# UT Austin housing: the supply ledger and the moving demand base

## Public evidence edition • Research cutoff November 1, 2026 • Prepared November 2, 2026


The evidence is consistent with new supply relieving housing pressure around UT, while demand for living close to campus has expanded. It does not establish that luxury towers mechanically pulled older buildings’ rents upward. It also does not establish an exact market-wide shortage or a complete delivery total through 2029. Those are different questions, with different denominators.

Two started university projects announce 1,395 gross beds for 2027 and 2028: 1,055 at Whitis and 340 at Law School Village. A started private project, Eleven03, advertises another 350+ beds without a verified residential opening year. This is an identified construction subtotal. It is neither the entire pipeline nor a guaranteed delivery forecast. Approved and proposed towers add material uncertainty beyond it. [1–3]

The near-term twist is a withdrawal: Dobie will be unavailable for the 2027–28 academic year. Subtracting its two published capacity benchmarks from Whitis produces illustrative increments of about 305 or 75 places. The comparable operating-capacity change is unverified, because the catalog describes approximately 750 students while the older acquisition announcement describes 980 physical beds. The closure is confirmed for one academic year, not permanently through 2029. [1,4–6]

The rent premise also changes under inspection. The City’s inflation-adjusted per-bed series falls from $1,479 in 2004 Q3 to $1,275 in 2023 Q3, a calculated 13.8% decline. Yardi reports outright asking-rent declines around UT in January 2024 and January 2026, followed by renewed growth by May 2026. Those observations are consistent with supply easing pressure and subsequent absorption. None, alone, identifies how much of a rent change a particular construction wave caused. [7–10]

## Where the existing work stops

The existing literature falls into several useful but incomplete categories. Construction reporting identifies towers and intended delivery dates. Austin’s UNO studies explain the policy, changing neighborhood and rent measures. Industry reports quantify dedicated student-housing beds, preleasing and asking rents. Critical reporting documents students’ rising nominal bills and the expansion of expensive private housing. Each sees part of the market; none supplies a continuously reconciled building, removal, enrollment and effective-rent ledger for 2004–2029. [7–13]

The most consequential measurement problem is already visible in the City’s own materials: “units” can mean apartments in one project and bedrooms in another. An affordability-program start date is not automatically an opening date. A project can remain in an affordability inventory after its permit path changes. Summing that inventory without adjudicating the unit of measurement would manufacture a precise answer. [7,11,12]

The earlier critical account and the City’s later affordability finding need not contradict each other. A nominal household gross-rent series, an inflation-adjusted price per bed, and a changing-stock average ask different questions. A neighborhood can become more expensive per apartment while accommodating more people per apartment and becoming cheaper per sleeping place in real terms. This is a measurement reconciliation, not a claim that every student is better off.

Pew’s Minneapolis work is a useful model for relating construction to rent performance. The Minneapolis Fed’s subsequent analysis supplies an equally important caution: a local demand shock can make rent outcomes look like a pure supply effect. UT needs that same discipline. Timing, comparison areas, population changes and the composition of the rental sample matter. Evidence from other cities supports the plausibility of local rent relief, but an effect estimated elsewhere is not an Austin estimate. [14–16]

## What the ledger actually establishes

The historical ledger enumerates all 83 deduplicated UNO project IDs in the cutoff municipal inventory and four supplemental properties, for 87 individual rows. It preserves nonresidential exclusions and unresolved candidates. Of these, 54 have a documented year, 44 have a documented bed capacity, and 40 have both. Four overlapping portfolio or phase observations are kept outside the individual-project sum; three removal events are recorded separately. The workbook exposes the source, basis, alternatives and missing fields for each row.

The 40 dated-capacity rows sum to 20,676 beds across their recorded capacity vintages. That includes 966 beds in two pre-UNO properties. The dated 2004–2025 subset therefore represents 19,710 gross beds across 38 rows. It is incomplete: some large Block and Quarters observations remain at portfolio level, and several individual dates or capacities remain unknown. It is not a current-stock total or net additions since 2004. Reconfigurations, shared bedrooms, replacements and removals prevent that interpretation.

The recent wave is much better resolved. Named 2023 deliveries contribute 2,792 documented beds: The Mark 975, Rambler 817 and Rise 1,000. The two 2024 Union projects contribute 2,439: Union on 24th 1,448 and Union on San Antonio 991. Icon 555 and Villas on 24th 670 contribute 1,225 in 2025. The three-year named-project subset is 6,456. These are gross published capacities with source-specific alternatives retained in the ledger. [46–52]

The 2024 and 2025 subtotals match the corresponding annual figures in Yardi’s spring 2026 presentation. Yardi’s February report says 6,605 beds were delivered over the preceding three years. The named subset is 149 lower, but that difference is not proof of a missing 149-bed building: the report vintages, calendar versus academic-year labels and capacity definitions differ. The reconciliation should remain open rather than be forced. [9,17]

This is a useful result and an explicit limit. The current work produces a comprehensive enumeration of a defined municipal universe, a substantial verified historical subset, and a dated pipeline watchlist. It does not yet justify the claim that every physical student-housing building around UT has been counted with its original opening capacity and every subsequent change. The accompanying 161-entity price directory extends the search universe, but its networks and unpriced entries cannot simply be added to the building ledger.

## The pipeline through 2029: starts, approvals and promises

## Whitis: 1,055 gross beds, scheduled for 2027

UT’s construction advisory, updated October 21, 2026, specifies 1,055 student beds and a project end date of June 1, 2027. The housing page targets the 2027–28 academic year. Earlier contractor and marketing figures differ, so the latest precise university figure is used with the alternatives retained. The old approximately 200-bed Whitis complex was removed before the fall-2026 baseline; subtracting those beds again from a 2026-to-2027 comparison would double-count the loss. [1,18]

## Law School Village: 340 beds, scheduled for 2028

Greystar’s May 2026 financial-close announcement states that construction is starting on 340 apartment beds in 280 studio, one-bedroom and two-bedroom units, with completion expected for 2028–29. These are places targeted to law students. They can relieve pressure elsewhere through moves, but they are not 340 interchangeable undergraduate dorm places. [2]

## Eleven03: construction verified, 350+ planned beds, year unresolved

The capital partner states a July 6, 2026 groundbreaking and 350+ planned beds. A city shell-building permit at 1103 West 24th was issued September 28 and active in October. An earlier registration’s completion date concerns office or amenity work, so it does not establish the residential opening year. The identified prior use is an office building, with no residential demolition offset in the cited zoning evidence. [3,19,38]

## Several large candidates remain outside that subtotal

9 HUNDRED, also called Boardwalk or the 900 West 23rd redevelopment, has an approved site plan, an active demolition permit and a filer’s July 2029 target. Its new residential bed count is unverified. The developer’s 52-unit figure refers to the existing complex proposed for removal; a reported 383-unit new tower is an apartment count. Neither can be inserted as new beds. [20,39–41]

Bell’s Beach illustrates why announcements need current case records. The 75-unit building permits were withdrawn October 6, 2026. Investor materials describe a 103-unit, 187-bed scheme, while a separate October office filing carries a different schedule. The relationship among these versions remains unresolved, so 187 beds are not counted as committed delivery. Other projects are waiting on legal or fiscal clearance, in review, or have expired completeness cases. A completeness-check approval is not a released full site plan. [21,42–44]

The 32-row pipeline file also retains Sinclair’s 2026 delivery and conflicting 358/368-bed descriptions, Avalon’s unresolved actual opening and capacity, athlete-housing proposals, and ordinary residential developments that cannot be labeled dedicated UT beds. Ventnor’s filing describes 300 apartments and a July 2028 target while its city case remains in review. An older East Campus phase-two announcement specified approximately 500 beds, without a verified current start or delivery schedule. Inclusion flags keep these material candidates outside the started, dated subtotal; their project-specific evidence is in the workbook.

No included started project is assigned to 2029. That means the dated subset has no verified 2029 entry; it does not mean Austin will deliver zero student beds that year. Missing capacities and uncommitted projects prevent a defensible finite upper bound. The correct public answer is 1,395 scheduled gross beds in two identified starts, plus Eleven03’s 350+ planned beds with unverified timing, plus a separately documented candidate pipeline.

## The withdrawal that changes the 2027 calculation

Dobie makes gross construction a poor guide to near-term choice. UT’s 2021 acquisition announcement described 980 beds. Its current catalog describes approximately 750 students. Chron reported on October 30, 2026, with university confirmation, that the building would be unavailable for 2027–28. The reason and eventual use were not announced in that report. [4–6]

Two illustrative calculations follow: 1,055 minus 980 equals 75; 1,055 minus approximately 750 equals about 305. They show how much of Whitis could be replacement for unavailable places. They do not establish a statistically meaningful 75–305 forecast interval, because the inputs describe different things. A comparable fall-2026 operated-capacity count and fall-2027 opening roster would resolve the number.

The same distinction applies historically. UT’s purchase of an existing apartment building changes ownership, eligibility, pricing or management, but creates no physical beds by itself. Expiration of an affordable-housing covenant removes a price restriction, not a bed. Demolition and temporary closure remove available capacity on different timelines. A useful ledger must record all these events without treating them as the same flow.

## How many students need the new beds?

UT reports 55,172 students in fall 2026, including 44,675 undergraduates. Total enrollment was 50,377 in fall 2004, an increase of 4,795 or 9.5%. The standardized older undergraduate series gives 37,101 in 2004, implying growth of 7,574 or 20.4%; an institutional narrative instead gives 37,377, which implies 19.5%. The robust finding is approximately 20% undergraduate growth against 9.5% total growth. The historical classification discrepancy remains visible rather than being silently harmonized. [22–24,45]

The recent trend is cleaner: undergraduates increased from 42,444 in 2023 to 44,675 in 2026, a gain of 2,231 or 5.3%. Total enrollment rose by 2,090 over the same interval. Graduate and professional enrollment therefore fell slightly on this series. A demand story based only on nearly stable total enrollment misses a change in the population most directly relevant to undergraduate-oriented towers. These are fall headcounts with reporting-date qualifications, not a forecast. [22,25]

A comparison with matching intake years sharpens the puzzle. Undergraduates increased by 3,005 from fall 2022 to fall 2025, while the named 2023–2025 private delivery subset supplied 6,456 gross beds: about 2.1 gross beds per additional undergraduate. This does not establish a 3,451-bed surplus. It exposes the missing terms: beds removed or reconfigured, existing students moving closer, graduate and non-UT demand, and different housing types. New enrollment alone cannot account for gross construction, and gross construction alone cannot establish excess available capacity. [46–54]

The demand denominator still requires care. UT’s Common Data Set reports that 82% of degree-seeking undergraduates lived off campus or commuted in fall 2024. That is a large housing market, but it is not a shortage count. Students already housed in conventional apartments, co-ops, family homes and other neighborhoods are part of that share. A student who prefers to move closer can create new West Campus demand without being newly enrolled or unhoused. [26]

The mechanism is simple: near-campus demand depends on enrollment and the share choosing that location. At 55,172 enrolled students, a two-percentage-point increase in that share represents about 1,103 students—roughly one new Whitis hall. This arithmetic illustration is not an estimated migration flow. It shows why several thousand nearby beds can be absorbed even if university headcount changes little.

The City’s neighborhood evidence is consistent with that mechanism: UNO population rose from 5,742 in 2000 to 16,179 in the 2020 Census, and its maps show postsecondary students concentrating nearer UT relative to earlier distributions. Those maps cover students beyond UT and do not track the same individuals moving. The later 28,462 figure is a 2024 projection, not a fresh Census count. It should never be presented as a measured increase from 2020. [7,11]

An exact bed deficit cannot be calculated by subtracting one public university-housing figure and one vendor’s private stock figure from total enrollment. The catalog’s rounded residence categories sum to approximately 7,650 students; the housing homepage’s 9,948 “live with us” figure is a resident count across a broader operation. Yardi’s dedicated off-campus stock is a different universe from dormitories, university apartments and conventional housing. Its public roster is insufficient to verify overlap for every university-owned off-campus property. The workbook keeps these observations separate. [5,9,10,27]

There is also a double-adjustment risk on online enrollment. Texas Global states that its expanded statistics include Option III graduate programs excluded from official institutional reporting; UT identifies the online computer science, data science and AI programs as Option III. Subtracting their entire enrollment again from the official fall headline would therefore be unjustified. A fully harmonized annual residential-enrollment series remains unavailable here. [28,29]

## What the supply waves did to rents and occupancy

The historical record contains both high occupancy with rising nominal rents and periods of rent relief. A private market survey preserved in a 2011 city case file lists 19 West Campus comparables, including a Quarters phase aggregate, with 2,361 apartments and 5,512 reported beds. Reweighting its rows by reported beds reproduces approximately $821 per reported bed per month in base rent, 97.6% fall-2010 occupancy and 82.3% fall-2011 preleasing as observed May 29, 2011. All rows report zero concessions. This is a selected comparable-property survey; occupancy and preleasing refer to different leasing years. It is not a market census. [30]

A 2019 SEC-filed SkyLoft appraisal describes 6,579 new beds in the UT student-housing submarket during 2012–2018 and nominal rents rising from $867 to $1,128 per bed, a calculated 30.1%. That is the strongest historical support for the user’s puzzle. But the appraisal measures an expanding and changing submarket, and construction responds to expected demand. The correlation cannot tell us whether the new beds caused higher rents or prevented still larger increases. [13]

The later evidence is inconsistent with a universal upward ratchet. Austin’s case study reports the 13.8% real per-bed decline over 2004–2023 and slower West Campus rent growth during the 2020–2022 surge: 15%, compared with 27% for the metro. These are descriptive comparisons across changing stock and different geographies. They weaken the claim that building more never helped, but cannot isolate UNO’s causal effect. [7]

Yardi’s January 2024 table gives UT asking rent of $1,091 per bed, down 2.2% year over year, alongside 65.7% preleasing. The report’s prose instead says a 2.5% rent decline; the workbook retains the discrepancy and uses the table’s figure. In January 2026, the table shows $1,269, down 0.4%, and 68.0% preleasing. By May, it shows $1,310, up 4.5%, and 89.4% preleasing. Preleasing is not occupied housing, and January-to-May changes also reflect the leasing calendar and available mix. [8–10]

These points support a cyclical account: supply can soften terms, beds can subsequently lease, and prices can resume rising. The data do not establish a precise lag or a causal elasticity. Nor do they provide a complete current UT-only occupancy series. A 2025 CollegeHouse-based report supplies another occupancy observation, but its 32,124-bed market universe differs materially from Yardi’s roughly 25,000-bed universe. Those figures remain separate rather than being stitched into a false trend. [31]

The next-wave cooling signal is stronger than a headline comparison between a complete past wave and an incomplete future list. Within Yardi’s dedicated off-campus reports, beds under construction fall from 3,460 in January 2024 to 360 in January 2026, still 360 in May. That is a calculated 89.6% reduction in the reported construction snapshot. It is evidence of a much thinner private construction cycle at those dates, not a statement that all-sector delivery through 2029 is 89.6% lower. Subsequent starts and university projects require the separate project ledger. [8–10]

## Concessions and the limits of advertised rent

The concession hypothesis is plausible but not yet demonstrated as a chronological rule in West Campus. ALN’s September 2024 metro report records asking rents down 5.0% and effective rents down 7.4%, with 46.1% of properties offering concessions. The student segment and the UT Area–West Campus–Hyde Park submarket are separately defined in that report, with per-apartment measures rather than UT-only per-bed observations. This is useful context for the difference between asking and effective rent, not evidence that every West Campus student operator followed the same path. [32]

Texan 26’s official site displayed a fall-2026 promotion offering a choice involving a $600 September concession, a gift card or a free September. It is an actual operator example of discounting through terms. Its eligibility and expiration are not established, and by a November observation it may be stale. It cannot be treated as a currently obtainable deal or attributed to a specific nearby tower. [33]

The correct price measure starts with the full contract: base installments plus mandatory charges, less cash-equivalent concessions, divided by the covered occupancy period. Parking, furniture, utilities, meal plans, shared bedrooms and eligibility must be held constant or separately reported. A high face rent and a free month can coexist with a lower effective price. A fixed number of annual installments also need not be prorated calendar-month rent.

Student housing adds a seasonal constraint. An empty bed after the academic intake can have a very different revenue consequence from an empty conventional apartment that can be leased next month. That creates a reason to monitor the whole preleasing curve and late-season promotions. It does not prove that concessions always move first; the documented declines in asking rents show that adjustment can appear directly in the face-price series as well.

## What the existing 161-entity price file can test

The public Groundwork export contains 161 places and networks, 2,533 plan or term options and 2,329 priced options. Eighty-one entities have prices and 80 are quote-only. Only 11 entities have priced options in both rate years. Six are College Houses co-ops with term differences that obstruct a straightforward annual comparison; the remaining five are ACC entities. Observed dates are in October 2026. [34]

The reproducible matching rule uses entity, exact plan label, privacy, price basis, payment count, payment frequency, furnished status, eligibility and full-versus-academic term. It retains only a unique observation on each side. That yields 224 paired catalogue variants across the five ACC entities. Ambiguous duplicate keys are excluded. The Block is a network, and variants are not weighted by actual beds. The workbook retains ranges, advertised availability and source links rather than collapsing them into a market index.

A concrete example is 26 West’s four-bedroom, two-bath option: the export records base installments of $1,324–$1,334 per person for 2026–27 and $1,214–$1,224 for 2027–28, both observed October 26. The next-year offer is $110 lower at both ends. That is a comparison of two academic-year offers observed on one date, not a year-over-year change in prices observed twelve months apart. It is useful evidence against universal monotonic pricing, but cannot establish the market effect of new construction. [34,35]

The existing file should become the first observation of a repeatable panel. Preserve each scrape or quotation date; record the lease year, occupancy dates, signing fees, recurring fees, concessions, privacy, window status and eligibility; retain advertised availability separately from independently verified leased or occupied beds. Then compare the same plan at the same point in successive leasing seasons. Without that time axis, two rate years are not two years of observed market history.

## Geography and a better measure of need

The evidence supports a changing location of student housing, but not a confident declaration that one new neighborhood is “the overflow.” The private high-rise wave is concentrated in West Campus. East Campus has added university graduate housing—UT’s later account describes 784 beds at the apartments opened in 2024—and the law-school project will add another specialized option nearby. These places serve different populations from a general undergraduate tower. [2,36]

Riverside remains important to the historical story, but a current overflow claim would require recent student-location or commute data. River Park’s January 2026 city briefing identifies 252 apartments in its demolition/displacement account, reports infrastructure and venue work underway, and says other phases have uncertain start dates. That apartment figure cannot be translated into a current student-bed total without occupancy and configuration evidence. Conventional downtown and Riverside developments likewise do not become dedicated UT beds merely because students could rent them. [37]

The most useful new measure is an August usable-capacity balance. For each physical property and academic intake, start with places actually available the previous intake, add openings and reopenings, and subtract closures, demolitions and changes in sleeping configuration. Record ownership transfers separately. Apply student eligibility, commuting distance and all-in price as additional dimensions, rather than pretending every physical place is interchangeable.

A second view should report how many available places meet a specified student budget and set of requirements. A low-income undergraduate who needs a private bedroom and a law student eligible for specialized university housing face different choice sets. A coverage measure would divide usable, eligible, affordable places by the students seeking them; a citywide count of bedrooms cannot answer that question by itself.

For causality, the next analytical step is a repeat-property effective-rent and occupancy panel tied to actual occupancy certificates and August openings. Compare older buildings exposed to different nearby delivery intensities, inspect pre-trends, control for citywide cycles and leasing month, and test whether landlord portfolio membership or renovations alter the pattern. Tower siting is endogenous; proximity bands and event timing alone do not remove selection. This design would test both rent relief and an amenity or pricing-ceiling effect rather than assume either.

## What would change the conclusions

A current university operating-capacity schedule would replace the Whitis/Dobie sensitivity with a measured net change. A bed schedule, residential start evidence and achievable August opening date for each unresolved private project could substantially enlarge the dated 2027–2029 subtotal. A verified reopening of Dobie would also change the later-year balance. None of those events should be inferred from today’s missing fields.

A matched older-building panel showing larger rent increases after nearby tower openings, relative to a credible comparison group and net of concessions, would support the pricing-ceiling hypothesis. Evidence of lower effective rents, weaker occupancy or larger concessions around deliveries would strengthen the supply-relief case. The current public evidence favors relief as the general mechanism, but does not identify its UT-specific magnitude.

A repeated UT residential-location survey could determine how much demand comes from enrollment growth, movement from farther neighborhoods, household formation and non-UT residents. Until then, the spatial-demand mechanism is supported by neighborhood patterns and straightforward arithmetic; its exact contribution remains unknown.

The publication-safe conclusion is therefore narrower and more informative than either original story alone: West Campus has added a very large amount of capacity, real per-bed and some nominal rent measures show relief, and undergraduate growth plus the draw of proximity can absorb supply without invoking an unexplained luxury ratchet. Yardi’s dated private-construction snapshots show a much thinner cycle. The still-incomplete future pipeline’s net benefit depends on withdrawals, eligibility and whether announced buildings actually open before students arrive.

# Sources and reproducibility

The workbook contains property-level sources and the complete public price export, including unavailable and unconfirmed options. Blank numeric cells mean unknown or inapplicable; they are not zeros. Original names and aliases are retained. Later reported capacity is not silently relabeled opening-day capacity. Source conflicts remain explicit. Some checkpoint metadata was reconstructed after a workspace interruption; the JSON records that provenance, and lost full permit snapshots are not represented as recovered verbatim receipts.

[1] UT construction advisory: Whitis, updated October 21, 2026

[https://construction.utexas.edu/construction-advisory/cp1003754-whitis-court-residence-hall](https://construction.utexas.edu/construction-advisory/cp1003754-whitis-court-residence-hall)

[2] Greystar: financial close and start of Law School Village

[https://www.greystar.com/business/about-greystar/newsroom/greystar-reaches-financial-close-on-university-of-texas-law-school-village](https://www.greystar.com/business/about-greystar/newsroom/greystar-reaches-financial-close-on-university-of-texas-law-school-village)

[3] Capstaq: Eleven03 planned capacity and construction status

[https://www.capstaq.com/deals/eleven03-austin](https://www.capstaq.com/deals/eleven03-austin)

[4] Chron: Dobie unavailable for 2027–28, October 30, 2026

[https://www.chron.com/texas/article/ut-dobie-dorm-22501104.php](https://www.chron.com/texas/article/ut-dobie-dorm-22501104.php)

[5] UT catalog: university housing definitions and approximate capacities

[https://catalog.utexas.edu/general-information/student-services/university-housing-and-dining/](https://catalog.utexas.edu/general-information/student-services/university-housing-and-dining/)

[6] UT 2021 acquisition announcement: Dobie original physical capacity

[https://news.utexas.edu/2021/10/12/ut-austin-adds-student-housing-options-to-increase-campus-access-affordability/](https://news.utexas.edu/2021/10/12/ut-austin-adds-student-housing-options-to-increase-campus-access-affordability/)

[7] City of Austin: University Neighborhood Overlay, A Local Case Study

[https://publicinput.com/Customer/File/Full/dd6f15f6-ec17-454b-b705-648f3fd3e502](https://publicinput.com/Customer/File/Full/dd6f15f6-ec17-454b-b705-648f3fd3e502)

[8] Yardi Matrix February 2024 report, primary-authored PDF mirror

[https://blog.urbancatalyst.com/hubfs/Matrix%20Student%20Housing%20National%20Report-February%202024.pdf](https://blog.urbancatalyst.com/hubfs/Matrix%20Student%20Housing%20National%20Report-February%202024.pdf)

[9] Yardi Matrix February 2026 report

[https://www.yardimatrix.com/student-national/matrix-student-housing-national-report-february-2026/?direct=true\&download=1\&signup=false](https://www.yardimatrix.com/student-national/matrix-student-housing-national-report-february-2026/?direct=true&download=1&signup=false)

[10] Yardi Matrix June 2026 report

[https://www.yardimatrix.com/student-national/matrix-student-housing-national-report-june-2026/?direct=true\&download=1\&signup=false](https://www.yardimatrix.com/student-national/matrix-student-housing-national-report-june-2026/?direct=true&download=1&signup=false)

[11] City UNO amendment staff report, March 2025

[https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=447124](https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=447124)

[12] City Affordable Housing Inventory: raw mixed-unit administrative dataset

[https://data.austintexas.gov/api/v3/views/ifzc-3xz8/query.json?accessType=DOWNLOAD](https://data.austintexas.gov/api/v3/views/ifzc-3xz8/query.json?accessType=DOWNLOAD)

[13] SEC UBS 2019-C16 appraisal disclosures, SkyLoft and market history

[https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1532799/000153949719000414/n1550\_x2-ts.htm](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1532799/000153949719000414/n1550_x2-ts.htm)

[14] Pew: Minneapolis land-use reforms and affordability

[https://www.pew.org/nb/research-and-analysis/articles/2024/01/04/minneapolis-land-use-reforms-offer-a-blueprint-for-housing-affordability](https://www.pew.org/nb/research-and-analysis/articles/2024/01/04/minneapolis-land-use-reforms-offer-a-blueprint-for-housing-affordability)

[15] Minneapolis Fed: disentangling supply and demand, 2025

[https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2025/unpacking-supply-and-demand-in-rent-trends-since-the-minneapolis-2040-plan](https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/2025/unpacking-supply-and-demand-in-rent-trends-since-the-minneapolis-2040-plan)

[16] Asquith, Mast and Reed: Supply Shock Versus Demand Shock, Philadelphia Fed

[https://www.philadelphiafed.org/community-development/housing-and-neighborhoods/supply-shock-versus-demand-shock-the-local-effects-of-new-housing-in-low-income-areas](https://www.philadelphiafed.org/community-development/housing-and-neighborhoods/supply-shock-versus-demand-shock-the-local-effects-of-new-housing-in-low-income-areas)

[17] Yardi spring 2026 webinar: delivery figures and methodology distinctions

[https://www.yardimatrix.com/presentations/student-housing-webinar-spring-2026/?download=1\&signup=false](https://www.yardimatrix.com/presentations/student-housing-webinar-spring-2026/?download=1&signup=false)

[18] UT housing: Whitis Avenue Hall opening target

[https://housing.utexas.edu/housing/residence-halls/residence-hall-locations/whitis-avenue-hall](https://housing.utexas.edu/housing/residence-halls/residence-hall-locations/whitis-avenue-hall)

[19] City Eleven03 building permit, folder 13779566

[https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t\_detail=1\&t\_selected\_folderrsn=13779566](https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=13779566)

[20] City Boardwalk site plan, folder 13581377; additional records in workbook

[https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t\_detail=1\&t\_selected\_folderrsn=13581377](https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=13581377)

[21] City site-plan review dataset; dated project-specific records in workbook

[https://data.austintexas.gov/Building-and-Development/Site-Plan-Cases/mavg-96ck](https://data.austintexas.gov/Building-and-Development/Site-Plan-Cases/mavg-96ck)

[22] UT fall-2026 enrollment announcement

[https://news.utexas.edu/2026/09/22/ut-sets-academic-performance-records-remains-the-no-1-public-university-in-texas/](https://news.utexas.edu/2026/09/22/ut-sets-academic-performance-records-remains-the-no-1-public-university-in-texas/)

[23] UT catalog: historical total enrollment

[https://catalog.utexas.edu/general-information/appendices/statistical-summaries/](https://catalog.utexas.edu/general-information/appendices/statistical-summaries/)

[24] UT System Facts and Trends 2009: historical level series

[https://utsystem.edu/sites/default/files/documents/2010/facts-and-trends-archives/factsandtrends2009.pdf](https://utsystem.edu/sites/default/files/documents/2010/facts-and-trends-archives/factsandtrends2009.pdf)

[25] UT 2023–24 Common Data Set, primary-authored PDF mirror

[https://api.collegedata.fyi/storage/v1/object/public/sources/ut-austin/2023-24/e08e8feb990b2dae6b031a8d31bb8c8297224e0dabf50ff211446cb70c2cb558.pdf](https://api.collegedata.fyi/storage/v1/object/public/sources/ut-austin/2023-24/e08e8feb990b2dae6b031a8d31bb8c8297224e0dabf50ff211446cb70c2cb558.pdf)

[26] UT 2024–25 Common Data Set, primary-authored PDF mirror

[https://api.collegedata.fyi/storage/v1/object/public/sources/ut-austin/2024-25/11319f20fdbf9b5db0ce2abae2fcb9ab3d92e2bd6878d8649dbffc1ba25ed808.pdf](https://api.collegedata.fyi/storage/v1/object/public/sources/ut-austin/2024-25/11319f20fdbf9b5db0ce2abae2fcb9ab3d92e2bd6878d8649dbffc1ba25ed808.pdf)

[27] UT University Housing and Dining homepage

[https://housing.utexas.edu/](https://housing.utexas.edu/)

[28] UT Texas Global: inclusive enrollment definition and Option III exclusion

[https://global.utexas.edu/about/international-enrollment](https://global.utexas.edu/about/international-enrollment)

[29] UT graduate programs: Option III program classification

[https://graduate.utexas.edu/degrees-programs](https://graduate.utexas.edu/degrees-programs)

[30] 2011 private market survey in City UNO case packet, page 11

[https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=156538](https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=156538)

[31] Cushman & Wakefield / CollegeHouse 2025 university-market report

[https://sch.cushmanwakefield.com/api/public/content/2d00e2eab2d24bcd9e1a7018866585cd?v=e1e3f699](https://sch.cushmanwakefield.com/api/public/content/2d00e2eab2d24bcd9e1a7018866585cd?v=e1e3f699)

[32] ALN Austin market report, September 2024

[https://cdn.alndata.com/reports/newmarketreview/2024-09-fe9ae5a9/AUS-1dc58c.pdf](https://cdn.alndata.com/reports/newmarketreview/2024-09-fe9ae5a9/AUS-1dc58c.pdf)

[33] Texan 26 official site: posted promotion, expiry unverified

[https://www.texan26.com/](https://www.texan26.com/)

[34] Groundwork public housing price export

[https://sulayman-bowles.tech/housing/all-plans.csv](https://sulayman-bowles.tech/housing/all-plans.csv)

[35] 26 West official floor-plan data

[https://www.americancampus.com/api/lightning/floorplans/687](https://www.americancampus.com/api/lightning/floorplans/687)

[36] UT 2026 campus master-plan retrospective: East Campus graduate housing

[https://news.utexas.edu/2026/02/24/and-just-like-that-its-30-years-later-did-we-follow-the-campus-master-plan/?query-page=3](https://news.utexas.edu/2026/02/24/and-just-like-that-its-30-years-later-did-we-follow-the-campus-master-plan/?query-page=3)

[37] River Park official city commission briefing, January 2026

[https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=465594](https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=465594)

[38] City Eleven03 zoning report: prior use and residential demolition

[https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=435330](https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=435330)

[39] 9 HUNDRED demolition building permit

[https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t\_detail=1\&t\_selected\_folderrsn=13786792](https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=13786792)

[40] 9 HUNDRED TDLR registration and filer schedule

[https://www.tdlr.texas.gov/TABS/Search/Project/TABS2026025736](https://www.tdlr.texas.gov/TABS/Search/Project/TABS2026025736)

[41] 9 HUNDRED 383-apartment reporting: secondary source

[https://pro.groundbreak.city/austin/projects/791582ed-aaca-4930-a55c-9c08622f6eab](https://pro.groundbreak.city/austin/projects/791582ed-aaca-4930-a55c-9c08622f6eab)

[42] Bell’s Beach withdrawn shell building permit

[https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t\_detail=1\&t\_selected\_folderrsn=13511147](https://abc.austintexas.gov/web/permit/public-search-other?t_detail=1&t_selected_folderrsn=13511147)

[43] Bell’s Beach investor project description

[https://214invest.com/austin\_student](https://214invest.com/austin_student)

[44] Bell’s Beach office-only TDLR filing

[https://www.tdlr.texas.gov/TABS/Search/Project/TABS2027004237](https://www.tdlr.texas.gov/TABS/Search/Project/TABS2027004237)

[45] UT System 2005 accountability report: alternative 2004 undergraduate narrative

[https://www.utsystem.edu/IPA/acctrpt/2005/completereport.pdf](https://www.utsystem.edu/IPA/acctrpt/2005/completereport.pdf)

[46] Landmark: The Mark opening and bed capacity

[https://www.landmarkproperties.com/landmark-properties-delivers-record-number-of-student-housing-properties-for-2023-2024-academic-year/](https://www.landmarkproperties.com/landmark-properties-delivers-record-number-of-student-housing-properties-for-2023-2024-academic-year/)

[47] LV Collective portfolio: Rambler beds and delivery year

[https://lvcollective.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/LV-Partnerships-Deck.pdf](https://lvcollective.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/LV-Partnerships-Deck.pdf)

[48] Development executive portfolio: Rise at West Campus

[https://www.brodeurgroup.com/list-of-projects](https://www.brodeurgroup.com/list-of-projects)

[49] Union on 24th operator: resident capacity; architect completion source in workbook

[https://www.unionon24th.com/austin/union-on-24th/faqs/](https://www.unionon24th.com/austin/union-on-24th/faqs/)

[50] Hensel Phelps: St. Austin / Union on San Antonio redevelopment

[https://www.henselphelps.com/project/st-austin-catholic-parish-site-redevelopment/](https://www.henselphelps.com/project/st-austin-catholic-parish-site-redevelopment/)

[51] Hoar completion announcement for Icon, reproduced by Citybiz

[https://www.citybiz.co/article/729074/hoar-construction-announces-completion-of-new-student-housing-community-at-ut-austin/](https://www.citybiz.co/article/729074/hoar-construction-announces-completion-of-new-student-housing-community-at-ut-austin/)

[52] Villas Student Housing: delivered projects and capacities

[https://villas-sh.com/project/](https://villas-sh.com/project/)

[53] UT fall-2025 enrollment announcement

[https://news.utexas.edu/2025/09/18/ut-sets-all-time-highs-for-enrollment-and-student-performance/](https://news.utexas.edu/2025/09/18/ut-sets-all-time-highs-for-enrollment-and-student-performance/)

[54] UT 2022–23 Common Data Set, primary-authored PDF mirror

[https://api.collegedata.fyi/storage/v1/object/public/sources/ut-austin/2022-23/25f435db25e3a0ab50cd3c85de053f4de354aa9a287f6a9812e4d585e6d1eaf6.pdf](https://api.collegedata.fyi/storage/v1/object/public/sources/ut-austin/2022-23/25f435db25e3a0ab50cd3c85de053f4de354aa9a287f6a9812e4d585e6d1eaf6.pdf)


## Supporting data downloads

The public package contains curated, dated aggregate snapshots, dataset definitions and source notes. Its Excel workbook contains values, rather than the original editable formulas. The source and formula notes describe the reproducible scope.

- [Curated data, definitions and source notes (ZIP)](/research/deep-research/data/ut-housing-construction-and-closures-support.zip)
- [Curated tables, values only (Excel)](/research/deep-research/data/ut-housing-construction-and-closures/support.xlsx)
- [Primary comparison table (CSV)](/research/deep-research/data/ut-housing-construction-and-closures/project-ledger.csv)
- [Dataset definitions (JSON)](/research/deep-research/data/ut-housing-construction-and-closures/definitions.json)