Development List For Buildings In Houston

[swtsig]

Can you confirm if any high rise condos will be announced for Downtown? I mean, it's great that Uptown is booming, but I would hate to see Downtown get left behind. Downtown is already way behind The Central Business Districts of other comparable cities, like Seattle and Atlanta. I would hate for it to get even farther behind by not building more during these boom years.

Huh? Downtown is booming so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

[Nate99]

Can you confirm if any high rise condos will be announced for Downtown? I mean, it's great that Uptown is booming, but I would hate to see Downtown get left behind. Downtown is already way behind The Central Business Districts of other comparable cities, like Seattle and Atlanta. I would hate for it to get even farther behind by not building more during these boom years.

 

A little help for you.

 

All of the blue boxes in this picture are residential. All but a couple of them are 20+ stories, and one of the shorter ones takes up three blocks.  As swtsig mentioned, DT is blowing up with active projects right now.

 

 

[Avossos]

I expect several as of yet unannounced projects to become public in the near future including hotels and multifamily high rises in uptown, a couple office/mixed use projects along the Allen parkway/memorial corridor, a perhaps some additional condo high rises which are picking up serious steam in houston.

I am excited to see what else we have in store. I think the buffalo bayou area should rise. I didn't know how or when, but I am now excited to see there may be things in the works.

[Triton]

I expect several as of yet unannounced projects to become public in the near future including hotels and multifamily high rises in uptown, a couple office/mixed use projects along the Allen parkway/memorial corridor, a perhaps some additional condo high rises which are picking up serious steam in houston.

 

A birdie has told me something is going in at Memorial Dr. and Logan Ln. The lot was recently cleared.

 

 

 

On a separate note, I've noticed there are quite a few multi-family units going up that aren't being mentioned on HAIF surprisingly. There's one between Detering St. and Memorial Dr. called Park Memorial Apartments. There's also another unit going in at the corner of Sage and Greentree. I'll have to take pictures of them and create threads for them I guess.

[HoustonMidtown]

Here is a summary of all the apartments going up in downtown from HBJ

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/morning_call/2014/04/tenapartment-complexes-on-tap-for-downtown.html

 

 

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 8, 2019 by Timoric

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 8, 2019 by Timoric

[Triton]

I gotta think there is more going up this year than went up last year, even if the things started last year, it LOOKS like more is going up this year than last, I wonder if this will be the best year since say 1985 or 1986 when the last deliveries hit the market before the 35 percent vacancy rates and the empty Phoenix Tower article near Greenway Plaza in the New York Times -  if the metric is total square footage, total commercial construction value, or something along those lines.

 

Based on all the economic reports I've seen for Houston, they indicate that based on the trend lines the city will peak in construction from late 2014 into somewhere late of 2015. Now of course, trend lines aren't always correct. Price of gas can plummet and skyrocket. The Fed's quantitive easing can have some impact. Quickly rising home prices can put a damper on all the single-family construction. However, single-family construction is well below the historical norm. Annnnnnyway, I think the Houston area can support a couple of more years of good solid construction, but anything after that and you could be dealing with a Spain-type situation of overbuilding... that's well off into the future. 

 

Chart at historical residential construction:

 

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 8, 2019 by Timoric

[HoustonIsHome]

Wow, I had no idea 2007 was so high up there. Great chart!

It looks like the peaks were 2006.

I didn't realize the decline was that much ahead of the recession

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 8, 2019 by Timoric

[Triton]

 I think the Houston area can support a couple of more years of good solid construction, but anything after that and you could be dealing with a Spain-type situation of overbuilding... that's well off into the future. 

 

 

Ha! Funny... and a Houston Chron article comes out about it:

 

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/real-estate/article/Construction-boom-may-lead-to-lower-rents-5458011.php ($)

 

From the article:

 

 

Based on supply and demand patterns in Houston over the past 20 years, five jobs are needed for every new apartment, Bowden said.

If developers build between 16,000 and 18,000 units this year, that would require at least 80,000 jobs.

Brandt said he has heard job projections in the 70,000 range.

"We probably are going to experience some amount of oversupply," he said.

 

 

Again, we are FAR FAR away from any overbuilding at this point. But it's good to know that there are people asking those questions of "Are we overbuilding?" When everyone is thinking that it's a never ending chart upwards, that's when you know you are in a bubble about to pop.

[HoustonIsHome]

I hate when these experts make projections based on projections. Hee is using unreliable info to make an even more unreliable conclusion.

First that 5 jobs per apartment isnt a stress fast rule. There must be some give and take, then he goes on to say that there is going to be some over building because we need 80k jobs and he HEARD, that we are only projected to get 70k?

What about other variables? What about migration of supercomputers, retirees, people who moved in with family during the recession and looking for a cheap place of their own, student housing, second homes...

Using that 5 jobs rule should be just a guide. It might be a helpful guide but I wouldn't bet much on it. We were still building when we were losing jobs. Looking at projections for one year are as helpful as the projections themself

[Triton]

I think he was just using it as a guide? It's clearly an oversimplification. 

[HoustonIsHome]

I think he was just using it as a guide? It's clearly an oversimplification.

I am more speaking in general and using this as an example of overusing projections

[Subdude]

I hate when these experts make projections based on projections. Hee is using unreliable info to make an even more unreliable conclusion.

First that 5 jobs per apartment isnt a stress fast rule. There must be some give and take, then he goes on to say that there is going to be some over building because we need 80k jobs and he HEARD, that we are only projected to get 70k?

What about other variables? What about migration of supercomputers, retirees, people who moved in with family during the recession and looking for a cheap place of their own, student housing, second homes...

Using that 5 jobs rule should be just a guide. It might be a helpful guide but I wouldn't bet much on it. We were still building when we were losing jobs. Looking at projections for one year are as helpful as the projections themself

 

I see the point though.  I have read that a large part of the increase in apartment construction - not just in Houston but nationwide - is driven by the wave of retirees wanting smaller quarters more conveniently located.  Owned housing seems to be considered much less of a sure thing financially than it once was.

[CoPeople]

Outstanding break down OP, thanks for putting this together.

[HoustonIsHome]

Ha! Funny... and a Houston Chron article comes out about it:

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/real-estate/article/Construction-boom-may-lead-to-lower-rents-5458011.php ($)

From the article:

Again, we are FAR FAR away from any overbuilding at this point.

I've been reading up on this and you seem to be right.

For the last couple of years Houston has been number one for apartments demand but lagging in apartment construction. It seems the inventory set to be delivered this year won't make a crack in demand.

2015 and 2016 are slated to deliver more hefty numbers of units than 2014, but presently we are far from overbuilding.

It looks like we have been underbuilding for a couple of years which have driven occupancy to 96%. Strong influx of people and healthy job growth hints that this high rate will continue.

On a positive note it seems like 65% of new deliveries are centered around 4 job markets all in the core. 65% of the units are around Downtown, TMC, Greenway and Uptown. So that is a positive for urban growth.

[Triton]

Think we should probably update the development map on the first post and probably should include http://devmap.io/cities/houston/developments since it is getting buried already in this thread.

 

Edit: Oh and Marriott Marquis should be moved to under construction.

Edited May 11, 2014 by Triton

[Triton]

Not sure if y'all like these graphs but this shows that the hotel boom we are having here is actually a national trend. 2014 is the best year for hotels since 2000:

 

 

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2014/05/hotels-on-track-for-strongest-year.html

 

In other words, high occupancy.. new hotel construction is likely.

Edited May 11, 2014 by Triton

[Timoric]

-

 

Edited July 8, 2019 by Timoric

[Houston19514]

I checked how dense Houston is compared to other cities.

 

In 2010 there were 3,501 people per square mile

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48/4835000.html

 

Compared to some other cities you might be interested in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population_density

 

New York City - 27,778

San Francisco - 17,246

Boston - 13,321

Chicago - 11,868

Philadelphia - 11,233

Miami - 10,160

Washington DC - 9,856

Seattle - 7,250

Dallas - 3,517

Atlanta -  3,154

Austin - 2,653

Anchorage - 171

 

*My thoughts are that all large Southern Cities seem similar to Houston. Dallas is essential identical. It seems like it will be a long time to hit 4,000 per square mile. You would have to look at a subset of Houston to get higher numbers and say, "Hey that is dense." I don't know what the subset would be. Where is the densest place to live in Houston?

 

It's probably not going to be all that long before we hit 4,000 per square mile.  Based on the 2013 population estimate, we're already up to 3,662 per square mile.  At the recent rate of growth, we should break through the 4,000 per square mile mark before the end of the decade (approximately late 2018).

 

[H-Town Man]

I checked how dense Houston is compared to other cities.

 

In 2010 there were 3,501 people per square mile

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48/4835000.html

 

Compared to some other cities you might be interested in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population_density

 

New York City - 27,778

San Francisco - 17,246

Boston - 13,321

Chicago - 11,868

Philadelphia - 11,233

Miami - 10,160

Washington DC - 9,856

Seattle - 7,250

Dallas - 3,517

Atlanta -  3,154

Austin - 2,653

Anchorage - 171

 

*My thoughts are that all large Southern Cities seem similar to Houston. Dallas is essential identical. It seems like it will be a long time to hit 4,000 per square mile. You would have to look at a subset of Houston to get higher numbers and say, "Hey that is dense." I don't know what the subset would be. Where is the densest place to live in Houston?

 

This is based on city limits, which is not very useful for understanding urbanization. Some of these cities, e.g. Boston and San Francisco, are very hemmed in by suburbs so that only the real urban core, comparable to Houston's inner loop, is in the city limits. Whereas the city of Houston has annexed huge outlying areas (all the way to Kingwood) and thus has some pretty low-density areas within its limits, especially as you head towards Beltway 8.

 

A better understanding could be had if you pulled population data for the 1,3, and 5 mile radii from each city's downtown, which can be done here:

 

http://mcdc.missouri.edu/websas/caps10c.html

 

Only weakness is that adjustments must be made for cities with large bodies of water near the center.

 

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 8, 2019 by Timoric

[Luminare]

New York City - 27,778 *on several islands*

San Francisco - 17,246 *peninsula* 

Boston - 13,321 *peninsula* 

Chicago - 11,868 *big arse lake*

Philadelphia - 11,233 *large river and right up against New Jersey*

Miami - 10,160 *between national parks/wetlands, and a large ocean*

Washington DC - 9,856 *restricted boundary and a large river*

Seattle - 7,250 *in a valley between several foothills and next to a large body of water*

 

In these examples it was essential for these cities to become denser because of geography (and of course many other factors), but geography really does impact how a city sprawls.

We are on miles upon miles upon miles of flat land with narrow bayous so why not sprawl was the mentality. It's like playing Sim City and playing the Ultra large flat map lol.

[Houston19514]

This is based on city limits, which is not very useful for understanding urbanization. Some of these cities, e.g. Boston and San Francisco, are very hemmed in by suburbs so that only the real urban core, comparable to Houston's inner loop, is in the city limits. Whereas the city of Houston has annexed huge outlying areas (all the way to Kingwood) and thus has some pretty low-density areas within its limits, especially as you head towards Beltway 8.

 

A better understanding could be had if you pulled population data for the 1,3, and 5 mile radii from each city's downtown, which can be done here:

 

http://mcdc.missouri.edu/websas/caps10c.html

 

Only weakness is that adjustments must be made for cities with large bodies of water near the center.

 

Agree that city limits density is not very useful for understanding urbanization, especially relative to other cities/metro areas.  That is why I think it's most useful to look at urbanized area densities:

 

As of 2010:

 

Houston - 3,501 (city)   2,978 (urbanized area)

New York City - 27,778 (city)   5,319 (urbanized area)

San Francisco - 17,246 (city)   6,266 (urbanized area)

Boston - 13,321  (city)   2,232 (urbanized area)

Chicago - 11,868 (city)   3,524 (urbanized area)

Philadelphia - 11,233 (city)   2,746 (urbanized area)

Miami - 10,160 (city)   4,442 (urbanized area)

Washington DC - 9,856 (city)   3,470 (urbanized area)

Seattle - 7,250 (city)   3,028 (urbanized area)

Dallas - 3,517 (city)   2,879 (urbanized area)

Atlanta -  3,154 (city)   1,707 (urbanized area)

Austin - 2,653 (city)   2,605 (urbanized area)

 

 

Interestingly, of the 51 urban areas with more than 1 Million population, only 18 have higher densities than Houston.

Here is the complete list in rank order:

 

1) Los Angeles, CA:   6,999

2) San Francisco-Oakland, CA:  6,266

3) San Jose, CA:  5,820

4) New York, NY-NJ-CT: 5,319

5) Las Vegas, NV:  4,525

6) Miami, FL:  4,442

7) San Diego, CA: 4,037

8) Salt Lake City, UT:  3,675

9) Sacramento, CA:  3,660

10) New Orleans, LA:  3,579

11) Denver, CO:  3,554

12) Riverside--San Bernardino, CA:  3,546

13) Portland, OR-WA:  3,528

14) Chicago, IL-IN:  3,524

15) Washington, DC-VA-MD:  3,470

16) Phoenix, AZ:  3,165

17) Baltimore, MD:  3,073

18) Seattle, WA:  3,028

19) Houston, TX:  2,978

20) San Antonio, TX:  2,945

21) Dallas--Fort Worth, TX:  2,879

22) Detroit, MI:  2,793

       Virginia Beach--Norfolk, VA:  2,793

24) Philadelphia, PA--NJ--DE--MD:  2,746

25) Columbus, OH:  2,680

26) Austin, TX:  2,605

27) Minneapolis--St. Paul, MN--WI:  2,594

28) Tampa--St. Petersburg, FL:  2,552

29) Orlando, FL:  2,527

30) Milwaukee, WI:  2,523

31) Buffalo, NY:  2,463

32) St. Louis, MO--IL:  2,329

33) Cleveland, OH:  2,307

34) Kansas City, MO--KS:  2,242

35) Boston, MA--NH--RI:  2,232

36) Rochester, NY:  2,221

37) Providence, RI--MA:  2,185

38) Memphis, TN--MS--AR:  2,132

39) Indianapolis, IN:  2,108

40) Oklahoma City, OK:  2,098

41) Cincinnati, OH--KY--IN:  2,063

42) Louisville, KY:  2,040

43) Jacksonville, FL:  2,008

44) Richmond, VA: 1,937

45) Pittsburgh, PA:  1,915

46) Hartford, CT:  1,791

47) Nashville, TN:  1,721

48) Raleigh, NC:  1,708

49) Atlanta, GA:  1,707

50) Charlotte, NC--SC:  1,685

51) Birmingham, AL:  1,414

 

 

Very interesting that on both a city and urbanized area basis, the sprawl capital of Texas is... Austin.

Edited May 28, 2014 by Houston19514

[H-Town Man]

Agree that city limits density is not very useful for understanding urbanization, especially relative to other cities/metro areas. That is why I think it's most useful to look at urbanized area densities:

As of 2010:

Houston - 3,501 (city) 2,978 (urbanized area)

New York City - 27,778 (city) 5,319 (urbanized area)

San Francisco - 17,246 (city) 6,266 (urbanized area)

Boston - 13,321 (city) 2,232 (urbanized area)

Chicago - 11,868 (city) 3,524 (urbanized area)

Philadelphia - 11,233 (city) 2,746 (urbanized area)

Miami - 10,160 (city) 4,442 (urbanized area)

Washington DC - 9,856 (city) 3,470 (urbanized area)

Seattle - 7,250 (city) 3,028 (urbanized area)

Dallas - 3,517 (city) 2,879 (urbanized area)

Atlanta - 3,154 (city) 1,707 (urbanized area)

Austin - 2,653 (city) 2,605 (urbanized area)

Interestingly, of the 51 urban areas with more than 1 Million population, only 18 have higher densities than Houston.

Here is the complete list in rank order:

1) Los Angeles, CA: 6,999

2) San Francisco-Oakland, CA: 6,266

3) San Jose, CA: 5,820

4) New York, NY-NJ-CT: 5,319

5) Las Vegas, NV: 4,525

6) Miami, FL: 4,442

7) San Diego, CA: 4,037

8) Salt Lake City, UT: 3,675

9) Sacramento, CA: 3,660

10) New Orleans, LA: 3,579

11) Denver, CO: 3,554

12) Riverside--San Bernardino, CA: 3,546

13) Portland, OR-WA: 3,528

14) Chicago, IL-IN: 3,524

15) Washington, DC-VA-MD: 3,470

16) Phoenix, AZ: 3,165

17) Baltimore, MD: 3,073

18) Seattle, WA: 3,028

19) Houston, TX: 2,978

20) San Antonio, TX: 2,945

21) Dallas--Fort Worth, TX: 2,879

22) Detroit, MI: 2,793

Virginia Beach--Norfolk, VA: 2,793

24) Philadelphia, PA--NJ--DE--MD: 2,746

25) Columbus, OH: 2,680

26) Austin, TX: 2,605

27) Minneapolis--St. Paul, MN--WI: 2,594

28) Tampa--St. Petersburg, FL: 2,552

29) Orlando, FL: 2,527

30) Milwaukee, WI: 2,523

31) Buffalo, NY: 2,463

32) St. Louis, MO--IL: 2,329

33) Cleveland, OH: 2,307

34) Kansas City, MO--KS: 2,242

35) Boston, MA--NH--RI: 2,232

36) Rochester, NY: 2,221

37) Providence, RI--MA: 2,185

38) Memphis, TN--MS--AR: 2,132

39) Indianapolis, IN: 2,108

40) Oklahoma City, OK: 2,098

41) Cincinnati, OH--KY--IN: 2,063

42) Louisville, KY: 2,040

43) Jacksonville, FL: 2,008

44) Richmond, VA: 1,937

45) Pittsburgh, PA: 1,915

46) Hartford, CT: 1,791

47) Nashville, TN: 1,721

48) Raleigh, NC: 1,708

49) Atlanta, GA: 1,707

50) Charlotte, NC--SC: 1,685

51) Birmingham, AL: 1,414

Very interesting that on both a city and urbanized area basis, the sprawl capital of Texas is... Austin.

This seems to give average density across most of the metro area (they give a population of 4,944,000 for Houston's urbanized area). It's not as helpful if you want to compare the densities of the urban cores. Hence, LA and San Jose have higher densities than New York due to New York's sprawling suburbs, and Chicago is below many cities for the same reason. Edited May 29, 2014 by H-Town Man

[Houston19514]

This seems to give average density across most of the metro area (they give a population of 4,944,000 for Houston's urbanized area). It's not as helpful if you want to compare the densities of the urban cores. Hence, LA and San Jose have higher densities than New York due to New York's sprawling suburbs, and Chicago is below many cities for the same reason.

 

Yes, it gives average density for the contiguous urbanized (developed) area. 

[lockmat]

I see the point though. I have read that a large part of the increase in apartment construction - not just in Houston but nationwide - is driven by the wave of retirees wanting smaller quarters more conveniently located. Owned housing seems to be considered much less of a sure thing financially than it once was.

Also less people getting married or putting it off longer. More women in the workforce.

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 8, 2019 by Timoric