyes. Austin simply does not have the highway system to handle the type of development that other Texas cities (and the rest of the sunbelt for that matter) can. Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, and even El Paso have the infrastructure to afford sprawling growth, which is exactly what has happened. Heck, I would argue that even Brownsville has better infrastructure than Austin!

Urban growth, on the other hand, will more likely than not (again, in my eyes) accelerate. It has a great grid-based street system that—when I look at a map—appears to be more consistent and expansive than the other Texas cities. How I see it, the only way that Austin will be able to grow successfully and continue to actually function properly as a large city would be for it to densify the core 21 square miles, kind of like a miniature Philadelphia.

wishful thinking. Austin can easily expand east. Cedar park is about 18 miles from downtown. If you use google maps measure feature you can trace an 18 mile circle around downtown to see where the growth could occur.

There are tons of medium acreage tracts (20-50 acres) which are perfect for cheap subdivisions. It is flat, no rocks and austin could easily secure the right of way for major east west roads to hook into 130 and 183.

If that opened up we would be flush with new inexpensive housing again.

18 miles is lakeway, cedar park, round rock, pflugerville, kyle, driftwood dripping springs.

2/3 of the way to bastrop, manor, webberville, hornsby bend, garfield

[DTXman34]

Originally Posted by BlizzardFlurry

Suburban growth will stagnate in the city, in my eyes. Austin simply does not have the highway system to handle the type of development that other Texas cities (and the rest of the sunbelt for that matter) can. Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, and even El Paso have the infrastructure to afford sprawling growth, which is exactly what has happened. Heck, I would argue that even Brownsville has better infrastructure than Austin!

Urban growth, on the other hand, will more likely than not (again, in my eyes) accelerate. It has a great grid-based street system that—when I look at a map—appears to be more consistent and expansive than the other Texas cities. How I see it, the only way that Austin will be able to grow successfully and continue to actually function properly as a large city would be for it to densify the core 21 square miles, kind of like a miniature Philadelphia.

You might want to consult that map again. For one, its urban core is smaller than Dallas's and Houston's. So it will never be a miniature Philly.

[fly_me]

This is a hopeful (finally) page on Austin. It has been about 7 years since I was there. It had the perfect amount of people at the time. I was told it is quite different but all of you made me feel pretty safe it won't get any bigger if anything just join w S.A., which to me, 7 years ago, it already seemed people went back and forth often to those two towns.

[gwarnecke]

Originally Posted by cBach

I predict that because of Hurricane Harvey, the wealthier from Houston will choose to telecommute from Austin, living in the high and dry hills while their company is in Houston.

Jeez, you make it sound like half of Houston was underwater. No more than a few percent of homes and businesses flooded. It was horrible if yours was in that few percent (as was our rental property, but not our primary residence, both of which are located a stone's throw from Buffalo Bayou), but in most of the city things are already back to business as usual.

Big companies are unlikely to relocate from Houston to Austin unless another hurricane or two hits and the city/county/state have done nothing to improve flood control measures. Most of our flooded neighbors are rebuilding and staying put. If flooded residents want to move, there is plenty of housing stock in Houston that was high and dry.

Long-term, I think limited groundwater supply will be at least as much of a barrier to Austin's growth as the threat of hurricanes will be to Houston's growth.

[Austinite101]

Originally Posted by fly_me

This is a hopeful (finally) page on Austin. It has been about 7 years since I was there. It had the perfect amount of people at the time. I was told it is quite different but all of you made me feel pretty safe it won't get any bigger if anything just join w S.A., which to me, 7 years ago, it already seemed people went back and forth often to those two towns.

It added about 160,000 people and around a dozen skyscrapers in that time.

[fly_me]

Originally Posted by Austinite101

It added about 160,000 people and around a dozen skyscrapers in that time.

That is not that bad. It does seem most of the growth is in downtown. If you steer clear of it you are fine. 7 years ago when I was living downtown I was told there was a law that no more highrises were to be built. Obviously, all say that isn't true and they built about a dozen. Too bad it didn't stay exactly how it was 7 years ago. I walked all over the quiet little town. I'm sure I will feel a difference b/c all say I will but 160,000 more isn't that much if you lived in larger cities before. It seems some* that moved there live in a couple cities. I now have a friend that splits his time NYC/Austin due to his company in both cities.

[Austinite101]

Originally Posted by fly_me

That is not that bad. It does seem most of the growth is in downtown. If you steer clear of it you are fine. 7 years ago when I was living downtown I was told there was a law that no more highrises were to be built. Obviously, all say that isn't true and they built about a dozen. Too bad it didn't stay exactly how it was 7 years ago. I walked all over the quiet little town. I'm sure I will feel a difference b/c all say I will but 160,000 more isn't that much if you lived in larger cities before. It seems some* that moved there live in a couple cities. I now have a friend that splits his time NYC/Austin due to his company in both cities.

Eh, not realistic to expect a growing city to remain frozen.

[Ivory Lee Spurlock]

Originally Posted by CosmicAries

I hope it does someday. Having a very high population isn't always a good thing, ask India. I see the greater Austin metropolitan area leveling off in the 3- 4 million range.

When it comes to handling a large population, Austin could easily blow any town in India out of the water. India has a 3rd world kind of crowdedness that isn't found anywhere in Austin, or Texas, or in the entire United States, for that matter. Austin may be crowded and busy and congested, and chaotic, but it's organized and flows rather easily, where as in India the crowdedness looks like total chaos. I'd venture to say the poorest town in the United States is probably better off and more advanced than any town in India.